Warning! Long post with lots of replies! However, the rationale for a lot of the rules is done in a great book by David Nelson called
Anatomy of a Game: Football, the Rules, and the Men who Made the Game. This history behind these choices are outlined pretty well there.
Even though face guarding doesn't exist in college, the refs still "use it"
as a reason to call PI. It's maddening
It is used only as a red flag. Contact is required. The problem with many officials is that they assume contact. We have a mantra we are taught from day one: "See the ball down and in possession before blowing the whistle" (this is to avoid inadvertent whistles). Similarly, we have "Don't call penalties you don't see." This is often the case with turning your head and seeing some player flying to the ground. If you didn't see the contact to lead to it, assume it was legal. I often see among younger HS officials where if they see face guarding they assume contact occurred.
I wouldn't mind if 5 Olineman on the line of scrimmage. All eligible off the LoS
The history of football was that originally a minimum of 6 offensive players were on the line (and no more than 6 defensive players). The rules committee in 1906 argued about this quite a bit and decided that 7 men on the line was required. And from there:
One foward pass shall be allowed on a play provided the ball does not touch the ground before being touched by a player of either side--such as pass to be made by any man who was behind the line of scrimmage when the ball was put in play. If the ball touches the ground before being touched by a player of either side, it shall go to the opponents on the spot where the pass was made. The pass shall not be recieved by a man who was on the line of scrimmage when the ball was put in play, except for the two men playone on the ends of the line. A direct lob over the line within a space of five yards on each side of the center shall be unlawful.
Now, Nelson's book doesn't go into the why of this, but my understanding is that it makes it clear to the defense who is eligible. There was an upstart offense called the A11 that tried to take advantage of the numbering exception and created all kinds of crazy formations in order to confuse the defense on who was eligible. The other reason, as I understood it, was to limit the number of players behind the LOS. It wasn't so much about requiring people on the line, but to limit the backfield size, thus to limit the ability of players to get a running start before the defense could approach. I don't know if these are true, but are my suspicions.
I think you could make the argument that flags shouldn't fly if they don't impact player safety or the natural course of a play. Nothing more maddening than seeing a kid accidentally run up against the back of a defender on a kickoff and see a flag for block in the back.....when the ball carrier is 30 yards away.
Depends on the demeanor of the official, crew, and officiating leadership. It is nearly impossible to read intent in many plays. And certainly no official I know would flag when they see "a kid accidentally run up against the back of a defender ... when the ball carrier is 30 yards away." If the contact is clearly unwarranted (i.e. excessive) or unsportsmanlike (pushing a kid out of the play to the ground), it isn't just about safety, but sportsmanship.
Illegal formation is an interesting one and I'd be curious if someone can make an argument for why that one should exist.
See above. I think the argument that getting a running start at the snap is especially the case on punts, where the gunners would get more of an advantage over the defenders.
Ooh, just thought of another one, illegal touching when a player goes out of bounds, then comes back in and touches the ball. I mean, who cares? Why is that even a rule? Saw a pretty nice catch negated by that stupid rule yesterday.
NFHS doesn't have this. In NFHS, if a player who
voluntarily goes out of bounds and returning is an illegal participation foul. NCAA doesn't have this requirement. Players may leave and return, except K (the kicking team) or A (the offense) but cannot be the first to touch a forward pass. I think the concern was a player feigning leaving the field, then stepping back on and catching the pass. This was to avoid something of a "hideout" play. Note that being being
blocked out and immediately returning is not a foul (which I don't know how we got jobbed on that one in the Oregon game).
And, side gripe, I can't stand the "automatic first down" penalties. If it's 3rd and 40, why does a 5 yard defensive holding penalty result in a 1st down? Makes no sense.
My understanding is that these were added to enhance the offense. Kind of like the case where you can't be fouled under the basket. They committee wanted to see more offense. Note that the NFHS eliminated the automatic first down on defensive pass interference (and the loss of down on offensive pass interference), and has never had an AFD for defensive holding, or this stupid 5 yard contact rule the NFL has. I agree, they should go away.
