Football History

Football. It's a sport that ignites passionate debates, unites communities on Sundays (and Mondays!), and boasts a rich history filled with iconic moments. But how did the game we know and love today actually come to be? The answer lies in a fascinating journey of rule changes and innovations, shaped by a desire for safety, fairness, and, of course, pure entertainment.

Over the next few posts, we'll embark on a thrilling exploration of the evolution of American football rules. We'll delve into the early days, when the sport resembled a chaotic rugby match, and uncover the key figures, like Walter Camp, who laid the groundwork for the modern gridiron. We'll dissect landmark rule changes, from the introduction of the forward pass to the implementation of instant replay, and analyze how these modifications impacted the game's strategy, scoring, and overall flow.

So, buckle up, football fans! Whether you're a seasoned expert or a curious newcomer, this series promises to shed light on the fascinating stories behind the rules that govern America's favorite sport. Get ready to learn about the game's hidden history, the unexpected consequences of rule changes, and the ongoing quest to make football safer, more exciting, and ultimately, even more fun to watch.






Football. It's a sport that ignites passionate debates, unites communities on Sundays (and Mondays!), and boasts a rich history filled with iconic moments. But how did the game we know and love today actually come to be? The answer lies in a fascinating journey of rule changes and innovations, shaped by a desire for safety, fairness, and, of course, pure entertainment.

Over the next few posts, we'll embark on a thrilling exploration of the evolution of American football rules. We'll delve into the early days, when the sport resembled a chaotic rugby match, and uncover the key figures, like Walter Camp, who laid the groundwork for the modern gridiron. We'll dissect landmark rule changes, from the introduction of the forward pass to the implementation of instant replay, and analyze how these modifications impacted the game's strategy, scoring, and overall flow.

So, buckle up, football fans! Whether you're a seasoned expert or a curious newcomer, this series promises to shed light on the fascinating stories behind the rules that govern America's favorite sport. Get ready to learn about the game's hidden history, the unexpected consequences of rule changes, and the ongoing quest to make football safer, more exciting, and ultimately, even more fun to watch.

---

When we think about the creation and evolution of American football, the name Walter Camp almost undeniably will arise. He was an important figure in the game's development.

What is Walter Camp responsible for in the evolution of the gridiron? What innovation and concepts did he accomplish? We have these answers and more in this episode.

Here are some of the headlines we hit on in this episode: Author Roger Tamte shares insight and knowledge on the man that helped create American Football into the sport it is today. Roger's book is Walter Camp and the Creation of American Football.

-Transcript of Walter Camp Book with Roger Tamte

Darin Hayes
Hello, my football friends. This is Darin Hayes of pigskindispatch.com. In this bonus edition of the Pigskin Daily History Dispatch, we are bringing recognition to perhaps the most important man in American football history, Walter Camp, who many in the last 100 years or so have called the father of American football. There is some controversy and some inconsistency as to what day Camp was born. We'll talk about that in a moment. But as stated earlier on the Pigskin Dispatch, we're declaring this as Walter Camp weekend, just the same on the Pigskin Dispatch. Helping us in the study of Walter Camp is an expert and the author of an excellent book on the man titled Walter Camp, The Creation of American Football, authored by Roger R. Tamte, a scholar of early American football who studied Camp for many years. Roger Tampte, welcome to the Pigpen. Thank you, it's good to be here. No, we are certainly glad to have you, Roger. And first, we'd like to just learn a little bit about you. What brought your interest in the game of football?

Roger Tamte
Well, I've always been interested in football, and I grew up in Iowa, but my parents were from Minnesota. I was born in Minnesota, so I always had a little loyalty to Minnesota. I worked for 3M in St. Paul, Minnesota, and was a patent attorney for them for 30-some years, plus some consulting years. When I finished working for them, I wanted to work on some projects. I've always been interested in history, and I was interested in the University of Minnesota football, which in the 1930s had some national champions. Bernie Biermann was a coach, and there didn't seem to be a lot written about them, so I thought, well, I think I'd like to try and research that. I got started on it, but pretty soon, I began to realize there was not any well-documented book about the creation of American football, so I started to investigate that and became more and more interested and serious about it. I didn't immediately study Camp, but pretty soon, I realized that he was the key figure, and so I began to focus more on him.

Darin Hayes
Yeah, he's a very interesting figure. I mean, I was kind of on a similar path. I used to be a football official, and I would do some writing on the side for football officiating on some websites. I was also assigned to write about the history of football rules. And I became, you know, of course, football rules history sort of starts with Walter Camp, which we'll talk about here in a few minutes, including some of his accomplishments. But yeah, man, his contributions to the game of football are truly interesting. Now, you said, you know, you're from Minnesota, and you talked a little bit about the Golden Gophers program from the 1930s to the early 1920s. I mean, they really had some great teams back then. And I don't know if you have any, you know, things you would like to say about those programs anymore.

Roger Tamte
I don't know, I don't think so. I've often wondered why we could do it then and can't do it now, but it's been

Darin Hayes
Yep. We just said, uh, we do a daily, uh, bio on birthdays of hall of fame for the College Football Hall of Fame and a pro football hall of fame. And I know there's one just recently, and it's on the tip of my tongue. I can't remember the player, but he was a fullback for the Golden Gophers in the 1920s. And, uh, Newt Rockany of the, of Notre Dame was quoted saying, you know, he had to play him like three years in a row. And he said I can't believe we've got to play this going to get the guy again. I hope he graduates; it's just something that affects him. And, uh, so just some great golden go for history there in early football. But we, I, sorry, I threw you for a curve ball there. I didn't mean to do that. Let's try to stay on topic here. And that's my fault. Um, now you said, um, you know, you grew up in Minnesota and Iowa, you know, right in the Midwest, but, uh, and you learned a lot about Camp through, um, looking at some of the early history. Now, what was some of your research that you did to look up Camp on, you know, game of football?

Roger Tamte
Well, I don't remember the exact sequence of what happened, but I started off researching in the Minnesota Historical Society Library but soon realized that if I was really going to study the creation of football, I needed to get closer to Yale Harvard and Princeton, which were the so-called big three of that early football. So, I was really in retirement, and I began to travel. Now, I guess, here again, I don't remember the exact sequence, but I was working part-time for 3M even then as a consultant, and I occasionally had to go to DC, where the patent office was to have a meeting at the patent office. And I got so I would extend those trips on my dollar and go over to the Library of Congress. And I began to get some feel for information. I found a couple of early camp writings in their rare books collection, but I believe it was something like 2003. I took a trip out to Princeton, Harvard, and Yale. And I suppose on that trip, I realized that Yale had the papers for Walter Camp, and they had over 50 microfilm reels of papers that had been assembled very, very carefully and thoroughly, and I began to look at them. And I came home with what I had gathered but soon decided I needed to go again. And I should say, you know, I really had no training in historical research, and I maybe was not as careful as I should have been because I would learn things. And I could remember that I'd read them, but I didn't always take good enough notes to find them. So sometimes, when I went back, I had to look things up again or look things over. I've had to see.

Darin Hayes
issue happened to me, so don't worry about that.

Roger Tamte
I went to Harvard and Princeton maybe three or four times, but I ended up going to Yale more than that. I suppose I spent more time at the University of Minnesota libraries. They had very good newspaper magazine collections covering the time period when American football was being developed. And so I would probably go there at least once a week and try to dig through the newspaper files and magazine files. I basically enjoyed the research. It's drudgery many times, and yet when you find something that's new, and you're pretty sure it's interesting, why is that exciting? And it's kind of like exploring. You're an explorer out there trying to track down things. And so it turned out I enjoyed very much the process of researching. These were kind of my retirement years, so my wife and I took a few trips going south in the wintertime, and we'd go to places like Auburn. I found some material for my book in Auburn. A young professor at Auburn really instigated getting the students interested and able to play football, and John Heisman came along as their coach. That was his first really major five years. He was there for five years. That turned out to have some relevance to the book, even though it didn't have a lot to do with Camp. Anyway, I sort of lost track of your question now.

Darin Hayes
You answered very well in your research. Now, just digging in a little bit, I want the listeners to appreciate because I've also read a lot of Camp's put out a lot of things in periodicals, and he's written books. I have a few copies of my own collection, but even people at the time, some of the terminology and things that we call today were called differently back then. So you almost have to; it's almost somewhat interpreting a different language, going back 120, 130 years ago, talking about the game of football. As a matter of fact, the word football was broken into two words, the word foot and the word ball, early on. So I appreciate your research and your being studious because sometimes it is difficult to read some of that and try to incorporate it into today's language.

Roger Tamte
Yeah, right. You sort of come up with your own terminology, too. For example, we're going to talk about downs. And I've come up with the term downs and distance. It's really what the rule is about. But that's just my own idea. There are other ways to describe it, too.

Darin Hayes
I guess one of the best examples of it, you know, is the word snapper back is what was used quite a bit and not, you know, we can translate that to snapper or what we call today the center who snaps the ball, but the snapper back was when it sort of threw me for a loop a little bit, you know, just things like that. It's just a difficult thing to research at that time, sometimes in writing. So, I appreciate your diligence in what you did because I know what a chore it is. Suppose we could change gears a little bit. You know, in your studies, you know, we know we're going to talk a lot about Camp, the innovator and coach, and foot became a football, but can you tell us a little bit about what kind of a person Walter Camp was?

Roger Tamte
He grew up in New Haven. His father was an elementary school principal, and he attended the school where his father was the principal. He then went on to a private school in New Haven. He was always very interested in sports, I believe, and had a chance to see certain; if baseball came to New Haven, he had a chance to go see it and do things like that. He talks about wrestling, but when he got to Yale, he played baseball at the private school, Hopkins Grammar School. He played baseball for them and played soccer. But at Yale, for example, besides football, he played varsity baseball. He was in the first intercollegiate tennis tournament on the doubles team, representing Yale. He competed in intramural events in track and field. So he had a very, very deep involvement in sports, but he was also a good student. I would say not at the very top tier, but he won. He was recognized for his scholarship and was interested in writing. He'd been interested in writing ever since he was at Hopkins. He's on their newspaper staff. He also wrote poetry and had some poetry published. I would say he was also a very diligent person. I mean, he would undertake tasks and he'd follow through on them. During the development of football, as we might see, as we talk further, he was very responsible and really carried the effort, I think, in many ways. He was the only person who continued during those early years. I mean, most of them would come along for three years maybe, and once they finished school, then they left. But he continued to be involved, very diligent, and responsible. He was always characterized as quiet. And exactly what that meant, I don't know. I mean, he certainly he ended up being a coach and doing things like that. So he could speak when he needed to speak, but he was kind of in the background and quiet.

Darin Hayes
It's always the quiet ones you have to watch out for, right?

Roger Tamte
Well, something's going on, maybe. Yeah. Yeah.

Darin Hayes
Now, I believe if I read correctly, he was getting after school, still coaching at Yale, but he became involved in a family business in New Haven.

Roger Tamte
Well, yeah, when he finished school, he graduated from undergraduate school for four years and then attended medical school for three years. He did not graduate from medical school, however. But when he finished the spring of 83, he said that he wanted to catch on in business. He got a job for a clock company or a watch company in New York City. Connecticut was very prominent in the clock and watch industry. But he didn't stay with them very long because some of the graduates who were very much believers in him and what he could do for Yale and student athletic associations offered him a job at Yale to be in charge of all the athletic interests at the school. Now, in those days, it was the students and the graduates who were interested. There's not a lot of interest from the officials at school. So he worked that year in that position. And really, you can tell they hoped that Yale would hire him to continue that job as a regular Yale official. But they didn't. The Yale president, I don't think, thought it was the right thing. And so in 1984, after he'd worked at Yale for a year in sports, he again worked for the New Haven Clock Company. Now, they had an official named Camp, but he was not related to Walter. It was a stock investment company. But Camp continued there. He went to work in New York for about three years in the sales capacity, came back to New Haven, and was sort of, you'd probably call him, the sales manager. In the early 1900s, he was named chief executive president of the company. He was the president of the New Haven Clock Company, which was a worldwide company for about 20 years.

Darin Hayes
Now, uh, you know, you talk about him, uh, having to travel quite a bit, you know, go to New York City and I think, uh, by train, New York City is probably an hour away from, uh, New Haven. So, quite a bit of traveling. So coaching a football team, uh, can be quite difficult, but he had some help, I believe, uh, from his wife if you could go into that a little bit.

Roger Tamte
Yeah. I think it was common among former players to go back and help their teams after they graduated, and he did some of that. But in 1888, the captain of the Yale football team, who obviously wasn't an admirer, had confidence in what the Camp could do and asked him to really take full charge of their team. And it so happened that the Camp had just married Alice. It was the name of his wife.

Darin Hayes
Graham, Graham Sumter, was it?

Roger Tamte
I know her name very well, but I can't come up with it right now. Anyway, Walter was; they got married in July of 1888, I believe, and Walter started coaching the team that fall. I don't think he had a lot of money. He lived in a house right behind where his parents lived. He and Alice, and of course, he was working for the clock company, so he couldn't always be at practice, but she went in his place, and that's kind of hard to believe, but it's quite well documented. She went out there, walked the sidelines, and then took notes, I guess, and in the evening, would talk to Walter about what she had seen. The players got to like her. They called her Mrs. Walter, and she must have done a pretty good job. Then, in the evening, the captain would come over, and often, some players would come over to their house, and they'd talk about practice steps they needed to take. I don't know how much that happened. I assume he was that practice a fair amount, but I'm sure there were a lot of times when he couldn't attend practice, so she went in his stead.

Darin Hayes
Yeah. Can you imagine what most wives today would do if a husband said, Hey, can you go down to the football practice and take some notes? Well, I'm going to go to work. I know my wife would probably throw a couple of shoes at me or something if I asked a question like that. So she must've been very understanding.

Roger Tamte
Yeah.

Darin Hayes
we're supportive. Okay, so he had a lot of help. He had really deep roots in the towns of New Haven and Yale. Now, let's get into maybe some of his contributions and innovations. What are some of the big innovations that Camp brought to football?

Roger Tamte
Well, I think the first big one was the American Scrimmage rule. There's a camp that never said that he was the inventor of that rule, although I think most writers presume he was. But what happened there, I guess, was that American football was derived from rugby. Harvard was introduced to rugby by McGill College in Montreal in the early 1970s. Harvard challenged Yale, so Yale played them in 1975, which was kind of, I guess, not really a very clear cut as to the rules they were using. But in 1876, they played again, and there they used the regular rugby rules, pretty much. Other schools also became interested, and, in the fall of 1876, Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale formed the Intercollegiate Football Association. They adopted the regular rugby rules as the rules by which they would play. Now, the rugby scrimmage rule, which I'd like to read, says a scrimmage takes place when the holder of the ball, being on the field of play, puts it down on the ground in front of him. All who have closed around on their respective sides endeavor to push their opponents back and, by kicking the ball, drive it in the direction of the opposite goal line. I think of this as a brute-force type of game. They were intended to clash in the scrum and physically fight their way through that scrum and kick. He's kicking in opposite directions, but it, I think, was kind of a rough situation. They adopted that rule, and the Americans adopted that rule, but they really didn't like it very much. And they, you know, rugby had been in place in England for many years. And I've got a novel that was based at Rugby School, Tom Brown School Boys, it's called. And they have a rugby game described in there. And they describe the scene of a scrimmage. Here come two of the Bulldogs, and they go straight to the heart of the scrimmage, bent on driving the ball out the other side. And so the Americans, when they started playing that game, sometimes the varsity scrimmaged against the scrubs, and the varsity was bigger, and they could drive it through the scrubs. And so the scrubs began to think of something else, and they began to kick the ball sideways. And eventually, they began to kick it backward. They also didn't like the rugby method because when the two teams were clashing in the scrum and bouncing the ball back and forth, it often bounced out in unpredictable directions. Camp said that this conflicted with the Americans' idea of order and preparation. And now the Americans didn't have this history in rugby and weren't committed to it. So they began to try other things. One of the things they tried was to kick the ball backward, hoping one of their backs would get it and run around the scrum. And that became effective. At some point, what Camp wrote was an adventuresome spirit and developed a very vigorous backward kick. He was able to place his foot on the ball and kick it backward. And I'm assuming this was in the tangle of a rugby scrum. He somehow got his foot on the ball and was able to kick it out quickly so that the collegians began to call it a snapback. I guess it was fast enough and quick enough that they used the word snapback on it. However, the ball was kicked, and it was rolling and bouncing on the ground. So, one of the backs would gradually move closer and closer behind the guy who was kicking to be able to grab the ball before the opponents came through the line and grabbed it instead. And they began to call him the quarterback. I think they chose that kind of based on the location; he was closer to the line than the halfback. But anyway, the American-style scrimmage, or what I call the snapback scrimmage, developed out of that situation. In 1879 and 1880, the Americans deleted the rugby scrimmage lines of coming together and attempting to force their way through. And instead substituted other words, which, again, I'd like to read this. This rule was introduced in the 1880 rulebook. A scrimmage takes place when the holder of the ball, being in the field of play, puts it on the ground in front of it. All those words are exactly the same words from the rugby language. But then, this is the new part. It puts it in play when onside by kicking or snapping it back. The man who first receives the ball from a snapback shall be called a quarterback. And those seem simple words, but they accomplished a revolution. Rugby's brute force, forward kicking, and scrimmage battles were replaced with ordered play, planned and thought out in advance. And that happened because they knew who was going to kick the ball back. So that team was on offense, whereas in rugby, both teams were in the same status. I mean, you're on offense if you had the ball, but if the other team got the ball, then you were on defense. But in this case, they started the scrimmage with one team in charge of the ball. And so that team could know that it was going to be able to handle the ball and could put in effect a plan that they had practiced. And obviously, it changed the whole nature of the game. It's not clear who wrote those words, although Camp is commonly thought of as having written those words. What we know for sure is that he wrote a manual of instructions to go along with the rules. That manual, 11 pages, is a pretty detailed description of who was part of the 1880 rule book. Obviously, he had given this a lot of thought, and Yale had probably practiced it. And that became the American scrimmage rule.

Darin Hayes
I mean, just stop for a second and think about, I mean, how important that development is, you know, basically, you know, the invention of the quarterback or creation of the quarterback and creation of play calling, you know, the plans that you're talking about play calling for offenses, and subsequently defenses could call plays. So that's just the whole, probably the main source of interest for the game of football is just that I give and take and those, you know, one play, one team scheme against the other with their plays trying to gain an advantage and I mean that's gigantic in the game.

Roger Tamte
Yeah, it is. And it still has its effect today. Camp later, quite a few years later, the game was growing more and more popular. And he listed some reasons why he thought the game was popular. The first one he listed was the fact that the game is constantly developing and is always open to new methods. And that all arises from the fact that it's a game of planning. And the plans are quite an open slate of possibilities. And they keep developing and developing and developing. And it's responsible for what American football has become. So yes, it is. It was a very crucial and important rule. Now, however, I think you also asked about the downs rule. And I think that one is also a very important rule. This was definitely a camp invention. The first purpose was to correct a flaw in the 1880 scrimmage rule. The nothing in that rule limited a team in the number of possessions they could have. And so, teams, such as an inferior team, would stall and would not really try to move the ball forward; they would try simply to hold on to the ball if the other team could not score. That way, they at least would not lose. But those games were called block games. And the Americans tried for a while to overcome that problem. But they didn't, they didn't really solve it. And so in April of 82, in April 1882, they had an emergency rulemaking meeting. All four schools sent each sent three delegates. It was the largest rulemaking meeting they had at that point. Camp was in medical school, but he was a delegate for Yale. He came in with a proposed rule reading that if, in three consecutive downs, a team does not advance the ball by at least five yards, they must give up the ball to the opposite side on the spot of the last down. These are very familiar ideas. It was three downs, five yards. But today, you know, we think of that as kind of a natural or logical thing. But when Camp proposed it in 82, it really wasn't; I mean, if you think of the fact that putting a limit on the number of downs, which they didn't have, but also providing a way to extend that limit. That was a new idea and really a new creation. Conditioning the extension on how many yards the offensive team achieved within a certain number of downs was also a new idea. Using physical measurements to measure the distance a team had moved in three downs was a very new idea, and the other delegates were all opposed to this idea. They said you'll need a surveyor on the field to make it work, or constant delays will surely occur. The referee will be given superior powers and face impossible decisions. This is kind of an interesting satellite, but Camp answered them by suggesting that the field be marked with lines five yards apart. And the other delegates laughed and said, it'll look like a gridiron. And as far as I know, that's the first time that word was used that has become so common in describing a football field. Finally, the chair of the meeting, who was also opposed to the idea but had worked with the Camp enough to have some confidence in him, obtained a compromise. He says, and he persuaded them to enact the rule on the condition that in the fall if it didn't work, they would cancel the rule. Well, when the fall came, the play was so clearly improved that no effort was made to kill the rule. There was, first of all, an absence of block games. But more importantly, the game was made more interesting and compelling. Each down was important. Players had an exciting new focus. Each down became important to obtain the required yardage. Viewers knew what was at stake and were more interested, so they sat on the edge of their chairs, wondering if they would make these yards. Each down really told a story with winners, losers, and sometimes heroics. So anyway, Camp always said that it is the most important role in our game. And I think he was being sincere. It turned out that in 1912, the first historian of the rule, Park Davis, wrote that Camps' 1882 downs and distance rule had made American football preeminent over all other games of strategy and prearranged tactics. So, other people thought it was also an important rule.

Darin Hayes
Yeah, it's definitely a big contribution. I can't imagine going to a game and watching one team have the ball the entire game and just stand in the same place. That would be kind of boring. I think the game probably would have died out if it stayed that way.

Roger Tamte
worried about that. That's why they had an emergency meeting of 12 people because they really were worried that it couldn't die out.

Darin Hayes
Yeah, Camp, that's a brilliant idea he had, you know, and there was no other thing like it, you know, nobody had ever seen, as you said, so that's, that's really interesting. Now, if we could, you know, if we could fast forward to maybe 1904 or 1905, but the temperature of football was and what was about to happen and how camp sort of was involved in that, the whole thing with the, you know, there was no passing game at that point in time. Well,

Roger Tamte
Yeah, it was always a dangerous game, of course, but it became a time when there were a number of injuries and a number of deaths, and the public became upset about it and pushed for some sort of change. And Camp, I guess, you know, John Heisman had written some letters and claimed that he had suggested the idea of forward passing to Camp. I never found any letters from Heisman in the camp papers, so I don't know just what happened. But Camp was not too interested. And he really, they began to have in 1906; I haven't really looked at this stuff recently, but I think 1906 was the first year that the Rules Committee met. A number of the members of the committee advocated forward passing, which is a very limited kind of forward passing. Camp opposed it, however, and I think maybe it did start in 1905. In 1906, they did pass it. The Rules Committee over camps and other objections did put in rules allowing passing. I think they also, in that year, increased the downs, the yards that had to be made in three downs. There were still three downs, but they increased it to 10 yards. Now, President Theodore Roosevelt gets mixed into this story also. He was a friend of Camp's and a great admirer of Camp's. And, you know, I have not gone back and really refreshed myself on this story. And I don't think I want to take it on, but it's a really interesting story. Roosevelt eventually became persuaded that Camp was wrong and that there needed to be a change. He did some things to help that process along so that eventually, in 1912, a quite liberal passing rule was passed. Again, Camp opposed it. They did, at that point, increase the number of downs to four. So, in 1912, I think it was four downs to make 10 yards. But at the end of the 1912 season, Camp wrote in, you know, he had started a guide that contained the rules, and it had become taken over by Spalding. Camp was the editor and the main writer for this guide. And he wrote in that guide that 1912 had proved the effectiveness of rulemaking. And it was very complementary to forward passing. I think that's another insight into Camp: although he had opposed vigorously, in the end, he lost. However, he realized I think he had been wrong and that forward passing was going to be a very important part of the game. And it was, of course, and he used it. He used forward passing in his own coaching at Yale.

Darin Hayes
I believe it was even to the extent, going back to 1906 after Roosevelt sort of put the hammer down and told the intercollegiate rules committee they had to make some changes to make the game safer, institution of the forward pass, but Camp and some of the opponents of the forward pass put into some strict rules that first year, like if you threw a forward pass and it was incomplete, it was turned over on downs, like a recovered fumble. So you couldn't pass any more than five yards downfield, some really crazy rules that we wouldn't even recognize today. But it's, I'm glad to hear your 1912 that, you know, Camp saw the value of the forward pass and, you know, basically said, Hey, you know what, you guys are right. This is great for the game. And just like you said, in that 1912 rule book, a Spalding handle. So yeah, that's some great stuff there. Now, I got sort of a, let's fast forward another decade here, you know, Camp continued to go to the rules committee meetings that they were held annually, sometimes a couple of times every year. And, you know, he was extremely dedicated to the rules. And if you could take us maybe up to that 1925 rules convention, his last committee that he attended.

Roger Tamte
World War I also came along during this time. After the 1912 meeting and agreement, there were some rule changes, but within two or three years, they had reached a point where they made almost no changes to the rule book. That was really quite a change. I mean, almost every year until that time, there had been some fairly significant rule changes, but Camp has said the game is working well at this point, and we should let it continue. And so it did. After the war, during the war, there were a number of Army and Navy football teams. So, people got exposed to football that way. They also got some pent-up demand because some of the schools stopped playing football. So, at the end of the war, from 1920 to 1921, the number of games had really increased. And really, during the 1920s, a lot of the major football stadiums were built. But anyway, leading up to 1925, I don't think there was anything really earthshaking that was going to be held at that rulemaking meeting. But Camp had pretty much attended all of the meetings, and he went. He was 65 years old, I think, at that time. And they met together on Friday night and had some discussions. But planned to have further meetings the next day. They all went home to their hotel room. On Saturday morning, the committee met, but the usual prompt Camp was not there. And after an hour or two, the chairman of the committee sent a couple of people to go look for Camp. They got the hotel manager to open the door, and they found that Camp had died during the night. Apparently, he was at peace in his bed. So it's very ironic. This man who gave his life to football really died during the night between two sessions of the rulemaking committee. Obviously, it was quite a shock for his wife. That was the end of Walter Camp's participation in the rulemaking.

Darin Hayes
You know, I always maybe I'm over-romanticizing the situation, but I always like to think of it, you know, he accomplished so much and went through so much controversy to keep this game of football, you know, first of all, to get it off help get it off the ground and playing it and, you know, adapting rules and adopting rules and, you know, going to all these meetings and practices and going through the whole Teddy Roosevelt, you know, summons to the White House and the forward pass. You know, controversies, and he overcame all that, and football in the 1920s is sort of settled down, as you said, and there weren't a whole lot of innovations taking place at that time, at least in the major rule innovations, but he was sort of, you know, goes that that Friday night meeting. And you said how he died peacefully; I always like to envision it as he was sort of at peace with the game of football. And, you know, to be a football icon, you have to go out at a football rules meeting. There's just something about that that's astonishing and ironic, like you said, but also, you know, almost in a romantic sense that brings nostalgia to the event. And, you know, I don't know, it's just died doing the thing he loved, I guess, is a better best way to say it.

Roger Tamte
Yeah, there's a Grantland Rice. Walter Camp had presented an All-American team in Collier's magazine for many years, and when Camp died, Rice took that job over. But Rice was kind of a poet, was a poet. He wrote a poem that I always thought was if I can read it. Oh, please do. A few months after Camp died, Grantland Rice wrote this poem when he, I think, was perhaps naming the next All-American team, but Rice assumed Camp still remembered those players that he had named in the past and that he occasionally thought about them, imagined them as they marched along the skyline of memory. As they marched by, how often must have come to him the memory of the great battles which brought them fame, battles in rain and snow and sun and shadow, the flying tackle and the savage line thrust, the forward wall braced for the shock, the graceful spiral careening against the sky of blue and gray, the long run down the field, the goal line sand, the forward pass, the singing and cheering of great crowds, young and old America, gathered together on a golden afternoon with bands playing and banners flying? It may have been in the midst of such a dream that the call to quarters came, and Taff's was sounded as the great night came down the field. It's repeated more than once.

Darin Hayes
It's a beautiful tribute by Grant Lynn Rice to the great man Walter Camp. All right. I guess this is a question. Now, we've sort of encompassed the whole football life of Walter Camp, but you being an author and being so engrossed in his life, if you could travel back in time, I said, Roger, here's a time machine, and you can go back any time at any point in Camp's life and either witness an event or ask a question of Camp, what might that be?

Roger Tamte
Well, you know, one idea that comes to my mind is that I've always wondered what goes on in these rulemaking meetings. I mean, the Camp was apparently persuasive, but not a dictatorial person or early rulemaking meetings and see what the manner of discussion was and, you know, there would be a lot of times that might be of interest, but that's one that comes to my mind.

Darin Hayes
Yeah. And just you saying that sort of put the picture in my mind; I'm picturing a room full of cigar smoke in the air. We're probably waving our hands, trying to clear the air a little bit. And maybe what you said earlier with describing Camp as sort of a quiet person, maybe he was almost like that old EF Hutton commercial. You know, he didn't say much, but when Walter camp spoke, everybody listened, you know, maybe that's an instance that we could maybe look upon of what happened, you know, but that is, that would be a good question. Now, I appreciate you coming on today with us, Roger. Now, why don't you tell us the title of your book and maybe where some of our listeners can purchase your book?

Roger Tamte
The title is Walter Camp and the Creation of American Football. And, you know, I know that Amazon has the book available. But I don't actually know other places. I'm pretty sure that if you went to a local bookstore and asked for the book, they would get it. But that's all I know.

Darin Hayes
Okay. So, uh, Amazon, I mean, is a very common place where everybody buys books these days. Uh, the way they sort of the way the internet is taking over the marketplace, but again, that book is Walter Camp and The Creation of American Football by Rogers are T empty. Uh, make sure you check it out at Amazon and get a copy of it. Uh, it's a great piece of writing about a great man in American football history. And it's a very interesting read and, uh, one that everybody should have, uh, in their library. And, uh, Roger, we very much appreciate you joining us on what we're calling Walter camp weekend. I know we're a little bit controversial on the date, but, uh, uh, still, we're celebrating the man's life, uh, sort of in the appropriate time of year, the appropriate month, let's say, to, uh, make sure he has paid tribute to for his great contributions.

Roger Tamte
Well, thank you for asking. I've enjoyed participating. And, and I, you know, I feel that Camp is someone who we need to know better, and it is very much the father of American ball and, and there should be some times when we recognize what that contribution is because the game is obviously very important in, in the United States.

Darin Hayes
Sir, you've certainly shed some light with us here today and in your book and we are all much wiser and more informed for it and we thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Roger.

Roger Tamte
Thank you.

Dr. Tony Collins Is one of the most revered experts and historians in the disciplines of football globally, especially in the different types of Rugby Football. We had the honor of having a discussion with Tony along with one of America's foremost experts on the early origins of our brand of football in North America, Timoty P. Brown of Football Archaeology. Tony sheds light on so many items in the relationship and shared history of these football games and what each has given to the other.

Transcript of the Discussion between Tony Collins, Timothy Brown, and Darin Hayes

Darin Hayes
Welcome to a special edition of The Pigpen, where we will discuss the great history of football, not just American football. We'll go back much further than that. To help me along the way, we've got a couple of guests. I think possibly this first one—we can't even give them the title of guests anymore—Timothy P. Brown of Football Archaeology.com. Tim, welcome back to The Pig Pen.

Timothy Brown
Thanks, Darin. Glad to be back here and especially looking forward to this conversation.

Darin Hayes
Tim, you approached me a few weeks ago and said you had contact with someone very special, an expert in football history who is slightly different from what we normally talk about. Maybe you could give us a brief synopsis of that.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, so, you know, as if, you know, those who read my blog regularly know that I've been doing a series on the original rules of football. So, from 1876, the original rules of gridiron football. And in doing that, you know, football was Rugby at that point. And so, I am trying to get a better understanding of Rugby. I had been doing additional research and came across Tony Collins, now Professor emeritus, in the UK at a university. He's, you know, Tony, you'll be able to tell us otherwise, but I think you're kind of the foremost authority globally on the origins of these various games we call football. And so anyways, because I'd come across some of this information, we eventually, you know, I eventually, or we kind of reached out to each other connected and had a conversation and just thought it'd be great to have Tony on here with you and let your guests kind of get a different flavor of the games that we love across the world.

Darin Hayes
The listeners, we are in for a real treat today because, as Tim said, Tony is an expert, but just listen to his bio line. Now, he is from the UK. He's a social historian specializing in the history of sports. Professor Collins is well-accredited as a Meritus Professor of History at De Montfort University, a research fellow at the Institute of Sports Humanities, and, in 2018, a visiting professor at Beijing Sports University. In 2020, Dr. Collins had his works come out and do some great things. In 1999, he had his first book, Rugby's Great Split, which won the Aberdare Prize for Sports History Book of the Year. He followed that up with some other prestigious books that won that same prestigious award: A Rugby League in the 20th Century Britain in 2007, A Social History of English Rugby Union in 2010, The Oval World, A Global History of Rugby in 2016, and A Social History of English Rugby Union was also the winner of the 2015 World in Union Award for the Best Academic Book on Rugby Union. To his credit, his other works are Sport and Capitalist Society in 2013 and How Football Began, How the World's Football Codes Were Born 2018. Tony Collins, welcome to the Big Ben.

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, thanks for having me on. It's an honor to be here. I only hope I can live up to your billing, which is fantastic. So, thanks very much. I am also listening to the podcast and an avid reader of Tim's blog, so it's great to be here.

Darin Hayes
Well, I think we both speak for Tim. We both thank you for that. It's quite an honor to have you on here and to have you look at some of our work, too. So Tony, maybe you could just give us a real brief. You know, we saw all your accreditations in your books. How did you get to this point where you were such an expert on Rugby?

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, I guess, like most people, this has two aspects. So I was born, bred, and raised in a northern England port city called Hull, one of the few cities in the north of England where the major sport is rugby league football, which was the breakaway from rugby union. So, I kind of grew up involved in the culture and the heritage of rugby league from a very early age. I think possibly you guys as well. My father took me to matches; his father took him. So there's a long tradition there. So I was very interested in why this was so important to us. But also, when I went to university, one of the things that interested me very much was the social history of Britain and the world in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. And that's precisely when all the different football codes started and became popular. So, I've been very lucky that I've been able to combine my interest in sports alongside a kind of scholarly academic interest in social history. I've kind of been lucky to be able to combine those two things.

Darin Hayes
Did you play the game when you were younger?

Dr. Tony Collins
well, very badly, which is why I became a historian. Yeah, but I'd say sports on the field was never. I discovered it very quickly, and it was not my strong point, so I guess sports off the field became a substitute for that. But no, I mean, I'm also involved in the heritage of Ruby Lakes. I've worked a lot with the Ruby League authorities and clubs on the heritage of game-organizing exhibitions and things like that. So I'm still involved in the sport's everyday life.

Darin Hayes
Okay. Now, I think I'm going to represent in this conversation. I'm unsure if Tim and I can be an equal representation, but we are the common American lovers of football and football history. And to tell you the truth, I know very little about the rugby game. I've seen a few games played. I don't know that I understand it. Uh, I'm not sure I, you know, I know a brief history of it. And so, as a representative of my fellow, common or here in America, not knowing the sport, maybe you could just give us a brief history of Rugby.

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, like all the different games that became modern football games, its roots are in this kind of pre-industrial society before people lived in towns and working factories and lived on the land. Many football-style games were played where the ball was kicked past and thrown to reach a goal, which is the basis of all the football games we know today. Rugby itself emerged, as the name implies, from an elite private school in the English Midlands, Rugby School in the town of Rugby. And it's... Rugby schools in the 1820s, 30s, and 40s became a kind of flagship of the British elite private school system. And one of the things that made it that was the importance that it placed on sport, both football in the winter and cricket in... It was another sport we won't get time to get into, which we won't get into now. In, you know, cricket was the summer game, Rugby was that Rugby and football was the winter game. One of the interesting things that happened was that it gave Rugby a massive advantage over the other football games played at other elite schools. So, all the elite English schools had their version of football. Some listeners may have heard of places and elite institutions like Eaton and Harrow. They also had their versions of football. But Rugby became popular beyond its school because of the popularity of a book called Tom Brown School Days, which you may have heard of. It came out in 1857 and was a massive, massive bestseller. A kind of the equivalent of Harry Potter, but without the magic. A football match played under rugby rules was at the core of Tom Brown School Days. And the popularity of the book meant that you know, people, not just in Britain, but people in the English-speaking world, decided that, you know, rugby football was an important part of a young man's education. So the game had a kind of moral importance, not just a... It wasn't just a recreation or an entertainment. So I had this moral, educative importance. And that meant that other schools took it up and also that, you know, people in the general public read the book and wanted to play the game. And, you know, that's also the case in the States. I mean, Tom Brown's School Days sold something like a quarter of a million copies in the States, and perhaps most famously, Teddy Roosevelt said that this is one of two books that every red-blooded American boy should read. So the game became popular on the back of Tom Brown School Days. And that led to the basis for its spread around the English-speaking world.

Darin Hayes
Okay, that clears it up, and that's probably, like you say, how it came across the pond here and over to the States. Now, Tim, I know you have a series of questions that you'd like to talk to and ask Tony about, you know, taking it up from that point where Rugby is in the States and, you know, sort of the transformation into what we know is the game of American football.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, and I guess I'd like to back it up just a bit because that is one thing I think about. So I've read, you know, Tony's book, how football began. And for me, the fascinating thing about it is that there was a stew of different folk games that, over time, some of them became more formalized, like Rugby, you know, developed established rules in the association game. So, just wondering if, you know, Tony, if you could talk a little bit about kind of what that looked like in England, this, you know, mishmash or stew of games, and then how it starts diverting or diverging into some of the different football codes that we know today.

Dr. Tony Collins
Sure, yeah. Well, there are two aspects to it. First, as I've just mentioned, the elite private schools in England each had their code of football rules, but there were also regional variations. So there were games of football played with widely varying rules, most of which resemble Rugby in the handling as well, and kicking of the ball was allowed. But it wasn't until the early 1860s when groups of young, well-to-do professional men who had left private school decided to continue playing football as adults and started to form their clothes. Still, one of their problems was that they'd all been to different schools, and they couldn't play; they didn't have a common set of rules by which to play the game. So they'd have this very unacceptable situation where the home team always played under its rules whenever a match was played, which meant that the home team won every time. So it's not very interesting for the players. So, in 1863, a meeting was called in London to try and form an organization that would come up with one set of rules that would unite all the different football clubs and schools to play the game under one set of rules, which led to the formation of the Football Association. However, it wasn't successful, and there was lots of infighting, politicking, and rivalry. The Football Association was founded in 1863, but several clubs were involved in the discussions which preferred a more handling code of football and left the Football Association eventually, in 1871, they formed the Rugby Football Union, which was the game that organized the clubs who based their rules on the rules of rugby school. So, those two organizations really set the agenda for the consolidation and codification of the two different sets of rules. One of the big things that helped soccer under the Football Association was the fact that the Football Association started a national knockout cup competition in 1871, the FA Cup, which soon became very popular and had great prestige. That meant that if you wanted to enter the cup and stand a chance of winning, you had to understand their rules and play them to a high standard. So, that started a differentiation between the two codes, meaning that clubs had to pick one side. You couldn't play both codes and expect to be successful in them. So, the consolidation of both codes was based on the need for competition with other clubs on a serious and well-regulated basis.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, interesting. So while that was going on in the UK, over here on the western side of the water, both in Canada and the US, the same kind of situation, elite young men were playing local codes. But then they started adopting both soccer rules and rugby rules. My understanding is that I probably get most listeners to know that we picked up Rugby through McGill University. And I think the first rugby game in Canada was British soldiers stationed there, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah, that's right. Yeah.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, that's right. I think in the 1860s, perhaps, but clubs were certainly being formed in Canada in the 1860s. Canada had a much closer link at that point. It's still part of the British Empire with the British. So, more football information flowed between the two countries than might have been between the States and Britain.

Timothy Brown
Yeah. And then, so then we end up with a, you know, kind of a mirror situation where we've got local, you know, basically to play one another, you know, you had to come up with a common set of rules because we face the same situation, whoever made up the rules won the game, you know, you know, so for us, it ends up that, you know, football emerges, you know, at the time. So, you know, this is kind of similar or taking off of what Darren said, where, you know, most Americans think of, of Rugby, the way it's played today, you know, not the way it was played in the 1870s. And so, can you describe how, maybe, association, football or soccer, and Rugby, those two games were played compared to your understanding of American football in the 18th, as American football started breaking away? What were those games like?

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, by the time we get to do it with soccer first, I think it's the easiest. By the time we get to the mid-1870s, soccer is not too different from today's. The rules have been consolidated. In the early years of soccer, incidentally, outfield players could catch the ball and knock it down with their hands. At one point in the mid-1860s, there was a provision in the rules to allow the scoring of rouges and touchdowns, allowing people to attempt to score a goal. So, the idea is that soccer has always been a game that's being played with the feet. It's not it's not quite right. But certainly, by the time you get to the 1870s, it's 11 11 players; no outfield player could touch the ball with their hands. Only the goalie could touch the ball with their hands. So it didn't change much of the well between then and now. However, Rugby was very different from what you see today in rugby union or rugby league. Firstly, the teams were 20 aside. This differs from today's 15, aside from rugby union, and 13, aside from rugby league. Of those 20 players, 15 were forwards, and the game was essentially a succession of scrums. And a couple of interesting things, I think, from the point of view of the links with football. Firstly, how the game was organized differed from how it was organized when a play was tackled. So before 1878, when a play was tackled, and his forward motion was stopped, he wrapped to his feet and waited for the other forwards in the scrum to gather around him. Then, he would place the ball on the ground and shout down, and each side would attempt to kick the ball through the other side. And I think the fact the player had to shout down when the ball was in play is the origin of football's system of downs. So that's quite interesting. The other very different thing is when you see a rugby game today, and the ball is put into the scrum, the ball always emerges at the back of the out of the back of the scrum. The idea is for the falls to heal the ball backward so it comes out and then be put in play by being passed to the backs. That wasn't the case in Rugby in the 1870s when it first reached America. The idea then was that the ball was in the scrum, and the forwards kicked the ball forward, tried to break through the opposing forward pack, and then dribbled the ball downfield. Eventually, it would come to hand. And there may be some passing, and the game's object was to score a goal. Tries, which were very important now to the game, again, were the same as touchdowns; tries were precisely what the name implied. Touching the ball down over the goal line allowed you to try to kick a goal, and only goals counted in the score. So again, there was no point system. As in soccer today, it was simply a question of which team scored the most goals. So the game was, in a sense, unrecognizable from what it is today. Mass scrummage in very long scrummage in not much lateral passing, not much kicking out of hand other than to try and gain territory to set up another scrum. But it was a scrum that was the core of the game. And that, I think, proved to be the, if you like, the pivot around which the other football games developed; it was by rejecting the importance of the scrum and the dominance of the forward pack and the reliance on the kicking of goals, which led to, in a sense, Rugby fracturing into the four different games that we have today.

Darin Hayes
Now, if I could ask a follow-up question on that, Tony, now you said that, you know, back in that era, there were attempts at scoring, but there was no scoring. So what was the purpose of the try if it was just the scored goals?

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, if you touched the ball down over the goal line and scored a try, you were allowed a kick at goal, a relatively unhindered kick at goal. In rugby rules, the rule was that you touched the ball down over the line, and then you had to throw the ball back out from the goal line to your kicker, who would then attempt to kick a goal. The rugby union abandoned that rule because it was too complex and also became quite dangerous. It allowed the kicker simply to take a kick at goal from the point at which the try scorer crossed the goal line. But it wasn't until 1886 that tries had any value in the scoring system, and even then, tries were worth one point, and a goal was worth three points. And the drop goal, which I think Doug Flutey was the last person to try in the NFL. I might be wrong, but a drop goal in those days was worth four points. So, that was the most valuable way of scoring up until the 1940s in rugby union.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, just for the listeners, a drop goal is, an American would call it, a drop kick. Yeah, but yeah, it's a goal from a kick. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. And so yeah, it's really what you've described as fascinating because, from a scoring standpoint, that was football early on because football was Rugby, right? And so, and I think the one thing that surprised me intrigued me in, you know, reading some of your, your, you know, your website, your book is just the whole, you know, I always had the impression of Rugby being much more free-flowing game. So when I thought of football and adopted rugby rules, it still looked like the Rugby we know today, rather than the scrumming mauling kind of game you describe. And so I, we had an earlier conversation, but you know, when, about this, but when, when Americans change football to use 15, and then 11 players, that dramatically impacted the nature of play. And could you talk about that a bit?

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, and I think this is one of, again, one of the pivotal moments in the history of Rugby and football. So there was, as you might imagine, a lot of dissatisfaction with how Rugby was played because it's not much of a spectacle just to see 30 guys pushing and shoving a ball, which you rarely see anyway in that type of game. So there was pressure to reduce the size of teams and make the game more interesting and free-floating, partly in response to soccer, which doesn't have scrims as much more open game. So in 1875, the Rugby Football Union, the governing body, reduced the number of players in the team to 15 in response to that. Then, it changed the actual tackle law in 1878, which stated that if a player was tackled, he had to release the ball immediately. So, the old style scrimmage in which players would just line up, the ball would be declared down, and then the pushing would change rapidly. And that meant that the ball could come into play much more quickly.
Nevertheless, there was still debate about how Rugby developed over the next ten years and the constant centrality of the scrum. And we can say this in America and Canada: football in those countries moved away quite quickly from the scrum. And incidentally, one of the things that will be interesting in your thoughts is that the Canadians were the first footballers to seriously discuss getting rid of the scrum in 1875. They held a football conference in Toronto where they criticized the importance of the scrum and said it was a blight on the game, eventually leading to them adopting a more open formation. But that was also true within Rugby in Britain and Australia because there were lots of complaints about the importance of scrummaging, the fact that the game wasn't more open, the fact that goals were regarded as more important than tries, which certainly people in the north of England, south Wales, and Australia in Rugby felt that tries are much more important and much more interesting for spectators and also much more scientific in the way they use the term scientific in those days. So, this general dissatisfaction with the dominance of scrum in Rugby could also be found in Rugby itself. And so many of the reasons for the changes brought into American football, obviously most notably by Walter Camp, were responses to problems that were similarly being grappled with, obviously in Canada, but also within Rugby itself. This was one of the breakaways that led to the formation of the Rugby League in 1895, which again moved away from having so many scrums and reduced the number of players on the pitch to make the game more open and attractive. So's that late 1870s period when football started to become football as we know it, which is also a crucial period for the subsequent development of Rugby and the way Rugby itself split into two sports.

Timothy Brown
Yeah. And, you know, in an earlier conversation, we had talked about how when football, you know, in a game of 20 or 15 on a side, it was easier, in a sense, to keep the ball in the scrum. Once you have only 11 players, you start dropping some of them back off, off the line. So you have fewer forwards. Now, all of a sudden, it's easier for that ball to get out of there, right? And to heal it back. And so then that leads to the passing and openness. So, if I understood correctly, in many respects, American football, or possibly Canadian Rugby at the time, generated that openness or was the first to generate that kind of open game, as opposed to the scrummy, mauling game of the past.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, I think that's true. As we've discussed before, I think adopting 11 aside teams meant that even if you wanted to have scrummage similar to what you had in Rugby, it's very difficult because you haven't got enough players. As soon as you start to kick the ball forward, the ball will come out with the scrum, and if you kick it forward, your opponents will get possession. If you're trying to hold it in the scrum, as was a common tactic within Rugby, you don't have the numbers to keep the ball in the scrum for long. It will come out, so I think that immediately raises the question of what you do and how you control the ball, which, you know, football is solved by the snapback. Canadian football had a similar thing with what they call a scrum. Eventually, in rugby league, they also introduced what was called the play of the ball, which is a similar type of thing and still is a similar type of thing to the original snap in football, where the ball was rolled back with the foot by the center to the quarterback. If you watch Game of Rugby League today, you'll see that when a player is tackled, he stands up, puts the ball, and then uses his foot to roll it back to what rugby league calls the dummy half, but it's equivalent to a quarterback.

Timothy Brown
So, can you distinguish between the Rugby Union and the Rugby League for the typical American?

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, it's a big question that takes two minutes. All right. That's the toughest challenge to that one. There are essentially two aspects to it. It essentially revolved around the question of payment for players. The leaders of Rugby, the Rugby Football Union, were committed to the amateur ideal in the north of England, where the game of Rugby was very popular amongst industrial workers and became a mass spectator sport. And at one point, it was more popular than soccer. Players had to take time off work to play the game and train, so they lost wages. And so clubs in the north started a campaign to allow players to be paid broken time payments, compensation for having to take time off work. The leaders of the Ruby Union said, no, this is equivalent to professionalism; we're not having it. Eventually, they started to ban players and suspend clubs. That led to the strongest clubs in the north of England deciding enough was enough and that we wanted to have a game where players were allowed to be paid. It's a spectator sport, and we think the players should be paid the same way as other entities. In 1895, they broke away to form what was initially called the Northern Union but later became known as the Rugby League. The other aspect of that split I just hinted at earlier is that there was also a different conception of how the game should be played. The clubs in the north didn't like the emphasis on scrimmaging and wanted to emphasize the scoring of tries, which they felt were more spectacular, scientific, and modern. They also wanted to make the game more open because of the threat from soccer. I mean, soccer was becoming, you know, essentially a juggernaut that was taking over everything. And so they wanted to be able to respond by making Rugby as attractive as possible. And so it's those two elements, the desire to pay players and the desire to have a more open, spectacular game that moved away from the traditional rugby scrimmaging that led to the creation of rugby league. A similar process occurred in Australia, where the game is now dominant in eastern Australia. The National Rugby League is probably the biggest club rugby competition of any rugby code worldwide. It's played in New Zealand, France, and many other countries. Rugby Union is still the biggest form and the most popular. The World Cup starts in France in a couple of months. And it's still a game of all the professional classes, more middle-class elements of society. Rugby League, wherever it's played, is very much a blue-collar sport. It's it's very easily distinguishable. The two constituencies of rugby union and rugby league are very different. So it's a combination of differences on and social differences off the pitch. And I think, in a sense, the rugby league probably has more in common with football than the rugby union. A famous Australian rugby league coach once said football and Rugby are the same sport but with different rules. We don't have the ball, and you've got to tackle hard. When you have the ball, you must run hard and score tries or touchdowns.

Timothy Brown
that is interesting. And I love the, you know, the, you know, it's the US had an analogous situation, you know, you talked before about, you know, the kind of the moral aspect of, of playing Rugby and, you know, kind of the rough and tough sport, the muscular Christianity issue. And so that's kind of the elite approach. And then you've got the spectator-oriented, professional, industrial focus. And so, you know, those same tensions played out in America between the elite universities playing football and the guys in Pennsylvania and Ohio and the leagues that they played, you know, in an industrial game of football.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, very similar. I remember years ago, in the 1980s, when British TV started broadcasting football and the NFL had an exhibition match with the Buffalo Bills at Wembley in the mid-1980s. Frank Gifford came over to England and, for English viewers, described the Bills as being very similar to one of the Northern Rugby League teams because they come from a similar industrial town that isn't doing too well. And that's the same, you know, that pretty much sums up where Rugby League's played in the UK.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, interesting. Another thing that intrigues me is, in American football, you know, because we had some rural changes, mostly the nature of tackling. Then, we've allowed blocking since very early on. And so our game ended up becoming this mass and momentum, very rough physical game, lots and lots of injuries, and ultimately deaths as well. And so, did other football codes go through similar kinds of experiences? And, you know, if so, how do they resolve it? How do they adjust their rules to try to remedy the situation?

Dr. Tony Collins
That's a really interesting question because this debate took place from the 1880s until the beginning of the First World War in 1914 across British sports. It was about the dangers of playing football, whether soccer or Rugby. Interestingly enough, the medical profession seemed to agree that soccer was more dangerous than Rugby because of the danger of broken legs. But there was nothing like the great crisis in the middle of the 1900s that confronted football. However, the only similar thing took place in 1870. There was a bit of a human cry, if you like, public consternation about deaths playing Rugby at schools. One of the reasons why the Rugby Football Union was formed in 1871 was to organize the game and make its rules safer. There was the Times, you know, the famous London Times newspaper, the main newspaper in Britain. Well, it still is today. The Times had a kind of campaign against the point of Rugby because it carried lists of young men who had broken legs, broken collarbones, and who had even died playing the game. One of the motivating factors for forming the Rugby Union was to make the game safer and the rules a bit safer. So you can see very strange things in the first set of the Rugby Union rules, such as you can't use iron plates or steel toe caps on football boats, which was quite common in schools because hacking, kicking opponent shins, was an accepted part of the game in schools and was seen as a way of demonstrating your hardness. Not only being able to kick but also taking hacks symbolized how hard you are, your masculinity, and your fitness. But obviously, that led to great dangers, particularly when people fell over and could get kicked in the head with iron boots and things like that. So one of the things that the Rugby Union did when the Rugby Football Union was formed in 1871 was to make the game much safer, ban hacking, and outlaw the use of fortified boots. So that's the nearest thing that occurred, but there isn't the same number of deaths as what started to happen in football with the mass plays. And there's never the same type of outcry that you got in 1905, 1906, when the president called the heads of colleges to try and figure out what to do about stopping football from becoming so violent.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, well, one of the things that's interesting, you know, is that I've always said I'm going to write an article about it; it just takes so much work. But, you know, a number of the deaths in the, let's just call it 1895 to 1905, and even the next ten years, a lot of those deaths are, were not things that somebody would die from today. You know, it was, you know, literally scratches on the football field that got infected. Or, you know, you mentioned broken legs, you know, broken legs at one time could be a death sentence, you know, that's not the case anymore. You know, and so that's part of it, they were the crushed skulls and those kinds of things that were directly the result of the nature of the play, which is why they changed some of those things. But yeah, it's, you know, that whole, a lot of the safety issues wouldn't be safety issues anymore. You know, just because of the advances of modern medicine.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, I think that's right. Yeah, I think you're right. And I think the other thing is that there's, as occasionally occurred in England, a bit of a moral panic about football for various reasons. So the numbers of deaths without wishing to downplay the personal tragedy, it's easy for the number of deaths to be exaggerated. I mean, for example, in the early 1890s, there was a London newspaper, the Paramount Gazette, that campaigned against football and compiled this list of 70-odd players who we claimed had been killed playing Rugby in the north of England in just three years, which, you know, if that was true, that would be a national scandal. Almost one player is being killed every week of the season. But, when you look back at the figures, they're not particularly robust. Some happen after matches, and some of them are things that, as you say, could have happened in any walk of life. People get sepsis from scratch, often broken fingers and things like that, which are not peculiar to football or peculiar to Rugby in this case. So, I think it's worth treating figures of deaths with something of a pinch of salt. That's not to downplay or decry them or say there's anything fake about them. But it's not quite as straightforward as I think the history books tell us at the moment.

Darin Hayes
Yeah, I think this is quite incredible and eye-opening to me, again, wearing that cap of the average American football fan. We consider Rugby a more brutal sport because of our perception today. In our football, we wear helmets, shoulder pads, and all kinds of protection. You look at these rugby players, who are pretty much just going out there with a shirt and shorts from our perspective and making a lot of contacts like you would in the game of football. So, I think it's incredible that the deaths and injuries weren't as prevalent in early Rugby as in American football.

Dr. Tony Collins
I think the other thing is that sometimes when football and rugby fans get together, you get this debate, which is the toughest. And the fact is, they're both different. I mean, one of the things I think that makes football is a game of short bursts. And so much emphasis is placed on yardage, which means there's much more force and impact in tackles than what you normally get within Rugby. But you've got to tackle and run with the ball, usually for a full 80 minutes, which, you know, footballs don't do. So that is the difference, as I say, with all football cards when people try to say, my game's better than yours, my game's tougher than yours, or anything. Each one has its challenges, and each one has its strengths. So it's, they're not, it's not worth comparing it in any way, I don't think.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, the other thing is Rugby doesn't allow interfering or blocking. Yeah, right. And so, while, you know, that just dramatically changes the nature of the game, the amount of contact, even if it's not, is the high-impact contact that you always see in, you know, from a tackle. Yeah. But you know, I know Rugby has its concussion issues, similar to one football face.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, exactly, yeah, yeah.

Darin Hayes
Go ahead, Jim.

Timothy Brown
Well, okay, I'll jump in. So, just wondering, did any other games that, at different points, allow the armoring of players, you know, the padding and, you know, football from early on had, you know, no hard surface or no hard materials? Hence, no iron, no, I believe it's called Gouda perch, or Gouda perch, you know, it's synthetic from Indonesian trees, right? Like a tar plastic sort of substance. That rule existed for a long time, so helmets were fairly soft until the 20s. But then obviously, football went away from that, you know, with the plastic helmets and harder leather. But did any other games have a period where they started allowing more padding? Or is it? Has it pretty much been? You're on your own, baby.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, kind of. I mean, for a long time, players in both games of Rugby, and one or two still lose it, wear what are called scrum caps, which are kind of like the old-fashioned leather helmets but made of much thinner material partly because it was believed that, for a long time, that would stop the dangers of concussion and head clashes. However, there's no evidence that they do. Scientists have claimed that giving players extra confidence makes them less aware of safety issues and head concerts. In the 1980s and 1990s, rugby league players wore thin shoulder pads underneath their shirts. There is nothing on the scale of football players' shoulder pads. But by and large, the rugby courts have stayed clear of that type of protective or offensive body wear. I think primarily because, in an 80-minute game, players are effectively playing both ways in football. So, carrying extra weight would not be a good thing.

Darin Hayes
No, go ahead, Tim.

Timothy Brown
I just have a quick comment: Just say, like, you know, in the 1910s, especially, there was a big movement to shed pads, and the game was going to be a speed game. So get rid of all paying it. And, you know, you're kind of looked down upon if you protect yourself with padding, and things went back the other direction. But so similar, a similar thing happened.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, I mean, just one quick note on that: what's interesting is that in the very early years of Rugby, the 1860s and 1870s, when hacking was still used, was still part of the game, to where shingards were seen as a sign of weakness. And there are a lot of stories where players would go on to the pitch wearing shin guards, and they'd be told either you take them off or we're going to kick them off, and often they end up worse for wear.

Darin Hayes
Interesting. Now, if I could, gentlemen, I just want to catapult us more to the modern times here and look at some of the differences between Rugby, football, both in the Union and the rugby league, and what we know, you know, in America. And I guess one of the things that, you know, football, our modern football, we are a society that just loves statistics. Baseball started over a century ago, and football looks for ways to get statistics to get fans more involved. Today, it's evolved into, you know, fantasy football and various things. Are there statistics important to the game of Rugby that folks keep track of today?

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, but not in the same way. I think one of the things that's very striking about football, and really, I think American sport, is the emphasis that there has been on statistics for a very long time. There's a little bit of it now, but for most of its history, the only statistics that mattered in terms of players were who scored the most tries in the season, who scored the most tries in the career, who scored the most goals. And individual accomplishments like that. So, in terms of measuring yardage, tackles made, kickoff returns, you name it, anything that any football fan knows off the top of their head, those things don't exist to any great extent in any of the other games. The rise of data analytics has meant that there's more of that now, even in soccer, which is much harder to keep any detailed stats. And certainly, in the two Ruby games, you can now find, if you want to go and find details of the yardage players have made, tackles they've made, tackle busts they've made, then you can find them. And they're certainly used by the coaching staff.

Darin Hayes
Okay. And I guess the other more modern question I have for you is from the UK, you know, from an American perspective, when we talk about the game of football, there's only one thing. It's, you know, the gridiron, it's American football, and we know that you folks in England are, when you talk about football, well, it could be a variety of things. So how would, if somebody's sitting there reading the London Times or any of the other periodicals over there and somebody mentions the game of football, how do they differentiate between all these different games that are considered football?

Dr. Tony Collins
Well, that's a really interesting question because it is a real problem when you look at reports of the various types of football in the 19th century in the newspapers. After all, it's assumed by and large that you will know which type of football is being referred to. So I think the basic rule of thumb in this is that whichever sport got to a place first, whichever, you know, whichever football code got to a place first, that is the one that is normally called football. So yeah, as I mentioned at the top of the show, I come from a town called Hull, and rugby league was the most important spot there. So my grandfather, who was born in 1907, always called it football. Whereas you go to other places and football, football means soccer. By and large now in England, then if you talk about football, people assume you're referring to soccer, and you get this, which, you know, I guess you may have had as well that soccer fans will say, how can it be football if it's not played with the feet? However, the other football codes are played with the feet, not to the same extent as soccer. Also, the nickname soccer is a very English invention anywhere because it comes from the word association, the SOC in association. When these games were played in the elite private schools, association football would be referred to as soccer and rugby football would be referred to as Rugby. So that's the origin of the two names. So it's, I'll tell you, the worst place to go there if you go to Australia, where there are four major football codes. Australian rules football, another oval ball code derived from rugby school. You have rugby football, rugby league football, and association football. Figuring out which code a person is referring to when they talk about football can sometimes be quite difficult. So yeah, I think the key thing here is, when in Rome, do as the Romans do, and whatever their locals refer to as football, that's football.

Darin Hayes
Interesting, go ahead.

Timothy Brown
Yeah, your question raised an interesting question for me. You know, it's one of the things that we get into, especially in football. I think, you know because the game has changed so dramatically. I mean, to some extent, baseball is still baseball, right? But football has changed so dramatically from how it was back in the day. And so the goats are the greatest of all time; all kinds of arguments become very difficult because comparing a player from one time to another is tough, and you've got recency bias, etc. Does the same thing occur in Rugby? I mean, do people feel like they can go back and say somebody who played who was a star of 1910? You know, how does he compare to a player from the 1980s versus, you know, the 2020s?

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, it's a really difficult issue. I've been involved in panels where you decide who's the greatest player ever. It's pretty impossible because, obviously, as a historian, I've got a much greater knowledge of plays in the past than a regular fan. Naturally, your bias is towards players you've seen play and have had an impact that is still felt today. It's an incredibly difficult thing. As you said, when I first started watching football and British TV in the 1980s, it's a very different game today when I watch it than what it was when I was watching Mike Dick as Chicago Bears when Super Bowl in 1985. That's true of the other games, as well. I mean, Ruby Union has changed a tremendous amount. Not least, in the past 40 years, it's gone from being a purely amateur sport to being a fully professional one. It's changed its rules to become, in a sense, a little bit closer to Ruby League. There's more emphasis on the scoring of tries and less emphasis on scrums, but its principles are still the same.
Again, Ruby League has changed very much. I think one of the interesting things is football's impact on the other football codes. American football has impacted the other football codes, particularly the Ruby codes. I think Canada is an obvious example of what originally Canadian Rugby was. It slowly transformed itself, partly under the influence of what was going on south of the border, to become a 12-a-side three-game gridiron. But I think when you look at the Ruby League, it has also been influenced heavily by football over the years. For example, unlike Ruby Union, you only have a limited number of tackles to score.
Originally, in 1966, there was an unlimited number of tackles, similar to the problem that faced football in the 1880s before three downs were brought in. Seems to just hang on to the ball as long as they could, particularly if they got into the lead. That was changed in 1966 when the Ruby League authorities brought in the system of what you would call four downs; we call four tackles. Then, that was changed to open the game up a bit more to six tackles in the early 1970s. I was struck by something you wrote, Tim, at the weekend about Eddie Kokums at Wisconsin, who proposed five or six downs without any outage requirement, which is essentially the system that Ruby League plays today. You have the ball six times, and if you don't do anything if you don't score, you turn it over to the other side. Even though we're in the 21st century, the games have never been further apart; there's still a little influence going backward and forwards. Pete Carroll at the Seahawks is a big fan of Ruby tackling. There are links between the sports and the different types of football in the 1870s and 1880s, but there's still a little residue today.

Darin Hayes
Now, I guess, I mean, it's fascinating, um, our modern times, now I know we've seen it in the NFL, even, even, uh, recently where some former, uh, legends of the game of Rugby have come across in the United States and tried their hand at American football, trying out for, uh, you know, an NFL team. I know for a while there, we, in the NFL, had some players from Europe put on a practice squad to develop them. Still, I haven't heard other than maybe a kicker, uh, making it into American football from one of the other, um, items of football rugby or whatever is, has it, anything ever gone the other way where an American football player has become something substantial in the game of Rugby.

Dr. Tony Collins
There's a couple of footballs. One was Al Kirkland, who I think played semi-pro football. I don't think he's ever drafted in the NFL, but he came over and had quite a long career in the British Rugby League. There was a more short-lived guy called Manfred Moore who went to play Rugby League in Australia in the 1970s. I think they played for the Saints; I'm not sure. I'd have to check that one out. Interestingly enough, the most influential football player who came to play Rugby, to play rugby union was Pete Dawkins, who came to Cambridge University in the late 1950s. I think he was a Heisman Trophy winner.

Timothy Brown
from our army.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, and yeah, and Pete Dawkins was the man who introduced the spiral throw in Ruby Union when the ball goes out of bounds or into touch, as we call it. It comes back into play through the lineup when the two sets of forwards line up alongside each other, and balls are thrown back in, and they lift and try and get the ball and put it out to the pass. For a long time, the ball was thrown in like soccer over the head and sometimes under the arm upwards and over. Still, when he came to Cambridge, it was Pete Dawkins who introduced the torpedo pass, the spiral pass to the line out, and that's the system used throughout Ruby Union now for bringing the ball back into play in a line out. So yeah, Pete Dawkins has probably been the most influential American footballer ever to play Rugby. It's because what he introduced into the game in the 1950s is still prevalent today.

Darin Hayes
Tim, do you have any further follow-up questions to ask Tony?

Timothy Brown
Uh, no, I, you know, I mean, partly interested. I mean, I, we could stand here all afternoon. But, uh, I just wanted to say this is like, you know, I don't know, Darren, from your perspective, but certainly from my perspective, this is the greatest of all time session for the podcast. I mean, I just, like, this has been fascinating. It's so much fun to hear your perspective on these things, Tony. It's, it's fun. Very much appreciate it.

Dr. Tony Collins
Yeah, me too. It's really enjoyable because I think one of the problems that we have as football historians is that it's very easy to get tunnel vision. And so, you know, you just look at your football. And I think these types of discussions when you step back and then think, well, there's a lot in common here. And certainly, you know, certainly in the history and the origins that, you know, we're of the same parentage. But even today, how problems are dealt with, the way innovations are brought into the game, I think there's a lot that, well, I think there's a lot of the games can learn each other on the pitch, but also as historians, I think there's a lot of value from discussions like this and long may they continue.

Darin Hayes
I agree. Now, Tony, before we let you go, let's let the listeners know who may be interested in picking up one of your books, any of your other projects, your podcast, or your websites. Maybe you could just give us some idea how to get in touch with some of your work.

Dr. Tony Collins
Sure, yeah, thanks. My website is www.tonycollins.org, and you can get an extensive preview of how football began from the website by clicking on the cover. I also have a podcast, which has been a bit quiet this year because I'm working on another project, but that's been running for four or five years now, which covers a lot of the stuff we've talked about today. It looks at the history of Rugby, a little bit of football history, and certainly a lot about how they relate and are intertwined. So that's where you can find links to that at tonycollins .org, but also, you know, if you go to www .rubbyreloaded .com, that'll take you straight to episodes of the podcast. So yeah, that's where you can find me, and hopefully, the podcast will. I plan to get the podcast back up and running in the next couple of months, and we'll be doing many more of these very interesting discussions. Hopefully, I can reciprocate and have you guys on the show.

Darin Hayes
That would be very, very intriguing. I can't speak for Tim, but I'd be delighted to do that.

Timothy Brown
I also just wanted to say, you know, I've got a copy of it, and part of the reason we initially connected was because I've read how football began. And just so readers or listeners know, it kind of, it goes back to some of the beginnings that Tony described here, but then also, you know, kind of on a country by country or code by code basis, it goes through, you know, Canadian football kind of, what's the story there? How did it evolve and break away from this, uh, you know, stew of games that occurred? And so anyways, if you're, if you're in Australia, if you're in Canada, wherever, you know, there's portions of this book that are directly applicable to your world and then others that are very much global and just fascinating.

Darin Hayes
Yeah. Uh, most definitely now, you know, I can't tell you enough how thankful we are and honored to have you on here, Tony, and have this great discussion with us. I feel almost like, uh, it's sort of a family reunion of sorts of, you know, meeting some of the second and third cousins and different genres of football together and uniting them. And, uh, this is, uh, triumphant. I feel pretty, pretty honored to have this happen here. So, we thank you for that, and we thank you for your time and for sharing your knowledge. Yeah.

Dr. Tony Collins
Thanks, guys; it's been a blast; I've enjoyed it.

Timothy Brown
It's been great talking because, yeah, yeah, right back at you.

---

We've all been at live football games, we watch them on TV, and we see how the players know sort of when they have to get into the midst of their huddle and call the signals and break huddle and get up to the line of scrimmage and when that little clock starts ticking for the play clock in golden times and what starts that with a certain signal by the referee the ready for play signal and its history are coming up today with footballarchaeology.com's Timothy Brown and we're up with Tim in just a moment.

Together, we'll have a few laughs, talk a little ball, and explore the evolution of the "ready for play" signal, its origins, and how it's become an integral part of the game.

This post is based on Tim's original article titled:The Meaning Behind the Ready-to-Play Signal and Others

We also have a podcast audio version of the discussion found at:
Unveiling the History of the Ready for Play in American Football with Timothy Brown or you can find it on your favorite podcast provider in the Pigskin Dispatch Podcast for July 23, 2024.

-Transcription of the Ready For Play Signal History with Timothy Brown


Hello, my football friends. This is Darin Hayes of pigskindispatch.com. Welcome once again to the Pigpen, your portal to positive football history, and welcome to Tuesday. It's footballarchaeology.com day, and Timothy Brown is bringing us another exciting aspect of football history.

Tim, welcome back to the Pigpen. Hey, Darin. Thank you.

Looking forward to signaling and talking about the ready-to-play signal. Well, actually, it's pretty cool stuff, I think. Yeah, I'm definitely ready to play to hear this and hit play. Have you tell us all about the history of this signal that I'm very familiar with?

Yeah, well, you know, it's one of those where, you know, I think a lot of us non-officials, you know, we tend to think of the official signals as the ones they give for penalties and then obviously scoring opportunities and things like that. But there are other signals that happen on virtually every play of the game that we just kind of don't even think about that very much. This one happens every scrimmage down, but yeah, every kicking down, too.

Yeah, and so it happens all the time, right? And so I forget how I think, you know, I came across an article on this or but so, you know, this is really about the, you know when you go back to the history of football, you know, it came from rugby. And so, you know, back in the day, it was much more of a continuous action game. You know, the game did not stop.

Well, originally, we didn't have downs in football. So, you know, definitely didn't stop. But even after there were downs, you know, I've done a tidbit or a story, at least on, you know, kind of breaking down the 1903 Yale Princeton game film.

And which is really a fun thing to watch and to read if you're interested in the breakdown of it. But one of the things that's really clear from seeing that film is the pace of play. You know, somebody gets tackled, the center gets over the ball, referee never touches the darn thing, center gets over the ball.

And as soon as the quarterback calls the signals, boom, they run the play. So, they're moving, you know, at much more of a rugby sort of pace. You don't have the stupid officials getting in the middle of everything and mucking things up for the players.

All those, the Zebras. I'm plugging my ears as you're saying. Yes, I know.

That's why I'm saying. The Zebras didn't even have stripes in those days. But it was just a very rapid pace of play.

You know, when they played a 45-minute half, they played 45 minutes. So, and even when the ball went out of bounds, originally, you know, the players were the ones that brought the ball back in, either by tossing it in like a line out, they could toss it back, they could plunk it onto the field, or they could walk it in after declaring how far they were going to walk it in. So, so anyway, it was just a different animal.

But then, then the 20s came about. And in the 20s, you had a couple of things going on, you had the Notre Dame box or Notre Dame shift, and the Minnesota shift was, you know, popular. So, you had a bunch of teams doing all these shifts before they snapped the ball, which slowed down the pace of play a little bit, right? Because they'd get in formation, then they'd jump and, you know, moved right or left, whatever they were doing.

Then, the other thing that happened in the 20s was that we had the beginning of consistent huddling. You know, there'd been a couple of people that huddled before that, but really, you know, Zupke in Illinois, they're the ones who really made huddling happen. And so that was, again, a thing that while they typically got the playoff almost as fast as teams that didn't huddle, it still kind of slowed the game down a little bit.

So, so then one of the tactics that came about was as the, as things weren't quite as fast as they had been in the past, and as much as anything, teams were starting to use different formations instead of just always aligning in the, in the traditional tee, they were starting to use, you know, like a single wing that either was to the left or to the right. So, you know, they were taking time to move into different formations. And so one thing, and then the defense would take a little bit of time to react and align themselves to, to whatever the offense was doing.

So one of the things the offense started doing was running quickie plays, where they'd like to get into a formation, boom, snap it faster than, you know, to kind of catch the defense off guard, which became problematic because then sometimes the defense was in, they were defensive, defenseless players in today's terminology. So it became a safety issue. The other thing that was happening is that they would sometimes like send, you know, once, then a little bit later when substitutions became, you know, started freeing up, you'd see teams sending three guys off the field and putting two guys on.

So they were missing a player. Well, sometimes they'd have that missing player standing right on the sideline, kind of hiding himself. Sometimes, that was called lonesome pole cat or lonesome, lonesome end.

But, that was also different, but nevertheless, the concept was that there'd be a guy over there all by himself, and they'd snap the ball, and he'd head downfield. So they'd toss him the P and, you know, hopefully, you know, catch a long touchdown pass. So all that stuff led in 1951 to a rule that said the referee has to spot the ball on every play.

And because, again, previously, it was much more of the center doing that. So, with the referee spotting the ball on every play he had, they developed what they called the ready-to-play signal to indicate to the players that the ball was ready to be snapped, right? And until he gave that signal, it couldn't be snapped. And so what I didn't realize until I got into, you know, doing this research was what that signal meant, right? Because there are a lot of signals that are just kind of meaningless.

They're just some kind of arm motion, but they don't really relate to the penalty themselves. There are other things, like the holding penalty, right? One arm, you know, yeah, they grab the wrist or just below the wrist. So, okay, that means holding, that makes sense.

And at least the old clipping rule, you know, made sense. There's others like that, you know, block in the back, maybe face mask. Yeah.

And so, but the, so the ready to play signal, that, the signal, which is some of the drawings make it look like he's kind of going with a full arm motion, but I think of them mostly as like kind of pulling straight down. You know, they raise their arm and then pull straight down. Maybe you can tell me what is proper.

It's the first one that you said because they call it a term on the field, which is chopping the ball in for play. So you're, it's almost like you have a little hatchet, and you're, you're making a chopping motion. Right.

But the whistle is really the true signal, the referee blowing that whistle, every play and chopping the ball and saying it's ready for play. And it's, and I know because of recent timing rules in between plays, it used to be when the 25-second clock would start. Now, you know, a lot of levels have changed that.

So you have 40 seconds or something in between when the ball was last dead to get the next snap off, but that's when that would use to start to at the ready for play. So it was an important, important part. And it also starts the clock.

If you had a play where you got a first down, you had an official's timeout. So you stopped the clock in high school to reset the chains, the ready for play would start the clock again in motion. Okay.

Well, so part of what I liked about the story was just that, that, that chopping signal was supposed to be at least some of the period articles said that that was supposed to be akin to, you know, the conductor on a train pulling the chain that blew the steam whistle or, you know, factories used to have whistles that, you know, to mark the end of a shift or, you know, lunchtime, whatever it may be. So it was pulling the chain and, yeah. And then even like, you know, I know when my kids were younger, sometimes they'd make that signal to truck drivers to get them to honk their horns as we're driving by because horns on trucks, you know, especially the horns that they have on the roof, you know, used to pull a chain to make them, you know, I think you're technically right.

If you look at the official signals, like when they have them on cards or in the back of books or anything, it is more like you're saying this, but I don't know. There are very few that do that. And it's probably because we're, you know, we're doing that a hundred times in a game.

Your blood rushes out of your hand. You're just having it down more towards your chest and your waist to chop it. The original images all show up as a full chop, an extended arm chop.

Okay. Almost like the Florida state people, right? That kind of emotion.

So, but I didn't know if that had evolved over time or not, but that was for sure the early signals. Okay. Yeah.

I know that's the way I always did. And that's the way, and I did it by observing my peers when I was, before I was a referee, when I was a line judge and headlinesman, I would watch the referee would do that. So, but they always called it chopping the ball.

And you know, it's okay. Yeah. Interesting.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

So, I mean, but part, again, part of the amusement for me is just, and I kind of ended this particular tidbit by saying, okay, so I went through, I think there's 45 or 47 current NCAA signals for the officials and just kind of saying, okay, well, about half of them seem to have an inherent meaning. They kind of match whatever the signal is, right? Or that whatever the infraction is or whatever they're signaling, whereas others, it's like, you know, putting your arms out, you know, there's like, okay, I don't know what that means, but you know, I mean, it's just like any kind of semaphore flags, you know, you're crossing them or waving them, you know, like the guys on aircraft carriers, you know, it's like, okay, well, whatever it was, as long as it means something to somebody.

There you're right. I mean, in it, when you're learning the signals as an official when you're a referee, I mean, that was, it's, that was like the thing that freaked me out when they said, okay, this is your first game, and you're a referee. That was the thing I panicked.

I know the rules. I know what the signals are, but I'm thinking, God, you have that stage fright, you know, everybody's looking at you to signal. And the ones I had problems with is you have the illegal substitution, and you have the signal.

I would get those two mixed up constantly. And I would have to study almost my first, especially that first season. I'm looking at that card every single game.

And before I got there, I'm like, Oh God, I don't want to get, you know, screw this thing up and have the wrong signal. And the PA announcer announced the opposite thing of what I was calling. So it's interesting.

And I love how, you know, the signals match, you know, like face masks, like you said, or horse collar, which is sort of a newer signal that there's no doubt what, what the guy did when you, when you're signaling that holding, you know, you sit there and you think about it very rarely in football. Have I ever called holding because some, uh, some, an opponent grabbed the other opponent's wrist to do it, but you get to just, it's still made, it makes sense? But it's kind of cool that hockey, lacrosse, and sports like that have adopted football officials' signals for holding, and they use the same signals on some of those things.

That's kind of cool. Yeah. Yeah.

Those baseball guys are there. Yeah. They're kind of weird.

Yeah. That's, that's for sure. But Tim, that is fascinating stuff.

I love when, uh, you know, we get into something that happens every day that people maybe just don't really realize it's happening and you bring out that aspect of football and then you take the history of it and how it evolved. That's just such a cool aspect of what you do. And maybe you could share with folks how they could enjoy some of your other work that you've done on some items like this.

Sure. Uh, just basically go to footballarchaeology.com, um, and just subscribe. It's pretty effortless process and you'll, you'll get an email every time that, that, uh, I post a new, new article and then there's different ways to follow me on social media as well.

And then, you know, I'll also just put in a plug. I've got a, a new book coming out called a history of the football that basically just goes back to literally the middle ages and kind of traces how the football has changed shape, size, color, stripes, weight, inflation levels, just kind of all kinds of little dorky little things about the football. But some of them, you know, there's, I think, you know, came across some, found some pretty interesting stuff, interesting stories about how things changed and how, you know, in some cases, some personalities and individuals like George Hallis, you know, had an influence on the ball that we know and love today.

No, right. Sounds like some great stuff. And, uh, we'd love to hear more about it and love to talk to you about some more football history next Tuesday.

Very good. Look forward to it.

---

The term "Tuck Rule games" evokes a singular moment in NFL history: the 2001 AFC Divisional Playoff game between the New England Patriots and the Oakland Raiders. A controversial officiating decision involving quarterback Tom Brady's Fumble, later known as the "Tuck Rule," significantly impacted the outcome, propelling the Patriots to victory and their eventual first Super Bowl win. This essay delves into the game, the controversy, and its lasting legacy on the NFL.

-Our call of the play
Let's relive the moment of the play with our call of the game.

Scene: AFC Divisional Playoff game, final seconds of the second quarter. New England Patriots trailing Oakland Raiders 10-3.

Broadcaster: Second and long, Patriots desperately need a play. Brady takes the snap and drops back... trouble! Raiders bringing pressure! Scrambles right, trying to find an open man... (crowd gasps) Fumble?! Stripped by Woodson, and it's Wheatley for the Raiders! Touchdown practically seals the game... wait a minute! Belichick throws the flag! They're stopping the play! What a turn of events here! Now, the officials are huddled around Belichick, so let's see what they come up with. Replay is incoming, folks; this could be a game-changer.
(tense pause as the replay shows the Fumble)

Broadcaster:  Whew, slow it down. This is right on the edge. Can Brady have tucked the ball away in a throwing motion before the Fumble? That's the whole ball game with the Tuck Rule. Here it comes. The arm starts to go forward just as the ball comes loose, and this will be close. Officials are talking it over...(longer pause, crowd noise rising in anticipation)... An incomplete pass is the call on the field! Belichick is sticking with his call, and the Patriots get a new lease on life! A huge turn of events, folks! We go to halftime with a completely different game on our hands!

-Commentary on the Tuck Rule

The game itself was a nail-biting defensive struggle. With mere seconds remaining in the second quarter and the Raiders leading 10-3, Brady, under immense pressure, scrambled out of the pocket and attempted a pass. Raiders linebacker Charles Woodson, in a move that could have changed the course of the game, stripped the ball, which Oakland safety Tyrone Wheatley then recovered. However, referee Bill Belichick (not related to Patriots coach Bill Belichick) ruled that Brady had tucked the ball away in an attempt to pass before the Fumble occurred, negating the turnover and awarding the Patriots possession. This call sparked a firestorm of outrage from the Raiders and their fans, who believed the game had been stolen.

The controversial Tuck Rule, implemented in 1999, was designed to protect quarterbacks from fumbles caused by hits while bringing their arm back to pass. However, its subjectivity and the rarity of its application in such a critical moment fueled the controversy. The ensuing media frenzy dissected every angle of the play, with opposing viewpoints highlighting the rule's subjectivity and the potential for officiating bias.

Despite the controversy, the Patriots seized the opportunity. They orchestrated a masterful drive down the field and scored a touchdown before halftime, dramatically shifting the momentum. The game remained a fierce battle, but New England ultimately emerged victorious with a score of 24-17. This victory, marked by the controversial call, was the catalyst for the Patriots' dynasty, as they went on to win Super Bowl XXXVI, the first of their six championships under the leadership of Tom Brady and coach Bill Belichick.

The Tuck Rule game's legacy extends far beyond that season. The controversy exposed the weaknesses of the Tuck Rule, leading to its revision in 2004. The revised rule offered a more precise definition of a "fumble" in the context of a passing motion. The game also cemented the rivalry between the Patriots and the Raiders, with the controversial call becoming a source of lingering resentment for Raiders fans.

The Tuck Rule game serves as a cautionary tale regarding the impact of officiating on high-stakes games. It highlights the need for clear and objective rules and consistent officiating. The controversy also underscores the passionate nature of NFL fandom and the enduring impact that controversial calls can have on a team's legacy and a fanbase's perception.

Other instances of the rule coming to light are:

-In their 2001 season opener (September 23) against the New York Jets, the New England Patriots received a controversial call later known as the "tuck rule." [See also: 2001 New York Jets season and 2001 New England Patriots season]
With just over a minute left in the second quarter, Jets quarterback Vinny Testaverde appeared to fumble the ball after pressure from Patriots defensive end Anthony Pleasant. Richard Seymour recovered the Fumble, but upon review, the call was overturned to an incomplete pass due to the tuck rule. This controversial call allowed the Jets to tie the game with a field goal on that drive and ultimately win 10-3. Interestingly, Patriots coach Bill Belichick referenced this game later in the season after the infamous "Tuck Rule Game," implying he knew the rule's potential impact based on this earlier encounter.

-The tuck rule was enforced in a regular season game on October 9, 2005, between the Washington Redskins and the Denver Broncos. Broncos quarterback Jake Plummer lost the football while in the Broncos' end zone.

-In a hard-fought AFC Wild Card matchup on January 9, 2011, the Baltimore Ravens defeated the Kansas City Chiefs.

In conclusion, the Tuck Rule game was not just a single playoff matchup. It was a seismic event that exposed officiating vulnerabilities, spurred significant rule changes, and marked the beginning of a dynastic era in the NFL. The game remains a hot topic for fans and analysts alike, a stark reminder of the drama, controversy, and enduring legacy that a single call can leave on the sport.

Aftermath:

On March 20, 2013, the NFL owners voted 29–1 to abolish the rule at the winter meetings. 

---

The modern touchback rule in American football, where a ball fumbled out of the end zone results in possession for the receiving team at the 20-yard line, wasn't always the way it was. Its history reveals an interesting journey shaped by strategic considerations, safety concerns, and the ever-evolving nature of the game.

Timothy Brown of FootballArchaeology.com joins us to discuss this interesting but rare football event and its evolution in history.

Early Days and the Muffed Punt: In the early years of American football (late 19th century), recovering a fumble in the end zone, even if accidentally, awarded the recovering team a touchdown. This strategy, known as the "muffed punt," involved intentionally fumbling the ball just before crossing the goal line to score. It was a risky maneuver but potentially offered an advantage in scoring position.

Safety First: Introducing the Safety: Recognizing the dangers of this practice, a new rule was introduced in 1882, awarding the opposing team two points (later changed to one) for recovering a fumble in the end zone, effectively discouraging the "muffed punt" and prioritizing player safety.

Strategic Shifts and the Touchdown: However, the new rule also created a strategic conundrum. Teams facing fourth-and-long situations near their own end zone could intentionally fumble the ball out of bounds for a safety, essentially sacrificing two points to avoid a potential turnover and touchdown by the opponent. This led to the introduction of the "touchback" rule.

---

The tipped pass is an exciting play that we see often in the pass-happy offenses of modern times and the athletes on both sides of the ball downfield. The rules we know today concerning the play were very much different than they are today. The video covers the early history of tipped pass rules in American football.

Darin Hayes, is interviewing Timothy Brown from Football Archaeology. Besides the video we have the audio on our podcast too. Brown discusses a time in football history, from 1907 to 1911, when a tipped pass was considered a fumble. This means that if a pass was tipped by a player from either team, the ball was live and could be recovered by either team. This rule was implemented to increase player safety, as the forward pass was a new and dangerous play at the time. However, the rule was eventually changed because it led to too many scrambles for the ball, which could be dangerous for the players.

The video also discusses other interesting facts about the early days of the forward pass, such as how teams would sometimes try to create a circle of players around the receiver to protect him from being tackled.

Modern rules concerning a tipped pass go along these lines. A pass tipped by a defender can be caught by anyone on the field, including a previously ineligible offensive player. Only an eligible offensive player or any defender can legally bring a tipped pass by the offense.


-Transcribed Conversation with Timothy Brown on When Tipped Passes Were Live Balls[b]

Hello, my football friends; this is Darin Hayes of PigskinDispatch.com. Welcome again to The Pig Pen, your portal for positive football history. It is Tuesday, and we have another special treat: Timothy P. Brown of FootballArcheology.com will join us to discuss one of his most recent tidbits. And this one is recent and fresh.

Tim, welcome back to The Pig Pen. Hey, thank you, Darin. Yeah, this is a good one.

This is kind of one of the more bizarre rules or one that most people had no idea was out there because, you know, I just recently came across it. So, yeah, when I read it, I had no idea. You enlightened me.

And I thought I knew, you know, a lot about especially the rules and things like that, but this one caught me off guard. And you've titled it when tip passes were live balls as a little bit of a mystery, but also, you know, sells a point and just sounds odd to our modern year for football. So why don't you explain this to us a little bit? Yeah, so, as I tried to explain in the article itself, you know, with the forward pass, which had been around for a long time.

You know, it just was illegal. You know, if you threw a forward pass and what we would think of as forward lateral, you know, now, but if you did that, you lost possession of the ball. And then, in trying to, you know, open the game following the 1905 season, the rule makers made just a host of different changes to the game.

But one of them was a legalized forward pass. And, you know, the rule book for six only laid out six or seven rules related to the passing game. You know, they just couldn't see what this might become in the future.

And for them, they were thinking of forward laterals, this short little right in the area, kinds of, you know, not not the down downfield passing, which, you know, a couple of teams actually did in 1906. So they had just a really simple set of rules. But, you know, they were and mostly, you know, the game.

They risked the forward pass a lot. You know, if you threw an incomplete pass, it was a turnover and a spot foul. So it returned to the spot of the pass.

If the pass hit an ineligible receiver turnover, if the pass crossed the goal line on the fly, or if it bounced turnover. So, you know, things like that. And then you couldn't throw the ball until you were five yards to the left or the right of the center.

You know, so it was consistent with the checkerboard pattern field. And, you know, the first person to get the ball couldn't run until they were five yards left or right. So so anyways, you know, it just there were a lot of things, restrictions that just are inconceivable today.

But then, you know, they kind of went through a season and they decided to add a few rules. And one of them that they added in 1907 was that if the ball was in the air and touched an an eligible receiver, so an eligible offensive person or defense, then the ball and it it then hit the ground. That ball was locked.

So basically any kind of batted ball by a defender, but, you know, a tipped ball, a dropped ball, you know, from an offensive player, was essentially a fumble. And so, you know, there'd be a pass and somebody would tip, you know, try for it. They wouldn't get it, but they'd touch the ball.

So then, you know, the balls are rolling on, you know, like any kind of situation where there's a fumble, it's a mad scramble to get to the thing. And since the pass was probably a little bit more in the open field because it had to be five yards right or left, you know, all that kind of stuff. There were guys flying in all over the place, trying to get to that ball.

So so it's just one of the it's one of those rules. It just it seems so bizarre that they that they did that. And yet, you know, it was.

So the 1907 season, you know, it's always, you know, if you read through, you know, some of the commentaries, you'll just're reading like an old newspaper report of a game and saying, you know, the ball bounced off of Smith, and there was a mad scramble for the ball. And, you know, Pittsfield State recovered or, you know, whatever. And so then, you know, again, the whole rule of the game rule changes were supposed to be for player safety, and they recognized that there were too many scrambles.

So they made a change for 1908 where they said only the first offensive player that touches the ball. Can you recover it, right? So if you think about it, you know, the football rule that only you know, like if an offensive player touches the ball or touches a forward pass, then it has to have a defensive player touch that pass before an offense can then before a second offensive player can grab it. However, that originated in the 1908 rule, which was trying to eliminate some of the scrambles.

So and then, you know, so it remained in place until 1911, and then they then they cut the rule out. But so you had, you know, so you had seven, eight, nine. So you had a four year period where.

The tip ball was a fumble, you know, effectively. And the other thing that's just funny about that is, you know, talking about teams being unable to really conceive how to throw the pass and how, you know, how do you create a pass route if you've never seen anyone throw a forward pass before? And one of the things that teams did fairly frequently back then until, I think, it was maybe 32. The offensive lineman could go downfield on a pass.

One of the approaches that the teams took was to you'd send all your offensive linemen to the left or something. And then whoever the receiver was, you know, maybe an end, would get in the middle of those offensive linemen. They kind of form a circle around them.

And then they try to pass the ball to, you know, to the middle while the offensive line blocked. The difference is trying to get at him because, again, there was no pass interference yet. So it is probably while the quarterbacks get mauled by like five guys that aren't getting blocked because they often lose the line.

I mean, yeah. So it's just crazy when you think about, you know, what that had to be. You know, plus, you know, again, most guys weren't wearing numbers.

If they had numbers, it was only on the back of their jerseys. But even like Carlisle, as far as I can tell, Carlisle was the first school to paint their helmets. And they did it because they wanted to be able to identify who their players were, you know, in, you know, as they ran downfield, you know, for passes.

That old Glenn Warner was a clever guy. Well, he wasn't there yet. He wasn't.

He was OK. Yeah, he went back and forth between Cornell. You know, he started Cornell, went to Carlisle, and went back to Cornell.

And then he was back at Cornell or Carlisle in 07, but no six. One of the former players, you know, the coach. But they.

They had, well, one of the other things that teams did was like when they circle the guy, some lift them up in the air, like in a, you know, the rugby lineouts, you know, when they're tossing the ball in. And, you know, which was just a few years before, had still been away. One of the ways that football teams brought the ball in from the sideline, you know, from out of bounds, was the law.

Or they call it a fair as well. Anyways, they'd lift the guy up in the air and throw him the ball. But so it's just one of those things that just, again, made sense at the time, maybe, you know, I mean, they were just trying to make some up some things, you know.

But the idea of a tipped pass being effectively a fumble is just kind of bizarre. Yeah, you know, maybe four or five years ago, if you would have said that with the guy in the circle and everybody else, you know, helping him with the before the tush push and brotherly shove or whatever you call it, maybe we would have said, oh, you're out of your mind. That wouldn't happen.

But maybe it's a little bit more the normal activity we see in football these days, which I hope they get rid of because I hate it. But go back to the rule. I'm OK with it.

I'm OK. You don't like the tush pusher. No, I like when they used to have the rule, you know, you can't aid the runner.

You know, that's. Yeah, yeah. Let him know you can block guys in front of you.

You can't pull, push or otherwise move that runner, help them go. I I still I'm a traditionalist. I think that should be the maybe it's not so traditionalist.

Maybe they were helping the runner long before that rule, as you're saying. But yeah, the football I grew up with, you couldn't do it. Yeah, no, exactly.

I mean, it it it went away, you know. Quite a while ago, but I mean, it was part of the original game and then they then they got rid of it really as a player safety issue. I blame it.

I blame it on Matt Leinert and Reggie Bush against Notre Dame in 2005 or whenever it was. That's because they're like the next year that they changed. Right.

Right. Plus, they beat Notre Dame on that play. Yeah.

Well, well. But, you know, back in the day, they. You know what? At the time that they instituted, you know when they.

Said you couldn't aid the runner. Part of it was, you know, you only had three officials on the field. And so that call, you know, officials were reluctant to make the call.

Right. And so anyways, that's part of it. I'm kind of getting a little bit confused now, but anyway, so, you know, it was one of those things where the trying to force the officials to make the calls that that's actually one of the justifications for why they brought it back, because people, you know, nobody wants to make that call.

But yeah, that's true. That's true. But it's getting crazy.

Somebody's going to get hurt. That's my theory. And that's when the rule all of a sudden change and be banned again.

But I don't want somebody to get hurt. You know, it could be offense, defense, alignment, whatever. But somebody's going to get hurt.

But, Tim, you know, we love how you bring up some of these, you know, oddities of football and things, unique aspects or something maybe a team did, you know, a hundred years ago that we never heard of before. And including this rule here, you know, that's just part of football. And it's a great history.

And you do things like this each and every day that you write about and explain very thoroughly, and a lot of times with images that you find in old yearbooks and newspapers. And how can people share in these tidbits that you put on to see them as they're coming out? Real simple. Just go to footballarchaeology.com and subscribe.

Then you'll get an email. Alternatively, you can follow me on Twitter. You can also get the Substack app on threads or through the Substack app because, you know, my blog newsletter is on Substack, and you can follow me on Substack as well.

So, whatever floats your boat. All right. Well, his name is Timothy Brown.

Footballarchaeology.com is his website. And Tim, we appreciate you coming here this Tuesday. And we hope to talk to you again next Tuesday about some more great football.

Very good. Thank you, sir.

Transcribed by TurboScribe.ai.

Dive into the fascinating history of football with Timothy P. Brown, the expert behind Football Archaeology.com! In this episode, we’ll unravel the origins o... — www.youtube.com

---

Dive into the fascinating history of football with Timothy P. Brown, the expert behind Football Archaeology.com! In this episode, we'll unravel the origins of the sideline and pass eligibility rules, exploring how these fundamental aspects of the game we know today came to be. Join us as Tim sheds light on the evolution of football through the ages! #footballhistory #rules #sideline #passeligibility #footballarchaeology

This information comes from his original post titled: Eligible Receivers and the Sideline

For audio only check out the Podcast version -The Football History of Sidelines and Eligible Pass Catchers with Timothy Brown.

-[b]Tim Brown on the Origins of Eligible Receivers and Sideline Play

Hello, my football friends. This is Darin Hayes of PigskinDispatch.com. Welcome once again to The Pig Pen, your portal for positive football history. Welcome to another exciting Tuesday where we get to go back in time and talk about an aspect of football history that may not be mainstream, but it is definitely worth the listen and education that we're going to get with Timothy Brown of FootballArcheology.com. Tim, welcome back to The Pig Pen.

Hey Darin, good to chat with you again, and I look forward to talking about the eligibility of receivers.

Yeah, the eligible... No dad pun there, just straightforward information. Now, you don't want to talk about the married receivers, just the eligible ones, right? That's right. I had to throw the dad joke again.

That's really pretty bad. Yeah, that was bad. We'll let you do the dad jokes and I'll just be the straight man.

Yeah, so tell us a little bit about the history of the eligible receivers in the sideline. Yeah, this one's fun. I think just one of the things that I like about researching almost any aspect of football history is trying to find stories where the reason we have something today, a rule that's in place today, sometimes isn't the reason that rule was put in place originally.

Conditions change, so sometimes the rule still makes sense despite football evolving. However, the original rule was put in place for a different reason than why it makes sense today. So like a great example of that is the roughing of the punter penalty, and I won't get into the details of that. There's a tidbit out there, and if anybody wants to search for it, if you put in roughing the punter penalty in football archaeology, it'll come up right away.

Sounds like a future episode to talk to you about. Well, I'm surprised we haven't already. Yeah, I don't think we have.

Maybe we did. So, but that's one where, you know, that penalty was put in place. It was actually called roughing the fullback originally.

And so, you know, it just, it evolved for reasons that no longer exist in football based on rule changes. So, and the eligible receiver, like stepping out of bounds, that's really what this tidbit is about. And that originated kind of for reasons that no longer exist.

So, you know, back in the day, so pre-1933, football did not have hash marks. And so when a player was tackled close to the sideline, if they're tackled three yards from the sideline or two yards from the sideline or one yard from the sideline, the ball, the next play started wherever that player had been tackled, just as if they'd been tackled in the middle of the field. So, you know, offenses, every offense practiced and kind of had plays in their playbook that were called sideline plays.

You'd, you know, you'd change the formation. So you only had one, you know, you might, sometimes you had to have the center right on the sideline snapping the ball. Other times you might be able to fit the guard, the tackle or the end in there.

So one of the things that would happen is that if it was safe, four or five yards from the line of scrimmage or from the sideline, you might be able to put your whole right side of the line of scrimmage or of your offensive line in place, you know, inside the boundary. But sometimes in order for that, at that end wasn't, you know, if he's the eligible receiver and you're running a pass play in order for him to get, you know, to avoid the tackle or the defensive end and get down field, he'd just run out of bounds, you know, to dodge him, right. And which is perfectly legal.

There was no, there's no restriction on somebody leaving the field and reentering the field at that time. The other thing was that that was in the days of the coaching rules against coaching from the sideline, which typically required all the players and the coaches to be seated or kneeling back on the bench. So the sidelines were barren, you know, there is nobody there other than, you know, maybe a linesman, assistant linesman or two.

So if the end was aligned next to the sideline, he could scoot, you know, run 10 yards down field while out of bounds and then reenter and hopefully, you know, catch a pass. I think I, I think I officiated in the wrong era. That sounds like a much better sideline than when I officiated.

Yes. So anyways, you know, so these guys could reenter, you know, so if you went out of bounds, you could reenter, you know, nothing, nothing against doing so. But then, you know, then they decided, okay, well, these guys are going out of bounds.

I mean, they could have gone 10 yards outside of bounds and then reenter. So they, in 24, they made a rule change. And they said, okay, if the receiver goes, if an eligible receiver goes out of bounds, he's no longer eligible to catch a pass.

And then, and that stayed in place until 1978. And at that point, they said, okay, if he goes out of bounds on his own accord, then he's not eligible. But if a defender pushes him out of bounds or forces him out of bounds, then he can reenter and be an eligible receiver.

So, so that's kind of the, the other catch that he had to return immediately. You know, he got pushed out of bounds. He couldn't run down to five, 10 yards.

Like you said, he had to try to get back on the field as soon as he could. Yeah. Yeah.

So, you know, so it's just one of those things where, you know, the original reason for putting this rule in place was because of these sideline plays. And then, you know, once he had the hash hash marks, then, okay, that reason goes away, but the underlying rationale still made sense. So they left it in place until making a modification, you know, basically 50 years later.

So, you know, it's just kind of goofy how some of those rules come into play and, you know, what, what the original reason, you know, was for them. Yeah, that, that is, that is interesting. Now, I'm not sure what they do in college and the professional level, but I know high school, that instance, now we're a receiver when they go out of bounds on their own and they come back in, it goes under the substitution rule.

It's an illegal substitution when they come back in, which is kind of interesting during live ball action. You know, he's a, cause they're a player where when they're one of the 11 that are inside the numbers, you know, at the ready for play and, you know, they break out on go wherever they'd like to on their side of the ball. But so they no longer are player when they exit on their own and they now become a substitute and now it's an illegal substitution when they come back on.

So it's, it's kind of an odd thing where you're, cause most of the rule books, I know for the NFHS, they're broke up in dead ball. You know, there's a bunch of rules on dead ball and then there's a bunch of rules on live ball and kicking and snap and everything. But this one is a live ball.

That's actually in the dead ball section, which is kind of drives you crazy if you don't know where to find it. Yeah. It is funny.

I mean, so just, that's a classic example of, you know, you have to try to categorize these things. So what is it? Right. Right.

And I can't think of the examples right now, but there, you know, there are other situations where like the logic, I mean, it's kind of like, you know, I've never been a lawyer, but I imagine some of these things, you know, when you're making the rules and trying to classify them and categorize them, you know, you're trying to find what, what's the fundamental logic behind this rule. And, and sometimes that changes over time as we've seen. But so you kind of classify things based on the logic, which may not be apparent to somebody who doesn't really know the rules inside and out like an official one.

Yeah. It's, it's right up there on par when, if you have somebody let's say somebody punches a player and it's during live ball. Well, that is a personal foul.

If they do it during dead ball, it's an unsportsmanlike foul. They're both 15 yard penalties, but you know, the enforcement may be different depending on the style of play. I'm not sure.

I don't think I recognize that. Yeah. So it's, so you have, but that's why there's two different signals, one for unsportsmanlike, one for personal foul.

Personals are always live ball fouls, unsportsmanlike are dead ball fouls. All right. So, but you can do the same action.

It's illegal. It just depends when you do it. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. No, I mean, it makes sense.

Right. Right. Right.

You know, you need, you need the distinction, but, but again, I would guess 95% of football fans don't know that. No, that's, that's true. I didn't know it until I officiated.

I mean, I was kind of surprised when I, I did that when I learned that. So kind of, kind of an interesting aspect though too. So, you know, Tim, that's a great thing.

And I, I'm glad that you shared this with us and wrote about it, and you know, how the rule came about. And it's just interesting how it, for a totally different predicament and they turn it into something with the modernization of the game and how the game flows. So that's pretty cool how they tied that in and how you brought the story to us.

But you have a lot of unique stories like this that you share on a regular basis. And maybe some of the listeners out there and viewers would, would like to be interested in hearing what you have to say on, you know, as you, as you're saying them and your tidbits and how, how can they participate in something like that? Yep. Just, you know, go to footballarchaeology.com and subscribe. You'll get an email every time I send out a new post.

You can also follow me on Twitter, Substack or the Substack app or on threads, or just go to the site, you know, whenever it suits your fancy. Okay. Hopefully, hopefully very often.

Yeah. And folks, it's, you know, Tim said in a segment we had last week, keep watching the social media and footballarchaeology.com for his new book coming out on the history of the football. It's going to be a great read and something I'm sure you'll all want on your bookshelf.

So, Tim, we thank you for sharing with us again, another piece of football history, and we'd love to talk to you again next week. Okay. Look forward to it.

Thanks, Darin.

One of the most hated/loved calls in all of football is the Offensive Pass Interference call or OPI. It is football at its finest with one player against another battling for position and ultimately the ball.

The calls on OPI and even DPI have changed like the wind over the years to the point that today, it is hard for the average fan and coach to even know what exactly constitutes a foul and what is fair game.

Timothy Brown did his research and went to work on the Changes of Pass Interference in September of 2023. Tim also paid us a visit to chat about the subject.

-Transcribed Conversation with Timothy Brown on Changes to Pass Interference

Hello, my football friends, this is Darin Hayes of PigskinDispatch.com. Welcome once again to The Pig Pen, your portal to positive football history, and welcome to another Tuesday where we get to visit with our friend Timothy P. Brown of FootballArcheology.com. Tim, welcome back to The Pig Pen.

It's good to see you and hear from you. Oh, wait, I'm getting a little interference. Yes? No, okay. I didn't think you'd have. Okay, I'll stop doing that.

I didn't have a segue into this one, but folks, he did it again. His tidbit was titled, back in September, changes in pass interference penalties, and that's why Tim was really stretching it out there to get the interference for his customary intro into his tidbit.

So, Tim, pass interference has really been a big play for decades. I think that in our generation, that's probably the biggest penalty, where people gain the most yardage in our era, and people almost anticipate every time a long pass is being thrown; they're hoping for one of two things. Either if you're on offense, pass interference on the defense, or the guy catches the ball.

So, what can you tell us about the pass interference back in this era that you're talking about? Yeah. So, one of the most interesting things about pass interference is that the forward pass was legalized in 1906, but for the first two years, they did not have a pass interference penalty. So, they just didn't foresee the need to have a penalty.

And part of it is, I mean, again, you got to go back to, okay, what were they thinking when they introduced and legalized pass interference? They were not thinking about the downfield passing game that we have today. They were thinking about a short toss to somebody who's ahead of you, kind of like an option quarterback who's flicking it to the guy behind him. They were thinking the forward pass would be like that: just little dumps and basketball shots to somebody.

And initially, the ineligible receivers were not limited in terms of where they could go. They could go downfield, they could block. I mean, they could block defenders.

And so, some of the initial pass plays were basically guys who the offensive line would let everybody go. And then, the receiver would get in the middle and be guarded by his teammates. And then they kind of took the ball into the middle of that circle.

And then he'd catch it, and they'd block for him. So, the defensive players were coming in there, flying in, trying to break it apart, break it up because there wasn't any defensive pass interference. And the offensive guys were blocking like they would because there was an offensive pass interference.

So, it took them two years, but then they figured out, okay, well, maybe we shouldn't allow this to be the case. And while the linemen still were able to go downfield, that didn't change. Blake and I would say it started changing in the 30s.

So, there was a long time when linemen could be downfield. And so, in 1908, they said, okay, pass interference was like a 15-yard penalty on the offense and a five-yard penalty on the defense. And I forget exactly why they distinguished the two.

Maybe it's just because the offense was the one who's throwing the ball. And so, they had more control. But then in 1910, then pass interference became a loss of a down for the offense and a 10-yard penalty on the D. So, that became the norm.

One of the things that I always find interesting is that there are bits of the game and elements of how players make decisions, as well as things that are considered unsportsmanlike in an earlier era. But then, now we treat it as, well, that's smart play. And so, one of those was as when there was a loss of down for the or a 10-yard penalty on the defense, they kind of figured, okay, hey, if I'm getting beat on a pass, I'm just tackling a guy.

I'm just going to tackle the receiver. And because I'd rather take and accept the 10-yard penalty than allow a touch pass. And so, I mean, we do that today, right? I mean, a smart D-back is going to do that.

But at the time, once they started doing that—I mean, it took them a few years to do that—it was viewed as really unsportsmanlike. You're cheating, or you're, it was outside the spirit of the rules.

So, in 1916, the colleges increased the penalty to 15 yards from 10. And then, in 1917, they made it a spot. So, you tackle somebody 35 yards downfield, or you interfere 35 yards downfield, then that's where the ball's spotted.

That stayed the case for a long time, but then they started having concerns. Another regular recurring theme in football is the idea that the officials don't want to make calls for really long penalties, severe penalties, or questionable penalties.

So, they swallow their flags. And so, on these long pass interference penalties, when it's a spot foul, people felt like the referee swallowed flags. And so, they finally said, no, you know, we got to get rid of that situation.

And so, in 1984, then the colleges went to a 15-yard penalty, whereas the pros retained, you know, it's still a spot foul, you know, in the pros. So, and let me, I'll just interject by saying this whole issue of the long penalty or that it doesn't even have to be a long penalty, but one that, you know, feels like has an impact on the game. That was one of the reasons why they got rid of, you know, the penalty for what now is being called the tush push, you know, that aiding the runner and helping the runner.

One of the reasons they got rid of that was because it was difficult. You know, sometimes they called it, and sometimes they didn't. It's a judgment call. And obviously, it's, you know, it's either somebody's going for a first down or somebody's going for a touchdown.

So, it had a big impact. And so, and, you know, they just felt like, you know, the referee's officials were reluctant to call it. So, they basically got, took that out of the game, you know, and then later, you know, add it back in.

But it's just, you know, those things are kind of interesting to me. So, both the idea of people like you, referees who swallow their whistles or their flags when, you know, on a long, you know, longer, you know, important penalty situation. So, just that idea.

And then, you know, the change from unsportsmanlike behavior to, hey, that's a smart play. You know, hey, guys, you know, tackle the receiver, do whatever you got to do. Don't let them get the long one.

Yeah. It's interesting when you're talking early in this conversation, and you were telling, you know, how the evolution of the forward pass in the first couple of years of bringing this about. And you sit there, and you got to think back, you know, with these folks, these rules makers, they had no idea, like you said, what the forward pass was going to end up being.

And they had no idea what people were going to try to do to gain an advantage. And so, that's why you see these changes in everything. So, it really is kind of fun to go back and try to look at it from their perspective.

And I think you do that in a lot of the articles that you put on here and, you know, by explaining the rules the way you do. And it's really an interesting endeavor to go back and think that way. You know, God, these guys didn't even think the ball was going to go downfield.

So, why would anybody interfere with them? You know, you're just playing football. Yeah. And so, it's funny.

I've got it; it's an article I've been making notes on for two years, probably. But it's basically, the article is, the gist of it is, what were people thinking in 1906? So, if you were a coach and, you know, speculating on how the forward pass is going to work, both, you know, offense and defense, you know, how did you prepare? You know, because you hadn't seen it. It hadn't happened, right? And so, there's a lot of really interesting newspaper articles from all these experts, you know, respected people who said, oh, here's the way it's going to work.

You know, most of them are wrong. You know, their conception of what a forward pass was going to be and how it would change the game was just off. And most people, you know, thought that the onside kick from scrimmage was going to have much more, you know, substantial effect.

And, in fact, for the first couple of years, it probably did. But, you know, the other thing about, like, rules like this is, it's a reminder that when you're playing a game, no matter if it's Monopoly or Parcheesi or, you know, Hopscotch or whatever, but football, there are lots of rules and every one of them is arbitrary. You know, you could change that rule tomorrow.

And, you know, it's like the tush push, you know, it's a considerable controversy, but you can change it tomorrow. And there's nothing sacred about it. There's nothing preordained.

It's just that people decided to make the rules. And so, change whenever and however you want. And for penalties as well, what's a penalty, and what's the relative punishment that should be tied to each penalty?

All arbitrary. Right. I tell people all the time, you know, it's the most complicated athletic event in the world.

It's got the most complicated rules. Let's say that. And the most complicated of those rules of the game are the plays that only happen once in a while, the kicking game.

That's where all the crazy stuff happens. It's the offensive defense. That's, you know, a piece of cake.

It's you get in the kicking game rules. It's, you know, bar the doors because it's some craziness is going to happen and we see it all the time. And so it's interesting.

Yeah. All right. Well, Tim, you have some great articles, you know, just like this every day that talk about an aspect of football, mainly from antiquity and, you know, explaining how it got to the point of where it is today, or maybe an advertisement or piece of equipment, you know, how can other people share and read your tidbits? Maybe you could give them some information.

So the easiest thing is just to go to www.footballarchaeology.com. You can subscribe here and get an email every night at seven o'clock Eastern. And with that day's story, if you don't want the emails that can follow me on Twitter or threads, because I posted both those or, you know, set up a Substack account and, you know, they've got a reader. And so you'll get, you know, whichever Substack you, you know, apply to or follow, you'll get those coming through your feed as well as the ability to browse for others.

So, you know, that's a great way to do it too. So, whichever one works for you, have a look at it. All right.

Well, Tim Brown, www.footballarchaeology.com. Your link is in our show notes. You know, listeners, you can go there and look at Tim's stuff and enjoy his work. And we will talk to you again next Tuesday.

Thanks, Tim. Thank you.

Transcribed by TurboScribe.ai.

---

Intentional Grounding is not something you see every game, especially in the NFL, where once a QB leaves the pocket, the foul becomes non-existent. The history of the foul is almost as old as the forward pas itself, and our Guest Timothy Brown has written about this football no-no in a recent Tibit titled: How Intentional Grounding Came to Pass How Intentional Grounding Came to Pass

What is Intentional Grounding?

Intentional grounding is a penalty called against the offense when a passer throws a forward pass that meets these two criteria:

-Facing Imminent Loss of Yardage: The passer is facing pressure from the defense and is likely to lose significant yardage if he sacks the ball (takes a knee) or throws it away.

-No Realistic Chance of Completion: The pass is thrown towards an area of the field where there are no eligible receivers in the vicinity, or the receiver has little chance of catching the ball.

-Why is the Rule in Place?

The intentional grounding rule protects quarterbacks from unnecessary hits. Without this rule, quarterbacks under pressure might be more likely to force throws into tight coverage, risking interceptions and injuries.

-Exceptions:

There are a few exceptions to the intentional grounding rule:

-Spike: A quarterback can legally throw the ball directly into the ground to stop the clock (spike the ball) if he begins the throwing motion immediately after receiving the snap. Note this must be a hand to hand snap, as shotgun would make this be intentional grounding.

-Batted Ball: If a defender tips the ball at the line of scrimmage, it's not considered intentional grounding even if there's no receiver in the vicinity.

-NFL rules allow a QB to escape the pocket and void intentional grounding rules.

-Penalty:

The penalty for intentional grounding is a loss of yardage, typically 15 yards from where the passer released the pass. If the pass is intentionally grounding in the end zone, it results in a safety scoring two points for the defense.