CoachJ
Junior Member
Posts: 307
|
Post by CoachJ on Jun 26, 2008 7:35:16 GMT -6
Ok, I wouldn't, what would you rather have them do? Would your opinion change if they threw a block here and there ? Throw the ball to him. MPP and all, he may surprise you and catch it. Also he should be trying to throw a block every play. Even if a kid lacks talent, that doesn't mean he has to lack effort. Make effort a big deal to this kid. Tell him you are going to put him in their specifically when you need a tenacious blocker. Make that his expectation. He will more than likely become what you expect him to become. Even if he doesn't make a great block, I almost garuntee he will do everything he can to try.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2008 9:29:31 GMT -6
Coach, that's not to say they aren't learning in practice, we don't justr send them downfield every play they do block, and from time to time catcha pass
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jun 26, 2008 9:41:36 GMT -6
Coach, I like MMP rules although Ive coached for the most part in leagues that dont have them. If kids are coming to practice they should play, some youth coaches just dont get that. Ive seen teams suit up 52 kids for 1 team Why? BEcause the coaches were so weak the only way they thought they could compete was by getting so many kids eventually they would find some kind of game breaker amoungst the horde. Im playing all my kids no matter what. When I play in leagues that dont have MMP rules Im at a distinct disadvantage. How does thaat work your team belongs to different leagues , Also we don't have the MP rule either, but I like this it kills the corners for the sweeps, In 15 years Ive lived 3 different places, hence different leagues including starting one myself. Coach long enough and move a time or two and you will also. We dont play our MMP type kids at corner and we can tell if a team is just running a kid off with a MMP type player. In last 8 seasons, just 1 sweep play for over 10 yards against 1st defense, boxing ends. We have 3 coaches that help on offense, 1) is OC and he coaches and spots the POA 2) Is the assistant OC he scouts the specified complementary play keys on each play (not the POA) 3) Is our stats guy and he scouts the MMP players from the other team, when they come in and when they try and sneak a stud back in Since we are no huddle wrist band team, they all know what to look for every play and our stat guy is charting our offensive production/who makes the tackle against us and when the MMP types come in at DB or WR.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2008 10:40:39 GMT -6
Oh, man I thought you had your teams playing in different leagues. Iwas asked to start a team once, but never a league,
|
|
|
Post by adolphrollingover on Nov 6, 2009 17:47:49 GMT -6
I beleive you, but that's not to say the guy doesn't come up with some great ideas. I never ran his offense, but I faced it with a coach who didn't use the flanker streaks, we didn't have any problem with it. Wused to run the GAM as well....dumped it too. The only thing of Reeds we do follow pretty tight is his clock management strategy, in which we immediately go into slowdown when we take the lead, but we've refined it to being up 2 scores, 1st. Everything else we do is pretty by the book I was motivated by Reed to run the SW, but after running it, there is little room for error. One negative play, or penalty and you are in real trouble. With Dave Cisar's you can recover from those errors.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 7, 2009 12:23:49 GMT -6
Thanks for bumping this old thread. I was unaware of what Reed was recommending with the rotation of the flanker, and I was actually planning (when I get a chance, some of you may know my story) to do a similar thing with fly series. To keep the fly (the name I use for the flanker who carries on the fly end run, which isn't really a sweep) fresh for sprinting across the formation, I was planning to rotate them often, and would conveniently have them simply exit the field at the end of fly motion to sub out. Unfortunately my fly end run is in only 1 direction so the benefit of the sideline would exist for only half the game, and because they're sprinting across, it wouldn't quite be the same as being able to come off the bench, hit the 9 yard mark, set, and go. However, I would actually have the ball handed to the fly enough to make it a serious threat and fun for them, and they wouldn't all be MPPs, although some might have speed and nothing else.
Meanwhile, good to have Doug's reminders on those coaching basics.
|
|
|
Post by coachdoug on Nov 7, 2009 14:54:18 GMT -6
Bob: How do you figure that the "Fly Sweep" (or "Fly End Run" as you called it) isn't a sweep? There are no ISO 9000 Standards for football terminology so a sweep can be whatever any coach that is using the term wants it to be. Yes, there are certain things that are generally recognized as being part of a sweep play, but for the most part the main thing that makes a sweep a sweep is that it is run to the outside. It can be off a handoff or off a toss/pitch; it can have linemen pulling or not; it can be run strictly to get to the sideline or with the option of turning it back inside; it can be to a runner that was stationary at the snap or who was in motion. The only thing different about a Fly (or Jet) Sweep is the location of the handoff (unless it's from a shotgun formation, in which case I see nothing different from a traditional sweep play). So what in your mind makes a Fly/Jet Sweep not a sweep?
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 8, 2009 10:23:41 GMT -6
How do you figure that the "Fly Sweep" (or "Fly End Run" as you called it) isn't a sweep? There are no ISO 9000 Standards for football terminology so a sweep can be whatever any coach that is using the term wants it to be. Yes, there are certain things that are generally recognized as being part of a sweep play, but for the most part the main thing that makes a sweep a sweep is that it is run to the outside. It can be off a handoff or off a toss/pitch; it can have linemen pulling or not; it can be run strictly to get to the sideline or with the option of turning it back inside; it can be to a runner that was stationary at the snap or who was in motion. The only thing different about a Fly (or Jet) Sweep is the location of the handoff (unless it's from a shotgun formation, in which case I see nothing different from a traditional sweep play). So what in your mind makes a Fly/Jet Sweep not a sweep? The way some people run it, it is a sweep. AFAIK, "sweep" comes from the metaphor of the bristles of a broom sweeping out the dirt, and refers to lead blockers running more or less in parallel like the strands of a broom. It's not the end run itself that makes it a sweep, it's those blockers getting out there. If you make the end run naked, just hooking an end, or just reaching the next opponent you meet at the line, you don't see that picture of sweeping action that you get with the pulling linemen and/or blockers from the backfield. The only other time I've heard "sweep" in football referred to the similar action of coverage players on a kickoff, which resembles a broom even more closely. Since I don't assign anyone to get in front of the fly, the closest thing being the play side linemen whose assignment would be to block the 1st opponent to the outside (as long as they got a signal from the blocker inside them that took off "man on" responsibility), it's an end run but not a sweep. Maybe someone would view a couple steps to the side by a couple of adjacent linemen as sweeping action, but I wouldn't use the word.
|
|
|
Post by coachdoug on Nov 8, 2009 11:29:18 GMT -6
Okay, I've never heard that definition of a sweep before - I think that is something you made up - which is fine, as I said terms can mean whatever the coach using them wants them to mean. Nonetheless, most jet sweeps have either or both a RB and pulling G out in front of the play. Sometimes, in a one back set, if the back is executing a fake trap (or other complimentary play) you won't get a lead RB out there. And, at the youth level, a lot of teams won't pull the G because their linemen are just not athletic enough to do it, but you better have a lead blocker out there coming from somewhere because there's going to be a force defender (probably in space) that will stop the play dead in its tracks if you don't get a hat on him. There is no reason, if you have a reasonably athletic guard, that the G can't get out in front of the play - you're snapping the ball when the motion man is at or just outside the BST, so the PSG has a 3-3.5 position head start on the Fly guy. You don't have to worry about blocking any d-linemen inside of the PS 3-tech, so the T can block down on the 3-tech, and the G pulls out. I'm sure there are some youth teams that run the play with no lead blockers, but any success they have is probably just luck - a well designed, properly executed Fly/Jet sweep has to have at least one lead blocker, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by daveinsarasota on Nov 8, 2009 18:41:37 GMT -6
In my playbook, we have "quick pitch", which....to us, is NOT a sweep, although it goes to the 7 and 8 holes respectively. I used to run a 38 Pitch (or toss) out of the I...again, to me it was not a sweep.
I have to be honest...on plays that I actually call a sweep, involves EITHER pulling linemen, or leading backs to either side. So I understand the whole "sweep" definition, as provided by Bob....but I guess I never put a lot of thought into it...
But....isn't this merely semantics? I mean...it is common for us to holler out "SWEEEEP!" when you see the pitch to the back as he is running wide...
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 8, 2009 21:46:46 GMT -6
Okay, I've never heard that definition of a sweep before Well, where did you think the word came from? It must've been chosen for some reason, because "end run" or "wide run" was always there. But that's the reason I want to have that play -- to keep that defender out there on air. And have him out of position when the motion man without the ball is used as a blocker inside of him, thus taking out both the opponent being blocked, and the wasted defender. The fly end run, naked, looks like such a good threat that the defense has to commit to stopping it dead -- so you let them. Not my way. He's going to be inside the back side tackle, and going a little closer to full speed than most ways of running it, because the QB on getting the snap is already facing the direction the fly is coming from and just has to swing the ball back from the snapper's butt a foot or so for a reach-take. Plus, I'm not counting on having more than one OL in the formation coached up in pulling the first year, and he'll be the other guard, for reasons having to do with other play series. I got a chance to try this only in skeleton last year's summer, when we didn't even have enough players to make 11, and I was replaced before they got 11 together, but the ballhandling & footwork of a fly-dive-belly-spin keep cycle with a deuce backfield looked very feasible.
|
|
|
Post by coachdoug on Nov 9, 2009 1:37:28 GMT -6
Bob - I have never really given any thought to the origin of the word sweep in football terminology. Like Daveinsarasota said, it's really just semantics anyway - we all know what's being talked about when someone says "Sweep" regardless of whether or not there are lead blockers or any of the other details that one could argue about.
I don't really see the value in wasting a play by designing it to be stopped dead, but if it works for you then go for it. I get what you're trying to do - set up the defense by getting defenders out of place, and then come back with a complimentary play, but it seems to me that the complimentary plays will work a whole lot better if the base play is successful. Maybe that's just me.
I forgot about your sidesaddle scheme. I'm not familiar with it, so if you're saying that you won't be able to pull a lineman to lead the play, I'll take you at your word. It seems to me, though, that you're going to have a slot receiver (or maybe it's a blocking back - I'm really not familiar enough with your scheme to say) that will be out in front of the play playing the same role as a lead back or pulling lineman, even if you are going to ignore the force defender.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Nov 9, 2009 8:59:47 GMT -6
I don't really see the value in wasting a play by designing it to be stopped dead, but if it works for you then go for it. I get what you're trying to do - set up the defense by getting defenders out of place, and then come back with a complimentary play, but it seems to me that the complimentary plays will work a whole lot better if the base play is successful. Maybe that's just me. Just minutes ago I noticed a message in the Delphi single wing forum by Dave Cisar that frequently in a game he'd run a sweep (we're talking real sweep here, to the strong side of an UBSW, but it doesn't really matter what kind of play it was in this case) only 1 or 2 times, and once he had a team that in a whole season ran the sweep only once. And yet he considers the sweep one of the core 6 plays of his system, and I'm sure they practiced it frequently. The point is to have it in there so defenses will honor it, which makes the off tackle to the same side better. And they do honor the threat to the extent of causing him to call the play only rarely. It's not so much that the play is successful, just that it would be successful to the extent of making big gains if the defense didn't take such strong measures to stop it. It's as in boxing, where you typically lead with your non-dominant hand, because the threat of that rare strong punch from the other fist that's kept back is what dictates the course of the match. And it's why we worked on a series that threatened in quick sequence to go wide (fly around end), or hit the B or C gap on the same side (as well as diving the A gap on the other side). What I envisioned was that if this cycle was working well, the defense would have someone tackle the fly runner every time, just that he usually wouldn't have the ball. Not in the main series. The other backs are occupied threatening those other gaps, and the back side guard will be pulling the other way along with a counter step by one of those backs. The fly motion would be used most of the time in other series too, but not presenting the same kind of threat as in this one. For example, the fly motion in front would help camouflage a snap to the deep backs; one of them that I would've had in 2008 was a good lefty passer. I have thought about possibly having the play side tackle wrap around the end (a tight end) on the side the fly was running to, but thought it wouldn't be worth it to try to teach -- at least the first year, maybe not ever. To keep it simple I was going to have them base block the series the same way every time, relying on the near-simultaneous threats at adjacent gaps. The only time they'd down block would be on series where the ball would be snapped to the deep backs, single wing style.
|
|
|
Post by daveinsarasota on Jul 9, 2010 9:51:57 GMT -6
I apologize for bumping such an old thread, but I am using Doug's "10 mistakes" in a Coaching Clinic this weekend with our Pop Warner organization. We have 3 first year coaches, and one verteran who could really use the information, which is so succinctly presented by Doug. I also think new guys to this board could benefit greatly from this thread.
|
|
|
Post by mhcoach on Jul 9, 2010 11:59:11 GMT -6
D I S
Thank you for revising this thread!
Doug
Once again your ability to clearly & consiely put into words many of my thoughts shines through! I would like to copy that and hand it out to our coaches at our coaching clinic, I hope that is ok with you.
It also amazes me that Bob was still contemptious 2 years ago.
Joe
|
|
|
Post by coachbuck on Jul 28, 2010 7:59:08 GMT -6
One big mistake I see rookie coaches make is line kids up to far apart and do tackling drills. Gets kids hurt and the rookie coaches think "man that lil guy hits hard" all the while killing most of his teams confidence. I put kids no more than two yards apart for head on and angle tackling drills. That way they can go full speed dont get hurt and gives them the confidence they need. I can usually tell by a teams pre game if its gonna be an easy game or difficult one.
|
|