|
Post by tog on Feb 3, 2009 11:36:06 GMT -6
well i would love to comment right now
but
i get to go work out about 60 kids in the weightroom
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Feb 3, 2009 12:30:46 GMT -6
Maybe this doesn’t count…but we ran the a-11 with a very talented group of 8th grader this past season.
Me…I have been coaching football since 1983 and have run some form of a spread offense since the late 1980’s. I was inspired by my HS coach back in the early 1970’s who ran a bunch of Tiger Ellison stuff.
So I have learned how to teach some pretty good passing offenses for youths over the years.
We play in a competitive unlimited weight league…overly competitive if you ask me but it is what it is. From the 2007 season to the 2008 season we lost most of our linemen and could not replace them. Some played for their private MS programs…some moved away.
So we decided to run Coach Bryant’s offense with a few twists.
Positives- We ran the most incredible turn back, tunnel, missile and bubble screens. All great plays. We forced opposing defenses to play a unique brand of football right along with us. Most positions were completely interchangeable. Our ability to block in space became outstanding. A tough thing to teach. The linemen that were still on the team were now catching footballs. Many opportunities to hit big plays. This offense scores fast. The fans loved it. The players learned a lot about formations. The whole idea was quite advanced for them and they did well with that.
Negatives- The officiating was a weekly challenge. Our red zone offense was terrible. You need a QB with ice water in his veins. A turnover was typically a TD because the offense was so spread out. Required a ton of practice time to get right so in turn our defense got less practice. We couldn’t platoon because for the first time in years our numbers were way down. No series based stuff. No power running game to speak of. No counters unless you consider the halfback pass or a long reverse a counter play. Requires serious team speed…which we had. Tough to clock manage.
At the end of the day the A-11 was a poor choice for us. Mainly because the officials really do struggle with it. We use HS refs mostly. My son who is the HC did get ejected from one game over complete frustration. We didn’t purchase anything from Piedmont. Because I love to pass the football and there is nothing really available on that subject for youth coaches I learn from film and forums like this one and then dumb it all down from there. Over the years I have become very good at this and then apply my own rules.
We ran a sudo no huddle….quick huddle to set the formation and motions…then call the play at the LOS. It was a hard offense to call because we had to keep close track of our eligible positions. Sometimes even our tackles were eligible. Plus with such wide formations against bizarre defenses it was tough to read at times. We do not follow the jersey numbering system so that was never an issue.
My take…the offense isn’t worth the efforts. I did go watch one of our local HS teams that ran this offense and they did well so I have witnessed the a-11 be successful.
We were not.
We went 11-0 and won all the marbles in 2007 running the spread I and empty …0-8 and in last place in 2008 running the a-11. Defense was the same. In truth, we lost enough talent on our lines that I really don’t know if another offense would have helped. We played in the champions division meaning all 10 teams had been a champion at one time or another…so the idea that this offense levels the playing field is not true. You still have to play defense.
One misnomer about this offense is that it creates wussies. That is not true. Big hits in space takes some guts. Our kids turned into wonderful and very legal headhunters. Regardless we all had some fun with it but never again.
The idea of a unique federation just for this offense is completely absurd.
My 2 cents...
Coach Mike
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Feb 3, 2009 16:04:20 GMT -6
i am not weighing in on the merits, pros/cons of the offense or style. my questions or concerns if you will, are the total ramifications. the logistics involved. it is one thing to play a singular game using modified rules. it is another to want to play all your games with these. how will that impact your program? how will that impact your season, postseason, etc.? what travel or other costs will occur? what backlash (if any) can come about from withdrawing to form a new league? how will that league be set up? what new governing body will now be in place? what are the logistics for that?
i'm sure the coaches that are seriously considering this are chewing on these issues. but, i don't know any of the answers and that is what i'm asking about. could care less about the "feelings" on your style, or whether you agree with the a-11offense or not. it isn't ultimately about that when making your decision (to stay or join the new). one must answer all those questions (and many more, i'm sure) to decide if this is right for you.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 3, 2009 22:06:06 GMT -6
So, can anyone please tell me how this offense "evens the playing field", better than any other offense? 11 on 11 is even right? Also, I saw in the A-11 Website that it says "The A-11 is here for good". Is that true? Out of the thousands and thousands of football teams in America, how many use the A-11 offense and would be willing to divide over it? As they say "Can't no womans "stuff" be that great to where you stay after you know she is using you." Sorry for the expression, but come on! A possible seperation just because of a rule that does not want to be follwed? Are all A-11 teams going to make there own league? So all offense are A-11? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) It now becomes an alternate form of football...like the CFL or the Arena League. No it doesn't. Nobody running their own league would ever think of adopting all existing rules specifically to retain this by-product of some wishful thinking in rules writing combined with excellent R&D by a coach exploiting the loophole left thereby. People who wanted an alternate form of football would probably alter many things, and would try to write the rules in such a way as to not require such a Rube Goldbergish way to exploit them. Canadian football has a long history of slow organic parallel development in contact with the USAn version of the game, not specifically a desire for an alternative. Arena football is an example of the latter, partly in imitation of indoor soccer and partly as a way of making use of a patent on the rebounding screens -- while meanwhile pulling its punches so as to appear to not be too much different from the outdoor game. The comparisons don't make sense. Robert in the Bronx
|
|
|
Post by tog on Feb 3, 2009 22:12:42 GMT -6
by-product of some wishful thinking in rules writing combined with excellent R&D by a coach exploiting the loophole left thereby/quote] bob are you a lawyer herewith and stuff? lol good points though as an ex lawyer type the language is funny to me i wouldn't call it excellent r+d either what it is more than that it is www.shamwow.com/ver8/index.asp
|
|
|
Post by redandwhite on Feb 4, 2009 17:36:21 GMT -6
Hey, gotta get me one of those Shamwows!
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Feb 4, 2009 19:06:42 GMT -6
On KTLK the other day someone called in and said they bought a Shamwow. Said it didn't work. I don't know, its made in Germany and German's make good stuff so it should work. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) It soaks up water like a mo-fo in the comerical so how to you fake that?
|
|