Spreading things out from the SW

I wouldn't do it. I would just stay with in the SW and run different formations. What age group. We ran a Wishbone/pro-set type offense last year. It flopped. One coach wanted this one wanted that and it just didn't work. I think it was to predictable. That may not be the offense maybe it is us as coaches. Anyways I would just stick with one.

I would stick with the single wing. It is a good offense and you will have success with it. I'm coaching a team that is a mixture of kids that have won 4 games in three years and kids that have won 0 in two years. We are 2-0 and lighting up score boards. If you want to spread defenses out you can do some stuff from the single wing that will do that. I run a trips package that gives us a spread type look, but we still have our single wing attitude.

If you are only coaching the 9-10 year olds I would go as simple as could be and expand after you have the sainted 6 down. Look at Dave's stuff it is worth it. As the year progresses add in some different formations. I wouldn't fret about the center snap. I am coaching 8-9 and it is a snap (no pun intended). I can't believe I didn't put in the SW earlier. I almost like offense more than defense now;)

At that age group mixing in a bunch of under center stuff would be a huge mistake

What works is perfecting a core series of integrated plays
Once you PERFECT those, then you move on to the next set of integrated plays

We have had no problems with the center snap because our kids arent back 5 yards in a "shotgun" we are 2 yards back:

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-699579089183056593

Often later in the season with only our well executing teams we run more spread Single Wing with Jet motion:

I second the half spin, or the buck lateral

Coach I have to disagree, I used it for a couple years, and personally never had a problem with it. I also used to use the smallst kid on our team as the dive back, I felt it hid him better.

I think it all depends on how committed to it you are. It does require some committment, but I wouldn't call it difficult.

Althought it's the SW equivalent to the option, it certainly doesn't require as much time, but whatever time we spent was well worth it.

If I ever were to return to SW again, the Buck series would be the foundation of my offense, hands down.

-------0---0--X--O--O--O------O
-------------------O--------O

-----------------O
-------------O

There were a couple ways, we used down blocking vs alot of teams, but it was mostly based on wing T buck sweep blocking...basically pulling guards, because we didn't pull when balanced. We used backside trap most of the time time. PSG pulls...Leads TB on sweep, everybody hooks. Off tackle PSG kicks out end, backside trap. Counter was the opposite BSG kicked out end, PSG pulled.

If the LB's were really sitting on the dive, we wouldn't trap but scoop backside

offcoachbam, saw our SW back in 06, we scored a 65 yarder on the Buck lateral sweep. Won the game too

I miss that thing

I wish I still had some, the only film we ever had was from the parents, we had one guy that filmed 5 or, 6 games than up and moved , we lost contact , other than that, we never had someone that would film for us, this year though we will, but we're not runing SW. Like I said offcoachbam saw it in person, tough game too.

Unfortunately, I've left the SW family to try new things ...but I'd go back in a minute, I can't say that about a few other systems.

Trust me it isn't that hard, I just think that style isnt as popular as other styles, (ex spinner), which is why I liked it so much. The, basic install was about 8 days, give or take , the quickest I can recall was 4 days If you have any questions coach, I'd be glad to answer them for you.

How do you figure? Are you referring only to the play where the blocking back (or "link man") comes out with the ball running a keep-or-pitch to the TB? Or does the entire series somehow figure as "equivalent" in some way?


Stop me if I've asked before, but what technique of handoff from the dive back to the link player did you use, and what technique of handoff from the link man to the WB coming around?

The reason I ask is that I'm contemplating for the future a buck series where the tackles (ETGCGTE or ETCGGTE) handle the ball, and I'm thinking about various forms of hand work for a quick bang-bang pair of exchanges, preferably while hiding the ball.

On the buck lateral, did the link man gather the ball into a "basket" and then work it out to his hands for the lateral? Or did he take it in his hands to begin with? Was there any hip swing with the pitch, or just a straight underhand toss?

You gotta remember too Dave when we 1st started using it there weren't as many forms that we know of now. There was spinner, half spin, power and Buck...Ted introduced alot of concepts I never heard of, like the Owen A formation.

All I had on the SW was Blount's book, and that was it . The 1st ILL book I ever picked up was Caldwells

I liked the buck series, I don't know why I guess there weren't alot of guys asking about it over on Delphi back then, everyone wanted to use the spinner. I went the other route, I still personally like it the best.

just my opinion

OK. What I say is that the buck lateral is equivalent to the wing T's buck sweep. Robert McAdams and some others say the draw on the defense is greater in the buck lateral series, because the defense actually sees the dive player with the ball, than in the wing T buck sweep, although I have my doubts.


Do you mean the BB forms the tray with his hands & bent forearms, or takes it off a tray formed by the HB?


Did he drop his forearms & let the ball slide down the tray to his hands? Or did he pull in the tray to his chest like retracting an airline seat back tray and get his thumbs around the ball first?


Under the QB's chicken wing? I'd've thought the WB would do a reach-take off the tray, if I'm right in imagining the BB's tray. But you probably don't need as quick a bang-bang pair of handoffs as what I'm cooking up. In the classic series, the BB would hold the ball out for the fake lateral to hand it to the WB, a slower sequence than mine, where the handoff would occur before (and more frequently than) the lateral.

What I'd been thinking of would be the dive player rubbing elbows with the link man (the tackle in my case), who would receive the ball on top of his near forearm (opposite of the under-the-wing handoff), tucking it in with his opposite hand, and leaving it parked there for a reach-take by the opposite pulling tackle, then if that's a fake scooping it out with his "tuck" hand and cocking it for the lateral. But that's in the context of the dive back's passing to the outside of the tackle, the handoff to the other tackle coming from this one's inside, and the lateral to a flanker going the other way. Similar to the classic buck lateral series, but in a mirror and with part of the sequence reversed. I'm trying to work out as much in advance of actual experimentation as possible the hand work to optimize as many as possible of:

• buck/dive player protecting the ball with an outside grip when he keeps
  
• buck/dive player's grip not revealing whether he's keeping
  
• safe exchanges
  
• speed
  

...and the whole thing is set up by a crossbuck fake where the tackle ordinarily just pulls across to lead to the other side. (The QB is the real BB who kicks out.)

One thing I may be overthinking is the buck player's not tipping the play with his grip on the ball. With players with relatively small bodies (almost all of them in youth ball), with a layered look the ball is pretty well out front no matter which side they're theoretically carrying it on.


Did you ever try it other than on an extra point or when the score was lopsided? I ask because I'd like to think of it as a regular part of the series, but don't know how seriously that can be taken.

Giles is bad a$$, I love that power game they have, I really don't think they even need the Buck. I guess I never realized the time committment because it's all we ever did, along with the short punt stuff. I personaly thought the spinner was tough, it took us so long to get the footwork the way Aldrich did, I remember watching that old video about 50-60 times , with the book in my lap, before I decided to come up with my own. We ran it for 2 games then went back to buck.

Figured it was about time to change the subject line. OK, the "tray" was as I first envisioned it, thanks (once I got clear of the other possible meaning).

Wow, you mean after the snap, not pre-snap? Guess I shouldn't be too surprised, players call for passes in other sports.

Considering the player receiving the handoff is facing backward, which is the "correct" pocket? Is that under the near elbow or the far one? My guess would be the near one (the inside one in the usual form of buck lateral), because all else equal you'd rather hand off close than across the body -- but as I wrote, even with 12 YOs, before the adolescent spurt and before the age where big body types come to dominate the game, I find the ball so big in relationship to them that tucking it under the far elbow doesn't seem much farther than the near one.


Under the near elbow or far?


Heh. Well, that's if it's a standard type offense rather than the 2nd season of my 2 season plan. 1st season install a basic version of my balanced-line sidesaddle T with fly with just 1 pulling guard and the sidesaddle QB, the guard G blocking the kickout and QB leading thru one way, fly man or QB kicking out and guard leading thru the other way, deep backs only at the depth of Dave Cisar or Menominee HS, and none of this buck series stuff -- just a QB 3/4 spin with fly handoff, dive, belly, and keep, a slanting fly trap (same guard), and simple cross bucks snapped to the deep backs where one dives or fakes and the other goes wide either around end or cutting off tackle (or fakes). Oh and of course wedge and passes off the action of most of these.

2nd season spread & deepen the backs more to allow a greater variety of real or fake POA combinations cross-bucking at the snap, and have both tackles be the pullers, QB kicking out. They'd be used to handling the ball because they'd do it enough to be worthwhile. The tackle handling the ball would start by pulling behind the guard and be protected by his block, that of the QB cutting in front of the tackle, the TE down blocking if there was one on that side, and somebody's going to be occupied by the dive back slanting just outside where the tackle winds up. (The other deep back would usually be faking the same thing to the opposite side.) And the most frequent way to continue the play would be by the opposite tackle, pulling across as if to lead, taking the handoff and continuing around end. So I figure the tackles in season 2 to be something of the stars, the MPPs that season rotating as guards, center, maybe sometimes ends. The tackles would hardly ever have to drive block, so they wouldn't be chosen as your usual tackle types. If the league doesn't have eligible receiver numbering, you bet they'd sometimes be disguised ends with various tricks to shift the fly (flanker) onto the line on either side.

I wouldn't see the point of a buck series from this formation with the dive back handing the ball to the QB, because QB could've taken the snap to begin with, and as I've written I'm not sold on the greater draw to the defense by having the dive back start with the ball than by having the QB handing the ball to him. However, I have seen that sort of thing done elsewhere -- a QB with hands under C standing at an angle in DW, snap to the FB, QB turns around and goes back to receive a handoff on the way to setting in the pocket. I really don't see what's gained there vs. snapping to the QB in the 1st place.

I can't remember where that thing was?? Was it Aldrich's site? Or the Still Running page?