coachriley
Junior Member
"Tough times don't last; Tough people do."
Posts: 406
|
Post by coachriley on Aug 24, 2009 20:47:18 GMT -6
I am installing the single wing this year, my first year as a youth coach and first year with the single wing (sounds like a great combination) lol. Anyways, had a meeting tonight with my one assistant for the time and we both kinda want different things from the offense. I was completely content with staying with maybe 3 or 4 formations from the single wing and keeping the same base plays and obviously mixing in a few things to surprise the D. He is willing to go with the SW too, but wants to put in some other formations that the kids will use later on, i.e. I, Wishbone, those types of things.
My question is does anyone know a way we can both combine what we want without making things too complicated for the kids?
|
|
|
Post by gameface on Aug 24, 2009 21:13:52 GMT -6
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.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 25, 2009 8:24:01 GMT -6
What age group? Average experience level of players?
|
|
|
Post by coachguy83 on Aug 25, 2009 11:22:01 GMT -6
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.
|
|
coachriley
Junior Member
"Tough times don't last; Tough people do."
Posts: 406
|
Post by coachriley on Aug 25, 2009 21:40:03 GMT -6
They are 9-10 year olds. A bit over half the team has played football before.
83, would you mind sending me some of your trips stuff that you talked about?
I still want single wing, but I know one of the most important aspects is having a reliable center to make consistent snaps, and I dont know if we have that right now. We havent installed anything yet, so its no big deal if we make a change.
|
|
|
Post by gameface on Aug 25, 2009 21:56:22 GMT -6
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;)
|
|
|
Post by kkennedy on Aug 25, 2009 23:29:50 GMT -6
Coach, stay with the single wing it is the best system of the ones you listed you guys were thinking about running. If you try to do too many things you won't end up being very good at any one thing. As far as the assistant talking about "running things the kids will use later" Ask him if he has watched Florida lately, they have won 2 national titles in the last 3 years running a spread offense with tons of sw elements in it. If you are wanting to run the single wing and you are the head coach then run the single wing. If the assistant does not like that then well.........
As far as your issue with a reliable center, you actually need at least 2 and 3 is better but you can build a center no problems thats what we do as coaches. Just like what was already mentioned take a look at coach Cisars material you can't go wrong with his stuff.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 26, 2009 7:08:07 GMT -6
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=-699579089183056593Often later in the season with only our well executing teams we run more spread Single Wing with Jet motion:
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Aug 28, 2009 18:29:51 GMT -6
Although I am a first year YOUTH coach, I do have experience as an OC on the varsity level. I installed the single wing with ONE formation and Six plays. I am very happy with the results and the confidence that our kids have with the plays. No one has stopped us yet and we have been on the short end of the stick as far as talent goes all three teams we've played. With 9-10 year old kids I would add a half spin into the playbook.
I'm with Dave, a center/QB exchange is a nightmare. FUMBLES, FUMBLES, FUMBLES.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2009 18:39:54 GMT -6
I second the half spin, or the buck lateral
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Aug 28, 2009 19:25:44 GMT -6
I second the half spin, or the buck lateral The buck lateral series at that level is very difficult to coach. It takes certain personell (a big athletic back to crash into the line every play with good hands), and a lot of practice time to master just the ball handling portion of the offense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 7:36:25 GMT -6
I second the half spin, or the buck lateral The buck lateral series at that level is very difficult to coach. It takes certain personell (a big athletic back to crash into the line every play with good hands), and a lot of practice time to master just the ball handling portion of the offense. 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.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Aug 29, 2009 9:21:27 GMT -6
How did you block your buck series?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 11:32:56 GMT -6
How did you block your buck series? -------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
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Aug 29, 2009 14:56:43 GMT -6
The buck lateral series at that level is very difficult to coach. It takes certain personell (a big athletic back to crash into the line every play with good hands), and a lot of practice time to master just the ball handling portion of the offense. 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. I totally respect your opinion. Of the single wing guys I've talked to they all say that it is more difficult to master, especially at the lower age levels. You say differently and I believe you. I would love to trade some tape with you so I could see it in action. Us single wing guys have to stick together! haha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 15:16:11 GMT -6
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.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 29, 2009 18:07:56 GMT -6
I dont like the Buck lateral series, 2 ball exchanges on 1 play. I prefer 1 exchange and with our Buck Wedge series we got it down to 1 with nearly the same effect. First year we ran it, 8 plays, 7 TDs, second year 11 TDs off the buck wedge pass etc at age 8-10. Even that series, we only run it with our youngest kids, ditched it for more effective series.
For the practice time and risk reward, I think there are better ways to go. Even at the High School level of all the Single Wing teams, Giles is the only one that runs the Buck Lateral series. Menominee, Stone Bridge, Osbourne, Colton, Apopka etc dont run it.
There are so many series to choose from, you cant keep them all and be good at em all. We are- SW Sainted 6 Plus 1 SW Burst (Olivet T Inspired) SW TB 1/2 Spin (Mouse) SW FB Full Spin And Spread SW Jet Series for the older kids.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Aug 29, 2009 20:35:17 GMT -6
The buck lateral series at that level is very difficult to coach. It takes certain personell (a big athletic back to crash into the line every play with good hands), and a lot of practice time to master just the ball handling portion of the offense. 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, 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?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 21:18:54 GMT -6
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, 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? The buck series is similarto option in effect , IE it sells the ball inside then there's the possibility of the ball winding up in several different locations. I'm not saying that the concept is the same, (read and react) but the effect is similar. Though an option play is entirely possible off the BB keep . I beleive Don Farout was the one who described it this way. We used a basic handoff Hb caught the ball low makes a one handed handoff outside to the BB waiting for the ball. We say the BB takes it on a "tray". The receiving BB either pitched the ball 2 handed arms extended down, oint of the bal toward the ground "off his inside thigh" to the TB on the sweep, or simply made a one handed handoff to the WB for the counters. We had the flip pass too. I'd be glad to answer any other questions
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 21:28:16 GMT -6
I dont like the Buck lateral series, 2 ball exchanges on 1 play. I prefer 1 exchange and with our Buck Wedge series we got it down to 1 with nearly the same effect. First year we ran it, 8 plays, 7 TDs, second year 11 TDs off the buck wedge pass etc at age 8-10. Even that series, we only run it with our youngest kids, ditched it for more effective series. For the practice time and risk reward, I think there are better ways to go. Even at the High School level of all the Single Wing teams, Giles is the only one that runs the Buck Lateral series. Menominee, Stone Bridge, Osbourne, Colton, Apopka etc dont run it. There are so many series to choose from, you cant keep them all and be good at em all. We are- SW Sainted 6 Plus 1 SW Burst (Olivet T Inspired) SW TB 1/2 Spin (Mouse) SW FB Full Spin And Spread SW Jet Series for the older kids. 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
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 30, 2009 3:29:58 GMT -6
Kell,
Oh I agree it is a very cool series, no doubt. Thing of beauty the way Giles runs it.
I only tried to make it work 1 season and wow, it just ate up my practice time compared to the others.
Personal preference thing, I hate turnovers and I hate things that gobble up my practice time, hence we "redesigned" the Buck Lateral series to meet our needs.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Aug 30, 2009 11:33:46 GMT -6
The buck series is similarto option in effect , IE it sells the ball inside then there's the possibility of the ball winding up in several different locations. I'm not saying that the concept is the same, (read and react) but the effect is similar. 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.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 15:42:34 GMT -6
The buck series is similarto option in effect , IE it sells the ball inside then there's the possibility of the ball winding up in several different locations. I'm not saying that the concept is the same, (read and react) but the effect is similar. 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. I guess it could be said that' it's similar to the Wing T buck series, however the Wing T buck series is perpetuated by a fake, the Fb never actually has the ball, in the Buck series, the Fb does have the ball he sells the dive, at one point we tried having him read the LB, and decide whether or not he was going to hand off, but we never really got it, so we just called it. We also experimentedwith having the Tb give a signal to the BB Whether to pitch to him or keep, it actually worked really well. If the Tb wasn't covered after the keep ws signalled, he would sprint to pitch relationship with the BB, we never got a pitch there, but there were quite a few times where the BB could've pitched the ball for huge gains, he just never did. Combine the 2 you'd have my. oddball version of the triple option For the transfer, we prefer that the FB catch the ball underhanded, thumbs out, like fielding a punt except the ball is coming straight at him, he simply hands the ball off to the BB on his dive track, the BB is waiting doing the same thing, palms up thumbs out arms bent and together...we call it a tray. We practice setting the ball into the BBs hands, it isn't that hard...another technique we used ws what we called "wrong pocket", where the BB spins around and makes the incorrect pocket open away from the diveback, which put the ball nicely in his hand, and we would pitch a spiral one handed, however, it's harder to coach, because they are often used to making the correct one. When handing it to the Wb, we always used a one handed handoff, this is where the wrongpocket works nice. The BB would begin his turn toward the end the BB would make a simple handoff similar to that on a DW trap. That portion was very similar to the Wing T buck lateral series. Ours actually resembles the Spin series slightly The flip pass, (or alley oop as they called it We only used 3 or 4 times, we used it mostly on EP's one was critical. It's a risky play, I only called vs heavy fronts, in short yardage situations. I also don't reccommend handing the ball off to he interior line, EVER, I dont even like handing it off to the ends. Remember they are unprotected, unlike the BB behind the LOS, he has distance, and blockers in front of him. You also have to remember that you are going to be giving the ball to kids who arent used to handling the ball in game situations. We tried Eien's Left guard special a few times, I'm not even in Bruce's league, we got killed every time, he made it look easy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 16:36:21 GMT -6
Kell, Oh I agree it is a very cool series, no doubt. Thing of beauty the way Giles runs it. I only tried to make it work 1 season and wow, it just ate up my practice time compared to the others. Personal preference thing, I hate turnovers and I hate things that gobble up my practice time, hence we "redesigned" the Buck Lateral series to meet our needs. 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.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 30, 2009 17:34:55 GMT -6
I have that old slow motion video too, looks like made in someones backyard LOL> Yep even in slow motion, kinda tough to figure out, I agree 100% That's why I went to the Single Wing Conclave in Wilks Barre with 100 other Single Wing coaches, who know how to run it LOL> Best 2 football days Ive ever spent. I got a base to work from, then made a few modifications based on personal experience etc We give our FB the base steps, teach em it before practice the day we introduce spin and run with it. First with no ball and FB only, then no ball add the TB, then no ball FB/WB only, then all 3 walk, jog, then we add the ball. Once you have the base action in, you basically have 5 "new" plays. Line learns nothing new. We are in so tight, our "rubs" dont have to be super tight to fool the defense (but they usually are) We do teach the spin footwork to our kids, but let them figure it out a bit once theyve been repped through using the steps we teach. Not been a problem and we have taught it as young as 7-9. I do NOT recommend it for all rookie teams or any team that is struggling to perfect thier base series first. In 11 seasons it has always been our biggest YPC series. I love the BL. I just like handoffs and direct snaps rather than 2 ball exchanges and a pitch in the air heading to a moving target toward my goal line Personal Preference
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Aug 30, 2009 19:22:54 GMT -6
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). We also experimentedwith having the Tb give a signal to the BB Whether to pitch to him or keep, it actually worked really well. 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.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 20:33:54 GMT -6
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). We also experimentedwith having the Tb give a signal to the BB Whether to pitch to him or keep, it actually worked really well. 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. Yeah it was read on the run, guess it was inherited from my dad's old wishbone days. One of my assistants called it "Dive Read Option" ...he used to break my stones on it...if something went wrong it's "this is YOUR baby, you came up with the {censored} thing".... The dive portion was difficult at 1st, we told the FB, to try to read the 1st defender head up to outside the PSG, but he couldn't see him, so I told him, to run his track and if someone, anyone steps into his track, he is to dish the ball off to the BB. We would take a look at the onset, and decide who we would read. We came up with a few drills for it, it helped. The BB never takes his eyes off the TB, who is either coming in motion from the Wing position (what we called Carlisle formation) of from his deep position. The Tb signals the BB by either hand position, but eventually all he had to do was look straight at the BB to get the pitch. He would read ANY defender coming around the end. When the kids had a hard time with it, we just called it ourselves. The handoff, from the FB to the BB, lets say were in the right formation (the one above), on the snap the BB will turn counter clock wise, toward the short side. He will have his right arm down, his left arm up across his chest...the opposite of how he should take a handoff (IE opening always to the ball). The ball will be placed into his stomach on top of his hand. He will cradle the ball with his right hand, eyes on the TB, the whole time, placement is the respnsibility of the FB. The continuation of the turn from that position, put's him in an excellent position to pitch the ball in a spiral underhanded if need b, we used to tell him to "go bowling" . But he's also in an excellent position to hand off to the W on a counter. The FB dives INSIDE the BB, if the BB is facing backward, from the right formation , the FB will be approaching on HIS right, we hand off right hand to right hand. Also check your league rules, about handing off to linemen, we had to change the play, around alot (probably why it failed)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2009 4:24:15 GMT -6
I have that old slow motion video too, looks like made in someones backyard LOL> Yep even in slow motion, kinda tough to figure out, I agree 100% I can't remember where that thing was?? Was it Aldrich's site? Or the Still Running page?
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Aug 31, 2009 6:27:25 GMT -6
I dont know, I had it on an old VHS tape amoung my many stacks LOL. I also have or had a copy of Aldrich's College team running the SW in practice, no pads. Short shorts, high socks and all, great stuff
|
|
|
Post by morris on Aug 31, 2009 11:44:15 GMT -6
I have that Aldrich tape. It has the guys on the practice field running through plays and the slow mode stuff that looks like it is shot in the backyard. You can see the old cars goin gby in the background. I would love ot get my hands on some Giles stuff.
|
|