Get ready fellows.. the tables are a turnin

Because most states use Federation rules, I don't expect to see a huge increase in teams running the option because they can't cut outside of the free blocking zone.

At the HS level, I don't know that we'll see 'true' flexbone or SBV offenses popping up. People are still very much in love with the SG spread concept. Around here, I imagine that we'll see more teams dabbling in the veer and midline, adding to their spread packages. I don't think that they'll sell out to the veer/midline philosophy and as such, they'll struggle.

Plus, I have seen very few coaches that understand what these offenses entail, the time and effort it takes to get it right. Even if they do kick over to the offense completely, I don't know that it'll be run very well. I have seen it a lot at the lower classes around here; they want to be a veer/midline team, but they're flat out terrible at it. They're just to d-mn stubborn to go out, research the offense, and do it right.

I've seen two teams in the state that run the offense right and they are very good teams. But, I have seen far more teams that don't know the offense and it's obvious. The Xs and Os aren't sound, the meshes are bad and the pitches are worse. It's obvious that they don't spend the time that they need to on the simple stuff.

So, we'll see what happens.

the cut rule in the fed should be changed


it widens the talent gap
it isn't effective for it's intended purpose
and it is just lame

I'm with SP on this, the cut rule hurts the option terribly in the HS ranks.
The one and only Flexbone team I face runs both Veer and Mid-line and they are tough bunch. However, they don't ever have a good record, but they are tough runners and rarely pitch.

I was coaching when the rule change can about and every Veer and Wisbone Option coach that I knew was running the Wing-T or "I" the next year. Well, one team didn't but they were lousy anyway no matter if they were allowed cut-block or cut with a razorblade.

OJW

If you watch Navy today, watch the slot backs.

I have. The question stands.

Not having coached the flexbone but having to prepare for it several times over the years I have some insight on the philosophy.
Playing cut blocks is not a big deal for us, we do it all the time. We teach technique to play off of cut blocks and make plays. When I played a flexbone team you had to put more emphasis into playing cut blocks. These teams want to get you on the ground and cut off pursuit.

2nd emphasis is that by cutting they create those running lanes with man blocking. This allows the ball carrier to have a running lane without having to cutback (which you can't do running the option). The ball carriers are running downhill in a clear running lane.

Now by cutting, again I emphasize it allows man blocking principals instead of zone blocking. It is much more difficult to man block someone up high that it is to cut them. I was an OT in college, believe me I know.

Cut blocking along the LOS is legal in Federation. We do it all the time. Why is cut blocking outside of the FBZ considered so critical to option offenses?

It matters a ton for several reasons, I ran this offense in college and we like most option teams were awarded as LOS players for getting cut blocks. On all Dive phase, cutting LB's was highly effective as the dives hit quick and getting a LB on the ground allowed the ball to scoot by, also allowed undersized lineman to take hard angles and attack through knees. The perimeter concepts it is obvious the advantage that would exist in any offense. However, with the Flexbone playing smaller quick kids in the slot the cut block is a great equilizer against OLB's. Changing the cut block rules in high school football would enhance all schemes however, quick hitting dive schemes would benefit the most.

It's the second level that critical, those slots and tkls getting to the second level and cutting LB's and safeties. That's the biggest difference. They cut LB's and safeties, not just DL.

You don't have to have the greatest speed in the backfield but if you take the defender to the ground and cut off pursuit, then your average speed can make big plays.

Cut blocking does not require that the blocker overcome the leverage/position of the defensive player. This is especially useful in option schemes since there are two potential perimeter ball carriers. It allows a much smaller player to negate a bigger player (slotback on LB) for the QB phase, and it allows for an easier block in space (throwing at a players legs) regardless of leverage in the pitch phase.

Sure, I understand that cut blocking makes it easier (as a DC I have to say that tackling would be MUCH easier if they'd just let us grab facemasks). Why is it considered critical, to the point that the inability to do it is a deal-breaker, to option teams? Are you really telling me that you can't run option without cutting?

exactly---this is one of the reasons the rule needs to be changed---to narrow the talent gap

Well, in that game it was an easy mistake to make.