|
|
Post by coachchance on Jan 6, 2007 14:10:12 GMT -6
i am an o.c. for high school team and was wondering how many formations other coach's use? we use a number of formations and i think we have to many, seems like every sunday night at film our whole staff has ideas and wants to add stuff. we end up spending alot of time on new things and end up losing alot of individual time. all input will be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by djwesp on Jan 6, 2007 14:57:49 GMT -6
We run 5 bone formations.
3 I formations
3 Shotgun formations.
We used to run one formation Wishbone Traditional. We found that we could add some formations and get people to do more of what we want, however we've always been big proponents of doing something really well instead of having a bunch of stuff we do mediocre and not so well.
Being really creative and adding a bunch of formations is nice, but at some point you have to teach your team to execute all of this stuff. We've found that when we OUT EXECUTE the opposition we win, very rarely has creativity had anything to do with it. Your creativeness and multiplicity is only as good as what your team can do with it on the field.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jan 6, 2007 15:20:14 GMT -6
As many as your team can execute. I know that's vague but it really does vary from team to team and year to year.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jan 6, 2007 15:34:40 GMT -6
The real question is how much success did your team have this year by doing this?
There are two main schools of thought on this.
Run as many plays as you can from a few formations.
Run a few plays from as many formations as you can.
I like a little of both myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Jan 6, 2007 15:59:29 GMT -6
I have run as few as 6 or so and as many as 20 in a season. Right now we run the following as standard formations:
Pro I
Flanker
Power I
Wing I
Bone
String I
Twins
Trips
End Over combined with one of the above 2 of 3 back formations.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Jan 6, 2007 16:31:02 GMT -6
I also believe it depends on how many different types of plays you will be running and how many different blocking schemes and pass protections. We believe in multiple formations with a limited number of plays. We have 5-6 run plays but those run plays are based out of 3 blocking schemes. We have 3 screens, 4 quick passing game, and 5 - 5 step pass plays and 3-5 playaction passes. We avg close to 12-18 different formations each game. A lot of our formations may be the same with a different tag. We can add wing to the formation and now our H will align 1 x 1 off of the TE. We can add bunch and the H and Z will compress the formation off of the TE.
Here is an example of having 3 formations based off of one.
Trey
X__________TGCGTY
_____________Q________H_________Z
_____________T
Trey Wing
X_______TGCGTY
__________Q___H____________Z
__________T
Trey Bunch
X______TGCGTY
_________Q___H_Z
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jan 6, 2007 16:40:06 GMT -6
We only run 2 formations. Spread and Wing-I. We are always strong left. We do have a shift were the TE and WB shift over to the opposite side, but do not do that much. We will on occasion motion the FB out to emtpy or just align him out there. We will also bring the flanker over some and run trips.
But we always line up with a TE on the left side and a SE on the right.
We scored over 400 points and racked up over 5000 yards this season, so I guess we must be doing something right. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Jan 6, 2007 19:06:04 GMT -6
4 base formations, 6 backfield sets, and 6 flanker sets
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 6, 2007 20:11:21 GMT -6
if you are a TE oriented team (traditional 2-back personnel) then basically you only have 2 formations --- pro and twins. this, of course is without regard to backfield alignment. however, you basically have 4 -- I, off-set strong, off-set weak, and split (could get more in-depth, but 4 is pretty standard depending on overall schemes you run, but, most teams will only use about 4)
so, what you really want to focus on is what you are calling "Pro" and what you are calling "Twins". then, set the backs.
example: R - pro right (TE / Flanker right) .... L is opposite
use your "base" backfield set as the standard rule. example: I is what you are. so, R is also I for the backfield (now you don't need an "I" term). right now, your players are onlly learning 2 things (r/l) and the backs learn 3 (light, heavy, split). With these "moving" terms for the fullback (light, heavy, slot, wing) you can move him around to get into a variety of sets. however, only one player has to learn anything, really. If you want a TE right, with slot left (flanker right, also) ... well, call "R Slot" ... R indicates the TE, Flanker, Split end to align according to "R" i.e. pro right. "slot" is a moving term for the fullback that tells him to go away from the TE. What you have now done is created a system in which you can align in a variety of formations without having a great deal of memorization (i.e. giving every formation a completely new name). Yes, your formations are typically 2 words (if you want to move the fullback or adjust the backfield from the I) but the plus-side is that the chances for a mixup (i.e. do i go right on ricky? or is it randy? .. lol)
now, address a name for the twins formation (rag / lace). use the same moving terms by the fullback (rag wing ... rag heavy, etc.) again, limited amount of memorization yet multiple formations.
can do same thing (with moving terms) when you replace the fullback with a 3rd receiver. Twins, Pro, etc. Terms can be whatever, of course, but the X, Z, Y don't have to memorize any other formations ... pro-twins set?? "R Twins". X, Y, Z align in R and the 3rd receiver is aligns in "twins" -- i.e. #2 weak.
I won't bore you with the entire formation system we use. You can use any terms you choose. But, I would like to point out that this system is based on limiting pure memorization. X, Y, Z learn 4 terms (R, L, Rag, Lace). The fullback (and the 3rd receiver) each learn 4 things (FB - heavy, light, wing, slot /// 3rd rec - twins, pro, wide, loose). a rule we use, is that we want our formations to never be 4 words, and rarely 3. (a 3 might be R Pro Squeeze -- with squeeze merely compressing the R Pro formation .. again, eliminating memorization of more formations).
take a look at what formations you want, and how you might be able to utilize a system such as this. it has its con's, of course, but i feel it cuts down on the #1 cause of mistakes ... forgetfullness (i.e. too much memorization required).
|
|
coachf
Freshmen Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by coachf on Jan 6, 2007 22:24:19 GMT -6
I like lots of formations. But,I usually cut them down before the season. I will always have 2 or 3 formations we use for a special play or trick play, but I don't count them in our total number.
What I like to do is figure out before the year, if a new formation is worth the time to implement it. How many plays will you run out of it? Not, how many you want to run, but how many you "will" run. I have cut the formations down to make sure that I am not wasting time trying to get guys lined up. If we had enough players to go one way, I would probably use a lot more, but since we are mostly two-way players I don't want to get to fancy.
|
|
|
|
Post by poweriguy on Jan 6, 2007 22:41:47 GMT -6
We had basicaly 3 formations.
Power I
Wing I
Sniffer
But out of all those formations, we had tight, regular, and wide splits. And an unbalanced line with the 3 different splits.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachJohnsonMN on Jan 7, 2007 9:52:42 GMT -6
We are a one-back team that uses as many combinations of 2 x 2 and 3 x 1 as possible. We only have 7 run plays, 4 screens, bubble screen, jailhouse screen, 4 3-step plays, and 7 5-step pass plays. With the exception of our bunch formation, every play can be executed from each formation. We will use motion to create a two-back formation (similar to Florida, Utah, etc) and this is created simply using the motion tag. We used to use 3 or 4 formations and many plays. This created uncertainty and lack of aggression. I feel that if you can have the players do most of their thinking prior to the play, the better off you will be (i.e. formations). I try to limit the amount of thinking they have to do as a play develops.
|
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Jan 7, 2007 10:12:02 GMT -6
I think as many formations as possible, with the lowest # of plays possible is effective.
We run the same plays out of as many formations as possible...that way a defense spends time worrying about lining up against all the formations and less time learning how to stop the plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Jan 7, 2007 11:14:31 GMT -6
if you are a TE oriented team (traditional 2-back personnel) then basically you only have 2 formations --- pro and twins. this, of course is without regard to backfield alignment. however, you basically have 4 -- I, off-set strong, off-set weak, and split (could get more in-depth, but 4 is pretty standard depending on overall schemes you run, but, most teams will only use about 4) so, what you really want to focus on is what you are calling "Pro" and what you are calling "Twins". then, set the backs. example: R - pro right (TE / Flanker right) .... L is opposite use your "base" backfield set as the standard rule. example: I is what you are. so, R is also I for the backfield (now you don't need an "I" term). right now, your players are onlly learning 2 things (r/l) and the backs learn 3 (light, heavy, split). With these "moving" terms for the fullback (light, heavy, slot, wing) you can move him around to get into a variety of sets. however, only one player has to learn anything, really. If you want a TE right, with slot left (flanker right, also) ... well, call "R Slot" ... R indicates the TE, Flanker, Split end to align according to "R" i.e. pro right. "slot" is a moving term for the fullback that tells him to go away from the TE. What you have now done is created a system in which you can align in a variety of formations without having a great deal of memorization (i.e. giving every formation a completely new name). Yes, your formations are typically 2 words (if you want to move the fullback or adjust the backfield from the I) but the plus-side is that the chances for a mixup (i.e. do i go right on ricky? or is it randy? .. lol) now, address a name for the twins formation (rag / lace). use the same moving terms by the fullback (rag wing ... rag heavy, etc.) again, limited amount of memorization yet multiple formations. can do same thing (with moving terms) when you replace the fullback with a 3rd receiver. Twins, Pro, etc. Terms can be whatever, of course, but the X, Z, Y don't have to memorize any other formations ... pro-twins set?? "R Twins". X, Y, Z align in R and the 3rd receiver is aligns in "twins" -- i.e. #2 weak. I won't bore you with the entire formation system we use. You can use any terms you choose. But, I would like to point out that this system is based on limiting pure memorization. X, Y, Z learn 4 terms (R, L, Rag, Lace). The fullback (and the 3rd receiver) each learn 4 things (FB - heavy, light, wing, slot /// 3rd rec - twins, pro, wide, loose). a rule we use, is that we want our formations to never be 4 words, and rarely 3. (a 3 might be R Pro Squeeze -- with squeeze merely compressing the R Pro formation .. again, eliminating memorization of more formations). take a look at what formations you want, and how you might be able to utilize a system such as this. it has its con's, of course, but i feel it cuts down on the #1 cause of mistakes ... forgetfullness (i.e. too much memorization required). Appreciate the time you spent writing this huey... its sometimes hard to get info across quickly at times and knowing that your schedule is very busy right now I just wanted to say "thank you " for taking time to talk about something you are passionate about. |
|
|
|
Post by lukethadrifter on Jan 7, 2007 12:01:46 GMT -6
being on a highly successful defensive staff the past couple of years, you are easy to scheme against, etc... when you only have a few formations - I agree with the gentleman that said as many as your kids can handle - the more formations, motions, shifts, etc... that you can make your opponent prepare for, the better - a lot of times, it limits what your opponent defensively can do against you - especially if you run just enough option to keep the opponent honest
playin' it cool - Luke
|
|
jjbtx
Freshmen Member
Posts: 22 
|
Post by jjbtx on Jan 7, 2007 22:33:36 GMT -6
Depends on what your offensive offensive strategy is. You do not have formations just to have formations. Each formation has a specific role.
Look at the Army. They have armor units, calvary units, artillery units, infantry, special forces, and supply and transportation units. Some of the units are even broken down into light and heavy.
Ditto for the US Navy. The US Navy has these ship classes (and more): DD, DDG, FF, FFG, CG, CGN, BB, LST, LPD, mine ships, aircraft carriers, ssbn (and other subs)
Why do they have all the different types? Can't just one Army unit do all these tasks? No, they cannot.
Same is true for an offense. A power I or DW has limited passing ability but Strong running. A Bunch formation, trips, or Spread strong passing, not strong running game. BUT, great misdirection for aggressive defenses.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachveer on Jan 8, 2007 7:23:18 GMT -6
We have 21 in the playbook. We start the week with about 15 but our fromation sheet in our game play only has room for 12.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 8, 2007 7:46:52 GMT -6
I have never liked having a ton of formations (or plays for that matter). As an HC/OC the most formations I have ever had was 5-6 along with about a dozen plays. Here's my thought; each minute I spend installing a new formation or motion is a minute that I could use to teach fundamentals. It all depends on my personnel also; if I have a couple big, solid RBs, I'll live in 3 double back formations- pro, slot and double tight. If we're smaller with a little more speed, we'll go with 4-5 single back sets.
|
|
mib36
Sophomore Member
Being a male is a matter of birth. Being a man is a matter of choice.
Posts: 238
|
Post by mib36 on Jan 8, 2007 8:17:57 GMT -6
800/900
Blue 8/9
Gold 8/9
Green 8/9
Green 8/9 Wide
Ends 8/9
Ends8/9 Wide
Flex 8/9
Tite 8/9
Bus 9
Special
Rip/Liz
Crazy 8/9
Reo/Leo
Gold 9 Empty
Gold 9 K
Gold 9 K Strong
|
|
kdcoach
Sophomore Member
Posts: 194
|
Post by kdcoach on Jan 8, 2007 8:19:12 GMT -6
7 formations and a total of 15 runs and 50 passes out of the combination of formations. We are an option heavy run offense and have been fortunate for the last few years to have a qb that is tall, mobile and can throw. I'm not a big fan of the shotgun spread option that is in vogue right now, (don't feel like it hits as fast) so we stay under center and when we want to throw we use a lot of the trips and spread formations and a little bit of gun with those.
We start our pass install offense in March in the gym and usually have it down pretty good by the 7 on 7 season in June. That leaves off days in the summer and most of preaseason camp to get our option timing down. It's worked out pretty well for us the last couple years for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachchance on Jan 11, 2007 18:45:32 GMT -6
this is all very interesting, this past season we had 26 formations, and it seemed like we never had time to work on individual technique's because we were working on timing for new plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by dacoachmo on Jan 11, 2007 21:02:08 GMT -6
Cut down the 26 formation into the top ones that are easiest on the timing issue. Whenever I put in a new formation. I check to see how much practice time will be needed. Did the new formations and new plays go hand in hand or did the new formations cause major changes for the base plays?  ? |
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Jan 12, 2007 17:35:30 GMT -6
Interesting discussion - we probably have hundreds of possibilities for formations but we think we keep it pretty simple for the kids -- right/left, or r/l for ends, colors for backs -- with all the different combos we can have a myriad of formations.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartancoach on Jan 12, 2007 19:28:19 GMT -6
When I stopped to think about it, I guess we run a lot of formations, although I never looked at it that we. We are a Pro I team, but make small adjustments. So we run:
Pro; Slot; Twins; Twins Open; Trips; Trips Gun; Trips Open; Trips Open Gun; Bunch; Bunch Gun; Bunch Open; Bunch Open Gun; Ghost (Empty); Ghost Gun; Ghost Open; Ghost Open Gun
|
|
|
|
Post by CVBears on Jan 13, 2007 12:23:36 GMT -6
We currently have eight. The adjustments are for the WR's in 4 and the TE & RB's in the other 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by chscoach on Jan 14, 2007 8:36:38 GMT -6
Formations:
Ricky - Right I
Lindy - Left I
Randy - Right - HB away (weak)
Larry - Left - HB away (weak)
Roger - Right - HB over (strong)
Louie - Left - HB over (strong)
Rex - Right even split backs
Lee - Left even split backs
Plus/Minus (FB alignment); Plus - wing outside TE; Minus - Slot 1x1 from weakside tackle
Hard/Soft FB alignment; Ex: Hard Ricky (FB in strong position behind guard); Soft Ricky (FB in weak position behind guard)
Ex. Ricky Plus, Lindy Minus
Slot/Wing (Z alignment) Slot - 1x1 from weakside tacke; Wing 1x1 from TE. EX. Ricky Wing, Lindy Wing
Over/Under (Z alignmet) Over: Split the difference between X and weakside tackle (twins look) EX. Ricky Over, Lindy Over. Under - Align outside of X (X would split the difference between Z and weakside tackle)
Tight (Two Tightends) Ex: Tight Ricky Plus, Tight Lindy Minus
I could go on. It's not the learning or memorizing formations, but learning what our terminology means and being able to apply it. I could put all of our terms into a hat and pull out two words we've maybe never run before and the kids could line up in it without thinking.
|
|
|
|
Post by sls on Jan 14, 2007 22:00:30 GMT -6
2 years ago we used 30 different.
This year we went to no huddle and used about 15.
|
|
?
