|
|
Post by coachbw on Dec 13, 2010 11:52:55 GMT -6
I was snowed in this weekend, so I took some time to catch up on reading a stack of articles I have had sitting in my office. One of the articles was titled "How David Beats Goliath." In the article, a researcher analyzed the wars between strong and weak armies over the last 200 years. He found that when conventional strategy was used, the strong army won 71.5% of the time. When the weaker armies used unconventional strategies, they were able to beat the stronger army 63.6% of the time. He then went on to compare this to an outmatched basketball team using a full court press the entire game. It got me thinking, what are the unconventional things, that you have had success doing in games where you were a big underdog? The article can be found at: www.edinboro.edu/events/innovation/Articles/How%20David%20Beats%20Goliath.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 13, 2010 12:02:36 GMT -6
We have used Unbalanced formations.
Use option offense or short passing game.
Use a different Front to stop their best play or player (employed a Split-Six variation against Mark Ingram, for example).
Fake Punt and/or Surprise Onside Kick off to maintain possession-keep ball away from superior opponent.
Use most of play clock before snapping ball.
Give players a copy of poem "It Couldn't Be Done."
Go to church Wednesday night and twice on Sunday.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Dec 13, 2010 12:44:19 GMT -6
Of course, int that article, the weaker armies could only function with "home-field advantage." As for odd things I've seen/done:
Onside punting (short and long)
Fearlessness on 4th down
Sell-out on defense (obviously not every down)
"awkward" formations
shorten the game (keep the clock running, take your time, both Off and Def)
|
|
jlt
Junior Member
Posts: 313
|
Post by jlt on Dec 13, 2010 12:57:26 GMT -6
Thats why I use DW. Means GOliath has to either work hard to stop it or rely on their best players to stop it. Only 1 of the above works.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocketcoach on Dec 13, 2010 13:08:39 GMT -6
What's an onside punt? (short and long)
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Dec 13, 2010 13:13:15 GMT -6
I was snowed in this weekend, so I took some time to catch up on reading a stack of articles I have had sitting in my office. One of the articles was titled "How David Beats Goliath." In the article, a researcher analyzed the wars between strong and weak armies over the last 200 years. He found that when conventional strategy was used, the strong army won 71.5% of the time. When the weaker armies used unconventional strategies, they were able to beat the stronger army 63.6% of the time. He then went on to compare this to an outmatched basketball team using a full court press the entire game. It got me thinking, what are the unconventional things, that you have had success doing in games where you were a big underdog? The article can be found at: www.edinboro.edu/events/innovation/Articles/How%20David%20Beats%20Goliath.pdfFor David to beat Goliath, Goliath has to cooperate. CC pointed out the importance of "home field advantage" in David winning wars militarily. Whether we're talking about Vietnam or The American Revolution, military "upsets" are almost always the result of the stronger nation losing the will to continue the conflict (and that's not calling anybody a "quitter". It's a question of cost-benefits. At some point you have to question whether the cost in cash and blood is worth it). That isn't true of a football game. For David to beat Goliath in a football game, they do have to take chances but without killing themselves. I'm not a big fan of onsides kicks (Goliath will be anticipating it), drastic changes in the offense, and stuff like going for it on 4th on your own 20. No percentage in it unless you do it all the time. I do agree that you have to make judicious gambles of defense ("He who defends everything defends nothing") but make sure that you're playing the percentages. Trick plays can help but don't depend on them. Don't oversell the idea that you have to be perfect. You won't be. Just some thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by coachdennis on Dec 13, 2010 13:16:09 GMT -6
If you are facing a prolific offense, Sell out on D EVERY play. Run a modified version of John Reed's GAM, and get right up in the offense's face. Have linebackers partying in their backfield all day. Shut down their run, and force that young QB to make quick, accurate hot reads all day. Chances are, he can't do it. Seeing that kind of a defense really throws the offense off, especially if they aren't having any success against it early.
Is heavy pressure D a risk? Absolutely - no question you are taking a chance that they could score in a hurry. The alternative is playing conventional D, and if their athletes are better than yours, you are going to lose, period. A modified GAM at least gives you a chance to generate some chaos, turnovers, and some early three and outs. Bottom line - the younger the age group, the more this kind of a defense works, and I still think there's a place for it at senior high school if you are facing a Rocky vs. Apollo Creed scenario.
|
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Dec 13, 2010 13:27:15 GMT -6
Money Quote:
The trick is to find a way to play as David, to play 'your game', without getting sucked into the traditional methodology of your opponent. I believe Gladwell makes reference to Vietnam and the way that the US Army just wanted to face-up on the battlefield and steamroll them the "American Way", but the VC generally refused to fight without the element of surprise or superior numbers.
In football, how do we do this? I think BLB's list is a good starting place. Unbalanced formations can be used creatively to make a defense play outside 'their game'. Option football can make good/great players WRONG (Imagine the US committing troops to one part of Afghanistan while the Taliban attack another, great soldiers being made wrong). Burning the clock can give you a statistically better chance to succeed because you're limiting their chances to assert their superiority.
To add to BLB's list, I would say experimenting/drastically altering tempos can induce the 'rush state' that Pitino mentions. If you're going warp-speed tempo for 3-4 plays, then sprint to the line and draw the clock out, you're going to throw them off-balance and create a degree of confusion, uncertainty, loss of confidence. Likewise, if you're slow, slow, slow for a few drives and then all of a sudden hit them with warp-speed tempo, you could induce some panic or wide-eyed play.
Also, as the article says, don't underestimate attitude. You need to do whatever is necessary to instill the right kind of attitude for your guys to be world-beaters.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Dec 13, 2010 13:42:44 GMT -6
This is less of a gameplanning thing, and more of a program planning thing.
It's using the unorthodox strategy to gain an upper hand.
Those very first schools who committed to weightlifting, more recently, the ones who've committed to speed training..........instead of listening to what was the conventional wisdom of the time (namely, that kids are "fast and/or strong" because of their genetics, and there is nothing you can do about it) gained a HUGE advantage.
The first guys who committed to passing on first down.
The first guys who always went for it on 4th down.
The first guys to use no huddle.
Heck, use to be convential strategy that if you were backed up against your GL, you punted on 1st down........who ever went against that strategy held an advantage.
I left out schematic advantages (some guys talked about the spread or DW or GAM as equalizers)..........scheme only levels the playing field if your opponent isn't familar with it..........if the 8 other teams in your conference are running the Run and Shoot, then any noted advantage you may have is nullified.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Dec 13, 2010 14:34:24 GMT -6
You need to pay attention to momentum and swings and take advantage of them in ways that you normally wouldn't.
For example, if we've got a good team on the ropes and I want to keep them that way, I'll dig into the 'bag o' gimmicks' a little bit. For example, if they've turned the ball over to you and you run into a 4th down situation, now would be a good time to call a fake punt. You need to keep the drive alive and, more importantly, you need to keep them down.
|
|
|
|
Post by davishfc on Dec 13, 2010 15:47:21 GMT -6
We have used Unbalanced formations. Use option offense or short passing game. Use a different Front to stop their best play or player (employed a Split-Six variation against Mark Ingram, for example). Fake Punt and/or Surprise Onside Kick off to maintain possession-keep ball away from superior opponent. Use most of play clock before snapping ball. Give players a copy of poem "It Couldn't Be Done." Go to church Wednesday night and twice on Sunday. That was a very interesting article. We've been a part of several of these David and Goliath battles. We've been the underdog more often than not. We've tried to do a number of unconventional things within our program to ensure we give our team an opportunity to be successful against Goliath. 5-Day Camp...check - for first full week of practice our program stays at the school and makes football their focus from the time they wake up (5:30 a.m.) until lights out (11 p.m.) - 3-a-days on the first two days followed by two-a-days on the next three days with team camaraderie activities in the evening - most teams in Michigan have a 3-day camp so we feel like this unconventional aspect and greater commitment on our part gives us an advantage over our competition unbalanced formations...check option offense...check frequent hard counts...check multiple fronts...check 4-point, A-gap plugging DTs...check Cover 0...check occasional fake punt and/or surprise onside kick...check burning clock before the snap...check I'm sure there are other unconventional things we do that are not coming to mind right now. I'll post again if some more come to mind. Thanks for the list to help my train of thought blb. |
|
hawke
Sophomore Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by hawke on Dec 13, 2010 15:53:41 GMT -6
After strength training and speed and agility work and with aggressive kids convince them that the field is only 10yds long both offensively and defensively and work for manageable 3rd downs on both sides of the ball. Play a 10 yd. field Stop them from making 10yds and you make 10 yds.
Hawke
|
|
|
|
Post by coachguy83 on Dec 13, 2010 16:08:05 GMT -6
What's an onside punt? (short and long) In Canada a punt is a live ball once it hits the ground. I read an article somewhere in the past few months talking about Boise State and there ability to compete with bigger programs consistently. One of the ways that the article talks about is the willingness to approach the game differently and not play by the same set of "rules". Since reading the article I've been trying to think of ways to become a "David" program. I've come up with a few: 1) Run A Contrarian Offense 2) On Side Kick Frequently 3) Never Punt/Frequently Fake Punts 4)Rush 10 or 11 On Every Punt 5)Control Clock 6)Play Aggressive Defense/Force Turn Overs |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Dec 13, 2010 16:25:00 GMT -6
After strength training and speed and agility work and with aggressive kids convince them that the field is only 10yds long both offensively and defensively and work for manageable 3rd downs on both sides of the ball. Play a 10 yd. field Stop them from making 10yds and you make 10 yds. Hawke You only have to beat Goliath that day. You may not be able to beat them every time but when you do it'll be because you outplayed them, not because you outcoached them. I'm on the Goliath side now but I used to be a David. Kept trying to come up with gimmicks. They rarely worked and only made the a$$whippings worse most of the time. As a Goliath I can't even count the number of times that the other guy had a chance but screwed it up with a bad gamble. Get rid of the ego. When we focused on "outcoaching" the other guy, we got hammered. When we focused on outplaying them that week, just coaching up our positions, we got better. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 13, 2010 16:42:21 GMT -6
If you rely on "Gadget" plays and a "Defense of the Week" you will only fool yourself, and probably get beat worse than if you had tried to play the "Goliath" more conventionally, or at least more soundly.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachbrek on Dec 13, 2010 16:58:42 GMT -6
This is a very interesting topic.
Interestingly enough I recently taught a lesson on the story of David and Goliath, to my youth group at church.
David did not pick up a sling and stone for the fist time in his life, he was very proficient with it, he practiced with it all the time and put a lot of food on the table with it, he carved and polished his stones so they were perfectly round and accurate all the same size and weight.
When David was allowed by King Saul to Fight the Giant they tried to put the Kings armor on him and give him the kings sword to fight with. But the armor was too big, heavy and cumbersome for David.
When David came at Goliath with nothing but a sling and a stone Goliath hurled insults at him, laughed, and mocked him.
Remember David was well practiced an proficient with his sling and stone, he hit Goliath where he had no armor he knocked him out and then cut his head of with Goliath's sword.
When we read the story this way it was not such an unfair fight was it. If David would have used the kings armor and sword and played into Goliaths strength David would have been killed instantly. Instead David used what he was good at and proficient with. He hit him were it hurt and went for the kill.
I have read the Art of War, I have also watched documentaries on how Sun Szu's Art of War as been used in military conflicts throughout history.
I have also read and studied several contrarian approaches to winning football.
Some programs are built around being Goliath beaters.
We are not going to pick up some stone laying near by and cast it hoping for the best when we face a giant.
We are going to polish and carve stones that will hit with deadly accuracy a very high percentage of the time in a place where there is no armor.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachdennis on Dec 14, 2010 8:41:52 GMT -6
If you rely on "Gadget" plays and a "Defense of the Week" you will only fool yourself, and probably get beat worse than if you had tried to play the "Goliath" more conventionally, or at least more soundly. This lays out an interesting philosophical question. When playing an elite team, do you play to win, or play not to lose too badly? I see a lot of coaches doing the latter - running a safe, ball control offense even when losing by 17 points, punting when down by three scores, playing a safe D, etc. Why? They want to hold down the margin of defeat so it doesn't look so bad at the end of the year. My theory is that we play to win, period, and if that means taking risks, you take them. Different coaches will have different takes on this, but I have to tell you that when I see coaches punting in the second half when they are down by 17, it makes me want to scream, because in my view they have given up on their kids. Just one man's view... |
|
|
|
Post by rocketcoach on Dec 14, 2010 10:01:22 GMT -6
What's an onside punt? (short and long) In Canada a punt is a live ball once it hits the ground. Wow! Did not know that, thanks. That would make the game interesting! |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Dec 14, 2010 10:17:27 GMT -6
actually, the punter and anyone who was behind him at the time of the kick are eligible to go down and grab the punt. Other players have to give a 5 yard cushion, even after it hits the ground (because there's no fair catch).
Short onside punt is like an intentional shank, into the hole of the defense and the punter or a speedy onside slot runs down and grabs it just past the first down marker, but if it doesn't work, you give up lots of field position.
Long onside punts you kick it long with your fastest guys running down to get it, a little safer, less chance of recovering it.
on a historical note, in vietnam, the NVA and VC were using a total David strategy, but they were still getting killed at a much faster rate than the US troops.
|
|
|
|
Post by flexoption91 on Dec 14, 2010 11:38:18 GMT -6
Great topic and I really enjoyed the article.
I agree with Mariner, and the article, that attitude is very important.
All the variations or unconventional things mean very little if the kids and us are not on the same page.
The situation I am in is a perfect example. I am back coaching where I went to school. When I was in school 10 years ago we were the Goliath. We were winning state championships and for 10 or 11 years in a row did not lose before the regional championship. We did not have athletic freaks walking the halls, but we had an attitude that would make you think we were. We simply hated and refused to accept losing. Also, even back then the teams that were successful had a great weight room program. We had one of the best in the area if not state.
In the time span since we have fallen on harder times. We are not to the point of long losing streaks or multiple losing seasons, but have not won a playoff game in 5 years and missed them all together this year. The kids are still the same, in fact we may be more athletic talented now. We had two D-1 recruits this year. However, we are David to a couple teams Goliath in our league and region.
This biggest difference between then and now.....attitude and commitment. I am not talking about just from the kids, but all involved with the program. I got here and we had about a 25% weight room attendance record. There were one maybe two coaches “watching” the weight room. I would talk to kids about getting better every day and working towards a goal and they would look at me like I was talking a foreign language. I talked to our HC, who was my HC, and would shrug it off or try and change the subject. We went through one of the most difficult seasons, and none of it had to do with losing. At the end of the season he wanted to can everything and change up the offense and defense. I told him none of that matters if you do not change the direction of the program.
This offseason, he turned over the weight room and commitment program to me. Our first day all I talked about with the players was attitude and changing what it took to be on the team. I have not mentioned one thing about winning football games. All we have talked about is trust, effort, and selling out for a cause. For some, especially the older guys, it has been awkward and difficult to transition. However, they know their spot is no longer guaranteed and we have a very committed underclass. Every player that has been in the weight room has commented that this offseason has been more strenuous than anything they could have imagined. That being said, attendance is at 95% and we have 4 or 5 coaches in the weight room. Every player has commented they have never seen the weight room this full. Now it is still early, but the signs that the attitude is changing are all over the place. Older guys are leading younger guys. Players who never spoke before are working with each other. We had a snow day yesterday and I had a couple players call to see if weights were still on. When I told them no, they asked if they could come in anyways. These were players who attendance record was less than stellar last year.
Was this the cure-all? No and we are well aware of that. But if on Friday nights the attitude goes back to the guy next to me is out for the same goals I am and away from I am here for me, than we are going to do some great things. As always said, that will only come the top down and a commitment to the weight room and an attitude of together while working out as a team.
|
|
|
|
Post by jpdaley25 on Dec 15, 2010 0:06:11 GMT -6
It also depends on the gap between David and Goliath. I've had to line up a bunch of 14 and 15 year olds against state champion caliber 18 and 19 year olds. A lot of what you do depends upon your estimation of that gap.
|
|
dania
Junior Member
Posts: 365
|
Post by dania on Dec 15, 2010 8:34:38 GMT -6
I am amazed that very overlooked technique that is seen quite often has not mentioned, no tricks, nothing unconventional, just good ole fashion execution will go a long way in beating goliath.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 15, 2010 8:49:23 GMT -6
just good ole fashion execution will go a long way in beating goliath. That is of course true and also I believe the point of brek's excellent message. But if you are faced with playing a superior opponent, logically if they use "good ole fashion execution", play to their potential, and you do too - you lose. So the gist of the topic is, how does an underdog win? You can't count on the other team having an "off day." |
|
dania
Junior Member
Posts: 365
|
Post by dania on Dec 15, 2010 8:55:24 GMT -6
you need some breaks, even with gimmicks.....but its seems to work for paul johnson.....
mike leach, lavell edwards......and even air force.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 15, 2010 9:01:40 GMT -6
In the examples you cited, their base offenses WERE the "gimmicks."
Very few people (Coryell at San Diego State) were throwing the ball like Edwards and BYU started doing in early '70s.
And few people in FCS run option like Georgia Tech, Air Force, Navy today.
So "good ole fashion execution" is-was more likely to work for them because of opponent's unfamiliarity with their scheme.
|
|
dania
Junior Member
Posts: 365
|
Post by dania on Dec 15, 2010 9:05:14 GMT -6
In the examples you cited, their base offenses WERE the "gimmicks." Very few people (Coryell at San Diego State) were throwing the ball like Edwards and BYU started doing in early '70s. And few people in FCS run option like Georgia Tech, Air Force, Navy today. So "good ole fashion execution" is-was more likely to work for them because of opponent's unfamiliarity with their scheme. I said even with gimmicks....not those gimmick offenses...which I clearly do not believe are gimmicks... My reference to those coaches and school is soley due to lack equivelant or equal talent of their competition.....Byu won a national championship in the 80s, and tech won the acc with less than superior talent......... |
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Dec 15, 2010 10:49:50 GMT -6
I am amazed that very overlooked technique that is seen quite often has not mentioned, no tricks, nothing unconventional, just good ole fashion execution will go a long way in beating goliath. I think one thing we are having a hard time with is this "If your technique is that good and your execution is so solid you probably aren't David in this situation". |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 15, 2010 10:58:44 GMT -6
In the examples you cited, their base offenses WERE the "gimmicks." Very few people (Coryell at San Diego State) were throwing the ball like Edwards and BYU started doing in early '70s. And few people in FCS run option like Georgia Tech, Air Force, Navy today. So "good ole fashion execution" is-was more likely to work for them because of opponent's unfamiliarity with their scheme. I said even with gimmicks....not those gimmick offenses...which I clearly do not believe are gimmicks... My reference to those coaches and school is soley due to lack equivelant or equal talent of their competition.....Byu won a national championship in the 80s, and tech won the acc with less than superior talent......... I don't believe those offenses are "gimmicks" any more than my own Houston Veer is. They are good, sound systems that are (or in BYU's case, was) uncommon and thus levels the playing field some for those teams. Appears you missed my point but I don't know how to explain it better. |
|
dania
Junior Member
Posts: 365
|
Post by dania on Dec 15, 2010 11:03:33 GMT -6
You did a fine job of explaining...I did not.
Can you stop it, can they execute it. No tricks. You know whats coming and probably when its coming....HENCE the word execution.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 15, 2010 11:47:51 GMT -6
some things I've found helpful in going up against perennial state contenders are (defensively speaking)....
1. Automatic formation matching Teams who have a special package or are hip to formation a defense, are susceptible to having a defense quench whatever momentum they were looking to acheive by simply formation matching with automatics, so you always have 'the' answer to what they are attempting. Nothing will frustrate an OC more than when you effectively scout/plan for these situations.
2. Show irrelevant looks prior to the matchup I've found this helpful, probably more as a gimmick, that 2 or 3 games leading up to a big matchup, to throw out garbage looks we may not even use against other opponents.....stuff like corner blitzes, voids, weird split fronts.....usually just before the half, just something to get on film for them to contend with during THEIR game plan sessions.
3. Prepare, indoctrinate, brainwash This probably happens every week, but just preaching to your players how the opponent is broken down, illustrating when they weren't effective (and why), and getting them to believe in your game plan (to stabilize their emotions before and during the game). Your kids should feel confident in how you all are going to handle the situations. With this, I've found scripting the first 10 plays are so, and walking through them a few times on Thursday is helpful, because YOUR kids know what is coming.
4. Win the first half Just hold on....don't worry about the big picture, just reduce the 48 minute contest into digestable pieces. How can we hang with these guys for 5-7 series, give our offense a chance to get moving without having to panic, and illicit some doubt in the minds of our opponent? Just manage the first half, throw some looks at them to put them on their heels (and to have to address at halftime) to take your shots, but keep it simple.
I say all this but there is a fine line between being 'unconventional' and reckless. There really is no better way to limit an opponent than solid fundamentals. When you put a premium on 'being different' or bizarre, you create opportunities to have it all blow up in your face. The art of game planning is all about going into the game with minimal risk - the best way to do that is having kids, who may not be studs, but who can consistently perform.
|
|
