|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 18, 2007 8:12:54 GMT -6
WOW...really kind of got off track on this one here. All I wanted to do is hear some H.S coaches talk about why they thought that certain offenses would work in small school football, but not in big H.S. football.
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 18, 2007 10:26:54 GMT -6
WOW...really kind of got off track on this one here. All I wanted to do is hear some H.S coaches talk about why they thought that certain offenses would work in small school football, but not in big H.S. football. I do not know of anyone off hand who would say that a certain offense would or would not work at different levels within high school. Now, of course sometimes at these lower classes you do not have a True TB or running QB.. so a good Pro I offense might be tough.. or the option.. Or you might not have a kid on the team who can throw the ball well.. so it would be hard to run the spread.. Now as a bigger school coach.. I can usually find someone out of 60 or so athletes to play QB. I actually have 6 possible QB's right now.. All of them have the ability to play the position.. but you might not always have that at a 1A school. But as a generalization I would not say a certain offense would not work at a lower level of high school ball.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 18, 2007 10:37:14 GMT -6
I came to the conclusion that any offense can work at the HS level after working under my first HC.
He ran 1 formation (double tight staggered I formation) with about a dozen runs and a dozen PA off of those runs. He had an easy 3 step package and 5 step package with a limited route tree- he rarely used either.
He ran the ball down your throat all night long and dumped it over your head off of PA; his teams executed every play almost perfectly and got the job done. He actually didn't run a whole lot of option off of this attack; just punched in the teeth each and every down. He played small, athletic OLs that fired off of the ball and attacked you every single down; perfect blocks I might add.
He coached in the largest classification here in MT (schools up to 2500 kids in enrollment) and took them into the playoff consistently.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 18, 2007 11:09:21 GMT -6
I agree with you airraider--thats why I started the thread. I had read on this site, a coaching site, severaltimes "well, that might be ok for small schools, but you wouldnt be successful at the bigger schools with it." I was flat shocked to read that from coaches. From fans..sure, they view it like technology, the "newer" or most prevalent, is always best, and older is worse.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 18, 2007 11:20:50 GMT -6
Anyone ever see Olivette College run double tight full house T with 6 inch splits at the college level? Unfreaking believable actually. some would say its " a pee wee offense" but there theyd go up and down the field over and over again running those same 5-6 plays over and over again. Somewhere online the rushing stats they had were posted. Ill bet a whole lot of people thought and offense like that wouldnt work at the college level.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 18, 2007 11:29:09 GMT -6
The Double Wing at the Div I level
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 18, 2007 11:31:45 GMT -6
Anyone ever see Olivette College run double tight full house T with 6 inch splits at the college level? Unfreaking believable actually. some would say its " a pee wee offense" but there theyd go up and down the field over and over again running those same 5-6 plays over and over again. Somewhere online the rushing stats they had were posted. Ill bet a whole lot of people thought and offense like that wouldnt work at the college level. Yup, the guy I referred to above ran OSV veer dives and quick pitches as the staple of his offense. There were many games where these two plays were call 15-20 times a piece. They just played simple, smash mouth football Heck, in a playoff game a few years back, they made a living off of GT counter trey to the HB- they ran that play and it's PA every other down. The beauty of this scheme wasn't just its simplicity, but the PA scheme he had. Each one was designed to take advantage of where and how the defenses was loaded up against the run.
|
|
|
Post by warrior53 on Jul 18, 2007 12:52:23 GMT -6
Brophy, what point were you trying to make - that the DW is good at the DI level or bad? or just that it is there?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 18, 2007 13:04:55 GMT -6
Brophy, what point were you trying to make - that the DW is good at the DI level or bad? or just that it is there? it apparently isn't a 'youth' thing Execution and application is all that matters.
|
|
|
Post by 2leegit on Jul 18, 2007 13:15:58 GMT -6
An American Football Monthly survey of 2006 state champions found that 39.3% of the respondents said they ran multiple pro-set/spread offenses. Second on the list of offensive systems used, at 16.8%, was the I-formation. In 2004, only 22.7% of the state champions used spread offenses, according to the publication. From USA today www.usatoday.com/sports/preps/football/2007-07-17-passing-leagues_N.htm
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Jul 18, 2007 13:36:53 GMT -6
Could it be said tha t most state championship caliber teams could pretty much within reason run whatever they want?
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 18, 2007 13:37:16 GMT -6
Brophy, what point were you trying to make - that the DW is good at the DI level or bad? or just that it is there? it apparently isn't a 'youth' thing Execution and application is all that matters. But those arent Double Wing offense.. those are Flexbone offenses..
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 18, 2007 14:19:14 GMT -6
oopy...........someone told me Nicholls runs DW............my blow. I guess no one runs DW at the DI level.
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jul 18, 2007 15:14:07 GMT -6
The thread that just keeps going... I'll start off by saying this is just my humble opinion, and that this topic is going to be "won" by the guy who has the last post Remember your basic football history. Back in the day it was full house and two TE's - three yards and a cloud of dust. Spread offenses developed as a way for teams to compete with physically superior opponents. Generally speaking, the best talent is still going to win, but we're talking about being able to compete. For you NFLers, the teams that struggle at QB, STRUGGLE because except in rare instances, defenses dominate because the running game can't compensate for a poor pass game. At the HS and college level, Double Wing systems, and their kin, allow a defense with one or two dominating players to exert more of their influence in a smaller area. It's one thing to say, "we're going to double this guy and kick that guy out and fake the backside LB..." but in a true compressed formation, unless you are bigger and stronger than your opponent(or your players are technique madmen from your great coaching!) those 2 defensive studs will rule. Others have already addressed the political ramifications of running the DW at small HS, big HS, and college. One of the colleges I interviewed at this winter was interested in me in part because of my (our?) spread offense - the fired coach had been DW! Was he fired because of the DW? NO! But the school wanted something different - and the previous coach who had retired was also a spread coach who was very successful. I know there are several successful small college programs who run Wing T/DW. I also believe - remember, this is MY opinion - that they are coached extremely well AND that the coaches have done a great job of recruiting talented players to win those bigger / stronger battles. Next?
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jul 18, 2007 15:22:51 GMT -6
The thread that just keeps going... I'll start off by saying this is just my humble opinion, and that this topic is going to be "won" by the guy who has the last post Remember your basic football history. Back in the day it was full house and two TE's - three yards and a cloud of dust. Spread offenses developed as a way for teams to compete with physically superior opponents. Generally speaking, the best talent is still going to win, but we're talking about being able to compete. For you NFLers, the teams that struggle at QB, STRUGGLE because except in rare instances, defenses dominate because the running game can't compensate for a poor pass game. At the HS and college level, Double Wing systems, and their kin, allow a defense with one or two dominating players to exert more of their influence in a smaller area. It's one thing to say, "we're going to double this guy and kick that guy out and fake the backside LB..." but in a true compressed formation, unless you are bigger and stronger than your opponent(or your players are technique madmen from your great coaching!) those 2 defensive studs will rule. Others have already addressed the political ramifications of running the DW at small HS, big HS, and college. One of the colleges I interviewed at this winter was interested in me in part because of my (our?) spread offense - the fired coach had been DW! Was he fired because of the DW? NO! But the school wanted something different - and the previous coach who had retired was also a spread coach who was very successful. I know there are several successful small college programs who run Wing T/DW. I also believe - remember, this is MY opinion - that they are coached extremely well AND that the coaches have done a great job of recruiting talented players to win those bigger / stronger battles. Next? Yeah, but if you listen to any double wing coach, they say they run the offense to be able to compete with lesser personnel...just like Wing T coaches and Option coaches, and Spread coaches.... so WTF?
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 18, 2007 15:55:21 GMT -6
[/quote]
Yeah,
but if you listen to any double wing coach, they say they run the offense to be able to compete with lesser personnel...just like Wing T coaches and Option coaches, and Spread coaches....
so WTF?[/quote]
Well, what do you expect them to say-
"Yeah, this offense is great, but only if you've got talent" ;D
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 18, 2007 16:34:56 GMT -6
Yeah, but if you listen to any double wing coach, they say they run the offense to be able to compete with lesser personnel...just like Wing T coaches and Option coaches, and Spread coaches.... so WTF?[/quote] Well, what do you expect them to say- "Yeah, this offense is great, but only if you've got talent" ;D[/quote] hey its all good, I still say that the "rags to riches" stories among double wing coaches is much more frequent. But hey, im a complete double wingnut. theres the dw...and then there soccer.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jul 18, 2007 20:14:17 GMT -6
Right,
But my point is that a dedicated DW coach uses the DW well with lesser talent because he knows the system and is a good coach. A dedicated option coach does well with lesser talent because he believes in option football and coaches it up. A true Wang-T cult member will get that thing running whether or not he has studs. A balls-out I-formation guy will still roll people up without a stud TB because he knows his system inside out and knows how to teach it.... Etc, etc, etc.
There's no magic fix offense. There's not one offense that works better with less talent. That's bunk. The advantage is if the coaching staff really believes in the system, sticks with it, and coaches the heck out of it, making the proper adjustments, etc.
The only time an offense (or defense for that matter) as a SCHEME has a total and true advantage is if it is misunderstood, underestimated, and/or not properly defended (ie: people treating the Spread as a pure pass offense, people blitzing or stunting the DW, etc.).
The equalizer isn't the offensive system. The equalizer is the coach who loves his system, knows it well enough to adapt it to his talent, and can SELL it to the kids.
Doesn't matter if it's I, wang-t, DW, spread, flexbone, straight t...you'll never convince me otherwise. For someone like calande the "double wing nut," (funny, btw) all this means is that it's more about his believe in his system and his ability to coach it than the system itself.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 18, 2007 20:21:07 GMT -6
Great point loch- that's part of the reason why I have no qualms installing the SG spread option with my freshman unit this year. I've had a few fellows I coach with look at my funny when I tell them what we're running.
But. I've been researching the heck out of it, asking a lot of questions and watching film on it.
By August, I'll know the system inside and out; from the OL blocking schemes to the WRs foot steps on their routes. Heck, I've already got our 2 minute offense put together! I believe in it, the kids will believe in it and we're gonna roll people. Especially given the fact that NO ONE on our schedule faces a spread team.
|
|