|
|
Post by coachbw on Apr 17, 2006 16:41:11 GMT -6
I have long been a believer of I Formation/One Back Offense. My most recent position has been at a school with demographics very similar to an inner city school. In order to compete there, we started to go to a 4 and 5 wide offense.
I now find myself at a new school. It has an enrollment of about 900, but most of the schools in the conference are much larger. I really believe in 4-5 years we will be in a very good situation, but right now . . . we are going to see teams with much more talent than we have. That being said. Do we go I Formatioin which is what I have had the most experience and success with, spread, something else? Also, I have been at a much larger school so I am not sure about this, but with an enrollment of 900 can we expect to have a QB capable of running spread every year (if that is what we decide to run). Thanks for the help.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Apr 17, 2006 16:43:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Apr 17, 2006 17:24:35 GMT -6
Go with what you know best. The I is a good place to start anyway because you can get multiple from there. You know the I is the jack of all trades. With a good running QB you can use some option schemes in there as well. With a school of 900 you should have a TB who can run too! Just a suggestion. IMO schemes are less important than the people who run them. Make sure they are in the wt room!
|
|
|
|
Post by jonnyboy on Apr 17, 2006 17:28:13 GMT -6
It is a double edged sword...do you go with what you know the best (I) or change it up to suit your personnel and combat talent level (spread)?
We had the same dilemma last year. Had a wonderful QB who played FS for us as well. We are a 2 back team (iso, trap, counter, toss) as a base but do some one back stuff as well. The QB would have been ideal in the shotgun and making decisions but I didn't want him to get banged up and not be able to play FS...he saved at least a TD a game at FS and was almost more important to us there than at QB. Another problem was that we finally convinced the 7th and 8th grade coaches to install our offensive system and to have them watch us on Friday and see us doing something totally different would have been counterproductive in our eyes.
Our decision...we were in 2 backs 50% of the time and 1 back 50% of the time, roughly...depending on opponents. Our run plays were exactly the same regardless of under center or shotgun! The beauty of the I running plays is that you can run them all out of the gun (QB now has to read the end on counter) without changing anything for the 5 guys up front.
Wins and losses weren't the best for us this past year (2-7) but we were finally competitive against the 3 top teams in our conference...usually the games were over by halftime but the dynamics of the offense kept us in the game right up until the end, lost 5 games by 7 points or less.
It is a tough decision because you never know if the offense you will be running is a "flash in the pan" one year shot or going to be a staple. We want to build something that created an identity for us (2 back running plays) so we stuck to our guns and built for the future. If you go total spread and change you are banking on the one year shot because what do you do next year? Going into our summer camp our kids are really excited because everything is the same for the 4th summer in a row...nothing has changed. We do not have to teach anything new at all. Plus, consistency in your program allows for an easier transition for the kids who play both ways!
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Apr 18, 2006 6:29:04 GMT -6
coachbw;
Two trians of thought here just like jonnynoy stated in his post. The first thing I would do is look at the league itself and see what is being run. Being a contrarian by nature, i tend to run the exact opposite of the leagues i am in, with that being some form of a spread/one-back scheme. if your league is predominately a running league, then passing is a great way to neutralize their advantages, especially if they arent used to seeing a solid passing attack. If they are great at pass rush and pass defense then i would suggest either the double or single wing attacks.
Schemes are not all they are cracked up to be, especially if their Xs are bigger and more athletic than your Os. Building a great program for the future should start now. Get the kids in the weightroom, working on their speed on the track, and focusing on what it takes to be a team. Start assimulating them to YOUR style of football and what YOU expect a successful program to be. Remember that to be a success, it is a journey not a destination. Good lick!
|
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Apr 18, 2006 8:38:10 GMT -6
I think the "I" is a great base to start from and expand from there as talent permits. All of our run game is interchangable from "I", 1 back or gun, same schemes up front, just moving people around to gain advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardslv on Apr 19, 2006 9:04:13 GMT -6
Go w/ what you know, but adjust it to fit your talent. I think you can do that w/ most any O so long as you're not stubborn.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 19, 2006 9:09:32 GMT -6
Go with what you know best the first year. Adapt or adjust the second year. By your third year you, the staff, and the kids should be in a comfort zone.
Just make sure you keep terminology, numbering, etc. as consistent as possible so you're all speaking the same language, regardless of how your backfield lines up.
|
|
|
|
Post by stone65 on Apr 19, 2006 9:10:33 GMT -6
do what you know. if you are facing teams with much better talent, you will want to keep their offense of the field. control the ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Apr 19, 2006 17:42:26 GMT -6
I agree with do what you know. If both the players and the coaching staff are complete neophytes to the scheme, that is a recipe for disaster (especially since typically in new coaching jobs the fundamentals are the biggest hurdle to cross!).
The only caveat being is study what the rest of your league runs and have answers within your scheme. If your scheme doesn't have answers prepare some adjustments and do research on those specific things that you'll need to be able to do, rather than scrapping your system and doing something completely foreign.
Just as a chance to make the point, this is one reason that new schemes fail. Not because the scheme itself is bad, but experienced coaches have answers for everything, if for no other reason than they have that terribly frustrating game under their belt when they had no answer for that particular thing. New schemes/coaches aren't always ready for those contingencies, and a clinic and a playbook and even a visit to a school isn't always going to be thorough enough to give it to you.
Anyway, bottom line: start with what you know, do your homework on your opponents now rather than later, and realize that whatever you do, you're going to need at least some flexibility to deal with unforeseen issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by oguru on Apr 20, 2006 7:14:48 GMT -6
You should always do what you know best. However one of the reasons Urban Meyer claims he went to the sapread at Bowling Geen is that he did not feel that they could line up against the teams in the MAC and run the I formation.
The other one was he hates seeing eight man fronts and running plays into unblocked defenders.
If the spread offense is going to give you a true advantage as well as an oppotunity to win then run it. If not then stick o what you know,and take your lumps you'll be better in the long run.
|
|
