|
|
Post by coachchance on Feb 18, 2007 10:50:09 GMT -6
i need to know if this amount of offense is feasible to run.
spread with basically 5 run plays- trap, draw, counter trey, zone, sweep. 5 screens, 3 sprint outs, 14 routes on route tree for numorous combinations.
I-formation, with wedge, trap, counter trey, iso, zone, midline, veer,sweep, same route tree.
10 formations:
spread- 2x2, 3x1, 3x2, 2 backs with 2x1, te with 1 back 3 wide
I-formation- pro, max I ( both wideouts on one side & te on other)
heavy set, where we add another lineman.
no answer will offend me, just need to know before we get started this summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcatcoach on Feb 18, 2007 12:00:58 GMT -6
I believe one of the big factors is the type of kids that you have to work with. If you have kids that can handle the mental load, you would be ok for the most part. Another big key IMO is your oline. They are the ones who are going to make it work. You seem to have good carryover from your spread runs to your I stuff. My only reservation would be with the veer and midline. Just whether it will be worth the time it will require. On your screens, it has been my experience in the spread (we have run it for ten years), that you end up running/executing about 3 of those. Formation wise, just be aware that TE sets will change up your line blocking some. Just some random thoughts - it looks like you have done your homework. Hope this helps. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 18, 2007 12:03:05 GMT -6
It depends on how in-depth your passing game is- because you're going to have to practice midline and veer every single day for at least 15 minutes.
Also, you're really going to over load you're offensive line with all of those blocking schemes. Zone blocking takes time and reps also. Counter trey, veer, midline, trap, wedge, G sweep, draw, zone, and pass pro- that's a lot of stuff to teach you're OL.
Personally, if I were going to shotgun and zone, I'd ditch the midline and veer and go with the zone read for my option attack. I'd use the I formation as my power game, running Isos, IZ, OZ, and counter trey.
|
|
|
|
Post by dacoachmo on Feb 18, 2007 12:12:53 GMT -6
also depends upon the amount of gametime you will be in what set and running what plays?
personally I always start with the option game first, once the players grasp the reads then I go to the other runs.
counter trey and zone plays will have the most difference in steps....meaning more practice time. you may want to see which works best for your team...then adjust. TREY in Gun and ZONE in I...for example.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Feb 18, 2007 12:30:22 GMT -6
You will also need to practice your zone combo's daily. IMO, too much. Not enough time in the day for all of this. I would focus on what you can run out of both the spread and the I.
If you're going to have 10 formations I would find what plays you can run from all the formations and be great at those plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Feb 18, 2007 13:35:46 GMT -6
Carryover from the the gun to the under center stuff is key, use the same blocking from under and gun, if you can't run a play from under and gun, then scrap it, keep it simple up front. You can run trap, trey, veer, zone, power all from both, with multiple formations/motions you call be plenty multiple. One important thing is that your systems terminology is simple enough and flexible enough to be up to the task.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 18, 2007 13:55:07 GMT -6
I think as coaches, we all try to do too much sometimes. I've been guilty of it before; tough consequences for it too.
The powerhouse in Montana right now is as simple as you can get. They're a single back H-Back unit that makes a living on the IZ, OZ, counter-trey, a simple sprint out, 3 and 5 step passing system and PA. The run a few screens, but nothing spectacular; track and quick stuff. They never run more than 10 formations and generally line up in 5 of them consistently.
They play their best athlete at RB and feed him the ball with IZ, OZ, Iso and counter trey as much as they can. Their OL is very good at what they do and it shows. They also tend to throw the ball fairly well, at least well enough to make you think twice about loading up the box. This is also due to their simplicity.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 18, 2007 14:33:39 GMT -6
Too Much. I would venture to say that you will probably not get good at ANYTHING with such a diverse package. Teams with that much offense trying to incorporate everything they like/see (spread packages, airraid screens, multiple I, zone schemes, veer and midline) tend to only be successful when they are simply better athletically. How would you know what you wanted to call?
The tradional powers in Louisiana have all been "system" teams, with somewhat questionable influxes of talent from other schools.
John Curtis (team that beat hoover) is split back veer (but they give 90% of the time because they have averaged 250+ across for the past million years, with a BCS caliber back every year)
Evangel Christian dominated with the deep spread, running simply route combos (and having a D1 qb for 10 straight years)
WEst Monroe runs the Deep back I option (and they have as many transfers into their school as the two previously mentioned private schools)
Where is your program in relation to where you want to be? Mediocre? Good? Consistent league champ? Consistent state contender? If you are anything but constantly playing in the state championship game with your offense, I would trim it down, and get GOOD at it.
I wouldn't try to mix in Spread and I concepts. Too different, in both run scheme and Pass Pro. While the differences might seem simple to remember on the board and at practice, under the heat of the Friday night lights, when lined up against a 265lb DT who just committed to a BCS school.....
|
|
|
|
Post by spartancoach on Feb 18, 2007 15:53:54 GMT -6
Why not try to cut it down to your 5-6 favorite running plays, then your play action, 3 step, 5 step, screens and sprint out then run them from Gun and I, using the same basic formations on the outside. Then from gun or under your "schemes" are not terribly different.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Feb 18, 2007 16:28:27 GMT -6
i need to know if this amount of offense is feasible to run. spread with basically 5 run plays- trap, draw, counter trey, zone, sweep. 5 screens, 3 sprint outs, 14 routes on route tree for numorous combinations. I-formation, with wedge, trap, counter trey, iso, zone, midline, veer,sweep, same route tree. 10 formations: spread- 2x2, 3x1, 3x2, 2 backs with 2x1, te with 1 back 3 wide I-formation- pro, max I ( both wideouts on one side & te on other) heavy set, where we add another lineman. no answer will offend me, just need to know before we get started this summer. my very first thought, "where is the power off tackle play- the bread and butter?" Is that just part of your zone scheme? |
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Feb 20, 2007 14:33:05 GMT -6
You can be very SIMPLE and MULTIPLE at the same time, develop a solid rules based terminology system, use a core base of schemes up front, trap, trey, veer, zone, power, etc and then match backfield actions to them. Same thing with the formations, use a few core base formations and alter them with tags, "tight", "open", "bunch", etc. Here is an example of how we go from under center to gun giving multiple looks in the backfield, but using the same scheme up front. There have been lots of threads on this site argueing the simple, few play approach versus the multiple play/look approach. Honestly, I agree with both camps of thought. We fall into the catagory of both...LOL.... We keep it SIMPLE up front and do a lot in the backfield. By combining different backfield actions (plays) with the same schemes up front, we get a multiple look. It looks like a lot to an outsider, which is what we want, but its simple communication for us.  |
|
