|
|
Post by tentboy on Feb 10, 2009 20:39:01 GMT -6
We are a multiple formation offense. One and two back set with the zone blocking scheme (Coverdale).
How do you go about building an offensive idenity, so you have something to hang your hat on. How do you go about explaining the offense to people. They think its a grab bag offense, but there is more to it.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Feb 10, 2009 20:46:53 GMT -6
I think you take a play and build everything around that. Think of it like the hub and rest of the offense are the spokes that come off it. You could even use that as a visual.
If you are thinking from a zone running game perspective I think it could look something like this:
HUB: IZ
Offshoots: OZ, Counter, play action off OZ, boot off IZ, etc, etc.
We hung our hat (and sometimes ourselves LOL) around midline and veer and the other plays (counter, rocket, FB Iso) were the spokes.
|
|
|
|
Post by poorbob on Feb 11, 2009 1:15:29 GMT -6
Choose something and do it well. It may be one play or an aspect of offense, but do it well, and then you can build off of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanddecide on Feb 11, 2009 7:26:57 GMT -6
Your identity can also be more than what you run.
Physical
Up-Tempo
Shifts/Motion
Formation changes
Speed
etc...
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Feb 11, 2009 8:36:10 GMT -6
WE have a fourth and three play. We call that play any time we have fourth and three and I do not care who knows it. We convert often. That 4th and 3 play is the play the entire program is built around. I look at kids and think "where and how can they help us on 4th and 3?" - I look at other plays in the playbook and sometimes think of their effect on our 4th and 3 play. Kids know, 4th and 3 that we are not going to punt. We just build that into the identity of who we are.
|
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Feb 11, 2009 9:08:00 GMT -6
An identity comes from your success, and your success comes from your ability to identify what your kids can do the best.
If you are not successful then you simply look ignorant.
Have you ever heard that little saying about the definition of "insanity." It's been popular with clinic-speak for a number of years. Insanity if doing the same thing over and over with similar effect but hoping for change.
Your identity is also made over time. It takes a number of seasons before you can be "pegged" as a certain kind of coach.
Then your identity is built not with just plays, but with a philosophy of offense. This also comes with time and success.
Who do you model or style yourself after?
Often coaches will style themselves after a local university, this isn't a bad idea IF you can make it work.
But success is important.
Then after many years, you will begin to realize that you pattern your own philosophy after other great men and programs.
Other's will then remark that your system or philosophy is like a certain college or NFL coach.
I don't think this is really so bad.
It takes time and success.
OJW
|
|
|
|
Post by coachinghopeful on Feb 11, 2009 17:33:11 GMT -6
Does it matter if others think you've got a "grab bag" offense, if it's working and you have a set of solutions you can draw on to whatever they throw at you?
The other replies in this thread are sound. Look at yourself, then look at your players. What do you understand best and know how to teach well? What can your players execute well? As beardc said, there's a LOT more to offense than what you draw up on the whiteboard.
Getting something to "hang your hat on" is really a matter of focused personal philosophy. What do you devote most of your practice time to perfecting? What do you believe is the most versatile, reliable play or set of plays that you want to run? Who do you want to feature in your offense year in and out? Ask yourself those questions and go from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by kylem56 on Feb 11, 2009 18:01:26 GMT -6
I think an offensive identity is composed of:
#1 What you know the best or else you (or at least your assistants) will struggle to teach it and kids can see through that
#2 what you believe in: for example...
Do you believe in pounding the football, 3 yards and a cloud of dust
Do you believe in spreading out defenses to make the defenders tackle your best in open space
Do you believe in throwing to open up the run game or vice versa
#3 Your System (should have an answer for every possible situation and should be adaptable to whatever type of players you happen to have that year)
i dont think it consists of plays. When I think of an "offensive identity" I think of it as more of your philosophical approach to a game
|
|
|
|
Post by cltblkhscoach on Feb 19, 2009 4:14:51 GMT -6
I'm with groundchuck, you take a base play and build off of it. We were pass heavy last season, but our HC decided to make us more balanced and he made OZ the focus of the offense and built the complementary stuff off of it. People may think we're West Virginia copycats next season, but that's his vision and I believe in it. And I was the OC last year, lol. Shows how much I know....
|
|
|
|
Post by tripowingt on Feb 25, 2009 7:21:20 GMT -6
If you have 220lbs stud halfback your identity should probable be running the ball. If you have Colt Brennan at QB it should be passing. Establish what your team does best and just tell them this is what we do.
I think the easiest way to establish your team is to have 2-3 guys that you can look them in the eyes and tell them make it happen. And let the rest of the guys just feed off of them. But all the other ways work and may work better then my way depending on there style and team.
|
|
|
|
Post by red2slam on Feb 25, 2009 8:21:37 GMT -6
If you change your offense every year based on studs you have, then what do you really believe in? At some point you are not going to have a stud...especially at the HS level.
I just dont know how you build any consistency with that approach. If your changing offenses every year, your not really learning ins and out of an offense. Same with defense. If your a attacking 4-3 this year, slant 50 next..... You never really learn the ins and outs of one... learning the ins and outs is a beauty staying in a system.
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Feb 25, 2009 8:28:41 GMT -6
I coached with a program that was going to run the belly series and sprint draw every year. That is what they have been doing for close to 40 years now. But some years we would run more option, throw more, or just try and jam the rock up between the guards based on who we had.
But depending on the year and who we had to run the ball, or throw and catch we did slightly different "peripheral" plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripowingt on Feb 25, 2009 9:22:48 GMT -6
If you change your offense every year based on studs you have, then what do you really believe in? At some point you are not going to have a stud...especially at the HS level. I just dont know how you build any consistency with that approach. If your changing offenses every year, your not really learning ins and out of an offense. Same with defense. If your a attacking 4-3 this year, slant 50 next..... You never really learn the ins and outs of one... learning the ins and outs is a beauty staying in a system. Of course you don't want to change 'systems" every year, but play calling is dictated every year by your personel. Lets say you run a wishbone and run the ball 40x a game, you find out Colt Brennan is transferring to your school are you still going to run a wishbone? |
|
|
|
Post by gdoggwr on Feb 25, 2009 14:59:18 GMT -6
Of course you don't want to change 'systems" every year, but play calling is dictated every year by your personel. Lets say you run a wishbone and run the ball 40x a game, you find out Colt Brennan is transferring to your school are you still going to run a wishbone? Yes. As groundchuck said I'd build the extras to suit the throwing ability of the QB but if I'm a wishbone guy we'll run the bone. Besides, lets say you spend all training camp working spread/gun stuff and don't put the reps into the belly, or veer, or power, or what ever it was that you've always based you Offense on because you've got 'Colt Brennen'. Then 3 plays into the first series of the first game he takes a shot and blows out he knee, done for the year... |
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 25, 2009 15:47:58 GMT -6
Of course you don't want to change 'systems" every year, but play calling is dictated every year by your personel. Lets say you run a wishbone and run the ball 40x a game, you find out Colt Brennan is transferring to your school are you still going to run a wishbone? Yes. As groundchuck said I'd build the extras to suit the throwing ability of the QB but if I'm a wishbone guy we'll run the bone. Besides, lets say you spend all training camp working spread/gun stuff and don't put the reps into the belly, or veer, or power, or what ever it was that you've always based you Offense on because you've got 'Colt Brennen'. Then 3 plays into the first series of the first game he takes a shot and blows out he knee, done for the year... I agree. Not only that, but how short-sighted is it to think that passing out of the Wishbone cannot be DEADLY with a great QB? Pound the ball with authority and yet everyone knows you can and will hit the homerun on playaction...please...THAT's awesome. Not only that, but selling out on a system change for one stud can also hurt if you don't have other "studs" to compliment him. Colt Brennan is useless if he has a bunch of Jack Dundee's at WR. I think, to use the Wishbone example, what you do if you have a "stud QB" come in, and you are a Wishbone system, is you make some adjustments to the core system. Split a WR out and go with "31" personnel or even both guys and go with "30" personnel. I've seen plenty of teams do this. Use a little flexbone if you feel adventurous. But, I'm not changing what I... 1. know how to coach effectively inside and out 2. know the kids know how to execute inside and out 3. know has been very successful for us in the past. HIGHLIGHT the skills of the "studs," but don't redefine your offense or your approach because of them. Personnel change too much in HS year-to-year. You've got to have that core "identity" (getting back to the point) to always fall back on. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoach36 on Feb 25, 2009 20:49:00 GMT -6
As a defensive coach learning offense, the identity of the offense I am trying to piece together is simple and makes alot of sense to me coming from the defensive side of the ball.
I'm going to run the offense that would give me nightmares as a DC. Or as I am referring to it as now "The DCN"
Option
Unbalanced
Great Quick Game
Ability to change tempo at will
Lots of motion and Shifting
Just an overall pain in the @$$ to gameplan for on the defensive side of the ball.
With that being said I guess thats more of a philosophy then an identity.
I like the wheel analogy with the spokes someone mentioned earlier.
This how I would figure it out. If someone stormed into my house in the middle of the night while I was in a deep sleep and said to me its 3rd and 3 on a gaming winning drive in the fourth quarter what play are you running?
My answer(weather it be a power run, zone scheme, quick pass etc) will probably be the identity of my offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by pantherpride91 on Feb 26, 2009 11:51:12 GMT -6
If you change your offense every year based on studs you have, then what do you really believe in? At some point you are not going to have a stud...especially at the HS level. I just dont know how you build any consistency with that approach. If your changing offenses every year, your not really learning ins and out of an offense. Same with defense. If your a attacking 4-3 this year, slant 50 next..... You never really learn the ins and outs of one... learning the ins and outs is a beauty staying in a system. Of course you don't want to change 'systems" every year, but play calling is dictated every year by your personel. Lets say you run a wishbone and run the ball 40x a game, you find out Colt Brennan is transferring to your school are you still going to run a wishbone? Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school |
|
|
|
Post by gdoggwr on Feb 26, 2009 12:03:58 GMT -6
Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school dang! I forgot to add that yesterday and you beat me to it!! ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by calicoachh on Feb 26, 2009 12:06:52 GMT -6
you dance with the date that you brought to the prom. each year the music changes a little, the way you dance changes a little, but if you are a good dancer, then you are a good dancer.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripowingt on Feb 26, 2009 16:19:39 GMT -6
Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school I bet if they threw the ball more they would have won a fewmore games |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 26, 2009 16:31:57 GMT -6
Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school How many did they win? I bet if they threw the ball more they would have won a fewmore games |
|
|
|
Post by coachinghopeful on Feb 27, 2009 17:55:38 GMT -6
Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school dang! I forgot to add that yesterday and you beat me to it!! ;D ;D Wasn't his dad even the HC of his HS team while he was running that Wing-T? |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 27, 2009 18:55:54 GMT -6
Brett Farve ran the wing-t in high school I bet if they threw the ball more they would have won a fewmore games Obviously a case of stupid coaching. I am surprised Brett's parents didn't force he coach into changing systems. WAIT..A SECOND...AS Coachinghopeful mentioned..HIS DAD WAS THE COACH. Also remember, that you don't score a single point for throwing the ball in football. You score points for advancing the ball across the goalline. So while Brett might have been a great thrower, to advance the ball across the line, he would need pass pro, he would need receivers, etc. etc. AND remember, once Brett left what was the coach (his dad) to do. Not to mention, that running the Wing-T doesn't mean you can't throw the ball. Rich Gannon did OK.. Finally, just factually, I had heard Brett was a wishbone QB..not a wing-t qb. could be wrong, just saying what I heard. |
|
|
|
Post by tripowingt on Feb 28, 2009 1:59:45 GMT -6
Eh that's not maxmizing your talent if your running the ball 40x a game and brett favre as your QB.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 28, 2009 6:45:26 GMT -6
Eh that's not maxmizing your talent if your running the ball 40x a game and brett favre as your QB. You are going to make a great parent in the stands one day. Parents concentrate on ONE...and decide that maximizing ONE persons talent is the way to go. Coaches concentrate on TEAM..and decide that maximizing TEAM talent is the way to go. Lastly, don't forget that Brett Favre was an NFL caliber athlete. He was BIGGER than most high school kids, he was STRONGER than most high school kids, he was FASTER than most high school kids... So Brett Favre running the option and waggle (Like Donovan Mcnabb at Syracuse) was probably a pretty scary thing for most defenses. Added bonus, they didn't need to teach new things to the OTHER 10 players, who probably got to do what they were better at as well. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 28, 2009 11:24:39 GMT -6
Eh that's not maxmizing your talent if your running the ball 40x a game and brett favre as your QB. I have heard coaches talk about "maximizing their talent" over and over again throughout the years. You want to know what happens? They run 5 different offensive philsophies in 4 years and THEY LOSE GAMES. The teams that emphasize "maximizing talent" are more focused on schemes and less focused on fundamentals. Iin the end, they become "grab bag" and "grab bag" doesn't work. And, I've got news for you; a team that can run the ball 40 times a game and throw out of PA 20 times a game. You know what's easier to defend? A team that spends 3 years repping their Wing T package and then scraps it because they've got a "QB with a cannon". Oh, and Brett Farve averaged around 30 passes per game throughout his career. That means that the teams he played for ran the ball about 35 times a game... Seems to me, running the ball 35 times a game isn't that much different than running it 40 times a game. But, hey, HC and OCs in the NFL might not know how to "maximize their talent". |
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Feb 28, 2009 12:47:32 GMT -6
I like what Mike Price (HC at UTEP) said a clinic when he was the HC at Washington State. According to him the best way to build an offensive identity is to score a lot of points.
Our offensive mission is to score points, take care of the ball, and use the clock to our advantage. Sorry guys but I'd rather have a defensive identity (and I'm the HC/OC) and be known for defensive football. At least this is what we preach.
The other thing I liked about what Price said is the secret to winning football games isn't turnover/takeaway ratio. It isn't total first downs. It isn't time posession. The best way to win is to score more points than the other team whether that's 2-0 or 55-54. It just doesn't matter. I know this isn't the theme of the thread but I had to say it.
Offensive identities are really up to the perception of others when you get right down to it. So, we don't spend time on convincing ourselves or our players that we have to be a certain way. One DC from our league felt that we were a smashmouth, playaction type of team. Another DC had commented that he likes the way we spread it around with bubble screens, option, and our boot package. In both cases we've averaged over 35 points per game over the past three years over both programs. Not sure what they were relecting on as we ran pretty much the same stuff at both of them.
|
|
