|
|
Post by coachweigelt on Feb 17, 2009 2:59:54 GMT -6
Anybody else has gotten this via email? My question would be am I reading this correct and do they ask you to "cheat" their formations with look a like numbering?
I have been looking into this last year based on the BYU formation but I would have never numbered my players in order to confuse the defense... This is just a bad bad thing to do, and I believe it goes against ethic concucts which coaches should be under.
Any comments??
|
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Feb 17, 2009 6:39:53 GMT -6
I suppose you get as small as numbers on your jerseys as the federation allows and then have your players put their hands over them when they came up to the L.O.S.. My god, I think I've come up with something!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 17, 2009 6:46:59 GMT -6
Some people need to start focusing on coaching blocking and tackling and improving players with weight room programs and off-season agility / conditioning programs and recruit some of the big kids walking around in the hallways. Imagine how good our sport would be if we'd do all this and stop trying to come up with the next great thing to out-manuver someone.  |
|
|
|
Post by veerraid on Feb 17, 2009 6:47:44 GMT -6
Well, I have stayed out of the numerous posts on the A-11 since the inception. As an offensive coordinator, and a former defensive coordinator, I found it interesting to look at from both sides of the ball. I really had no opinion on the subject, except that it was 'out-of-the-box' thinking, which I admire.
However, "look alike" numbers to deceive the defense? Now they have lost me. To me, that pushes the edge of unsportsmanlike conduct. As a DC, I faced the old "Emory & Henry" formation, which is similar in concept. A wing-t team threw it at us as a surprise, and it worked for the first drive (gaining some yards) until we adjusted (we ended up pitching a shutout). But they did not use numbers to try and confuse the defense. Although only the end man on the LOS would be eligible, which takes away much of the deception of the numbering, just the thought of it is appalling. As an OC, it would NEVER be something that I would consider doing. What are we teaching the kids by doing so??? You have to look for loop holes and deception the rest of your life to gain an advantage?
BTW, just so you know, I coach at one of those smaller, public schools that the A-11 professes to help. We are the smallest school in our division (AA and all others are AAA), and even some of our out-of-division games are against schools that are one or two classifications higher. We have held our own so far by working hard, and hopefully will continue to do so (we went 7-3 last season).
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Feb 17, 2009 6:49:56 GMT -6
Its sad.. but not unethical.. kind of good thinking.. good by the rules thinking.. nothing wrong with it.. BYU with a thought.. nothing wrong with that.. When compared to the other things they have been trying to get away with..  |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 17, 2009 8:20:08 GMT -6
Sounds like an ingenious plan! I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the eligible numbered player because their NUMBERS are similar   seems like it would be a whole lot simpler, advantageous, and beneficial to do just what lochness described. This is a lot of effort and planning into something that really won't make a bit of difference. If you can fool a defense for a half on jersey numbers you may be playing the wrong team. |
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Feb 17, 2009 8:46:36 GMT -6
I think someone is stealing my thunder -- I realized I did this last year! My left tackle was #69 and my left end was #89 -- I kind of feel bad for the outside linebackers we played - they must have been confused all year.
I'm going to get rid of the numbers we have on the sides of our jerseys and have our entire team stand sideways until right before the snap!!!!! The defense will never be able to figure it out...
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 17, 2009 9:01:41 GMT -6
I'm going to get rid of the numbers we have on the sides of our jerseys and have our entire team stand sideways until right before the snap!!!!! The defense will never be able to figure it out... CURSES!!! The dreaded Valence Blind Offense!!! |
|
stylee
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by stylee on Feb 17, 2009 9:10:21 GMT -6
I haven't written on any of the A-11 threads but I do want to say
(a) I have no problem with deception, as long as it is within the bounds of the rules - as these "Camo" formations are and the A-11 isn't. They don't owe their existence to a loophole.
There's some fun stuff you can come up with using this sort of thing.
(b) I don't think these formations are anything new. And if a team thinks they alone are going to dramatically tip the scales in that team's favor, they're in for a rude surprise. They're not unstoppable by any stretch of the imagination.
|
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Feb 17, 2009 14:12:03 GMT -6
Brophy,
you made me laugh so hard, I started coughing.
CURSES!!!
The dreaded Valence Blind Offense!!!
Why haven't I thought of that before.
Oh yeah, since the only way a defense has of recognizing the players are their numbers, this might fool the whole bunch.
I'm got 'em all with eligable numbers so they look the same,
but I'm having trouble getting the linemen's 300 pound frames to fit into the receivers uniforms though.
I need "Dr. Who" to solve this little "spacial mass thingy."
|
|
|
|
Post by coachnorm on Feb 17, 2009 14:19:56 GMT -6
I do have to say some of the most hilarious threads going lateley have dealt with the a-11.
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Feb 17, 2009 15:30:44 GMT -6
i think this is great stuff. make the defense think.
|
|
|
|
Post by dtackle74 on Feb 17, 2009 16:42:42 GMT -6
I guess this numbering camofloogie (thank you Bugs Bunny) is a good idea, but what happens when 68 or 86 gets hurt or can't play? Are you just going to switch numbers in and out amongst the kids all the time? Like someone else said, what is this teaching kids? Not to get TOO high and mighty but isn't one of the purposes of football (and athletics in general) to teach kids good life lessons, about hard work and self-determination and discipline? I guess Piedmont is churning out a bunch of future lawyers and stock brokers.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 17, 2009 17:12:57 GMT -6
BTW, just so you know, I coach at one of those smaller, public schools that the A-11 professes to help. We are the smallest school in our division (AA and all others are AAA), and even some of our out-of-division games are against schools that are one or two classifications higher. We have held our own so far by working hard, and hopefully will continue to do so (we went 7-3 last season). I'm glad that you mentioned the school size thing because we're the smallest school in our league by almost 300 students and we've done OK. Maybe blocking and tackling are more important than hiding your numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Feb 17, 2009 17:26:06 GMT -6
I guess this numbering camofloogie (thank you Bugs Bunny) is a good idea, but what happens when 68 or 86 gets hurt or can't play? Are you just going to switch numbers in and out amongst the kids all the time? Like someone else said, what is this teaching kids? Not to get TOO high and mighty but isn't one of the purposes of football (and athletics in general) to teach kids good life lessons, about hard work and self-determination and discipline? I guess Piedmont is churning out a bunch of future lawyers and stock brokers. you are teaching them to think on there feet. Heck I would want all my kids to become future lawyers or stock brokers. Those guys make good money and have good a life. better then working down at the plant for min. wage. Pete Carrill wrote a book called "The Smart Take From the Strong" the A 11 is about the smart taking from the strong. the spread offense is about the smart taking from the strong. all I know about the spread offense I took from pete carrill's spread basketball offense and adapted it to football. I did make some changes though. in basketball you slow the game down. in football I speed the game up. Isolate and divide. make the defense defend from sideline to sideline and from goal to goal. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Feb 17, 2009 17:26:12 GMT -6
I'm glad that you mentioned the school size thing because we're the smallest school in our league by almost 300 students and we've done OK. Maybe blocking and tackling are more important than hiding your numbers. Wow thats cool...do you have a book or dvd on that I could buy for a few hundred dollars? |
|
|
|
Post by airman on Feb 17, 2009 17:28:36 GMT -6
if you want to complain about the price then you should do it to American Football Monthly who rakes us over the coles and not about the A 11 guys.
The A 11 guys have very little control over the A 11 becasue they signed agreements which AFM. everyone who has videos through AFM is in the same position. you sign over control of what you do.
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 17, 2009 19:11:04 GMT -6
airman
Please respond to my PM. I am curious on your thoughts
|
|
|
|
Post by coachinghopeful on Feb 17, 2009 19:31:47 GMT -6
Ummm... so does this mean the A-11 guys are going to start playing WR types at the tackle spots to just be decoys? Are they going to intentionally switch to some bizarre, confusing font for their jersey numbers to make them unreadable?
I don't see a rule in the book that says players can't have their numbers written in wingdings, nor do I see a rule that says that a player with Jersey #68 can't have "Eighty Six" written out on it.
Hey, maybe that's the plan! They're going to give the kids 2 different numbers on the same jersey!
I'm suprised the A-11 guys didn't do something clever to get their "ineligible" numbers the ball. I have an idea for it that's going to change the world... but I've got to go speak at a great clinic.
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Feb 17, 2009 23:20:03 GMT -6
I saw a team one time that had a big stud that had 2 different numbers for his jersey. The regular original number was an ineligible lineman number that he used when he played O-line and blocked. But sometimes they put him in the backfield as a FB and wanted an eligible number for him so they had a piece of the jersey material with an eligible number (33, I think) with velcro around the edges and they would stick it on over his other number and go play in the backfield.
Hey, maybe the jerseys for the new A-11 can have no number on them, but the players have a velcro'd piece with an eligible and ineligible number on opposite sides, and then right before the snap they slap on whichever they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Feb 17, 2009 23:23:18 GMT -6
Btw, wouldn't you love to be one of the 5' 8", 160 lb guys that wears #77 on his jersey? Yeah, thanks coach.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 17, 2009 23:53:13 GMT -6
Ummm... so does this mean the A-11 guys are going to start playing WR types at the tackle spots to just be decoys? Are they going to intentionally switch to some bizarre, confusing font for their jersey numbers to make them unreadable? I don't see a rule in the book that says players can't have their numbers written in wingdings, nor do I see a rule that says that a player with Jersey #68 can't have "Eighty Six" written out on it. Hey, maybe that's the plan! They're going to give the kids 2 different numbers on the same jersey! I'm suprised the A-11 guys didn't do something clever to get their "ineligible" numbers the ball. I have an idea for it that's going to change the world... but I've got to go speak at a great clinic. |
|
|
|
Post by coachbdud on Feb 18, 2009 0:59:17 GMT -6
piedmont says they have no linemen, no big kids...
well the local paper has one of their DL listed as a cream of the crop top junior... so they have at least 1 kid, just have him play both ways like everyone else does
|
|
|
|
Post by unc31 on Feb 18, 2009 6:49:57 GMT -6
When I watched one of their games on the internet, it appeared that they had SEVERAL big kids. At least as many as any other normal team. In fact, in the game I watched, they started out in a traditional formation with 5 regular linemen. From what I saw, I think they could be very successful with a traditional offense.
|
|
stylee
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by stylee on Feb 18, 2009 8:26:35 GMT -6
I guess this numbering camofloogie (thank you Bugs Bunny) is a good idea, but what happens when 68 or 86 gets hurt or can't play? Are you just going to switch numbers in and out amongst the kids all the time? Like someone else said, what is this teaching kids? Not to get TOO high and mighty but isn't one of the purposes of football (and athletics in general) to teach kids good life lessons, about hard work and self-determination and discipline? I guess Piedmont is churning out a bunch of future lawyers and stock brokers. you are teaching them to think on there feet. Heck I would want all my kids to become future lawyers or stock brokers. Those guys make good money and have good a life. better then working down at the plant for min. wage. Pete Carrill wrote a book called "The Smart Take From the Strong" the A 11 is about the smart taking from the strong. the spread offense is about the smart taking from the strong. all I know about the spread offense I took from pete carrill's spread basketball offense and adapted it to football. I did make some changes though. in basketball you slow the game down. in football I speed the game up. Isolate and divide. make the defense defend from sideline to sideline and from goal to goal. Pete Carroll.* Although I could be wrong, I'm just an option guy, not one of those fancy book learnin' types. |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 18, 2009 8:47:53 GMT -6
I assumed he was referring to Pete Carril because of the basketball reference. Although, I'm a little befuddled with the "strong" vs "smart" argument being made above - I thought, as coaches, we were beyond this type of blind sports writer rhetoric. Nothing wrong with using more analytics and tactical applications in the game, but 1) all the strategy is worthless without fundamentals
2) spending inordinate amount of time on illusions and slight-of-hand gimmicks takes away from utilizing the building blocks of success (see #1) I think this is a novel concept (lining up same-numbered players), but for as much as you will invest in it, you will not get anywhere near the return to think it will work for more than a series or one play, and it only further highlights (imo) the basis of this is nothing more than running the polecat as a FT offense. |
|
stylee
Sophomore Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by stylee on Feb 18, 2009 9:13:35 GMT -6
Okay, please ridicule me now. I deserve it.
|
|
