|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 5, 2007 21:13:09 GMT -6
As many of you know (because I have bugged the piss outta ya) I have been reading and studying offenses. I have formed the opinion that the Double Slot is the most versatile offense out there. It seems to me that with very simple motions you can align in the Double Slot and end up in almost any formation known. The problem that i have is trusting myself and my opinion. I am learning, i have nowhere near the knowledge of most of you. Offer your opinion please. Do you agree? (why)? Disagree(why)? What would YOU suggest? I want my boys to be versatile. I want them to be whatever they need to be THAT week to win THAT game.
|
|
|
Post by information on Jul 5, 2007 21:14:54 GMT -6
I agree....hard to defend...can be multiple and lends itself to the quick pass game & option.
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Jul 5, 2007 22:33:10 GMT -6
I disagree...
Any offense that can be everything, isn't anything...
High school, and I'm assuming this is high school, multiplicity is costly... and most programs don't have the time to pay...
I believe it best, at the high school level, to do a few things well, and hang your hat on those things... as opposed to being everything...
|
|
|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 5, 2007 23:31:14 GMT -6
But that is what is so great about this offense. If you run well, you can out of many formations. If you can pass well you can out of many formations but you have the option to pick. You can find the few things you do well and run the crap out of them from various formations with minimal change.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jul 6, 2007 0:46:27 GMT -6
For what it's worth... The double slot (and even a double wing... not necessarily THE double wing) is great because there is so much multiplicity built within one formation (same could be said about almost any completely balanced alignment... but there are probably more possibilities for adapting series from a variety of sets in a DS/DW because of the access to 4 backs, plus an alignment of 4 quick receivers). I'm not trying to start an argument here (because I'm stubborn on this... I think I'm right, won't argue... and don't care to convince anyone else of "my way")... but contrary to "cult" philosophies... I think you can take parts from many great systems (wishbone, I, wing-t, double wing, etc.) and apply certain series as per YOUR preference/philosophy and make them work from a DS type of set (with or W/O TEs, nasty slot, etc.). We've done this for years and it has worked well for us.
I will say Khalfie has a good point though- one of the best things about this system (or similar ones of adaptability)- is one of the worst. It is a Pandora's box: it is hard to omit things that are good... but you have to in order to create a system. Having enough plays to choose from in the spring is not a problem- trimming it down to the necessities is.
For me, this is the greatest formation ever, for the reasons you've stated. Along with our "single wing" (which, for us, is very similar for all but 3 guys), this is basically what we do (people have called us a double slot, double wing, wing-t, flexbone... and I like it that there is no perceived continuity to it). We are, however very systematic; we have 4 series of 11-13 running plays per year (6 we have every year- the other 5-7 depend on personnel), plus 3-5 specific to being in shotgun. Each spring I start with about 35-40 (or more) but with my players tiny minds being lead by my tiny mind... the only way we will survive is to have only the essentials (we do keep some stuff on the back burner though).
It is a great formation if you discipline yourself to be committed to the refining process (which, I'm realizing as I type this that I did not do very well this past spring). Having enough is never the problem. Having too much is.
|
|
|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 6, 2007 8:00:21 GMT -6
Excellent info...I was told Clovis high runs the DS...does anyone know how to contact the offensive coaches..do they post here? Would love to see and discuss plays or a playbook with them (if they would).
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Jul 6, 2007 8:52:49 GMT -6
I'm not trying to start an argument either... Ok... who am I kidding, of course I'm trying to start an argument... its what I live for... more so, finding an argument against the Double slot is a great challenge? If I had to find one... and since you were asking for consensus... I almost felt obligated to... Here would be my few issues with the Double Slot Offense... 1. The multiplicity, subtracts by adding to much, which divides a teams focus... (see what I did there? ) 2. True Double Slot, might as well be double tight, double wing, and when your offense is that compact, you have to have superior personnel, because you have now brought all 11 players into the mix. 3. Motioning from the Double Slot, only changes the dynamics of the offense, if they leave the box. Orbit motion only takes you to an I wing formation, but you still have 11 in the box. Motioning to the sidelines, gives you 1 split, but you still have 9 to 10 defenders in, or near the box. 4. Once you start varying the splits, spreading them out; Spread wing, twins with backside wing, double twins, unbalanced trips... are you still double slot? 5. The Double slot, basic motion to trips bunch, or orbit motion, has been well studied, and doesn't provide the defensive conflicts inferior personnel will need to be competitive. Again... just to be argumentative... those would be the issues I'd have with the Double Slot... but in all honesty... its another great offense that could get it done, when executed.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 6, 2007 9:12:29 GMT -6
it's a great base to then expand and contract from
but, like khalfie is saying, it is up to the coaches to focus the offense based on the talent available
|
|
|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 6, 2007 9:15:27 GMT -6
I knew Khalfie would come around!!
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jul 6, 2007 10:50:52 GMT -6
Ok Khalfie... Not an argument (but I'll give a response just the same):
1. The multiplicity, subtracts by adding to much, which divides a teams focus... (see what I did there? )
Can easily happen- which is why pulling in the reigns and filtering this (or any) system is important- otherwise it is too much.
2. True Double Slot, might as well be double tight, double wing, and when your offense is that compact,
Completely true from my perspective- but not always the case from the perspective of defenses we face. We used to align in 2TE full house- and we run much of the same stuff now, but we will face less in the box now sometimes.
you have to have superior personnel, because you have now brought all 11 players into the mix
I'll disagree here- we can hide players easier than we would in 2TE wishbone, for example (of course you gotta throw to those SEs once in a while). I also like it if we have 1 superior back we can use him as a runner more without being overly right/left handed (again, I'm comparing this to when we ran the wishbone)
3. Motioning from the Double Slot, only changes the dynamics of the offense, if they leave the box. Orbit motion only takes you to an I wing formation, but you still have 11 in the box. Motioning to the sidelines, gives you 1 split, but you still have 9 to 10 defenders in, or near the box.
A wing can motion back to an I back spot, can motion across to a wing T or wishbone HB spot, can motion to a sniffer back spot- to me Dynamic would include alignment position and angles made by an effective pre-snap action. So you could run I plays, wing t-plays, wishbone plays, yet still be within one system and not have the "myriad offense".
4. Once you start varying the splits, spreading them out; Spread wing, twins with backside wing, double twins, unbalanced trips... are you still double slot?
Who cares?
5. The Double slot, basic motion to trips bunch, or orbit motion, has been well studied, and doesn't provide the defensive conflicts inferior personnel will need to be competitive.
Well...if a wishbone, wing-t, double wing, run-and shoot, etc. CAN help inferior personnel- so would a DS, because it can morph in to any of those. If they can not... well neither will the DS or anything else (except... Single Wing? ;D )
Khalfie... your responses are very similar to my DCs. We argue about this all of the time. I see where Coach Bruce is going with this idea... I was there at one time too, thinking the same things. And to be honest, I've kind of come around to Khalfie's camp a bit-I've learned that the only coach I routinely outcoach ... is myself.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jul 6, 2007 11:02:26 GMT -6
As many of you know (because I have bugged the {censored} outta ya) I have been reading and studying offenses. I have formed the opinion that the Double Slot is the most versatile offense out there. It seems to me that with very simple motions you can align in the Double Slot and end up in almost any formation known. The problem that i have is trusting myself and my opinion. I am learning, i have nowhere near the knowledge of most of you. Offer your opinion please. Do you agree? (why)? Disagree(why)? What would YOU suggest? I want my boys to be versatile. I want them to be whatever they need to be THAT week to win THAT game. All double slots are not created equal. Some are Wing T, some are wishbone, some are multiple which, to me, means that they don't have a philosophy. Bluto said that you need great athletes. I disagree. I think that the double slot, like the Wing T or Double Wing, is a great way for a coach who has some good football players, not great athletes, to be successful.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jul 6, 2007 11:21:58 GMT -6
Bluto said that you need great athletes. Don't recall saying this... I did imply several times that you do not need great athletes for this (average kids who execute will do well in it). some are multiple which, to me, means that they don't have a philosophy.Also, I'll respectfully disagree... between posts, I was thinking about our running game and where it originated. Of 14 running plays: 4 came from the I formation 3 from Straight T 3 from Wing T 2 from Wishbone 1 from Double Wing 1 from 1 back We've been using this system for many years now- it is multiple (in origin anyway), but completely within the realm of our philosophy (which is we aim to run power and misdirection very well, plus aim to be competent in a simple (1 read) option game and the passing game). All double slots are not created equal. This is a great point and what I like about the DS as a formation- it is not as easy to pigeonhole as some other offensive sets. Now I also did say that : I'm not trying to start an argument here OK... apparently THAT is a lie.
|
|
|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 6, 2007 11:57:10 GMT -6
God, I do love discussion!!! This is how I learn. I will say that what I want is a simple power game, good misdirection and the ability to pass at any time, anywhere on the field that we chose. We have the qb, line and receivers to do so. This is why this system appeals to me so much.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 6, 2007 13:17:33 GMT -6
we are double slot base with a zone identity this allows us to run jets, IZ, OZ, veer, trap, power, gt, gc, ga, and all sorts of mish mash of that stuff with concept passing spreading the formation in and out as we want
we are all gun
the beauty of it to me is, it has elements of option. wing-t, air raid, traditional spread, all rolled into one, that allows us to swing more towards one aspect of the playbook from year to year
but the core is still so fundamentally sound that we can add all that other stuff on top and just make it window dressing to make it appear much more complicated to a defense than it is to our kids
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 6, 2007 13:18:26 GMT -6
Outside of what plays you're running from double slot, lets talk about the advantages of the formation itself-
1. Its balanced- DCs need to play a balanced coverage and front against it. If they're not being honest (say committing an extra guy to the wide side of the field or to a run tendency) you'll see it in the box and you can make them pay for it.
2. Its fairly multiple- you can play both slots in tight as WBs, split them out, or a combination of the two. If you play them as wing backs (and they can block) you've got a nice, balanced powerful formation. If you split them out, you've got a spread formation that cleans up the box nicely. This is a great fromation from under center and in the gun.
3. Simple slot motions are great- I love being able to motion into a spread trips formation. Motion is nice- cheap to install, not so cheap to defend with coverage adjustments. Plus, I love motioning to trips; forces DCs to roll into 1-2 simple coverages, makes like easy as a coordinator. Plus, again, you see how they adjust and make them pay for it.
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Jul 6, 2007 22:21:46 GMT -6
ok.... love the discussion and have learned one thing in my 16 yrs of coaching..everyone is right if they do what they believe in.
AS a former DC all I can say is that i hated seeing balanced formation schemes (unless they had very distinct tendenancies) since you had to cover everything. One thing I wont do as an OC is run and I formation scheme since as a former DC you drew everything up against what? the I formation.
|
|
|
Post by CoachDaniel on Jul 6, 2007 23:25:18 GMT -6
I learn so much more than I can actually offer. But I agree most with coachcb's #3 - if you can motion and do several things effectively, you put a great deal of the decision making in the hands of the teenagers on the field, not the old men who think about it all the time.
Saintrad great point, I just looked at our defensive playbook. 58 pages (incredible expanding coaches version, not what the kids see) that are drawn up almost exclusively against the I. Our kids have never played in the I, and see 4 I teams a season. Those games come down to horses.
|
|
|
Post by dblwngr on Jul 6, 2007 23:36:52 GMT -6
Amen to that! Our defensive playbook is full of I form...LOL
Now add motion to the balanced offense and watch the vultures (offensive coaches in the box) pick out the weak link to our now vanilla defense.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 7, 2007 0:28:53 GMT -6
formation wise the cool thing you can do from a flex look like this is turn it into I by motion and run the same kinda stuff
good posts here fellas keep it up
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jul 7, 2007 1:39:17 GMT -6
Yes, but without a TE you will be forever outnumbered at the POA, and you will have shortened the path to the QB in passing situations.
|
|
|
Post by information on Jul 7, 2007 8:23:29 GMT -6
Coach Orr,
Maybe...but as a DC...you have to expect the slot guys to run a route....if they don't that gives them an extra guy vs your DE (if in a 5 tech). If you widen him to a 9 Tech you give up anything off tackle, plus on the pass it gives the tackle more separation on his Kick-slide...thats why it tough...they make you choose and that could put you in a bind...especially if you play a team like this early with no "tendencies" established.
|
|
jamesmthomson
Sophomore Member
www.lakewoodfootball.com
Posts: 176
|
Post by jamesmthomson on Jul 7, 2007 8:51:44 GMT -6
I am in Southern California and we have a double slot system that has been succesful for years. Last year we averaged over 350 yards/game and over 30 ppg. That being said, here are my biggest observations of the double slot:
1. The innovation of reading the backside c-gap defender on run plays turned this from a novelty finesse offense into one that really had balance. We can now run gt counter--our bread and butter play--out of double slot and I am convinced it is as good as any counter from a fullback/tight end oriented system.
2. You have to have at least one go-to wide receiver that really scares the defense. You can move him around to any of your four receiver spots, but you have to have someone who forces them to put at least one safety over the top. If the defense feels it can easily lock you up in Cover 0, you better have answers in the form of traps and screens, etc, but that makes it tough.
3. The double slot can completely take good defensive players out of the game. I remember a team 11 year ago running it (one of the first I am aware of) against the school at which I used to coach, and we had a great all-league run stopping linebacker who we had to bench in the second quarter. He just could move in space and they were smart enough to take advantage of it wherever he was--option routes, drags, picks, name it.
4. Your slot receivers especially have to be able to block. If you have interior receivers who can't block, it will really hurt your run game, period. You are putting those guys i the game in lieu of fullbacks and tight ends, so they had better be able to at least get in the way effectively, or your ability to break long runs will be severely hampered. If you have one slot receiver who is a special athlete that can run your short and occasionally intermediate routes and then also motion into a fullback spot, you can really do some special things with the defense in terms of formation and personel match ups.
5. Like all offenses, you have to have answers and they had better be good. If they __________, we will _________. I actually think the double slot is one of the easier formations from which to create answers. This is mainly due to being able to isolate personel match ups, stretch the whole field, making defenders play in space, etc.
6. Lastly, your trigger man has to be smart, not necessarily talented. Because the ability to get big plays out iof the spread is high, our trigger man's number one and two jobs are: 1. don't hurt us by turning the ball over or losing big yards and 2. Know where the ball needs to go. If you can accomplish those two things in the spread, there will be solid production.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 7, 2007 9:28:40 GMT -6
Yes, but without a TE you will be forever outnumbered at the POA, and you will have shortened the path to the QB in passing situations. lets see when in flex/double slot, we have 7 guys up there they usually have 7 or 8, we run option stuff and outnumber people with jet motions, we use the qb as a runner, we have misdirection built in, so if anything we look at the numbers game as something we will always win (at least on the whiteboard) and from a 1x1 slot position we have had as good as or better blocking with smaller/quicker guys than most any TE on the line and, we can motion those guys, and they are threats in the passing game i don't get the outnumbered at the POA argument at all
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 7, 2007 9:39:27 GMT -6
if you come out in doubles, you are evenly stretching the field (formation-wise) horizontally & vertically.
The defense has to respect that. By mere alignment / positioning they can outnumber themselves.
I don't see where a TE gives an inherent advantage, unless that PLAYER is the difference maker.
Out of double slot, you CAN run pretty much anything (doesn't mean you HAVE to) Motion in a slot to run jet, run belly, run isos, run bubbles, run your quick game, run power.
the formation, itself, is the threat.....to the defense......with all that space, you pretty much have to declare what you are going to do and WHAT the matchups will be.
You can equally run deep & quick game and run the ball effectively....the FORMATION is a multi-dimensional threat.
|
|
|
Post by coachnichols on Jul 7, 2007 16:43:56 GMT -6
what exactly are we calling the double slot? I mean, how are they lined up?
|
|
|
Post by coachjaz on Jul 7, 2007 17:03:37 GMT -6
I believe we are talking 1x1 off the tackle
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 7, 2007 17:28:17 GMT -6
I believe we are talking 1x1 off the tackle wouldn't that make them a wing?
|
|
|
Post by coachjaz on Jul 7, 2007 17:44:36 GMT -6
Thats where flexbone guys line them up. I know if you like to chuck the ball around more, you move em out further.
Technically I would call them wings if I wasnt talking about the flexbone, but the flexbone is sometimes called a double slot formation or spread option, although spread option now usually means shotgun option.
I dont want to call flexbone double wing because well that invokes images of guys lining up foot to foot and then I get queasy
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jul 7, 2007 17:47:20 GMT -6
I believe we are talking 1x1 off the tackle wouldn't that make them a wing? some refer to a "wing" as aligned off of a TE and a "slot" as aligned off of a tackle. for us, when speaking generically in reference to these terms, that is what we use. we distinguish between the two as such as it also explains the "eligibles" on the box perimeter ... i.e. a "wing" set would have 2 eligibles on the box perimeter (with box perimeter being the front line excluding split receivers)
|
|
|
Post by Coach Bruce on Jul 7, 2007 18:05:14 GMT -6
Thank you all so much. I learn so much from you. This discussion is what I was hoping for. Any suggestions for plays. I have been drawing up different counters and some flood out of motioned trips. What works best for you guys. We will have a dynamite TB and a very smart, better than avg quickness Qb with a good line (- any depth). Speed at the rec and slots is my concern. Blocking is NOT a concern. Any suggestions.
|
|