|
Post by WB22 on Jan 23, 2008 10:37:03 GMT -6
I'm stuck..don't know whether to get in a two-point stance (sacrificing pass set, to an extent) or a three-point stance (sacrificing leverage, etc.). I'm looking for either 1) how to come out with greater force & leverage from a two-point stance, or 2)how to pass set more effectively out of a three-point stance. Thanks. *We are a spread team that throws about half the time, but want to run the ball more consistently.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jan 23, 2008 11:19:14 GMT -6
WHY NOT USE 3 POINT STANCES WITH ONLY 25% OF THE WT ON THE FINGERS?
|
|
|
Post by realdawg on Jan 23, 2008 12:00:00 GMT -6
When you run the ball are you a zone team? If you are most of your first movements are lateral, so why not just be in a two? Its not like you have to be cocked and locked like you are running power or iso.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 23, 2008 12:34:36 GMT -6
Leverage in both pass and run comes from the hips. The reason, to be in a two point stance is for better vision and to help defeat defensive ends with NFL and D1 college speed. If you do not do any five or seven step drops, then there is little need for the two point stance. I am not sure you even need a two point for the gun, but I know many Gun teams do. I guess it would depend on what your Draw/ screen/ pass ratio is to the running the football is (lead, power, veer etc.)
I would prefer a three point stance and when coming into a pass set and I would emphasize that the lineman do not hunch the soulders or straighten the legs when coming out of his stance. The progression of the pass progression steps should not be done from an upright or hunched position.
If you ever watch some of the NFL guys (I know there is one on youtube of the Giants online coach) teaching the step progression out of the two point you will see that they are trying to shorten the path to the QB and not give up the inside. I simply teach a bigger first step from a three point to perform essentially the same function.
|
|
|
Post by onthemarkfootball on Jan 23, 2008 17:07:58 GMT -6
I feel the same as coachorr. The three point stance will reduce the ability of the defense to key your run and pass tendencies. We found success in keying the"hand weight" and stance this past season and audible'd as necessary.
I also teach a quick hard step to allow the OL get to the point of contact in the proper position. I stress the quick feet action in the past set with a low stance (head on a swivel). Most guys who struggle in this area employ a chopping feet action after the hard step and then explode and roll their hips as they make contact.
|
|
|
Post by fcsdawg55 on Jan 23, 2008 18:00:09 GMT -6
If you ever watch some of the NFL guys (I know there is one on youtube of the Giants online coach)
Coach is Jim McNally and he has a whole O-Line tape that is awesome. I know in college we got a lot of our drills from that tape and watched it a fair amount in the off-season to help us see how its suppose to be done. If you can get your hands on it its a great tape.
|
|
|
Post by lionhart on Jan 24, 2008 17:49:07 GMT -6
we are a spread gun team and we are always in a two point stance. we align as far OFF the ball as possibel, to help our zone scheme. we like the two point because our ol seem to see things better (blitzes, stemming,etc) and also, it allows us to "hide the ball" an extra second on the qb/rb exchange.... this is especially helpful on the zone read. our line have said its the best thing we've ever done, and they really love not putting their hand down. we drill them to death on keeping their hips down and moving their feet. we lost nothing in our pass protection or our run blocking, and the separation we created by having or ol as far off the ball as possible really was a plus.
|
|
|
Post by coachgregory on Jan 24, 2008 20:46:39 GMT -6
This is for youth level but you can teach a two point (really modified 3pt) for kids that don't have strong enough cores or lower body strength to consistently get out of three point stance in an explosive manner or simply lack the coordination to do so. Most kids will simply stand straight up or drop their butt then drive up ward when they have poor core and/or lower body strength or they lack proper coordination to do so. By doing so they lose that first step and really generate very little power. By moving the center of gravity back near the front of the navel vice under the stomach (via the 3 pt) you allow them more control over their movement. Power is generater from the body into the ground back through the body doesn't so it really doesn't matter if it comes from a 3 pt or a 2pt. The only advantage is the 3 pt will get the linemen slightly lower then the 2 pt...but if the linemen is executing technique correctly and keeping his chest near his knees on his first step (our load step) then that is irrelevent as he unloads on the explode step through the defender. Here is an example of how it looks compared to a murphy 3 pt stance: 2pt stance 3pt stance Jack
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 25, 2008 0:59:44 GMT -6
Can I help ya?
I am not sure I see what needs to happen in these stances.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 25, 2008 6:55:12 GMT -6
I have only ever taught one stance; in every offense I have run (veer, spread, Pro-I formation, etc..)
Three point stance with 50-50 weight distribution front to back. I don't want to sacrifice a low pad level for ANYTHING. Our passing game consists of PA, 3 Step, and Sprint Out; our pass protection schemes involve aggressive initial footwork.
If we ran more 5 step stuff, I would still keep them in a three point stance; but I would pull 25% of the weight off of their hands.
|
|
|
Post by coachgregory on Jan 25, 2008 8:56:00 GMT -6
Coach Orr,
Actually neither one well get steam rolled. There stances are correct. We use a balanced stanced that puts very little weight on the upper body which allows us to move in various directions. We want the compact so that they are loaded and ready to fire off the los as the ball is snapped.
I have never seen a kid get steam rolled while in the stance if they are in it properly.
Jack
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 25, 2008 12:29:56 GMT -6
Sorry about the negative comments, I was really having a bad day yesterday. My sincerest apologies, but I do see many problems with these stances.
|
|
|
Post by coachgregory on Jan 25, 2008 16:09:21 GMT -6
No problem Coach. I just noticed that I posted the wrong 3 point stance... I had two one was what not to do and one was correct.
The one now on the board is the correct Murphy 3pt stance. I had the other one to use as a contrast and both were labeled the same in my folder and I got them confused when I downloaded them...my fault. I should have looked at the picture before I posting reply...
The two point we use is fundamentally sound from a movement and power generation stand point. Since contact is not made until the second or even third step it is all a matter of proper foot work and body mechanics. The stance reduces the need to "get up" from his stance if the player has a weak core/lower body. It puts him in a loaded position and simply has to complete the LOAD on his first step and then UNLOAD on his second step. We teach numbers on the knees so on his first step his back doesn't raise at all in fact we tell them as they load their arms their chest should lower when their foot makes contact with the ground.
Secondly and most importantly for us we don't drive block we angle block, pull, trap, cut, wedge, and pass pro all of which are multi-lateral movements. The two point essentially speeds up our linemen when they move laterally because it eliminates one phase of the movement progression in a 3 point stance...
Jack
|
|
|
Post by lionhart on Jan 25, 2008 21:10:51 GMT -6
put them in the chutes EVERY DAY in the offseason in a two pt stance.... you will NEVER have a problem with pad-level
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 25, 2008 21:26:09 GMT -6
One of the biggest keyes that I overlooked for many years regardless of 2pt or 3pt is this: Knock their knees slightly i.e. their knees should be inside their feet. This places the weight on the inside halves of their feet which gives them much more leverage for that first step.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 25, 2008 23:34:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 25, 2008 23:45:53 GMT -6
Boards and speed chutes are the two tools.
|
|
|
Post by lionhart on Jan 26, 2008 20:43:05 GMT -6
the two pt stance pictured can be tweaked a little, in my opinion. i would have him tuck his elbow in tight to his ribs, and either place his hands on the outside of his kneecaps or forearms on thighs. he looks like hes ready to explode, and we teach explosion on second step, not first. the school i saw that does the best job in the 2 pt is toledo... they even are in a 2 pt stance on the goalline, and they do just fine. looks like you can place a glass of wine on each ol back and not have it spill. elbows tight, hips low... very well coached in my opinion
|
|
|
Post by coachgregory on Jan 26, 2008 21:22:10 GMT -6
Leverage comes from the instep of the foot. I have heard that stated before but I don't think it is actually a fact. Considering the foot is a power transfer/shock absorber if you look at the foot the forefoot, mainly the ball of the foot, is the point of propulsion while the midfoot is the shock absorber and a big portion of the force transfer mechanism. Having a player isolate the instep, in my opinion, reduces the full power transfer/shock absorbation of the foot and also reduces the ability of the subtalar joint (the three joints that make up the hindfoot). when you move laterally I can see you pushing off on the instep but in most cases it is the ball of the foot (not a specific point) that should make contact with ground. If you tell a player to isolate the instep is knees will bow inward and in my opinion that is dangerous to the subtalar joint and knee joint as it would isolate the surrounding stablizer muscles and reduce their ability to stablize those joints (there by weakening them with undo stress from an unnatural movement pattern). Just my opinion though. I think a more true statement is that leverage is attained by maintaining seven cleats on the ground (or keeping the heel on the ground as you step to maintain a wider base on the foot and thus more force absorbed through the foot). Also if you maintain seven cleats it forces the lower body to stay partially loaded and thus increasing leverage. The second three point stance is more close to how it should be....in my opinion, which is just that. What I would say, however, is that A. he is too far forward and B his feet are too narrow. One adjustment that I like from the original picture is that he has moved his hand down foot back a bit to allow him to put his hand down rather than reach across his knee. [/qoute] I teach my kids to have their feet as wide as their arm pits but if they like the can widen or reduce as long as the foot breaks the plane of the arm pit. In either case the base is wide enough to transfer power explosively while still being stable...bearing in mind that as he steps his base will widen as he takes a 6 inch power step. I agree that he has a little to much weight on his forward hand I like to see a 70/30 split in weight with the majority being in his lower body as we move in multiple directions. I like to tell my guys that they need to have weight on the hand but not too much weight. Two ways to go about this, one have them in the normal two point stance with forearms on the thighpad, then simly place the hand down. Then as a coach you should be able to knock the hand away and the player does not fall forward. That is what we teach.
|
|
|
Post by coachgregory on Jan 26, 2008 21:32:03 GMT -6
the two pt stance pictured can be tweaked a little, in my opinion. i would have him tuck his elbow in tight to his ribs, and either place his hands on the outside of his kneecaps or forearms on thighs. he looks like hes ready to explode, and we teach explosion on second step, not first. the school i saw that does the best job in the 2 pt is toledo... they even are in a 2 pt stance on the goalline, and they do just fine. looks like you can place a glass of wine on each ol back and not have it spill. elbows tight, hips low... very well coached in my opinion Coach, I tend to not stress about the arms. I tell my kids to pre- {censored} (load) their arms as if they are a gunfighter. Which is exactly what they do. If he brings his elbows in tight or places them the forearms on the thighs, hands on the knee caps my experience is they rise up and I don't want the high I want them loaded. Kids tend to fatigue much faster then high schoolers so you have to put them in stances that they will be able to maintain for the entire game. We use a teaching progression called LOAD-EXPLODE-GO Essentially it means LOAD - take a 6 inch power step with the near foot, keep your numbers on your knees (back should never rise), load the arms fully,. Aim the foot for the spot in front of the far big toe when angle blocking. EXPLODE - take a 6 inch power step with the far foot, unload your body from the ball of the feet all the way up into the near palm and far forearm into the defender. Eyes lock on the far arm pit. GO - Go through the defender - take a third 6 inch power step with the near foot and every step there after driving the defender down the track. We teach that contact is more then likely made on the second step and the first is their load step. In a two point I want my kids pre-loaded so they stay low and as they take that first power step they power stomp and load their arms so that on their explode step they will fully unload. I have had a lot of success with the stance we use it at all phases on offense to include goal line and short yardage. Helps to speed up our big kids and give them an advantage in get off. Jack
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 26, 2008 21:56:03 GMT -6
Looks pretty good. Especially, the two point stance. I really like the terminology. Basics is KEY. Very nice.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 26, 2008 21:57:59 GMT -6
Oh, BTW, the leverage comment is not mine, I got it from the former BSU oline coach, who is now with the Bills. It is what I have used and it has made sense to me, so I have just stuck with it.
|
|
|
Post by lionhart on Jan 26, 2008 22:22:47 GMT -6
coachgreg, i agree with your load idea... we use it too. we also teach that contact will be initiated on the second step. so, using that theory, we dont feel the need to " {censored}" the arms or "load" them BEFORE we step. again, i dont see how arm placement can influence whether a kid sets too high or not, i would have to watch how its being taught. we have our kids cup their hand sover the outside of their kneecap, elbows bent and tucked. why the elbows tucked? its very simple... if your arns are at more of a right angle, the power increases. this is why we always tell our linemen... whoever gets thjeir hand inside will win the battle. its the whole point of handfighting drills. same reason why wide-grip bench presses are harder than regular grip. so if the kids hands go from kneecaps to "holster" , or loaded position, with the elbows tight... he will be exploding with maximum force into the center mass (hopefully of the defender. we also keep the elbows tight because if we are pass blocking, our hands automatically come in tight to deliver a "punch", and keep the defensers hands off our numbers/chestplate. that being said, ive never coached younger kids and have no idea if what i do would work with them.
|
|
kw
Freshmen Member
Posts: 87
|
Post by kw on Jan 26, 2008 22:24:58 GMT -6
I have to agree with the coach that said that kid has too much weight forward. That kid cannot move efficiently in 8 possible directions because that is not a balanced stance. Just look at his five finger bridge. There is no way that kid can pick up his hand with out losing his balance. A balanced staggered stance is imperative. A balanced staggered stance will allow for proper weight distribution on all three points (feet and down hand).
Also, I have to disagree with you about the balls of the feet. You want them to squeeze the knees and the weight is distributed on the mid-foot or instep, which is below the balls of the foot. Kids who are on the balls of their feet tend to play on the balls of their feet and in turn they will loose balance and power. You want them to play on the mid-foot not on the balls of the feet and not flat footed. An important key is that the weight is distributed on the insteps or the mid-foot below the balls of the feet. If linemen play flat footed they will stick and stay becoming unexplosive. Therefore, poor body angles along with poor weight distribution will defuse the power need to generate an effective block. Also, I don’t understand why that kid has his off arm so far away from his body? When run blocking you have a position step and a power step, you have a lead leg and a drive leg.
COMPONENTS OF THE 3 POINT STANCE: 1. Feet shoulder width. 2. Instep to toe or heel relationship (45 degree stagger). The stagger will put the body in a configuration that will generate the most power. 3. Squeeze the knees. 4. Toes are aligned straight ahead with weight on the insteps of the feet (the mid-foot or right below the balls of the feet). 5. Flat back, parallel to the ground. 6. Five finger bridge. 7. Off arm is placed on the outside of the knee with hand open and ready to strike, but relaxed. The elbow of the off hand is placed outside the knee, which will square the shoulders. Hand is open and relaxed ready to strike the defender. 8. Look through the eyebrows, scan the defense 180 degrees.
kw
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 26, 2008 23:10:49 GMT -6
Well, KW; I have to agree. What you are saying is what I do. As far as youth or coachgreg, I cannot say. I like how he breaks down the progression, but what he is saying is not what the pictures are showing. I just thought I was the only one noticing this. I just tell kids to hav their hands on their thighs, having the arm up is like trying to gunfight with your hand up before you draw your gun. And I say this because I gunfight so often.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 26, 2008 23:19:09 GMT -6
kw--without knowing what someone is asking of a player, how can one say that the stance is too heavy on the hand. Perhaps the coach does not ask the player to move in 8 possible directions.
|
|
kw
Freshmen Member
Posts: 87
|
Post by kw on Jan 26, 2008 23:38:12 GMT -6
The terminology I use is load your guns and deliver a blow. As far as the footwork I tell them it is toe, instep. My guys will get a protractor and measure the six inches, so I tell them toe, instep. It gives them a visual. Contact should always be made on the second step. You have a position step and a power step (1 step position, 2nd power, 3rd step plus maintain your base of support). Power and leverage is generated from the hips. You play football with your legs and your a$$ and you are always after two types of leverage, hand and pad.
kw
|
|
kw
Freshmen Member
Posts: 87
|
Post by kw on Jan 26, 2008 23:51:21 GMT -6
You are right. I guess that all depends what level you are at. Those are youth kids? How many directions do they have to move out of a 3 point stance, I don't know? Maybe a youth coach can answer that.
kw
|
|
|
Post by luvdemlinemen on Jan 27, 2008 0:46:23 GMT -6
youth linemen have to move in the same directions older players do... Coach 8th grade, everything from straight up dive/blast I to zone/power/counter to wing t and would never have a kid in a stance with his hips higher than his shoulder pads. Cant do much of anything other than straight out goal line style power block, forget down blocks, pulls or even pass sets...all staples of youth blocking schemes...
off hand is in a good position if they teach a flipper technique, though not too many youth teams teach that anymore...
|
|
iso
Freshmen Member
Posts: 78
|
Post by iso on Jan 27, 2008 7:05:21 GMT -6
My two cents:
Young kids should learn the fundamental three point stance - they can stand up later
Although there are slight variations, if you have linemen going both ways, there is some consistency in their stances when flipping from offense to defense if their offensive stance is a three point
|
|