|
|
Post by Coach Bennett on Mar 14, 2021 20:14:45 GMT -6
If you align your defensive front to field/boundary, do you do the same for your offense? Why or why not? E.g. "Field offensive tackle" and "Boundary offensive tackle"
|
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Mar 14, 2021 20:21:41 GMT -6
I never really thought about it, but probably because kids have a hard enough time remembering what they do on plays when they stay in one side. I don't think most kids have the brain power to process what to do on counter for both left and right guard/tackle.
I mean, probably 80%+ of our WRs couldn't remember what route they were supposed to run amd we had a passing tree with only 8 options for our passing game.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 14, 2021 21:03:52 GMT -6
In college, we had a "strong" side and a "quick" side. The ST and SG would always line up on the right side and the QT and QG would always line up on the left side unless the formation was called "left". In that case, ST and SG lined up on the left side and QT and QG lined up on the right side.
What was unique about the system is that the playcalling terminology followed the players. So, even-numbered holes were always to the strong side and odd numbered holes were always to the quick side, regardless of whether they lined up on the right or left side.
Example: our off-tackle play to the strong side was called "24". 2 back through the 4 hole. We usually ran it to the right. But if the formation was called "Left 24" in the huddle,ST and SG would line up on the left side and the play would be run to the left.
It was initially confusing because virtually all high school players equate odd numbered holes to the left and even numbered holes to the right, but eventually it made a lot of sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 15, 2021 5:03:17 GMT -6
If you look back in the day when heavyer personnel was normal you had the adjusments based on field/hash. Strong side opposite of the passing side, but without flipping linemen.
Now it is harder with all those spreads sets, but it is doable when you have a TE, at least. I prefer, now wiser (I hope so lol) and older, instead of the H-Back because it is easier to predict and adjust.
Wouldnt be harder to communicate if you did both? Harder to make the players stick with it? By no means I think it is a bad idea, actually think thats a good food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 15, 2021 5:05:50 GMT -6
I never really thought about it, but probably because kids have a hard enough time remembering what they do on plays when they stay in one side. I don't think most kids have the brain power to process what to do on counter for both left and right guard/tackle. I mean, probably 80%+ of our WRs couldn't remember what route they were supposed to run amd we had a passing tree with only 8 options for our passing game. It is funny, the freakest skill player I've ever seen, if wasnt by an ugly motorcycle accident he would have a good shot to be selected on nfl international pathway program, that wasnt american couldnt remember his route most of the time. And he wasnt dumb or anything, just always forgot. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 15, 2021 9:19:59 GMT -6
A lot of teams do though.
Remember offense dictates where the play is going, defense for lack of a better word is just guessing.
When a defense tilts or aligns to the field they are guessing the offense is going that way. From all my years of running hudl reports, many teams DO have a clear wide side tendency in their offensive play calls.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Mar 16, 2021 12:57:36 GMT -6
If you align your defensive front to field/boundary, do you do the same for your offense? Why or why not? E.g. "Field offensive tackle" and "Boundary offensive tackle" What would be the advantage? Defenses do it to put their personnel where they want them, not where the offense wants them. In HS wide side is important. The offense can put their players wherever they want to, though. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 16, 2021 14:53:12 GMT -6
My boss has his entire based on the field. His "entire" what? Reading your posts is like trying to solve a "Wheel of Fortune" puzzle without the vowels. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Mar 16, 2021 15:13:18 GMT -6
My boss has his entire based on the field. His "entire" what? Reading your posts is like trying to solve a "Wheel of Fortune" puzzle without the vowels. Except that on Wheel you can buy one. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Mar 16, 2021 15:54:50 GMT -6
My boss has his entire based on the field. His "entire" what? Reading your posts is like trying to solve a "Wheel of Fortune" puzzle without the vowels. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 16, 2021 16:49:15 GMT -6
In college, we had a "strong" side and a "quick" side. The ST and SG would always line up on the right side and the QT and QG would always line up on the left side unless the formation was called "left". In that case, ST and SG lined up on the left side and QT and QG lined up on the right side. What was unique about the system is that the playcalling terminology followed the players. So, even-numbered holes were always to the strong side and odd numbered holes were always to the quick side, regardless of whether they lined up on the right or left side. Example: our off-tackle play to the strong side was called "24". 2 back through the 4 hole. We usually ran it to the right. But if the formation was called "Left 24" in the huddle,ST and SG would line up on the left side and the play would be run to the left. It was initially confusing because virtually all high school players equate odd numbered holes to the left and even numbered holes to the right, but eventually it made a lot of sense. Very similar here in HS. Deleware wing T plays (but not terminology). Numbered Players. Base had 2,4,6 (G,T,TE) on the Right and 3&5 (G and T) on left. When the formation call had an "over" then the 2,4,and 6 (G,T,TE) were on the left etc. To answer the OPs question, I don't know if having pre set FIELD/BOUNDARY based players or alignments on offense provides any real plusses. |
|
|
|
Post by coachlit on Mar 16, 2021 18:07:30 GMT -6
I was just watching a glazier video from Tony Annese at Ferris State and their outside receivers are field and boundary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 19, 2021 6:28:55 GMT -6
My boss has his entire based on the field. His "entire" what? Reading your posts is like trying to solve a "Wheel of Fortune" puzzle without the vowels. Thats unnecessary, I dont agree with most of his posts but there is no reason for that one. You can always assume entire (offense). Or just ask. The world is a little better place after the Snyder Cut's release lol |
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 19, 2021 6:32:23 GMT -6
I was just watching a glazier video from Tony Annese at Ferris State and their outside receivers are field and boundary. Interesting approach if you have those Johnny Featherweight at receivers. More room for some routes and time to adjust for the hits. Starting and/or ending. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 19, 2021 6:43:23 GMT -6
His "entire" what? Reading your posts is like trying to solve a "Wheel of Fortune" puzzle without the vowels. Thats unnecessary, I dont agree with most of his posts but there is no reason for that one. You can always assume entire (offense). Or just ask. The world is a little better place after the Snyder Cut's release lol I disagree, and so did at least three other posters ("likes"). Why assume offense? Why not defense? Or special teams? How about @coachpithy stating explicitly what he means? And what does "Snyder Cut's release" have to with anything here? That reads like something @coachpithy would post. |
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 19, 2021 6:52:06 GMT -6
Thats unnecessary, I dont agree with most of his posts but there is no reason for that one. You can always assume entire (offense). Or just ask. The world is a little better place after the Snyder Cut's release lol I disagree, and so did at least one other poster. Why assume offense? Why not defense? Or special teams? How about @coachpithy stating explicitly what he means? And what does "Snyder Cut's release" have to with anything here? That reads like something @coachpithy would post. I dont have a dog in this fight, but that last sentence a lot of coaches are in the same target audience of the movie. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 19, 2021 7:03:29 GMT -6
I disagree, and so did at least one other poster. Why assume offense? Why not defense? Or special teams? How about @coachpithy stating explicitly what he means? And what does "Snyder Cut's release" have to with anything here? That reads like something @coachpithy would post. I dont have a dog in this fight, but that last sentence a lot of coaches are in the same target audience of the movie. You joined the "fight" of your own volition, but regardless of that - What does the movie have to do with Field/boundary offense (or defense), the topic of this thread? |
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Mar 19, 2021 7:47:15 GMT -6
Thats unnecessary, I dont agree with most of his posts but there is no reason for that one. You can always assume entire (offense). Or just ask. The world is a little better place after the Snyder Cut's release lol I disagree, and so did at least three other posters ("likes"). Why assume offense? Why not defense? Or special teams? How about @coachpithy stating explicitly what he means? And what does "Snyder Cut's release" have to with anything here? That reads like something @coachpithy would post. The question is were you genuinely seeking to find understanding in his post or were you just trying to point out his inefficiency to derail the topic into a spiral of personal attacks. If you think his posts slow the productivity of the conversation, does pointing out your criticism of it help to improve the effective dialogue? |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 19, 2021 7:50:29 GMT -6
I disagree, and so did at least three other posters ("likes"). Why assume offense? Why not defense? Or special teams? How about @coachpithy stating explicitly what he means? And what does "Snyder Cut's release" have to with anything here? That reads like something @coachpithy would post. The question is were you genuinely seeking to find understanding in his post or were you just trying to point out his inefficiency to derail the topic into a spiral of personal attacks. If you think his posts slow the productivity of the conversation, does pointing out your criticism of it help to improve the effective dialogue? 1) The former. 2) Hopefully yes, if he takes it to heart (as coachd5085 also pointed out in a different thread). |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Mar 19, 2021 8:37:55 GMT -6
I was just watching a glazier video from Tony Annese at Ferris State and their outside receivers are field and boundary. Interesting approach if you have those Johnny Featherweight at receivers. More room for some routes and time to adjust for the hits. Starting and/or ending. And you might not even have to teach certain routes if that's how you move your receivers. Immediate example is your boundary WR probably isn't going to run too many deep outs. No need to have him spend a ton of time repping something he isn't going to do. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Mar 19, 2021 8:44:34 GMT -6
I can see setting up your offense so that you have your better WRs to the field and weaker ones to the boundary. But, it wouldn't need to be done with tags; just simplifying your formation tags and player alignment. Have your best WRs aligned to the same side of the formation the majority of the time and then just call it as such.
As far as the OL goes, having a quick and strong side of the OL is great if your blocking schemes dictate it. You just have to be careful with tendencies. For example, we were an IZ/OZ/Power/Counter team and our quick guard was our best OL. IZ went his way the majority of the time and Power/Counter went away from him (he was pulling). It was an easy read for the LBs; that guard tells you where the play is always going..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2021 8:51:12 GMT -6
On offense, we set everything to the field unless. We have it, the unless, we don’t use it. It’s for coaches more than the kids but eliminates word from call. Blue(personnel) trips(formation) ninja(play)
|
|
|
|
Post by macdiiddy on Mar 19, 2021 9:43:55 GMT -6
We call our strength to the field. It helps as the defense already knows where they are lining up and there is not a big flip of bodies. Additionally it naturally gives multiple looks to each play and each formation.
When you set the front to the TE. It can make it easy to say we are always going to run trap strong because that is where the 3 tech will be.
We also base out of a 4-3 under front. Which allows our Sam to displace outside of the box. By setting our strength to the field this allows him to better adjust to white splits.
But I think the greatest strength of doing this, is making it difficult for the OC to figure out where certain shades are in a given formation. Because it changes play to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Mar 19, 2021 9:50:00 GMT -6
We call our strength to the field. It helps as the defense already knows where they are lining up and there is not a big flip of bodies. Additionally it naturally gives multiple looks to each play and each formation. When you set the front to the TE. It can make it easy to say we are always going to run trap strong because that is where the 3 tech will be. We also base out of a 4-3 under front. Which allows our Sam to displace outside of the box. By setting our strength to the field this allows him to better adjust to white splits. But I think the greatest strength of doing this, is making it difficult for the OC to figure out where certain shades are in a given formation. Because it changes play to play. Trap to a 1 tech and a 4 or 5 (trap the 4 or 5) is a fantastic play. |
|
|
|
Post by Victor on Mar 19, 2021 14:25:18 GMT -6
We call our strength to the field. It helps as the defense already knows where they are lining up and there is not a big flip of bodies. Additionally it naturally gives multiple looks to each play and each formation. When you set the front to the TE. It can make it easy to say we are always going to run trap strong because that is where the 3 tech will be. We also base out of a 4-3 under front. Which allows our Sam to displace outside of the box. By setting our strength to the field this allows him to better adjust to white splits. But I think the greatest strength of doing this, is making it difficult for the OC to figure out where certain shades are in a given formation. Because it changes play to play. Trap to a 1 tech and a 4 or 5 (trap the 4 or 5) is a fantastic play. Trap is fantastic everytime when it is well called haha |
|
CoachF
Junior Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 378
|
Post by CoachF on Mar 19, 2021 18:13:01 GMT -6
I think it’s important especially given hash marks in college and high school.
Most RPO heavy teams place their single receiver to the boundary and utilize the field for their post snap stuff. Can do vice versa and make the matchup that much more obvious.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachlit on Mar 21, 2021 11:56:11 GMT -6
I also got a coach tube class, about using 1 word play calls for quick game. In that offense, the coach has a left and right wide out who stay put. The slot receiver type goes to the field and their TE type goes to the boundary. In 3x1 the TE is #3.
It seemed to work really well since the kids knew where to line up automatically after a snap: they assumed it would be 2x2 which allowed them to be a lot more up tempo than a team that flips.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 22, 2021 7:44:34 GMT -6
or
you could just call a formation how you wanted it.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2021 7:55:36 GMT -6
Anybody align in more than one way? Boundary/field? To/away run/pass strength?
|
|
SconnieOC
Junior Member
Just here to learn the facemelter
Posts: 408
|
Post by SconnieOC on Mar 22, 2021 8:05:21 GMT -6
I can see setting up your offense so that you have your better WRs to the field and weaker ones to the boundary. But, it wouldn't need to be done with tags; just simplifying your formation tags and player alignment. Have your best WRs aligned to the same side of the formation the majority of the time and then just call it as such. As far as the OL goes, having a quick and strong side of the OL is great if your blocking schemes dictate it. You just have to be careful with tendencies. For example, we were an IZ/OZ/Power/Counter team and our quick guard was our best OL. IZ went his way the majority of the time and Power/Counter went away from him (he was pulling). It was an easy read for the LBs; that guard tells you where the play is always going.. I guess we technically do this with our formations. Our X is generally our best WR, and I want him to the boundary so he has more 1 on 1 opportunities. We have other formations that move him around, and we can always just call it the other way, but I want our fastest slot kid to the field, and our best guy to the boundary 95% of the time. Now nothing about this is unique, but you can easily designate your formations to be a field/boundary team if you wanted to make it really simple. I could see some merit, but I don't think it's worth the investment to be F/B with your OL |
|
