Nothing, part three

When in doubt, turn to strategery – in this case, an excellent blog post from a high school defensive coach about the questions you need to ask about how to defend trips formations.  (h/t Smart Football)

Here’s a little taste:

Question #2: Is their QB a part of their running game?

This one scenario in-and-of-itself has single handily turned the spread run game on its ear.  Before the advent of the QB run out of spread, it was sort of a “ho-hum” offense.  You knew what you were about to see, some sort of passing game and as a defense you could pin your ears back and go.  Not so much any more.  With the QB being a focal part of the offense in both zone schemes and gap schemes you now have to account for all six of the skill positions to be able to carry the football.  Also, the real nuisance in all of the new spread run game is the rebirth of the option.  Not just the double option either, the good old triple option, with veer, arc and load schemes to bound!  As DC’s we are facing a resurgence of the modern day wishbone triple option, just packaged differently.  No longer are halfbacks split in the backfield in three-point stances, but they are split out at wideout and can block, catch passes and run with the football in their hands as pitch backs.

About these ads

6 Comments

Filed under Strategery And Mechanics

6 responses to “Nothing, part three

  1. Always Someone Else's Fault

    Yeah, offenses definitely need all of the other advantages the rules committee is handing them, given how limited their schematic and athletic opportunities are.

    • Dog in Fla

      I miss the Dan Quinn the Eskimo-like Seahawk bone-crushing defense days of 14-10 and 17-14 games

      • Always Someone Else's Fault

        Nothing a pace-of-play adjustment, a few performing-enhancing drugs, and some rigorous roster management can’t cure.

        • Dog in Fla

          It is so weird to find agreement with Nick, much less Jen’s fat husband, on anything. I feel so Finebaumish when that happens.

  2. mdcgtp

    this is all part of the process of coaches innovating and adapting. While I am admittedly biased, this suggests to me is that we might be in the later stages of success of spread based offenses (particularly the run based variety), as it becomes more mainstream. I would venture to guess that a SIGNIFICANT if not OVERWHELMING majority of teams in college football are running either a run based spread or “air raid” based spread or a hybrid of such as their base offense. the good news for those teams is the simplicity of those schemes allows for very quick adoption AND more time to strive for great execution. the bad news is they don’t really teach QBs the types of things that make them very effective passers. thus, if you can take away the zone read and tackle well, these teams are in very poor shape offensively.

    Conversely, the principles we employ are not “fadish” NOR are they based upon simplicity. It takes a bit of time for our QBs to gain confidence with our play book and what Richt and Bobo are coaching them to do. That is what I like about our offense. We take no short cuts, but the pay off for getting things right is an offense like the past two years where we have a physical running game and vertical passing game. Neither of those two things are based on tempo or finesse! that said, we can always integrate a bit those two things to good results. In contract, the teams that are based on tempo and finesse can’t import power running and vertical passing because they usually don’t have the QB or the physical RB/OL combo to do it.