Consider helping MosleyTheCat keep the web hosting hamsters fed and happy. Please Donate.

Author Topic: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone  (Read 3114 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline coachnick

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1921
  • Total likes: 17
  • offense dw defense gambler
  • Coaching: High School
  • Offense: Multiple
Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« on: December 18, 2014, 07:33:09 AM »
many of the posts I have read about defending the flexbone actually has the "read" take care of the fb...meaning since we are a double eagle front and the 3 tech is squeezing down the qb "reading " will take care of the dive as it will be a pull read.  Mike would be on qb? anyone have thoughts on this?  I mean our read all year would be the fb for Mike. Now verses the flexbone we would change it up?    Also what blitzes do you like vs a flexbone team that runs inside and outside veer. midline, counter, veer pass, and some belly

Offline CoachCalande

  • Moderator
  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7999
  • Total likes: 727
  • Its never been "My bad"
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: 46
  • Offense: Double Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2014, 08:29:41 AM »
many of the posts I have read about defending the flexbone actually has the "read" take care of the fb...meaning since we are a double eagle front and the 3 tech is squeezing down the qb "reading " will take care of the dive as it will be a pull read.  Mike would be on qb? anyone have thoughts on this?  I mean our read all year would be the fb for Mike. Now verses the flexbone we would change it up?    Also what blitzes do you like vs a flexbone team that runs inside and outside veer. midline, counter, veer pass, and some belly

A gap dive by fullback would be your trouble spot, in addition to the possibility that your 3 tech is undisciplined or misses a tackle. Falcon on qb....going to get a free running shot with no block on him.
MOJO    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtcRmKnRcsA

Go to WWW.COACHCALANDE.COM  for Double Wing DVDs, Playbook, Drills Manuals, Practice footage and emagazines. Ask me about our new 38 special dvds!

Offline bignose

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 892
  • Total likes: 225
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: 3-5-3
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Retired
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #2 on: December 18, 2014, 09:10:15 AM »
If you can stop the FB Dive with 3 players, your 3-0-3, the Inside Veer is no good. But realistically, there are going to be at least 4 offensive men accounting for them, and a 5 th man to block the MLB.
This is what teams tried to do in the late 1990s from the Miami 4-3 defens: the 3 and 1 tech, plus the MLB were responsible for the FB. They could switch up between the DE and  OLB taking the QB, and the safety playing pass to pitch.

Worked O.K. is you had Ray Lewis at  MLB.

And then the  Flexbone teams started running Mid-line instead of Veer, and it negated this defense.

The 4-3 with the Safeties inverting from a 4 across look gave the Veer play issues, as well.

From the Double Iggle look, as we had discussed on Steve's site, the Mid-line keep will be a problem. The FS is not accounted for in the Mid-line blocking scheme, although the Slot can inside release-a seal block- looking from OLB to FS.

And, BTW, the squeezing 3 tech is dealt with by running plays other than Inside Veer. As before, Mid-line, Counter Trap Option, and Belly Option (double Option with FB fake off tackle) are examples of plays that could be run agains the  46 Defense.
You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles!

Offline bignose

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 892
  • Total likes: 225
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: 3-5-3
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Retired
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2014, 11:12:37 AM »
I always figured that when defending a good Flexbone team, you need to assign 4 defenders to the Dive (minimum) and one on each side to the QB, the Pitch , and the Deep 1/3-Pass. This allows you to have a FS who is responsible for the Deep Seam to Run Alley, late.
Otherwise you have issues.
Problem is, of course is that you have 5 offensive men blocking for the dive, one blocking for either the QB or the Pitch man, and one threatening deep every play.

As we have discussed ad nauseum, you need at 13 defenders to be sound if the team can throw.
You have two potential receivers to the front side and the defender covering the #2 receiver usually has a dual role, and is conflict. Or if you are in a Cover 2 the man covering #1 has the same issue.
Yeah, I know you are going to be in Cover 1 or 0 and your defenders are going to beat my blockers every play.

Depends on who has the chalk last.

If it was that easy, other than by having superior personnel, there would be that "magic defense" that stops the Flexbone.
Yeah, teams that have 20 practices can scheme it up before a Bowl game, but we don't have that luxury at our level. At most we have 3-4 days and only if you are a two platoon team.
The Triple Option theory has been around since the mid 1960's, and it's still sound.
You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles!

Offline coachnick

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1921
  • Total likes: 17
  • offense dw defense gambler
  • Coaching: High School
  • Offense: Multiple
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2014, 11:57:46 AM »
this flexbone is a pian in my ass to defend--

Offline NFCBeast

  • Copper
  • Posts: 6
  • Total likes: 0
  • Coaching: College
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2016, 09:40:02 PM »
If you can stop the FB Dive with 3 players, your 3-0-3, the Inside Veer is no good. But realistically, there are going to be at least 4 offensive men accounting for them, and a 5 th man to block the MLB.
This is what teams tried to do in the late 1990s from the Miami 4-3 defens: the 3 and 1 tech, plus the MLB were responsible for the FB. They could switch up between the DE and  OLB taking the QB, and the safety playing pass to pitch.

Worked O.K. is you had Ray Lewis at  MLB.

And then the  Flexbone teams started running Mid-line instead of Veer, and it negated this defense.

The 4-3 with the Safeties inverting from a 4 across look gave the Veer play issues, as well.

From the Double Iggle look, as we had discussed on Steve's site, the Mid-line keep will be a problem. The FS is not accounted for in the Mid-line blocking scheme, although the Slot can inside release-a seal block- looking from OLB to FS.

And, BTW, the squeezing 3 tech is dealt with by running plays other than Inside Veer. As before, Mid-line, Counter Trap Option, and Belly Option (double Option with FB fake off tackle) are examples of plays that could be run agains the  46 Defense.
Have to disagree that the flexbone negated the Miami 4-3 defense. If you get a chance, watch the 2010 Orange Bowl to see how the Miami 4-3 defended the flexbone if you don't believe me. 4-3 over cover 4 can deal with flexbone. All depends on who has better athletes but the Miami 4-3 can shutdown flexbone.
NFCBeast

Offline NFCBeast

  • Copper
  • Posts: 6
  • Total likes: 0
  • Coaching: College
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2016, 09:53:41 PM »
By the way, I wouldn't say Iowa had way better athletes than Georgia Tech that year. But they out gained them by well over 200 yards and Georgia Tech didn't even have 200 yards of total offense. That was one of the best teams Paul Johnson has ever had at Georgia Tech. Iowa's defense totally dominated them in that game.

Offline NFCBeast

  • Copper
  • Posts: 6
  • Total likes: 0
  • Coaching: College
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Mike on fb in base gambler vs flexbone
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2016, 12:13:25 AM »
All comes down to block down, step down, spill and wrong arm techniques to deal with triple option. Take away fullback and force the QB to pitch and then run down to the outside.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2016, 12:35:47 AM by NFCBeast »