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

Author Topic: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense  (Read 6988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ronin

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1493
  • Total likes: 274
  • Work hard! Play hard!
  • Coaching: 11 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2015, 08:55:05 AM »
Have you looked into the GAM?  It is a 10-1 Defense that adjusts according to your opponent.  Works great at the youth level.  It is a great pressure defense that is MMP friendly.

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2015, 09:33:43 AM »
There's more info here then most coaches have available for the 10.

There is no playbook for the 10 that I'm aware of besides

http://www.texas10defense.com/

What I've put together I almost regret because now it opens up more issues. But all this was shared with me so I feel obligated to return the favor.

Most don't Wana take my advice from the defense...that's fine... talk to jon carbon or superpower at hueys... or call up butch ford or his son at celina.

In youth with the 10 you only need 3 cover guys... even in spread depending on age.

But if you face spread get out the 10
"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline parone

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 766
  • Total likes: 122
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2015, 10:01:46 AM »
This year I'm coaching 11 yo and I feel we could handle the spread based on what I saw last year. I am eager to look at your material Zach. I have no problem taking advice from anyone who has experience, since I have zero.
Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2015, 10:12:19 AM »
You only need 2 calls based on eligible receivers

First call (10 cover 1) : 3 cover men not including mike backer and fs

First call (10) : 3 back 2 te* depending on what you see more

Second call (10 cover 0) : fs comes down and locks up a 4th receiver

3rd call (10 special cover 1) : covers 4 receivers with 1 shell

That's it.  In special you get more leway as the stand up ends are playing olb with back out responsibility similiar to dc46.

We can talk more...just start with that...digest n come back
"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2015, 12:45:07 PM »
Here's a gap air mirror video... to me would be "10 buddy" or just "buddy" used to say "double buddy" but now it's an automatic style call.

https://youtu.be/oxvW75vY-uk
"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline parone

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 766
  • Total likes: 122
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #20 on: July 07, 2015, 08:24:33 AM »
Zach, am I missing something, or do I have to pay $795 to get on that websight(texas 10)?
Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.

Offline Ronin

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1493
  • Total likes: 274
  • Work hard! Play hard!
  • Coaching: 11 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2015, 08:30:09 AM »
This is a good GAM resource:  http://www.johntreed.com/GAM.html

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2015, 09:31:44 AM »
Zach, am I missing something, or do I have to pay $795 to get on that websight(texas 10)?

Nope you have to pay...or attend a glazier they're presenting.

"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline Michael ODonnell

  • Copper
  • Posts: 237
  • Total likes: 22
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: 6-2
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #23 on: July 07, 2015, 10:55:00 AM »
Coach Parone,

If you have been playing a 4-4 successfully, why not keep the 4-4 and combine it with the 10-1 by blitzing into the "10"? Although you stated that you have not blitzed much from your 4-4 look because you were concerned about "sending your best tacklers and giving up the big play," won't you be doing much the same if you move to the "10"? If I was committed to the implementing the "10" into my scheme and I had a couple of solid tacklers I wanted to preserve as LBs, I would see if I could fill the gaps with who I have on the field (MPPs included) and keep my better tacklers (regardless of position) in spots where they could be most effective. Zach is a tremendous resource on employing the 10-1 as a system and in his thread on this site he has some outstanding ideas on implementing the "10" as a part of what you are currently doing.

An old coaching addage states that the more penetration you get, the less pursuit you will have. While the "10" lives on disrupting the offense through penetration, it is a sound scheme because you also force the ball carrier into unusual cuts and traffic. In addition, the "stress" it can cause offenses can be accumulative over the course of a game. Thus, the offense may make uncharacteristic errors late in the game that were not being made earlier. As you well know, the more you can control how the game will be played, the greater control you will have over the final outcome.

Coach Potter's thoughts re: shutting off the explosive plays/home runs are well stated and his views are proven essentials to employing an effective defense. We have emphasized similar thoughts for many years at all levels from youth ball (beginning in 4th grade) all the way to the high school varsity level. Our three biggest axioms on defense are the following:
1. Defend the field (force the offense into the short side/less area to defend - we want to get more tacklers to the ball)
2. Keep everything inside us (typically our rovers will set the edge/narrow the field - we want to get more tacklers to the ball)
3. Keep everything in front of us (don't give up the long pass/run/shorten the field - we want to get more tacklers to the ball)

Our pregame preparation centers around the following two statements:
1. Identify our opponents' strengths (Can we limit their effectiveness?/What do we need to stop or control?)
2. Create more matchups that we can win (Where can we be most successful?)

In summary, I would seriously think about holding on to the 4-4 which appears to have been a strong defense for you in the past (it appears to be something you and your players know well) while trying to implement aspects of the "10" into its basic design. Depending upon what you typically see from your opponents' offenses, you could either play more 4-4 (I find the 4-4 to be an extremely flexible defense that is able to successfully match up with multiple offensive formations) or more 10-1 (if the offense is more compressed and employs limited flankers). To get into the "10" you could either blitz/stunt into it or align in it. In addition, you could align in it and then "bail out" on the snap and play your 4-4 just to give the offense another worry.

Best of luck.
We are all in this together.
Simple is good . . . simpler is better.

Offline parone

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 766
  • Total likes: 122
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2015, 02:12:40 PM »
Michael that is a pretty interesting idea.  The ends and corners would have similar assignments.  Could kick the MBs into a gap or blitz into it. Dts are in b gap in our 4-4 anyway.  Olb technique would be pretty different but doable. That would leave our bandit(fs) as the 'mike' in 10-1 parlance. Really it would be pretty easy to have both, as long as the olbs adjusted well.  And we could always line up in 10-1 in certain situations
Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2015, 02:35:28 PM »
I have multiple power points about blitzing into the 10. One is on coach robs site

And a few on here

"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline Threepwood

  • Copper
  • Posts: 404
  • Total likes: 56
  • Coaching: Middle School
  • Defense: DC Pro 4-3
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2015, 05:46:57 PM »
I think you'll do find with the 10-1.  The spread with a good passing game can kill it, but you don't often see that.  MPP as the interior linemen can be effective in stopping the wedge.  The wedge is easily destroyed by submarines of any size.  That being said, I run the wedge a lot because my opponents don't teach the submarine move and try to get fancy with their defense.

Simple is king!


Offline parone

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 766
  • Total likes: 122
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2015, 06:06:23 PM »
honestly, the spread is the least of my worries.  from what I've seen the last four years, press coverage and a pass rush give our team a great opportunity to be very successful vs any spread offense. 

counters/misdirection/trap are what concerns me.
Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.

Offline parone

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 766
  • Total likes: 122
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #28 on: July 08, 2015, 06:01:09 AM »
Zach, your link to Framingham's GAM is really helpful.  actually, the GAM sounds like it's about 90% identical to a lowtech 10-1, but with a slightly different alignment and more defined coverage/read responsibilities(ie, OLBs responsible for specific backs).  but the down 4, DEs, and Cs alignment/resposibilites are identical.

in any case, thanks for the link. 

I loved his 'matrix' idea for mixing/matching the DL and making sure everyone gets plenty of snaps.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2015, 06:02:49 AM by parone »
Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10271
  • Total likes: 868
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Low Tech 10-1 attack defense
« Reply #29 on: July 08, 2015, 09:20:48 AM »
Zach, your link to Framingham's GAM is really helpful.  actually, the GAM sounds like it's about 90% identical to a lowtech 10-1, but with a slightly different alignment and more defined coverage/read responsibilities(ie, OLBs responsible for specific backs).  but the down 4, DEs, and Cs alignment/resposibilites are identical.

in any case, thanks for the link. 

I loved his 'matrix' idea for mixing/matching the DL and making sure everyone gets plenty of snaps.

Reed started gam after seeing celina play either live or in person not sure.

Either way it works but isn't an ever down defense if you face well coached teams.

You can add to the gam and run a youth 46 like Clark or steve.

"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random