Help MosleyTheCat keep the forum running smoothly. Please DONATE using PayPal!

Author Topic: Defenseless defenders  (Read 1208 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DREagle

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 790
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: DC Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Defenseless defenders
« on: April 24, 2017, 10:56:21 AM »
With the new emphasis and prohibition of crackback blocks I'm wondering how this effects the DCWT.  A lot of the blocks that we use to set the edge could certainly be considered crackbacks:

on 47 Speed the way we teach "nearest, deepest" for the SE often means he is cracking the OLB if he's sliding to the play which looks a lot like a crack back.  Also, on plays like 16 and 38 we often have the WB crack the DE.  These have been pretty effective for us but now I'm wondering if we can continue to do this and, if not, how we can adjust.  Maybe we've just misapplied our understanding of the DCWT and others are blocking these plays differently.  I'm mostly just curious to see what others are doing.  Here are a couple of examples:

The first play is 47 Speed, watch the SE on the far side of the field.  Is this still permissible?  The other 2 plays the WB cracks the DE.

https://youtu.be/GWcRA9PF9Yk
« Last Edit: April 24, 2017, 11:20:15 AM by DREagle »

Offline Bob Goodman

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8792
  • Coaching: 9 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2017, 11:59:09 AM »
With the new emphasis and prohibition of crackback blocks I'm wondering how this effects the DCWT.  A lot of the blocks that we use to set the edge could certainly be considered crackbacks:

on 47 Speed the way we teach "nearest, deepest" for the SE often means he is cracking the OLB if he's sliding to the play which looks a lot like a crack back.  Also, on plays like 16 and 38 we often have the WB crack the DE.  These have been pretty effective for us but now I'm wondering if we can continue to do this and, if not, how we can adjust.  Maybe we've just misapplied our understanding of the DCWT and others are blocking these plays differently.  I'm mostly just curious to see what others are doing.  Here are a couple of examples:

The first play is 47 Speed, watch the SE on the far side of the field.  Is this still permissible?  The other 2 plays the WB cracks the DE.

https://youtu.be/GWcRA9PF9Yk
A little hard for me to see, and only your hairdresser official knows for sure, since it's hard to tell how this will be administered, but if you're concerned about the Fed change, know that it doesn't apply to hands blocking.  I can't see whether the SE makes contact first by a hand or a shoulder.  It looks like it might be ruled "forceful", and I don't know whether the opponent had him in his field of view at whatever the "right" time is, but it's still legal if the initial contact is by the palm of one or both hands.

Offline Prodigy

  • Silver
  • Posts: 2299
  • Banned
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2017, 12:06:24 PM »
I think it's tough to say for certain and you can pretty well guarantee that mileage is going to vary from town to town and one officiating crew to the next. Case in point, I went a whole season running DTDW and we'd run XX motion (WB's crossing) under what might be a handoff to the FB.  WB's had a "fake first - hit second" assignment.  We received one flag the entire season for our WB creaming a kid who was away from the play.  I didn't even really mind the hit we took on yardage over the penalty, I just thought the penalty was a poor call all the way around...and yes the referee specifically said "Defenseless Defender" which blew my mind and I've joked about it since.  Also of note, the whole season we had our backside TE cutting across C & B gaps, that's 8 regular season games, that's probably 60 plays a game, we're talking hundreds of times...We get to the superbowl and one of the referees comes over to warn me that it's a potential chop block.  We discussed the FBZ and what was supposed to happen etc.  We never ended up pulling a flag for it but it was interesting that in the whole season nobody said a single thing about it and then we get to the championship game and suddenly it's an issue.
If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.

Offline coachkev

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1260
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2017, 03:52:12 PM »
I would expect A legal block in the vicinity of the play to be legit. Perhaps I don't understand the rule but that looks clean to me

Offline DREagle

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 790
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: DC Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2017, 05:25:19 PM »
"The definition of a blindside block established by the committee is “a block against an opponent other than the runner, who does not see the blocker approaching,” and now results in a 15-yard penalty."

The bolded part is what worries me.  Most of our officials have to wear velcro shoes b/c if they have to focus on tying their shoes in the morning they forget how to breathe.  I'll be interested to see how this is called I guess.

Offline davecisar

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8657
    • Winning Youth Football Coaching Site
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Wide Tackle 6
  • Offense: Single Wing
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2017, 08:07:58 PM »
It is against the rules and will be a point of emphasis
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

Winston Churchill

Offline coachkev

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1260
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2017, 08:41:06 PM »
How can a block in the vicinity of the play be illegal? I can see where that could apply on the opposite end of the play but in that close of proximity?  Geez

Offline davecisar

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8657
    • Winning Youth Football Coaching Site
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Wide Tackle 6
  • Offense: Single Wing
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2017, 08:43:10 PM »
Read the rule
We can like it or not like it
At the end of the day it is the rule and you have to comply or suffer
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

Winston Churchill

Offline Prodigy

  • Silver
  • Posts: 2299
  • Banned
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2017, 09:16:16 AM »
I guess coaches will also have to adapt and lose the timeless saying of

Quote
"Head on a swivel!!! Head on a swivel!!"

If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.

Offline DREagle

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 790
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: DC Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2017, 11:47:56 AM »
So really the question for DCWT folks is, "what modifications, if any, do we need to make?".  The "nearest deepest" rule for the SE on any outside run to the his side ends up looking like a crack on any LB playing wide. 

Offline mahonz

  • Administrator
  • Kryptonite
  • Posts: 22848
  • No Wimps
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 3-5-3
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #10 on: April 25, 2017, 12:06:23 PM »
So really the question for DCWT folks is, "what modifications, if any, do we need to make?".  The "nearest deepest" rule for the SE on any outside run to the his side ends up looking like a crack on any LB playing wide.

Have your SE yell BOOM! right before impact. Then tell the Ref you warned the defenseless player.

For me....there are blocks like the one in your video that happen during most every game whether intended or not. Some in the open field and other in the trenches.

One could argue a well executed trap is now illegal if this Rule is to be taken literally.

I dont believe the Spirit of the Rule is to flag blocks that attack against flow well after the ball is snapped. I believe the Spirit of the Rule is to stop motions to crack more than anything that are immediate. Those are brutal blocks that are mostly in the back. A block face to face like your video shows is still legal IMHO.

I would simply ask the Refs if WR cross blocking is illegal. I think your answer will be 100% no. Heck...we cross block on KOR's. Im not about to change anything with that.

The head of CHSAA football refs son plays on our Spring Team. I will ask him. I learn all kinds of neat things from him.
Collect moments, not wins.

Offline DumCoach

  • Administrator
  • Platinum
  • Posts: 9500
  • "What me worry? I'm not far enough behind yet!"
  • Coaching: 10 & Under
  • Defense: DC 46
  • Offense: DC Wing T
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2017, 04:29:22 PM »
So really the question for DCWT folks is, "what modifications, if any, do we need to make?".  The "nearest deepest" rule for the SE on any outside run to the his side ends up looking like a crack on any LB playing wide.

A "defenseless defender" usually gets knocked down on a play.  That's why he needs protection.  If a little SE is knocking down OLB's he must be quite the player.  The player most at risk is the "defenseless blocker" - the SE (If the LB sees him coming.).  None of my SE's ever put a Will LBer on the ground.  Would have been cool if they had!   8)

Unless your SE can actually, truly, knock an OLB to the ground, the rule is really only going to apply to the WB in motion who can, indeed, truck a defender.  The solution there is to use hands instead of shoulder to avoid smearing the defender.
"Football is for the kids - But let's win anyway."

Offline Bob Goodman

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8792
  • Coaching: 9 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2017, 08:05:06 PM »
"The definition of a blindside block established by the committee is “a block against an opponent other than the runner, who does not see the blocker approaching,” and now results in a 15-yard penalty."
Unless it's delivered by the palms of the hands.

Offline PSLCOACHROB

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 11514
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2017, 06:42:52 AM »
I don't know that any of us can say how the rule will be enforced until they start enforcing it. I also don't get how a hit by a stud player to a defenseless defender should be looked at any differently than a hit by a not so good player. The hit is either legal or it isn't. So different players play by different rules? I hope not. I have had some kids run a motion crack that went on to play D1 ball. Those blocks can really effect how that backer plays. That is the whole point really imo. I would rather teach a one block fits all for that than try and tell my stud player to take it easy and my not so physical guy to try to crush him.

Offline Prodigy

  • Silver
  • Posts: 2299
  • Banned
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: Defenseless defenders
« Reply #14 on: April 28, 2017, 11:02:13 AM »
For the sake of conversation and really nothing more, does this seem to be the case of excessive rules to anybody else?  Consider criminal law, there's multiple laws that are extremely specific like OUI or DUI yet there's laws that probably already cover OUI and DUI by simply combining reckless driving and public intoxication.  There's manslaughter and then there's vehicular manslaughter...at the end of the day what's the difference?

In this game, you can pretty well count on both hitting and getting hit, unless perhaps you're a kicker.  There are rules in place to ensure that the hits are fair and are as safe as possible given the way the game is played.  Do we need another rule?

What troubles me is, I feel that this is an unnecessary rule that detracts from the spirit and play of the game.  Offensively the ultimate goal is to score, we have 11 players to match up against 11 defenders to accomplish this mission.  In a perfect world, we'd put 10 players on 11 defenders and that would leave our ball carrier free to run for a touchdown.  Aside from imposing our will physically against a defense to cause them doubt, mental and physical suffering...what if you've got a play to the left that ends up breaking out to the right.  That kid on the right who would normally be far away from the play, say you don't block him and he steps up and levels your runningback and puts him out for the season?  You're probably going to wish that you had blocked him.

For me...maybe I'm a crappy coach but I'm not going to concern myself with this rule change.  I feel that it's ambiguous enough that I don't want to try explaining to the kids I coach what is and isn't a legal block or a cheap shot.  I don't want them doubting themselves and the way that they've been playing.  If we start pulling flags left and right, maybe I'll worry about it then.  Yet...even if we do pull flags, we're likely going to be beating the crap out of our opponent which might even be worth the trade-off.
If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.