Choosing a base defense at the high school level- lessons learned

[CoachCalande]

Most of you know me as a long time 46 coach.

Previous to my long lasting love affair with the 46, I had been a multiple 7 and 8 man front coach with the best success coming from coaching the Tom Simonton style 44 stack defense.  Since 2008 however, I have blended in some 353 stack defense into our arsenal. 

This is by far the single most important lesson I have learned as a high school coach...

1) examine not only your starting personnel but your depth and backups when choosing a base defense.

2) teach a multiple defense with a very good understanding of that base so you can play it when the injury/eligibility issues come up (and at the small school level, they will kill you). Run your base at the feeder levels (our jr high runs a 53)

3) When going multiple with the defense, rep the daylights out of it with the starting unit while the backups continue to get work in the base defense. Youll waste practice time trying to get your 3rd and 4th teamers to rep stuff you might only run 15% of the time.

When the injuries happen, and they will,  youll have to be more vanilla but your backups will step in with some level of success.

So, what does this rambling mean? Ill give you an example, we have, on paper, a nice 46 Gambler lineup for this coming season....but we cannot afford one injury to either defensive end or our sam, mike or will or we could not run the 46.... but we feel we can still run the 353 stack with some level of success. We will teach and rep the base to all, teach our 46 looks to our top dawgs and spend the rest of the time getting better at the "bring it" and pursuit/hustle part of the game.

The plan then becomes to base the PROGRAM  around the 353 for both varsity and JV and examine the talent each year to see what MULTIPLICITY we can run from that.  Ie, the 425, the 46...etc.

I feel that every year I have coached hs football I could find the kind of kids that we might need to play a 353. The spur positions are filled right now by linebacker types, not dback types and our inside guys are all classic okie fifty front plugger types...eventually, Id like to have kids built like my spurs playing inside and faster kids playing on the edge...essentially we have 53 personnel playing a 353.  But we have 5 spread teams on teh schedule. I find that we can also use personnel substitutions at times. Ie if we want to go man up with the spurs, I can probably sub in some cover guys to take their spots.

our dbacks are diminutive and looking at the top teams in each class, the better teams have linebacker size kids who can run playing corner and safety, we do not yet have that. 

IN any case,  I know its obvious but you have to truly consider your PEOPLE when choosing your base and then be multiple based on that. Its really not much different from offense in that your playbook should reflect getting the ball to playmakers.

[duece]

How hard is it to learn to run and tackle?  What else is there to defense?

Duece

[CoachCalande]

How hard is it to learn to run and tackle?  What else is there to defense?

Duece

Running and tackling is the basis for all defense. Theres obviously much to in than that Coach, IM sure you know. Proper alignment, knowing your assignment, reading your keys, recognizing blocking schemes and reacting to the keys/flow and executing the assignment post snap, getting off blocks and fitting properly in the trapping of the ball or in the coverage.

Maintaining discipline post snap is the hardest part for a kid, they all want to make the tackle and are willing to compromise the defense to do it, ie putting their hat in the wrong gap or taking a poor angle.

[Vince148]

This topic brings up an interesting point of debate. In reading through various threads, there seems to be two schools of thought on this. First, develop your scheme to fit the personnel that you have, which Steve seems to be advocating here, or make your personnel fit into your scheme. I probably fall more into this category.

I guess I look at it from the standpoint of how much do I know and my ability to teach it. Is it better to have knowledge of 3 or 4 different schemes and never have adequate time to become perfect at any of them, or do I have extreme confidence in one scheme where we can rep the heck out of it so we can run it to perfection week in and week out?

Maybe I'm wrong about this, but at the pro level, it seems that teams focus on one scheme. Of course, they have the luxury of drafting the personnel they need to run that scheme. In youth and high school, you don't have that option.

I look at my youth team and I have no way of knowing what my personnel will be. I don't even know if I'll be coaching the same level from one year to the next. In that respect, it's virtually impossible to wait until you get a team to figure out what you're going to run. I'm already working on my offense and defense for next season not knowing what I will have. I will try to make my personnel fit my scheme.

In high school, I suppose it's different because you know what players you'll be dealing with for at least for 3 or 4 years. But you're still saying that I'll figure it out when I see my team. I guess the one thing that I see with winning teams is consistency, that is staying with an offense or defense regardless of the cards you're dealt. Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking, but that's how I look at it.

[ZACH]

The most succesfull teams in SE PA... Central buck, north penn, arch bishop wood, strath haven they are all vanilla defenses that play more coverage then pressures but when they do wow!

[CoachCalande]

I think you have to coach what you know and know what you coach.  Id say my conversion to the 353 as a base defense has been in the study/works for 5 years now.

Like Markham going to the double wing, it wasnt an overnight thing.


With me, I am very comfortable in calling the 46 defensive package, practicing it, trouble shooting and preparing...Im getting better at the 353 fast.

What my point is...there has to be a "plug and play" philosophy here somewhere...you run out of "specialists" that can actually do what you are asking them to do.

For example, how many big slow linebackers can play man to man defense? how many short undersized corners can play bump and run coverage? how many small linemen can play the 3 tech position?

These are things one has to consider when chosing a base.

You hang your hat on something. I am feeling lately that its easier and more sensible to hang my hat on a cover 3 shell and a multiple 8 man front. We could have more lbers one year and more dline the next ....

[jcarbon2]

I think you have to coach what you know and know what you coach.  Id say my conversion to the 353 as a base defense has been in the study/works for 5 years now.

Like Markham going to the double wing, it wasnt an overnight thing.


With me, I am very comfortable in calling the 46 defensive package, practicing it, trouble shooting and preparing...Im getting better at the 353 fast.

What my point is...there has to be a "plug and play" philosophy here somewhere...you run out of "specialists" that can actually do what you are asking them to do.

For example, how many big slow linebackers can play man to man defense? how many short undersized corners can play bump and run coverage? how many small linemen can play the 3 tech position?

These are things one has to consider when chosing a base.

You hang your hat on something. I am feeling lately that its easier and more sensible to hang my hat on a cover 3 shell and a multiple 8 man front. We could have more lbers one year and more dline the next ....

Steve,

You have a 5-3 playbook for your jr high??

John

[durfee4]

We use Coach Cox,s 521/53/33,what ever u want to call it,but worked very well at our level,and works very well at the HS level with all coverage packages planned into it.Just a thought.

[duece]

Then don't have "specialists".  I mean, I think too many of us get wrapped up in "my guys can't do this" or they must do this.  You are right about alignment and assignemet, but too much "assignment" can lead to paralysis by analysis and that leads to poor alignment and poor execution. 

I've been a DC for years now, and have done both with very good success.  Some of my best defenses have been both, vanilla, and flavorful.  Depends on the kids, what they can do, what they can't do, but for the most part we were a 4-3 all those years.  The scheme is just the vehicle you choose to get you to your path, "how" you get there is what separates the meager coaches from the good ones.  Even the best talent, in a 3-5 if not taught proper tackling, angles, and assignments are going to fail.  Scheme, however, rarely fails IMO.  Defense is super simple, 8 gaps, run to the ball, tackle soundly when you get there.  How you choose to align is up to you...

Basically, it's a trick question, as there is no "best defense".  The best defense is one YOU know so you don't spend time learning it and then having to teach it to your players.  This way you can focus soley on the fundamentals of running and tackling.

Duece

[CoachCalande]

"then dont have specialists"- thats the point.

The job the sam does in the 46 is very different from the job the mike and will do. The job the Will has to do in the 46 (ie leave the box and play as a dback in man coverage vs ace sets) is very different from what a Mike backer has to do.  The job the defensive ends do is very different from the job the linebackers do and so on.

With the 353, the sam, mike and will are essentially interchangable.  The "plug and play" aspect, because of the simple alignment, stances and keys/reads and simple terminology allows for a very fast coaching up of a player and can allow a coach to cross train players and create more depth.

[JrTitan]

The job the sam does in the 46 is very different from the job the mike and will do. The job the Will has to do in the 46 (ie leave the box and play as a dback in man coverage vs ace sets) is very different from what a Mike backer has to do.  The job the defensive ends do is very different from the job the linebackers do and so on.

With the 353, the sam, mike and will are essentially interchangable.  The "plug and play" aspect, because of the simple alignment, stances and keys/reads and simple terminology allows for a very fast coaching up of a player and can allow a coach to cross train players and create more depth.

Are we really saying that we should match our personnel to the coverage we can play?  Most of the issues you cite seem to go to not having the personnel to run cover 1 bump and run every down against the multiple formations, alignments and match-ups you are getting from the offenses you see in high school.  Fair?

[CoachCalande]

Yes, thats fair.

With our linebacker types, pretty much stocky guards and fullbacks, they are not going to be able to fit into the sam/will  body to play on slots and ends.

Thats the point, basically we are now a multiple front cover three/four team that can mix in some other things, ie man but without doing it with those backers.

For me to sit and say "nope, we are a 46 team, we will live and die with the 46" when we dont have the will/fred/sam types we need for man coverage would be silly.

[duece]

Go watch kids play on a playground.  You will find everything you need to know about man coverage there.  Tag "is" man coverage!  I think a lot of us make a mountain out of a mole hill here with "I don't have this" and "I don't have that".  Look at what you DO have, and then go from there.  You can run the 46 w/out man coverage...Rex Ryan does?!  I think all too many of us get caught up in what we don't have (glass 1/2 empty) and lose focus on what we do have (glass 1/2 full).  Losing this focus, clouds your abilty as a coach to mold your scheme around your players as your constantly worrying about what your players "can't" do.  Control what you can control and let the chips fall where they must.

Duece

[CoachCalande]

Go watch kids play on a playground.  You will find everything you need to know about man coverage there.  Tag "is" man coverage!  I think a lot of us make a mountain out of a mole hill here with "I don't have this" and "I don't have that".  Look at what you DO have, and then go from there.  You can run the 46 w/out man coverage...Rex Ryan does?!  I think all too many of us get caught up in what we don't have (glass 1/2 empty) and lose focus on what we do have (glass 1/2 full).  Losing this focus, clouds your abilty as a coach to mold your scheme around your players as your constantly worrying about what your players "can't" do.  Control what you can control and let the chips fall where they must.

Duece

Isnt that what we are talking about here?

[CoachCalande]

Steve,

You have a 5-3 playbook for your jr high??

John

no, they have silly rules that they have to follow. no blitzing, cant line up in the gaps, only 5 near the line of scrimmage until you are inside the twenty etc etc.

of course when i go watch games i see coaches playing the gap 8 vs the ms double wing.