Author Topic: Secondary-Front relationship  (Read 11140 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2016, 11:55:21 AM »
One of the big reasons we never ran m2m.

It's def a good enough reason to have some zone.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #46 on: December 22, 2016, 12:08:10 PM »
Yep. And if backers have force/contain on a fly sweep, as i'm sure you know, we win 100% of the time.

depends on the types of Ends and the Coaching?

jet sweep isnt a hard play to stop, you just have to know how to properly coach Contain & Cutback
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2016, 12:22:03 PM »
depends on the types of Ends and the Coaching?

jet sweep isnt a hard play to stop, you just have to know how to properly coach Contain & Cutback

If your DE has. anything to do w/ the play, thats not a real jet sweep. lol. If our sweeper is so slow the DE gets him, well then we're not running fly sweep.

 And you can teach all you want, a stationairy backer vs a sweeper, pulling guard & FB lead will never win
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2016, 12:25:49 PM »
If your DE has. anything to do w/ the play, thats not a real jet sweep. lol. If our sweeper is so slow the DE gets him, well then we're not running fly sweep.

 And you can teach all you want, a stationairy backer vs a sweeper, pulling guard & FB lead will never win

so you are saying your sweeper gets outside the box BEFORE the ball is snapped? thats impressive.....

this is a "last man with the chalk wins" discussion at this point... there are tons of things you can do from a front perspective to stop jet sweep, if there wasnt, everyone would run it every down.
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline defensewins

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 899
  • Total likes: 34
  • Coaching: College
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Other
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #49 on: December 22, 2016, 12:47:47 PM »
Agree with Coach JC on this one...if the DE has anything to do with the sweep guy in the backfield, the wrong guy is the sweep guy.  If the DE is playing so wide that the DE can get in the backfield to affect a decent sweep guy, then comes yellow light sweep (or even red, for that matter)...or power...because that is a lot of SPACE that the defense is giving up.  HUGE advantage to the offense. 

Also, man coverage doesn't have to be a negative against jet/fly sweep.  Keep the DE's normal...Let the safeties "bump" responsibilities on the motion.  It allows you to have a quick trigger on the sweep and an answer to any "tricky" stuff that comes off of it, without giving up a ton of space.

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #50 on: December 22, 2016, 01:07:42 PM »
so you are saying your sweeper gets outside the box BEFORE the ball is snapped? thats impressive.....

this is a "last man with the chalk wins" discussion at this point... there are tons of things you can do from a front perspective to stop jet sweep, if there wasnt, everyone would run it every down.

No, i'm saying if a stationary DE is a factor in the play, there's only 2 reasons why:

1: The sweeper is trash

2: The DE is not playing sound defense, & will get ate alive by red sweep (foot in the ground, run under the DE.

I 100% agree there are tons of ways to stop jet sweep. Never said anything remotely close to saying there isn't. All I said is you cannot stop jet sweep w/ a run pass option from M2M coverage. At least not w/ sound defene. Sure, you could over commit & get gashed up the middle.

EVERY coverage has weaknesses. Every offense should have man beaters, cover 2 beaters, cover 3 beaters etc. Jet sweep w/ a RPO just happens to be a man beater.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #51 on: December 22, 2016, 01:11:30 PM »
No, i'm saying if a stationary DE is a factor in the play, there's only 2 reasons why:

1: The sweeper is trash

2: The DE is not playing sound defense, & will get ate alive by red sweep (foot in the ground, run under the DE.

I 100% agree there are tons of ways to stop jet sweep. Never said anything remotely close to saying there isn't. All I said is you cannot stop jet sweep w/ a run pass option from M2M coverage. At least not w/ sound defene. Sure, you could over commit & get gashed up the middle.

EVERY coverage has weaknesses. Every offense should have man beaters, cover 2 beaters, cover 3 beaters etc. Jet sweep w/ a RPO just happens to be a man beater.

i think you are misunderstanding the idea of contain defense.

the idea IS to force the sweeper to cut up, and the linebacker should be scraping to the cut lane to make the play. the DE is rarely the playmaker, he just forces the decision.
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #52 on: December 22, 2016, 01:13:48 PM »
Agree with Coach JC on this one...if the DE has anything to do with the sweep guy in the backfield, the wrong guy is the sweep guy.  If the DE is playing so wide that the DE can get in the backfield to affect a decent sweep guy, then comes yellow light sweep (or even red, for that matter)...or power...because that is a lot of SPACE that the defense is giving up.  HUGE advantage to the offense. 

Also, man coverage doesn't have to be a negative against jet/fly sweep.  Keep the DE's normal...Let the safeties "bump" responsibilities on the motion.  It allows you to have a quick trigger on the sweep and an answer to any "tricky" stuff that comes off of it, without giving up a ton of space.

Correct. Rolling the coverage is the best answer when in M2M, tho it leaves you a bit susceptible on counters, backdoor screens, deep fade to the backside etc.

But that's why we coach! The chess match! Every D/coverage/front has a weak point. Trick is understanding your weak point & how to prevent exploitation.

These discussions are exactly why we get into so many different looks & coverages. They find pur weak point & we're already in a different look.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #53 on: December 22, 2016, 01:32:36 PM »
i think you are misunderstanding the idea of contain defense.

the idea IS to force the sweeper to cut up, and the linebacker should be scraping to the cut lane to make the play. the DE is rarely the playmaker, he just forces the decision.

Oh....sweet baby Jesus do I understand the contain defense. It's what makes youth offense so easy. Watching our offense murder contain defenses is why we switched to a spill & kill D. And why I can count on 1 finger the amount of TD's we've given up in the last couple years (simple swing pass to a RB, our force defender let him crosss his face on a blitz).

All we see every week is contain defenses. Again, if a DE can contain our fly sweep, then either our sweeper sucks, or we're scoring every drive.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #54 on: December 22, 2016, 01:57:48 PM »
Man coverage w/ contain ends in an 8 man box is what I like to call the Daddy ball stack defense. Lol. Been seeing that about 98% of the time since I started coaching. Heck, what I started w/ too.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline Coach Kyle

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4799
  • Total likes: 163
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #55 on: December 22, 2016, 02:02:10 PM »
Yep. And if backers have force/contain on a fly sweep, as i'm sure you know, we win 100% of the time.
How often does a backer have  contain at the youth level? If they do, it's a split 44. A 43 is pretty rare.

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #56 on: December 22, 2016, 02:03:55 PM »
How often does a backer have  contain at the youth level? If they do, it's a split 44. A 43 is pretty rare.

3-4 is pretty common around here.
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline COACH JC

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 6945
  • Total likes: 728
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #57 on: December 22, 2016, 02:17:49 PM »
How often does a backer have  contain at the youth level? If they do, it's a split 44. A 43 is pretty rare.

A lot of it is just terminology. At the upper levels a backer is essentially desingnsted on whether or not your hand is in the ground. At the youth level, most DE's stand up, so we usually designate if they're a backer based on if they're on the LOS &/or if they have coverage responsibilities.

Like, in our 4-2-5, our safties have force. But you can argue they're backers or even ghosted DE's vs a double tight fullhouse backfield.

So it's a tough question to answer. But if you mean backers that begin inside the tackle box, then yes, pretty rare.
It's all about having fun.  But losing aint fun!

Offline Coach Kyle

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4799
  • Total likes: 163
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2016, 05:16:23 PM »
A lot of it is just terminology. At the upper levels a backer is essentially desingnsted on whether or not your hand is in the ground. At the youth level, most DE's stand up, so we usually designate if they're a backer based on if they're on the LOS &/or if they have coverage responsibilities.

Like, in our 4-2-5, our safties have force. But you can argue they're backers or even ghosted DE's vs a double tight fullhouse backfield.

So it's a tough question to answer. But if you mean backers that begin inside the tackle box, then yes, pretty rare.
To clarify, if a player is in a 9 tech, it's unlikely for them to drop into coverage, and if a player is back 3-5 yards, it is unlikely for them to play force, unless they blitz. It's just hard to do.

Online Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7492
  • Total likes: 864
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Retired
Re: Secondary-Front relationship
« Reply #59 on: December 22, 2016, 09:33:33 PM »
All I have read thus far is "Scheme"!  Yet it all tends to infer that Coverage does dictate your Fronts.  Most of these post are have been geared towards trying to overcome a shortage in one for the other! Regardless of Pass or Run. 

Im just an Old Fart but, to my thinking, Keying on one thing means sacrificing the other!  There is no "Balance".  Even the Latest and Greatest 30 or 4-2-5 Defense MUST morph based on the opponents successes!  I would be remiss if I did not mention that 80% of the Youth Offenses 6th Grade and under are Run Oriented.  A vast majority of those are Sweep oriented!  A lot of those Sweep plays are going to to their Bench Side.  Jack Gregory has done the Studies!   

So, regardless of your "Defensive Formation" a Wise DC will set up his Defense to Stop Off Tackle and Sweeps First!  He will, most assuredly, define Field and Boundary Sides.  He will set his Coverage to Keep the Ball in front of the Defense and teach them to read Keys. WHY? Its a great base analogy to start from!

If a DC or Header Understands how to adapt the "Passing Game" should not bother you!   

I want them to Pass at these age levels!  (Its Called Chuck, Duck, and Pray) 

Play The Percentages!   

just sayin.   8)
 
   
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 09:35:41 PM by Dusty Ol Fart »
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)