Author Topic: Defending the UBSW Offense  (Read 158412 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dimson

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7541
  • Total likes: 504
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: Killer Bee
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #300 on: June 13, 2014, 04:28:39 PM »
D

I think we are past that now.
Good  :P

Offline Pearls of Wisdom

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4611
  • Total likes: 73
  • Read Only Account. Please no PM's or Emails
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #301 on: June 13, 2014, 04:35:20 PM »
I know I said I don't make changes for particular team, but we do run an odd front, 5-3 and mix in an assortment of blitzes, as we do with the WT6.

WT6 works best for us to get everybody playing time but we've had great success in the 5-3 when we had quality players at every position, especially LBs.

It has more to do with the players I have each year as to what we run the most and how many defenses we can play.


You'll LOVE Bud's book.  It has the WT-6;  the Overshifted-6 (which BECAME the 5-2 Okie); 5-3; 4-3;  7-1; & three Goal Line defenses (Gap-8; 6-5; 7-4).  A GREAT chapter on Defensing the Single Wing!

As I said he carried 3 calls into a game.  1. WT-6;  2. Overshifted-6;  3. ONE of the OTHER defenses listed above from 5-3; 4-3; 7-i; etc.
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline mahonz

  • Administrator
  • Kryptonite
  • Posts: 24264
  • Total likes: 2547
  • No Wimps
  • Coaching: 8 & Under
  • Defense: 3-5-3
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #302 on: June 13, 2014, 04:36:11 PM »
I know I said I don't make changes for particular team, but we do run an odd front, 5-3 and mix in an assortment of blitzes, as we do with the WT6.

WT6 works best for us to get everybody playing time but we've had great success in the 5-3 when we had quality players at every position, especially LBs.

It has more to do with the players I have each year as to what we run the most and how many defenses we can play.

H

Every D has an Achilles Heel and that Achilles Heel is due to a particular Formation IMHO.... less the funky stuff like bunched quads or polecat....that I think has to be a scout thing for most everyone.

So how do you maintain vs all comers playing one D? Better talent. Better coaching. More speed. More nastiness. Two Platoon all come to mind.

One thing we started doing last season and it was inspired by Texan on this Forum was to blend two D's as one. Dont blend them and play it front to back in the D.  That would effect the coverage more than you probably want.  Instead blend them side to side in the D.

For example in my World the Achilles Heel of the 46 is fixed in the 353 and the Achilles Heel of the 353 is fixed by the 46. This is a Formation issue only. So rather than teach two individual D's....throw both of them in a blender and teach them both as one. Now you might have the entire D play the 46 in a particular game but that is driven by the Formation...or the entire D is playing 353 rules the next week or one half is 46 and the other half 353 the week after that. Still whatever Achilles Heel exists in the 46 or the 353 is now gone.

You could do the same exact thing with the WT6 and the split 44 that JrTitan runs, for example.

Thing is people don't think like that...generally. I watched Texan's Steel Talon D in 2012 that blended two completely unique D's into one....The Killer Bee and the DC46....with a group of very talented 7th grades. I was floored how brutal this was on the Offense. Floored. They didn't know what was what.

When it comes to Defense...sameness is Death. This of course once the kids become experienced. For the Super Smurfs its line up here and do this...or else.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 04:40:20 PM by mahonz »
What is beautiful, lives forever.

Offline Michael

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 14275
  • Total likes: 2843
  • Coaching: 13 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Assistant
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #303 on: June 13, 2014, 04:37:49 PM »
D

I think we are past that now.

We should probably go outside and see how much damage there is.
Michael can not receive PM's, emails or respond to Posts. He passed away in September 2018. To honor his contributions we are leaving his account active. R.I.P - Dumcoach Staff.

Offline HCScott

  • Copper
  • Posts: 363
  • Total likes: 38
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #304 on: June 13, 2014, 05:08:55 PM »
H

Every D has an Achilles Heel and that Achilles Heel is due to a particular Formation IMHO.... less the funky stuff like bunched quads or polecat....that I think has to be a scout thing for most everyone.

So how do you maintain vs all comers playing one D? Better talent. Better coaching. More speed. More nastiness. Two Platoon all come to mind.

One thing we started doing last season and it was inspired by Texan on this Forum was to blend two D's as one. Dont blend them and play it front to back in the D.  That would effect the coverage more than you probably want.  Instead blend them side to side in the D.

For example in my World the Achilles Heel of the 46 is fixed in the 353 and the Achilles Heel of the 353 is fixed by the 46. This is a Formation issue only. So rather than teach two individual D's....throw both of them in a blender and teach them both as one. Now you might have the entire D play the 46 in a particular game but that is driven by the Formation...or the entire D is playing 353 rules the next week or one half is 46 and the other half 353 the week after that. Still whatever Achilles Heel exists in the 46 or the 353 is now gone.

You could do the same exact thing with the WT6 and the split 44 that JrTitan runs, for example.

Thing is people don't think like that...generally. I watched Texan's Steel Talon D in 2012 that blended two completely unique D's into one....The Killer Bee and the DC46....with a group of very talented 7th grades. I was floored how brutal this was on the Offense. Floored. They didn't know what was what.

When it comes to Defense...sameness is Death. This of course once the kids become experienced. For the Super Smurfs its line up here and do this...or else.

Never thought of it that way, but I have considered the 5-3 to turn into a 6-2 when we blitz our MLB in the A gap with the nose shifted to the opposite A gap. We play our DT's tilted in the 5-3 so then it becomes a 6-2 with tilted DTs.
I think this is a sound defense as we are single gap but ask the DTs to squeeze down the B gap to help our LBs. Does this make sense to do?
I like it when we have the right players.

 For us it seems when we have more linemen the WT6 is best and when we have more LBs the 5-3 was best.
"The quarterback must go down and he must go down hard"

Offline HCScott

  • Copper
  • Posts: 363
  • Total likes: 38
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #305 on: June 13, 2014, 05:18:43 PM »

You'll LOVE Bud's book.  It has the WT-6;  the Overshifted-6 (which BECAME the 5-2 Okie); 5-3; 4-3;  7-1; & three Goal Line defenses (Gap-8; 6-5; 7-4).  A GREAT chapter on Defensing the Single Wing!

As I said he carried 3 calls into a game.  1. WT-6;  2. Overshifted-6;  3. ONE of the OTHER defenses listed above from 5-3; 4-3; 7-i; etc.

We are the only team running the SW in our league.

I'm seeing the "I" most of the time.

Some teams have gone to some sort of pistol or the inside, outside zone read. Although I don't think they really know how to run them.
Schematically am I ok in the WT6? Seems like even when we have been beaten we had tacklers in position to make the tackle. Either they missed a great RB or he broke a tackle.
Just bought the book Modern Defensive Football, so maybe I'll have the info I need.
"The quarterback must go down and he must go down hard"

Offline JrTitan

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1295
  • Total likes: 82
  • Coaching: Middle School
  • Defense: 4-4 Split
  • Offense: I Formation
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #306 on: June 13, 2014, 05:23:12 PM »
Would a Nasty Y mess with a wide DT that wants to play as a 6 tech? Would he move with him?

Not sure about the WT6 tackle, but our OLB split rules:

  • 1'-2'  head up
  • 2'-3'  play inside eye
  • 4'-5'  loosen slightly 1 yd
  • >6' (Nasty)  - switch w/end and play head up end (corner would drop down on the wing 5x1)

I don't think the tackle woud allow himself to get pulled more than 5' before he aligns in a 5 tech.  Perhaps Coach Mountjoy can weigh in.
"They call it coaching but it is teaching...You do not just tell them...you show them the reasons"

"You have to be smart enough to understand the game, and dumb enough to think it's important."

“…you have no bad habits to break...We either coach it or are allowing allowing it to happen.”

Offline HCScott

  • Copper
  • Posts: 363
  • Total likes: 38
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #307 on: June 13, 2014, 05:40:30 PM »
I am learning a lot from this thread about recognizing what the different defenses are trying to do to my offense.
I am very appreciative of all the discussion. I'd have never learned so much.
"The quarterback must go down and he must go down hard"

Offline Pearls of Wisdom

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4611
  • Total likes: 73
  • Read Only Account. Please no PM's or Emails
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #308 on: June 13, 2014, 05:43:51 PM »
Not sure about the WT6 tackle, but our OLB split rules:

  • 1'-2'  head up
  • 2'-3'  play inside eye
  • 4'-5'  loosen slightly 1 yd
  • >6' (Nasty)  - switch w/end and play head up end (corner would drop down on the wing 5x1)

I don't think the tackle woud allow himself to get pulled more than 5' before he aligns in a 5 tech.  Perhaps Coach Mountjoy can weigh in.

Tackle STAYS in a 7 unless a WB/TE then he moves to a 6.

SPLIT RULES for all WT-6 coaches I ever knew were:  If the split between the DT & DG is more than 2 1/2 yds the LB (who does NOT need to move) makes a "Tight" call.  Then the DE moves from an 8 to a 9, & the DT moves from a 7 to a 5.  No one else NEED move.  They will not get an OLM ON the LB!

Numbers = ATTACHED:
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 05:52:37 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline Pearls of Wisdom

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4611
  • Total likes: 73
  • Read Only Account. Please no PM's or Emails
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #309 on: June 13, 2014, 05:50:38 PM »
We are the only team running the SW in our league.

I'm seeing the "I" most of the time.

Some teams have gone to some sort of pistol or the inside, outside zone read. Although I don't think they really know how to run them.
Schematically am I ok in the WT6? Seems like even when we have been beaten we had tacklers in position to make the tackle. Either they missed a great RB or he broke a tackle.
Just bought the book Modern Defensive Football, so maybe I'll have the info I need.


WT-6 AND Overshifted-6 = ALL YOU NEED.  You do need BOTH of them (& it's easy to have both)

The great "Bear" Bryant called his WT-6 "NORTH".  If he overshifted left that was WEST".  If he overshifted right that was "EAST".  NOTE:  He could get in either "East" or "West" & SLANT BACK to "North" (see diagrams).

I will ATTACH those here for your perusal.  Bud's book covers BOTH in tremendous DETAIL especially vs. UBSW).  You're LUCKY - I think you bought the LAST copy of Bud's book available on Amazon:

« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 06:30:46 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline JrTitan

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1295
  • Total likes: 82
  • Coaching: Middle School
  • Defense: 4-4 Split
  • Offense: I Formation
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #310 on: June 13, 2014, 06:58:55 PM »
Tackle STAYS in a 7 unless a WB/TE then he moves to a 6.

SPLIT RULES for all WT-6 coaches I ever knew were:  If the split between the DT & DG is more than 2 1/2 yds the LB (who does NOT need to move) makes a "Tight" call.  Then the DE moves from an 8 to a 9, & the DT moves from a 7 to a 5.  No one else NEED move.  They will not get an OLM ON the LB!

Numbers = ATTACHED:

Thanks Coach!
"They call it coaching but it is teaching...You do not just tell them...you show them the reasons"

"You have to be smart enough to understand the game, and dumb enough to think it's important."

“…you have no bad habits to break...We either coach it or are allowing allowing it to happen.”

Offline Pearls of Wisdom

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4611
  • Total likes: 73
  • Read Only Account. Please no PM's or Emails
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #311 on: June 13, 2014, 07:15:41 PM »
Thanks Coach!

You are always welcome.

See the three "6's" we ran ATTACHED (pretty complete "package"):
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 07:18:26 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline Coach TonyM

  • Benefactors
  • Silver
  • Posts: 1901
  • Total likes: 280
  • Coaching: Middle School
  • Defense: Killer Bee
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #312 on: June 13, 2014, 07:57:32 PM »

It IS easy to PLAN FOR (PERSONNEL = the important thing).    Just some people trying to make it difficult (nonsensically so).  Hate to see what they would do if they faced the following, all of which I find more difficult to deal with, & it would probably require another 300 posts EACH:

1.  Defense of Split-T
2.  Defense of Winged-T
3.  Defense of "I" (Power-I, Slot-I, Pro-I, etc.)
4.  Defense of Split-Back Veer
5.  Defense of Wishbone (& it's off-shoot Flexbone)
6.  Defense of Pro-Style Offense (2 to 3 WR's)
7.  Defense of Spreads with 4 or more WR's  (including Run & Shoot, Air Raid, & Zone-Read/option, ETC.)

The UBSW "riddle" was solved by 1945.  MAYBE if we reach 1,000 posts on this topic people will tire of this folly!
Bill,  recently read Homer Rice's book on The Explosive Short T... very intrigued by it.  Have you ever faced it?

Offline Jburk

  • Silver
  • Posts: 1190
  • Total likes: 9
  • Speed + Technique = POWER
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #313 on: June 13, 2014, 10:05:26 PM »

It IS easy to PLAN FOR (PERSONNEL = the important thing).    Just some people trying to make it difficult (nonsensically so).  Hate to see what they would do if they faced the following, all of which I find more difficult to deal with, & it would probably require another 300 posts EACH:

1.  Defense of Split-T
2.  Defense of Winged-T
3.  Defense of "I" (Power-I, Slot-I, Pro-I, etc.)
4.  Defense of Split-Back Veer
5.  Defense of Wishbone (& it's off-shoot Flexbone)
6.  Defense of Pro-Style Offense (2 to 3 WR's)
7.  Defense of Spreads with 4 or more WR's  (including Run & Shoot, Air Raid, & Zone-Read/option, ETC.)

The UBSW "riddle" was solved by 1945.  MAYBE if we reach 1,000 posts on this topic people will tire of this folly!

Seems to me that the UBSW, or any offense at all for that matter, isn't a riddle at all. Just another offense with strengths and weakness. Is it your opinion that the UBSW has no value anymore?

I watched a great team play for a state championship this year, running UBSW.
The sword is more important than the shield.

Offline HCScott

  • Copper
  • Posts: 363
  • Total likes: 38
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #314 on: June 13, 2014, 10:37:17 PM »

You are the only coach to mention the IMPORTANCE of "horizontal placement" of the ball in defending the UBSW.  You are a step ahead of any of the other "posters" on the topic:

Sine the ball is WITHIN 5 yds. of the hash 80% of the - your defense MUST be able to cope with (& they present DIFFERENT problems):
1.  Long side of UBSW into the BOUNDARY (DON'T overshift).
2.  Long side of UBSW into the field (DO overshift)
3.  You must NOT get "outnumbered" to EITHER side of the middle man on O-Line (G).

Any coach plays against an UBSW should DEFINITELY buy Bud Wilkinson's book (with TONS of stuff vs. UBSW).  Best book EVER on the topic.  Bud beat the UBSW like a poor step-child.  Look on AMAZON.COM

Modern Defensive Football. by Gomer Jones and Charles (Bud) Wilkinson (1957)

Bill

I wanted to get back to the horizontal placement of the ball as I have some comprehension but now I'm thinking I need to match my personnel to the boundary or the field.

Should I be playing my best DE, LB and CB to the field side on every down? 

Are there some specific rules I should be following concerning field side or boundary side ?

How does this effect my interior linemen ?

How does my FS align considering the field side?
"The quarterback must go down and he must go down hard"