Author Topic: Defending the UBSW Offense  (Read 158376 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

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 #315 on: June 13, 2014, 11:11:50 PM »
Bill,  recently read Homer Rice's book on The Explosive Short T... very intrigued by it.  Have you ever faced it?

Only once (1990).  Homer went all the the Pro Set after he used the Short-T.
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 #316 on: June 13, 2014, 11:13:37 PM »
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.

I don't say the UBSW has NO value, but I would rather play against it than ANY of those other offenses I listed!
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 #317 on: June 13, 2014, 11:18:25 PM »
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?

I don't think I would "flip" personnel at your age group.  Since MANY teams are "right-handed"  play your best DE & DT on left (Tackles must be quicker than the Guards).  Best run ILB on left & best pass defending LB on right.  Guards = no preference (but they are generally bigger & slower than the Tackles).

Rules are simply if the ball is withing 5 yards of the hash - that is considered "ball on hash".  THAT (& formation) determine use of WT-6 & Overshifted-6 (I mentioned that before).  Formation to open field = OVER-SHIFT.  Formation into bnoundary = WT-6.

Anytime you want to discuss this = feel free to phone me at 804-716-7038 (Va).
« Last Edit: June 13, 2014, 11:21:48 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

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 #318 on: June 13, 2014, 11:58:04 PM »
I don't think I would "flip" personnel at your age group.  Since MANY teams are "right-handed"  play your best DE & DT on left (Tackles must be quicker than the Guards).  Best run ILB on left & best pass defending LB on right.  Guards = no preference (but they are generally bigger & slower than the Tackles).

Rules are simply if the ball is withing 5 yards of the hash - that is considered "ball on hash".  THAT (& formation) determine use of WT-6 & Overshifted-6 (I mentioned that before).  Formation to open field = OVER-SHIFT.  Formation into bnoundary = WT-6.

Anytime you want to discuss this = feel free to phone me at 804-716-7038 (Va).

I have been doing exactly what you have prescribed with personnel so far.

I am going to call during the day and ask you questions concerning formations.
Thanks, this has been very informative.
"The quarterback must go down and he must go down hard"

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 #319 on: June 14, 2014, 09:59:59 AM »
Only once (1990).  Homer went all the the Pro Set after he used the Short-T.

I'll have to plead a bit of ignorance on my part, as I really am not familiar with the "Short-T". I'm somewhat familiar with the Split-T, but not so much the short-t.

Coach, you have any more info on it?
The sword is more important than the shield.

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 #320 on: June 14, 2014, 11:24:15 AM »

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

Typically none of these O's are run with a heavy unbalanced line...don't implement a BB and all have a traditional QB.

You have to appreciate how unusual the UBSW Formation is to youth coaches.
What is beautiful, lives forever.

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 #321 on: June 14, 2014, 11:30:02 AM »
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.

J

I consider every well coached O a riddle. The UBSW being the worst....or the best depending on which sideline you are standing on.  :)
What is beautiful, lives forever.

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 #322 on: June 14, 2014, 11:35:34 AM »
I have film of this defense completely shutting down the BEST SW teams: 


Bill

Is it possible to see these films on youtube?
What is beautiful, lives forever.

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 #323 on: June 14, 2014, 11:47:30 AM »

You talk so much about YOUTH football to the point you use it as a crutch (like "it's too cold for 8 year olds but we're going to play the game ANYWAY").

In youth ball = we played vs UBSW, Unbalanced line DW, Unbalanced line Winged-T's, and none of the gave us the problem that BALANCED lines did (on my 8-9 team, my 10 year old team (6 th grade), and my 11 year old team (7th grade).

No well known long time Single Wing Coach EVER had the success Bob Neyland did.  When asked WHY he he didn't use UBSW he said the off-tackle play hit SLOWER.  (plus you saw too many "screwball" defenses).

I fail to see where you gain ANYTHING going unbalanced (I don't care if the players are 3-4).

Bill

When a youth coach is hired simply because he can pass a background check and nothing more....you have to appreciate their level of inexperience. I think the UBSW takes extra advantage of this...scratch that...I know the UBSW takes advantage of this. I've seen it happen with my own two eyes many times.

So...lets do something about that ! Since we cant hire coaches...we can feed info and hope it makes it way out to more inexperienced coaches. Why did I start this Thread? For the coaches that PM'd me on the subject...and Neyland aint one of them  :P
What is beautiful, lives forever.

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 #324 on: June 14, 2014, 11:51:17 AM »
I fail to see where you gain ANYTHING going unbalanced (I don't care if the players are 3-4).

Bill

Isnt the common 21 personnel considered unbalanced?
What is beautiful, lives forever.

Offline PSLCOACHROB

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 12511
  • Total likes: 2440
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #325 on: June 14, 2014, 01:32:44 PM »
Bill

When a youth coach is hired simply because he can pass a background check and nothing more....you have to appreciate their level of inexperience. I think the UBSW takes extra advantage of this...scratch that...I know the UBSW takes advantage of this. I've seen it happen with my own two eyes many times.

So...lets do something about that ! Since we cant hire coaches...we can feed info and hope it makes it way out to more inexperienced coaches. Why did I start this Thread? For the coaches that PM'd me on the subject...and Neyland aint one of them  :P
I agree with Mike here. The crutch is not the players but the coaches. They players can run whatever we teach them and Mike gets that for sure(maybe more than any of us). Almost all youth coaches have no idea what the ubsw even is. They have no idea how to align to it. They don't know they have resources like this site to find help. What you have drawn up and what Bill is presenting with his wt6 and shifted 6 is great but if you don't know about it you end up drawing up some crazy bs defense that will get crushed. The ubsw might as well be another sport for many youth coaches. I have on more than one occasion had Pop Warner coaches ask me what we were running with that spinning shot gun offense(we are multiple but still run a decent amount of ubsw) and I respond with "have you ever heard of Pop Warner?" Blank stares. ::)

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 #326 on: June 14, 2014, 01:34:22 PM »
Bill

Is it possible to see these films on youtube?


MIKE:  What, are you doubting my word?  I never have put ANYTHING on youtube.  I have a TON of film (I have a few coaches I met online coming here in July to SEE them).  Can send it to you for $75 each (to convert 800' of 16MM to DVD) or $25 (to convert VHS to DVD).  $5 postage will do it (no charge for my time involved).  How many would you like?

In your coaching career - did anyone ever explain to you that all football (by AGE) is "RELATIVE" (size, speed, psychological make-up)?  I have found this to be 100% true in a coaching career that dates back to 1959).  What the hell does using an unbalanced line have to do with coaching "youth" (if that guaranteed success why doesn't all "kiddie" coaches use it)?  That is just sheer NONSENSE!

You use the term "youth" as a "crutch" (this is getting "old").  I coached youth football too (kids still wore socks, jock straps, pants, jersey,  helmets, mouth pieces. shoulder pads, cleats; = kids still had to block & tackle; ETC).  I fail to see where you gain ANYTHING being "unbalanced" (even if the "kiddies" are 3).  1960 I coached 8-9 age group.  1961 I coached 10 year olds (6th grade), & 11 year olds (7th grade).  In 1962-63 I coached HS ball, BUT, also had a 7th grade team that practiced in the evenings.  We saw PLENTY of UBSW, UBDW, & UB/Winged-T, & UB/DW-T.  None gave us as much problem as BALANCED lines (that's why 99% of teams use balanced lines).  I will post a picture of my 1961/10 & 1961/11 year olds (that's me behind the "A" team) at bottom = ATTACHMENT #1).

PS:  In watching UBSW on youtube & DVD (much of it from members of this site) = the following things "jump out at me" as WEAKNESSES (UBSW).  There MAY be UBSW coaches who might benefit from reading this (unless they have "closed minds").  Every coach who abandoned the UBSW in the 1940's spoke (& wrote) of these: (most of the UBSW coaches on this site will "poo-poo" these, but hell, who cares if ostriches bury their head in the sand?).

1.  You time the plays with a calendar rather than a stop watch.  Bob Neyland (winningest SW coach of all times) preferred the balanced line SW BECAUSE the off-tackle play towards the WB  hit so much QUICKER (& you had more power on off-tackle plays away).  See #2:

2.   The teams of members on this site make direct snaps to the TB & he has to sit & WAIT on the damned ball (slows the play down).  ALL the great SW coaches (on EVERY LEVEL) I ever knew made LEAD snaps to the TB (snapping the ball at the FB's original align so the TB could take it on the MOVE).  ATTACHED below (#2) is what Pop Warner said (in 1912) about "LEAD SNAPS").  "Youth" centers CAN be taught to snap it to where the FB aligned (he does this on FB plays anyway). 

3.   If you pull the long-side Guard (next to the center) it causes BIG penetration over his position.  Princeton & Ken Keuffel quit doing this (the Michigan staff got FIRED in the early 1950's & this was one factor cause they couldn't run O.T. anymore).  I had 2 kids to PLAY for Princeton (late 50's & early 60's), & Princeton All-Time Great - Dick Kazmaier - lived in Richmond.  They ALL alluded to this.  I have Keuffel's (& Princeton's) film, & have been a guest in his home, & watched him play.  I doubt if ANYONE living (next to Ed Racely) knows a FRACTION of SW ball like the late Ken Keuffel did).   In 1945 almost every SW coach who dropped the offense for the Tight-T & Split-T alluded to this fact).  Leahy at ND, & Blaik at Army, wrote (& spoke of this).

4.  Center is not 100% a blocker (with his head between his knees).   In 1945 almost every SW coach who dropped the offense for the Tight-T & Split-T alluded to this fact as a MAJOR CONCERN).  Leahy at ND, & Blaik at Army, wrote (& spoke of this)

5.  "A primary weakness of the UBSW is that the weakside attack tends to be just that - WEAK".  Quote from Fritz Crisler whose 1947 Michigan team was the most TALENTED UBSW team I ever saw (I have their film).

6.  Harder to teach than most other offenses.  In 1945 almost every SW coach who dropped the offense for the Tight-T & Split-T alluded to this fact).  Leahy at ND, & Blaik at Army, wrote (& spoke of this).

7.  WHY was there a "mass exodus" from the UBSW (on ALL levels) beginning around 1945 (the reasons above were FACTORS)?

PS:  Anyone wanting to discuss any of this DEEPER (there are solutions to many of these problems) can phone me (in Va) at:  804-716-7038

ATTACHMENT #1 = my 10 year old team ("B Team"), & my 11 year old team ("A-Team).  That's me sitting behind the "A-Team".  We were undefeated, & unscored on (the year BEFORE I had the 8-9 year old team),

ATTACHMENT #2 = Pop Warner comment on Center snaps: 





« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 03:04:21 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline MHcoach

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7753
  • Total likes: 1847
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Other
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #327 on: June 14, 2014, 02:33:10 PM »
CMJ

I agree with you, using "they are youth" excuse just doesn't hold water. What I didn't get or understand till just now, is the excuse isn't about the players rather the coaches. I still think it's an excuse, albeit a valid one.

While I have only faced UBSW twice & neither teams was very good, I would still prepare to defend it because we had no idea what offenses we would see at the Nationals. Then again we prepped for anything we thought we would see. At the HS level I hope we get to see it this year, that would mean we were playing Apopka in the state semi's.

What our plan always was against all offenses was to get players to the ball. We were based out of a 4-4 that simply morphed into a 6-2, so with a simple call we would be into the over-shifted WT-6. We had another call that allowed us to roll up the FS, we often did this against teams that played 2 te's & full house backfields, so this was no great change.

In looking at this, was this because of staff always tried to have an answer & was prepared for anything; where as the typical "youth staff" isn't? Often have I seen youth teams have to call a time out because they aren't prepared for something simple.  I never made the connection that the coaching was the answer, because I only knew what we did.

Joe
"Champions behave like champions before they're champions: they have a winning standard of performance before they are winners"
Bill Walsh

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 #328 on: June 14, 2014, 02:46:32 PM »
CMJ

I agree with you, using "they are youth" excuse just doesn't hold water. What I didn't get or understand till just now, is the excuse isn't about the players rather the coaches. I still think it's an excuse, albeit a valid one.

While I have only faced UBSW twice & neither teams was very good, I would still prepare to defend it because we had no idea what offenses we would see at the Nationals. Then again we prepped for anything we thought we would see. At the HS level I hope we get to see it this year, that would mean we were playing Apopka in the state semi's.

What our plan always was against all offenses was to get players to the ball. We were based out of a 4-4 that simply morphed into a 6-2, so with a simple call we would be into the over-shifted WT-6. We had another call that allowed us to roll up the FS, we often did this against teams that played 2 te's & full house backfields, so this was no great change.

In looking at this, was this because of staff always tried to have an answer & was prepared for anything; where as the typical "youth staff" isn't? Often have I seen youth teams have to call a time out because they aren't prepared for something simple.  I never made the connection that the coaching was the answer, because I only knew what we did.

Joe


Joe:

Correct (that's just "excuse-itis" by coaches)!  I realize most youth coaches are not experienced but if they want to "talk the talk" they should be prepared to "walk the walk" (I.E. GET experience by visiting experienced coaches & learn "in person" & not by typing on a site)!  You OWE that to your players!
 
There is an old saying about communication:
1.   Letters (typing on here) are only a beginning.  You can get a severe case of EYE-STRAIN reading all this "BS" - including mine!
2.  Phone calls are better than letters.
3.  Face to face = better than phone calls & the BEST way to communicate (& learn)!
4.  "It's what you learn AFTER you "know it all" that matters"!  I am 76 years old & do not know "shitski" (Russian for "doo-doo"), but I strive to learn more every day.  Football consumes most of my waking hours.

CMJ
« Last Edit: June 14, 2014, 03:02:59 PM by billmountjoy »
My Contact Info: Coach Bill Mountjoy phone: 804-716-7038 EST /  Email: butzadams@hotmail.com

Offline PSLCOACHROB

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 12511
  • Total likes: 2440
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Retired
Re: Defending the UBSW Offense
« Reply #329 on: June 14, 2014, 02:57:46 PM »

Joe:

Correct (that's just "excuse-itis" by coaches)!  I realize most youth coaches are not experienced but if they want to "talk the talk they should be prepared to walk the walk" (I.E. GET experience by visiting experienced coaches & learn "in person" & not by typing on a site)!  You OWE that to your players!
 
There is an old saying about communication:
1.   Letters (typing on here) are only a beginning.  You can get a severe case of EYE-STRAIN reading all this "BS" - including mine!
2.  Phone calls are better than letters.
3.  Face to face = the BEST way to communicate (& learn)!
4.  "It's what you learn AFTER you "know it all" that matters"!  I am 76 years old & do not know "shitski", but I try to learn more every day.  Football consumes most of my waking hours.

CMJ
BIll,
   That may of been the most important post you have ever made. Unfortunately 99.99% of youth coaches will never read it and will never have a clue. They will just keep doing the same dumb bs over and over again and blame their players. Youth footballs limitations are 100% because of the coaches.
   Joe, I need that Miami tackling circuit btw. Up for some company?  :P