Author Topic: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation  (Read 4533 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline champion

  • Copper
  • Posts: 14
  • Total likes: 0
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: I Formation
  • Title: Other
we play against youth teams that run those defenses against us  and we are a 2 back I formation offense how should we attack those fronts out of the twins look or any other I formation sets ---help is needed

Offline CoachOCD

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4152
  • Total likes: 398
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Multiple
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2015, 10:16:20 AM »
when you say "we run" what does that mean? You have an offensive coordinator who has selected the I? or someone who is trying to make you run the I?

Offline ZACH

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10165
  • Total likes: 777
  • freedom of choice, not consequence - N. Saban
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2015, 10:56:04 AM »
Similiar posts under a different name last year same time.

Best cut is not cut:

Run power and wide zone to a 3 tech (red)
Run counter and tight Zone to a 1/5 tech (white)

* you can run any play to any front, just expect to bounce or roll back.

If you lead with the fb on zone you're essentially closing lanes/options for your runner.

Good luck
"When a coach said hes going back to fundamentals it usually follows...I just got my butt kicked" - random

"Some athletes have division dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline Bob Goodman

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 9083
  • Total likes: 295
  • Coaching: 10 & Under
  • Defense: 4-4 Stack
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2015, 01:50:18 PM »
If you lead with the fb on zone you're essentially closing lanes/options for your runner.
Please explain.  If the lead blocker is given the same instruction as the runner would've, i.e. find the hole & run thru it, & the runner then follows the lead, how does that close lanes?

Offline ZACH

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10165
  • Total likes: 777
  • freedom of choice, not consequence - N. Saban
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #4 on: August 03, 2015, 02:58:12 PM »
Please explain.  If the lead blocker is given the same instruction as the runner would've, i.e. find the hole & run thru it, & the runner then follows the lead, how does that close lanes?

In zone run scheme a lead block is there to let the runner know he needs to cut soon and into another lane. This isn't an is where he we come and we smash our way through.

We don't want to make the read harder then it already is .. we use force blocks now and it works better for yardage
"When a coach said hes going back to fundamentals it usually follows...I just got my butt kicked" - random

"Some athletes have division dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline Bob Goodman

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 9083
  • Total likes: 295
  • Coaching: 10 & Under
  • Defense: 4-4 Stack
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #5 on: August 03, 2015, 03:11:28 PM »
In zone run scheme a lead block is there to let the runner know he needs to cut soon and into another lane. This isn't an is where he we come and we smash our way through.

We don't want to make the read harder then it already is
How does it make the read harder?  All it does is assign that job to a different player -- the lead blocker.

Is the problem that the lead blocker isn't deep enough, so doesn't have enough time to make the read?

Offline ZACH

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10165
  • Total likes: 777
  • freedom of choice, not consequence - N. Saban
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #6 on: August 03, 2015, 05:01:39 PM »
How does it make the read harder?  All it does is assign that job to a different player -- the lead blocker.

Is the problem that the lead blocker isn't deep enough, so doesn't have enough time to make the read?

There's a lot of factors. In youth it skews the vision of the rb. If the fb searching doesn't get Ino the second level you made the read much harder.

Eg tight Zone right
-----------m-----------------------w
-------1-----------3--------5
-----0----#-----0-----0

Right now if you is the mike where does the ball have to go...the roll back

Now if fb goes to the will (force) now we have a 2 way go.

It's very particular at higher levels I feel. In youth my experiance it makes the read almost impossible
"When a coach said hes going back to fundamentals it usually follows...I just got my butt kicked" - random

"Some athletes have division dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline Bob Goodman

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 9083
  • Total likes: 295
  • Coaching: 10 & Under
  • Defense: 4-4 Stack
  • Offense: Wing T
  • Title: Assistant
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #7 on: August 03, 2015, 08:40:27 PM »
There's a lot of factors. In youth it skews the vision of the rb. If the fb searching doesn't get Ino the second level you made the read much harder.

Eg tight Zone right
-----------m-----------------------w
-------1-----------3--------5
-----0----#-----0-----0

Right now if you is the mike where does the ball have to go...the roll back

Now if fb goes to the will (force) now we have a 2 way go.

It's very particular at higher levels I feel. In youth my experiance it makes the read almost impossible
Are you getting what I'm saying?  I'm saying have the lead back make the read, the runner just follow him.  The only read the runner has to make is the lead's butt when he runs into a defender.

Or am I missing something you're saying?

Offline mahonz

  • Administrator
  • Kryptonite
  • Posts: 23862
  • Total likes: 2263
  • No Wimps
  • Coaching: 7 & Under
  • Defense: DC 46
  • Offense: Single Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2015, 10:13:12 PM »
Are you getting what I'm saying?  I'm saying have the lead back make the read, the runner just follow him.  The only read the runner has to make is the lead's butt when he runs into a defender.

Or am I missing something you're saying?

B

That would be asking a lot.

The FB just gets in the way of the rotation of the zone. He is best served up blocking to the edge.
Collect moments, not wins.

Online Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7232
  • Total likes: 692
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Double Wing
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2015, 10:47:18 PM »
Gents:

It doesnt make a difference what the defense is, you attack the bubbles they give you.  Why waste time and energy running into a Brick Wall?  Every defense has bubbles!  Most every team has a weak sister somewhere on the LOS. 

Why run a 32 Dive at a 1 tech when a 31 Dive is at an open hole (LB)? 

Just sayin 
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)

Offline ZACH

  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10165
  • Total likes: 777
  • freedom of choice, not consequence - N. Saban
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2015, 09:00:18 AM »
Are you getting what I'm saying?  I'm saying have the lead back make the read, the runner just follow him.  The only read the runner has to make is the lead's butt when he runs into a defender.

Or am I missing something you're saying?

Yes you're missing something

That fb gets stuffed into a hole...now where does the rb have to go...probaby no where bc you told him to follow the fb.

If the fb goes to block the edge the lb stays flat. So now we have a 2 way go at least.

By inserting a fb you close a lane and make it easier for the defense regardless of what interior lane that is.
"When a coach said hes going back to fundamentals it usually follows...I just got my butt kicked" - random

"Some athletes have division dreams and jv work ethic" - random

Offline CoachOCD

  • Gold
  • Posts: 4152
  • Total likes: 398
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Multiple
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2015, 11:26:13 AM »
FB, lead blocker? whats that?

The OP didnt chime back in, just asked a vague / ambiguous question, said he was a I 2 back set as base and wanted to know about attacking defenses from twins...??? there's a wholatta questions here to start with


I think there is 2 different conversations here.

Bob - First having a lead blocker aint a bad thing in most I-formation plays, Im pretty sure thats how it was intended

second some of you are talking zone blocking and the running backs "zone read", right? Are you guys making an assumption that the OP is zone blocking? or are you suggesting he zone block.

and 3rdly Bob - I think a lead blocker has a couple of probs with zone- 1st he is 1 more player in box so now defense has another player in box - minimum, 2ndly what the other coaches said already (mh & mahonz) they have higher football IQs than me and many more years of experience. If your asking them a question, OK. BUT if your arguing a point contrary to their advice...IDE PACK A LUNCH & MAKE SURE I DID MY HOMEWORK FIRST!

If I wanted to look retarded I could walk up to Logan and debate his offense, the one that hung up 48 on DLS..something nobody has done prior

Online PSLCOACHROB

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 12330
  • Total likes: 2277
  • Coaching: 14 & Under
  • Defense: 5-3
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Retired
Re: running plays vs 46,4-4,6-2,5-3, defenses out 2 back twins formation
« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2015, 04:06:39 PM »
we play against youth teams that run those defenses against us  and we are a 2 back I formation offense how should we attack those fronts out of the twins look or any other I formation sets ---help is needed
Lots of zone talk here and I am going to assume you aren't running zone. No one answer for all those fronts. My favorite play is power. I like to run it a bunch of different ways. I really like iso from the I and that along with toss sweep with a bunch of pullers and a motion crack on a backer seem to be the base of most youth I offenses. Add in a few counters, fb dive, a trap and a pap or two and you have an offense, for youth anyway. Sprinkle in some fakes/misdirection every now and again and you are dooiking with gas. That combo of plays should be able to move the plays against any youth front. Which ones to run really depends on much more than the info you gave. Find the bubble and run to it. As an I team you should be able to run iso to various gaps and it is pretty easy to teach the qb to read where to run it as he walks up to the line and call the play.