Help MosleyTheCat keep the forum running smoothly. Please DONATE using PayPal!

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
DC Wing T Offense / Re: DCWT Beast
« Last post by mahonz on Today at 12:27:17 PM »
Mike:

It does make sense however, Jack's DE's shouldn't chase that kind of split.  Personally, I would much rather string the play to the sideline than give up the Off Tackle plays.  Doing do allows more defenders to get there.

I also agree that Tight Splits don't work from my limited experience with same (BEAST) this season.  Progressive splits should do nicely.  Wouldnt hurt to throw a 7 yard split (lmolos) once in a while to see if they do chase.  Might open up the play book a bit.     

Devils Advocate

"S"

Thing is....if Jacks DE does not chase the splits...it only helps.

The reasons are complicated....but if a DE does not play his 9 tech or if a LB'r walks up....it actually helps the blockers because now the blockers dont have to travel as far....if that makes sense.
2
General Discussion / Re: How do you keep kids' interest?
« Last post by gumby_in_co on Today at 12:20:28 PM »

The studs could not get helmet stars for yards gained or TD's scored.  But every offensive lineman who "blocked the right guy" every play got one and every receiver who caught a pass and didn't drop it got one.  The QB even got one if it hit the receivers hands whether dropped or not.  So absolutely everybody on offense but the stud backs were getting helmet stars.

On defense, the studs got one for every tackle they made but DL's who maybe went the whole game without a tackle got one for every double team they drew without going backwards and two stars if they split it.  Corners got one star if they covered their man every play, a second if they broke up a pass, a third if they intercepted, and a fourth if they made a tackle.  So everybody was getting helmet stars.  So the studs had serious competition.  Their only chance to keep up was to make a whole lot of tackles on defense (Which they did.).

Even the MPP's were in the competition.  My rules were if you played only half the game, whatever number of stars you won was doubled.  If you only played a quarter, they were quadrupled.  So - Yes - Everybody was in the running for that trophy.  I never had a running back win it although most came within 2 stars.

There was a third thing I did but, before I get to that, let me add something about those stars.  The equipment managers didn't like having helmets returned at the end of the season with decals on them.  So we used "gummy" stars that peeled off the helmets.  What the kids would do was, at the end of the season, peel those gummies off and stick them to a plaque and then hang them on their bedroom walls.  A ton of them did this.  They were proud of those stars.  They represented individual accomplishment.

Oh!  Yeah!  The kid who won the trophy?  It said "MOST VALUABLE PLAYER" on it with their name.  Now tell me you wouldn't keep that?

OK.  I said there was a third thing I did.  That was set team goals.  Every week we set several team goals for the next game, NONE OF WHICH WERE RELATED TO THE SCOREBOARD.  We were going to give up one less first down than last week.  We were going to get one more first down on offense.  We were going to cause on more fumble than last week, get one less penalty on offense, one less penalty on defense.

And, when the game was over, we'd see how many of those goals we had accomplished.  It did not matter whether we won or lost, if we achieved just ONE GOAL we were getting BETTER.  You never, EVER, create a team goal related to the scoreboard because, who knows, you might just lose.  That would be a recognition of failure and not accomplishment.
 But, you know, if you achieve those goals they actually will show up on the scoreboard and, if you only achieve one, you're still getting better.  You want to be able to create a positive even out of a loss.  And when your team has a goal to accomplish, they're not BORED! 


Wow, Clark. We don't do helmet stickers, and I don't think we'll ever start, but I see HUGE value to having an MVP competition like this. I'm thinking that instead of helmet stickers, I'll keep track on a graphic on our team website. Then at the end of the season, present them with a plaque with all the stars they earned over the course of the season.

Also, we do something called "promise keepers" the last practice before a game where each player makes a promise to the team for the upcoming game. Sometimes the promises are either outrageous, like "I promise to score 5 touchdowns". Sometimes they are vanilla. We had to ban "I promise to fight for my brothers". If each position coach can focus the individual goals during the week, then the promise could be "I promise to block the right man every time", etc.

Lastly, I love the team goals. Mahonz was lamenting our problem with penalties, so this is one way to get the team focused on a team goal like that. Thanks for the post.
3
S

I agree to what you are saying in principle. This is where I differ from most coaches with my defensive philosophy. My DL's aren't there to just keep my LB's clean & not make plays, I want them to be play makers. I also don't play MMP's on the starting defense. I believe all 11 on defense have to make plays.

Joe


I dont disagree at all.  I want kids who can effect plays as well.  Being rural we dont have many kids on our roster.  Few fit the prototype for any position therefore I have to find ways to make life miserable for the OL.  If thats my Bulldozer type OK but I'll switch that up with an Ankle Biter who can out quick the OL and effect the play.  Truth be told I dont want my DL "Square Dancing" with the OL.  I want them 1 yard into the backfield, head up, looking for the ball.  Doing so means my Gap is covered and I can effect the play.  If, on the other hand, they are playing Push me -Pull you,  I havent controlled my Gap and I have no idea where the ball is.     :)

4
DC Wing T Offense / Re: DCWT Beast
« Last post by Dusty Ol Fart on Today at 11:47:57 AM »
Mike:

It does make sense however, Jack's DE's shouldn't chase that kind of split.  Personally, I would much rather string the play to the sideline than give up the Off Tackle plays.  Doing do allows more defenders to get there.

I also agree that Tight Splits don't work from my limited experience with same (BEAST) this season.  Progressive splits should do nicely.  Wouldnt hurt to throw a 7 yard split (lmolos) once in a while to see if they do chase.  Might open up the play book a bit.     

Devils Advocate

"S"
5
General Defense Discussion / Re: Is 8 in the box a thing of the past ?
« Last post by CoachDP on Today at 11:45:57 AM »
I never bought into the THOUGHT of the front 3 occupying olm for backers to be free or hiding people there

Neither did I.  I want defensive linemen making plays and having the opportunity to make plays; not be blocking dummies or bear crawlers.  Not saying that a defense can't be effective using bear crawlers.  They certainly can.  I just wanted my guys in the backfield making the play.

--Dave
6
General Defense Discussion / Re: Is 8 in the box a thing of the past ?
« Last post by CoachDP on Today at 11:42:54 AM »
I heard discussion about moving the sidelines in 15 yards when Potter's guys play.

Scott, they might as well.  We don't play much wider than the Free Blocking Zone.

--Dave
7
General Discussion / Re: How do you keep kids' interest?
« Last post by CoachDP on Today at 11:40:20 AM »
"Why are they in the endzone?"  I'd ask as they ate their frigging oranges.

"So their coach can scream at them without their parents hearing," they'd yell back.

Clark, I love this. ^ lol

--Dave
8
DC Wing T Offense / Re: DCWT Beast
« Last post by mahonz on Today at 11:35:51 AM »
It is a legit question and whatever Mahonz and Gumby are smoking I want to buy some.

Dont forget the age group here....8th graders that have been running this stuff for a while now.

Generally.....the better teams....follow their rules of alignment. At the smurf level this makes sense because we all see so many 50 and 60 fronts with less 2nd level Defenders. Smurfs are not going to be running 7' splits either. So at the Smurf levels every OLM and TE is generally covered or has a Gap Defender.

At the MS levels things changed because we all see a lot of 40 fronts so now you are faced with blocking a lot of 2nd level defenders which at the youth levels is really not Job Number One for most coaches.

So....you must make blocking 2nd level defenders Job Number One.  GOD is far more desirable for most youth coaches over GOL or a BOB count system.

Now with the heavy unbalanced and the mega splits half of your blocking surface will be blocking 2nd level defenders most every snap vs the 40 fronts. At the youth levels....THAT is RARELY the case because those 2nd level defenders are spread out more evenly. Plus we get real upset if our blockers chase any double teams UNLESS a blocker asks for help.

So...stop thinking normal and consider this. Most every single run blocking rule requires the blockers to MOVE a defender. When Michael first approached me with this nutty idea the thought process was to NEVER move a defender. If a Defender aligns here....keep him there. If a Defender wants to go there....run him there.

This works BEYOND belief and why Michael is truly the genius here.  This would never work with normal splits.....they have to be pushing the absurd per the age group you are dealing with. The splits Clark posted up thread would be a good starting point for 2nd or 3rd graders. The splits Gumby posted up Thread is a good ending point for 7th or 8th graders.

Quite honestly.....if a coach adopted mega splits for his DCWT then his Offense would improve....dramatically. The spacing for the backfield and QB footwork would need to change but it would improve.....dramatically.

In the end you have to consider what these super spread splits do to EACH defender. Now a NG that is used to Defending 9 square yards of grass is now defending 18. Every single LB'r is now taking 8 steps to do a task rather than 4. CB's who are generally really good open filed tacklers and rarely have to get off blocks to make a play....are now so wide they are only helpful on sweeps or spills.

And the biggie....most every single youth team makes their hay running C/D gaps so they play their turds at DG because they can. Well...your splits are so wide it takes about a week to run to the D gap so may as well start running a lot of A/B gaps plays. You will find yourself running North and South far more than East and West. By doing this I have found we rarely lose yards....always moving forward.

Another play that comes into the fold big time is the QB sneak from under center. When we run it now we EXPECT to score....even if its 80 yards. One of our QB's is so good at this he calls it on his own and is the only one that knows the play.

https://youtu.be/mYWVkHvMIhE

So....if you are going to run Beast and use normal splits....great. Keep thinking with the Left side of your brain. Using absurd splits will require Right side brain thinking.

Me personally....both the DCWT and the DCB should be run 100% Maxi. The reason being....learn and practice loose because you can always compress with no real negative effect. Learn and practice compressed then going loose is a bear.

Gumby's latest experiment was pulling to lead and trap. Pulling to lead same side ....good.  Pulling to cross the Center...bad. Wham traps....we ran out of time getting these right but they will work. We never truly got the spacing correct for the backfield. Plus we didn't get any real buy in from the OC.  We also experimented with Sally and Draw. That has potential....real potential.

I used to think mega splits would only work for certain deigns. Now I believe they will work for most any design. I believe you must employ a TE and a FB / H Back / Sniffer Back because they complete the deal for every overload I have come across.

The only exception....Empty 5 wide. That was our "base" Offense this year and we destroyed teams with it....running and passing.

Just thought I'd throw out some philosophy here to help things along. The Beast plugged in using Clarks progressive splits will be fine. Foot to foot will suck. Absurd will crush it.

Still....looking forward to play designs you all come up with. I have always kept things pretty basic for Beast and put more energy into our Base Offense.

Final note....someone mentioned direct snap to the inside Sniffer Back. This is a SPECTACULAR play design that few teams can execute.  Its a real mystery. Lots of fumbles.

My take.
9
I ran counter once as my opening play.

Eric, against some teams, anything you run will work.

--Dave
10
Putting MPP'S ON DEFENSE IS NEVER AN OPTION AND I ALWAYS CARRY + 30 KID'S . And two Joes's point we alway' s stress OUR front 3 making play's ! If they can cause havoc it makes everyone else job easier....So in a perfect world we would love king kong at nose who's big and aggressive that can two gap but if you get a smaller guy that can shhot gap's can work just as effectively . I never bought into the THOUGHT of the front 3 occupying olm for backers to be free or hiding people there ... MAKE PLAY'S IS HOW WE APPROACH IT AND BE PHYSICAL !!!!!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10