Notifications
Clear all

DE Play

Page 2 / 7

jrk5150
(@jrk5150)
Diamond
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 6431
 

I think boxing DE's are a huge mistake against off tackle teams.  Basically takes what should be a good-sized defender out of the play. Now, if you happen to have a really good CB filling inside of that DE, maybe that could work, but he better be really good at reading play action as well or he's going to get burned badly.

I think even guys who use their DE's to shut down sweep (Cisar) don't have them passively boxing. That's a John Reed thing, and total waste of player. We drool over boxing ends running DW.

I run JJ's 33, and our "DE's" are force players, but they are still playing outside-in and shouldn't be giving up the outside unless the RB bubbles deep to gt around them. Their basic instruction is to make the back stop and cut, taking away his momentum and allowing the rest of our defense the time to get there.


ReplyQuote
Dusty Ol Fart
(@youth-coach)
Diamond
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 7701
 

Dave:

Yes, the "Feathering" or "Slow Play" with Leverage is Contain.  Doing so makes it harder for the DE to be Trapped or Kicked out because of the angle involved. Not to mention it eliminates a Free Release by the TE. If he decides to use his OSLB for contain purposes, then the DE can indeed attack (Force) the backfield as they do in the 6-3.  I also believe the Spread is making a bit of a Dinosaur out of the 5-3 Defense.  Boxing Ends are a bygone use for Ends in the 5-3. 

I would suggest that he study the Odd Front variants, if this is his choice of defense, and be ready to adapt his defense situationally.  Nothing says you cannot swap Contain back and forth between the DE and OSLB.......As long as the Kids understand it, that simple switch can have a huge effect and the Offense wont know from play to play. 

 

Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  🙂


ReplyQuote
Coach Correa
(@coach-correa)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1592
 

An easy way to explain this as a 5-3 Coach is that DE has to own a 1x1x1x1 area  off emol keeping his outside arm free taking on blocks forcing BC back inside. Having his outside arm free should also allow him to expand and make a play if need be. If the rest of the defense is playing write none of this should be an issue. imho boxing only works 10 and below up top i would suggest setting the edge aggressively

Head Coach Tito Correa New Britain Raiders 14-U


ReplyQuote
mahonz
(@mahonz)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 23171
 

I don't care what kind of "line" you run defensively, whether's it's an "L," an arc or a straight line, we aren't passive.  We are attacking and compressing their offensive backfield from the outside in.  We have used our DEs, as well as our OLBs for contain but's it's always a full-out rush.  We use a banana (arc), lined up 1-yard outside of the EMLOS so that our DE/OLB can't be reached and attacking to deepest player depth.  Our route assures us that we are containing and "turning up" their play, but we don't wait/sit/watch by "running an L," boxing the DE and having him sit.  I've seen that done, but I am always left scratching my head wondering what does that even accomplish?

--Dave

D

Then you play your E's as the force players. For me this means you are forcing the issue by compressing the backfield. Will the ball funnel or spill? Either way you are covered.

Those that play their E's as contain are forcing one thing....the ball must funnel.  If its spills....it might be good night Irene.

Playing E's as contain outside of the typical 40 front has pretty much gone by the wayside IMHO. Rare to see it these days with the 50 and 60 fronts that are so common at the youth levels.

What is beautiful, lives forever.


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 17893
 

Yes, the "Feathering" or "Slow Play" with Leverage is Contain.  Doing so makes it harder for the DE to be Trapped or Kicked out because of the angle involved. Not to mention it eliminates a Free Release by the TE. If he decides to use his OSLB for contain purposes, then the DE can indeed attack (Force) the backfield as they do in the 6-3.  I also believe the Spread is making a bit of a Dinosaur out of the 5-3 Defense.  Boxing Ends are a bygone use for Ends in the 5-3. 

I would suggest that he study the Odd Front variants, if this is his choice of defense, and be ready to adapt his defense situationally.  Nothing says you cannot swap Contain back and forth between the DE and OSLB.......As long as the Kids understand it, that simple switch can have a huge effect and the Offense wont know from play to play.

Scott, I get you.  Good explanations, thank you.

--Dave

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
Pantherlinecoach
(@pantherlinecoach)
Bronze
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 427
 

Coach DP,

Can you elaborate on how you "force contain" by attacking from the outside in?

If you play it how I'm thinking, sounds like it might be what I'm considering when I say attack the deepest back. My thoughts were to have him rush straight at the deepest back by tracking outside hip and not letting him outside, and taking on any lead blocks on the outside shoulder.

This is the approach we take in Carbons 6-2 Shooter. If you take this approach I would put my better athletes at DE. This allows a little room for error, as the kids will not always be correct in their angles to the backfield. Just my two cents.


ReplyQuote
Dusty Ol Fart
(@youth-coach)
Diamond
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 7701
 

OK to my thinking here.  I have used both Jacks 6-3 and Paul's (JRTitan) Split 4-4. Jack's DE are Hybrids (Not True DE's) and Force Players.  JR's DE are Also Force but True DE's  These are Even Front Defenses. 

By Force I mean attacking the backfield to blow up or change the play. 

Contain DE's, such as the 5-3 DE's are meant to be, are there to turn the play inside.

Yet, so long as it is understood WHO is Contain, the 5-3 DE can be used as a Force player as well.

The Key to being Force is that YOU MUST EFFECT THE PLAY!  You can't whiff.  Ergo, if the Force player can either Drop it in the Backfield, Turn it inside ala Contain, or re-route the play deeper to go around (Spill), your Defense has an opportunity to collapse on the play.  Again to my thinking the DE's in a 5-3 are Just a little bigger and a couple steps slower than your OSLB.  So too they are much more effective in Collapsing the TE or OT down one Gap, and coming off that event to Drop the OT or Sweep play. 

I have also toyed with the Notion that your DE's are more like Nose Tackles.  In other Words, they sink their arses and Set the Edge!  None Shall Pass Mindset.  This is more a 5-2 Monster/Rover scenario.  IMHO extremely useful in Youth Settings where you are more apt to see 80/20 or 90/10  Run to Pass Ratios. 

Again, with the advent of the SPREAD OFFENSE, Defenses are much more likely to Base in what is normally considered Nickel and Dime Packages to offset the Screens, Slants, and Hitches.  In laymen's terms more LB and DB's. 

3-5, 3-3-5 and 4-2-5 Variants! 

jmho

Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  🙂


ReplyQuote
Bob Goodman
(@bob-goodman)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 9631
 

I'm thinking about running my base defense out of a 5-3 alignment this year with DE's in a 9 tech and I'm having an internal debate if I should box DE's or have them attack deepest back. I'm leaning toward attacking the deepest back but just curious what you all teach and why you teach it that way. Any thoughts or opinions is greatly appreciated.

I've never had charge of defense alignment (except 1 PeeWee game where I chose & signaled between our even & odd fronts), but can someone give a good reason in this coach's case (11Us, 5-3) why the ends shouldn't be wide 9s angling in?  That's seemed to have good results on teams I coached on, or opposing ones in our division.  I guess it could be put in terms of his "attack deepest back", if by that is meant to line up aimed at where that back's lined up.


ReplyQuote
Bob Goodman
(@bob-goodman)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 9631
 

a few times a game we'd cross it up.  X stunt or Loop stunt, meaning the DE would shoot inside and someone would take their contain responsabilty(usually OLB, but that would be your call).

kids get so used to seeing the same thing that when we ran this stunt, we almost always had a guy unblocked.  it's not a one trick pony, but obviously, the more you use it, the less of a surprise it is.

I bet that even when it's not a surprise, even if the opponents have practiced against it, they still get thru unblocked frequently.  But the problem isn't that; it's that if the other team has the right play on in anticipation of the stunt, they'll burn you because they don't need one of them blocked.


ReplyQuote
parone
(@parone)
Silver
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 766
 

that's true Bob.

but honestly, with the X stunt, you're still in a pretty sound set up.

your E is just shooting the C gap-which a lot of 4-4 teams do as a matter of course, with the OLB now taking over primary contain and CB with secondary contain.

the key, i think, is practicing it enough that the steps are fast and clean, and the player is coming through with his head up, looking in the backfield so he can react.

you are right, it isn't perfect vs everything.  we would try to call it when we were struggling vs off tackle plays which, with us being a 10-1/contain 4-4 team, OT was really our bugaboo.  this stunt helped us.

Dream Big.  Work Hard. Stay Humble.


ReplyQuote
Coach Tmac
(@coach-tmac)
Copper
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 21
Topic starter  

Thanks for all the input coaches. General concenses is DONT box, so that's out. Now I just have to decide how I want them to attack if aligned in 1x1. Maybe a little more info on The rest of my defense will help. So I'm planning to stack the LB's at 3-4 yards. My NG will slant one direction or the other with my mike taking his read step the opposite direction and have opposite A gap responsibility.  My DT's will slant either B gap or C gap, with my OLB's taking their read step opposite direction and having opposite gap responsibility. DB's in cover 3.

I basically want my DE's as a LB hybrid, because I'll ask them to cover as well. Against a #2 receiver, hit off the line and cover the flat. Man cover #2 if trips to their side. Follow motion in or out if motion to their side and play normal responsibility.

Thoughts?


ReplyQuote
patriotsfatboy1
(@patriotsfatboy1)
Platinum
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 3260
 

Thanks for all the input coaches. General concenses is DONT box, so that's out. Now I just have to decide how I want them to attack if aligned in 1x1. Maybe a little more info on The rest of my defense will help. So I'm planning to stack the LB's at 3-4 yards. My NG will slant one direction or the other with my mike taking his read step the opposite direction and have opposite A gap responsibility.  My DT's will slant either B gap or C gap, with my OLB's taking their read step opposite direction and having opposite gap responsibility. DB's in cover 3.

I basically want my DE's as a LB hybrid, because I'll ask them to cover as well. Against a #2 receiver, hit off the line and cover the flat. Man cover #2 if trips to their side. Follow motion in or out if motion to their side and play normal responsibility.

Thoughts?

I might consider using the LB's to cover the flat and allow the DE's to attack.  Giving them responsibility to the flat is going to take much of their aggressiveness away. I would have them with the ability to pin their ears back and disrupt what is going on in the backfield. 


ReplyQuote
Coach Correa
(@coach-correa)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1592
 

Our DE's are allows responsible for the flat that's how the 5-3 is played.

Head Coach Tito Correa New Britain Raiders 14-U


ReplyQuote
Dusty Ol Fart
(@youth-coach)
Diamond
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 7701
 

Thanks for all the input coaches. General concenses is DONT box, so that's out. Now I just have to decide how I want them to attack if aligned in 1x1. Maybe a little more info on The rest of my defense will help. So I'm planning to stack the LB's at 3-4 yards. 

Not sure Stacking is "Ideal" in a 5-3 set.  Whats your intent or goal by doing so?

My NG will slant one direction or the other I Suggest that the NG is on the Snap hand of the Center with my mike taking his read step the opposite direction and have opposite A gap responsibility.  My DT's will slant either B gap or C gap, We used everal calls for the interior linemen.  Fan, Pinch, Slant to Strength,  Slant to Wing, All of which were designed to change up the front 5 according to set or game evidence.  That being said, the true nature of the aforementioned was to keep the OL off of my LB's so they could make the plays. with my OLB's taking their read step opposite direction and having opposite gap responsibility  I think you will find a log jam of bodies if you use the OSLB's this way. DB's in cover 3.

I basically want my DE's as a LB hybrid, because I'll ask them to cover as well. Against a #2 receiver, hit off the line and cover the flat. Man cover #2 if trips to their side. Follow motion in or out if motion to their side and play normal responsibility.  Not sure what your goal is using the DE to cover in Trips?  You have a Corner, Safety and OSLB for that purpose.

Thoughts?

Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  🙂


ReplyQuote
Bob Goodman
(@bob-goodman)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 9631
 

I basically want my DE's as a LB hybrid, because I'll ask them to cover as well. Against a #2 receiver, hit off the line and cover the flat. Man cover #2 if trips to their side. Follow motion in or out if motion to their side and play normal responsibility.

Thoughts?

I think that's asking a lot, especially with following motion.  If I know he's doing that, I'll just motion a little WB across, and have him effectively take out a DE who'd normally have to be kicked out.

Against my pre-motion setup, your DE on that side would be trying to jam tight end who usually is looking for an inside release, and then your DE is trying to cover in the flat the WB who's lined up just outside him.  The geometry looks daunting.

With all those responsibilities, I think an offense playing against you has its choice of what type of matchup they want, hoping one of them will be a mismatch.


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 7
Share: