It's all the same.
 
Notifications
Clear all

It's all the same.

Page 1 / 4

Prodigy
(@prodigy)
Platinum
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 2520
Topic starter  

I was an UBSW guy.  Last season I drank the kool aid and became a DW guy.

I do a fair amount of reading, researching and talking to other coaches to learn.  Over the course of the past year or so, while running the double wing, I kept comparing it to the single wing.  I got to thinking about how similar they really are.  I also started simplifying the way I thought about football offenses (speaking primarily about the run game):

  • Power - blockers at the point of attack
  • Deception / misdirection - fool the defense

Yesterday I was on the phone with Coach Perry and he was talking about what he is planning for the 2016 season.  I realized I was mistaken, there's actually three approaches to offense:

  • Power - blockers at the point of attack | usually sacrifice deception for blocks
  • Deception / misdirection - fool the defense | sacrifice blocks for deception
  • Option - boolean to make defenders wrong

From here we could talk about the approaches to implementation of these offensive attacks

  • systematic - apply a consistent look & feel to the attack while attacking different areas of the field
  • grab bag - utilize various looks & feels to the attack while attacking different areas of the field

This post isn't really about debating which way is better, because quite frankly (like many things in life) the best approach to football is the one that works.  What I really wanted to touch upon is that all of this stuff is the same.

I've got "single wing" books where the formation doesn't include a wingback.  I've got "double wing" books where there's a single wingback or no wingback at all, in fact I've seen double wings that look more like single wings and even double wings that run out of the I or what's closer to a "T" than a double wing.  JRK5150 I love you brother, yet I'm going to challenge you here - when you're running toss without motion and you've got your WB off of the line...at what point does that WB technically become a HB?  I've heard some coaches say things like "the double wing isn't a formation or a system, it's a philosophy."  Actually it IS a formation, there are successful systematic approaches to utilizing the formation and the philosophy you are using is either power, deception or option.

I don't care whether you think you're running the double wing, single wing, wing-T, wishbone, I, inverted wishbone...this stuff is all the same.  It does the same exact thing.  I will however; give credit to Clark (at least I think it was Clark) with his lines of force theory.  I do believe that different formations provide strength by ways of geometry and forces.  If we've got our backfield lined up in an "I" and we give it to the deepest back who is running straight ahead behind 2 other backs running straight ahead, it's going to hit quicker and stronger than if we try to run a sweep out of that same formation. Additionally, formations can be used to misdirect the defense.  For instance, running a trips look out of the SW for a sweep play will likely result in the defense playing pass when it's a run with 3 blockers closer to their blocks.

I can understand where people have a need to quickly classify something so they can find common ground in order to speak about the game of football.  When someone asks what you do offensively, it's easier to say "I run the double wing" or "I run mostly out of the I" rather than saying "I utilize a systematic approach out of multiple formations that are a pretty even balance of deception and power."  Because people want to "SEE" a formation in their head and understand how it operates.

Anyhow, I hope that this dissertation helps some of you here who are wondering what to run out on the football field.  It's all the same.  There is nothing inherently different between a double wing, a single wing, an I, a wishbone or whatever except for the angles, distances and forces produced.  The thinking-mans' approach to this should be "what formation or formations best utilize the talent that I have.  Do we have players who can dive play after play?  Do we have players who are fast enough to make it to the edge?  Do we have great blockers where we can use a power attack?  Do we have smart, disciplined kids who can carry out fakes?"

If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.


Quote
SingleWingGoombah
(@singlewinggoombah)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 2070
 

I've got "single wing" books where the formation doesn't include a wingback.  I've got "double wing" books where there's a single wingback or no wingback at all

That is because these are not formations, they are umbrella terms for offensive systems. 


ReplyQuote
jrk5150
(@jrk5150)
Diamond
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 6431
 

Ha!  No worries.

As for your specific comment - if you're talking about my O when I'm under center, I shift the WB to the pitch point vs. motion him.  I consider that to be the same thing - we start in DW, we move one WB and snap with him at a HB spot, just like if he motioned.  It was an adjustment based on age and practice efficiency. I still consider that DW.

If you're talking about my current direct snap offense, it's definitely NOT DW.  As I explained to you on the phone, my O is absolutely a hybrid of DW, SW and Wing T.  But DW is what I know best, and that's been the heaviest influence on what I do.

Stepping back, I think the problem is that the overall offense has been named after the traditional base formation of the offense.  That doesn't mean you don't/can't do other things.  The SYSTEM is the determining factor, not necessarily the name of the formation. And that's why you see "DW" offenses that aren't in double wing, because you're talking about a system that was built/created with that two wing tight split formations. But let's face it, it could be called anything at all. It's just easier to refer to it as "DW" because other people now understand what the foundation of the offense was predicated on, and what the philosophy is.


ReplyQuote
Bob Goodman
(@bob-goodman)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 9624
 

It's all partly the same & partly different.


ReplyQuote
CoachCalande
(@www-coachcalande-com)
Diamond
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 7059
 

I was an UBSW guy.  Last season I drank the kool aid and became a DW guy.

I do a fair amount of reading, researching and talking to other coaches to learn.  Over the course of the past year or so, while running the double wing, I kept comparing it to the single wing.  I got to thinking about how similar they really are.  I also started simplifying the way I thought about football offenses (speaking primarily about the run game):

  • Power - blockers at the point of attack
  • Deception / misdirection - fool the defense

Yesterday I was on the phone with Coach Perry and he was talking about what he is planning for the 2016 season.  I realized I was mistaken, there's actually three approaches to offense:

  • Power - blockers at the point of attack | usually sacrifice deception for blocks
  • Deception / misdirection - fool the defense | sacrifice blocks for deception
  • Option - boolean to make defenders wrong

From here we could talk about the approaches to implementation of these offensive attacks

  • systematic - apply a consistent look & feel to the attack while attacking different areas of the field
  • grab bag - utilize various looks & feels to the attack while attacking different areas of the field

This post isn't really about debating which way is better, because quite frankly (like many things in life) the best approach to football is the one that works.  What I really wanted to touch upon is that all of this stuff is the same.

I've got "single wing" books where the formation doesn't include a wingback.  I've got "double wing" books where there's a single wingback or no wingback at all, in fact I've seen double wings that look more like single wings and even double wings that run out of the I or what's closer to a "T" than a double wing.  JRK5150 I love you brother, yet I'm going to challenge you here - when you're running toss without motion and you've got your WB off of the line...at what point does that WB technically become a HB?  I've heard some coaches say things like "the double wing isn't a formation or a system, it's a philosophy."  Actually it IS a formation, there are successful systematic approaches to utilizing the formation and the philosophy you are using is either power, deception or option.

I don't care whether you think you're running the double wing, single wing, wing-T, wishbone, I, inverted wishbone...this stuff is all the same.  It does the same exact thing.  I will however; give credit to Clark (at least I think it was Clark) with his lines of force theory.  I do believe that different formations provide strength by ways of geometry and forces.  If we've got our backfield lined up in an "I" and we give it to the deepest back who is running straight ahead behind 2 other backs running straight ahead, it's going to hit quicker and stronger than if we try to run a sweep out of that same formation. Additionally, formations can be used to misdirect the defense.  For instance, running a trips look out of the SW for a sweep play will likely result in the defense playing pass when it's a run with 3 blockers closer to their blocks.

I can understand where people have a need to quickly classify something so they can find common ground in order to speak about the game of football.  When someone asks what you do offensively, it's easier to say "I run the double wing" or "I run mostly out of the I" rather than saying "I utilize a systematic approach out of multiple formations that are a pretty even balance of deception and power."  Because people want to "SEE" a formation in their head and understand how it operates.

Anyhow, I hope that this dissertation helps some of you here who are wondering what to run out on the football field.  It's all the same.  There is nothing inherently different between a double wing, a single wing, an I, a wishbone or whatever except for the angles, distances and forces produced.  The thinking-mans' approach to this should be "what formation or formations best utilize the talent that I have.  Do we have players who can dive play after play?  Do we have players who are fast enough to make it to the edge?  Do we have great blockers where we can use a power attack?  Do we have smart, disciplined kids who can carry out fakes?"

power- mass momentum
misdirection
quick hitting
option
play action
straight out throwing game
run pass option

more or less how I view it.

Id say that even the mass momentum and misdirection games can be quite different from a defensive fit stand point based on the number of lead blockers you send through the hole, which can alter the run fits quite a bit.

MOJO    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtcRmKnRcsA

Go to WWW.COACHCALANDE.COM  for Double Wing DVDs, Playbook, Drills Manuals, Practice footage and emagazines. Ask me about our new 38 special dvds!


ReplyQuote
Prodigy
(@prodigy)
Platinum
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 2520
Topic starter  

There is much to teach you young grasshopper.

I do not think for a second that I have this stuff "whipped", mastered or completely understood.  I will say that if you disagree with my rant -- please put it out here for all to learn from.

I've based most of what I said before from my exposure to the single wing and double wing (along with reading on this forum and looking briefly at other "systems" / formations).  I've said before that for as simple as the game of football is, it's very complicated.  Today I sent an email to JRK5150 and I compared football to the game of chess.  The thing is, in chess you normally start with all of the same pieces and it's an equal match-up where strategy is the chief determining factor in how the game turns out.  In football, rarely is everyone playing with the same pieces.  I may step onto a game field with what amounts to pawns relative to the queen, rooks, knights and bishops of my opponent...or vice versa.  Imagine playing a game of chess against an opponent where you don't have any key pieces.  It's possible to still win if you're very good at tactics and strategy, yet it becomes more difficult than not.  Likewise, there are times when you step on the field and your opponent is playing with what amounts to pawns, while you have knights and bishops.

I look at systems like the "Power T" and this is a system that's built around deception / misdirection where blocks are sacrificed in an attempt to fool the defense.  Other systems where we take all of our backs and make them block are power-based systems...where we're trying to overpower the defense at the point of attack.  Then, like I said we've got option ball where we look at certain defenders as keys and say "if the tackle blocks left, the QB takes the ball, if the tackle blocks right, we hand the ball to the fullback.  If the QB keeps the ball, he runs down the line of scrimmage and looks at the defensive end, if the DE crashes down, we pitch the ball, if he doesn't, we keep the ball.  If we keep the ball, we continue down the line of scrimmage and if the corner comes down, we throw ball, if he doesn't, we run the ball.

Coach Calande suggested play action and such, but to me that falls under deception.  We' trying to FOOL the defense into thinking we're running...which pulls them off of their pass man or zone so that we can pass...the opposite of which would be a draw where we're faking like we're going to pass, which puts them onto their man or zone so that we can run. 

I put this out here for discussion purposes so that everyone could kick in and contribute and prove me wrong by sharing their knowledge and expertise.  I've only been at this since 2011.  We've got guys here who have been coaching for longer than I've been alive -- prove me wrong guys.  <3

If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.


ReplyQuote
Dusty Ol Fart
(@youth-coach)
Diamond
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 7700
 

Yes and No!

It all boils down to being able to EXECUTE!  Don't give 2 Sh*ts what formation or "Offense" ya run!

My Fav "Offense"??  The "Boring"  I Formation. 

Why?  I can do a multitude of stuff.  Yet I study the DW, Wing T, Spread, Wishbone (Variants) too.

Why??  Because there might be "One Lousy Play" I can run form any offensive set!    😉

Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  🙂


ReplyQuote
mahonz
(@mahonz)
Kryptonite
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 23169
 

K

I don't think anything you are saying is necessarily wrong.... per say.

Teams that run off tackle the best usually win. Every Offense worth running does this by design. From there I think Counters are important. Every Offense worth running has a great set of Counter plays whether they are a run or a pass or both. From there I think now you have to look at a good passing game. This is where things can fall apart IMHO. Every Offense that is worth running will lend itself to a good passing game whether its pure passing or roll outs or play action.

Now...run off tackle the best...check.... have a set of really good counters...check... add in the ability to pass well and you should do very well regardless of the talent. Yet how each Offense accomplishes this now becomes VERY different. Now nothing is the same. Some do better than others at certain things.

I have delved into a 100% shotgun Offense this Spring season that can do it all...EXCEPT in a driving sleeting hailing torrential downpour of a rain storm. If the Center is struggling with a wet ball and turf and the dynamics change....the Offense is "off". WAY off. Not sure but its probably worse in a blizzard.

I have lived in my under center World for probably a decade plus now with the exception of a couple of packages that I shelf in terrible weather.

Im now thinking I have made a mistake by going 100% shotgun. I can do just about everything I do now from under center but its C O M P L E T E L Y different for the backfield....but fully weatherproof. 

The difference between the traditional UBSW and the DW that you are familiar with...one is direct snap and one is not. G I N O R M O U S difference. One is right or left handed and the other is fully ambidextrous. G I N O R M O U S difference. One is a great roll out Offense and the other a terrible roll out Offense. G I N O R M O U S difference....etc.

That is where the per says come into play.

My take.

What is beautiful, lives forever.


ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 4495
 

I have delved into a 100% shotgun Offense this Spring season that can do it all...EXCEPT in a driving sleeting hailing torrential downpour of a rain storm. If the Center is struggling with a wet ball and turf and the dynamics change....the Offense is "off". WAY off. Not sure but its probably worse in a blizzard.

Cutter. Gloves.

Say the word and I will buy a pair for the Center(s). When Kent and I coached together, I just about insisted that everyone who touched the ball wore Cutters at practice and in good weather. The logic?

Gloves or no gloves in good weather? Doesn't matter as long as the kid is used to gloves.
Gloves or no gloves in bad weather? Gloves are far better, provided the kid is used to them.
Ergo . . . get them used to gloves so when it starts raining frogs, your offense stays on track.

BTW, the end over end snap thing? MUST be done with gloves in bad weather. What size hand do you think Fish has? Youth Large?

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
spidermac
(@spidermac)
Gold
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2462
 

Okay...hmmm...

lots of good stuff here, this could be a fun thread...

First off, to your chess analogy...the even playing field is only even if the guys (the coaches in your analogy?) playing chess are of equal skill. Yes they all have the same amount of the same pieces, but who knows best how to use them....

Same could be said on the football field, each coach has 11 players to use some of their knights might be better than my knights...but who is going to use them better? I went out to watch a couple of my boys who are playing that flag football for fun stuff..5 on 5, they were on a 3rd grade team, playing against a 4th grade team...the other team had bigger and faster knights and bishops and pawns...the team my boys were playing on, coach new how to use his pieces better...they ended up tying, they should have won, they turned the ball over on downs 3 times right at the goal line.

Okay, I will buy off on some of what you said in the original post...the game at it simplest form is blocking and tackling. How these two are accomplished is through scheme and technique, which comes back to your chess analogy. Space to run in is your friend...how do you create it? Spread guys attempt to spread the defense out and create space that way. Power Running Offenses, such as the DW, create space by compressing the defense and creating the space outside the 9, 10 or in some cases 11 man boxes they see. Now, the spread team that cannot threaten the defense with it's perimeter players does not have to be honored by the defense...whenever I face a spread team, I send 8, until they show me those perimeter players pose a threat to me. Same way a defense will shift its defense away from the motion wing to stop power against a DW team. Why defend the backside if they aren't going to run away from the motion, why waste defenders?

The DW offense is more than a formation...it is a state of mind...or a philosophy....just like the different chess masters will play the game differently...putting 4 backs in your backfield, 2 at wing positions does not mean you are running a DW offense. I have seen many a coach do that, and it just doesn't work as they are not using blocking schemes that take advantage of the balanced formation and the ability to attack the entire front. They don't know how to teach the counter plays that are contrary to what the defense thinks it is seeing.

I guess maybe I am agreeing with you after all, to a degree, it is all the same, but it is still different 🙂

None of them suck, they just haven't found what the kid is good at yet.


ReplyQuote
Ronin
(@ronin1974)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1492
 

Cutter. Gloves.

What does "Cutter" mean?


ReplyQuote
jrk5150
(@jrk5150)
Diamond
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 6431
 

Cutter = a brand.

It's all relative.  A few years ago we were fumbling snaps in the rain and I went gun (shallower snap - probably pistol depth) and it calmed right down.


ReplyQuote
Prodigy
(@prodigy)
Platinum
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 2520
Topic starter  

Perhaps I'm doing a poor job at explaining my theory here, because I get the impression that mostly everyone participating in this thread are in agreement..

Rules dictate that we have to have 7 guys on the line of scrimmage.  That leaves us with 8 holes (including outside of the EMLOS on both sides). The 7 players on the line of scrimmage can pull or execute any number of blocks, whether it's rules, zone or whatever.  This leaves us with 4 players, 1 of which will have to be in position to receive a snap, whether it's shotgun, under center, sidesaddle or whatever. What we do with the other 3 players is up for debate.  We can put them on the line, we can put them in the backfield.  We can put them in a T or an I or something that looks like a diamond or a wishbone or a Notre Dame Box.  We can put them in motion and we can shift them...we can run to all 8 holes out of any of these formations.  Obviously some formations would be easier to hit all 8 holes over others...common sense stuff.

Now, regardless of how you want to arrange the backfield or how your line is blocking, there's two approaches to moving the football on offense.  Either overpower the defense with blockers or trick the defense.  Again, some formations and motion might be more conducive to whatever approach you're taking than others...for instance, you can run a dive out of both the I and the DW.  In the I, you could easily get 2 blockers in front of the ball carrier, in the DW, you've got the FB diving...you give up the power/blocks by having a motion wing and also by having your non-motion wing stick to his original look.
If you really wanted to, you could bring them both over into the I and run the dive and you're going to lose your misdirection entirely.

If you show up for a fair fight, you are unprepared.


ReplyQuote
Ronin
(@ronin1974)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1492
 

Cutter = a brand.

It's all relative.  A few years ago we were fumbling snaps in the rain and I went gun (shallower snap - probably pistol depth) and it calmed right down.

Are you saying you had trouble going UTC in the rain and moving to gun(pistol) helped?  I would have expected the opposite.


ReplyQuote
SingleWingGoombah
(@singlewinggoombah)
Gold
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 2070
 

What you are saying in way too many words is that there is a finite amount of things you can do in football and that no matter how many prom dresses you try on, its the same body underneath.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 4
Share: