Notifications

Blocking scheme with a smaller line  

Page 2 / 3
  RSS

32wedge
(@32wedge)
Silver Moderator
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 695
Virginia
Middle School
Only / Head Coach
August 26, 2020 9:36 pm  
Posted by: @bob-goodman
Angle blocking does not generate more force.  What it does is diminish the force your opponent exerts on you.
That’s a way to look at it.  
 
In a typical angle block, your opponent’s force is not directed straight at you while your force is directed straight at the opponent.  The resultant vector is the sum of your force and the opponent’s force and will be directed at a new angle away from the point of attack.  The angle between the two determines whether you cancel each other as in a straight ahead board drill type drive block or add your force together as in a severe angle block.  The sharper the angle, the more advantage the blocker has.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 4146
August 26, 2020 10:37 pm  

Know what? Let me attack this from an entirely different direction. I do not believe that lack of size on the o-line is a disadvantage until 6th grade. We play bigs on the line because we have a patch rule. 

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


32wedge liked
ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 26, 2020 11:23 pm  
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

Know what? Let me attack this from an entirely different direction. I do not believe that lack of size on the o-line is a disadvantage until 6th grade. We play bigs on the line because we have a patch rule. 

I disagree.  (Surprise, I know.)  I've coached all ages from 7-17.  Some of our guys were big and some weren't, some were fast and some weren't.  Regardless, we teach them how to use leverage and technique to their advantage, how to move their feet quickly through footfire drills, how to play aggressively, and how to block in a way that gives them an advantage against any defender.  The last time I coached the Double Wing in high school, our heaviest starting offensive lineman (Center) was 195 lbs. and we had a 150 lb. Offensive Tackle.  Size matters when 2 hammers are hitting each other the same way.  But if my yardstick whips you across your knuckles, then you can't even pick up your hammer.

--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
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 4146
August 26, 2020 11:34 pm  
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

Know what? Let me attack this from an entirely different direction. I do not believe that lack of size on the o-line is a disadvantage until 6th grade. We play bigs on the line because we have a patch rule. 

I disagree.  (Surprise, I know.)  I've coached all ages from 7-17.  Some of our guys were big and some weren't, some were fast and some weren't.  Regardless, we teach them how to use leverage and technique to their advantage, how to move their feet quickly through footfire drills, how to play aggressively, and how to block in a way that gives them an advantage against any defender.  The last time I coached the Double Wing in high school, our heaviest starting offensive lineman (Center) was 195 lbs. and we had a 150 lb. Offensive Tackle.  Size matters when 2 hammers are hitting each other the same way.  But if my yardstick whips you across your knuckles, then you can't even pick up your hammer.

--Dave

I'm not convinced that size up front is a huge advantage after 6th grade, either. I'm saying that a younger kid with size that is athletic enough to use that size is pretty rare. Phil Bavo has won a couple of state championships running DW with his biggest lineman at 195.  Our local HS won their last state championship featuring a 190lb NT.

But 8-9 years old . . . it takes a LOT of work to teach big kids how to move and most coaches don't bother.

This post was modified 2 months ago by gumby_in_co

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
terrypjohnson
(@terrypjohnson)
Bronze
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 277
United States
Head Coach
August 26, 2020 11:37 pm  
Posted by: @bob-goodman
Posted by: @terrypjohnson

If you're small and athletic, I'd definitely recommend SAB and a lot of pulling. Even if your line is smaller, if they're moving fast, they'll still generate a ton of force (up to 2 1/2 to 3 times the amount depending on the angle.. and yes, I borrowed that from Coach Gregory). 

Angle blocking does not generate more force.  What it does is diminish the force your opponent exerts on you.

If that's what you think, I won't argue with you. Reasonable minds can -- and will -- disagree. Unless you hate the Single Wing. That just makes you wrong 😉

All kidding aside, let me clarify where I'm coming from (e.g. maybe I could've worded it better). The presentation I used to help teach/refine SAB last year (attributed to Coach Gregory, but shared by another person on Slideshare), states "Striking an opponent at an angle gives the blocker a x1.5 to x3 force advantage depending on the angle of attack". Since force is multi-dimensional (magnitude and direction), I'd argue that the blockers are generating more force because they have more time to accelerate (albeit a step or two). If you're saying it's because there's less resistance because of the angle, that would mean we're both right (e.g. they're moving faster and there's less resistance).

Whether its more force generated or less resistance put up (resulting in a force differential in favor of the blocker), the point I wanted to make to the poster (Coach @Reberson4) is that they'll gain an advantage with the angle blocking against bigger opponents. With my little dudes, I call this "windshield wiper blocking" because everything gets washed out of the way. However, I like @32wedge's freight train analogy better and will probably use that when I get my official roster next week.

Coach Terry

Fight 'em until Hell freezes over, then fight 'em on the ice -- Dutch Meyer


32wedge liked
ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 27, 2020 12:02 am  
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

But 8-9 years old . . . it takes a LOT of work to teach big kids how to move and most coaches don't bother.

I'll agree with that, completely.

--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
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 27, 2020 12:12 am  
Posted by: @terrypjohnson

The presentation I used to help teach/refine SAB last year (attributed to Coach Gregory, but shared by another person on Slideshare), states "Striking an opponent at an angle gives the blocker a x1.5 to x3 force advantage depending on the angle of attack". Since force is multi-dimensional (magnitude and direction), I'd argue that the blockers are generating more force because they have more time to accelerate (albeit a step or two).

This is 100% correct.  I experimented with this many times using the same two players against each other using angle and distance to see what yielded the greatest result.  Jack Gregory's instruction is, as usual, spot on.

--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


32wedge liked
ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 4146
August 27, 2020 9:48 am  
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

But 8-9 years old . . . it takes a LOT of work to teach big kids how to move and most coaches don't bother.

I'll agree with that, completely.

--Dave

You and are on on the same page with 2 point stances. Last season, I had the D-line and Mahonz insisted on a 3 or 4 point stance. I disagreed, but fell in line and coached within the parameters given because that's what I do. This, BTW is exactly how I became a Mega Splits guy.  Anyway, we had a lot of size on our team last year, but they were pathetic with their hand on the ground. Even the athletic bigs were a mess. I decided to chip away at the problem with the goal of improving a little bit every day.  One of our daily warmup exercises is "sprint from prone". Lay on your belly and when the ball moves, get up, sprint to the far line, touch the grass and sprint back. I took the all 8 bigs in the far 2 lines and had them go out of a 4 point instead of prone. I studied their stances, mimicked them and figured out why they weren't working. The first thing I learned was how to teach them all to get into a consistent stance. I had them start on their knees with the balls of their feet in the grass, fists touching their knees. On "ready", I had them simply raise their butt until their hips were slightly higher than their shoulders. A very common problem was the kid "adjusting" to a more comfortable position on "ready" rather than doing exactly what they were instructed. Easily fixed.

Initially, results were pathetic, but at least they were consistently pathetic. Left to my own designs, I would have given up and put them back in a 2 point. Then, one magical day, our girl came close to "winning" her round, even against the "skill players". Eventually, all but 1 of our bigs were flying out of their 4 point stances. 

That whole exercise was very educational for me. Most coaches see a big kid an expect him to be a good offensive or defensive lineman, then blame it all on the kid's "want to" when he's not. Or, they chalk it up to "he hasn't decided he wants to play football yet" or some other nonsense. But to the point, we've had some VERY good offensive lines over the years and it's rare that we are big all the way across. My biggest challenges as an o-line coach have been taking big guys who were studs on their Fall teams and teaching them to block OUR way on our Spring teams. One thing we've always agreed on is knowing why you do something, then accepting nothing else. That applies no matter what your blocking scheme, techniques, or size of your players.

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
mahonz
(@mahonz)
Kryptonite
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 22973
August 27, 2020 10:13 am  
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @mahonz
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

Mega splits forces them to play in space.

No.  Mega spilts does not force anyone to play in space.  Some defenses just choose to do so because they believe they have to.  It's kinda like the 3-point stance.  Most coaches teach it because they think that's what they're supposed to do.

--Dave

oh no no no no.

Things change...a lot. Unless of course you change your rules of alignment.  😎 

I never said, "things don't change."  What I said is that mega splits does not force a defense to play in space.  Any more than an offensive line lining up foot-to-foot forces a defense to put 11 in the box.  Most defenses may choose to play us that way, but how they play us is still up to them, not me.

--Dave

Makes sense. 

 

What is beautiful, lives forever.


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 27, 2020 10:54 am  
Posted by: @mahonz

Makes sense. 

From time to time I hear coaches discuss, "If we do this, it forces the defense to do that" when actually, it doesn't force a defense to do anything.  If we line up in a Trips formation, it doesn't "force" the defense to put three coverage guys on us; despite the fact that we'll see that every time.  What we might see (if someone had the guts to do it), is to take away those three coverage defenders and use them to blitz our QB from different locations.  Maybe we win, or maybe our opponent does, but a certain offensive formation or scheme doesn't force my opponent to do anything.  This is why I refuse to spread out our defense against a Spread offense.  I won't accommodate an opponent's offense while weakening our defensive scheme at the same time.  My theory is that you can coach defensive scheme one of two ways:  Either you accommodate your opponent by adjusting to his formations and motions, and try to match him tit-for-tat.  Or, much like our Double Wing offense, don't concern yourself with an opponent's scheme.  We run defensive plays that rely on success through our execution, not from an adjustment to their scheme.  Our preference is for our offensive opponent to be more concerned with how to block us and keep us out of their backfield, than they are about their own formation, snap count and the overall execution of their play.  If our opponent's coaching staff are yelling at their offense to "block" us, or to "hold on to the ball," I know we've made their focus be less on scoring touchdowns and more about just keeping their offense intact.

I'm reminded by the dozens of youth games I've attended over the years where a Wide-Out (or several) are flanked out further than the QB can pass the ball, or get the ball there quickly and accurately.  And yet, the defense will man up with each Wide-Out, only to watch the offense run some sort of Between-the-Tackles play.  And adding insult to idiocy, that offense will continue to do it over and again as the defense chooses to cover the QB who can't throw, receivers who can't catch, and even if they could, aren't fast enough to take it the distance.

--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
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 4146
August 27, 2020 11:23 am  

@coachdp

Man, I didn't want to go down this rabbit hole, but here goes.

True, Mega Splits doesn't "force" anyone to do anything, but I think the way we do it, we give the defense 2 options with their own pros and cons. We, being extremely familiar with mega splits, understand those pros and cons and fell well prepared to avoid the pros and exploit the cons. Our typical opponent, on the other hand initially scoffs at our ridiculous alignment and and tries one or more of several "typical responses" that we've seen at least a dozen times. Over the seasons, we will occasionally face an atypical opponent. Sometimes we adjust well, sometimes not.

Addressing your approach to do what you do and refuse to accommodate us:

You ran the 33 Stack with the Durham War Eagles for a number of years.  Simple question:  When you were stacking and tapping, was it acceptable for 2 players to go through the same gap?

 

 

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
mahonz
(@mahonz)
Kryptonite
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 22973
August 27, 2020 12:47 pm  
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @mahonz

Makes sense. 

From time to time I hear coaches discuss, "If we do this, it forces the defense to do that" when actually, it doesn't force a defense to do anything.  If we line up in a Trips formation, it doesn't "force" the defense to put three coverage guys on us; despite the fact that we'll see that every time.  What we might see (if someone had the guts to do it), is to take away those three coverage defenders and use them to blitz our QB from different locations.  Maybe we win, or maybe our opponent does, but a certain offensive formation or scheme doesn't force my opponent to do anything.  This is why I refuse to spread out our defense against a Spread offense.  I won't accommodate an opponent's offense while weakening our defensive scheme at the same time.  My theory is that you can coach defensive scheme one of two ways:  Either you accommodate your opponent by adjusting to his formations and motions, and try to match him tit-for-tat.  Or, much like our Double Wing offense, don't concern yourself with an opponent's scheme.  We run defensive plays that rely on success through our execution, not from an adjustment to their scheme.  Our preference is for our offensive opponent to be more concerned with how to block us and keep us out of their backfield, than they are about their own formation, snap count and the overall execution of their play.  If our opponent's coaching staff are yelling at their offense to "block" us, or to "hold on to the ball," I know we've made their focus be less on scoring touchdowns and more about just keeping their offense intact.

I'm reminded by the dozens of youth games I've attended over the years where a Wide-Out (or several) are flanked out further than the QB can pass the ball, or get the ball there quickly and accurately.  And yet, the defense will man up with each Wide-Out, only to watch the offense run some sort of Between-the-Tackles play.  And adding insult to idiocy, that offense will continue to do it over and again as the defense chooses to cover the QB who can't throw, receivers who can't catch, and even if they could, aren't fast enough to take it the distance.

--Dave

The first realization for me using these nutty splits was that it does not fall under the traditional "spread" philosophy. It simply forces all box defenders to have to cover more space. Each linebacker must take an extra step or two while a blocker may or may not have to match steps...every DL alignment creates a rather large bubble somewhere. The only real fix...more box defenders or more speed. A REALLY talented MIKE has always given us problems. But...that kid gives everyone problems.

The biggie is a RB that utilizes that space well. Much like a RB that can run the zone in a zone scheme. Seeing the forest thru the trees to use a cliche. Or a good DW WB running toss....trust the tunnel for it will appear. Some kids get it...others not so much. . 

One other thought....mega splits and the 2 point stance are a perfect marriage. 

And I agree and will quote Lou Holtz....if you split out a wide receiver with no arms....somebody will cover him. 

What is beautiful, lives forever.


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 27, 2020 12:50 pm  
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

@coachdp

True, Mega Splits doesn't "force" anyone to do anything, but I think the way we do it, we give the defense 2 options with their own pros and cons.

--Now that I agree with.  There are pros and cons.  As long a you're comfortable with that, know what they are and how how you'll address both, you should be fine.

Addressing your approach to do what you do and refuse to accommodate us:

You ran the 33 Stack with the Durham War Eagles for a number of years.  Simple question:  When you were stacking and tapping, was it acceptable for 2 players to go through the same gap?

--We have primarily been a Split 4-4 over the years (leaving the A-Gaps uncovered by our Level 1 defenders) that has morphed from and into everything from a 33 Stack to an Umbrella 8.  Our formation was of less importance to us than the responsibilities and how we taught the positions.  Yes, 2 players could go through the same gap, if it were assigned.  We've probably designed any number of things that were used for one season only, based on the personnel we had and what player's strength we wanted to take advantage of.  But generally, I'm not a gambler.  I don't like stunts, yet we stunted.  I don't like blitzes, yet we blitzed.  I feel like our base (and basic) defense should allow us to do everything we want to do.  And if that opponent is good, we'll maintain our basic defensive responsibilities and philosophy, but we're also looking to cut off the head of the snake.  

--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
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 17390
North Carolina
High School
August 27, 2020 12:52 pm  
Posted by: @mahonz

And I agree and will quote Lou Holtz....if you split out a wide receiver with no arms....somebody will cover him. 

I won't.

--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


32wedge liked
ReplyQuote
mahonz
(@mahonz)
Kryptonite
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 22973
August 27, 2020 12:56 pm  
Posted by: @gumby_in_co
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

But 8-9 years old . . . it takes a LOT of work to teach big kids how to move and most coaches don't bother.

I'll agree with that, completely.

--Dave

You and are on on the same page with 2 point stances. Last season, I had the D-line and Mahonz insisted on a 3 or 4 point stance. I disagreed, but fell in line and coached within the parameters given because that's what I do. This, BTW is exactly how I became a Mega Splits guy.  Anyway, we had a lot of size on our team last year, but they were pathetic with their hand on the ground. Even the athletic bigs were a mess. I decided to chip away at the problem with the goal of improving a little bit every day.  One of our daily warmup exercises is "sprint from prone". Lay on your belly and when the ball moves, get up, sprint to the far line, touch the grass and sprint back. I took the all 8 bigs in the far 2 lines and had them go out of a 4 point instead of prone. I studied their stances, mimicked them and figured out why they weren't working. The first thing I learned was how to teach them all to get into a consistent stance. I had them start on their knees with the balls of their feet in the grass, fists touching their knees. On "ready", I had them simply raise their butt until their hips were slightly higher than their shoulders. A very common problem was the kid "adjusting" to a more comfortable position on "ready" rather than doing exactly what they were instructed. Easily fixed.

Initially, results were pathetic, but at least they were consistently pathetic. Left to my own designs, I would have given up and put them back in a 2 point. Then, one magical day, our girl came close to "winning" her round, even against the "skill players". Eventually, all but 1 of our bigs were flying out of their 4 point stances. 

That whole exercise was very educational for me. Most coaches see a big kid an expect him to be a good offensive or defensive lineman, then blame it all on the kid's "want to" when he's not. Or, they chalk it up to "he hasn't decided he wants to play football yet" or some other nonsense. But to the point, we've had some VERY good offensive lines over the years and it's rare that we are big all the way across. My biggest challenges as an o-line coach have been taking big guys who were studs on their Fall teams and teaching them to block OUR way on our Spring teams. One thing we've always agreed on is knowing why you do something, then accepting nothing else. That applies no matter what your blocking scheme, techniques, or size of your players.

Im forcing Purcella to play from a 3 point. Oh man....its ugly. But his two point is worse. Then he becomes a very good blocking dummy. I'd let someone like Moll play from a 2 point anytime. But he is a rare breed. 

 

Jericho is back....smart kid. In one day he was catching his man like he had been doing it for years...effortlessly. The next Ean Lee? Mehi is doing very well at CB. A bit of a surprise. 

What is beautiful, lives forever.


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 3
Share: