Hi Bob,

Intriguing adjustments.  Appreciate you're walking us through the process. 

Thanx 

Posted by: @coyote

Intriguing adjustments.  Appreciate you're walking us through the process.

I hope they appreciate it on my team.  I wouldn't count most of them as adjustments, though, but rather as additions to what's a fairly standard wing T playbook -- probably closer to standard than many kiddie versions.  "Adjustment" would be where you're changing something, subbing something out for something else coming in, like the way we changed the footwork in 2019 for the 20 series (buck sweep) to eliminate the reverse pivot.  Really the only change I'm recommending so far is in the fullback's positioning and in the footwork on the buck (trap)-sweep-waggle/counter sequence.  The rest is suggestions to add plays, especially the Quick.

However, truth be told, I do have at least one suggestion coming where I'm saying to not just add a play, but drop another we have that'd be redundant with it.  I'd like to take out our existing Power -- the off-tackle or sweep play with the fullback leading (30 series) -- and replace it with one snapped thru the quarterback's legs to the halfback after he just barely starts in Rocket motion.  Everything else would look the same except we'd gain the quarterback as a blocker.  I think I'll post links to the snap-thru-the-legs plays in the Single Wing section here.  As you may have noticed, I like combining wing T and single wing stuff.

Age group?

--Dave

Posted by: @coachdp

Age group?

--Dave

13th birthday after July 31, 2020, plus no more than 3 older-lighters.  I don't think we'll have any older-lighters this fall, because the level above us needs them.

Here's the next entry.

After this, stuff to go with the 30 (power) series.  I looked in the 2015 playbook of the NBYFL that we based off, and saw that on some 30 series plays they already had the FB cheat forward 2 feet.  None of them have the FB offset in a shade like I do, though.  And of course none of them have the ball snapped thru to the HB or FB as I'm about to suggest.

The plays that are snapped thru will be posted here in the Single Wing area.

Any chance ou can draw them up vs 6-3?

Posted by: @jcarbon2

Any chance ou can draw them up vs 6-3?

Maybe, if you'll show or tell me where to put all of the defense against double tight or single tight.  I think we might've seen one 6-3 look last year, and we set one up in semi-opposed practice.  Meanwhile, did you follow the continuation in the Single Wing area?

@bob-goodman

Yes, I am following in the SW area. The 6-3 vs double tight we see is head up DL on OGs and OTs and DEs on air. MLB in 00, OLBs in 50s and both corners 7x3 off TEs 

Posted by: @jcarbon2

@bob-goodman

 

Yes, I am following in the SW area. The 6-3 vs double tight we see is head up DL on OGs and OTs and DEs on air. MLB in 00, OLBs in 50s and both corners 7x3 off TEs 

OK, I'll include some of those.  Not going to diagram our fairly standard wing T stuff against those, just the unusual stuff I'm suggesting be added.

Here's the FB quick hitter against jcarbon2's D:

As illustrated, the guards could either crab or block butt-to-the-ball, whichever works best.  Crabbing I think would make a better pile to keep the DTs from sliding over, but you should teach the players to mix it up, keep the opponents guessing.  How you block the LBs would be a matter of priorities: Who's been better at cutting off your runs, who's been over-committing and winding up behind the play.  So the amount of emphasis on annihiliating the MLB vs. not letting anyone cross their face from the outside would be adjustable.  Some of the time the OT's not going to be able to get free of the charging DT in time to make a second-level block anyway, but I hope your players are sophisticated enough to not get mentally tied up with the opponent directly opposite them; that's tough to get across to kids, a lot of the time they want to play their own little game of beating up on that guy rather than playing a team sport.

I notice when I post a diagram composed in OpenOffice Draw here, the expanded picture looks funny as a GIF or PNG, retaining the individual drawing items, but a JPEG comes out nice and flat.  The thumbnail looks a little better as JPEG too.

We should compare these to the Quick plays in Clark's system too.  I haven't looked at them in a long time, but the basic idea of quick hitter's the same.  I totally lifted the name "Quick" from him, though!

Having looked now, I see he uses the term only for those HB inside slant plays like you see on highlight films from the 1950s (and on the quick pitch plays that were popular in the pros until about 50 years ago; darn, does that make me feel old).  Makes sense because he still has the FB deeper than the HB, the HB not so wide; while we have the HB splitting the T's outside foot and I'm suggesting the FB be moved forward and slightly offset, so my quick hitter's going to be a FB run.  The only midline quick hitter he has is the QB jailbreak.  The blocking scheme is the same for my Quick as his Quick, though.  Also the same concept on the handoff that the QB is just pivoting out with the ball as the RB takes it.

And here's the pop pass, whose blocking was so simple, I looked for ways to make it complicated (and failed):

If it's take what the defense gives you, this is what this defense gives you.  The only thing more you could ask for would be a middle blitz.  The fullback has to check off the fake Quick (dive) and the fall-down, in order to pick up the DE who may be screaming in, but the only worry would be if the MLB, without that dive fake, would drift back to cover the pass when he sees the center not come out at him.

If you want to know what complication I considered, I thought instead about having the RG cut the DT, the RT pick up the DE, and the FB follow thru with his dive fake and pick up the DG instead of falling down.  The whole idea of the FB's falling down was to keep him out of the QB's sight line, but if he's going to be picking up an otherwise unblocked DG, there's the situation I wanted to avoid: the QB having heads in his face.

The 101 Rocket vs. the 6-3 would be blocked just like the 5-3 with the CB coming to the line, as shown in the upper right diagram of  http://users.bestweb.net/~robgood/football/Rocket-explained.pdf .

The 126 Keep vs. 6-3 would be blocked as against the 4-4, except the RG would be blocking the MLB instead of the ILB shown in  http://users.bestweb.net/~robgood/football/126keepExplained.pdf in the lower left diagram.

Here's the Rocket counter that's not one of the thrown-snap plays:

 The ones that are thrown-snap are linked from the Single Wing section.