Chris Brown's Football Talk and Chalk

I've Moved!

2005-09-13T12:45:00.000-04:00

Sorry, but I've moved locations again. You should be redirected shortly [I'll actually have to fix this tonight due to a webmaster error]. If you are not redirected then you can go to the new location at http://smartfootball.blogspot.com

Too big for my britches

2005-08-09T15:57:00.000-04:00

I keep getting hit with this Daily Bandwidth limit exceeded thing. Looks like I really ought to move the site to a better host and purchase a domain, though I really hate to move the site again. I still gets lots of traffic routed through the original nohuddle.freeservers.com address, and many of the old football sites simply do not update and won't be changing their lniks. I would sure hate to have potential link-clickers have to be re-route twice, but I'm out of good ideas.

There had been some talk of a name change too for the site. I'm all for any ideas you have.

Lastly, I've been wanting to solicit other coaches for articles for some time, but none have submitted any yet. I even approached a few upper level coaching staffs, but all were a bit wary. Maybe in time.

Anyway, just wanted to apologize to those who keep seeing the Daily bandwidth limit exceeded page. A surprising turn of events for a little site that has been around for several years (ironic though that more people check to see what I have to say now that I am no longer actively coaching, though I do have more time to update).

Thanks Judge

2005-08-09T15:55:00.000-04:00

This is the entirety of this Judge's concurring opinion. Not saying I disagree, but unusual material for a Judge's opinion. Thanks to the Volokh Conspiracy for the pointer. From Oakland Raiders v. NFL, a California Court of Appeal decision filed on July 28:

RUSHING, P.J., CONCURRING

The Raiders are a diverse group of athletes. But despite such pluralism, the Raiders is a singular football team, and because of this, I must concur in the technical propriety of such phrases as “the Raiders asserts,” “the Raiders does not contend,” and “the Raiders was discriminated against,” which appear in the main opinion. However, although these phrases may be sound, their sound, to me, is personally foul and deserves dissent, if not a 15-yard penalty and loss of down. This is especially so when the phrases are read out loud.

I have long been a loyal fan of grammatical agreement. The natural harmony between subject and verb is usually euphonious. But my boosterism has not deafened me. Though the merits of agreement may be great, here it is grating. The phrases noted above are like blasts from an air horn or plastic trumpet, blaring technical correctness.

Obviously, with a subject like “the Raiders,” the writer enters the challenging zone of subject-verb agreement. And in this appellate opinion, I do not think we should have simply agreed to “disagreement.” However, I believe we could have reached our goal of meaning and avoided fumbling dissonance with a judicial substitution: pulling “the Raiders” and going with a second-stringer like “the plaintiff.”

Substitutions, Personnel, and Formations

2005-08-07T11:36:00.000-04:00

Anyone who has watched Edge NFL Matchup (the best football show on television by far) is familiar with the idea of "matchups" or "formationing". However, rarely is the concept used properly by coaches. Often, even experienced coaches will give lip service to "using multiple formations" and that, without purpose, if you run X number of plays in Y formations it somehow inherently makes you a better offense. Further, tactical substitution is even less understood. Sometimes not substituting is tactical (i.e. the wishbone or run and shoot looks the same pre-snap every play), but substitution and formationing are tools to be used by the crafty coach.

The great advantage to formations and substitution versus new plays and schemes as a tactic is that new schemes and plays require the coaches and players to learn something new. Whereas, on the whole, a formation, once learned, can be used over and over in many different situations, and a personnel grouping only requires that other players learn certain responsibilities (which can sometimes be demanding if that player is required to learn several significantly different positions). However, the coach can pretty much substitute or throw in a new formation at will, and the players pretty much will execute their task regardless of who is in the game or what the formation is.

Formationing

I will discuss this the least, since the literature and discussion of formationing is more widely available, and I think the most useful approach to this is for individual coaches to spend some time doodling it onto paper to see what can be discovered on their own.

However, this is the first tool used. Each defense has various strengths and weaknesses, and often defensive coaches, consciously or unconsciously, will often try to overcompensate for these weaknesses through personnel or tactics, so that creates further games. However, knowing these strengths and weaknesses is important for any offensive coach. For example two situations are digrammed:

On the left, the offense lines up in trips, which is troublesome for a defense that wants to play cover 2. The three frontside receivers require coverage from the undercoverage defenders, and the QB and RB can option or run the ball to either side, putting the inside linebackers in a bind. Further, with a favorable matchup, X versus the single cornerback presents different problems, particularly for slant routes. Thus the offense can kind of work a progression of frontside quick passes, strongside running to weakside running, to weakside passing, making the lives of the defenders, particularly those two inside backers, miserable.

In the diagram on the right, versus a 3 man front, vs what we would call a 3-4 strong stacked (or a 3-5 if the team uses this consistently as a base defense), we first line up in a balanced formation, seeing if the defense tries to load one side or another.

Most importantly though, with only 3 LOS defenders, we go two tight ends (we can go 2 backs and 2 tights if we truly want to be a powerful run team). First, we have six inside gaps (8 if you count off end runs) that the D must account for, and we can double team all of the LOS defenders and still have a free linemen, here the left guard, that can free release to block a second level defender. From here, as with the trips, the games would begin where we would want to run the ball, waiting until their contain defenders cheat inside or the free safety cheats up, at which time we would start throwing quick passes or passes off a run action.

Personnel and Substitutions

When planning for the year, it is important to identify your "studs" or the players that can change--and win--games on their talent, ability, and drive. These can take different forms, from gamebreakers to linemen who can pancake defensive linemen to a multitalented tight end or wingback, but they must be identified.

Second, you must flesh out your O with your best 11 players. I am a firm believer than you need a strong 11 players who are your "starters" and these will be the guys that help you score points and win games. I do not have guys that just stand out to the side or linemen we don't run behind, all are expected to contribute.

Starting from this helps discipline your thinking when substituting. Coming back to your studs and your best 11 helps prevent you from substituting without purpose or for purely cosmetic reasons; if I am going to take one of my best 11 off the field then I need a damn good reason.

The Value of Openers

First, when designing openers I like to, almost indiscriminantly, get the ball to some of my studs. As little as it should matter, psychologically it helps them get into the flow of the game, and they approach games more seriously and confidently knowing that we have plays designed for them to get the ball early when we practice our openers.

However, we also run lots of formations, motions, and a few substitution packages to get a feel for the defense. First, this can send them scrambling to see what we've thrown at them, but, most importantly, we want to see what they do. Do they put a linebacker or a safety on this guy? Do they shift their backers over? Do they shade their DL? Different coaches watch for these adjustments and we confirm a picture about the D. The more unconventional your offense the more important this is. From my experience teams would line up in all new defenses versus us almost every week, so our weekly preparation had to be contingency based rather than definitely prescriptive.

The big question we ask during the week and seek to confirm early in the game is: "Do they substitute based on situation (down and distance) or based on offensive substitution? Is there a breaking point where they shift between one or the other?"

This is very important, because it changes our entire method of substituting. If we know they like to go nickel on 3rd and 7, then we need to anticipate the nickel personnel and maybe we want to stay in base, or maybe we MUST sub in quicker players or else our RBs and tight ends will not get open. Conversely, if they substitute based on personnel, maybe we can do a power package on 1st and 10 and they will take out their free safety who we really fear in the passing game but is a poor tackler. This will be worked on all week as well as mid-game.

Again, the great advantage of this kind of strategy is it does not require the players to learn anything new. We do like our players to be smart (I used to tell them that by the time they leave I hoped they could all be coaches), but it doesn't require extra practice time to do this kind of stuff. A new trap play does.

Walkthrough of Situation

To help highlight what I mean, I will walk through one simple situation. Let's say we are a base pro-set team, with a halfback, fullback, tight end, split end and flanker. W want to make an adjustment and line up with the halfback split out as a receiver, so we move him outside of the split end and we look to see how the defense adjusts, as diagrammed below.

First, do they cover him at all? If they play way off, we may want to throw an immediate pass to H, who is our best runner, out in space. I've called this, seen our halfback make some people miss and score a long TD. Makes you feel like a genius, but is so obvious!

Here, they play man or some kind of "up" coverage. Importantly, since the cornerback's rule is probably something along the lines of "take the widest man" then our split end, our best or second-best receiver and route runner, is now matched up with a linebacker (it could also be a safety, and this could be advantageous as well).

Let's just say that it is pleasing to look up and see one of your speedy guys being covered by someone with their number in the 50s (or up!).

Obviously here we would try to isolate our split end on this player and let him beat his man on a pass route.

In the diagrams below the defense matches up with the corner on the split end and moves the LB out. Aside from the passing game, this is helpful for the run game, as we have taken a better run defender outside. Anyway, though, we now have H matched up on the outside with a LB.

Above we show the RB versus this backer in the backfield or split out. While he can run many routes from the backfield, he is not the threat deep that he would be, and the LB has more help from his safety and other cover man inside. However, split out on the sideline, he is on an island, and must first defend against the straight go or fade route (also the easiest to teach a RB who otherwise needs to learn other responsibilities).

Lastly, if we have been successful with all of these tactics the defense may get fed up and rotate a zone over to this side. First, we realize that we still have a strong run formation strong with our tight end. Second, it is a 3 receiver side, and we can flood the zone to this side where we can achieve an advantage. Thus are the cat and mouse games of offense vs. defense.

Motion and Shifting

I will be brief here, but motioning and shifting are easily applied to the concepts shown in this article.

The first thing about motioning or shifting is that they achieve the same purposes as formationing and substitution--it is the final formation that truly matters--but they generally give the defense less time to adjust and see what you are doing.

Motion

There is lots of overlap between motioning and formationing, but here is a brief list of reasons to motion (mostly taken from Bill Walsh).

1. Create a certain mismatch
2. Force the defense into a certain coverage
3. Put a player in best position to do a job (i.e. motion a RB out to go deep)
4. Confuse the defense's responsibilities
5. Disguise the play by breaking a formation tendency
6. Give them more to think about (motion causes emotion!)
7. Force defense into revealing keys (can be misleading at times)

Do NOT use motion cosmetically. If you are just motioning to motion, because you think you should, then you are wasting time and throwing off your offensive rhythm. You are better off getting to the line and calling the play on a quick count.

The special case of orbit motion or return motion, where a player motions in, usually to the center, and then goes back out to where he was, is on its way out. At one time this was very effective for determining if the defense was in man or zone, but has become increasingly less telling, and you see it less and less at the higher levels of football. If you see value in this motion then by all means use it, but its usefulness is decreasing.

Shifting

Shifting, as compared with motion has a few strengths and weaknesses. First, its strengths are that more than one player can shift at a time, and, as shown below, you can actually change the strength of a formation (which can be done with motion but not as easily or dramatically). This is maybe the most powerful adjustment at the LOS you can make.

The primary weakness of a shift is that your players must be set before the snap, giving the defense some time to adjust, while motion allows less.

Conclusion

This is the probing approach to formationing and personnel. It is not reactive in the passive sense. "Take what the defense gives you" has been changed from useful advice to a condemnation of conservative playcalling.

However, to some extent, it is still true when approaching the game tactically. This is formationing, shifting, and substituting with a purpose: intelligent strategy incorporates what the other team is doing, while staying true to your team's strengths.

Moreover, football is still a game of talent and people. If their 11 are better than yours, it probably matters little whether H is in the backfield or lined up wide as a receiver or if you shift your tight end from one side to the other. However, you look for what you can get. If you can find one personnel advantage then you can potentially trigger a structural change that can open up the rest of your offense and put your other players in position to succeed and contribute.

During a game you may have 2, 3, or 4 of these little mini-games going on. Moving this guy here, motioning that guy there, recreating the formation and doing something different, etc. A well designed and well taught offense can do these without confusing your players, putting the D in a bind. Conversely, a well designed and well taught defense can react to all these little offensive tactics and still let their players just go out there, play some football, and hit somebody.

To reiterate a running theme, football is a very simple game. The actual concepts you use, the number of ways to put 11 (or 22) pieces on the field is more finite than we think. All we can do is to teach our players as best we can during the weeks and then on gameday put them in the best position to succeed.

Response to Krugman: Euro Values, Immigration, and Terrorism

2005-08-04T19:10:00.000-04:00

From NY Times columnist Paul Krugman's recent column: Free subscription required.

Americans tend to believe that we do everything better than anyone else. That belief makes it hard for us to learn from others. For example, I've found that many people refuse to believe that Europe has anything to teach us about health care policy. After all, they say, how can Europeans be good at health care when their economies are such failures?

Now, there's no reason a country can't have both an excellent health care system and a troubled economy (or vice versa). But are European economies really doing that badly?

The answer is no. Americans are doing a lot of strutting these days, but a head-to-head comparison between the economies of the United States and Europe - France, in particular - shows that the big difference is in priorities, not performance. We're talking about two highly productive societies that have made a different tradeoff between work and family time. And there's a lot to be said for the French choice.

First things first: given all the bad-mouthing the French receive, you may be surprised that I describe their society as "productive." Yet according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, productivity in France - G.D.P. per hour worked - is actually a bit higher than in the United States.

It's true that France's G.D.P. per person is well below that of the United States. But that's because French workers spend more time with their families.

O.K., I'm oversimplifying a bit. There are several reasons why the French put in fewer hours of work per capita than we do. One is that some of the French would like to work, but can't: France's unemployment rate, which tends to run about four percentage points higher than the U.S. rate, is a real problem. Another is that many French citizens retire early. But the main story is that full-time French workers work shorter weeks and take more vacations than full-time American workers.

The point is that to the extent that the French have less income than we do, it's mainly a matter of choice. And to see the consequences of that choice, let's ask how the situation of a typical middle-class family in France compares with that of its American counterpart.

The French family, without question, has lower disposable income. This translates into lower personal consumption: a smaller car, a smaller house, less eating out.

But there are compensations for this lower level of consumption. Because French schools are good across the country, the French family doesn't have to worry as much about getting its children into a good school district. Nor does the French family, with guaranteed access to excellent health care, have to worry about losing health insurance or being driven into bankruptcy by medical bills.

Perhaps even more important, however, the members of that French family are compensated for their lower income with much more time together. Fully employed French workers average about seven weeks of paid vacation a year. In America, that figure is less than four.

So which society has made the better choice?

I've been looking at a new study of international differences in working hours by Alberto Alesina and Edward Glaeser, at Harvard, and Bruce Sacerdote, at Dartmouth. The study's main point is that differences in government regulations, rather than culture (or taxes), explain why Europeans work less than Americans.

But the study also suggests that in this case, government regulations actually allow people to make a desirable tradeoff - to modestly lower income in return for more time with friends and family - the kind of deal an individual would find hard to negotiate. The authors write: "It is hard to obtain more vacation for yourself from your employer and even harder, if you do, to coordinate with all your friends to get the same deal and go on vacation together."

And they even offer some statistical evidence that working fewer hours makes Europeans happier, despite the loss of potential income.

It's not a definitive result, and as they note, the whole subject is "politically charged." But let me make an observation: some of that political charge seems to have the wrong sign.

American conservatives despise European welfare states like France. Yet many of them stress the importance of "family values." And whatever else you may say about French economic policies, they seem extremely supportive of the family as an institution. Senator Rick Santorum, are you reading this?

Krugman is essentially defending the less flexible labor/job markets in France, or more broadly, Europe, laying out advantages for families and entrenched workers: less likely to be fired, fewer critical performance measures, no fear of competitors willing to work more hours than you taking your job, etc. Most of these, as Krugman points out, are protected by government regulation (e.g. the 35 hour work week).

Leaving aside the argument for or against this choice and the France's lower GDP growth and higher unemployment rate (which Krugman seems to gloss over), it is important to look at these less flexible labor markets with regard to a segment of the population that desperately depends on their ability to be able to compete for jobs they currently do not have: immigrants.

If the labor laws provide a more rigid structure to support those currently working, it is more difficult for those not employed (e.g. immigrants) to assimilate into society and get the jobs of non-immigrants and firmly entrenched workers, which are almost always better paying and more prestigious, because of this entrenchment.

If the structure of society impedes assimilation, it threatens to leave many of them--particularly muslim immigrants--alienated and marginalized to the fringe of society. This alienated muslim population has proved to be attractive to those recruiting for radical extremists.

Conversely, (and this is somewhat debatable) the United States assimilates its muslim immigrant population much better than Europe does with its more flexible job market. The many violent incidents across Europe, anti-semitic bigotry in France, all are symptoms of a more widespread problem. On the other hand, by the second or third generation, muslim families are usually assimilated quite well into the U.S. Here the median income for muslims is actually higher than the median for the population as a whole, and there are fewer acts of domestic bigotry and violence against muslims in the U.S. than in much of Europe. Of course, this is not to say that violent extremism cannot and will not happen in the U.S. Indeed, it is no doubt that right now there are many radical cells--so-called "home grown terrorists"--operating and preparing in the United States.

However, the recent London bombings also throw a wrench in this theory, since the labor market in the U.K. is quite similar in its flexibility with the United States. It can be reasoned as well that the United States is a country of immigrants, whereas most European countries have a history of emigration, so the U.S., culturally is more adept at assimilating newcomers.

Nevertheless, countries that do not assimilate and provide opportunities (as well as support) for large segments of its population--such as its immigrant population--can expect this marginalized population to be attractive to radicals, extremists, and terrorists.

Number of plays

2005-08-03T19:22:00.000-04:00

Coach Bill Mountjoy had a clinic a few weeks back (which I was unable to attend, but I heard was amazing).

From the early reports Larry Zierlein, formerly of the Cleveland Browns, gave a talk heavily based in empirical work about several topics concerning the run game in the NFL, but particularly about the number of run plays used by the best rushing teams. As reported to me (something like 3rd hand, so forgive me if I miss some details), is that there is an optimum number of base run plays for a football team, and, surprisingly, this ended up being only around 5 run plays--at the NFL level!

I'll have to wait for the actual numbers, but this makes intuitive sense, and can be applied to much of your offense.

First, how many times do you run the ball? The typical NFL team runs it around 25 times a game, so that is around 5 times a game for a run play to be run per game. High School games are shorter, D-1 football games are longer, and, along with how many times you run the football, the number of plays can be adjusted from there. The kiss of death is to have a "base" run play that doesn't even get run in a football game, even worse is to have several football games where it doesn't get called. This is a good sign it should NOT be in your playbook.

Implicit in these reported success rates is the amount of practice time dedicated to each play and its techniques, and how comfortable the players are with it. If the best rushing NFL teams only have around 5 base run plays, why do you have 8 or 9? They are dealing with players much more versed with the fundamentals of running the football (blocking, running, eyes up, even handoffs) which you could be teaching instead of adding new plays, have more time, face more variations in their fronts, and, sorry to say, are probably better coaches than you or I, as well.

Furthermore, let us say that you have identified a weakness in your opponent and you want to run the ball off-tackle. You have four off-tackle runs. What is the likelihood that you will call the right one? What is the likelihood that your players are comfortable with all four of them versus whatever front you see? Having extra plays makes your job and their job that much harder, without making your opponent any weaker.

This mindset applies not only to run plays. While we can dream up a multitude of passing scenarios, football is a pretty simple game in terms of what one team or another can do, and much of it is simply window dressing. Therefore, you probably need many fewer pass plays than you would like to have in a perfect world. The same logic used earlier applies to passing: if I have a play or two that can defeat a particular coverage, how many more do I need? It may even look dramatically different than the other plays that attack that coverage, but is it really a necessary tool? Especially compared to what else I could be practicing?

Up to this point I've focused mainly on "base" plays, i.e. plays that make up the large chunk of your offense. There are certain plays that only need to be called once in a game to be successful, or are necessary for certain situations and are crucial to help you win, but you may not actually experience that scenario. Examples are some play action passes, trick plays, goal line plays, and fake punt/field goal plays. These justify practice even though you may only call them a few times a season.

However, the same rules apply: how many of these do I need? Do I need 6 goal line/short yardage passes if I realistically only call a few all season? Do I really need so many trick plays if I only call one trick play per game--if that?

All this speaks to paring down your offense (and defense) as much as possible. This is not always so easy; we see the gains of adding a new pass play and scoring a touchdown or getting a particular first down more visibly than we see our general effectiveness at the rest of our passing game deteriorate from lost practice time. However, this is exactly what Larry Zierlein's empirical results showed with the running game in the NFL.

Further, it is sometimes difficult when comparing plays. For example can we really compare the inside zone or triple option with a quick trap? The zone and the option require significant practice time outlays, and are more adaptable to more scenarios. However, we could install the trap, and a fake trap with a boot pass, and a third counter in the same practice time. Which is better? One is three plays, the other only one?

This is why being a coach, despite the fact that football is simpler than we usually make it, can be quite challenging.

Learning to Live With Terrorism

2005-08-03T19:10:00.000-04:00

Original article from the Economist can be found here.

The bombings will change London, but not in the ways most people expect

“OUR lucky day” was the judgment of one British newspaper on the second attempt in as many weeks to murder users of London's transport system. Unlike the four men who blew themselves up on July 7th, killing 52 others, the plotters who struck a fortnight later failed to take lives. But the second bombing hinted, unnervingly, at a long-term campaign. Before July 21st, London was recovering from a past atrocity. Since then, it has been coping with an enduring menace. Two terrorist bombings, it turns out, are more than twice as bad as one.

If spreading fear was the terrorists' objective, they have succeeded. A poll for The Economist shows that 90% of Britons (and almost the same share of Londoners) believe the city will be targeted again within a year. Fully 59% reckon that travelling in the capital has become more dangerous, while only 1% believe the opposite.

But what will be the lasting effect of the bombings? There is a simple rule of thumb. If it is difficult to imagine something ever returning to normal, it is likely to do so quickly. The sources of long-term disruption and damage are more subtle. Much of the harm will come only indirectly from the attacks, and will be caused by the responses to terror rather than the terror itself.

Any fear and anxiety whipped up by the bombings will dissipate quickly. “Most people recover of their own accord in just a few weeks,” says Anne Eyre, a consultant who specialises in trauma and disaster management. While some people who were close to the bombings or have experience of traumatic events will find it harder to recover, the great majority will not require counselling or therapy.

That was so even in New York, where the attacks of September 11th were far more deadly and visible than the London bombings. Project Liberty, a federally funded outfit, deployed thousands of counsellors to meet some 1.2m people. Just 6% were referred for further treatment, mostly for minor symptoms such as sleeplessness. Another survey found that the share of local people reporting symptoms of trauma fell by two-thirds in the six months following the attacks.

...

Meanwhile, the police carry on. Their conduct over the next few months poses the greatest long-term threat, as well as the best hope for stopping further attacks. So far, London's Metropolitan Police have a mixed record. Mosques have been visited and politically incorrect talk avoided. But the shooting of a man mistakenly thought to be a terrorist (see article) has set some Muslim nerves on edge.

The danger is that Muslims'relations with the police will sour, rather as happened with Afro-Caribbean men in the 1980s. Black anger stemmed from the seemingly prejudiced use of street searches—a tactic that, ominously, was increasingly directed against Asians even before the London bombings. Between 2000-01 and 2003-04, the number of Asians stopped and searched rose by 60%, compared with an 8% rise among the population of England and Wales. Fewer of these searches led to an arrest than searches of any other ethnic group.

In the aftermath of terrorist attacks, the extravagant use of such police powers might seem tolerable, or even desirable. In the long term, the consequences are more likely to prove otherwise.

I'm not going to say that greater law enforcement and a broader interpretation of the police's power to search, investigate, and prosecute crimes is bad (especially since this article refers specifically to London and the UK, while here in the United States our police are bound by the 4th amendment to the constitution). This is a difficult issue and will continue to be waged by the public, media, policy makers, and the courts.

The most important point to me of this article is the statement I bolded: that the causes of long-term change are subtle, and often fly under the public radar. Just as the fall of the Berlin wall was a visible but late-coming incident that reflected the many subtle changes that had occurred over the previous 40 some-odd years--particularly the prior 10-15 as the institutions and governments that practiced communism fell increasingly into disarray--these large terrorist acts are simply emblematic of the many subtle changes affecting our lives.

I can only hope that in the future more of these "emblematic acts" are positive rather than tragic.

Sprintout/Half-roll passing

2005-08-03T18:04:00.000-04:00

Discussion of half-roll protection and diagram from my original website:

Our half-roll protection is very similar to that used by the run and shoot, except our QBs have more freedom to keep rolling out. It is actually designed as a full-sprint out, but the QBs usually end up stopping and setting up after a half or semi-roll out.

It has been a great benefit to vary the launch points for our QB. I am a firm believer in dropback passing, but a simple way to roll-out has been very effective. Further, this has helped a diverse number of QBs, particularly shorter QBs and ones without strong arms. I think many QBs can be more comfortable with the rollout and half-roll passing game.

The Rules:

Backside Tackle: Backside Tackle: Turn and Hinge
Backside Guard: Turn and Hinge
Center: If covered or shade to callside, reach. If uncovered with no shade to callside, turn and hinge.
(Note, on turn and hinges, unless you make immediate contact begin to get depth to stay between the QB and your man. You do not want to be still on the LOS as the DE comes upfield)
Playside Guard: Reach, plug hole/backside
Playside Tackle: Reach (Note: On any reach block, if you are unable to reach, ride your man out to the sideline. Don't get beat outside trying to reach hopelessly. A man pushed out of bounds and kept on the LOS is just as effective.)

RB: Take two steps to callside, looking at outside rusher. Look for OLB or outside rusher to come shooting, block first color that shows. If none show, check middle and then backside. You are the QB's bodyguard. Step to rush, do not wait for him to get to the QB.

QB:Pre-snap look is key. QB will go at a 45 degree angle to a depth of 5-6 yards and then will level off. He will need to get his eyes up, and look downfield. He can continue moving parrallel to the LOS, but he must know when he must stop and step up in the pocket and deliver the ball. If he breaks contain he can continue out, he does not have a set place he has to be, but he must be smart.

This is a protection reliant on the QB being smart. On a dropback everyone knows he should be in the pocket, 5-7 yards behind the center. In this protection his blockers are doing the best they can and he needs to find the best space to throw or run the football from.

He must help his blockers by not getting into trouble and thinking he can outrun everyone. He must have a good sense of timing and be well practiced, as this type of dropback is not as carefully calibrated as our 5 and 3 step drops are. However, its simplicity has been a real asset to us.

Below are some of my favorite sprint out/half-roll pass routes and a (very) brief discussion of each. I like to keep them simple. Also, this series becomes even more viable in the red zone, where giving your QB a run-pass option can be a huge boost to your O. Also, most of the passes are designed to go to the outside, since a) one advantage of moving the pocket is making these passes shorter, b) it puts the defenders in a tougher run/pass bind and c) throwing on the run is easier when the receivers are either stationary or moving in the same direction as you are, so we try to limit receivers to these two categories.

1: My favorite movement pass. The outside man runs a post-curl, looking to make his post move at 8-10 and then curling at 13-15, depending how upfield the defenders are. #2 wants to run a 10 yard out. I like to speed cut this out, but some good passing teams prefer a sharp cut. The QB reads outside to in. He wants to throw the out route every time, but if they fly out he will point his shoulders inside and throw the post-curl. If the post-curl isn't there he thinks run, looking to cut back against the grain. I've seen more than a few long-TD runs by QBs on rollouts, almost all cut-back runs.

2. My second favorite. #1 runs a whip. He will release inside and push to 6 yards and turn back to the QB. Versus man he will pivot and run back to the sideline, versus zone he will turn back to the QB and slide with him. #2 runs a 10-12 yard corner. The QB reads corner to whip, again looking to run/cutback if they are not there. Great in the red-zone.

Also, you can run this from trips sending a man on a seam route (#3) or a go route down the sideline (#1). Either can hurt the defense, but the go is the easier throw for the QB.

3. Great sideline route. Outside receiver runs a comeback to the sideline, making his break at 15. The slot pushes to 12-14, turning inside to the QB but pivoting back outside. Again, the QB reads outside to in.

4. This is a simplified version of the run and shoot choice route, diagrammed in 6. You can tag or call the single receiver's routes, and then from there read across the field as the receivers come into the QBs view. Some coaches would prefer to read deep to short for the deep cross and shallow cross/drag, and while this would be desirable, the receivers come into the QB's vision in this order and this will better reflect how the defenders will actually react to the receivers.

5. This is our adjustment to the first play I diagrammed. Here, the slot runs an out and up and the post-curl looks to whip back out to the sideline a bit more. Great if if you've thrown this a few times and the deep cover men (safeties/corners) think they can jump your possession passes.

6. The run and shoot choice route, thrown in just because it is so effective. Most of you won't want to install all the reads (I didn't), but it's a play many teams have had great success with.

Utah - Urban Meyer Zone-Read

2005-07-31T11:24:00.000-04:00

Football's Golden Son for now is worth looking at a bit. Nothing revolutionary, but lots and lots of coaches incorporate some of these concepts now, and they are quite sound. I have never incorporated the triple from gun and am not an expert--check out Jerry Campbell's books and notes or study Meyer and others' offenses this coming fall--but it is fairly easy to incorporate the backside read by the QB in the zone or any frontside run play from gun.

Petrino at Louisville will incorporate this into more than just the zone, which is how I have used it. I use the QB read of the backside end with our "base" or "Wrap" or guard-pull scheme, which I diagrammed a few months ago here.

The University of Louisville will pull both the backside guard or the backside tackle (not something I do as much because it is harder to get the tackle over there in time) but both are viable tactics and easy to do.

Incorporating the QB read is simple and can essentially add another runner to your offense. From there you can add a pitch relationship with another runningback or a slot man. (Check out the earlier article on the no-back shovel and Meyer's offense here.)

Also, along with this are some broad outlines about the Utah/Bowling Green/Meyer offense and some coaching points, and diagrams from the 2002 Bowling Green playbook (very simple, so not overly informative, but the written material is excellent).

Mike Sanford - Bill Williams Football Clinic, San Diego, Ca March 2005

Offensive Strategy and Goals

1. about 65% run 35% pass
2. 95% out of shotgun
3. Most physical and best zone blocking team in the country
4. Stretch the defense across the field and make them play assignment football

3 Critical Keys

1. Protect the football
2. Score in red zone
3. Convert third downs, practice scenarios

5 Offensive Goals

1. Win
2. Score 66% red zone TD
3. No Turnovers
4. 45% on 3rd down conversions
5. 55% run efficient (4 yards a carry)

Wide receivers have key blocks every single down

Center's snap needs to be perfect everytime

Zone Read Play - 14/15 Read

Rules

- 7 in the box / cover 0 = audible to option or pass
- 6 in the box = block playside 5 and leave 1 (backside DE) Read
- 5 in the box = block 5 (give inside zone)

Running Back:

Alignment:

- Toes at 6 yards, inside foot on guards outside leg

Footwork:

- Shuffle step, step replace step and go, looks like a draw play, close gap with QB, responsible for creating mesh point, rollover ball , hands together even if QB keeps

Aiming point:

- Outside leg of PSG, Read first man of center to outside foot / butt of tackle (B gap)
- Slow to, Fast through - make cut and get vertical

Quarter Back:

Alignment:

- Toes at 5 yards, shotgun (practice everyday with center for a perfect snap)

Footwork:

- Wide open step, pivot opposite foot, extend ball, watch inside shoulder of read man - upfield = give
stay home = give
down line = keep

Aiming point:

- C gap in general
- Read C gap defender - could be DE or LB

Offensive line:

- Inside zone blocking front and backside
- Splits are 2 ft guards, 3 ft tackles

Communication in Football

2005-07-21T16:01:00.000-04:00

The very act of writing, speaking, and articulating complex ideas disciplines the mind and its thoughts.

Football, and particularly coaching, is based almost entirely on communicating effectively. We each have to explain to our fellow coaches and our players what we are trying to do ("combo block this man, then move on to 2nd level linebacker"), how to do it effectively ("hips low, use hands, eyes up"), and why ("numerical advantage against this front, the fullback will kick out the end").

Further, football even has its own complex sub-language particular to it and to specific teams to help quickly communicate lots of information quickly, and, in some cases, to do so without revealing information to the competition.

Practice itself is a continual series of communications to reinforce desired behavior ("Good job!" "No, sink your hips, and don't false step."). In so doing we discipline our own thoughts and can often achieve new insights through the process--we have all experienced epiphany moments in the middle of practice. This is one reason that experience is so valuable: years upon years of articulating complex ideas in increasingly simple and effective terms to neophytes to that level of football (players and young coaches). This can and should be one of the goals of communication in football: to not only convey an idea but to broaden and deepen our own understanding.

To put an idea into words, to make a playbook, a gameplan, a playcall sheet and the like are essentially disciplining procedures for coaches. By forcing ourselves to write it out, to plan for various circumstances and contingencies, and--maybe most importantly--to transform it so it can be understood by others besides ourselves is often a difficult but highly rewarding process where discontinuities, excesses, and illogical ideas can be eliminated. Interestingly, sometimes it is not the superiority of the plan or even having a plan that gives a team or coaching staff an advantage, it is the process by which they created it and the fact of having gone through that process that provides them with the insight and tools to succeed.

Communicating With Players

Beyond the planning phase, the ability to communicate to our players what they want to do and how is under constant scrutiny because if they fail to understand us then, first, they will fail to even begin to resemble what we want them to do, and second, they will often tell you directly or tell other coaches that you simply don't know what you are talking about. I've met more than a few highly intelligent and knowledgable coaches whose own players all felt like that they understood the game of football more than their coach, and it could not simply be explained by labelling them arrogant kids.

With respect to relating to and communicating with players coaches are usually either portrayed by both the media and even other coaches as ones that require their players to come to them, and make little effort to understand them individually but instead to mold them into a football team in their image--the so-called disciplinarian or drill sargeant--or as "Player's Coaches", who are seen to gravitate to their players' levels, be one of the guys, and to usually be perceived as more lax with conduct, dress codes, and the like.

All coaches, if they hope to be successful--whether in building men or winning football games--have to "understand" and "relate" to their players, which includes socio-economic background, family status, age and maturity, and current environment (college campus, large city, small rural town), because effective communication of ideas to players is really all that is being judged on Friday Nights, Saturdays, and Sundays. Therefore, while the styles of communication may be different, communication is rarely effective if the intended audience, in this case the players, are not understood extremely thoroughly and in a non-critical, though still demanding, fashion.

Football Strategy and its Development

On the other side, the actual blueprint of a football program and its various strategies, decisions, and plans, despite the fact that most teams are coached by a staff of multiple coaches, is usually designed and made top down by one, maybe up to three people (Head Coach, O and D coordinators), and then articulated downwards through assistants and players in a non-collaborative way. I believe it is evident from some of my other writings that I endorse a collaborative approach, which includes involving the players whenever possible.

The common reasons cited for this consolidation of decision making and planning are a call to power or authority ("It's my team!"), experience ("I've been coaching for 20 years and I have three rings to show for it."), or simply time. I would agree with the first two before the last, time, which, I believe when used as an excuse is a fallacy given the enormous amount of inefficiently spent hours by football coaches, and the short amount of time necessary for effective collaboration (15 minutes is an excellent start). Further, assuming they don't cheat, your opponents are under the same time constraints that you are. Not collaborating can have its own side-effects, from loss of morale to lack of knowledge and growth in football knowledge by assistants and layers. Bringing coaches and players into the decision making process can help make the team theirs, which, among other effects, can increase work ethic.

For now, though, I only want to draw attention to the lack of communication involved in such a centrally-planned system, and that in a collaborative approach each person, if they want to productively contribute, must be able to communicate their thoughts in an understandable way in the form of words, drawings, powerpoint slides, handouts, videos, etc. This is a powerful incentive to think about and learn the game of football more thoroughly.

Furthermore, apart from this intra-coach communication there is an increasing amount of inter-coach communication going on now, through visits (w/ reduced travel cost being a large factor), mailings, videos, articles, and, of course, the internet, where sharing of knowledge has exploded the last few years.

In the oft-repeated story, Mike Leach of Texas Tech literally had to volunteer on the BYU staff in the 1980s in order to learn their offense; now you can track down Norm Chow's four-hour video on the subject. Or, to learn what Leach does now, attend one of his many clinics, give his staff a phone call, or visit one of the websites where you can download one of his playbooks.

When being so up front about what you do there is a very real risk of exposing your own tendencies and vulnerabilities to the competition. However, this risk is overestimated by most in practice. Looking at the NFL and Division I, transparency of tactics is high, film is readily available, and coaches (and players in the NFL) are frequently hired away and change team affiliations. This does not seem to cripple any of the established and successful teams, despite the fact that these high profile and well financed squads are in the best position to exploit this flow of knowledge.

However, offsetting that risk (which I argued was overestimated) is the fact that these coaches have to distill all their teachings, philosophies, and tactics into single, easily decipherable talks, articles, and videos, which are then heavily scrutinized by other sophisticated football minds. It can actually be looked at as a bit of an interesting paradox: your offense may not warrant making a complete installation video about, but the act of making one may make your offense that much better, because you are forced to think about it more, bounce ideas around, and make it useful to other coaches.

Therefore, giving repeated lectures about what you do may remove some secrecy (which was probably never really there to your opponents anyway), but can actually yield more gains to the coaches giving the talk or making the video than those on the receiving end. (Though I've seen some pretty informative videos!) Moreover, obviously communication is a two-way street. The more you communicate the more you will receive in return. I know this has been true for me and this website.

Conclusion

The lone inventor is a popular fallacy depicted throughout history, and is not foreign to football. Individuals, coaches included, are often elevated to "genius" status and the fact that great head coaches often spawn future head coaches from their staff is usually seen as merely justification for the original innovator. Just as likely, however, this points to the valuable collaborative process involved with making those teams and head coaches successful in the first place--coaching is far too time consuming for the all important decisions and adjustments to be left in the hands of just one or two people.

Do not be afraid to share ideas, to work through problems as a staff, to encourage dialogue at all levels of your program, including players, as well as outwardly, at clinics and even through the internet. The very act of sharing these ideas and communicating them can make them clearer and your implementation of them more effective.

Draw Trap

2005-07-07T10:22:00.000-04:00

I hope to put more run game stuff up in the future and be able to tie it together, however, I'd like to call attention to one of my favorite runs that I don't see run or talked about much: the draw trap.

The draw trap is a very simple play, that does require good execution and timing. It can be run from a variety of sets and doesn't require different calls for one-back versus two-back, etc.

The primary purposes of the play are:

1. To provide a running play that looks like standard drop-back pass action to help hold linebackers and safeties when you do and to help make the fake-draw playaction more successful. Without good draws your dropbacks and fake-draws aren't going to be very successful.

2. To provide an effective counter for upfield charging defensive linemen.

3. The draw-trap is particularly effective because it is designed to specifically attack defensive ends, which are often the most dangerous and aggressive, and can make them more weary of charging hard upfield.

4. Also, the draw-trap is much better than the regular draw versus certain blitzes. The traditional draw is most effective versus hard charging defensive linemen and fast dropping linebackers and safeties (outside rushers can also be negated), but the draw trap can seal inside dog blitzes better and get the runner more to the outside quickly.

The rules, in quick and dirty form are as follows. Then you can look at some of the diagrams. Sorry I did not have time to better label some of the fronts.

QB: Dropback, deliver the ball, and carry out your fake.
All linemen will pass set for a quick count. Traditional draws and slow screens have a much longer pass set up than the draw trap, which is fairly quick.

PST: Quick set, combo down with the PSG guard to near linebacker.
PSG: Quick set, combo 3 or 2 tech with PST, combo 1 or 0 with C to linebacker.
C: Reach/combo nose, drive 0, seal backside.
BSG: Quick set, pull and trap first man that shows. If no one turn up to LB
BST: Step playside, seal, drive, release downfield if nothing

PSY: Outside release like pass, block LB
BSY: Step playside, seal, drive for a count then release downfield

Playside back: Release outside tackle like pass route, block first man that shows
Ball carrier: Shuffle playside with head up--show pass pro look. Take ball and follow pulling guard, cut inside his block, get upfield and then look outside.

Wideouts and slots will block man on to, release for safety away.

At the line the QB is responsible for running this play to the side that it will be most effective. I do not ask my QBs to constantly check plays at the line, but I do ask them to run the ball where we will be most effective. We do that through common sense ("Don't attack walled cities") and some rules of thumb.

For the draw trap we tell the QB that if they are in odd (noseguard) we want to run it weak unless they are heavily shifted weak. If they are in even we want to run the trap to the "widest 3 technique", or I suppose it can be thought of as the wider defensive tackle. This adapted from our rule for the quick inside trap, but has served as well for wider traps as well.

If the defense is in some kind of monster style or slanting defense that is trying to fool us into running into their slants, then we will gameplan this.

Below are some diagrams:

4th of July Links

2005-07-03T12:21:00.000-04:00

Tomorrow the New York Times will reprint the Declaration of Independence, as it always does. Equally important to the survival of the union as declared originally by the founders, was the Civil War, summed up most movingly and concisely by President Lincoln in the Gettysburg address. I think these are well worth reviewing, so forgive me for taking up blog space to reprint them here:

Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. -- Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

[List of charges against the King follows]

The conclusion and formal declaration: We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Gettysburg Address:

Nov. 19, 1863

Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it as a final resting place for those who died here that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have hallowed it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.

It is rather for us the living, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

Mini-Curl/Spacing Concept

2005-07-03T11:56:00.000-04:00

A play that is gaining in popularity is the spacing/mini-curl. A simple route that happens quickly (especially important with protection becoming more and more difficult), Norm Chow at USC, the University of Michigan and many others have been using this play.

This description comes via Ted Seay, via the Chucknduck boards.

Coach: No film, but the following comes from Jody Ashby, on Coach [Andrew] Coverdale's staff at Newburgh Castle HS in Indiana:

Spacing - is the old curl/out route cut in half. So, think miniature post curl, arrow, and a sit route. You can make this look a ton of ways, but I'll give you the most basic way we would run it. Michigan does a lot of this (for your reference). Lets take a bunch formation, the outside receiver who is off the ball runs a miniature curl (4 yards vertical, skinny post to 7, drumroll and stick the toe in the ground, present your numbers to the quarterback, you will get some width on your initial steps to help create spacing), the middle receiver on the ball, runs the mini sit route (he should aim for the far shoulder of the "danger" defender, his depth should be @ 4-5 yards, he is the outlet), the inside receiver is off the ball and runs the arrow route (he should get width fast, aiming point would be 4-5 yards, but should emphasize width first, if he reaches the numbers and hasn't received the ball turn up).

The quarterback uses a big 3, because we want the mini-curl. He will use his shoulders to encourage the flat player to chase the arrow, opening up the mini-curl lane. He will often see the arrow pop open quickly reading flat defenders shoulders, but he will complete it for 2 yard gains, if he's patient, the mini-curl will work itself open. If his mini-curl lane was invaded from inside, he would go to his outlet "the sit." We often have a single on the backside of this and we will always check to see if we can throw single first. If we are unable to throw single, then we should have the numbers (unless 0 coverage) to work the spacing route. If you have "The Bunch Attack" book and look at the mesh route with a stem call, which gives you a sit route (because of the sandbox rule), there you have it - A quick version of mesh stem AKA "spacing."

Diagrams below are mine:

Sid Gillman Theory

2005-07-03T11:49:00.000-04:00

Via Coach Bill Mountjoy and www.chucknduck.com. These are some basic principles of Sid Gillman, the father of the modern passing game. These are even more true today (and a surprisingly large portion of coaches still are not familiar with them!).

SID GILLMAN PASSING GAME THOUGHTS

TIMING OF PASS:
1. The timing of the delivery is essential. It is the single most important item to successful passing.
2. Each route has its own distinct timing. As routes and patterns are developed on the field, the exact point of delivery will be emphasized.
3. Take mental notes on the field on timing of the throw.
4. If you cannot co-ordinate eye and arm to get the ball at it’s intended spot properly and on time, you are not a passer.
5. Keeping the ball in both hands and chest high is part of the answer.
6. Generally speaking, the proper timing of any pass is putting the ball in the air before, or as the receiver goes into his final break.
7. If you wait until the receiver is well into his final move, you are too late.

ATTACKING DEFENSES:
1. You must know the theory of all coverages. Without this knowledge, you are dead.
2. You are either attacking man for man, or zone defense.
3. Vs. Man for Man Defense, you are beating the Man.
Vs. Zone Defense, you are attacking an Area.
4. Not knowing the difference will result in stupid interceptions.
5. Study your coverage sheets so that by merely glancing at a defense you know the total coverage design.
6. Man for Man Defenses
a. Hit the single coverage man. This will keep you in business for a long time.
b. Stay away from receivers who are doubled short and long.
c. Do not throw to post if weak safety is free unless you are controlling him with another receiver, and even then it can be dangerous.
d. Flare action is designed to hold backers. If backers are loose, HIT flare man.
e. The secret to attacking Man for Man is to attack the single coverage man who is on his own with no help short or to either side.
f. You must know the individual weaknesses of our opponents and attack them.
g. There are many methods of dropping off by deep secondary men. Each method provides a weakness – know them.
7. Zone Defenses
a. To successfully attack zone defense, concentrate on attacking the slots (X-Z Curl, Y Curl, Cross Routes).
b. Flare action is a must to hold the backers close to the line to help open up the zones behind them.
8. Exact knowledge of defensive coverage and the patterns to take advantage of these is a
must.

SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPLES SID GILLMAN LIVED BY:
1. Spread the field horizontally and vertically with all 5 receivers;
2. Pass to set up the run (NOT the other way around);
3. One-Back formations are a MUST!

All-Curl

2005-06-26T21:54:00.000-04:00

Expect some run game posts coming up soon, but first a post on one of my all-time favorite plays (though less good now versus the prevalent cover 4 and cover 2 defenses).

This has always been one of my favorite calls versus single-safety teams, and has been around since about the first time Angelo Bertelli threw a spiral.

The play is a horizontal stretch with 5 potential passing lanes stretching 4-under zones. Cover 2 zone with 5 underneath zones is difficult to throw this pass against and cover 4 with the safeties bracketing the curling receivers is also a threat. However, this is still a pass many teams use and will continue to be effective.

The techniques are simple:

12 Yard curl route by the outside receivers. Some teams teach an inside release or various stems or things to do at the top of the route. I still think that the best way to run it is to simply burst hard vertical for 12, selling the go route. Attack the outside hip of the cornerback with off-coverage. This route should be calibrated with steps, to achieve perfect timing.

Versus press coverage take an inside release and then push to 12, and box out your defender.

Flat or shoot routes. See my post about runningback routes . If you are a tight end or a slot receiver you will also take a direct shot to 3 yards, no wider than the numbers. If you are a slot and you have press man, push up the field a couple yards before breaking it out. Otherwise, shoot right away.

Last, the inside control route is a sit route over the ball at 6-8 yards. If a tight-end then it will be at 8, we say 6-8 if it is a slot split out 4-5 yards who must get inside as well.

The QB will take a 5-step drop. The first read is the sit #1, curl #2, and flat #3. If he throws the sit it will be thrown on a rhythm--5-steps and no hitch step. If he throws the curl or the shoot it is 5-steps with a hitch step.

On his pre-snap read he will do his normal scan of the defense: left corner, safeties, right corner, back over the linebackers with eyes on the DL, back to left corner, repeat. He wants to identify the weak safety, the safety structure (1, 2, 3, 4), the mike-linebacker and any potential unblocked rushers.

On his first step off the line he will eye downfield at the safety structure. He doesn't need to think out "oh, it's cover 3" but he should get an idea of where the flow is. Also, keeping his eyes downfield will help hold the defense.

Then he will look at the Mike linebacker (middle linebacker or first linebacker inside Will in a 3-4 look), reading his drop. If he drops straight back or strong, then the QB will work weak (sit, to weakside curl, and shoot).

If he drops weak, then QB progresses strong (sit, strongside curl, shoot/swing).

That is it. Very simple. From there he reads passing lanes. "Do I have a clear lane to throw the ball?" The receivers on the curl routes are looking to make eye-contact. They will naturally find the proper window.

Next I'll briefly touch on a few adjustments one can make to the slot man to help the pass versus some different coverages and provide a different look.

First, versus cover 4 we will send the slot/tight end on a seam or post route to clear out the safety and to open up the lane for the curl.

Normally, the safeties will bracket the curl and there is nowhere to go with the ball.

However, with a post, now there is a passing lane to the strongside.

Next, is when we split out the player running the sit route we will have him run what we call a "shake", which is sort of a square-in/shallow cross. This is something we got from Gary Crowton's Louisiana Tech days. The slot will take a 4-5 yard split from the tackle. Basically he has some freedom to get open, keep running or find a window. He will inside release, push upfield to 5-6 yards. Versus man and he will stick and break flat, versus zone he will hook up, showing his numbers to the QB. He wants to catch it underneath the Mike linebacker.

Jerry Seinfeld - Still Master of His Domain

2005-06-26T20:54:00.000-04:00

Read the full Washington Post commentary by Tom Shales here:

And why do we always see, in all these [terrorist training] films, terrorists training on monkey bars? Is it expected that eventually a crucial battle is certain to be fought on a children's playground?

Seinfeld's usual subject matter leans more toward the social and cultural: "People are stopping for coffee on their way to Starbucks," he says as part of a very funny riff on Americans and their beverage fixations. If manufacturers can be so presumptuous as to name a cereal "Life," Seinfeld wonders, then why not go the next step, throw caution to the wind and just call it "Almighty God"? (A devoted cereal eater himself, or maybe he just played one on TV, Seinfeld speculated that the escalation of the raisin wars among makers of raisin brans could lead to the ultimate insanity: "all raisins, one flake").

Will China Keep Propping Up the Dollar?

2005-06-26T20:44:00.000-04:00

Niall Ferguson says yes:

Even the gloomiest pessimists accept that a steep dollar depreciation would inflict more suffering on China and other Asian economies than on the United States. John Snow’s predecessor in the Nixon administration once told his European counterparts that “the dollar is our currency, but your problem.” Snow could say the same to Asians today. If the dollar fell by a third against the renminbi, according to Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University, the People’s Bank of China could suffer a capital loss equivalent to 10 percent of China’s gross domestic product. For that reason alone, the PBOC has every reason to carry on printing renminbi in order to buy dollars.

Although neither side wants to admit it, today’s Sino-American economic relationship has an imperial character. Empires, remember, traditionally collect “tributes” from subject peoples. That is how their costs—in terms of blood and treasure—can best be justified to the populace back in the imperial capital. Today’s “tribute” is effectively paid to the American empire by China and other East Asian economies in the form of underpriced exports and low-interest, high-risk loans.

Read the whole thing.

Controlling the Ball With the Pass - Bill Walsh

2005-06-21T15:06:00.000-04:00

Old article from 1979 but still a good one. From the Unofficial Westcoast Offense Site:

Emphasis below is mine--

Controlling the Ball With the Pass
BILL WALSH
former San Francisco 49ers and Stanford Cardinal

My philosophy has been to control the ball with the forward pass. To do that we have to have versatility-versatility in the action and types of passes thrown by the quarterback.

Dropback Passes

We like the dropback pass. We use a three-step drop pattern, but more often we will use a five-step drop pattern of timed patterns down the field. From there we go to a seven-step drop. When our quarterback takes a seven-step drop, he's allowing the receivers time to maneuver down the field. Therefore, we will use a three-step drop pattern when we are throwing a quickout or hitch or slant which, by and large, the defense is allowing you to complete by their alignment or by their coverage.

The five-step drop pattern for the quarterback calls for a disciplined pattern by the receiver. He runs that pattern the same way every time. He doesn't maneuver to beat the defensive back.

Too often in college football, either the quarterback is standing there waiting for the receiver, or the receiver has broken before the quarterback can throw the ball. These are the biggest flaws you will see in the forward pass. Now when the receiver breaks before the ball can be thrown, the defensive back can adjust to the receiver. Any time the quarterback holds the ball waiting for the receiver to break, the defensive back sees it and breaks on the receiver. So the time pattern is vital.

Play-Action Passes

You can't just dropback pass. You have to be able to keep the defense from zeroing in on your approach. That's why the play pass is vital. By and large, the play-action pass will score the touchdown. The dropback pass will control the ball.

For play-action passing, we have certain blocking fundamentals that we use. We will show different backfield actions with basically the same offensive line blocking. We will go to the play pass as often as we can, especially as we get to the opponent's 25-yard line.

...

In Scoring Territory

I have seen many teams march the ball beautifully, but right around the 15-yard line, they are already warming up their placekicker, because right at that point defenses change, the field they can operate in changes, and suddenly their basic offense goes all to pieces.

My contention is that if we are on their 25, we're going for the end zone. Failing at that, we will kick a field goal. In an evenly matched game, I don't want to try to take the ball from their 25 to the goal line by trying to smash it through people, because three out of four times, you won't make it. Unless you are superior. Of course, if you are vastly superior it makes very little difference how you do it.

Why? First, every defensive coach in the country is going to his blitzes about right there. The pass coverage, by and large, will be man-to-man coverage. We know that if they don't blitz one down, they're going to blitz the next down. Automatically. They'll seldom blitz twice in a row but they'll blitz every other down. If we go a series where there haven't been blitzes on the first two downs, here comes the safety blitz on the third down. So we are looking, at that point, to get into the end zone.

By the style of our football, we'll have somebody to get the ball to a little bit late-just as an outlet to get 4 or 5 yards, to try to keep it. But from the 25 to the 10, we're going for the end zone.

...

Short Yardage

We have standard passes to throw against a goalline defense. Too often people try to go in there and butt heads with good linebackers on the goal line. Too often they don't make it.

If we get inside that 5-yard line, half the time we are going to throw the ball. Now, if you're marching through somebody, you can just close your eyes and hand the ball off But when it's very competitive, that goal-line pass is vital. So we have a series of those. We never call them anywhere else on the field.

When we are around their 35-yard line in a short-yardage situation, if we don't see somebody standing deep down the middle, we're probably going to go for the six points.

To make it on third-and-1 we will often throw to a back out of the backfield. Third-and-3 is the toughest of all to make. We have a certain list of runs and a certain list of passes. When we have a third-and-3, we don't grope. We go to it.

Democracy - An Essay

2005-06-21T15:02:00.000-04:00

From The Economist (Subscription Required):

ALMOST all of us are for democracy now. But what is it? We tend to know until we ask. The news adds to our puzzlement. A thoroughly democratic referendum in France as good as kills constitutional changes which, defenders say, would have made the European Union more democratic. China's post-Maoist leaders promise riches first and, maybe, democracy later. Iraqi drafters of a democratic constitution to replace one-party tyranny disagree over the legitimate reach of strict religious law. Each item touches democracy's core. At what political level does it work best? Is it tradable for prosperity or stability? How far may majorities compel minorities in its name? None of these questions is academic.

Answering any of them in fewer than 250 pages would be a feat. John Dunn, a professor of political theory at Cambridge University, tackles them and more in this rich and subtle essay. He describes how government by the people began and what it has become. He blends history and ideas, bringing alive contemporary arguments for and against democracy, particularly in the American and French revolutions. It is a masterly performance.

He starts in fifth-century Athens, where the term “democracy” came from. Its intricate system of self-rule by an active citizenry remains an archetype of the direct or participatory sort. After excluding a quarter of a million women, children, foreigners and slaves, Athenian citizens numbered only 30,000-40,000. That lucky minority engaged, or had a right to engage, in government more fully than people virtually anywhere since.

Many more people have a say in how they are ruled today, but there is less choice. Voters pick among small groups of politicians competing for the right to rule pretty much as they choose within the law until dismissed at the polls. Virtually none of the theorists of representative democracy—Madison on the right, for example, or Robespierre on the left—thought anything else remotely practical. So different are the direct and representative sorts of democracy that Mr Dunn wonders why we use one word for both. Yet he is not a despairing critic who sees modern democracy as a sham. Underlying it and the old kind alike he detects a basic and seemingly universal human preference for being persuaded rather than coerced.

Mr Dunn does recognise the distorting influence of money and special interests. He tells the story of democracy since the late 18th century as a conflict between egoism and equality, his code for free-market capitalism and social democracy. The first has triumphed, he tells us, at the second's expense. Historically at least, that judgment sounds too stark. Modern capitalism has survived and flourished not just by delivering the goods. It came through many 19th- and 20th-century crises thanks in large part to state-provided stabilisers such as state schools, public welfare and social insurance that the party of equality wrung from the party of egoism.

Mr Dunn touches many other topics too. “Setting the People Free” is lucidly and provocatively written, even if the argument is too compressed at times for total comfort. Next time you hear the word democracy, reach for this book. If you want to think harder about democracy's shortcomings and challenges, it is an excellent place to start.

My reply about the different "mesh" plays

2005-06-21T14:35:00.000-04:00

From Coach Huey's board:

I think there is much to gain from both forms of mesh [the Kentucky mesh being two shallow crossing receivers, one at 6 and the other at 5 crossing over the midline getting a good rub. The play commonly also has a frontside corner route for a high-low on the cornerback, though as I explain I do not use this. The Coverdale/bunch mesh is #1 on whip (drive inside to 6, sit or whip back out to sideline), #2 on 10-12 yard corner, #3 on flat route], though I think the bunch/Coverdale version is better as an all-purpose zone route with the high-low on the corner.

Therefore we don't (usually) run the outside guy on a corner in our kentucky version, we send him on a post to just take the top off the D and as a weapon versus cover 0. We look at the Kentucky version as basically an anti-man to man play--which it is great at. Versus zone we we look for the meshers but the QB mostly wants to drop it off to the flat. We usually only have the outside guy run a corner in the red zone/goal line.

The merits of the "triangle" mesh (bad semantics, but that's the terminology I use) from the bunch or more standard formations have been covered great by scooby and others. Two notes on what we do:

a) this is the play we usually go to if we cannot get a good read on what the defense is doing. If they are playing 2 safeties with everyone else about at 5 yards across with no good coverage keys and several different looks (4, 2, 3-cloud, etc) we like this because it allows us to chink away at the coverage for 5-6 on the whip/sit and the flat and if they come up we can still hit the corner. Once we get a handle on the coverages we can go to more standard curl/flats, corners/post, etc.

b) We tag the backside a lot. For my actual progressions the QB usually gets a strict 1-2-3, but pre-snap and on his initial drop we read the w/s (or sometimes mike). A favorite is to have the backside run a skinny post, bs#2 runs a flat. Qb keys the w/s, if he stays in the middle (as a f/s) or works weak, the QB works the mesh (corner, sit, flat) hitting the first receiver in the progression, if the w/s works strong we look 1-skinny, to 2-flat (our QBs will often still use the frontside flat as #3 but that can be dangerous). A common tag for the triangle/bunch-mesh is curl-flat backside because cover 3 is the coverage we like this combination for the least, unless their flat defenders are very poor at coverage the flats.

QB Mechanics - Good Message Board

2005-06-21T14:04:00.000-04:00

Found this on Coach Huey's Xs and Os message board. Lots of great discussions:

QUARTERBACK EXCHANGES

QB/CENTER (Most Important Part Of Every Play)
1.QB Stance – Feet shoulder width or less, weight balanced and on the balls of the feet. Slight bend in the knees and the waist, chest up and butt high. Arms extended, throwing hand on top with thumb of the bottom hand in the groove of the top thumb.
2.Hands should be deep in the Center’s groin with fingers spread. Top hand should apply pressure to the Center (try to lift him up).
3.Keep hands open until ball hits the top hand and go with Center while closing on the ball.
4.Immediately seat the ball (bring it in to the waist) as soon as the QB has the ball in both hands.

QB/RUNNING BACK EXCHANGE (Hand Off)
1.Keep the ball seated until ready to make the handoff.
2.Get the ball as deep to the Running Back as possible
3.Eyes on the pocket while pulling hand near the RB away and giving with the opposite hand. Place the ball firmly in the pocket.
4.Let the RB feel his way through the ball. Pull the hand away as the RB goes by. It is the QB’s responsibility to get the ball in the pocket.
5.On fakes, Pull the ball away with near hand and leave opposite hand for fake.

PASSING TECHNIQUE

PROPER GRIP
1.Thumb and first finger are in an “L” spread at the back tip of the football.
2.Third and fourth fingers are spread out comfortably over the laces of the ball.
3.The football will be held with the fingers. There should be “daylight” between the palm of the hand and the ball.
4.Relaxed grip is better. No “white knuckles”.
5.2 hands on the ball 99.9% of the time.

PRE-PASSING POSITION
1.Ball is chest high under the armpit of the throwing arm.
2.Points of the ball are perpendicular to the ground.
3.Elbows comfortably at your side.
4.Shoulder of non-throwing arm pointing at target.
5.Feet approximately six to eight inches apart, no wider than the armpits, with weight on the balls of the feet.
6.Proper grip with two hands on the ball.
7.Head and eyes looking down field.

THROWING MOTION
1.Shoulders parallel to the ground with the shoulder of the non-throwing arm pointing at the target.
2.Non-throwing hand pushes the ball back to the “coc ked” position by the ear on the side of the throwing hand.
3.Throwing arm elbow will come up above or even with the shoulder and stay high through the throwing motion.
4.Rotate hips back trying to point butt at the target.
5.Ball should now be ear level and the body coc ked and ready to release.
6.Bring the upper body through to get chest pointing at the target. This begins with the non-throwing elbow coming around at the target and then into the back of the QB.
7.Step “past” not “at” the target, (inside of the foot should point to target), so that the hips can rotate completely through. The stride should be short enough so that the ball of the foot hits the ground first, not the heel.
8.Elbow of the throwing arm should come through above the shoulder, about even with the ear.
9.Arm snaps down with the thumb pointing to the ground and the index finger pointing at the target. The index finger will be the last finger to touch the ball.
10.The weight should transfer to the front foot as the ball leaves the hand.
11.On the follow through, weight is on the front foot with shoulders over the toes, throwing hand comes down to the thigh of the front leg, and the shoulder of the throwing arm should rotate through and point at the target.

Read the rest of the thread here.

Also check out the offensive drills thread which you can find here.

Risk and Return in Play Selection

2005-06-17T14:08:00.000-04:00

Below is a chart describing the probability (based on a normal distribution) of gaining 10 yards in 3 plays, based on a particular play's expected gain/variance relationship (or three different plays with the same characteristics):

Chart courtesy of reader Brad Eccles.

You can muse on this for some time, but this is accounting for losses, as well. It shows the important relationship between risk and return but also demonstrates--looking at the steep slope for the results on the right hand side of the chart--that average or expected return has a huge effect, implying that higher return rather than conservative playcalling strategies are beneficial, even accounting for risks (standard deviation).

Quick caveats: This is highly abstract, and takes no account of down or distance or position on the field; what may have a low standard deviation or high return in one circumstance may not in another. Also, the standard deviation for higher returns may need to be higher than 20. I still am looking for a large enough set of data to analyze.

Lastly, and this is not a bad thing, is that the assumption of a normal distribution may be off, because I would imagine that returns for a football play are heavily skewed (i.e. in a single play it is more common to gain 30 or 40 yards than it is to lose 30 or 40 yards.). This may also work in the favor of aggressive playcalling, particularly if you can quantify turnover/field position risk.