Option football questions

[crash123go]

Hey guys, I'm looking for some help from the knowledgable posters on the boards to see if they can help me with all the styles of option football, specifically the Veer.
I know a lot about football, specifically defense and I'm currently studying the 46 defense so that I will be able to coach it on the high school level but I need a couple people who know a lot about option football who can draw up some plays so I can learn how to stop all forms of it with the 46. Thanks for the help

[broncos SB2010]

Hey guys, I'm looking for some help from the knowledgable posters on the boards to see if they can help me with all the styles of option football, specifically the Veer.
I know a lot about football, specifically defense and I'm currently studying the 46 defense so that I will be able to coach it on the high school level but I need a couple people who know a lot about option football who can draw up some plays so I can learn how to stop all forms of it with the 46. Thanks for the help

what formation are they running the veer out of? Flexbone is getting to be a popular choice. I think the key to stopping the veer is teaching sound assignment/gap responsibilities and stopping the QB keep/pitch making them give the ball to the inside back ..... that is the million $ question.

We run some option but it is more a complement to the rest of our offense and not the bread and butter plays. We run out of the offset I and bunch formations

[crash123go]

It's not a specific formation, I'm trying to work through most option offenses. Rex Ryan teaches that as soon as teams see that you run the 46 they will game plan all types of option because somehow people started saying that the 46 can't stop the option. I'm just trying to cover all my bases.

[samparnell]

what formation are they running the veer out of? Flexbone is getting to be a popular choice. I think the key to stopping the veer is teaching sound assignment/gap responsibilities and stopping the QB keep/pitch making them give the ball to the inside back ..... that is the million $ question.

We run some option but it is more a complement to the rest of our offense and not the bread and butter plays. We run out of the offset I and bunch formations

That's the question answered by scouting. That will show which system for which to prepare. The main ones I saw in NM 1994-2006 were Split Backs Veer, Wishbone and Option I. We played a lot of Wing-T teams that ran a little Option, but that isn't the base rushing attack of the Wing-T.

46 is the Double Eagle, a variation of the 50. Most HS coaches are familiar with Homer Smith's concepts of how to attack the Double Eagle. There is a coaching clinic presentation of his in Offensive Football Strategies by the American Football Coaches Association. It is entitled "Scoring Through the Double Eagle", pp. 32-38. He shows Counter Option from Split Backs, SMU Option and Trap Option from the I. Watch out for those because he chalked them up against the Double Eagle.

When playing triple option teams, we spent a lot of time on who has give, keep and pitch. We had to have every formation and motion possibility for the cards for the scout team. We worked on keeping the D-Linemen from standing up and looking into the backfield. If they couldn't do that, we just had them bear crawl. We never blitzed an option or Wing-T team.

Playing an option team requires strict assignment football. One concept that worked well to defeat zone steps by Veer teams was to have the defensive front jam and slide and build a wall. It was the mirror image of zone steps. It was very effective and allowed the Backers to make a lot of plays. It tends to spoil the read. Always have a defender at ball depth when the play is going away; usually a DE or Backer.

fastandfuriousfootball.com has hundreds of free playbooks including those on Veer, Wishbone and Option from other formations including the I. I printed hundreds of them and put the pages in sleeves in large binders. It is a valuable resource available two steps from where I am seated.

Double Eagle is a good D vs. inside run plays. The T-N-T guys are the key if they have some lead in their butts and stay low. If I was attacking it with Triple Option, I think I'd go weak side and read the 9 tech. That might force an adjustment which could be attacked and be the basis of a series which is what Option football basically is. Wishbone should be effective, but Spread Option could be deadly especially PAP to which Double Eagle is vulnerable. Watch out for motion from Spread Option teams. It sets up kickout/seal, pitch and weak side routes.

[crash123go]

I've seen you say that before, the 46 is the double eagle. The double eagle is a 7 man front, 46 is a eight man front. The double eagle is related and is one of the father formations of the 46 but it is not the 46.

[samparnell]

The way Buddy Ryan played the Double Eagle resulted in an eight man front, essentially a 6-2. Instead of just a 9 tech on the tight side, he brought SS Doug Plank, #46 up in a 7 tech. The offensive tackles were uncovered on LOS, but covered by Backers at Backer depth.

The result was the Bear Defense, a Double Eagle with SS on LOS in either a 7 or 9 if they switched. If you show that to a Veer attack, they will probably run weak and read the 9. I don't advise a 46 look vs. Veer or Spread Option. A regular 50 might be more effective.

When the 4/5 tech in a 50 kicks inside to a 3, that is called Eagling that side. When both 4/5 techs kick inside, it is called Double Eagle. 46 is a Double Eagle because it has T-N-T. It is an odd front and is a variation of the 50.

When the Broncos were at New England in the 2011 playoffs, Belichick played a 50 to counter Double Option. When Denver was TE right with McGahee to Tebow's right in gun, NE Aggied the 0 to a strong side 1, Eagled the split side 5 to a 3, brought the split side 9 to a 5 and boxed the tight side 9 with a 5 on the same side. Tight side Backer was over the B Gap at Backer depth.

There was no place to run against that alignment. Spencer Larsen was out and the Broncos couldn't get into the I to get the Pats out of that look.

[crash123go]

No, buddy Ryan's 46 defense was designed to put the will in the 7 with the Sam in a 9, with Doug plank used as the adjuster in the defense lined up in a the weakside 40 and singletary at the Mike.

It wasn't until Rex Ryan adjusted the 46 to his style that the SS was put at the 9 with the Sam pushed down to the 7. I know your smart but your wrong on this one, read Rex Ryan's book, coaching the 46 defense and it's right in the first paragraph what I just explained.

The weak side option can be stopped with the bear. Your weakside 3 has to take the double team, your will is the spill, End is the force, FS is the alley. That's just the blue call and the simplest way to stop the weak side option, there are much more aggressive calls to stop it and it just has to be coached right.

The bear isn't a odd man front, 4 down lineman, the Sam and the SS. That's a even man front. The double eagle is 3-0-3 with your end and Sam at 9's and your will and mike at 40's, 3 yards off the LOS. That's the double eagle front not the bear

[broncos SB2010]

No, buddy Ryan's 46 defense was designed to put the will in the 7 with the Sam in a 9, with Doug plank used as the adjuster in the defense lined up in a the weakside 40 and singletary at the Mike.

It wasn't until Rex Ryan adjusted the 46 to his style that the SS was put at the 9 with the Sam pushed down to the 7. I know your smart but your wrong on this one, read Rex Ryan's book, coaching the 46 defense and it's right in the first paragraph what I just explained.

The weak side option can be stopped with the bear. Your weakside 3 has to take the double team, your will is the spill, End is the force, FS is the alley. That's just the blue call and the simplest way to stop the weak side option, there are much more aggressive calls to stop it and it just has to be coached right.

The bear isn't a odd man front, 4 down lineman, the Sam and the SS. That's a even man front. The double eagle is 3-0-3 with your end and Sam at 9's and your will and mike at 40's, 3 yards off the LOS. That's the double eagle front not the bear

I'll have to check when I get home...I have that book

[samparnell]

I'll have to check when I get home...I have that book

When you do, check to see if the 46 has a 0 tech and two 3 techs, and get back to me on that.

[broncos SB2010]

When you do, check to see if the 46 has a 0 tech and two 3 techs, and get back to me on that.

traditional 4-6 alignment...pg 9

Sam LB--inside foot on tight end outside foot on LOS
Will LB outside foot on TE inside foot on LOS
Mike LB--headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS
left end--shaded outside OG
left tackle--headup on OC
right tackle--shaded outside OG
right end--1 yard outside of OT on LOS
SS headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS




I didn't read the whole book but by looking at some of the play formations sometimes the Sam and SS switch positions and sometimes the Will lines up over the weakside OT off the LOS with Sam inside TE and SS outside TE.


edit...It likes most of the plays diagrammed have the SS outside TE, Sam inside TE, Will over OT off LOS. like this pic with the $ as SS but the RDE is not shaded, he is out 1 yard



I am going to assume the "traditional 4-6" is what Buddy ran and moving the SS up to the LOS and moving will back was an adjustment by Rex. To me, they look pretty much identical it's just the position names are different.

[samparnell]

traditional 4-6 alignment...pg 9

Sam LB--inside foot on tight end outside foot on LOS
Will LB outside foot on TE inside foot on LOS
Mike LB--headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS
left end--shaded outside OG
left tackle--headup on OC
right tackle--shaded outside OG
right end--1 yard outside of OT on LOS
SS headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS




I didn't read the whole book but by looking at some of the play formations sometimes the Sam and SS switch positions and sometimes the Will lines up over the weakside OT off the LOS with Sam inside TE and SS outside TE.


edit...It likes most of the plays diagrammed have the SS outside TE, Sam inside TE, Will over OT off LOS. like this pic with the $ as SS but the RDE is not shaded, he is out 1 yard



I am going to assume the "traditional 4-6" is what Buddy ran and moving the SS up to the LOS and moving will back was an adjustment by Rex. To me, they look pretty much identical it's just the position names are different.

OK, a 0 tech and two 3 techs, an odd front inside. As you know, in HS football, whether or not a front is split or odd matters to how the offensive line plans to block the D based on scouting. It helps a lot if a team has an end zone camera and has access to EZ video. During the game, it helps a lot if there are some sharp coaches in the box who can tell the sideline exactly how the D is lining up. The sideline view isn't the greatest and some rural press boxes aren't that high.

During my time, we ran both odd and split fronts. The biggest deal about an odd front was always the 0 tech. Finding a kid who could at least stand his ground against a double was consistently the biggest problem with running an odd front. Even the 3-3-5 which spills runs to the sideline was an issue because the 0 tech played an A Gap and was against some big OL. Getting the DL to play low and not stand up was always addressed at practice. We spent a lot of time in the trap chute.

Odd fronts are a little more limited on how much stemming the DL can do. Our most successful D was a split six. We stemmed and sugared the DTs and inside Backers on each play and changed the calls so that the DTs were lined up differently on consecutive identical D & D situations. The jam and slide technique of run D, which I saw the Broncos use in 2011, was very successful. The last time we won a District Championship, the leading tackler was one of the DTs and the fourth was the other. They played both ways.

In HS football it helps for a defense and its coaches to be as flexible as possible due to the variety of offenses they will play. My experience showed more variety than pro football and most college conferences. Although, at one time, the MWC had 3-3-5, 4-2-5, 3-4 and 4-3 defenses and offenses which were pass heavy, run heavy and balanced including everything from Wishbone to Run and Shoot.

When I was coaching, we saw Single Wing, Split Backs Veer, Wishbone, Power I, Option I, Wing-T, Spread, Spread Option and, on GL/short yardage, Full House T and Stack/Full I. During one season, we would have to defend Option teams with zone blocking, smash mouth teams, misdirection teams and teams with an all out passing attack not to mention those that tried to be balanced. We had success with the Split Six because it offered flexibility from game to game if our scouting, game plan and week of practice was good.

The Bear defense is aggressive and difficult, but not impossible to run on. A good passing team can have some success with that approach against the Bear D. The DL will be the key to success.

Self scouting is essential to finding and fixing problems. Changing players isn't a luxury many HS coaches have. I have been asked on the sideline if I had someone who could do better than "so-and-so". In those situations, I turned around and looked at the bench then looked back at the field and said, "'So-and-so' is doing just fine." Coaching on the sideline is always necessary and difficult if a kid is playing both ways.

The Bear is strong at LOS and less so in the secondary and at the second level. If I was running the Bear, I would spend a lot of time compensating for any offensive success last week's opponent had in preparation for the next because that's what they will do. Beating up on a weak team shouldn't be allowed to distract. Emphasize what opposing offenses did well and fix it, if possible. I question how flexible the Bear D can be, and still maintain its basic concepts.

IMO the biggest differences between HS and pro football are the hashmarks and the play clock. When playing triple option teams, the ball will often go outside the hash which means the ball will most often be put into play from the hash. For defense, that means c.50' to the boundary and c.100' of field from where the ball is put into play, and the plays are happening fast. Many HS teams use no huddle. Three guys I coached with are at Zach Gentry's HS where they have been running no huddle since his soph year.

The single high Safety in the Bear will need to be in the middle of the field, not over the ball. An option offense that lines up strong to the boundary and is able to pitch to a fast back to the field will find a lot of running room. What to do? Those extra guys over the TE might be needed elsewhere.

A good number of high school teams use formations with 11, 10 personnel or even empty. This puts a lot of strain on a HS Bear D. In order to counter the kind of spread passing attacks seen in HS, a Bear would need to have versatile players. They are rare at the HS level.

[crash123go]

traditional 4-6 alignment...pg 9

Sam LB--inside foot on tight end outside foot on LOS
Will LB outside foot on TE inside foot on LOS
Mike LB--headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS
left end--shaded outside OG
left tackle--headup on OC
right tackle--shaded outside OG
right end--1 yard outside of OT on LOS
SS headup on OT 4.5 yards off LOS




I didn't read the whole book but by looking at some of the play formations sometimes the Sam and SS switch positions and sometimes the Will lines up over the weakside OT off the LOS with Sam inside TE and SS outside TE.


edit...It likes most of the plays diagrammed have the SS outside TE, Sam inside TE, Will over OT off LOS. like this pic with the $ as SS but the RDE is not shaded, he is out 1 yard



I am going to assume the "traditional 4-6" is what Buddy ran and moving the SS up to the LOS and moving will back was an adjustment by Rex. To me, they look pretty much identical it's just the position names are different.

It's also a adjustment Rex Ryan made to the 46 while he was coaching in college to attack the weak side option and to get a better advantage against the TE. The Rex Ryan book is my bible, I'm studying it to a point where I have it completely memorized. He never adjust out of his base set with the SS at the 9 and the Will at the 40 unless faced with a multiple receiver set or a split TE.

This is a strong system to coach even in high school because you don't have multiple reads for the linebackers, it is designed to keep your linebackers clean, it puts pressure on the offensive line every play and limits what blocking schemes can be used against it. Having a defensive player in each gap makes it very difficult for any offensive scheme if you are smart enough to coach it, teach it and call it.

The 46 is designed to handle any offensive formation, you just have to know how to call it, how to adjust and how to study the opponents film. Ryan covers how to defend 3 wr sets, 4 wr sets and even empty.

Sam you can't just hand pick certain players on the dline and call it a odd front. In the 4-3 bear there are 4 defensive lineman on the LOS, the Sam and the SS you have a 4 man dline which makes it a even man front. In Rex Ryan's bear defense he runs in NY they are a base 3-4 which will give you a odd man front.

[broncos SB2010]

I don't know......if an option team hit that weak side and beat the Will.....TD...or big gain at least. You would have to have a heck of a Mike or FS to get over there to make that play.

Offensive teams may not do well on every play but I think they would get yards in bunches and I think PAP would be very effective against this defense at the HS level as well if they had decent blocking up front. My experience is nothing like Sam's, I am unsure about yours, but I don't think I would be comfortable committing so many guys to to the LOS and leaving the second level so exposed.

[crash123go]

I don't know......if an option team hit that weak side and beat the Will.....TD...or big gain at least. You would have to have a heck of a Mike or FS to get over there to make that play.

Offensive teams may not do well on every play but I think they would get yards in bunches and I think PAP would be very effective against this defense at the HS level as well if they had decent blocking up front. My experience is nothing like Sam's, I am unsure about yours, but I don't think I would be comfortable committing so many guys to to the LOS and leaving the second level so exposed.

Against option teams you can focus a little more on the weak side option because it would be almost insane to try and run the option against the strong side.

The DE has the pitch responsibilities as the force, the will is your dive as the spill player and the FS is your alley. It's more important that your 3tech be hyper aware of the double team from the guard and tackle, if they don't double team him then he should be able to beat the reach block of the guard and wreck the B gap which will give the QB a pitch read. Now there should be a two on one on the pitch with the DE and the FS.

There are also many different play calls to change the option responsibilities which can be more affective then the base blue call.

[broncos SB2010]

Against option teams you can focus a little more on the weak side option because it would be almost insane to try and run the option against the strong side.

The DE has the pitch responsibilities as the force, the will is your dive as the spill player and the FS is your alley. It's more important that your 3tech be hyper aware of the double team from the guard and tackle, if they don't double team him then he should be able to beat the reach block of the guard and wreck the B gap which will give the QB a pitch read. Now there should be a two on one on the pitch with the DE and the FS.

There are also many different play calls to change the option responsibilities which can be more affective then the base blue call.

what if they singled the 3 technique, kick out the DE with the OT then Will has to take the B gap and the dive player allowing the option to go outside the DE, especially if they playing out of Gun or Pistol. They could just give it to the dive back and the Will would have have to make that 1-on-1 tackle every time.

They could even combo the 3 and Will, kick out the DE with a lead TB and run right through the B gap. I don't know...I don't like it. I never ran that defense but it just looks too risky to me.