Split Field Coverage Concept - The Underneath Players

What's underneath there???

I get a lot of questions about this topic, especially regarding TCU's Blue coverage and how they deal with crossers.  Now, I've not heard it from the man himself, but from what I've watched on film and broken down, here is what I've come to find out.  To first illustrate, we need to look at how traditional zone coverages, that are not split field in nature deal with crossing routes.

Traditional Zone
In a traditional zone, much like in basketball, routes get passed off to other defenders when the run through a zone.  In the early years, if you were to have run with the receiver after he passed through your zone, you surely were getting yelled at as a player.  The idea behind zone is that all eyes are on the football and that in an attempt to minimize spacing, you pass routes off to one another.  This works good in basketball where things work on a much tighter scale, however in football, OC's found out that there was just too much ground for a traditional zone player to have to work with to effectively control passing concepts by simply passing one receiver from zone to zone. This "passing off" is where many zone coverages fail and it's for two major reasons.  Reason one, is sheer athleticism.  Most underneath zone guys are linebackers or inverted safeties who are not as fleet of foot as their cornerback counterparts, yet they are still having to cover receivers within their zones.  As the spread has evolved, instead of the number two receiver being a tight end or a running back, he's now a slot receiver, which makes this match up that more lopsided in the offenses favor.  Secondly as offenses have advanced through the years, passing concepts have become more and more advanced, and are using this "passing off" technique against the defense by overloading zones with multiple crossers and/or high lowing a zone AND adding a crosser.  These two factors are the single most important reason to pattern read in my opinion.  That's for another post however...

Anyhow, in traditional zone, if a hook to curl defender expands to his landmark and gets a receiver coming into his zone, he runs with him, until something makes him stop.  Now this can be the edge of zone, or another receiver entering his zone.  A lot of people call this passing the route and looking for work.  In the beginning of pure zone coverage concepts, I'm sure this was the bees knees, however as offenses have figured this out, the stress put on these underneath coverage guys by both horizontal and vertical stretches have become so great, most folks are not using any "pure zone" concepts anymore (if you are, please proceed to the nearest mental hospital, put on one of their fancy white coats and stay awhile).  With two speedy receivers crossing in a linebackers zone, or high-lowing his zone, the idea that you ask him to split the two and rally was a good answer in the beginning, but as QB coaching has progressed, even in high school football there are kids who can fit the ball into the tightest of windows.  So now you get pattern reading.  But how does pattern reading and the split field concept tie together?  Let's take a look.

Reading...you're doing it wrong!

Pattern Reading
I would venture a guess that ALL major college football defenses pattern read.  I'm sure there are a few that still use some landmark drops, but most are now at least using a progression type read, reading from two to one, or one to two and so on.  Other pattern read schemes have very definitive rules, such as "all of number two vertical and out", which gives a clear cut picture of what the defender is doing.  This pattern match principle can be easily seen on display every Saturday afternoon in the fall.  Pattern matching is not really all that new either, but it's refinement is what's really taking pattern matching to new heights here lately.  Anyhow, what I really like about pattern matching is the definitive answer to reacting to what a receiver or offensive player is doing.  This leaves very little gray area for the defender to have to deal with.  Gray areas are what force your players to play slow, because it makes them think. Now many of those that argue against pattern matching, don't really understand the concept and just how concrete it is.  It's the best of both worlds is what it really is.  It's zone in nature, which means we have all 11 eyes on the football at the snap of the football, helping immensely with stopping our opponent's run game.  Secondly it's man in nature in that once the man trigger has been pulled by the defender, he simply covers the receiver man to man.  We all know that man is one of the simplest coverages out there, so all you are really doing, when pattern reading, is giving qualifiers to man coverage.  Anyhow, I could go on for days here, but even in pattern matching, defenders can still pass off routes to other defenders.  In Saban's Mable adjustment to trips, if there are two crossers, the inside linebackers will pass them off to one another, they do not run with them man necessarily, even though their base rule would say to do so.  This can lead to some confusion though and lead to open receivers.  It can also allow the offense to use this passing off feature against the defense, much like offenses exploited it back when it was still a pure zone concept.  So how does the split field concept alleviate the stress put on a defense by crossing receivers?

Split Field and Crossing Receivers
Now I'm speaking of how TCU's split field concept works and what makes it so solid, I'm sure there's plenty of split field coaches out there that will disagree with this approach, however the TCU scheme is by far the BEST I've seen for dealing with crossing routes.  Let's set up a two-by-two set up playing Blue to both sides (though TCU does not do this, we could simply say playing quarters to both side etc.).  Anyhow, does not matter where the read side is, just keep in mind what the underneath players are doing.  Let's look at the following concept (similar to the levels concept) out of the two-by-two formation shown below.

The corner to the away side has to honor the vertical of one to help the weak safety get over the top, so the out will inevitably be open, however the Mike, is the slice player so he will exit 90 degrees in an attempt to undercut this route.  Now, if the read side linebacker (Sam in my illustration), passes off the shallow crosser, the QB can have a field day!  Here's where the man trigger of pattern matching comes into place.

As we can see from the illustrations, if the read side linebacker passes the crosser off, there's a large void and an open area for that receiver to sit down in.  If he runs with the crosser, which he should, then this window is immediately closed.  Also, from the illustrations, you can see there are still elements of pure zone coverage as look at the strong safety, who sees two go inside and knows now I look to work under number one's route.  He is, in effect, "passing off" the crosser to the inside linebacker, which as stated above, is a pure zone concept.

Now, the other beauty of the way TCU plays things, is that behind everything they do, there is a "common sense rule".  Which basically means, "don't do anything stupid".  For instance, one would say, "What about mesh coach?".  This is a valid question, since now you have two crossers and as we all know (or should know), crossers can severely damage man coverage, ESPECIALLY when they cross.  Here's where the common sense rule comes into play though.

The two linebackers will communicate to each other on the crossing routes and come off and switch.  Here the switch makes sense because Mesh attempts to beat the tar out of man coverage with these crossing routes.  Had the two defenders stayed locked in man a natural rub would occur and one defender, or both, could be compromised, thereby leaving a receiver open.

The Weakness
Much of the questions I get on the subject of underneath coverage defenders has to do when one of these defenders is assigned to the vertical of a certain position.  For instance, in Blue, the read side linebacker is the middle hook dropper and will have all of number three vertical.  This scares the hell out of folks, because they are not accustomed to having their linebacker run with any vertical threat.  This is not a big deal IF you've done your scouting homework.  I once faced an OC in that would get in stacked twins, two-by-two look with the receivers out on the top of the numbers and would run the running back vertical down the seam because he knew we were running quarters.  They had a major down and distance tendency for doing this, and had a damn good running back who could catch as good as any receiver on their team.  When we saw this look, or expected it, we simply rolled into good ol' country cover 3.  They ran fade/hitch with the other receivers which cover 3 took care of nicely.  The safety would roll to the MOF and we ended up picking off that route once and breaking up another to where they quit running it.  My point is, don't make one coverage fit everything.  That would be like you waking up in the morning, trying to find an outfit for the office that would also look good for your job interview that afternoon and be comfortable enough at your son's Little League game later than night.  CHANGE YOUR FRICKEN' CLOTHES DUDE!!!  C'mon, don't ask one coverage to cover everything, I mean that's what everybody supposedly loves about cover 3 is that it aligns to everything.  BIG DEAL, it covers NOTHING, so why use it?  If you know a team likes to do a particularly thing you need to have an answer for that.  It may mean another coverage, it may mean tweaking what you have, but Lord knows, whatever you do, don't just "hope" your linebacker can run with their back if he can't.

We have found a weakness!

The other thing I get, is coaches saying "Well that's just man, I don't like my linebackers to play man".  Well why not?  I mean, the best way to see man to man coverage, is to go to a playground and watch kids playing tag or a pickup game of football.  If you watch, there will be mismatches everywhere, hell that's LIFE.  But watch closely and time up the time that the kids begin to run or chase the other kid and the time that one either separates or closes the gap between the other.  You will see this time will be around three to five seconds.  Sound familiar?  Any kid can run with a receiver for three to five seconds, anywhere on the field.  This is not a major issue in my book, and I always roll my eyes at that question, but go check it out for yourself.  The other thing to remember is that 75 percent of pass defense is pass rush.  So if your guys can run with their guys for three to five seconds, you need to be able to apply pressure in that same amount of time.  That, my friends is EXACTLY how good pass defense works.

The face of your pass defense.

To me, the major weakness of the underneath coverage in the split field concept is communication.  If communication is missed it can lead to open receivers or defenders running into each other.  It is imperative that you, as the coach, make sure that your players know not only why they should communicate, but how to effectively communicate.  I worked for a guy that used to have underneath guys yell "crosser" when a receiver would cross in front of them and leave their zone.  I always wondered why, because trying saying the word "crosser" with a mouthpiece in.  I came to him one day, and said "Why don't we just say in, instead of crosser?  It's shorter and easier to say than crosser."  He looked at me, as though he'd never thought of that, which to find out, he hadn't and we immediately changed that and our communication with our underneath players got much better.  These are the things that you, the coach, can do to facilitate your players and help them be successful implementing the underneath coverage in a pattern read scheme.

Conclusion
The underneath coverage  in the split field concept is not as tricky as folks make it out to be, especially if you build communication into your system and a set of fail-safe rules.  I always tell folks, using the word "always" in building your rules is a bad thing, because good OC's find out your "always" and then exploit it.  Keep your rules open and flexible as possible to allow for your players to adapt to what they are seeing.  Just as in the example above, both the inside linebacker's man keys were triggered, but because of communication and common sense (which should be ingrained in how you coach the coverage to your players) these players knew what was coming and were able to adjust.

Always...not "always" a good word...

Duece

Why Install Both Special and Solo Coverages?

I get this question a lot from guys, and I guess things are not making sense, so I'm going to try and set the record straight with this post.  First off, we must understand, that everything is done for a reason.  Solo and Special Coverages are overloaded zones pushed to the passing strength to help with 3x1, 3x2 and 4x1 offensive sets.  So let's take a look at what each coverage is, and why each coverage is needed.

Solo
Solo, often referred to by old-school Quarters coverage guys as "Poach" is basically Blue (2 read) to the number one and number two receivers on a trips side.  In the TCU 4-2-5, the read side corner, strong safety (SS) and free safety (FS) will all play blue coverage to the number one and two receivers.  The number three receiver strong is handled by both the read side linebacker and the away side safety.  The weak side corner will cover the single receiver man-to-man, and the away side linebacker (LB) will take the running back in man coverage also. 

Here are the individual rules:
Read side:
Corner: All of 1 vertical/Swing deep of 2
FS: All of 2 vertical; 2 not vertical and in, rob curl to post of 1, 2 not vertical and out, man 1.
SS: Curl/Flat/Swing deep of 3.
LB: Strong hook, short wall 3.

Away side:
Corner: Man #1.
WS: Deep 1/2, all of 3 vertical.
LB: Man #2.

Pros of Solo Coverage
Right off the bat you can see that the simplicity of the coverage is that the read side needs no new teaching (with the exception of the wall off technique by the read side linebacker).  This is nothing more than the simple "X-out" concept many loaded zone coverages employ.  The away side is also a relatively simple assignment as well, since kids have been playing man-to-man since they were first put on playgrounds.  Also, the run support to the read side is very solid, with the SS still being in a great position to force the football from his normal alignment.

Cons of Solo Coverage
The weak side run support is the biggest issue I know of with Solo coverage.  The WS is put in a bind in that if the number three receiver goes vertical, he MUST honor that release, leaving the force player late to the party on the away side.  However, you must remember, the read side is always set to the wide side of the field when the ball is on a hash, so there is not much room for the offense to maneuver to the single receiver side.  In the middle of the field though, I would say this could be a recipe for some big gains, particularly if your opponent is used to sending its receivers vertical.  The other issue is the WS's ability to get over the number three receiver when he is running vertical.  Another tough issue, is when the vertical of three becomes a corner route.  There is some much needed seven-on-seven time with Solo coverage.  Another issue that arises is that most times the single receiver in a trips set is the best receiver of the bunch, and if they pit him against your corner, you could see some mismatches based on personnel. 

Another con is flood routes to the read side.  Depending on how you declare receivers vertical, you can be caught in a pinch if you are not careful.  The flood route is as dangerous as one may think, but does take some work to perfect.

Special
What Solo isn't, Special is.  That's about as simple as you can put it really.  Special is an excellent 3x1 coverage, that is also an "X-out" concept, however this time the manned receiver is on the read side instead of the away side.

The individual rules are as follows:

Read side:
Corner: Man #1.
FS: All of 3 vertical; 3 not vertical and in, rob curl to post of 2; 3 not vertical and out, man 2.
SS: All of 2 vertical, swing deep of 3.
LB: Strong hook, all of 4 vertical.

Away side:
Corner: Play call (can play sky/cloud,bronco etc).
WS: Play call.
LB: Depends on call.

The away side has a ton of freedom.  You can do any of the following options.

Cloud
TCU would refer this as cover five, however in my system when the corner is the flat player, then we simply tag it Cloud.  In cloud, the corner is the flat player, and is also the swing deep of two player.  The WS then becomes the deep 1/2, all of one vertical player with the away side LB playing the weak hook to curl, and has all of number two vertical.

Sky
Sky is simply the opposite of cloud for the WS and weak corner.  I like Sky coverage because it has safety run support, and I prefer to have my safeties force instead of my corners.

Blue
You can run blue coverage to this side as well, but you do have a rough time defending the curl from blue coverage, so I only recommend this if your opponent does not attack the curl area, or if you on a hash.

Bronco
Bronco is a better option than Blue, because you can tighten the WS's alignment to assist in supporting the run.  Bronco is played many ways, I simply man the corner on the number one receiver and the WS will take all of number two vertical or out. 

Solid
Solid is the way to truly get 3x1 teams out of trips.  In Solid you can run Solid Backer, Solid Smoke, or Solid Cobra.  All three are shown below.

Solid Backer

Solid Smoke

Solid Cobra

As you can see, the defense is taking advantage of a three-on-two match up and attacking the offense with this match up.  Solid coverage is one of my favorites because the offense does not expect this from a zone look on the backside of a 3x1 formation.

Pros of Special Coverage
The top reason I like Special is the fact I can cover my opponents best receiver with two players.  You can mix and match either having the safety over the top, or the corner, thereby keeping your opponent's quarterback (QB) guessing as to which player is responsible for what zone.

The addition of Solid coverage on the away side is another great reason to play Special Solid.  Attacking the offense is what the defense should ALWAYS have in mind, and Solid does just this. 

The weak side run support in Special is much better than Solo because either the corner or WS has deep help to their side.  This frees this player up to attack the line of scrimmage (LOS) on run looks, as well as helping to play the cutback on runs to the strong side.

Cons of Solo Coverage
The cons most often come to the read side.  The read side run support is tricky at best.  The SS should be the force player, but can easily be influenced by the release of the number three receiver.  The FS and read side LB can alleviate this somewhat, but the run support to that side takes some work.

The cross-training of the SS as a corner also takes some work, but is not as tedious as many may thing.  However, this does add to the complexity of the coverage. 

Conclusion
So, looking at what both these coverages are and aren't, really shows why both are a compliment to each other.  The biggest reason to run both, is quite easy, run support.  I did not run much Special for fear of the complexity and did just fine, however flood routes and away side runs did take their toll on my team.  I would have benefited from installing Special, to combat the problems that are inherent to Solo coverage.

Yes, both coverages take time to implement, and I recommend installing Solo first, as it is an easier coverage install.  However, I do think, as the season rolls along, you should have Special installed by your third game at the latest.  This is just my opinion, and obviously the earlier the better. 

Duece

Creating an Eight Man Front to Defend the Spread Offense

Did someone say eight man front?

When I first went to the 4-2-5, my team struggled to grasp the concept, but it wasn't just the concept alone that hurt us.  There are some glaring weaknesses in the "Pattersonian 4-2" that if you are "out-athleted", you simply are setting yourself up for failure.  I will explain further, but after some miserable seven-on-seven outings, I had to do something.  Well, what I'm going to present you is what I came up with, and a bit of it was stolen from our 3-3 brethren, as well as from Brophy's blog on Nick Saban's adaptation of Cover 3 to the spread offense.

I was forced into the 4-2, because like a lot of coaches in struggling situations, we needed answers which correlated to wins.  Now, this story doesn't have a happy ending, however, there are some excellent things to be learned from the trials and tribulations of ANY coach.  So when the switch was made, things looked good on paper, then enter the seven-on-seven league we played in.  Where we got hurt the most was in the curl area to the away side of the coverage.  Blue is a great coverage, however to the away side, you are essentially giving up the curl, and if you play Bronco, you are giving up that out route to the flat due to the leverage issue of the Weak Safety (WS).  Well, after four disappointing games, and four weeks of not seeing any progress, I became enamored with finding a solution.  I needed something simple and quick to install.  Well, I found my answer on the pages of Cripes, Get Back to Fundamentals in the posts on Saban's Rip/Liz adaptation.  So, the following Monday we installed Cover 3, and Mable, and went on to look a whole lot better in seven-on-seven.  After losing our first four games, we ended up winning three out of the last four, to finish three and five for the summer.  The kids liked the new coverage better and I just knew we were going to succeed.  Well, enter the pre-season!

Prior to the start of the season, the goal was to keep the defense simple so the kids could play fast.  Well, our base coverage to any 2 back set was Robber, and then if we got any one back set, we moved on Cover 3.  Trips check would be Mable, and we were going to blitz empty if we got it (we only saw empty five times that year, even though we played seven spread teams).  What I'm going to do in the following paragraphs is explain the coverages we used, and then go through the "rights" and "wrongs" that we did so you can see how we came to an end result which was an eight man front that was sound against the spread. 

Robber
Robber coverage is nothing new, and since I was a Quarters guy, it fit with my mentality of pattern reading.  Trouble is, we only faced two, two back teams that year, and both were at the end of the season.  Sure, we saw some mix of some spread two back, but not much, so Robber was no the first coverage I taught.  Now, the Robber I ran, was the typical Virginia Tech Robber scheme that so many people have become familiar with over the years.  There's been so much written on the topic that for me to write more, would simply fall into the category of "white noise" as there is very little I can bring to the table on the subject that hasn't already been written about.

Cover Three
Cover three, has also been written about a lot, and most know, by now, the links to Brophy's site where he speaks about Saban's adaptation to this age old fundamental coverage.  Most who really know me, know I can't stand cover three.  Anyhow, after reading the beautifully written pages of Brophy's blog I was hooked.  Saban's cover three is everything you love about cover one, and everything you love about cover three, all rolled into one.  I heard one person even comment to Brophy that Saban's cover three was much like a one-high version of Quarters.  This comment really caught my attention, and got my wheels to spinning.  I'm going to re-hash the rules for Saban's cover three, in case anyone missed them.

For the corners, Rip/Liz (what Saban calls his adaptation), is basically like cover one with some zone principles.  The corner's rule is he has all of the number one receiver vertical.  If one is shallow and in or out, he zones off his deep third.  Pretty standard, yet vague enough of a description to be dangerous.  What I added to this to help our corners was to put in a depth of the route, and more specifically a time. If the corner was able to count to three after the snap and the receiver was still running vertical, then he locked on to him man to man (ala cover one).  If the receiver had made a break before this, then the corner would zone off into his deep third.  This gave the corner a feel for the three step game, since you can roughly count to three and be at the third step of the quarterback, and allowed the corner to anticipate whether he was getting a three or five step drop ( I can't tell you the last time I've seen a seven step drop in high school football).  Anyhow, that was really the basis for the coverage for the corners.  Now I did tweak one thing, that if the number one receiver broke off his route in a hitch or out, that the corner could cushion back and think smash and help play under the deep corner route.  This technique helped our outside safeties (OSS) who were sometimes a little outmatched by the opponent's slot receiver.  Ok, speaking of the OSS's, let's move on to their reads and techniques.



Corner reads

The OSS's rules for Rip/Liz were that they were to take the vertical and out by the number two receiver.  Here I had to tweak the term "vertical" a bit more as well.  What I found out worked for us, was that if the receiver took two steps up field, he was vertical.  I know this is slightly different than the corners, but had to be done this way to combat some of the spacing concepts such as all hitches or all slants.  This allowed us to play the short throws much like cover one would, in a basic man-to-man concept.  The OSS was to align in outside leverage so long as he did not cross the top of the numbers if the ball was in the MOF.  This allowed the OSS to maintain leverage on his run assignment of playing force.  If the number two receiver went shallow and inside, then the OSS would break immediately to the flat based on the corners call of what the number one receiver had done (in or out).  If the call was out, the OSS would flatten his drop and look to get in the "window" of the quarterback's vision.  If the call was in, the OSS would "sit down" and hang on the edge of the curl/flat zone boundary line looking for the slant or dig routes.  Again, we can see, Saban's adaptation has taken two of cover three's known weaknesses, the seams, and the curl flat divider and removed them from existence. 

OSS reads/reactions to number two vertical or out

The free safety had the very simple rule of playing the middle third of the field.  What I liked about the coverage is it took a huge strain off the free safety playing those seam routes against four vertical teams.  The free safety did not have to be such a good athlete as a typical MOF safety does, which was our case. 

So, in summary, the Rip/Liz adaptation really helped, and this help immediately showed in seven-on-seven.  However, like anything else, this adaptation had it's disadvantages too, which I will speak of later. 

Video Courtesy of our main man Brophy

Mable
Mable, which is Saban's adaptation of cover three to defend trips, is a very sound way of playing any three by one set you may see.  However, one weakness that stood out in seven-on-seven was that by pushing the linebacker to the trips, he was barely in the box, and really was asking a tall order of one of my inside linebackers to do what his rules were.  The rules are simple, but my adaptation was shown below, in what a friend of mine (Outlaw Josey Wales on the Huey board) called "dogs over".  This concept was one of many I borrowed from the 3-3 Stack guys, and it was simply to move the weak OSS over to the trips side and slide the linebackers one full shade to the weak side of the coverage.  This did two things, first it put our linebacker in man coverage in a situation with a better match up, our linebacker against their running back (which was much better than our linebacker against their number three receiver).  Second, by sliding the linebackers away, and utilizing our Two-Gap/One-Gap defensive line play, we were able to use this weak side linebacker as our force player.  Thirdly, this scheme, which I aptly named "30 backer" (cover three strong and cover zero weak with weak backer force) put our three better athletes on our opponent's three receivers creating the match ups that we wanted. 

"Dogs over" adjustment to trips in the 3-3 stack



"Dogs over" adjustment in the 4-2



Mable's reads are not that tough, and is nothing more than an overloaded zone pushed to the strong side with a man to man concept on the backside.  This is nothing new, and Brophy has detailed this quite a bit in his posts on Mable.  The key to Mable is that the two underneath droppers (the strong and weak safeties) have got to get the number two or number three receiver on a different level if the offense is running four verticals.  Fortunately for us, we didn't see four verticals from trips, and even though we worked the dickens out of it, this concept still concerned me. 

Coverage Summary
As you can see, that is a very simple and small list of coverages.  Much smaller than the standard TCU fare I've talked about in the past.  I'm not knocking TCU, I'm just saying, that it does require some athletes at certain positions to run.  If you don't have these athletes, you don't scrap the defense (although some would), you make the defense fit what you have.  Saban's adaptations have made this possible.  The ability to play an eight man front against spread teams, and especially the spread option teams has been a huge victory for defenses around the country fighting to keep up with spread football.  Sure, are there weaknesses, yes there are, and I will talk about those in the next post.  I'm going to cut this one up into a few posts, so hang in there, these should be some informative posts to those who don't have the athletes to run some of the seven man front coverage schemes!

Duece

Weak Safety Shuffle Technique in Solo Coverage

Uh oh...

Most who know me know I like the shuffle footwork for defensive backs (DB's).  I started using the shuffle about 2006 as a way to help my slow corners have an advantage against our competition, who was much, much faster than us.  Since then, the shuffle is all I've really used when coaching corners.  The technique really has allowed a lesser player to play the cornerback position and still be able to be effective against much better talent at wide receiver (WR).

Introduce Solo coverage, or as I was taught "Poach" coverage.  I learned this back in my early days of Quarters coverage.  I used it as my trips open check as an automatic.  The problem I always had with Solo was the weak safety (WS) and his ability to both get over the number three receiver vertical, and being able to come up and play the force player to the away side.  Sure, most times this player is into the boundary and our dear friend, the 12th player (the sideline) can help us out.  However, if you've had some of the athletes I've had to coach, over the past few years, you quickly realize you need some way of helping this kid out.  I had used both a flat-footed buzz technique (which is my standard footwork for a Quarters or Two Read safety), and backpedaling as the footwork technique.  I take to heart a lot of what the players tell me, as they are the one's who are having to execute the technique and perform.  Most of the players did not like the sit and buzz because they always felt late getting to the vertical of number three.  Secondly, they did not like to backpedal because they felt by the time they judged it was a run play, they were late forcing the football.  So what to do?

WS has an issue with leverage on both the vertical by #3 and being able to force.

A few years back, I started toying with shuffling the WS out at an angle, having him open to the number three receiver.  The kids caught on pretty quick and liked it much better than backpedaling or standing flat-footed.  The benefit is two-fold in this case.  The WS gets to open up to his pass key (number three), yet still can see the quarterback and EMOL to get his run reads.   If the number three receiver is vertical, the WS can get into better position using the shuffle because he opens in the direction of the number three receiver putting him closer to his assignment than if he would have simply backpedaled.  If the WS reads run, he can easily use the T-step, redirect and get back downhill to help force the run. 




By opening to #3 WS can easily read #3's intentions






By opening to #3 WS can still see his normal lane of ball read and redirect if necessary


You do need to tweak the alignment of the WS if you use the shuffle.  Originally I had the WS align in the away side A gap.  I felt this alignment allowed him to get to both assignments well, however the WS still was late forcing the run most of the time.  Anytime I tried moving him wider, then the number three receiver became a problem.  Once I tried shuffling, I was able to move my lesser athletic WS's to the B gap, and the more athletic one's to stacked over the away side OT. 




WS is too wide in normal alignment to account for #3 vertical




Something else, not related to WS technique, that can help with Solo coverage is having the read side LB work fast to wall number three and force this receiver to run a "bubble" when going vertical.  This gives the WS time to get a clear read and get to his assignment.  The LB has to work quickly to get to this route and at the very least help be in the throwing lane, especially vs. quick throws. 

Lastly, if you really like Solo coverage, mix in "Roll Solo" as well.  Roll is not a good coverage vs. four vertical routes, however, it is good against teams that run flood concepts with the number three receiver going vertical (instead of the standard of having number one take the top off the coverage).  Roll takes some pressure off of your WS because there is added help by the FS in this case.  Maybe that's for another article though...

Just something I tried and wanted to share with folks who may be experiencing the same issues I had when installing Solo coverage.  Solo is a very good coverage, but it does have it's weaknesses.  By utilizing a technique, I already was coaching my corners on, I was able to help out our WS's in Solo coverage.

Most of you are wrapping up spring practice, you've had your spring games and are looking ahead to the off-season.  However, some of you may still need some improvement.  Here's some great sites in my blog roll you need to check out!

Football is Life Blog Roll

Smart Football
Smart Football is a site I check daily.  The latest post on the Colts offense shows exactly why football coaches should use this site.  The attention to detail here is second to none. 

Gridnotes
Gridnotes is one of those gifts that keeps on giving.  It seems as if this site is updated daily.  Articles ranging from X's and O's to philosophy and tidbits that will make you a better coach grace the pages of this blog.  You can also find links to some of my long lost posts on there as well!  Great site chocked full of TONS of information on the great game of football.

Coach Hoover's Site
Coach Hoover, the master of creating and editing video has a great site with more links than I can possibly count.  Plenty of articles on drills as well as devotion and coaching philosophy can be found on Coach Hoover's site.  Plus...he's a Gator fan, what more could you want?!

Cripes, Get Back to Fundamentals
If you haven't found Brophy's site yet, you are missing out.  Cripes, Get Back to Fundamentals is the Mecca of a myriad of football information.  So stop lying around on a bean bag, naked, eating Cheetos, and get on the Internet to this site!  I guarantee you can burn up a couple of Saturdays doing nothing but reading old posts on here.  Good job Brophy!

If you are looking for good football knowledge, check out those sites, you won't go wrong there.  Well, I'm off for a bit, heading to enjoy my memorial day weekend.  Have fun, be safe and enjoy a cool one...





I hear Buffet playing...don't you?!


Duece

Two Gap/One Gap vs. One-Back Zone Option

Since posting the original Two Gap-One Gap (TGOG) posts, I have had numerous emails wanting more, more, more.  Where here you go!  In this post I'm going to show you how the TGOG scheme, when coupled with coverage can negate the zone read and zone read triple options being employed by many of today's spread offenses.  The TGOG was developed specifically to give lesser athletes an advantage against just such offensive schemes.  Let's get into the details shall we?

Setting the Front
There has been much argument about how to set the front when facing zone read option teams.  Personally, I like to set the three technique on the opposite side of the running back, or at the very least slant him in that direction from a two technique alignment (especially vs. those pesky OC's who flop the RB prior to the snap).  Anyhow, I also believe you need to mix things up, as good spread teams with a running QB will also run QB iso and QB power.  I think setting the three technique to the back is a good change up when expecting the iso and power type of QB runs.  Being able to mix things up keeps the offense on it's heels and they now do not know what to expect.  The TGOG scheme allows the defense to be sound, regardless of where the three technique is set.

Setting the Coverage
Assuming the ball is in the middle of the field (MOF), as with the three technique, I say mix things up.  There is no right or wrong way to do things, and in this article I'm going to look at all the possible alignments and how the defense is sound no matter where the read side of the coverage is set (assuming you use split field coverage).  Now we all know the ball is only in the MOF some 20 percent of the time, so the read side may or may not be set with your front.  I'm going to detail the scenarios to show you just how sound the TGOG scheme is, regardless of where the coverage is set.

Attack the Offense, Scenario #1- Front and Coverage set Away From the Running Back

As the drawing shows, the read side of the coverage and the front are both set away from the RB.  The DE on the strong side, being a one gap player can get up field and help play the spill by the Sam LB.  The three technique will allow himself to be reached and fall back in to play the A gap and help on cutback.  To the weak side, the one technique is a one gapper and will get up field, also preventing the cutback or "wind back" play from developing.  The weak side DE is a two gapper, so he is collapsing the OT, not allowing the OT to work up to the Mike LB and is playing the B gap cut back also preventing the "wind back".  The Mike LB, will have QB all the way.  This is very advantageous if you are in the MOF and playing Bronco coverage on the away side.  As you can see, you have all your bases covered.  Now let's look at the triple option run the same way.

The front assignments remain the same, however the secondary must make up for the motion and the resulting "extra player" that will show up on the away side of the coverage.  This is an easy check for the secondary.  The FS should check the secondary into either Roll Sky, or Roll Solo.  I'd prefer Roll Sky as the SS is already inverted and can help play under the #1 receiver on any playaction routes, as well as run with the wheel route by the RB off of playaction. 

The FS moves with the motion and is the alley/extra QB defender to the "new read side".  The WS, can screw down and is now the force player and will take pitch.  If the number two receiver blocks the WS, then the FS will overlap this block and play the pitch.  Again, you are sound as you have all three phases of the triple option accounted for (dive, QB, pitch), and you've done it simply by defeating the blocking scheme and not by assigning players to a certain phase.

Attack the Offense, Scenario #2-  Front and Coverage Set to the Running Back

Now the three technique is still on the same side as the SS, yet the RB is now to the strong side of both the front and the coverage.  Maybe you did this expecting a QB isolation run or QB power run and the offense decides to run the zone read instead...not an issue.  The strong side DE, being a two gap player, will work under the reach block by the OT and play the B gap looking to spill the play outside.  The one technique is a one gapper and is attempting to blaze a trail up field, not allowing the left guard to come off (even though I have it drawn up that way).  The one technique holds the A gap and helps on the cutback.  By alignment, the one technique is difficult to block one-on-one by the center, so you have eliminated any chance of a double and scrape by the center and left guard.  The weak side three technique is a two gapper, so he mashes the guard down in the A gap, and does not allow the guard to scoop to the next level while helping on the cutback.  The weak side DE is a one gapper and is coming hard up field and will play the QB all the way.  The Sam LB plays the spill created by the one technique and the strong side end, while the Mike LB is what some call the "fall back" player to the weak side.  The "fall back" player is responsible for the cut back or "wind back" that sometimes happens on the inside zone play.  Because of the play of the two gapping three technique the OT will be late scraping off to get the Mike and he is unblocked to help on the "wind back".

Against the triple option, the secondary has very little to adjust to.  The easy check here is to simply check into Bronco on the away side, or Solo.  I prefer Solo, as this keeps the WS with his eyes on the side the triple option has been run to as an extra player who can play if the FS "whiffs" on the number two receiver going vertical.

Again, the read side of the coverage can play "read force" where if the SS is unblocked then he will take pitch, and if the number two receiver crack blocks the SS then the FS takes pitch.  You also have two QB players in this scheme being the Mike and the weak side DE.  Again, as you can see, the defense is sound in it's attack of the offense.

Attack the Offense, Scenario #3- Front Set to the Running Back, Coverage Set Away

The only thing I do not like about this setup is the distance that the Mike must travel to get to his assignment.  This scheme is sound however, in that the "plus one" player to that side is the SS.  The strong side DE is a one gap player and will get up field and play the QB.  The three technique, being a two-gapper, mashes the guard into the A gap and plays for the cutback.  The play of the three technique creates a dilemma for the right guard and right tackle.  The guard is in no position to single block the strong tackle as he's expected to scoop to the 2nd level by getting help from the tackle.  If the guard sits and waits on the tackle, the Sam is unblocked coming right off the hip of the OT trying to scoop to the three.  If the guard tries to turn out on the three, and let the tackle drive up field for the Sam, then the three technique will come across his face into the A gap, and should be unblocked by virtue of sheer leverage.  Again, you have three players on two (don't forget the strong side DE).  To the weak side, the weak DE will spill the reach block by the OT (since he's a two-gapper), and the one technique is working hard up field.  The one technique must get up field and press the center so that the guard has to maintain the double team for fear of losing this block.  The reason the guard has to stay is the alignment of the one technique makes it impossible for the center to reach him.  This technique allows for the Mike to scrape across both the A and the B gaps and play for the spill.  Again, if for some reason the Mike does get picked off, you are "plus one" with the SS.

Against the triple option we see nothing changes from the above example where the offense runs the play to the away side.  The FS should make his check to Roll and let the new "away side" play either Sky or Solo.
 
Attack the Offense, Scenario #4- Front Set Away From the Running Back, Coverage Set to the Running Back

This look, again is not one of my favorites, due to the long distance traveled by the Mike LB, however it is still a sound and productive scheme.  To the strong side the DE is a one gapper, and will help play the Spill by the Sam LB.  The three technique is the two-gapper and will close the A gap playing for the cutback.  The Sam LB has a very simple job, fill the B gap to his side.  This gap should be open as the play side guard will be occupied with the three technique and the play side tackle has to handle the strong DE.  On the weak side the one technique makes life miserable for any double and scrape scenario that gets thrown his way.  The center cannot come off as the one technique penetrates up field in the A gap.  The weak DE is a two-gapper and will mash the OT down inside playing the B gap and allowing the Mike to scrape outside and play for the QB.

Nothing new here, as we've seen the triple option run to the read side before.  Again, not my favorite due to the distance traveled by the Mike, but this is a sound scheme if you get caught in this look.

Summary
As can be seen, no matter how you set it up, the divorced secondary coupled with the play of the TGOG technique is a very good weapon against the one-back zone option.  This scheme allows LB's to flow freely to the football, all the while allowing lesser athletes to play on your DL and make plays.  Utilizing the split field coverage scheme and playing coverages we already know such as Roll Solo, and Roll Sky make this a dangerous weapon in the hands of the right coordinator.

My preference is to keep the three technique away from the RB.  The read side of the coverage does not concern me because no matter what the offense does, the FS simply makes the adjustment, whether it be checking into Roll against motion, or playing read force when the option is run to the read side.  To me, the inside zone has a tough job running at both a three and a five technique.  Offensive coaches will tell you this is no big deal, but you watch enough film and you will see that zone teams struggle running at a three technique.

Another argument by many DC's is if you don't have the three technique set away from the back you don't have anybody playing for the cutback.  With the TGOG this is untrue.  You always have players dedicated to every gap and every phase of the option.  I think these factors alone are what has sold me on the TGOG scheme.

Keep the emails flowing, I try to get to them at least once a week, but keep in mind I have a job, and a team to coach as well.  Hopefully this stuff is helping!

Duece