Installing Today’s Hybrid Pistol Offense Run & Pass from Top to Bottom
This manual provides you with the full offensive line, receiver, and quarterback mechanics for installing each offensive play presented. Coach Campbell has left no stone unturned for implementing today’s Pistol Offense into your program.
We are thinking about installing the Flex defense next season. But before we do I want to know any potential problems with it. Especially how those problems relate to one back sets and teams that pass the ball alot. Also if there are problems scheme wise against veer option teams, and teams that run double tights. I do not want to get into next season and find out some major flaw in the system. If you have ever faced this defense please tell me how you tried to scheme it. Thanks
Wise men talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.---Plato
People say that it is vulnerable against the option & wide open attacks. I don't necessarily agree. However, no one argues that, in general, it's a great run-stopper. One DC in the Big Ten (who visited Arizona a few years back & coached the defense at the I-AA level) told me that it's the best run-stopping front in football. I plan on using it next year.
People say that it is vulnerable against the option & wide open attacks. I don't necessarily agree. However, no one argues that, in general, it's a great run-stopper. One DC in the Big Ten (who visited Arizona a few years back & coached the defense at the I-AA level) told me that it's the best run-stopping front in football. I plan on using it next year.
I might have a San Jose State Flex defense playbook (late 90's - and it is a derivative of Arizona flex) (I say "might" because I haven't seen it in a while - but I'm guessing it's in the stacks!) If anyone is interested let me know - (I'd have to mail it though - or get somebody with more patience than me to scan it!)
And I'd be interested in hearing the ADVANTAGES of the flex - i.e., Groundchuck and Rookie, why will you go to it next year?
If you have a copy of that San Jose State Flex playbook I will take a copy. I met with a coach in WI who runs it. He put it in 6 years ago and has never looked back. By making the area vrom tackle to tackle a "cluster" you can allow the LBs to fast flow outside. The DL is supposed to allow no run to go vertical, everything must spill laterally which allows the pursuit to run it down. I think this is a big advantage for us because our Lbs have good speed and can tackle in the open field. The scheme is very aggressive. IN our old 5-3 we always made our DEs contain, which I think my its nature is a more "passive" action. In the flex really no one has contain, the DL forces everything outside to the LBs, and FS has cutback. The CB would still need to force everything back in to the LB if he does not make the tackle himself. The flex DT causes problems for the OL by his alignment, and his keys. The kid we might play there was an ILB in the 4-4. the scheme allows us to play with smaller fast kids. I still want to know what its pitfalls are because there are some veteren coaches in our league and if they can find a weakness they will exploit it. Let me know if you find that playbook.
Wise men talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.---Plato
Groundchuck - I'll give it a look when I get to the office tomorrow afternoon - why don't you email me a reminder if you haven't heard from me by Friday sometime...I'll need to know how to get it to you also...
hornt@fccps.k12.va.us
one of the reasons we never went very far with it - even after I spent time at Arizona (can you believe I had a friend there but I couldn't get one their playbooks???) was that we couldn't find kids comfortable playing in the flex position - as it turns out we probably have the kids to do it now - but we're in love with the 3-5-3 - we routinely put LB types in a "flex" position near the LOS and they are great there...maybe it's worth another look!
38, Food for thought: Some teams now play the flex with 3-3 personnel. They play with TWO flex players, which might help alleviate some of the problems presented by a spread team... plus, a few more stunt/blitz possibilities. Groundchuck, The only thing I've worried about is this. With that "cluster" in the middle, the LBs BETTER make the play on the perimeter. In other words, maybe not enough people at the point of attack for some people. That's part of the reason I plan on playing a lot of Robber coverage, to get the FS in quick run support in the alley.
5 man, double eagle front with one 3 technique playing flexed - at the heels of the D-line. They cancel A,B & C gaps on both sides, spilling everything, where LBs are playing force. The nose is a two-gapper. Lbs are the adjusters vs. various sets, but they always have force, no matter where they align.
Seatlecoach-I noticed you had an "empty" post yesterday on this subject.
One thing I want to be sure of with this scheme is how based around talent is it? This scheme is so different from others that running it for one season and junking it does not seem worthwhile. Our multiple 4-4/5-3 philosophy adjusts easily to our talent or lack thereof. What are some thoughts on it? As you can tell I am not completely sold on the flex yet.
Wise men talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.---Plato