Run Blocking from the Two-Point Stance

Tiger one could you explain your previous post? We use a lot of 2 point stance and we never had the DL dropping down and cutting the OL?

Two things on the 2 point stance. Must rep it in practice and teach it just as you would the 3 point stance. 2nd, I have seen some teams sit in the 2 point stance and the OL backs are straight up and down. We are just slightly higher in our 2 than in our 3 point stance. Our chest is still close to sitting on our thigh boards.

I have a big 10th grade kid who is very slow coming out of his 3 point stance, so last year for a 10th grade game I told him to stay in his 2 point stance the entire game and what a world of difference it made for him. He was able to get off the ball quicker than he ever had. I am hoping with his improved hip flexibility and strength he can opperate out of a 3 point this year.

JD

3 point is better for firing out. But, A lot of people teach the three point where the hand down has so little weight on it though, that if you kick it out, it doesn't cause the ol to get off balance, which is essentially the same position as JD uses, just without a hand down. The tackles in our gun stuff are a little higher than jd's are I would assume, but we don't really ask them to fire out and whip someone's ass. They need to be able to pull, for zone-t, counter gt. They need to be able to reach and get inside position on a bad reach zone, then just maintain contact. This is one of the reasons we went to the gun stuff in the first place. To get subpar athletes to be able to play on the ol, so the defense could take the studs and just let them go one way. I wouldn't want to go 2 point under center and run stretch or iso. Out of the gun though, with as much as we throw the ball at least, it makes sense for pass pro purposes and for what we want out of them to have the tackles at least in a two point. Like jd, I have a 300lb kid that is slow out of his stance. He is at guard. I will start him out in a two point next year and then adjust.

We are in a 3 point stance most of the time. In our no back sets we are in a 2 point stance because we throw the ball the majority of the time in our no back sets. We will motion a receiver back in and run the ball and hopefully this year with our QB we will have some qb runs to throw into the mix with our no back package. I agree with you tiger one on the 3 point is better for exploiding and getting leverage on the defender, but I do teach the 2 point run block because we will run the ball in our no back sets. I misunderstood you on your first post about the OL being cut.

JD

It's all good Tiger. The stance we teach for our under center stuff is light hand. We pull enough both ways on counter and sweeps to need to be able to get out of it quick. For our zone stuff we have to be able to step laterally as well as 45 zone step so we need to be able to get that foot sideways some coming out of the stance. A heavy handed stance makes this harder, imo. Especially with some of the kids I have. Also, our feet are as even as we can get them stagger wise. When I get the kids the first day, we do stance. I put them back flat, head down enough to see the linebackers (or up enough to see the feet of the linebacker's feet) and hand down. Then I walk by and kick their hand out. If they stumble forward too much, then that is too much weight on their hands. By stumbling forward too much I mean that they have to put their hand back down or they will fall on their face. If I kick out their hand and they kind of rock forward and then can just sit down a little, then that is what we want. The weight is supported on the hips. Obviously in short yardage situations we get that hand out a little farther and put some more weight on it. (for some of the big gumbas we even get them back in a 4pt). But our base stance is light handed like that. For our gun stuff, the tackles basically do the same thing, they just sit a little taller with numbers visible for pass pro and tackle pulling square reasons. They are not standing straight up.

Center has more weight on his off hand as the snap hand is light on the ball. We don't like the two handed snap or the one hand on the ball only as the support for the down hand as we think it slows down the snap and the ability to move either way for our counter stuff as well.

Fellas, great discussion going on here. We will use the two point stances this year with a great amount of zone and counter run game. I have a great question for you two point stance in the gun coaches. Is your alignment as far back as the rules allow or do you crowd the line?

I think if you are going to zone the run and pass games you should push the limits and buy time with space to get to your combos and see exactly what is happening.

We are going to a full time 2 point this year, I beleive it will enable us to see better. We are going to crowd the ball as much as possible.

Tony DeMeo and Alex Gibbs are both proponents of the 2 pt stance in all passing and in specific run game instances. The advantages you have, if you are a zone run team, with the 2 pt stance is that you are able to create the "head-eyse up, flat back, and small steps" philosphy if the OLM are not worried about getting off, especially if they have a stud in front of them. It also allows for the 1/2 man zone fit to work better - if covered and have inside help, then an 2 pt is fine. If you look at some of the 2001-2003 Denver running tpaes with gubbs, he would occasionally have his backside OT on the wide zone plays in an up position IF the DE was a hard upfield pass rusher. DeMeo uses the everyone in 2pt (except center) philosophy for the reason that it is able to hide the backfield alignments and forces the DLM to think is this pass or run? Indecision is always a killer in football.

Hope this helped?

Coach Wheeler,

I believe Tony DeMeo also uses the two-point stance because he wants his offensive linemen to be able to alter their splits based on the alignment of the defensive player.

We try to use this to our advantage too. We start our linemen with three-feet splits. Based on the alignment of the defensive player, we will reduce our split to one foot or extend it to four feet.

If a defensive tackle lines up in a one-technique, for instance, our guard will reduce his split with the center to one foot. This gives us a natural double team. The offensive tackle, after hearing the call that moves his guard into a tight split with the center, will extend his split to four feet. This creates a natual seam that we want to use to our advantage.

It obviously works the other way too. If a DT lines up in a 3-technique, the guard widens his split one foot (Yes, this creates a four feet split between the center and guard) and the tackle reduces his split one foot. This sets up the guard and tackle to double team the DT. The center, in all likelihood, will be double-team blocking with the backside guard.

I will trade you two 4'8" 120lb wr's that can run a legit 5.6 forty for one of those ol guys.

We have some afflicted freshmen. I haven't heard anything changed on his condition.

We do like to either

kick out the linebacker with the bsot pulling
or just flat run over him and give our non riggins like backs a two way go off the iso block by the bsot
then our rb or qb, whoever the ballcarrier is, can run free (in theory)

We do have a couple of giants too. I am in the process of turning them from baby huey's into animals.

ol

Swidecoach, please describe the two-point stance you use. Do you want the chest close to the thigh, or do you want the chest in a more upward position? Thank you in advance. Ian Curtis