Option against 50 defense

What you are describing is the inside veer. The only concern is that your QB be ready to pitch very soon after the ride, because the 9 tech DE usually comes at the QB hard, and if he is not ready the DE will cause alot of problems.

We ran the midline vs. a 50 and we had great success, but we had to rep the heck out of it. Actually, we averaged more yards per play on midline vs. a 50 than vs. an even front with a 3 tech. We based the nose with our center. We released the frontside guard and tackle, with the PST on the Playside backer, and the PSG tracking backside backer to FS. The BSG tracked BSLB to FS as well. The TE based the 9 tech. The QB read the 5 tech for his give keep. We had the TB lead up on the Strong Safety vs. cover 3. VS cover two, he runs his pitch path and calls ball ball ball. The fullback reads the block on the nose for his path. He still aims at the crack of the center's butt for his mesh path, if he gets the football, he runs off the center's block. If the nose plays to the frontside A gap, the fullback rolls it backside, staying tight to the center. if the nose plays to the weakside A gap, the FB stays on path, slightly working to the playside A gap. It is a great football play vs. a 50 defense. We have our FB at 5 to 5.5 yards so he can get a good read on the center's block on the nose. I will be in Atlantic City speaking on the option game, and I will get in depth on running midline vs. the 50 defense because we had so much success with it.

As far as the strong safety, the TB went through the B gap, and led the QB. Then we had him take his release outside as if he was going to run his pitch path, and got downhill quick to get on the SS. There was no difference either way. Vs. cover 2, we usually got the playside safety flying up on him for pitch, so the QB could run free.

Our splits are 2 to 2.5 feet. On midline we might widen the guard and tackle a couple inches more to create more space inside. We wanted to see what the DT's rule was. How far would he follow us out to get in his technique? We never went more than 3 feet with a split.

DJ
We have had success with the "Jill" fold scheme against a 50 front. We run midline out of a Flexbone look (2 WB, 2 SE). We see an awful lot of 5-3 Cover 3 against our balanced set, with the DT in a 4 tech and DE head up or outside shade of the WB. We use the PST to fan block the DE and fold the WB behind on the PS backer. The WB is taught to treat the blocking as an iso type play. This means if the PS backer closes down hard to the hole, the WB will wash him inside. If the PS backer stays outside to stay on the pitch man, the WB can kick him out.

DJ
We have had success with the "Jill" fold scheme against a 50 front. We run midline out of a Flexbone look (2 WB, 2 SE). We see an awful lot of 5-3 Cover 3 against our balanced set, with the DT in a 4 tech and DE head up or outside shade of the WB. C and PSG Ace combo the nose to Middle backer. The fullback path is modified to be the outside hip of the center as opposed to straight up his butt. We use the PST to fan block the DE and fold the WB behind on the PS backer. The WB is taught to treat the blocking as an iso type play. This means if the PS backer closes down hard to the hole, the WB will wash him inside. If the PS backer stays outside to stay on the pitch man, the WB can kick him out.