46 Defense- Cover 7

The 46 Defense designed by Buddy Ryan and evolved further through the work of current Jets Head Coach Rex contains many concepts that could be incorporated into different schemes. I know many coaches still operate for the most part out of a 1-High Middle of the Field Coverage look. In this shell the main coverages are 3-deep zone and man free. There are some things you can do, like roll the secondary into 2-deep coverage, but most people in “1-high looks” prefer to play 1-high coverage.

Buddy Ryan utilized multiple coverages in his 46 package. In addition to basic cover 3 and man-free, he integrated a number of rotation coverages each with multiple variations. The coverage I will be discussing today is “Cover-7” which is a (man-under halves) weak-side rotation coverage.

Base Rules

Coverage on the Wide-outs

The WS rolls to the weak ½ while the strong-side corner plays “thumbs” technique that involves him opening to the other ½. The other part of the thumbs is the jack backer getting underneath #1 and playing an inside-trail technique on the receiver. His job is to cover the inside cuts (and provide solid support on outside cuts) forcing the ball deep and outside to the deep corner.

Weak Corner and WS can play different games on the #1 WR. The options for them are:

1. Fist
2. Slice
3. Fist/Slice

Fist is basic inside trail bracket coverage. The Corner lets the receiver get ahead while he trails him 1 yard behind and 1 yard inside. His key here is the WR’s hips (or feet). He is responsible for underneath coverage of the WR. The WS plays over the top and is responsible for deep to deep-outside routes.

Slice is outside bracket. In Coach Ryan’s playbook slice technique is described: “The corner drives through any outside break, and the Safety drives through any inside break.” It is used as an automatic inside the 20 yard line.

Fist/Slice is an interesting adjustment. Is a unique bracket that works well against a slot WR (but good on a single WR). The corner forces the WR outside (same as fist) then crosses over him to a point 3 yards outside and even with the WR. This is a difficult read for the offense because the corner appears to be denying the inside breaks while inviting the outside breaks. However, after the initial jam, the corner works to take away any outside breaks. This is a great adjustment to teams whom like to run the “choice” route to the open side. The big question in this technique is how to properly defend inside cuts. Here the WS has inside cuts by #1. He should be aware of deep routes, but must play the inside breaks aggressively. The only problem with the aggressive play of the WS versus the inside breaks is the threat of the double move (i.e. Slant-go). The corner must help out with these situations. In Fist/Slice the corner must get over the top of #1 anytime he breaks inside to the WS. This is why the corner must play the WR outside and even, so he is in a position to get over the top of inside cuts. This technique allows the WS to play inside breaks very aggressively.

Coverage of the Middle 3

I have covered the bracket techniques used on the WR’s to each side. The remaining three eligible receivers require a coverage system. The Strong Safety, Mike, and Charlie have this responsibility. Their options are:

1. Frank
2. Zebra
3. 3-Way

These coverages are varied techniques that alert the player for lock-man, 2-man combo, or 3-man combo responsibilities. Frank is very basic; the player has his assigned person in straight lock-man. There is no exchanging; you follow the receiver to the stands if he goes there. In the diagram below the SS has the slot man to man. There are times you can put the corner in Frank technique and allow the SS to play the brackets with the WS, but I will not discuss the variations here.

Zebra is a combo (banjo) coverage, this is common to most teams that run man coverage. In the above diagram the Charlie and Mike banjo the TE and back. Zebra is basically an alert for a possible 2/3 switch.

3-Way coverage is an alert for a 3-man exchange and more importantly a play action strong. On play-action the Charlie would have 1^st man out, the SS would have the first crosser (the Mike would pass him off ), and the Mike would play the man in between the two.

Anytime the backers are not in 3-way, they must be aware of which of one is in Frank. Usually, if a player is in a frank technique, the other two are in zebra.

Adjustments

Like any coverage, there are going to be prepared adjustments for certain formations. Formations like wing-trips (12 personnel) create conflicts with the linebacker.

The Charlie and Mike are not in position to cover the 3 receivers. If the wing releases flat and the TE runs a corner, there are going to be problems. First, the Charlie would be responsible for the #2 WR (wing) but could easily get walled by the TE because of alignment. Second, the Mike will have difficulty getting underneath the TE. Besides checking to a different coverage, there needs to be more effective way of handling this Set.

The “I’m Out” Call

This call involves the Jack and Mike swapping responsibilities. The Jack now plays man with the Charlie and Strong Safety. He will now be in either frank, zebra, or 3-way. The Mike is now the player in “thumbs” playing inside-trail on the #1 WR. The full adjustment looks like this:

The drawback here is the positioning of the Mike in respect to the #1 WR. He has more distance to cover to get in proper trail relationship on #1. However, the defense is in a better position to leverage the routes of the middle three wide receivers. Even versus some problematic formations, this coverage can involve simple adjustments and remain sound.

Situations to Check out of Cover-7

Cover-7 is used to aggressively attack and take away underneath routes. It is most effective against 1 receiver to each side and a combination of the other 3 players in running-back or TE alignments. As a basic rule of thumb, cover 7 can be run whenever 3 eligible receivers are aligned in close proximity to the core of the formation and there is a wide receiver to each side. There is more to it than that, and spread formations/tight end trips/twins variations will take the 46 defense out of cover 7. The purpose of this coverage is to provide aggressive underneath coverage versus sets with a wide-out to each side.

Summary

Cover-7 is nothing new to football. Coach Ryan ran this coverage in the 1980’s. This era was dominated by running formations. Despite the fact that spread formations were not as big an issue, Ryan found a way to get his defense into a 2-High coverage from a 1-High shell. In addition to just getting into the coverage, he crafted a simple and effective way to change up the way he did his rotation coverage. This illustrates a timeless principal. For every coverage concept you have, it helps to have simple and alternative ways of running it. If you are a cover 3 person, it helps to change up which players have flats, Curls, and middle thirds. The 4-spoke, 3 deep rotation coverage are examples of this.

No matter the types of formations you see, you will always have to disguise and confuse the offense. Cover-7 is a great change up coverage that can be easily run out of a run-stopping front like the 46.

Pattern Reading vs Spot Dropping

This is a debate I deal with on a regular basis. What type of zone coverage is more effective for high school athletes. Most (if not all) colleges employ some form of pattern-match coverage. However, many high school coaches believe that this type of coverage is difficult for high school athletes to preform. In this post I will explore the pro's and con's of each.


Spot Dropping Defined

Spot dropping is just what it sounds like. On a pass read, pass defenders begin to drop back toward landmarks on the field. Terms like "Top of the numbers" "hash" , and "middle of the field" are used as horizontal markers. Then a depth is usually assigned. For example, a hook to curl linebacker could have a landmark 12-14 yards deep.

While on their landmark and in the process of dropping there, players have their head on a "swivel" reading the QB's eyes while they get to their landmark. In this scheme coaches emphasize two main things:

1. Break on the Ball
2. Gain depth

Pros

• Simple to teach
• Simple to execute
• More eyes are on the ball
• Better pursuit
• Poor throws can easily be intercepted
  

Cons

• Defenders can be stuck covering grass
• There are many windows in the defense
• Requires a better than average pass rush
• A proficient passing team can slice you apart
• Very susceptible to Intermediate routes.

Pattern Matching Defined

Rather than take your drop to a spot and wait for receivers to arrive, pattern-match coverage involves taking coverage to the most dangerous threat a defender recognizes in his zone. In this coverage defenders are taught to key certain receivers when they read pass. Usually, it is the #2 WR to their side. From the receivers action, they can diagnose whom the most likely threat to their zone is.

After a certain point, pattern-match coverage turns into man coverage. The aim of this coverage is to get the best of both worlds. Zone offers defenders the advantage of having their eyes in the backfield playing the run before the have to commit to the pass. On the other hand, man coverage puts defenders in the dark as far as the run goes, they are dialed in on the WR that they have in coverage. Pattern-reading uses zone principals early, and man principals late.


Pros

• Fewer windows
• Fewer completions
• Ability to play run and cover intermediate routes
• Defender aren't stuck covering grass
  
• confusing for the quarterback
  

Cons

• QB scrambles could hurt
• Takes more time to teach initially
  
• Fewer interceptions
• more susceptible to the big play
• more potential mismatches.
  

Are the Two Coverages Mutually Exclusive?

Is there a team that is purely a spot drop team or purely a pattern match team? I don't think so. In today's game of spread out offenses, no team will survive with traditional spot dropping. Conversely, in pattern matching the defenders know the general area that their coverage will be in.

In spot-dropping the underneath defenders are taught to see the QB as well as the WR's that could cross their zones. There are times the defenders are told to collision or re-route receivers. This is a principals at the heart of pattern matching.


My Position

These modern offense requires defenses to adjust. The same old style of defense is not gonna work the same way. As one side evolves the other side must as well. I am a firm believer in pattern reading. It just make sense in today's game.

The main argument against pattern-matching is difficulty. Many coaches argue that it is too difficult and that typical high school athletes cannot handle it. They reason along these lines. "Spot dropping is easier than pattern-matching. Our players are making mistakes spot dropping. So how can they begin to understand pattern reading?" The other line of reasoning involves the capability of high school athletes. Many critics question a players ability to see all these routes. I agree that at time it may appear like a lot, but like anything in football, it can be taught if you perfect the way you are going to teach it.

Training the Eyes

When making any type of "reads" in football, it all boils down to the eyes. There needs to be methodology to where a players eyes are supposed to be looking and how they respond to what they see. The more clear we can be with the progression of a players eyes, their ability to diagnose a situation, and trigger the appropriate response; the better we can all be at coaching defense. In the analysis below, the focus will be on underneath droppers, not the deep defenders.

Eyes in Spot Dropping

First, eyes begin on the run/pass key. The most common keys are linemen and running back. Regardless of the key, the player should be able to diagnose run/pass and then move on to the next action. If the defender reads pass, the player should open to his landmark and begin dropping. The eyes should go to the QB second to diagnose the drop type. (On sprint out flow rules usually trigger) On straight drop back plays the linebacker continues towards his landmark reading the QB back to his landmark on the "swivel". This is the basic way of spot dropping. Most coaches have tried to incorporate reads into their drops. However, this is where problems have occurred. The problem is usually a rules conflict.

This conflict stems from two primary goals of spot dropping. First, is the ability to see the QB so the defender can break on the ball. Second, is to gain depth. This is done to prevent an intermediate route from getting wide open. The philosophy is that if the player can accomplish goal #1 and goal#2 then the only open passes should be shallow routes. Shallow routes are not a big concern, because the underneath defenders will be able to see the QB release the ball. This allows the players to break forward and keep the play to a minimal gain. However it usually does not work this way.

Intermediate routes become open anyway. The defenders are so busy focusing their eyes on the landmark and QB that they don't know where the intermediate receiver is going to be. By the time they "break on the ball" they are usually out of position to make a play on it. Coaches begin adjusting their drop rules and involve pattern read concepts. They try to train their players to see these routes developing. Many times these players learn how to do this. However, the rules conflict rears its ugly head. When you begin to involve reads two things usually happen. First, the defenders do not see the QB as well and the "break on the ball" is not as good. Second, depth suffers because droppers will stop and delay more when reading routes.

This angers the traditional spot-drop coaches, because they have always emphasized breaking on the ball and gaining depth. They have the habit of emphasizing these top two goals. The main problem is there is no clear process of where a players eyes go. In traditional spot-dropping the eyes are simple: swivel from the QB to the landmark. If you begin to involve reads into this system and emphasize these two goals the same way, then conflicts will be present. Spot-dropping will become more difficult and frustrating then before. I am not saying all spot-dropping coaches go through this. I am noting this because it is a trap that is easy to fall into.

Whenever you begin integrating route-read concepts into a spot drop philosophy, players will not drop to depth as consistently nor break on the ball as quickly.

Eyes in Pattern Reading

Similarly to spot dropping, eyes begin on run/pass keys. Once reading pass, the eyes go to a completely different place than their spot-drop counter parts. The body begins dropping in a predetermined direction, but the eyes flash to a particular receiver. Depending on what that receiver does the eyes could move somewhere else and/or the direction of the drop can alter quite a bit. Players are usually given a 3/2 drop or 2/1 drop. These are forms of "Hook to Curl" and "Curl to Flat". Here is an example

A 3/2 drop is usually an inside linebacker. On pass he opens at 45* and reads #3 (usually the RB) if he releases vertical he has him man to man. This is simple, on pass look at #3 if he goes deep you run with him. If #2 blocks or releases outside, the backer expands his eyes to #2. If #2 is running vertical, the backer walls him off and gets his eyes on #1. In this step he is anticipating #1 to make an inside cut (curl or dig route). If #1 continues vertical past 15 yards his final read is the QB, his technique to break down and rob the QB's eyes. This is not an exhaustive list, just a simple example of eye progression in pattern-matching. To Recap the linebackers eyes:

3/2 Pattern-Drop Eye Progression

1. Run/Pass Key
2. #3
3. #2
4.#1
5. Rob the quarterback's eyes

This is an example of cover 3 rules. In Cover 3, it is difficult for the inside linebacker to get underneath curl routes in a spot-drop scheme. But, in pattern reading the reads take the backer to the curl, to the point that he is anticipating the route. It is easier to get coverage on the route because the backer will have his eyes on the receiver.

At first this may seem like a lot to someone unfamiliar with this type of coverage. With enough time and understanding it becomes easy to coach. The key is emphasizing the progression of the players eyes and the recognition of what to do. This only requires simple terminology and efficient drills.

In this philosophy, you don't have to talk about routes in the general sense. Terms like slant, hitch, dig, and arrow can confuse the process. You only need to talk about receivers and their movements. If a player makes a mistake on his reads, the process is simple to correct. Questions are the key. Using the example of the 3/2 drop discussed above: if a player failed to cover #1 on a curl, what was the problem. He probably never got his eyes on #1. Ask him, "what did #1 do?" He won't know. Players will gain confidence in this system, because through repetition, reading a route progression will become second nature.

One major drawback to pattern-matching is that there will be fewer interceptions. Turnovers are a big key on defense. You have to weigh it with the benefits. The increased coverage will lower receptions and scoring. As a coach you have to decide what best fits you.


Summary

As the game changes so must we. High school teams have become more effective at passing the balls. If you try to play the same old keep the ball in front of you and break on the philosophy, you are going to get exploited. Spot dropping has its merits, but when you play in a league with proficient passing teams, you are gonna have trouble. Offensive coaches have done a great job.

Pattern-matching can make a tremondous difference for your team, if you commit to installing it. High School athletes can handle it. I once worked with 8th graders in the offseason, and showed them how to read routes. After a week it became easy for them. They would play 7on7 and have the routes covered. They even would talk to eachother with the proper terminology. The 2/1 dropper would yell at the 3/2 guy and say "Why did he catch the ball? #3 released out and #2 came in at you."

If spot dropping works for you and you are having success with, then by all means commit to it. A scheme is as good as its effectiveness. As coaches it helps to understand the different things teams are trying to do. Down the road coverage will probably take another evolution, because offenses will begin adjusting to pattern matching even more at the high school level.

Game Dynamics and Football Part III

The ideas I will discuss were inspired by a Poker Book, No-Limit Hold'em: Theory and Practice by David Sklansky and Ed Miller. I am in no way as astute at math and game theory as they are, but I was intrigued a couple years ago by a couple chapters from this book. I thought about how these principals could apply to two things I coached at the time: football and debate. After some thought I came to see these principals as integral parts of both the games of Football and Debate. The first one I will discuss is the Dynamic of Mistakes and second I will discuss the importance of multi-level thinking.

Dynamic IV: Winning the Battle of Mistakes

It has been said for many years, football games are won by the teams that make fewer mistakes than their opponents. Many games are decided by mistakes. If mistakes were not made, no one could ever win. Think about the lowest form of a game Tic-Tac-Toe (Questionably a game). If you know the perfect strategy you will never lose. However, if your opponent knows it too, neither of you will win. The game will always end in a "cat" game (tie). The only way to win is for one of the players to make a mistake. It could be an obvious mistake, where one person does not see that the other has two and a row and leaves the third spot unprotected. Or a not so obvious mistake where the mistake takes to more turns to come to fruition (some of you know the "trick" that gets the unaware people).

Whenever you win at a game, one of two things happens:

1. Your opponent makes a mistake by some oversight or similar error.

2. You cause your opponent to make a mistake.

Some times we because of the 1st type of mistake, when we really learn a game we begin to win because of the 2nd type. Football is no different. Some football games are won by an opponent oversight. For example, LSU lost a game recently because of poor time management. As coaches we work hard to avoid these types of mistakes. These kinds of mistakes get a coach fired quick.

So if the object of a game is to win the battle of mistakes, then a football game can be through two methods.

1. Try their best to limit the number of mistakes they make.
2. Force their opponent to make a lot of mistakes.

Some coaches have a philosophy that involves one more than the other. In my opinion, this is the dividing point between the conservative and the aggressive coaches. I am not saying one method is better than the other, just that these coaches have a different philosophy about winning the battle of mistakes.

The conservative method tries to win by playing simple mistake free football. They patiently grind out a game hoping for their opponent to make a mistake. When two of these types of teams face each other, most of the time the game comes down to 5 plays or less. These 5 plays can decide the outcome of the game. The drawback is, if your plan backfires you might not be able to catch-up if you fall behind.

The aggressive method tries to win by forcing their opponents to make more mistakes then they do. They don't care if they make 100 mistakes in a game as long as their opponent makes 101. When you think in this mentality, you become more aggressive, and more relaxed when mistakes occur. The drawback is, when your plan backfires you have a good chance of getting pounded.

Whichever style is more fitting to you is probably best, but both can be used to win the battle of mistakes. I really, used this concept in debate. My debate philosophy became much more aggressive, the students I worked with were more concerned with attacking their opponents and less concerned with making an error. The biggest overall benefit for debaters was the increased willingness to make decisions.

Dynamic V: Multi-Level Thinking

Multi-Level thinking requires two people. The levels (depth) proceed as the people involved proceed. In football multi-level thinking can happen in many different circumstances. The first being in the scheme and scout process. Consider an offense vs defense battle. The offense runs the spread and adheres to the 5 in the box/ 6 in the box rules. If there are 5 in the box, run, and if there are 6, pass. An astute DC can think beyond this OC by giving the appearance of 5 in box, but triggering a 6th man quickly on run plays (Squat/halves, cloud force coverage). Many DC's have done recently, the "tweener" linebackers that split the difference between the EMOL and Slot WR have caused offenses problems.

When I first saw the technique, I was amazed at how fast they could fall in and support the run and at the same time get in good pass coverage. It causes fits for the offense. The offense has to find a way to combat it. The way to begin this process is to figure out the techniques and assignments of these players. First, most of the time backers in this alignment are keying linemen. If they see forward movement or pulling they trigger on the run immediately. If the linemen pass block they know to get their eyes on the pass keys. With this information the offense can begin to think a level deeper and use their scheme against them.

What if you were to pull the linemen and throw a bubble screen away from the pull? The blocking WR would be on the corner and the other WR would have the ball with nothing but late safety support to worry about. The backer would not be readily available to help, because he triggered into the box on run support. How would the defense respond to this? Option 1, is to slow down the run support, which is great for the offense. Option 2, play the safety more aggressively on the bubble. The adjustment to this is common, pump the bubble and hit the other WR deep behind the overly-aggressive safety.

Suppose the defense is aware of what the offense is doing to them, how should they adjust. Whenever an opponent thinks at a level deeper than you, you must find a way to think a level deeper than them. The defense would need to utilize a different coverage and run fit package. Preferably Quarters type coverage robber, blue, and man combinations that change who the run force players are. These coverages employ a different combination of players who trigger into the box on running plays. The FS would now be the main person triggering into the box and run fits. A different type of play pass that uses the linemen pulling as false keys would be desired. (Faking a run, then throwing the ball to the Slot (#2 WR) deep behind the area vacated by the safety.) If the DC begins to mix quarters with the squat halves coverage, he can begin to put the OC off balance again. If he was unaware of the OC's plan to attack his squat/halves coverage and "tweener" backer, he would be getting exploited all day. But thinking a level deeper he can find a way to get the upper hand.

Conclusion

This brings an end to the discussion over game dynamics and football. I am not sure how much interest there out there for this subject. As a person whom enjoys games in general and has made a commitment to learning the game of football, I have enjoyed applying various game dynamics to the sport. Football is game with base rules and variables like talent, decision making, game theory, and multi-level thinking at its core. There are many other dynamics like preparation, team unity, and human attitude that play a roll. For the discussion, I believe that these dynamics are sufficient to illustrate the relationship between football and game dynamics.

I am planning to write some blogs on more 4-2-5 defense stuff, I am just trying to get an idea of what people are interested in reading. If anyone has ideas let me know. I have considered more trips coverages, linebacker run fits, man coverage combination, front/ stunt calls, and utilizing the system through efficient play calling.

Game Dynamics and Football Part II: Scouting and Play-Calling

In the sport of football coaches are always trying to get an edge, this will never change. One of the biggest things for defensive coaches is scouting offenses in the hopes of being able to call the right defenses at the right time come game day. There are varied views on the use of scouting programs and the reliability of tendencies, however, I think all can agree that we get some positive help from the process. In this article I will explore the game dynamics behind the calls coaches make, the statistical analysis behind them, and finally some ideas and principals that can be used (theoretically) to optimize their play calling.

Dynamic III- Game Theory and Optimization

General Football Strategy

No matter what team you are facing, tendencies will be present, period. Why is this the case? The reason is that coaches understand that certain situations call have particular optimal plays to call. For Example, consider this situation and assume that these teams are evenly matched opponents. You run a power-I offense, it is 3rd and inches on the -20. What type of call makes sense? Some type of inside run or QB sneak seems best, and most would agree with that. Will this play call succeed 100% of the time? No. It will succeed an overwhelming majority of the time, but it is in no way a lock. It is a high percentage play. Do all coaches in this situation run this play type 100% of the time? No. Why not if it appears to be clearly the best choice?

The defense is aware of the optimal play for the offense to run as well. Defense's load up the box and try to stuff the short run, if he could, a standard defensive coordinator would load all 11 of his players to stop the run. Few defenses ever commit all 11 players to stopping the run first, even in a 3rd and short situation. The reason they don't do this, is because the offense could easily exploit them. The offense could fake a base run and then throw a long pass to an uncovered receiver or fake the run and have the QB keep the ball on a naked bootleg. These types of plays force the defense to slow down some of their players on run support. Because of this Offensive coaches throw in little wrinkles here and there to keep the defense honest.

So will a play caller run the inside run/ sneak combo 100% of the time, No, but he will most of the time. Does the small % of time the offense runs something different affect the strategy of the defense? It certainly does. This is the game dynamics that are studied under the field of Game Theory (a branch of Economics and Mathematics). Game Theory applies to the sciences of decision making and competition games in general. Using game theory we can discover optimal choices to make, given certain circumstances.

Analyzing Football Tendencies and Statistics

When we scout, generally there are 4 main tendency areas we analyze:

1. Situation (including Down and Distance)
2. Formation
3. Personnel
4. Field Position

Beginning with situational analysis, we try to group different situations together and see if there is any statistical relationships. 1st and 10, 2nd and long, and 3rd and short are all situations we look at. Most coaches go the extent to break down 2 pt plays. With this data we get a snapshot of what the team is trying to do. For the most part, as coaches we discover obvious things like "they pass more on 3rd and long", "The run inside on 3rd and short", and "They do a bunch of different things on 2nd and medium". Every now and then, we stumble into a very clear down and distance tendency that goes beyond general football strategy. But this is rare, for the most part we discover basic things.

When we begin to break down formations, we get another set of tendencies. Consider this data.

Pro-I Rt formation

70% Run 30% Pass
Runs Right 72% Left 28%

Runs

Iso-Rt 30%
Power Rt 13%
Toss Rt 9%
Counter Lt 18%
Belly Rt 10%
Trap Lt 5%
Iso Lt 5%

When you look at this formation data, you find out that they like to run the right(strong side) twice as much as the left. Does this mean the defense should overload to the strong side when they see this information? No! Why not?

The data shows a tendency to the right side of the formation, however there are enough plays (by number and type) to the left that forces the defenses to respect those plays. If you overplay the right-side of this team, they are going to attack the left side quick. This is a major part of putting together a scheme. A classical example of this is the toss pass. If a team is killing you with the toss, sooner or later your corner (assuming he plays pass first deep 1/3 or 1/4) is gonna come off and play the toss aggressively. When a play caller sees that corner make a tackle close to the LOS. You can bet that the toss pass is coming up real soon. Because of the threat of the toss pass, the corner cannot come up on the toss aggressively. A team might never even have to run a toss pass, the threat of it is enough to keep the defense honest.


From Personnel and field position we can gather similar sets of information, but for the most part we will be in the same situation the first two areas, seeing a tendency, but limited in how aggressive it can be attacked.

Why do we scout then?

If you begin to combine the various things together a more accruate and clear picture can become present. You might find that 3rd and 8 Pro-I right formation is 60% pass with 80% of the passes being bootlegs. Given the game situation you might beleive that the opposing play caller will favor the pass. The other passes he has shown in this situation thus far are 5 step drop back passes. Given this play calling range, sending a backer/safety off the edge to the Boot Leg side seems optimal (as long as you get a body on the full back leaking out). Also, if it happens to be a running play, you don't lose much bringing an edge rusher. By combining different areas of statistics we can find more reliable albeit more particular tendencies. With the limited time we have to scout, we can only analyze so many situations. However the situations we do analyze can become very helpful come game-day. What can the offense do to combat this? Simple, balance his Play-call range.

Balancing Range Example-Poker

I don't know how many of you are poker players, but games like No-Limit Texas Hold-em involve similar dynamics to the football situation discussed above. Consider this situation (not realistic, but simplified for the example, you are playing someone heads up (2 players total), and you know this player will raise Pre-flop with any pair, and any combination of aces and face cards, and a few others. Further more, you know that if you re-raise him after he raises, that he will only call with Pocket Aces, Kings, and Queens. Given this situation, you (ideally) should re-raise every time he raises. You would exploit this player because he would allow you to bluff him too much because of his limited calling range.

How can this player keep himself from being exploited? First off he should call with more hands, and begin pushing all-in with some of his hands too, because you will be raising him with weak hands at times. If he adjust this way, you are put into a guessing game. This forces you to play your hands in a more standard way. How did this opponent keep you from exploiting him? He balanced the way he played his hand to keep you from exploiting him.

This applies to football too.


Back to Football.....

Assume that you are an offensive play caller. On 3rd down and long out of a 2x2 Gun formation you have the following tendencies

5 Step pass 80%

Sprint out Pass 10%

Run 10%

Given this distribution, a defensive coordinator is gonna be excited about this situation. The optimal call here is to blitz, because these passes take time to develop. To prevent this the offense coordinator should make calls to balance the situation and deter the defense from stunting. The calls used to balance the range are plays that hurt heavy blitzing. A more balanced range would like this:

5 Step Pass 65%

Sprint out Pass 10%

Screen 15%

Draw 10%

This presence of 25% screens/draws slows the DC's willingness to blitz. He must respect your ability to screen and run draws. If he stunts into one of these plays he could be in bad situation. This distribution changes the optimal call for the play caller. The optimal call is now to play a more basic defense that is focused on defending the pass. By balancing the play calling range the offensive coordinator can protect his QB from seeing constant blitzes. Balancing the call range does not guarantee no blitzes, just that he won't try to blitz every play. If he did happen to blitz every time in this situation, you could call screens and draws liberally to punish his aggressiveness. The best thing for the defensive play-caller to do, is mix up his own calls to include some blitzes and base calls. If I took the time, game theory models could provide the optimal balance.

A Wrench in the Works

" The Intuitive Play Caller"

Some coaches claim to be "feel" guys. They don't need a lot of statistical scouting information or planning for that manner, they believe that they can feel the game out and know what to call. I am not saying that these people don't exist, but how do you deal with these play callers? Let's assume that some of these people are so good that they can know what you are gonna call before you do at times? I am sure some of you reading this have had this experience before, when you just knew what a person was going to call. How do you combat this person, if they in fact are able to know what plays you are going to call? Simple, be unpredictable, to the extent that you have some randomness in the range of your play-calls. Here is an example to illustrate:

Lets say you are playing a person in Rock, Paper, Scissors. This person is astute at knowing what you are going to select, to the point he can beat you 2/3rds of the time. There is nothing you really can do to get an edge on this person, but you can reduce the edge he has and even the game. How do you do this, be unpredictable. If you look at your watch and the seconds hand is on a #1-3 you pick Rock, #4-6 you pick Paper, and #7-9 you pick Scissors. If your opponent has no idea that you are doing this, there is no way he can guess what you are going to throw. The game will return to its basic design, a guessing game based on chance, similar to flipping a coin, or rolling dice.

In football, if you are faced with a guy that knows how you are going to call plays, you could attempt something similar. Perhaps not to this extreme of an extent, but something to keep your opponent guessing. For Example, assume you want your opponent to respect your punt fakes, and you want to fake 10% of the time. Before you punt look at the score board if the game clock ends in 7 you run a fake. If it ends in any other # you punt the ball. If you keep this to yourself, no one will know when you will run a fake, they will be forced into a guessing game, with no idea of how to know when you will do what.


Conclusion

Game Theory plays a role in any game that involves decision making. The decision making process is at the heart of coaching on game-day. People like Bill Walsh were masters of planning and to an extent his ideas were consistent with Game Theory Optimal ideas. Just like in poker, keeping your opponent guessing makes life easier for you and your team.

The examples and ideas in this article were grounded in the "Ideal/Theoretical" domain. However, most of the time decisions on the field transcend this domain. These examples existed in a vacuum and involved small tidbits of information. This article was aimed at showing how optimal strategies and calls do exist given the information that you have. In the next article, I will go to the dynamics beyond game theory, and involve the importance of understanding the thinking of your opponent. That much of optimal scouting goes beyond the situation and formation tendencies, but extends into understanding the overall philosophy and though process of your opponent. In games of decision making, this psychological and logical dynamic is often the one that separates the good from the great.

Game Dynamics and Football: Part I: Base Rules and Talent

Any type of true game is governed by principals and many of these principals apply across many games. There are principals shared in football, backgammon, poker, chess, basketball, and many others. If you look at games in depth enough it becomes easy to see how principals apply. In part I I will discuss 2 dynamics things that play a role in football and compare them to other games.


Dynamic I: Base Rules- Field Size & the Number of Players Effect on Scoring

Fundamentally, base rules have the most significant impact on the way a game is played and developed. Monopoly would change if the players started off with less money. Poker would change drastically, if 6 cards made a hand as opposed to 5. Basic rules are prior to any of the in depth strategies and tactics that influence a game. Two of the most basic rules in football are the size of the playing field and number of players.

In football the field size is approximately 100 x 53.4 yards (120 counting End-zones). At any time up to 11 players from each team may be on the field. The game that we work with and enjoy is fundamentally shaped by those two characteristics. Both of these things influence the number of points that can be scored on average. The relationship of these two factor has an immense impact on the number of points that can be scored in a football game.

Consider this example. If football was played on a 20 x 20 field, with 11 players the game would change dramatically. Passing would not be a big part. Offenses would look more historical, the single-wing, wing-t, power-I, and double-slot would dominate the scene. The game would be one long rugby scrum. Why? Because there would not be enough space to score quickly and throw the ball. The defense would load all 11 guys in the box to stop the run. It would be harder to find "holes" in the defense. The game would be drastically different than the one we see on TV today, just because of 1 rule change.

Now imagine that the # of players allowed on the field increased to 12 and the field size remained the same. Ceteris Paribus (all other things being equal) the amount of scoring would decrease on average. Adding a 12th player helps the defense tremendously because, they have an extra person to defend the same amount of space. The offense is in the business of creating unprotected space. "Holes" and "windows" are offensive words to describe unprotected space. Conversely, defenses are based around protecting space, by having "gap" assignments and coverage "zones." The basic struggle in football begins with the defense creating a plan to protect space on the field while the offense at the same time maneuvers to create unprotected space. With 12 players the defense would be able to better defend the field. The 12th player would not have an overall net-positive effect for the offense. Think about it. One of the time tested principals "the offense wants to trade the defense 1 for 1 with defense" is a principal for a reason. Trading one for one is a way of creating more space for the offense. The field size remains the same while the # of players active on a play is lower.

The principal holds true if you lower the number of players to 10. The offense would be able to even easier to find unprotected space, Especially in the passing game. If you have ever played 7 on 7 touch football on a full size football field, you will know what I am talking about. The defense would have more players stressed. The would be caught in position where they are needed to play run first and play a major part in pass coverage as well. Also, the limited number of players would make it easier for the offense to get single coverage on a WR. In short, reducing the number of players would allow points to increase.

Arena football is a prime example of this dynamic. Arena football had to create some seemingly bizarre rules to allow the sport to function properly. Why did these rules come into effect? Because there was a conflict with these basic rules of field size and the number of players. The field is essentially reduced 50% in size, but the number of players is only reduced 27%. This created a playing environment that had players defending less space than they would in typical football. Given the logic I presented earlier, Arena football would be a defensive game. However, it is not. Arena football is the exact opposite, a score-fest. Does this mean I was wrong about the previous statements. No! Other variables changed besides the field size and number of players. Rules were put in place to assist the offense. Some rules limited the defenses ability to defend space. For example, rules limit the sides a blitz can from, and until recently, severely limited the mobility of the "Jack Backer." Also, simple rules like forward motion gave the offense an added boost. These rules helped to equalize and overcome the fundamental advantage the defense had in the amount of field each player had to defend. Overall, the rule changes allowed the arena football teams to score more points on average than NFL teams.

Dynamic II: Talent Level Effects on Strategy and Tactics

I should not have to prove to anyone how big an impact the talent of a team has on its performance. Experience tell us that the team with more talent wins more that a team with less talent. No team, no matter how much more talented is a 100% favorite. I will admit at times a team might be around a 99% favorite, but there is always a chance for the underdog to win. What having a talent advantage does give a team, is winning chances above 50%, making them the favorite. Looking at talent in a vacuum, we can begin to approximate winning percentages. However, other factors like a teams overall strategy, tactics, and the level of proficiency a team has at those things can have an effect on a teams winning chances as well. Before taking into account those things we must first consider, the effect talent has on the development of strategy and tactics.

Strategy deals with the overall view and philosophy of how to plan to win the game. Some teams prefer to run the ball, control the clock, and play field position. On the other hand some teams like to turn a game into an aggressive score fest. Tactics is the means by which a team executes their overall strategy.

An Example- Chess

The game dynamics of strategy and tactics play a huge and clear role in a game like chess. Consider a chess game where the black side starts the game with one less pawn. The person with the additional pawn (white), can be considered "more talented" in this example. Lets look at the overall strategy for each side in this example.

The white side wants to play a very straight forward and simple strategy. The best plan for white is to trade pieces off: a rook for a rook, a queen for a queen, and so on. His goal is to trade off enough piece that allow him to turn his extra pawn into a queen. Using the queen the white side will easily checkmate the black side. On the other hand, Blacks strategy is to prevent this from happening. Somewhere down the line, black needs to win a pawn back to equalize the game.

Tactically, both sides want to execute their desired strategies. What type of tactics would each side like to employ? First consider black. Black's will need to keep pieces protected and develop a complicated position. One where each move is difficult to decide. Black hopes that he can make better tactical moves than white can. In short, black wants to complicate the game and put more emphasis on decision making and less on the strength of each others pieces. There is a risk-reward to this plan. The reward is, this game plan will increase the likelihood of white making a mistake that will equalize the game. The risk is that black is more likely to make a mistake himself and get crushed by white. White wants to keep the game simple. He is content to move the game along and trade peaces off. His moves will seek to keep his decisions easy. Ultimately, white wants to avoid mistakes. His strategy will be more defensive and conservative. The goal for him is to keep decisions easy and rely on his advantage in pieces to win.

From chess a simple game strategy becomes apparent:

When you have an advantage, you want to keep the game simple and let your advantage take you to victory. When you are at a disadvantage, you want to complicate the game and lower the impact that your opponent's advantage has on the game.

For both players the goal is to maximize their chances to win.

Application to Football

Does this simple strategy apply to football? Yes, but not as simply as it does to chess. Unlike chess pieces, football players think for themselves separate from the people in charge of game strategy (coaches). Lets look how a talented team might put together a strategy, for an upcoming season. If this team will have a talent advantage over most teams, it would be beneficial to utilize a conservative football game plan. Offensively, this game plan should seek to protect the football by establishing the running game, and using passes only when necessary. The running game will be simple and favor match-ups over misdirection. They should deviate from this plan enough to mix up their calls to keep the defense honest. Defensively, the plan should be to play sound gap control zone defense will force the opposing offense to work to score. The idea behind this strategy is to limit mistakes and allow their talent to win football games.

The strategy for an under-talented team is different. From the opening kickoff the weaker team should be more aggressive. Onside-kicks, trick plays, 4th down attempts, and blitzes will all be a part of their game-plan. This type of team will need to do things to compensate for their lack of talent. If this team were to play the other team mentioned in the previous paragraph, these things would need to be done. If possible, on defense this team will need to be multiple and confuse the up front blocking assignments of their strong opponent. Creating situations where defenders are unblocked due to error, offsets some of the talent disadvantages. If this plan is successful, they will force the other team to throw more, in effect create more turnover opportunities. This is exactly what the stronger team wants to avoid. On offense the weaker team needs to be deceptive and creative. Misdirection, well-planned passes, and trick plays will keep the stronger team on their toes. This game-plan puts the weaker team in a position to get beat by a significant margin more often, but does allow them more of a winning chance.

This is not absolute by any means, and there many more variables that apply to game-planning besides talent. Things like continuity, mixture of personnel, player types, coaching philosophy, and system familiarity all influence the development of football strategy and tactics. Teams with weaker talent have won with a simple straightforward ball control philosophy and strong teams have been successful with aggressive, creative, and deceptive strategies.

The idea behind what I am stating is that talent can play a big role in the development of overall strategy.

If you have a talent advantage it is in your best interest to let it win for you; conversely, if you are at a disadvantage it is in your interest to limit the impact talent has on the game.

This is a complicated way of saying what all great coaches believe: Put your players in the best possible position to win. Teams like Boise State and SMU are examples of sound game-planning when you have a talent disadvantage.


Conclusion

Game dynamics are important to consider in all games. There are too many to consider, I have just touched on a couple of basic ones to illustrate that football is subject to the same dynamics as other games. In Part II I will discuss the game dynamics of the play-calling and scouting.

Football and Strength Training Part II: The Power Clean

The power clean has been considered the ultimate lift for the football athlete. It is a full body exercise that requires speed, explosion, and strength. It has been said that the best athletes can power clean a lot. I agree with some of this. However, the power clean is not as important as many believe. In my opinion it is not even necessary for building great football players. I believe this because of some fundamental problems I have with the power clean as a training tool.

Elements of the Power Clean

Let’s begin by analyzing what it takes to be “good” at the power clean.

1. Great Form
2. Explosion
3. Quickness
4. Strength in the hips and legs

First and foremost is great form. With a lot of practice, an athlete can develop the proper muscle memory to pull the bar up, explode underneath it and catch it in a good front squat position. The people that excel at the clean do a great job of getting underneath the bar and catching it in a solid position. Second, is explosion. An athlete must be explosive in order to get a good amount of weight moving off the floor. Third, is quickness. Once an athlete explodes the bar off the floor, he needs to be quick at getting underneath the bar. Finally, the athlete needs to have good strength in the hips and legs to push the bar to a finished position.

From what I have seen, athletes, regardless of size can excel at the power clean if they possess these 4 attributes. In short, a good solid athlete that develops proper technique will be able to excel at it. Many argue that there is a good correlation between teams with players that have good power cleans and a team's winning percentage. However, I believe that the correlation is founded on the fact that the team has good athletes. Athletes with good form can power clean, period! The power clean can serve as a good assessment of athleticism, especially at the higher levels. However, the proposition that the power clean can be at the core of football training in the weight room, is not valid.

Problems with the Clean

First, consider what it takes to implement the clean properly into football weight programs. Much time must be dedicated to developing proper form. This can take a great deal of time, especially for lesser athletes. Flexibility, explosion, quickness, and flexibility must all be fine-tuned to allow this to happen. Getting these things to sync up is a challenge. The major requirement here is the close monitoring and training by a coach whom is knowledgeable about the lift. Finding a steady group of coaches whom are well schooled at the clean is a difficult thing to do. For the most part, strength and conditioning coordinators that want to implement the clean into their program properly must spend a good deal of time training the coaching staff to monitor and correct the athletes properly. Probably the biggest flaw with the power clean is the resources and time a team must commit to it. Time is always against us, and the more time we have to dedicate to something means less time to work other things.

Second, the claim that through the power clean an athlete can become significantly better is suspect. Again, consider the 4 qualities I discussed at the beginning. I have already discussed the problems with developing form. Next, consider the development of explosion, which is developed by moving a reasonable weight faster. This can be done with your own body weight, resistance bands, or free weights. Beginning athletes don’t have the coordination down to properly move the bar off the floor with a reasonable weight. So the weights they begin working with don’t really push their bodies to exert the force needed on the field. I am not saying the power clean does not help an athlete become more explosive, but the amount of explosion developed is not optimal given the time it requires. Third, consider the development of quickness. Even if an athlete has the coordination to clean properly, can cleaning weights through repetition make an athlete quicker? I don’t think it can to the extent many believe. Finally, how much does the clean to do to develop strength in the hips and legs? A good power clean for a person weighing 140 pounds is 250lbs. A good squat for the same person is 400lbs. If a person is working out on a 5x5 plan with 75% of the 1-Rep max, then the bar should be loaded with approximately 190lbs for the clean and 300lbs for the squat. Which weight load would be more developmental for the hips and legs? Obviously the squat weight. The full workout for the clean would tax the body with 4,750lbs of weight, while the squat workout would tax the body with 7,500lbs of weight. When the body is stressed by heavier weight it is forced to get stronger. That is why as an athlete's workout loads must increase in order for their max to increase. The clean does not put enough pressure on the body to develop strength in the hips and legs to the highest levels.

As football coaches, what do we want our athletes to get out of the weight room? In general, we want their bodies to get stronger, more explosive, and less susceptible to injury. A strength coach can put together a workout plan that accomplishes these goals much more effectively than a program built around the power clean. For developing strength in the hips and legs, the box squat is very effective and takes a fraction of the time to teach compared to then clean. An added bonus from the box squats is the heavy stress it puts on the glutes and hamstrings. Most high school athletes are underdeveloped in this area. Another bonus from box squats is the development of explosion. As athletes begin to get stronger in the box squat, they begin to move weight faster. Also, explosion can be developed through plyo-metrics and weight exercises like box jumps with dumbbells. Quickness that translates to football performance can be better developed through various agility drills that most coaches employ during off-season.

Another goal that coaches have in mind from weight training is the ability to hit and drive (or tackle) opposing players more effectively. If you consider what it takes to hit and drive another person back you will see that it involves the uncoiling of the hips from the “football position.” This uncoiling is directed at the opposing player. To put it clearly, the power from the hips is exerted forward. In the power clean the little hip push that is used, is pushed near vertical. This is not the ideal angle for hit and drive. Again, box squats and machines like Hammer Strength’s Ground Based Jammer can work this motion much more effectively.

Conclusion

Even if you plan to use power cleans as a secondary lift, do you plan to teach the proper technique? Do you have the time to? Are the benefits worth the costs? Can the goals of a weight training program be accomplished without the power clean? To last question I believe yes.

I know the clean is a good test of athleticism and requires great skill to preform at the highest levels. I just don't think it is necessary for developing strength and power in football players.

I know many coaches might disagree with this, I have debated with many about this. I have just watched players work their tails off at the power clean and achieve minimal gains. Their development as athletes can be better done with other means. The time it takes to develop the power clean is not worth their minimal reward. Even the deadlift (another lift that takes a minimal time to learn) can produce good gains in the explosion and strength areas. If I decide to write about strength training some more, I will discuss the deadlift in more depth and the benefits it can have for the football player.

Attacking Empty Formations

Empty can be a problem for many teams. They force the defense to use coverages different from their typical 3x1 formation. Also, the defense can't be so worried about the pass, because modern spread offense will check to QB draws and kill you there. Many defenses will try to bring pressure at the unprotected QB. I once heard a successful defensive play caller say "I will man you ass and bring six". This is a good idea but vulnerable to the quick and screen game.

Edge pressure is inviting. However many offenses have taken the Texas Tech approach to things and have had their lines spread out to put your edge rushers further from the ball. This however has exposed these offenses to different blitz schemes.

A good adjustment to these types of teams is to place 6 rushers on the LOS and put your secondary into some type of man on the WR's.

The trap these wide split offensive lines put you in, is bringing pressure. They slide one way and then let one of your edge rushers go free from a wide angle, giving the QB time to hit a hot route or set up to throw vertical. The key is to not fall into this trap. Give the appearance of 6 rushers, but only bring 3,2, or even 1. This might sound nuts, but you can disrupt a teams empty formation package with just one rusher. The key is alignment.



If a team is gonna use wide splits, don't align your rushers in the gaps! Get your guys as far from the OL as possible. Put 2 guys on the shoulders of the Tackles and center. This makes it hard for the guards to get position on them. Teams don't want to man block this look. Why would they. The rules will put them into a slide protection look anyway. Give an empty formation team this look and they will slide one way or the other and cut one of the edge rushers loose.

The key to this stunt is in how your rushers blitz the QB.

Rule #1 if you are blocked and unable to get to the QB quickly Drop back and spy QB draw. Also, the droping rushers should play the QB on screens, and hot throws.

The Sliding linemen are stressed. The linemen who slide way across to a man not aligned on them will have a hard time getting to the rushers. The rusher that has the OL man turn his but to him, should hug the OL man's butt and get to the QB. The rusher that has the linemen turn to him should drop. This way the blockers are wasted on rushers whom drop to defend the pass.

In addition to the free rusher you have, you will probably get two more rushers up the middle that have linemen having to cover a long distance to block them. This gives you 3 man pressure with 8 men in coverage. This scheme will close the offenses splits (Allow good edge pressure) in empty or force them out of the package altogether(A plus for many).

The idea here is to use the empty wide splits scheme against them. Don't fall into the trap of getting in the gaps. This puts you close enough to the linemen to block you. Stress the o-line! They don't want to see that. Also, no matter what adjustments they make they will not be able to figure out which guys you have going and dropping because you are dropping based on their protection.