For many coaches, there is no "OFF SEASON"  -- conditioning and strength programs are in full swing, and many programs will implement QB School before team-wide football activities will take place.  Along those lines, I thought I would list a few bullet points:

Feeding a great player - having a specialized section in the game plan is nothing new; one thing I feel is important is that these methods should blend with the regular flow of the offense.   In other words, re structuring an entire system just to feature a single player is not the most efficient way to teach for the program's sake.  Obviously, if one were lucky enough to have a once-in-a-lifetime talent, one would want to take advantage of that.  However, a player can be GREAT for your level without being an NFL prospect.  Below, a simple variation to free up a great run after the catch RB is shown with  a complete pattern that is a staple of the offense.

Taking the same example of passing game match-ups with the back, we can augment the backside of STICK, taking advantage of W on an island:

Formationing to create stress on the defense - this is potentially the least expensive way to maximize your offensive attack.  Two things that need to be addressed are:

- The method for calling plays.  If the method for play calling calls for players to know their place in the formation relative to the ball (ex. inside, middle, outside), and there is NOT a descriptive way to call them, this can create chaos.  If the plan to take advantage of a great player is to move him around within the formation, the coach must consider the learning burden not only to the star player, but to the players that will be displaced as a result. The ability to move people within a given formation with minimal learning burden is yet another example of the benefits of our terminology structure.  

The above example isn't the only way to skin a cat; a client approached me this year of incorporating A.C.T.S.  into their passing game.  We were able to do so without changing ANY existing terminology for them.  Whether using word or numbers -- how the core pieces of the passing game are taught remain the same, and kids are able to execute a multi-dimensional attack.

- Creating new terminology to build new formations.  I have always felt that streamlining the terms used can be of a great benefit.  We have a terrific system of calling formations, that minimizes the memorization required at the same time.  Keith Grabowsky has also shared some great ideas here.  For now, here are the very simple alignment rules we use:

The chart above carries across all personnel groupings, and really cuts down the verbiage used in calling formations, allowing for more description in other parts of the call, and allowing for the next bullet point...

The use of TEMPO - much has been said on this topic, but I feel the need to clarify a few things.  We're all aware of the flashy, video game number-producing, throw it all over the park offense that gets all the media attention.  But the reality is that upper level college football is pretty much the only place  where teams can play full throttle the entire game and NOT hurt the rest of the team. Either that, or a program like the one I see every Friday night  (Allen High School has an enrollment of 6,000+).  Even Chip Kelly adjusted last season as his numbers dictated that he do so. That being said, I think analysts often miss the purest advantages of being up tempo from a coach's perspective:

 - Accelerated player development.  Being "up tempo" means devoting a practice philosophy to it (or at least - it should).  Working at a faster pace in practice means developing younger players at a faster pace, as backups would get as many repetitions as the starter.  In a high school setting, the ability to give the backup QB as many reps as the starter will pay dividends in both the immediate and long term future.

- Allows for balance.  Contrary to popular belief, I really am a proponent of balance.  Even more important - I think an offense has to be able to dictate to the defense.  The box count theory of running the ball is great, but the thing I have noticed is this: there is NO answer when you can run the ball right at a defense.  The one problem with running it 30-40 times a game?  It shortens the game too much, and can potentially let a team that is inferior STAY IN THE GAME.  Being up tempo and wide open does not have to be synonymous with soft; below, we see that of the top 25 offenses in Division 1 last year, only 2 huddled on a regular basis.  Furthermore, only 3 averaged less than 150 yards rushing per game.  The ability to speed up and slow down the game  help strike the critical balance between attacking mismatches and physically deconstructing a defense.

- Allows for "Navigation Tags."  Being able to guide the QB with specialized instruction is made possible when tempo is used as a weapon.  I wrote a post about these tags here.

- Shifting and Motion.  Having played in a college offense that shifted and moved on every snap, I saw very early on in my career the potential for stressing a defense.  If there was ever an opportunity to take advantage of shifting and motioning, a no huddle offense that varied its pace could take advantage.  

Being multiple, in addition to having the capacity to being up tempo, is invaluable in terms of creating stressors for the defense.  In business terms, these methods can be thought of as the "delivery" side of the offense.  Just as important is the production aspect -- the overall design. 

Prioritizing your passing game - not only is this pass offense built on its "bedrock" concepts, but it is based on universal individual routes as well.  By teaching the primary components of the passing game to all position groups, there is an enormous amount of flexibility.  One such route is a DRAG, with the drill illustration below:

With every skill group able to execute these fundamental building blocks, we are able to use the DRAG in an array of presentations, giving the defense different problems to consider: 

Practicing what you preach - too often, we get away from developing a kid's strength, instead focusing on his weaknesses.  At most levels of football, coaches cannot afford to do this. The best coaches I've known have maximized the potential of their players.  For example, much is made of the pass-catching TE at the NFL level;  while a kid may not be a Jimmy Graham, he could be and effective possession receiver, or even a solid seam threat vs. 3 deep.  It becomes incumbent on the coach to dial up these match-ups, not as a means of appeasing the player, but as a means of accountability to the program -- the coach must be committed to what is best for the team.  Sadly, I often see coaches who are not willing to be unselfish,  yet ask players to do the very same.

Taking this a step further, from a team perspective, it is imperative to commit to the development of players.  Development involves strategic planning on all levels of program and player development.  My last two posts, here and here, address these processes.

There is no doubt -- stability is the key to long term success; it is for this reason that a "system" needs to have all the answers, with as few "add-ons" as possible.  The ability to adjust, while minimizing learning burden, can only be achieved with a methodical, well-planned apparatus for teaching.

As many of you know, I played at The University of Texas; this year has been a very trying one for me.  On one hand, I recognize the accomplishments of Mack Brown, and can tell you that I am sad the way things ended this year.  I can tell you that he has been nothing but kind to me and my family, and that over sixteen years, the young men that played for him refer to him in only the most reverent terms.  As a proud wearer of a "T Ring", I am grateful for the program he built, and am sure the next head coach has very big shoes to fill.  I am eager for a few years to pass, so that Coach Brown will be remembered amongst the Burnt Orange fan base the way he should be.  I am thankful not just for the thrilling victories the brought Texas, but for the kind of man who would send my niece a personalized note just because it was casually mentioned.  For some reason, I have a hard time picturing many big-time football coaches doing the same.

Because of my allegiance to people in the program, and because I know how coaching changes affect families, I will avoid speculation and rumor.  I can only hope that the next staff will bring a along a track record for developing quarterbacks.  It is no mistake that high-profile programs are often synonymous with difference makers at that position.  And, it is also this author's belief that the best way to develop passers happens in a systematic manner.  A multifaceted passing game must remain intact year in and year out; while individual talents will allow for expansion, the roots of the system should not change.

In our QB Manual, we outline that a complete passing system must:

·         Give receivers the opportunity to defeat tight man coverage.

·         Prevent conflict between receivers.

·         Have a defined timing.

·         Stretch the defense vertically and horizontally.

·         Keep the QB out of interception danger.

·         Deny pattern reading by the defense.

·         Minimize one-for-one trades.

·         Keep receivers from free pass defenders.

·         Have a principle of route conversion.

·         Adjust to condensed field areas.

·         Have the ability to isolate certain parts of a pass defense.

·         Allow for quick throws when the defense is outflanked.

·         Accommodate delays and screens.

·         Have set reading concepts.

·         Have organized scramble rules.

·         Have the ability to adjust to multiple formations.

Furthermore, a complete passing system must have a method for teaching not JUST patterns, but the moving parts within the patterns.  For example, this pass offense is built off of 3 patterns (the drag, the streak read, and the stick) that form the foundation of the entire pass offense.   Daily drills are designed to reinforce this teaching, and are combined with advantage principles to maximize effectiveness.  Below, we see how a drill for option routes might be set up:

Moreover, the method in regard to how plays are called is irrelevant.  Whether word or numbers are used, the principles of teaching should be conceptual.  In other words, individual routes need to be taught as part of a whole; whether a pattern is called 441 or CURL, the spacing and timing of how routes come open in relation to the passer's eyes are of paramount importance.  In the illustration below, the progression desired is to work inside-out; this is a product of the timing of the patterns and how this timing is taught -- it is not a product of the nomenclature used.

More than anything, the term CONCEPT refers to a way of thinking, rather than the distribution of receivers in a pattern.  Take, for example, the STICK pattern.  In the diagram below, the post is the advantage route; the stick/ flat (beginning with the flat) will be evaluated as the QB comes off the post, and the backside elements serve as the outlet receivers.

Here, despite using the STICK pattern, the coach designs a pattern to attack away from the MLB's drop.  With the ball on the left hash and the Mike dropping straight back, there is a lot of space to work S inside-out.  Also note the outside receiver is instead given the responsibility of releasing outside the corner and driving him back.

While the timing of individual routes remains constant, the language must exist to communicate the coach's intention's to his players; the 2 examples above show how CONCEPTS and PATTERNS can be two very different things.  Having a language that can differentiate these two components is essential with today's no huddle environments.  This language can also lead to development of players beyond just the top 1 or 2 QBs in a system. 

How can this development occur?  Like anything else, it begins with commitment.  One of my clients has begun a project that not only involves the the high school and junior high programs, but the local youth programs as well.  A system will be put in place, and the results will no doubt come thereafter.

As one who is an admirer of the rhythm of the Zampese/ Coryell passing system (and I'd have to call you a communist if you weren't), one could say that few things in offensive football are prettier than the QB taking a rhythm drop, hitting a quick post as the receiver crosses the defender's face, and turning a short pass into a huge gain.  

A staple play of the system is SCAT 525 F POST; from Zampese/ Coryell to Turner to Martz to all the others who descend from this lineage, this play was sure to figure prominently  in the play selection.  

While his predecessors switched personnel groupings to get the desired player in the F position, Martz added the ability to simply call 525 Z Post/ H Post/ X Post to give the play even more formation flexibility.  Whether it was Faulk, Bruce, Holt, Az-Hakeem, or Proehl, Martz's Rams could dial up anyone to run the quick post. The play is designed to isolate the Post runner (hopefully vs. no short hole player) for a quick rhythm throw and catch.  

There are only 2 caveats: 
1.  The post runner is not to chop his steps -- this is an absolute in this offense in general
2.  The post MUST cross the face of the man over him.

If #2 DOES NOT happen, the passer hitches up, and swings his eyes backside, to the 3 man pattern created there.  While the likes of Aikman, Warner, Fouts, and even Everett have shown the ability to do so,  I would place this on the higher end of the spectrum, as far as  degree of difficulty is concerned.

As a solution, I offer BANDIT, which is a variation of BRONCO, the backside option route discussed here.  

Using the RAM advantage principle, the passer is able to assure a clean 1 on 1 to the slot; because of the option route rather than a "locked" quick post, there is a place to go with the ball even if the slot cannot get inside.

On the Cowboys' first 3rd and medium last Thursday, Dallas dialed up 525 F Post.  The Raiders had a 2 man disguise, only to come up with a Zone Blitz.  

The Cowboys have Miles Austin (#19) in motion to give him the release he needed as the post runner; however, the blitz forced Tony Romo to make a protection check at the line, delaying the snap and making Austin come to a set position:

RAM rules dictate to throw away from rotation, but to throw TOWARDS a blitz, as we want our eyes on protection problems first.  At the snap, the blitz is picked up; however, there is simply no way for Austin to get inside the LB  (#53) buzzing out to him:

From the QB's point of view, one can see the clear advantage of being able to hitch up, allowing the receiver to pivot out, as his access inside is denied, resulting in an easy completion:

The corner will be cleared by the outside receiver, and the QB will not be stuck holding on to the ball with no place to go, as Romo was on this play.  Furthermore, if the QB was treating this is straight zone because of the protection check (the zone blitz was nullified), the popular Y CROSS pattern is available for the passer away from rotation.  Because the passer's eyes are on MIKE instead of locking in on the slot at the onset of the play, he can bring his eyes all the way our in front of the cross.  The route technique affords the crosser the ability to defeat the match technique: