The idea of a NG disrupting a center is some what old school...............

I have to disagree. I'm not saying you can't win or be successful with out a NT, but I can say that having a NT can be very beneficial. Sure centers are taking a lot more practice snaps, and more proficient at their position, but the pressure that a NT can provide is invaluable, in my opinion. The center is always at a disadvantage, no matter how good he is, he is starting his blocks with one hand, while the NT is starting his stalemate with two. I played center, and I can tell you, I was relieved when I saw that we were going to be playing against an even front. I was quick for an OL, I didn't care to go out on a LB, but I hated playing against a quality NT. I was fortunate enough to be proficient at it, but it was a lot more work.

 

The center gets hit every play with one hand up, and one between his legs, that makes for a distinct disadvantage, plus in several blocking schemes the center has to protect two gaps, as opposed to one. Even in a zone blocking scheme, the center is crucial to beginning of the blocking assignments, and if releasing on a LB, can be held up by the NT, leaving a LB unblocked.

 

I'm not saying that you have to have a NT, but I can say it changes things dramatically, and a good defense can be made a lot better by having a quality NT.

Spread to run or spread to pass, it doesn't matter! The whole idea is to put your kids in space. IMO the answer isn't scheme, it's speed!

I have to disagree. I'm not saying you can't win or be successful with out a NT, but I can say that having a NT can be very beneficial. Sure centers are taking a lot more practice snaps, and more proficient at their position, but the pressure that a NT can provide is invaluable, in my opinion. The center is always at a disadvantage, no matter how good he is, he is starting his blocks with one hand, while the NT is starting his stalemate with two. I played center, and I can tell you, I was relieved when I saw that we were going to be playing against an even front. I was quick for an OL, I didn't care to go out on a LB, but I hated playing against a quality NT. I was fortunate enough to be proficient at it, but it was a lot more work.

 

The center gets hit every play with one hand up, and one between his legs, that makes for a distinct disadvantage, plus in several blocking schemes the center has to protect two gaps, as opposed to one. Even in a zone blocking scheme, the center is crucial to beginning of the blocking assignments, and if releasing on a LB, can be held up by the NT, leaving a LB unblocked.

 

I'm not saying that you have to have a NT, but I can say it changes things dramatically, and a good defense can be made a lot better by having a quality NT.

 

Perhaps I should have clarified myself better. I was referring to disrupting the snap. That last 5 years I have charted bad snaps and the overwhelming majority came against even fronts. I feel it is because my center gets anxious and moves his feet before the ball trying to get to the LB.

 

Also, IMO, if you have a center trying to protect 2 gaps you have a fundamental flaw in the blocking scheme and are asking for mistakes. If they have to protect 2 gaps that means that they potentially have to block 2 men.

Spread to run or spread to pass, it doesn't matter! The whole idea is to put your kids in space. IMO the answer isn't scheme, it's speed!

 

 

I agree.

 

To add to it, it is about putting your kids in favorable match-ups in space.

Another adjustment gun spread teams have made against odd front defenses is to trap the NG with a RB, TE, and most commonly a Tackle. This is something next to impossible to do under center. Most teams do not teach their NG to sit when they penetrate and the trap blocks can be devastating.

Perhaps I should have clarified myself better. I was referring to disrupting the snap. That last 5 years I have charted bad snaps and the overwhelming majority came against even fronts. I feel it is because my center gets anxious and moves his feet before the ball trying to get to the LB.

This I can agree with, obviously a center's first priority should be the snap, and I would say all well coached centers do assure a good snap first and foremost.

Also, IMO, if you have a center trying to protect 2 gaps you have a fundamental flaw in the blocking scheme and are asking for mistakes. If they have to protect 2 gaps that means that they potentially have to block 2 men.

I should have clarified as well, I mean a pre-snap assignment could rush either A gaps, giving the center one of two gaps to protect, meaning he can't commit to one gap until the NT commits. A guard or tackle can play inside out, stepping to their gap first then going to their assigned defender.

Even with a 0 tech the C is only going to be assigned one gap. In each play there has to be a gap that is more important. Depending on scheme you can get away with not blocking the nose on some plays even under center.

 

I do agree that if you get a good nose it changes how you play defense and offense. It is amazing what a good nose can do and it is tough to find that kid.

Like Cats, my response may come off like I'm being a jerk but it is not intended to be rude.

 

Run your defense! If you want to stop any kind of "O", you are better off running what your kids are used to running then trying to pick the perfect defense for a week and trying to impliment it.

 

Now, my favorite type of defense is the 50; I would employ what has been called a multiple 50. We would bring both 3 and 4 man fronts, bring a lot of pressure from different places and get the LB's involved in blitzes, stunts and coverages.

 

The team I coach runs the 4-4. We bring tons of pressure from the LB's and we move our front around constantly so that you can't predict where the 3 tec or 1 tec will be. We have had success with it (been to the last two state title games).

 

It really is about doing what you feel comfortable with. If your kids are comfortable, you can run any defense and be successful against most types of offenses.

 

If the defender isnt in a 3 technique, then he is not a 3 technique. That statement doesnt make since. If the 3 technique moves out to a 5 technique or down to a 1 technique, then he is no longer a 3 technique.

I think what he is saying is they play a 1 and 3 but they switch up which of those DTs is going to align there. I do not see a 4 man front moving a DT out to a 5.

:thumb: I agree with everything said here.

I will add if you are playing a zone running team you have to control the line of scrimmage. That sounds obvious, but your must be able to hold your own in the trenches or a zone option team will kill you.

Play your normal defense, make sure you can align correctly to all formations, and practice to stop their best core plays.

Also, if it is a true read option, you may need to know if you want the QB carrying the ball or not. This to me should be based on your defensive style and players capabilities and ofcourse on the other teams personel.

Hope this helps you out.

 

You make a very good point. Regardless of the formation(I assume we are talking about a 4 wide set or some variation here) the line of scrimmage has to be controlled. The zone play out of the shotgun has gotten very popular and it should because it has been working. People get prepared for those receivers all over the field with mabey some shifts and some motion sprinkled in. This has enabled the zone play to be a very effective weapon. As in any other defensive preperation, first deal with the running game which in this case will be the zone or the speed option. If the defense cant slow down these ground plays, being able to match up with their passing game is a moot point. Dont get me wrong....Im not knocking the offensive system....It is very dangerous when run correctly. The defensive personnel have to really be drilled on assignment football. Also stemming fronts and disguising coverages is an asset! But, all in all, its tough to defend! :thumb:

If the defender isnt in a 3 technique, then he is not a 3 technique. That statement doesnt make since. If the 3 technique moves out to a 5 technique or down to a 1 technique, then he is no longer a 3 technique.

 

Do you understand what is meant by a 3 and a 1?

 

This is the position where a defensive tackle alligns relative to the interior offensive lineman. A "0" technique refers to a tackle lining head up over the center. All of the other numbers are relative to that position. A "1" technique shades the guard to the side closest to the center. The "3" technique shades the guard to the side closest to the offensive tackle.

 

We allign our defensive tackles in "3" and "1" techniques 90% of the time. We try to move these guys around to make the zone read play more difficult for the offensive linemen to read their keys prior to the snap. The double team relies on keying where these defensive tackles are to run the play. That is why we have had success versus spread teams (again, we have been to two consecutive title games and hopefully we'll win one of the things!!!).

I think what he is saying is they play a 1 and 3 but they switch up which of those DTs is going to align there. I do not see a 4 man front moving a DT out to a 5.

 

Unless they were in a 4-3 Rover. Then he could be in a 5. Strange, but I've seen it done recently.

Unless they were in a 4-3 Rover. Then he could be in a 5. Strange, but I've seen it done recently.

 

You sure it wasn't just a 50 front? The only reason why I ask is because it really doesn't makes sense to widen that tackle out so close to the end and leave a gap in the middle like that unless you are in an eagle front. The minute my QB sees that, he is audibling to the iso play (or belly for you old veer guys).