Author Topic: The A11 minus 5 (Read 3411 times)

TXMike · « **on:** February 17, 2009, 04:10:08 AM »

Maybe they have given up on the "sub-federation" and/or lawsuit. From their website, appears they have a "new" scheme. I am assuming the term "numerical camouflage" refers to using players with jerseys that have similar digits on them and belieiving this will confuse the defense, i.e. put 3 guys out to one side with numbers 7, 17, and 77. When they go to the line this will "confuse" the defense and the offense can shift up to 1 second before the snap.

At least its legal.
==========================
Numerical Camouflage:

Coaches, some of the great ideas developed this weekend in Seattle at the Clinic were awesome, and One of them is called, Numerical Camouflage - and Using Game Breakers at Anchors.

Using regular numbered personnel (with the Anchors) wearing #50 - 79, it is possible to stress out the defense by having the Anchors jersey numbers Look Similar to those of the ELIGIBLE numbered players in the Red or Blue Pods.

This enables your team to implement "The offense that shall not be named" Concepts and Strategies (not full blown "The offense that shall not be named") but it does provide a lot of challenges for the Defense - because the Defenders have to figure out Which offensive players are wearing Eligible vs. Ineligible Numbers in a matter of a few seconds. And.......

a. Since you will most likely Not be in a SKF, then your QB can be Under Center - which enables your Bubble Screen and Negative Hitch plays Behind the LOS to the Anchors to develop easier and quicker, or.......your QB can be Staggered at 4 or 5 yards Depth too.

b. At the NCAA level, the Blockers can Cut Block - which will help when the "11 islands" are developed across the field of play.

Below some Examples of Numerical Camouflage No Huddle:

Base:

88......................68...............U...C...Y.............77........................17
...........86................................2.....................................7.............
...................................................1................................................

Base Out:

88............68.........................U...C...Y......................77................17
.............................86......................2..............7.............................
...................................................1.................................................

Base Wide:

..........88..........68................U...C...Y...............77................17........
86........................................2......................................................7..
..................................................1....................................................

331:

88..............68............86.....U...C...Y...........................................77
....................................................2..............7..............17.............
.................................................1..................................................

KB · « **Reply #1 on:** February 17, 2009, 05:21:48 AM »

All that really accomplishes is confusion in the offense, with the usually predictable results. Loss of yardage, penalties, injured players.

Teams that successfully run complicated no-huddles beat the crap out of their opponents with ANY scheme because they must be good at execution and do a lot of practising.

Weaker teams only get weaker when they try to outsmart themselves.

A weak team has to start working on basics. Running, blocking, tackling, throwing, catching, kicking.

A coach here once said
"What do I need to be successful in the juniors?
A defense that pursues and tackles well.
Two good run plays and two good pass plays.
Run a play until the opponent figures out how to stop it, then switch.
No need for smart trick plays, the time practising them is put to better use practising basics."

Dommer1 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:02:45 AM »

To quote a famous dude: "Much ado about nothing."

Kalle · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:08:19 AM »

Does NF have a jersey switching rule? If not, how about switching jersey numbers between downs/drives, too, to even more confuse the defense?

busman · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:10:20 AM »

In 331, he's actually eliminated an eligible position with 77 on the end of the line and 86 covered up. Candidly, anyone that can't officiate this under the new rule needs to be looking for another pasttime.

TXMike · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:15:23 AM »

The only thing about this that will be hard to officiate is the spread out nature of things. Will be hard for a 5 man crew to officiate and get everything covered. But that works bothb ways, some illegal acts by Offense AND Defense will be missed. Just the way it goea

Fadamor · « **Reply #6 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:30:05 AM »

I had covered wideouts this year, but no flag because it was a designed run to that side. Both wideouts blocked down to seal the end pursuit. 331 might be the formation for such a play.

NAUI · « **Reply #7 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:46:02 AM »

Quote from: Kalle on February 17, 2009, 08:08:19 AM

Does NF have a jersey switching rule? If not, how about switching jersey numbers between downs/drives, too, to even more confuse the defense?

Maybe Coach Bryan could velcro the numbers to his jersey so he could switch on the fly.... but someone would be 66 on one play and 99 on the next...

Etref · « **Reply #8 on:** February 17, 2009, 08:50:18 AM »

This is like a golf junkie, if they think it will help them one stroke, the golfer will buy it and try it. Then it usually winds up in the attic with the rest of the crap they bought that didn't work.

Jaybird · « **Reply #9 on:** February 17, 2009, 09:09:18 AM »

Is there a DVD for sale yet?

asdfjkl; · « **Reply #10 on:** February 17, 2009, 09:52:16 AM »

Quote from: jjseikel on February 17, 2009, 09:09:18 AM

Is there a DVD for sale yet?

I do believe so.....

It costs $991

GAHSUMPIRE · « **Reply #11 on:** February 17, 2009, 10:36:26 AM »

i've got a great idea!

When the offense breaks the huddle, have them hold their hands over their numbers! The defense won't be able to tell who it is!

Wait! how about they ball up the jersey in their hands so no one can see the numbers?

Or they could just find a mud puddle and jump in to so they can't see the numbers.

NAUI · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2009, 11:15:38 AM »

Quote from: GAHSUMPIRE on February 17, 2009, 10:36:26 AM

i've got a great idea!

Or they could just find a mud puddle and jump in to so they can't see the numbers.

This would never work. Look at how much grief the "The offense that shall not be named" got from us officials, If they used mud the football moms would hang the coach of the mud offense! They would have to implement a laundry team/program.

Fadamor · « **Reply #13 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:31:34 PM »

I don't care what numbering scheme you use, it's going to be next to impossible to make a defense think that someone the size of an interior lineman is going out for a pass. So split that tackle out towards the sideline. That makes the defensive end's pass/run rush that much easier.

TXMike · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2009, 12:35:50 PM »

I think they are planning on that lineman doing some blocking. But if he was a good enough blocker to do open field blocking then he could likely have blocked at the "normal" line. I guess if you had a bunch of kids who you could get to block like good wideouts can block you might have something here

VALJ · « **Reply #15 on:** February 17, 2009, 03:47:41 PM »

http://www.insidebayarea.com/high-school-sports/ci_11719709

Quote

Despite this latest setback, Bryan said the "The offense that shall not be named" will not go down without a fight. Piedmont plans to fight to allow programs to continue using the "The offense that shall not be named". Those that have benefitted typically are smaller schools that lack the big offensive lineman needed for a more traditional offense.

"It is our first hope that the NFHS is able to change with the times and will be most willing to help create an "The offense that shall not be named" football sub-federation within the framework of their existing organization," Bryan said in a statement. "If yes, then everybody wins, especially the schools like ours nationwide.

HLinNC · « **Reply #16 on:** February 17, 2009, 07:37:46 PM »

Quote

our first hope that the NFHS is able to change with the times and will be most willing to help create an "The offense that shall not be named" football sub-federation

Actually, there would be nothing stopping the State of California from implementing this "sub-federation", if Coach B could find enough far-sighted, free-thinkers, to come along with him. They don't need the Feds blessing nor do they need the Fed to do their work for them. They could make up any rules that they want.

It would probably get dull playing the same 6 or 7 teams every year.

Jaybird · « **Reply #17 on:** February 17, 2009, 07:55:32 PM »

Quote from: HLinNC on February 17, 2009, 07:37:46 PM

Actually, there would be nothing stopping the State of California from implementing this "sub-federation", if Coach B could find enough far-sighted, free-thinkers, to come along with him. They don't need the Feds blessing nor do they need the Fed to do their work for them. They could make up any rules that they want.

It would probably get dull playing the same 6 or 7 teams every year.

They should just start up 8 man football. It's for smaller schools and that's what Kurt claims they are. That way he wouldn't have to worry about jersey numbers.

waltjp · « **Reply #18 on:** February 17, 2009, 10:06:26 PM »

Quote from: LarryW60 on February 17, 2009, 12:31:34 PM

I don't care what numbering scheme you use, it's going to be next to impossible to make a defense think that someone the size of an interior lineman is going out for a pass.

Larry, you must have missed it when Coach B. stated this earlier - apparently his team doesn't have any players of this size.

Jaybird · « **Reply #19 on:** February 17, 2009, 10:25:55 PM »

Quote from: waltjp on February 17, 2009, 10:06:26 PM

Larry, you must have missed it when Coach B. stated this earlier - apparently his team doesn't have any players of this size.

That's because he ran them off, Walt. He didn't need them (read- didn't know what to do with them) in his fun, easy to officiate and safe scheme. Oh, I forgot... approved scheme.