|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 16, 2007 15:51:19 GMT -6
Coaches: Our sincere thanks to TOG and the great folks at Coach Huey for uploading this first segment of A-11 video! It is a bit blurry due to the transfering not anything with Tog's equipment. The first batch of our A-11 Offense is now available for you to watch. We hope you enjoy it and Piedmont's offense (A-11) is in Dark Jerseys in this first 14-minute clip. This is our Base set, but about 7 other formations are on the video too. X...................R..................U...C...Y.......................E.......................Z ..........A.............................................................................B.......... ..........................................2......................................................... ...............................................1.................................................... Player & Avg. Touches (not attempts) Per Game: X...........................4 A...........................4 R...........................4 2...........................10 1...........................35 Y............................2 E...........................4 B............................5 Z............................6 A-11 Offense Video Link: [gvid]-4950703501262187897[/gvid] video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4950703501262187897OR, enjoy this new A-11 Offense Playoff Video, Piedmont is in WHITE jerseys in this one - and it is Much Clearer: Video Link: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1886009758490023111 As put forth in another post, below is our standard "43" formation, but God Bless the Internet, as several coaches have sent in suggestions for Shifting like the one below ours too because an A-11 team can get into the "43" even faster: Piedmont's "43" formation: x....R....A....B...........................U...C...Y............................................ ..........................................................................E................Z...... ..............................................2.................................................... ....................................................1.............................................. Suggestion from Coaches to get into a "43" set even faster: x....A....R....2...........................U...C...Y............................................ .........................................................................B................Z...... ...............................................E.................................................. ....................................................1.............................................. Note: by Shifting the # 2 over to the Red Box, and bringing the E into the White Box, the A-11 team has arrived at an unbalanced set even quicker. And, other formations that were good for Piedmont are: "241 Wide Stagger" see below... ..............A.............R.................U...C...Y...E.................B.................. X..................................................................................................Z ......................................................1.............................................. ............................................................2........................................ Note: "Wide" means X & Z are OFF the L.O.S. "133" x............................................U...C...Y................E...........B............Z ..............A.............R........................2............................................. ..................................................1.................................................. "331" x.............A............R..............U...C...Y.............................................Z ..............................................2.......................E...............B.............. ..................................................1................................................... Sincerely, Kurt Bryan |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Dec 16, 2007 15:57:18 GMT -6
Coaches: Our sincere thanks to the great folks at Coach Huey! The first batch of our A-11 Offense is now available for you to watch. About 28 plays featuring the A-11 Offense. We hope you enjoy it and Piedmont's offense (A-11) is in Dark Jerseys in this first 14-minute clip. * I will be out of town until December 19th and I look forward to talking with you when I get back. A-11 Offense Video Link: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4950703501262187897Kurt Bryan I just want to say that after watching it.. its not as ground breaking as I originally thought.. That is a lot of the same stuff that we did this year at some points.. Also, not being funny.. but was that filmed with a cell phone? |
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Dec 16, 2007 16:04:45 GMT -6
Also not being mean, to me it just looked like a normal spread offense. Ya you have all eligible numbers and sometimes split out tackles, but didn't look like the reinvention of the wheel, not trying to insult anyone just Ithought it'd be more crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Dec 16, 2007 16:06:00 GMT -6
now if we could combine the A-11 (interesting scheme by the way - jury is still out) and the 6 wide (also another innovative scheme) then I think we have something.
|
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 16, 2007 16:18:35 GMT -6
Thank you guys, and Yes, all Players are wearing either # 1- 49 or 80 - 99. We have at least 8 guys wearing Eligible numbers with up to all 11, etc.
We normally align NEAR but not on the L.O.S., then according to the play call, certain WR's either step onto L.O.S. and/or remain off and/or shift, etc.
We have at least 6 wideouts minimum, Trips to Left and Right each play, and we NEVER split out Tackles, everybody is speed/skill TE/WR type and can potentially go downfield for a pass dependent upon formation.
Thanks for the feedback.
Kurt
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 16, 2007 16:21:18 GMT -6
I'm not sure what everyone was expecting, like it'd be the equivalent of getting more guys on the field or something.
But here's my question after watching this - and this may be most fundamentally a rules question. Say you have 11 guys all with eligible numbers. Can I shift guys forward and backwards at will to make them eligible and ineligible before the snap? Can I line up in one formation, then do a "scatter" and line up in another, then do another shift where in each the guys who are eligible and ineligible are interchanging?
That is what I would want to do. That way you could mess with the defense on who they could cover, ineligible guys could still run fake 1-step "look" passes to draw up dummer defenders, and they could certainly block on screen passes. You could have your "interior" linemen run pop passes and delayed screens, etc.
Like a formation with a center with an H-back to either side with a guard on one side of the guy and maybe even two tackles to make it totally unbalanced, with the linemen on the other side split out with receivers ready for quick passes and screens.
Maybe doing this kind of shifting is illegal depending how the rules work, but if the rule is just that it's an eligible man must have an eligible number and either be an end or be in the backfield, well, then there we have something. But I appreciate Kurt putting these videos up and for him being open about his new ideas and that his team is having success. It's certainly got the brains working.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Dec 16, 2007 16:33:06 GMT -6
I haven't been able to get the video on yet - but am looking forward to seeing it -- shifting would be OK as long as the someone doesn't shift back that is covered -- lets say the widest receivers on each side is off the line and so is the the QB and a fullback. The two widest receivers, the fullback, the QB and the two men on the line nearest the wide receivers would be eligible. If you shifted - those inside those eligibles could not move back after they have been set or it would be illegal.
I like the potential - lots of things you can do -- I don't know if I have 11 guys that can catch the ball though!
|
|
|
|
Post by swroberts on Dec 16, 2007 17:11:49 GMT -6
I am more intrigued by what it does to a defense. The fact that any one of 11 could be eligible depending on formation has to dictate what type of personnel the defense can place on the field. If you face an opponent that has 4 tough down linemen, or even 3 what a great way to keep them from playing. What if 2 of them were all conference, wouldn't you have to sit them if they couldn't cover in space. If your conventional offense struggled to move the ball against a bigger, physical opponent I would think this could help.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Dec 16, 2007 17:33:15 GMT -6
I was thinking it would look like a kick off team... well kind of.. like having people ever few yards..
Anyone can shift anywhere as long as 7 are on the line and everyone is set for a count.. and of course no one can shift after placing their hands in the dirt..
No offense.. but its kind of like a blind internet date.. I was expecting it to be much sexier based on the picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 16, 2007 17:48:23 GMT -6
thank god for video.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Dec 16, 2007 18:10:14 GMT -6
that should read thank tog i uploaded it for coach bryan i wish him well with it |
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 16, 2007 19:42:17 GMT -6
Thank you Big Time Tog for uploading the 1st batch of A-11 video segments, and the reason this one is blurrier is because of the transfering, etc. Nothing on Tog's equipment.
Our actual game videos are clear of course.
* To answer that question about Shifting back and forth and who is eligible or not on any given play:
Your players can shift to various sets and remain eligible as long as they are not set on the L.O.S and covered by the end man on the L.O.S., etc. Because once they are covered and set on the L.O.S., then they remain INeligible on that play for a downfield pass.
Yes, we do a lot of shifting NEAR but not on the L.O.S, and it puts tremendous pressure on the defense up until about 3-4 seconds before the snap.
And, more importantly if your team is smaller than your opponent's defense, it really helps level the playing field.
Kurt
|
|
|
|
Post by ref on Dec 16, 2007 21:06:39 GMT -6
But here's my question after watching this - and this may be most fundamentally a rules question. Say you have 11 guys all with eligible numbers. Can I shift guys forward and backwards at will to make them eligible and ineligible before the snap? Can I line up in one formation, then do a "scatter" and line up in another, then do another shift where in each the guys who are eligible and ineligible are interchanging? Coach is correct. You can't line up on the LOS. 7-5-2 EXCEPTION: When A sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation any A player numbered 1 to 49 or 80 to 99 may take the position of any A player numbered 50 to 79. A player in the game under this exception must assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage between the ends and he remains an ineligible forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B (7-5-6b). Once the player under the numbering exception is on the LOS and covered, he is now ineligible throughtout the down. The rule is to prevent exactly what you propose doing for the resasons that you want to do it.  |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Dec 16, 2007 21:19:25 GMT -6
But here's my question after watching this - and this may be most fundamentally a rules question. Say you have 11 guys all with eligible numbers. Can I shift guys forward and backwards at will to make them eligible and ineligible before the snap? Can I line up in one formation, then do a "scatter" and line up in another, then do another shift where in each the guys who are eligible and ineligible are interchanging? Coach is correct. You can't line up on the LOS. 7-5-2 EXCEPTION: When A sets or shifts into a scrimmage-kick formation any A player numbered 1 to 49 or 80 to 99 may take the position of any A player numbered 50 to 79. A player in the game under this exception must assume an initial position on his line of scrimmage between the ends and he remains an ineligible forward-pass receiver during that down unless the pass is touched by B (7-5-6b). Once the player under the numbering exception is on the LOS and covered, he is now ineligible throughtout the down. The rule is to prevent exactly what you propose doing for the resasons that you want to do it. Oh wow.. so pretty much.. that should render this useless.. |
|
|
|
Post by jcarbon2 on Dec 16, 2007 21:48:37 GMT -6
First, I would like to say this board/forum can be a great place to present new ideas because 9/10 times you will get honest feedback from the members. These are people that are competent professionals and not wanna be coaches.
Ok, here is my two cents.
I felt there was lack of consistency when the A-11 was used and it also seemed as every play ended up as a broken play. Did it seem this way to anybody else?? The hitch was probably the best pass play. I felt that since the QB had very little time you could only run the quick game and some spint out. I also felt the wide outs bunched up and while there where multiple targets none seemed to be wide open.
Overall, good idea but far from what I expected.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 16, 2007 22:59:12 GMT -6
Well that makes a difference. If you (a) have to line up with 7 guys on the LOS to begin with and (b) those interior five can't move, I think you're back into swinging-gate land. It's not an all bad thing. Certainly the play to play continuity can be different.
One direction I would take this is using the short-punt style sniffer and/or H-backs on the inside and then also use unbalanced lines. It might not be absolutely A-11 but I would be interested in seeing some wacky formations with say two H-backs to the left of the center with five linemen to the right with another tackle to the left with bunched receivers and shifts/motion etc.
At that point it just becomes about completely disrupting the idea of how to gameplan about valid formations and your QB/sideline coaches are just looking for numbers. You can block all pass plays as quicks or sprint out/half rolls and go from there.
Just ideas. I wouldn't junk this but yea, this understanding of the rules (thanks guys) certainly limits things.
|
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 17, 2007 0:01:37 GMT -6
Coaches and the Ref:
Thanks for helping to interpret the rules and remember please - we already spent more than a year getting everything submitted nationally and via the state and had it diligently approved by the powers that be.
1. Shifting...Pre snap, NEAR but not on the L.O.S. is very, very powerful cause at the last second your A-11 offense can get set, stay set for at least one second and snap the ball. In other words the defense must respect POTENTIAL downfield threats.
2. Various formations to put max pressure on the D: We did that all year long, remember this is only one-half of one game. We ran about 14 or 15 formations this year. I believe we display 7 in just the first half of this video clip
3. Regarding only the quick passing game can work mainly but not much else... Not correct respectfully. Because let's say in our Base set of 3 x 3 x 3 with two backs in shotgun (or staggered) that means at least one man on each side is INeligible to go downfield on that play, well if you Sprint Out your QB either way, you have what we call an ANCHOR who Hunts down the first threat pursuing your QB and then delivers Bone-Crushing blocks from outside - in, thus enabling your QB a lot of time to Roll Out and hit deeper routes.
The Roll Out game and Screen game played Huge parts in our success this year. As did the Wedge and QB draw.
We gave up less than 20 sacks in 11 games.
Kurt
|
|
|
|
Post by ref on Dec 17, 2007 20:38:59 GMT -6
1. Shifting...Pre snap, NEAR but not on the L.O.S. is very, very powerful cause at the last second your A-11 offense can get set, stay set for at least one second and snap the ball. In other words the defense must respect POTENTIAL downfield threats. Agreed. As long as they don't break the snapper's waist, they aren't on the line and they are locked in. I can see how the shift would be a headache for the defense. And officials. |
|
|
|
Post by stevebeyrle on Dec 20, 2007 13:09:39 GMT -6
I love what you are doing Kurt. I am impressed with your results considering it was the first season with the A-11. I predict great strides for your program in the A-11 now that you have a season under your belt. The possibilities are endless (formations, motions). The spread offense is the fastest growing offense I've ever seen. There is a reason for that and we all know why. The A-11 is the spread plus. The players and fans must be excited about it. Hats off to you for going for it. My staff and I have already started working on it but I need more information. Tell me how I can get more information, video or set up a visit. What do you suggest?
|
|
billyn
Sophomore Member
Posts: 231
|
Post by billyn on Dec 20, 2007 13:31:37 GMT -6
I predict rule changes requiring 5 players to have ineligible #'s coming soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 20, 2007 14:02:38 GMT -6
Thanks for the posts and...
Regarding the possibiliy of changing the rules to negate using the A-11 Offense on any down...a full year AFTER the NFHS and CIF already took the time to diligently review and approve the A-11 Offense in advance.
Are you kidding?
On what grounds...that
1. It makes the game more fun and innovative?
2. The fans like it?
3. It makes smaller teams even more competitive vs. larger teams?
4. The actual Officials who worked the Piedmont games this season did not have any problems with it at all?
Again, and to not waste valuable thread space on this site...95% of the feedback we have received has been overwhelmingly supportive of the A-11, from players, fans, coaches and officials.
I look forward to reading more creative ideas about what types of plays and schemes to use in the A-11 and other systems too.
Thanks,
Kurt
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 20, 2007 14:37:30 GMT -6
Coach bryan..why must EVERY single thread you post discuss only the "marketability" of your offense rather than the nuts and bolts of your offense?
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Dec 20, 2007 14:37:46 GMT -6
Thanks for the posts and... Regarding the possibiliy of changing the rules to negate using the A-11 Offense on any down...a full year AFTER the NFHS and CIF already took the time to diligently review and approve the A-11 Offense in advance. Are you kidding? On what grounds...that 1. It makes the game more fun and innovative? 2. The fans like it? 3. It makes smaller teams even more competitive vs. larger teams? 4. The actual Officials who worked the Piedmont games this season did not have any problems with it at all? Again, and to not waste valuable thread space on this site...95% of the feedback we have received has been overwhelmingly supportive of the A-11, from players, fans, coaches and officials. I look forward to reading more creative ideas about what types of plays and schemes to use in the A-11 and other systems too. Thanks, Kurt Could you please explain again the advantages of this? Other than vs a man team.. I dont see it giving a whole lot of problems.. I am not saying it cant.. I just dont understand how it would.. the last 2 on the line are eligible.. and anyone in the backfield would be eligible.. end of story.. |
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 20, 2007 14:53:06 GMT -6
airraider,
I'm not sure if I understand your hostility. In the earlier thread you went on about how it's not real football (which last I checked was just anything within the rules, as I said in another thread how is this less real football than say Canadian football where they only have 3 downs. Why would a new formation be more significant than that.)
Now the question is a silly one: Why is this effective? Well, for starters, one advantage of running a unique and varied offense is: I don't have to answer that question; it just is. And then from there the reasons are obvious, with the shifting and difficulty of ascertaining who is or isn't eligible, along with the fact that the 3x3x3 is not an unsound formation to begin with. There's no magical reason why all five interior linemen have to be there at all times. I see the real growth of this offense being a rethinking of the role of linemen, with more unbalanced sets and more unique ways to use them.
But if the allegation is that it's just cheesey, well then see above, and remember that as an "Airraider" there was a time when BYU and the Mumme/Leach offense was considered "Cheese," and still is by many.
And last, I'm not totally sold on the offense either. I probably wouldn't put it in right now. But I don't have to be, and neither do you. I mean, chances are that you wouldn't even face the offense any sooner than four or five years. Obviously Kurt really believes in this system, he's coaching at a small school and is having success with it. Will it be the Next Big Thing? Who the heck knows. If you aren't intrigued then take a wait and see approach.
In the meantime you can wait until the day that if or when a team runs this offense - either as a changeup or in whole - against you and you can put your theories to the test. That's how the soundness of ideas ultimately gets settled in football.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 20, 2007 14:58:12 GMT -6
spreadattach... I think you meant to direct that at ME..and not airraider.
I have stated numerous times why I disagree with the exploitation of the scrimmage kick rule.
I also see no hostility in asking the question why all of the posts from Kurt Bryan are marketability posts, and not x and o posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 20, 2007 15:06:36 GMT -6
Well, coachd, yours is a separate question. I could be wrong but my recollection was airraider was fairly hostile too. I understand the salesman question - yes many of the posts sound more like we are being sold something. That said, I haven't paid for anything yet. So I take the good with the bad. To each his own though.
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Dec 20, 2007 15:12:53 GMT -6
i only see one of his 4 current posts as having a marketing slant.
I doubt I would use this offense in my current situation but it is always good to be gaining knowledge. Obviously Kurt did his due diligence and it seems to work for them; more power to him. He found way to work within the system and he is the one that has to live with this choice (whether good or bad) and he probably doenst want to get into the Xs & OD (yet) until he is more comfortable with the site and the poeple here. Maybe he has read some of the older posts were coaches jumped all over other coaches because they believe in something strongly that doesnt go with the current "in" thing, or maybe several coaches from his area are on here and he doesnt want to give up too much info.
I personally think everyone needs to take a step back, read the ego's thread and look at this as a learning experience. If you stop growing, you start dying.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 20, 2007 15:17:33 GMT -6
here is a silly question....
what are the numbers on the A-11 in respect to distribution?
I am all for innovation, even if I don't plan to use it...I'd just like to get a grasp of the scope of its use.
what are the number of touches for all the players? I'm not interested in how many yards your best player got, just more interested in how many times the potential receivers actually threatened the defense.
I would assume you may have had 12+ players touching the ball during the season from this offense, yes?
We don't need to the "features & benefits", we don't need to be "qualified" .....
I would appreciate some brass tacks information implementation/application.....respond to us as coaches, not (potential) clients.
|
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Dec 20, 2007 15:19:57 GMT -6
here is a silly question.... what are the numbers on the A-11 in respect to distribution? I am all for innovation, even if I don't plan to use it...I'd just like to get a grasp of the scope of its use. what are the number of touches for all the players? I'm not interested in how many yards your best player got, just more interested in how many times the potential receivers actually threatened the defense. I would assume you may have had 12+ players touching the ball during the season from this offense, yes? We don't need to the "features & benefits", we don't need to be "qualified" ..... I would appreciate some brass tacks information implementation/application.....respond to us as coaches, not (potential) clients. thank you for this insight broophy for it think this is one that hasnt been explored yet... |
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Dec 20, 2007 15:43:52 GMT -6
OK:
In terms of actual number of players touching the ball per game, usually averaged about 9 different players, sometimes as many as 12.
Remember, after 21 years of coaching, this was my first year running any type of spread...so I am going to really invest time this off-season to learn many more ideas from the spread, such as, Bryon Hamilton's Shotgun Zone package up in Redding, CA etc.
I believe I have posted X and O info on here specifically, please search my other posts and/or look in other forums on here.
Please let me know what you want to know?
I hope this helps and gotta step out for a while.
Kurt
|
|
