Jump to content

Union vs Gate City


trumpet1988
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, UVAObserver said:

You do realize that the only difference in a wishbone and a T is that the FB is up in the wishbone as opposed to even in the T.  That's literally the only difference.  The end result is that you in essence have an extra blocker inside for the wishbone, while the T allows more misdirection.  Blocking schematics can be adjusted for zone/man reads with either of those systems, but the nature of wishbone favors man while the nature of T favors zone.

 

Given that Gate City has the speed of a tree cemented into concrete, you'd want the extra blocker as opposed to running doomed misdirection plays.

 

TL;DR: You have little, if any, idea what you're talking about.

Extremely different formations. Akers bone vs GC classic T. We are "trying" zone reading out of the bone. We leave a defensive tackle unblocked almost every play. In our classic T, we would rip or liz (motion) a back to the playside and literally outnumber the defense. We wouldn't run a lot of misdirection (Akers bone does).  Akers bone involves the QB to spin 180 degrees to hand off to the opposite side, then even fake it with a misdirection to the other side. GC's T would be down hill, come at you with power. Akers bone is run lateral, find the crease and hit it. (ZONE). There are many variations of the T and Bone, making you the idiot if believe there is only 1 T and 1 wishbone. Just like mulitple I-formations and shotgun formations. The PV/Appy T formation was even set up a bit differently than GC's. But decently similar. And those are the variations we have at GC. I played with the T from 9 years old to 18 years old. I know how GC ran it, I still know how it works. I've watched Akers run the bone for 2 years and I've picked up on how it works. So don't tell me I don't have a clue what I'm talking about when I know exactly what's going on. But like I said in the post that you ignored, I'm a firm believer in that you adapt your offense to you offensive skill set. We don't have the speed for misdirection. But we would be better loading up and going downhill in the T, instead of trying to get a back to make a read off of an uncovered defenders to cut up or bounce out. Hat on hat and outnumber them and hope everyone gets a piece on their block then you gain 3-4 yards a pop. It takes all 11 guys to do it, but it works if ran correctly. And the blocking scheme out of GC's T? "GOO" we used to GOO method for years. Football is a simple game of matchups and outnumbered matchups. If you can put 6 on 5 every play you're chances are great. But to leave a down lineman unblocked in a tight formation is just stupid.

 

Next!!! Anybody else? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
21 minutes ago, Leatherhead Larry said:

Extremely different formations. Akers bone vs GC classic T. We are "trying" zone reading out of the bone. We leave a defensive tackle unblocked almost every play. In our classic T, we would rip or liz (motion) a back to the playside and literally outnumber the defense. We wouldn't run a lot of misdirection (Akers bone does).  Akers bone involves the QB to spin 180 degrees to hand off to the opposite side, then even fake it with a misdirection to the other side. GC's T would be down hill, come at you with power. Akers bone is run lateral, find the crease and hit it. (ZONE). There are many variations of the T and Bone, making you the idiot if believe there is only 1 T and 1 wishbone. Just like mulitple I-formations and shotgun formations. The PV/Appy T formation was even set up a bit differently than GC's. But decently similar. And those are the variations we have at GC. I played with the T from 9 years old to 18 years old. I know how GC ran it, I still know how it works. I've watched Akers run the bone for 2 years and I've picked up on how it works. So don't tell me I don't have a clue what I'm talking about when I know exactly what's going on. But like I said in the post that you ignored, I'm a firm believer in that you adapt your offense to you offensive skill set. We don't have the speed for misdirection. But we would be better loading up and going downhill in the T, instead of trying to get a back to make a read off of an uncovered defenders to cut up or bounce out. Hat on hat and outnumber them and hope everyone gets a piece on their block then you gain 3-4 yards a pop. It takes all 11 guys to do it, but it works if ran correctly. And the blocking scheme out of GC's T? "GOO" we used to GOO method for years. Football is a simple game of matchups and outnumbered matchups. If you can put 6 on 5 every play you're chances are great. But to leave a down lineman unblocked in a tight formation is just stupid.

 

Next!!! Anybody else? 

GAP, ON, OVER!!! Yes, Sir!! Simple to read and it works against everything. This would take advantage of GC's big and talented backs / linemen. Scheme for your personnel!! Well said, LHL!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
6 minutes ago, Grapeape said:

GAP, ON, OVER!!! Yes, Sir!! Simple to read and it works against everything. This would take advantage of GC's big and talented backs / linemen. Scheme for your personnel!! Well said, LHL!!!

There is literally nothing you can do in a T that can't also be done in the wishbone.  As Barry Switzer once said, the only reason you run the wishbone is to get a slow FB into the play more quickly.  That's the reason for the modification from the T to the wishbone in the late 1960s in Texas HS football...you end up with busted plays if your FB is slow running from the T as opposed to the wishbone.

 

Parroting patently incorrect statements doesn't make it "well said".  It just makes him doubly wrong, and you wrong for being his personal echo chamber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
1 hour ago, Leatherhead Larry said:

Extremely different formations. Akers bone vs GC classic T. We are "trying" zone reading out of the bone. We leave a defensive tackle unblocked almost every play. In our classic T, we would rip or liz (motion) a back to the playside and literally outnumber the defense. We wouldn't run a lot of misdirection (Akers bone does).  Akers bone involves the QB to spin 180 degrees to hand off to the opposite side, then even fake it with a misdirection to the other side. GC's T would be down hill, come at you with power. Akers bone is run lateral, find the crease and hit it. (ZONE). There are many variations of the T and Bone, making you the idiot if believe there is only 1 T and 1 wishbone. Just like mulitple I-formations and shotgun formations. The PV/Appy T formation was even set up a bit differently than GC's. But decently similar. And those are the variations we have at GC. I played with the T from 9 years old to 18 years old. I know how GC ran it, I still know how it works. I've watched Akers run the bone for 2 years and I've picked up on how it works. So don't tell me I don't have a clue what I'm talking about when I know exactly what's going on. But like I said in the post that you ignored, I'm a firm believer in that you adapt your offense to you offensive skill set. We don't have the speed for misdirection. But we would be better loading up and going downhill in the T, instead of trying to get a back to make a read off of an uncovered defenders to cut up or bounce out. Hat on hat and outnumber them and hope everyone gets a piece on their block then you gain 3-4 yards a pop. It takes all 11 guys to do it, but it works if ran correctly. And the blocking scheme out of GC's T? "GOO" we used to GOO method for years. Football is a simple game of matchups and outnumbered matchups. If you can put 6 on 5 every play you're chances are great. But to leave a down lineman unblocked in a tight formation is just stupid.

 

Next!!! Anybody else? 

I believe he ran the veer last year before switching to the spread but I might wrong. Larry I don't think that Nick would have a win this year either ole buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
58 minutes ago, UVAObserver said:

There is literally nothing you can do in a T that can't also be done in the wishbone.  As Barry Switzer once said, the only reason you run the wishbone is to get a slow FB into the play more quickly.  That's the reason for the modification from the T to the wishbone in the late 1960s in Texas HS football...you end up with busted plays if your FB is slow running from the T as opposed to the wishbone.

 

Parroting patently incorrect statements doesn't make it "well said".  It just makes him doubly wrong, and you wrong for being his personal echo chamber.

G.O.O. - the base blocking rule - is not being used out of the Bum Bone offense. I could enumerate the similarities and differences between the wishbone and T all day, but the point is the blocking scheme doesn't match the offense in its present incarnation. But, by all means, continue to spew your foolishness. It's a free country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, Grapeape said:

Dude had all winter, spring, and summer to develop a QB / offense. When 7 on 7 drills exposed our weakness in that area he quit going to them and decreased his player's opportunities for development as opposed to increasing exposure and improving. I guess he just said 'Screw it, we'll run the ball every down'. You see how that has worked. He didn't send any kids to camps to supplement his coaching deficits. The weight program is a joke. He personally attacks players to the point where he is near universally detested on the team. He has failed to recruit from the hallways because word is out as to how he treats his kids. The fundamentals (avoiding FUMBLES) are severely lacking. There is zero discipline, as one can see by many behaviors LHL outlined. He is driving players away, not bringing players in. 

I can't think of one positive thing to say about the guy. Giving him another year will set the program back five and totally waste a talented group of upper classmen in 18. 

Gate City has went to more 7 on 7's in the last year than the previous staff ever went too which would be zero. I know of some kids that went to camps this summer. When Akers got to GC he had two kids that could bench 225 so I would say the weight program has been a joke for a while. Just telling facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Many different variations of the "T" and Wishbone. Is much more complicated than simply about how players are set before the snap.  

Too many of our plays are taking too long to develop. We are having too many negative, rushing plays. When healthy..............we have a couple of big backs, a couple of kids with decent speed, and an O-Line who can make some blocks. Like someone said earlier, football is not that complicated. It is about individual match ups. Could be 11 on 11 matchups, 6 on 6, or 3 on 3. We have got to figure out how to put ourselves in the best position to create some match up advantages for us.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1 minute ago, wasp90 said:

Gate City has went to more 7 on 7's in the last year than the previous staff ever went too which would be zero. I know of some kids that went to camps this summer. When Akers got to GC he had two kids that could bench 225 so I would say the weight program has been a joke for a while. Just telling facts.

Foolishness. You think GC never went to 7on 7s before Akers? That's just comically inaccurate. As far as 2  players benching 225... 68, 45, 61, 54, 55, 40, 71, and 50 were all over 225 in prior to Akers getting hired. Probably more that I'm not aware of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
10 minutes ago, Grapeape said:

Foolishness. You think GC never went to 7on 7s before Akers? That's just comically inaccurate. As far as 2  players benching 225... 68, 45, 61, 54, 55, 40, 71, and 50 were all over 225 in prior to Akers getting hired. Probably more that I'm not aware of. 

I don't think I know they didn't. If they did tell me when and where.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, UVAObserver said:

You do realize that the only difference in a wishbone and a T is that the FB is up in the wishbone as opposed to even in the T.  That's literally the only difference.  The end result is that you in essence have an extra blocker inside for the wishbone, while the T allows more misdirection.  Blocking schematics can be adjusted for zone/man reads with either of those systems, but the nature of wishbone favors man while the nature of T favors zone.

 

Given that Gate City has the speed of a tree cemented into concrete, you'd want the extra blocker as opposed to running doomed misdirection plays.

 

TL;DR: You have little, if any, idea what you're talking about.

As far as alignment goes, that is the only difference. But, as far as assignments, strategy, blocking etc. there is a huge difference between the T and the Bone.  I agree with LHL that the T is a more viable offense than the Bone.  With the Bone, much of your offense's success relies on the Dive as a root play...but that play leaves at least 1 defender in the vicinity of the hole unblocked.  If a D reads their keys, the Bone is easily stuffed unless a team has a full commitment to it and runs it extremely well.  The T is a different story.  With it, much of your success relies on the FB Belly or Off tackle Power, because everything runs off those root plays.  Then you just get a hat on a hat and push (attempting to capitalize on 3 on 2 match ups).  I've seen many teams with lesser talent be successful out of the T, not many with the Bone. A good example was Twin Springs in 03 and 04...went from the Bone to the T for a couple years and reached the Region D Finals both years.  Not bad considering they had 1 playoff win in school history up to that point coming out of the Bone.  Since they went away from the T, I don't think they have gotten another playoff win either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, Leatherhead Larry said:

Extremely different formations. Akers bone vs GC classic T. We are "trying" zone reading out of the bone. We leave a defensive tackle unblocked almost every play. In our classic T, we would rip or liz (motion) a back to the playside and literally outnumber the defense. We wouldn't run a lot of misdirection (Akers bone does).  Akers bone involves the QB to spin 180 degrees to hand off to the opposite side, then even fake it with a misdirection to the other side. GC's T would be down hill, come at you with power. Akers bone is run lateral, find the crease and hit it. (ZONE). There are many variations of the T and Bone, making you the idiot if believe there is only 1 T and 1 wishbone. Just like mulitple I-formations and shotgun formations. The PV/Appy T formation was even set up a bit differently than GC's. But decently similar. And those are the variations we have at GC. I played with the T from 9 years old to 18 years old. I know how GC ran it, I still know how it works. I've watched Akers run the bone for 2 years and I've picked up on how it works. So don't tell me I don't have a clue what I'm talking about when I know exactly what's going on. But like I said in the post that you ignored, I'm a firm believer in that you adapt your offense to you offensive skill set. We don't have the speed for misdirection. But we would be better loading up and going downhill in the T, instead of trying to get a back to make a read off of an uncovered defenders to cut up or bounce out. Hat on hat and outnumber them and hope everyone gets a piece on their block then you gain 3-4 yards a pop. It takes all 11 guys to do it, but it works if ran correctly. And the blocking scheme out of GC's T? "GOO" we used to GOO method for years. Football is a simple game of matchups and outnumbered matchups. If you can put 6 on 5 every play you're chances are great. But to leave a down lineman unblocked in a tight formation is just stupid.

 

Next!!! Anybody else? 

Actually, PV didn't run much T at all after 1982...They came out of the I Formation 75% of the time, and Split Backs the majority of the rest.  As for GC, I think they would probably have a tad more success out of the T...would at least have one misdirection play in the Counter Toss that would work most of the time off the FB runs if he were established.  Would also have a PA pass or two with a better chance of success than what they are doing now.  As far as translating into wins, I don't see that it would make that much of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
9 minutes ago, sup_rbeast said:

As far as alignment goes, that is the only difference. But, as far as assignments, strategy, blocking etc. there is a huge difference between the T and the Bone.  I agree with LHL that the T is a more viable offense than the Bone.  With the Bone, much of your offense's success relies on the Dive as a root play...but that play leaves at least 1 defender in the vicinity of the hole unblocked.  If a D reads their keys, the Bone is easily stuffed unless a team has a full commitment to it and runs it extremely well.  The T is a different story.  With it, much of your success relies on the FB Belly or Off tackle Power, because everything runs off those root plays.  Then you just get a hat on a hat and push (attempting to capitalize on 3 on 2 matchups).  I've seen many teams with lesser talent be successful out of the T, not many with the Bone. A good example was Twin Springs in 03 and 04...went from the Bone to the T for a couple years and reached the Region D Finals both years.  Not bad considering they had 1 playoff win in school history up to that point coming out of the Bone.

I mentioned in my first post on the topic that the T does give greater opportunities for misdirection and reads off-tackle.  However, this presumes that you have the personnel to execute efficiently around the edge, particularly from the FB and OT positions.  GC does not; in fact, Gate City is about as poorly suited to running the T as a team can be in their current format, with the lack of speed at the skill positions and along the edge.  That's really what I'm driving at here: his hatred for Akers and his blind fury about the situation in Gate City is so clouding his judgment that he can't see that his armchair coaching would result in disaster if implemented.

 

Unless you can effectively sell the FB Dive in a T formation (and with slow skill positions, GC really can't), then any advantage you gain on the inside is immediately eliminated, because the defense isn't kept honest with the FB Dive.  You lose that "extra man" advantage that the T supposedly helps with.  Whereas, with the Wishbone, the proximity to the line neutralizes the lack of speed from the FB position, and the FB remains a threat even when presented with the personnel limitations of the current Gate City team.

 

The T and Wishbone both attempt to create 3-on-2 and 1-on-0 opportunities along the edge, so I don't really find that argument in favor of the T that compelling.  As far as viability, there's a reason the Wishbone displaced the T in high school and college for over a half century.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

UVAO........have you seen GC play? One area where we are OK at is at FB. We have two kids who can "sell the FB dive". Our current version of a FB dive is taking too long to develop.

I am not an Akers' fan or hater. Just hate to see the current state of the program.

Will be the first to admit that I do not know what the immediate solution should be. Am not saying the T-Formation solves anything for us. Heck, part of me says to put Mack at QB and run some true triple option plays (current QB is not a threat to run the ball). Part of me says to spread everyone out as much as possible, and try to win an individual battle or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
44 minutes ago, Grapeape said:

You know nothing and its not my job to educate you. No surprise you support The Bum. Go sit down. 

I didn't think you would be able to tell me. Just keep on coming on here telling lies to support your agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1 hour ago, sup_rbeast said:

 I've seen many teams with lesser talent be successful out of the T, not many with the Bone. A good example was Twin Springs in 03 and 04...went from the Bone to the T for a couple years and reached the Region D Finals both years.  Not bad considering they had 1 playoff win in school history up to that point coming out of the Bone.  Since they went away from the T, I don't think they have gotten another playoff win either.

Didnt hurt that another Scott County school who ran the T got kicked up to D2 those two years......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
 
Just now, Grapeape said:

Somebody tell me about tha U. With their QB hurt, do they just operate under center? How are they getting 82 the ball - are they lining him up in the backfield? 

Mitchell at QB. He hands off some, runs some, throws a few.
Lester at QB. He hands off some, runs some, throws a few.
Qualls at QB. Not really sure. haha

It will be something different Friday, I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
 

Just my 2 cents

Wishbone is meant to attack the Middle and the Sideline. Need a workhorse Fullback and mobile QB.

  • Midline Veer with buck series compliment that attacks the outside. 

T formation is meant to attack multiple gaps inside the tackles. Need Faster Backs, QB need EXCELLENT FAKES.

  • Double Dive 
  • Better Lead Off tackle. 

 

Its easy to say that Philip Haywood at belfry runs this better than any high school coach in the country. 

He runs the Wing T option a large amount of the time, but has dabbled in all three offenses (Wing T, T, and Wishbone.)

And as far as Blocking schemes go. G.o.o.d. G.o.d. seems to be the new flavor of the month, an Improvement over G.O.D. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
21 hours ago, 1inStripes said:

Didnt hurt that another Scott County school who ran the T got kicked up to D2 those two years......

While that may be true, you play where you are put...you have to concede that most years it wouldn't matter who was in the Division, because either way TS was usually either sitting at home to start the playoffs or there a week later. Regardless, it was quite an accomplishment considering where they started, and most of the success can be attributed to the coach's implementation of the T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...