Union vs Abingdon

[goose111874 967]

3 hours ago, Union_Fan said:

I don't know if they still do, but SD squibbed every KO, and did a muddle huddle on every PAT in 2012. I want to think they did something weird on punts too. Just to keep teams guessing. I think Union needs to hire a Creativity coach to come up with weird plays and formations to keep from being so predictable at times. 🤔

Have they quit doing the little stand up trick on punts always seemed to work except 1 time we'll always remember

[goose111874 967]

15 minutes ago, vhs_falcon_volfan said:

Talk about not being prepared. No team should be fooled that many times in one game. 

Especially when they did the same thing a week earlier to another team.  

[BigWinners 1,643]

1 hour ago, UnionGuy2017 said:

I think with halfway decent special teams play Union wins a state title in 2017. It’s never been any good. Same issue over and over and over again. The Stuarts Draft game 2012 at the park was one of the most frustrating I’d ever seen. 

2017 Union absolutely wins. Two long returns, the 10 or so yard punt, just all sorts of special teams mistakes. Appo had one sustained TD drive. 

[Union_Fan 2,155]

1 hour ago, goose111874 said:

Have they quit doing the little stand up trick on punts always seemed to work except 1 time we'll always remember

Think they're saving that for a rainy day.

[jarhead24219 440]

WET weather for Friday and Sat., I really dont know if that helps UNION or not.The holding calls has to stop,the wide outs are the ones holding and i can say they are legit calls .Geeez ,guys all you have to do is get your body between the ball  and the defense , you dont have to hold. Run your pattern down the field every play and see if your man is cheating up and then go play action and throw.The wind and heavy rain on a grass field will limit some of what each team does but, that three man front that UNION runs will give the Q B lanes to run in ,so it may be a very long night.......oh well there is still MELLO MUSHROOM to eat at on the way back

[TaterHater 89]

1 hour ago, jarhead24219 said:

WET weather for Friday and Sat., I really dont know if that helps UNION or not.The holding calls has to stop,the wide outs are the ones holding and i can say they are legit calls .Geeez ,guys all you have to do is get your body between the ball  and the defense , you dont have to hold. Run your pattern down the field every play and see if your man is cheating up and then go play action and throw.The wind and heavy rain on a grass field will limit some of what each team does but, that three man front that UNION runs will give the Q B lanes to run in ,so it may be a very long night.......oh well there is still MELLO MUSHROOM to eat at on the way back

I don't think you will see Union run a 3 man front on defense. They have only ran that base defense in two games Richlands and Graham. I'd look for a 4 man front that has been typical for most games this year since Abingdon runs mostly out of I and not a lot of spread formations. Rain could be a problem if the ball stays wet....however both offenses can run the ball well from under the center and that takes away the bad snap potential. It helps that Union has probably the best center in the region. 

[#BBN 128]

43 minutes ago, foosballer said:

I don't think you will see Union run a 3 man front on defense. They have only ran that base defense in two games Richlands and Graham. I'd look for a 4 man front that has been typical for most games this year since Abingdon runs mostly out of I and not a lot of spread formations. Rain could be a problem if the ball stays wet....however both offenses can run the ball well from under the center and that takes away the bad snap potential. It helps that Union has probably the best center in the region. 

They ran it at Central, and got blown off the ball, and never made any adjustments at all. I'm sorry but a 3 man front is not going to slow down a good running football team,! I'm sure a lot are missing Barry Jones right about now!!!

[TaterHater 89]

1 hour ago, #BBN said:

They ran it at Central, and got blown off the ball, and never made any adjustments at all. I'm sorry but a 3 man front is not going to slow down a good running football team,! I'm sure a lot are missing Barry Jones right about now!!!

Bullpoop....they had 5 men on the line of scrimmage on every play against Central. WCYB has the game on their FB page if you want to re-watch. The problem with that game strategy on defense was putting players in positions that didn't suit the talent/capabilities.  

[Union_Fan 2,155]

39 minutes ago, foosballer said:

Bullpoop....they had 5 men on the line of scrimmage on every play against Central. WCYB has the game on their FB page if you want to re-watch. The problem with that game strategy on defense was putting players in positions that didn't suit the talent/capabilities.  

The term 3 man front is coming in because 2 of the 5 guys were standing up. You're doing a strong running team a favor by doing that. No leverage, and half the lineman's job is done for him. Four down linemen doing some stunts with LB's blitzing the alternate gap, would have been much more effective.

[#BBN 128]

2 minutes ago, Union_Fan said:

The term 3 man front is coming in because 2 of the 5 guys were standing up. You're doing a strong running team a favor by doing that. No leverage, and half the lineman's job is done for him. Four down linemen doing some stunts with LB's blitzing the alternate gap, would have been much more effective.

I agree, and that is the reason I said 3 man front! It also didn't help having an undersized guy playing nose tackle.....No matter what, Central handed it to them in the running game, and basically for 4 full quarters.

[TaterHater 89]

1 hour ago, Union_Fan said:

The term 3 man front is coming in because 2 of the 5 guys were standing up. You're doing a strong running team a favor by doing that. No leverage, and half the lineman's job is done for him. Four down linemen doing some stunts with LB's blitzing the alternate gap, would have been much more effective.

My bad.....I didn't realize having the ends play in a 2 point stance changed the defensive front from a Bear front to a hybrid 3-5 formation of some sort. 

[Union_Fan 2,155]

33 minutes ago, foosballer said:

My bad.....I didn't realize having the ends play in a 2 point stance changed the defensive front from a Bear front to a hybrid 3-5 formation of some sort. 

It does when they are just standing there and reacting. Getting no push, clogging no lanes, no stunting, and giving 2 pulling linemen a 3 yard running go to take them out of the play. It may be the same number of people, but it is not the same scheme at all. When Barry Jones was DC for Powell Valley he basically ran a 4-4 stack, but he referred to it as a 31. The job of the DT's were to basically hold their ground and clog while the LB's made the tackles, and the DE's were doing something different each play. They certainly didn't just stand there.

[TaterHater 89]

1 hour ago, Union_Fan said:

It does when they are just standing there and reacting. Getting no push, clogging no lanes, no stunting, and giving 2 pulling linemen a 3 yard running go to take them out of the play. It may be the same number of people, but it is not the same scheme at all. When Barry Jones was DC for Powell Valley he basically ran a 4-4 stack, but he referred to it as a 31. The job of the DT's were to basically hold their ground and clog while the LB's made the tackles, and the DE's were doing something different each play. They certainly didn't just stand there.

Can't blame the D ends for the loss to Central. Central gained their yards between the tackles and in the air. Like I said earlier talented players put in the wrong position played a big roll in the defensive wows.

Also, under Jones at PV in the 4-4 the D ends were expected to stay home, take on the block and maintain outside contain. The only time they did anything different was a C blitz, rarely called on non passing downs.   

[Union_Fan 2,155]

32 minutes ago, foosballer said:

Can't blame the D ends for the loss to Central. Central gained their yards between the tackles and in the air. Like I said earlier talented players put in the wrong position played a big roll in the defensive wows.

Also, under Jones at PV in the 4-4 the D ends were expected to stay home, take on the block and maintain outside contain. The only time they did anything different was a C blitz, rarely called on non passing downs.   

Don't blame the DE's, just the way they were used. They could have contained much better by taking on the OL rather than waiting to be blocked.

Obviously, the problem was the lack of beef in the middle of the DL.

Back to Jones. Don't remember "bullets"? Maybe he changed the terminology.

[TaterHater 89]

7 minutes ago, Union_Fan said:

Don't blame the DE's, just the way they were used. They could have contained much better by taking on the OL rather than waiting to be blocked.

Obviously, the problem was the lack of beef in the middle of the DL.

Back to Jones. Don't remember "bullets"? Maybe he changed the terminology.

I think bullets were for the LB's, and robber R/L for the rover back.

[BigWinners 1,643]

As a former terrible OL, if a run play was called, I was always happy if my guy was a standing DE/OLB. Makes it much, much easier to create a gap. I'm of the belief that if you're sole responsibility isn't rushing the QB, then the edge players are better off in a three point stance. It's obv different if your job is to sack the QB, standing up can be advantageous. But against Wise, you know what they're gonna do, you need some muscle inside eating up the gaps and having the inside linebackers read the ball and make the play. Alabama (and New England for a long time) had massive success with a three man front but they ALWAYS had a massive NT anchoring the inside and eating up multiple blockers (think Vince Wilfork or Terrence Cody). Without a massive body inside, the offense has a major advantage because they can create gaps easily. 

 

But a successful defense in 2021 can't be stagnant. It's gonna be hard to stay in a 4-4 for the entire game if a team goes five wide. Unless your outside backers are extremely athletic and can cover slot guys, they'll eat you alive. You really need about 14 quality defenders to play defense now, maybe 15. You need six DBs that can play when you have to stop downfield passing, you need four or five smart, fly to the ball linebackers and four to five DL. A team like Union has enough kids you would think you could create quality depth and run all sorts of different looks defensively.

[sup_rbeast 296]

9 hours ago, Union_Fan said:

The term 3 man front is coming in because 2 of the 5 guys were standing up. You're doing a strong running team a favor by doing that. No leverage, and half the lineman's job is done for him. Four down linemen doing some stunts with LB's blitzing the alternate gap, would have been much more effective.

The DEs should be in a 2 point stance as long as you can get by with it. You have to count the front by the number on the LOS, not the number with a hand or two on the ground. Going by the rationale that you call a defensive front based on how many guys actually have a hand on the ground, you would have to call PVs front in their glory days a 2 man front, cuz both DEs were always up…thing is, that’s not how it’s determined. It’s the number on the LOS.

[sup_rbeast 296]

.

[sup_rbeast 296]

6 hours ago, foosballer said:

Also, under Jones at PV in the 4-4 the D ends were expected to stay home, take on the block and maintain outside contain. The only time they did anything different was a C blitz, rarely called on non passing downs.   

In that defense, C was an automatic every play if the DE didn’t have a TE on his side. Bullets was for the OLBs.

[sup_rbeast 296]

5 hours ago, BigWinners said:

As a former terrible OL, if a run play was called, I was always happy if my guy was a standing DE/OLB. Makes it much, much easier to create a gap. I'm of the belief that if you're sole responsibility isn't rushing the QB, then the edge players are better off in a three point stance. It's obv different if your job is to sack the QB, standing up can be advantageous. 

If you use your DEs on run plays to cram the OT into the gap to his inside and hold the gap to his outside, if he can do that standing up you are better off because that way he can also set the edge if the play goes outside of him. That is the way Jones taught DEs to play. You lined up shading the OTs outside eye on every play whether there was a TE to your side or not. If you didn’t have a TE, you crashed down the line off the OTs butt and hit the first thing through. If it turned out the ball was going to your outside, you fought back and strung the play towards the sideline. If you had a TE, you crammed the OT down, held your ground in the offtackle gap, and found the ball. If it was going away, you trailed looking for anything coming back. If it was going to your outside, you set the edge and strung it out to the sideline. If it was coming straight at you, you held your ground and squeezed to the ball. Anytime you felt pressure from a TE blocking down, you held the off tackle gap against the pressure and squeezed towards the ball, because in that instance you had help from the OLB on contain responsibilities as he would usually walk up to the line shading the TEs outside eye and replace his feet if he blocked down or tried to release inside. On passes, you just recognized it was a pass as you played your technique, and then rushed knowing you had contain responsibilities on the QB.

[sup_rbeast 296]

8 hours ago, Union_Fan said:

When Barry Jones was DC for Powell Valley he basically ran a 4-4 stack, but he referred to it as a 31. 

It was a 4 man front, but the ILBs usually lined up more head up on the guards with the weak side ILB playing a step or two further off the LOS than the strong ILB, while the OLBs were outside of the DEs 99% of the time. The 31 refers to the alignment of the DTs. On the strong side, the DT was in a 3 shading the outside eye of the guard, while the DT on the weak side was in a 1 shading the inside eye of the guard he was lined up on. Ling the D Linemen up shading into the gaps allowed for the gaps they were shading to be more easily clogged cutting down on the scrape lanes for the LBs. A fairly simple alignment for a very effective defense as long as you had personnel athletic and strong enough to man the positions and do the job associated with each position effectively. One thing about it, in that defense, the D Linemen had to be unselfish players for it to work. But, as long as the DEs and DTs did their jobs, it was as hard a defense to run on as any.

[BigWinners 1,643]

1 hour ago, sup_rbeast said:

If you use your DEs on run plays to cram the OT into the gap to his inside and hold the gap to his outside, if he can do that standing up you are better off because that way he can also set the edge if the play goes outside of him. That is the way Jones taught DEs to play. You lined up shading the OTs outside eye on every play whether there was a TE to your side or not. If you didn’t have a TE, you crashed down the line off the OTs butt and hit the first thing through. If it turned out the ball was going to your outside, you fought back and strung the play towards the sideline. If you had a TE, you crammed the OT down, held your ground in the offtackle gap, and found the ball. If it was going away, you trailed looking for anything coming back. If it was going to your outside, you set the edge and strung it out to the sideline. If it was coming straight at you, you held your ground and squeezed to the ball. Anytime you felt pressure from a TE blocking down, you held the off tackle gap against the pressure and squeezed towards the ball, because in that instance you had help from the OLB on contain responsibilities as he would usually walk up to the line shading the TEs outside eye and replace his feet if he blocked down or tried to release inside. On passes, you just recognized it was a pass as you played your technique, and then rushed knowing you had contain responsibilities on the QB.

But on the offensive side, if the DE is standing up, it's much tougher for him to get lower than the OL coming out of his stance and as we all know, low man wins. I just always felt like it's harder to get that initial burst standing compared to in a stance in defending the run. It felt like it was easier to get your head on the right side on an inside play and if it's going outside, you can just take that initial movement outside and create the gap there. Now on a pass rush, if the OL is in a three and the DE is standing, it's much tougher to get a solid block. Much easier to get burnt if you can't get your hands on the inside with the initial movement. The DE has a running start at either a bull rush or if they gonna try and use speed to fly by or if they wanna set up a spin or something. But again, this is all solely my opinion. I just felt like if I'm going downhill on a run, it's easier to get low and get the drive going if the other guy is standing. From my perspective, it was always the goal to control both arms. Can't let the DE keep his outside arm free to play the sweep. If the DE is playing a wide five and the OLB is off the LOS, its A much harder reach block if the DE is firing off low and coming straight off the OTs left, so you may just try and ride him all the way to the outside and let the runner know he's gonna come off the your rear end to the inside. 

 

A great DE, it doesn't matter. He's strong enough to hold on initial pop and quick/savvy enough to use his eyes to diagnose the play and move around. But on the average, a stand up DE playing the 5 is easier to take away on a run, esp inside, than a DE in a stance at the 5. Don't see many standing DTs at the 3 or 1 unless.It's a pure pass rush and you've got four pass rushers on field that are gonna stunt and shoot everywhere  

[BigWinners 1,643]

51 minutes ago, sup_rbeast said:

It was a 4 man front, but the ILBs usually lined up more head up on the guards with the weak side ILB playing a step or two further off the LOS than the strong ILB, while the OLBs were outside of the DEs 99% of the time. The 31 refers to the alignment of the DTs. On the strong side, the DT was in a 3 shading the outside eye of the guard, while the DT on the weak side was in a 1 shading the inside eye of the guard he was lined up on. Ling the D Linemen up shading into the gaps allowed for the gaps they were shading to be more easily clogged cutting down on the scrape lanes for the LBs. A fairly simple alignment for a very effective defense as long as you had personnel athletic and strong enough to man the positions and do the job associated with each position effectively. One thing about it, in that defense, the D Linemen had to be unselfish players for it to work. But, as long as the DEs and DTs did their jobs, it was as hard a defense to run on as any.

Do you think that could work now against a team like RV that likes to go four and five wide? I'm genuinely interested. It just seems so much harder to defend all that space if your ILBs are clogged up inside and you're asking the OLBs to cover slot guys on routes. You can always sit back in a zone but every zone has holes, esp if the OLBs aren't as fast and athletic as the slot guys. If you have the S be involved, that removes all help deep and leaves DBs on an island with no help. A WR will eventually get one over the top if the offense knows the outside has no help unless both corners are very, very good in man coverage and can match speed with the WR.

[Union_Fan 2,155]

6 hours ago, sup_rbeast said:

The DEs should be in a 2 point stance as long as you can get by with it. You have to count the front by the number on the LOS, not the number with a hand or two on the ground. Going by the rationale that you call a defensive front based on how many guys actually have a hand on the ground, you would have to call PVs front in their glory days a 2 man front, cuz both DEs were always up…thing is, that’s not how it’s determined. It’s the number on the LOS.

This post and your other one, about the DE's role in Jones' D, support what @#BBN and I were trying to say. I don't think we were saying it was a 3 man front specifically because there were 3 men down. @foosballer was asking were the term 3 man front was coming from, and I referenced the 3 men down because the DE's were just standing there.

I agree wholeheartedly that in Jones' D, he ran a 4 man front because of the role of the DE's. Against Central, there may have been 5 guys on the LOS, but only 3 were actually engaging the OL, the other 2 were essentially taken out of the action.

[50kw 140]

I sure miss falconman and barnacleboy or whatever they were called 😉