AFM RSS Feed Follow Us on Twitter       
AMERICAN FOOTBALL MONTHLY THE #1 RESOURCE FOR FOOTBALL COACHES
ABOUT |  CONTACT |  ADVERTISE |  HELP  



   User Name    Password 
      Password Help





Article Categories


AFM Magazine

AFM Magazine


How To Stress Out a Defense

by: Glen Caruso
© More from this issue

Click for Printer Friendly Version          

Stress Value: Setting Up Your Formation to Maximize Defensive Stress

I recently spoke at a clinic in Minneapolis. The topic I chose is an idea that I have been working on for the better part of a year now and one that I used this past season as an offensive coordinator. In the weeks following the clinic, the feedback I received from the Minnesota High School coaches was overwhelming and many asked me to put the philosophy down on paper; so after speaking with AFM, I couldn’t think of a better place to introduce the idea of “Stress Value.”

For years I have heard defensive coaches say, “now that’s a tough formation to defend.” And when I would ask why, the answer was not very definitive, but rather abstract or subjective at best. In looking for a concrete way to quantify offensive formations, I began to develop this idea of “Stress Value.” “Stress Value” is no more than verbalizing common sense, looking at football a bit scientifically and quantifying offensive formations. It is not indigenous to this system or that offense, and by no means is it a substitute for good personnel or for proper technique. Rather it’s an additional advantage to give your offensive players the best possible opportunity for a good play by placing high amounts of stress on the defense you are facing by threatening multiple areas with your pre-snap alignment. This is not an idea that I am trying to patent but rather to encourage legitimate and thoughtful discussion.

What is Stress Value:
“Stress Value” is a number that you can come up with that signifies how stressful that a set is to a defense. It is based on the premise that against each set, a defense has to cover 1) a particular number of gaps (usually with the front) and 2) zones (typically with the coverage). After reading this article you can think as far outside the box for purposes of relaying the theory, but we will not get too wild with the formations. The formations I use will have from five to seven linemen (including TE’s). That being said, the number of gaps that can be created will be between six and eight. The total number of underneath zones one can hit is five and the total number of over zones somebody can hit is five (See Diagram 1).

Diagram 1. Gaps and Zones


In Diagram 2, in a I Pro set, the alignment creates seven gaps. The number of underneath zones that someone can hit is five (See Diagram 2)

Diagram 2.I Pro

and the number of over zones you can hit in this formation is three. Add up the numbers of gaps and zones (7+5+3) and your stress value is 15. The I Slot formation is the same (See Diagram 3):

Diagram 3. I Slot

seven gaps, five unders and three overs, equaling 15. If you were in an I Slot Open set, (See Diagram 4)

Diagram 4. I SLot Open

you can see how the stress value decreases to 14 (6+5+3=14). This is one of the lowest stress values on the formation continuum.

A commonly asked question is “doesn’t the FB create and extra gap?” It can, but that gap can be negated by a LB that meets it with force, thus negating the extra gap. “Stress Value” is an alignment premise based on the pre-snap formation. Since I cannot count on it by alignment, I do not count on it in deciding “Stress Value.”

When one begins to break the I formation and move into wing sets, you can see how the formation’s stress value begins to increase. Take a Pro Strong Wing set (See Diagram 5).

Diagram 5. Pro Strong Wing

You still have seven gaps created by the six linemen. You can still hit the five underneath zones but by moving the FB in essence into a wing alignment and you can threaten four over zones. Therefore, the stress value of this formation is 7+5+4=16. Wing pro (See Diagram 6)

Diagram 6. Slot Weak Wing

has a greater value than I pro. Some would argue that the wing also created an extra gap at the LOS; I would not agree, in large part due to the fact that 1) defensive coaches do not typically bump defensive ends outside of the wings to create an actual gap and 2) because I cannot count on the wing and my end man successfully combo blocking that gap because they are off levels. Some teams (particularly the double wing teams) in college football can, and in that case, if you feel good about it, then go ahead and include that as another gap made for you. It will further strengthen the “Stress Value” philosophy.

We can then move to some one-back formations. Take Flanker Twins, (See Diagram 7)

Diagram 7. Flanker Twins

a one back balanced set. There are seven gaps, five unders and 4 overs for a stress value of 16. This is (by alignment) a more stressful formation to a defense than one back Double Twins (See Diagram 8)

Diagram 8. Double Twins

with a stress value of 15.

Pro Trips (See Diagram 9)

Diagram 9.Pro Tips

is the same as Flanker Twins (Diagram 7). Seven gaps, five unders and four overs equal a stress value of 16. Once we see how the unders vary, it is natural to ask “well, what are some of the more stressful formations?” If we take the Flanker Twins set (Diagram 7) and move that slot receiver to a TE spot, then we have Ace (See Diagram 10).

Diagram 10. Ace

Ace creates eight gaps but still threatens five unders and four overs for a stress value of 17 – nearly as high as it gets.

Ace (Diagram 10) is a formation that coaches often say is hard to defend, particularly if an offensive coach can do a few things to hit all those stress points. I believe that a large part of our job as coaches is to match those formations that put high levels of stress on a defense with plays that can attack those areas which are devoid. Being multiple with your play selection (not necessarily in number of plays but variety of plays) while in a stressful formation leads to good offense.

For example, in the case of ace formation the stress points are all hit with a package consisting of (but not limited to) inside zone, option, three step and four verticals. If you take the Pro Trips set, another formation commonly referred as “stressful,” you have a 3 x 1 set and often see the defense roll the coverage down to the multiple receiver side leaving one high safety. Stress is easily put on that defense out of this formation by running four verticals bringing the #3 receiver across the FS’s face. If the defense plays it with tow high safeties, then on of the alleys (either strong or weak) will be voided and it would be rather easy to attack with any typical run game.

Other Factors
At the risk of getting overly scientific, there are a few more variables to consider. There are some formations that alone would not put a tremendous amount of stress on a defense. Take a Double Split Bone (See Diagram 11).

Diagram 11. Double Split Bone

It has a very low stress value, the lowest in fact at 13 (6+5+2). However, to anyone who has seen a good wishbone option teamwork, they would admit that it is very stressful – as nearly all options are. Therefore, I believe that there is such a thing as an “Option Coefficient” (such as for Pro Trips - See Diagram 12)

Diagram 12. Pro Tips

to be used as a multiplier to the stress value number. My best educated guess from prior research is that the coefficient for three back option is 1.3, two back options is 1.2, and one back option is 1.1. These numbers are based on a five year study of how effective option football was compared to no-option plays. If you disagree or if you do not have option in your game plan, there is no need to use the coefficients. Therefore, Double Spread Bone formation (Diagram 11) that is running option would be six (gaps) plus five (unders) plus two (overs) equal 13 x 1.3 (option coefficient) which equals 16.9.

So What Does This Number Mean?
Very simply, to go back to the beginning, it is the number of gaps and zones you can attack from a given formation. The defense always aligns with 11 players. A certain number of those may be relegated to just a gap like down linemen and some just to zones like cornerbacks. Let’s take zone blitzing and spot dropping out of the equation for now. The rest of the players are combo players: inside LB’s, outside LB’s and maybe even an FS if the scheme calls for it. The combo players will play a gap and a zone based on their run/pass keys. Then in a base four-man front, (See Diagram 13)

Diagram 13. Even Front Defense

even if the FS is involved with the run game, there are six players relegated for one area and five combos that if they are very well coached and/or talented can cover ten areas. Then a typical four-man front can cover a total of 16 areas. Then, “Stress Value” formation of 17 or greater should have an uncovered area. An odd or three-man front (See Diagram 14)

Diagram 14. Odd Front Defense

has five relegated to one area (the DL and CB’s) and six combos (ILB’s, OLB’s and S’s) that if well coached can cover 12 areas, thus covering 17 areas. Assuming equal talent, this forces the offense to get into “Stress Value” formations in the 18’s and 19’s to “outflank” the defense and there are not nearly as many 18’s and 19’s as there are 17’s and 16’s. My most stressful formation is the 2 Tight Empty Gun (See Diagram 15)

Diagram 15. 2 Tight Empty Gun

What Should I Do With This Info?
Again, it doesn’t replace good players or good coaching but I would not ignore the fact that coaches agree that some formations are more stressful and tougher to defend than other. At the beginning of each week, on my grease board, I have listed all my 14’s, 15’s, 16’s, 17’s, 18’s, etc. and I determine what I need to win that week. Some weeks I may outman the defensive personnel and I will be heavy on the low stress values. That way I can save some of the higher stress valued formations for weeks when I really need the advantage such as when I am playing superior talent.





NEW BOOK!

AFM Videos Streaming Memberships Now Available Digital Download - 304 Pages of Football Forms for the Winning Coach



















HOME
MAGAZINE
SUBSCRIBE ONLINE COLUMNISTS COACHING VIDEOS


Copyright 2024, AmericanFootballMonthly.com
All Rights Reserved