So, I guess Rockton Hononegah is changing their offense from the wing T to the Spread this year in hopes of generating more offense. Mums been the word on my team, Boylan. My guess is that they will use more Pistol 2 back sets because of their RB depth. Anybody's team changing up their offensive or defensive schemes this year?
Scheme changes...?
- Thread starter boylanfan33
- Start date
I always wanted SR to throw the ball more or run that spread offense, but now, in order to partially defend against the run-and-gun offenses and to keep games more competitive, I am missing the I-Formation, smash-mouth football that the Mustangs had run in the past.
For you see, there were less turnovers, less chances for a dynamic offense to put a forty spot on you, and controlling time possession meant basically controlling the damn game!
I guess the older one gets, things become more clear.
I have it from good sources that Hetlet has decided to showcase his athletes this year by running the spread. GW might be even better now that they are running the best high school scheme. Sf
After careful consideration, I hear the Brook is running the double-wing. 
We're actually so conservative that we are running the nickel D on offense.
Yeah, I like the I-formation and the power run game. But my favorite HS offense is the flexbone. Especially the way CoM ran it in the early 2000's. It was a thing of beauty
Hono has flirted with it the last few years. They've always had an interesting offense, would run alot of option looks without actually running any option. The QB was always told were to go with the ball before the play.
Way to much depth and talent at the school for 5-4, 6-3 seasons in the NIC-10.
'Yeah, I like the I-formation and the power run game. But my favorite HS offense is the flexbone. Especially the way CoM ran it in the early 2000's. It was a thing of beauty'
CoM is not classified as a Flexbone offense. They are a Triple Option team. True Flexbone teams do not use a dedicated TE.
Ask Paul Johnson the value a TE offers to running a core offense of IV, Midline, Zone Dive or any counters.
CoM is not classified as a Flexbone offense. They are a Triple Option team. True Flexbone teams do not use a dedicated TE.
Ask Paul Johnson the value a TE offers to running a core offense of IV, Midline, Zone Dive or any counters.
I may end up saying "DUH" to myself, but I am missing who "CoM" signifies. Sometimes I need an Edgy Forum lexicon to keep track of these! Thanks.
Not sure it mattered what kind of offense Com ran in that 01-03 span with that O line. To this day, I would still say that '01 semi at Richards was the strangest weather game I have been at. The Fog was so intense I could not see the game.
Isn't the triple option a play and not a formation? You can run the flexbone with 1 TE, 2 TE's, or no TE's. I've seen Paul Johnson videos, and he said that the Triple option is just one play, that you can run in a variety of ways in a variety of formations. You can run the triple option out of the I-formation or the Wishbone.
I traveled to CoM when Boylan played them in the playoffs back in those years. They dominated Boylan with their speed and efficiency. I believe CoM had a D1 TE that year the went to Minnesota. Lynn might have been his last name.
Jack Lynn was a backer out of Lake Zurich.
Not sure how Boylan is going to look. I've heard rumblings from a coach in the area they expect them to be better. They beat a 6-3 Belvidere North team to end the season last year. Somewhere around 5-4 to 7-2. Have 2 RB's that are nice players (ones a Soph) and have a D1 DE.
Not sure how Boylan is going to look. I've heard rumblings from a coach in the area they expect them to be better. They beat a 6-3 Belvidere North team to end the season last year. Somewhere around 5-4 to 7-2. Have 2 RB's that are nice players (ones a Soph) and have a D1 DE.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking. I have them at 6-3. I'm concerned about their run defense.
'Isn't the triple option a play and not a formation? You can run the flexbone with 1 TE, 2 TE's, or no TE's. I've seen Paul Johnson videos, and he said that the Triple option is just one play, that you can run in a variety of ways in a variety of formations. You can run the triple option out of the I-formation or the Wishbone.'
Paul Johnson and some other triple-option coaches broke the traditional 'Bone' in the backfield and went to two wing-backs (aka Double-Wing) and then took the TE position and 'flexed' him to the numbers (big white things on the field) with a mirrored SE to the opposite side, dramatically spreading the field horizontally, hence, the 'Flexbone' as it's referred to and why.
Flexbone was actually referred to as a 'spread' option system early on, unlike the spread systems we are familiar with today who put the QB in a shotgun formation with four receivers wide.
Paul Johnson and some other triple-option coaches broke the traditional 'Bone' in the backfield and went to two wing-backs (aka Double-Wing) and then took the TE position and 'flexed' him to the numbers (big white things on the field) with a mirrored SE to the opposite side, dramatically spreading the field horizontally, hence, the 'Flexbone' as it's referred to and why.
Flexbone was actually referred to as a 'spread' option system early on, unlike the spread systems we are familiar with today who put the QB in a shotgun formation with four receivers wide.
The triple option definition is even more broad than some earlier posts indicate. As long as these 3 phases exist within a single play ...
- a RB aligned anywhere in the backfield meshing with the QB with a chance to carry
- the QB with the opportunity to keep
- a 3rd player positioned to potentially receive a pitch or bubble screen
Dean, I have them going 6-3 in the NIC-10. They have some weapons on offense but I'm concerned about their run defense, especially up the middle.
I thought the "flex" in flexbone meant flexing the two HB's to the wings of the O-line. Can't the wishbone be used with 2 Wr's or two TE's, or 1 of each? Same with the flexbone. Maybe I'm wrong but I think the description of the Bone part has to do with the backfield alignment and not the TE/SE situation.