Why Run M2M?
Posted 11 June 2011 - 07:42 PM
To attack M2M, all a coach needs to do is send the defense wherever he wants it to go. It's like an orchestra, as the offensive coach just needs to move the defense one way, and hit them in the opposite direction.
Zone is a lot more difficult to coach, but it pays tremendous dividends. The kids will pick it up after a few games, and you build on it from there.
I'm curious to hear from the coaches on here who run M2M, and how it's worked for you. As mentioned, if you have the athletes to do it, it works. However, it can be exploited if you don't have tremendous talent. Thanks!
Posted 12 June 2011 - 08:16 AM
Posted 13 June 2011 - 07:40 AM
Posted 13 June 2011 - 01:30 PM
Posted 14 June 2011 - 09:36 AM
Posted 14 June 2011 - 05:57 PM
Posted 03 October 2011 - 02:25 AM
Posted 21 October 2011 - 08:49 AM
On offense we eat up zone defenses by passing with crossing routes where the zone gets confused who is to cover. Additionally we overload a side and do a silent snap to get us unfair odds on receivers and defenders. If they compensate, our RB heads over to the open side as an outlet pass receiver and then uses his speed down the field. Man to man can easily be beat with using your linemen to pick the receivers coverage, leaving them wide open.
We spent a year building our attack, it takes time. Focusing on the basics of passing, catching and blocking lead to success. Good luck out there.
Posted 07 November 2011 - 08:16 PM
Posted 08 November 2011 - 11:09 PM
My starting QB (my son) isn't the quickest or fastest, he doesn't have the strongest arm, but he's smart and reads defenses quickly. My receivers have learned over the season how to adjust to the defense that's in front of them, and we have a good time with it.
Once I know I'm facing man, I give my receivers 2 or 3 options on the play, 2 routes to run depending on the defense - inside or outside. For example, my slot receiver will either have a deep out or post or short in - all depending on the coverage.
I ran a zone defense for the most part, using man only when a receiver is really burning us - which happened only once this season. I put 3 players "in the box", a corner on each side, with three safeties. The corners set the edge, forcing all runners inside so no one gets to the sidelines. The safeties play deep, communicate constantly (the hardest thing to coach!), and do not chase receivers. If an opposing WR runs a deep cross or post or the like, the safety yells out to the center to cover. I have 4 really good safeties and two safeties who are okay, so we don't get beat deep often.
So - why play man? I suppose if there is that one player who is burning you with moves or speed or whatnot, put someone man-up on him. If not, I don't see a reason.
Posted 31 January 2012 - 10:30 PM
Posted 02 February 2013 - 07:08 AM
I run man to man against teams that spread. But when they bunch up, we typically switch to a 3-2 or a 1-3-1, depending on if the team likes to run or pass. Its always good to have versatility on your defense.