An analysis of successful defenses used against T formation football

Citation preview

AN ANALYSIS OF SUCCESSFUL DEFENSES USED AGAINST T

FORMATION FOOTBALL

A Project Presented

to

The Faculty of the School of Education The University of Southern

California

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Education

by Emil Suoh August 1950

UMI Number: EP46603

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UM I Dissertation Publishing

UMI EP46603 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346

p

J

’ S'i

S ^ ^ ^

l'y

c' ^

■

This project report, w ritte n under the direction of the candidate’s adviser and approved by him , has been presented to and accepted by the F a c u lty o f the School of E ducation in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirements f o r the degree of M a s te r of Science in Education. Date

..............................................L l ±

A d v ise r

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.

PAGE THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED . • The nature of the problem

1

• • • • • • • •

2

..........

2

Importance of the problem • • • • • • • «

2

Limitations of the problem

.........

3

Definitions of terms used • • » » • • • • •

3

T formation • • » • • • • • • « • • • • •

3

Defense « • • • » • « • » • • * • • • • •

4

Converging defense

• • • • • • • » • • •

4

Looping defense • • « • • • • • • • • * •

4

Sliding defense • • ..........

4

Flanker ..........

5

Statement of the problem

Man-in-motion Overshifting

• • • • • • • « • • • ............

5

• • • • * • • » • • • • • *

quick

.

Seam or slot

5 5

• • • « • • • • • • • • • •

6

Slant or angle charge • • • • • • • • • •

6

Stunting

6

• • • • • • • • • • • • * • • •

Diagrams of basic defenses used against the T formation ♦ * ...........

6

The 4-4-2-1 defense • • • • « « • • * • •

7

The 5-3-2-1 defense ............. • . . .

8

The 5-4-2 defense ♦ + » « • • • • « • • *

9

iii CHAPTER

PAGE The 6*3-2 defense • The

II.

6 - 2 -2 - 1

10

defense • . ........ . . . .

The 7-2-2, or J-box defense......... . .

12

The 7-1-2-1, or 7-diamond defense . . . .

13

The 8-2-1 defense ..........

14

. . . . . .

Method of procedure and sources of data . .

13

Organization of materials to follow . . . .

16

THE T FORMATION......................... The Chicago Bears, or Stanford T

17

.....

The Missouri, or Faurot T . . . . . . . .

III.

11

17 .

19

The man-in-motion • « . . • • . . • • • • .

20

The winged T

21

. . .

.........

REVIEW OF STUDIES AND LITERATURE IN THE F I E I D ...............................

IV.

FOUR MAN LINE DEFENSES The 4-4-2-1 defense The 4-3-2-1 defense

V.

..................

31

.........

31

..............

42

The 4-4-1-2 defense • • . . • • • • • • « •

44

FIVE MAN LINE D E F E N S E S .................

45

The 5-2-2-2 defense

................

45

The 5-3-2-1 defense

• • • • • • •

47

.............

59

The 5-4-2 defense VI.

23

SIX MAN LINE DEFENSES...................

62

The 6-2-2-1 defense • • • • . . . . • • . •

62

The 6-2-1-2 defense

76

iv CHAPTER

PAGE The 6-3-2 defense . • • • • • . . . . • • .

77

VII. SEVEN MAN LINE DEFENSES....................

79

The 7-1-2-1 defense • • • • • • • • . • • •

79

The 7*2-2 defense . . . . .

85

VIII.

...

EIGHT MAN LINE DEFENSES.................... The 8-2-1 defense

IX.

88 88

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

. .

Summary • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

91

....

92

Recommendations • • • • • • • • • • . • • •

9^

B I BL IOG RA PH Y.....................................

95

Conclusions . . . . . .

..........

91

CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED Sine© the fall of 1940 when the early-day system of T formation football was revived and remodelled by Clark Shaughnessy, coach at that time of Stanford University, the game of football has gone through an upheaval the like of whioh has never been experienced during the long history of the game*

Countless coaches almost immediately followed

suit and adapted their mode of offense to the "new” T form­ ation*

New is put in quotation marks because of the fact

that although the system is new to many of us, modern T type plays were used by Amos Alonzo Stagg at the University of Chicago before the turn of the century* *

The phenomenal

success Mr* Shaughnessy had with the T formation during the 1940 season opened the gate to new theories of offensive football, and as a result, many new theories of how to stop this new type of offense* E* R* Godfrey summed up the situation in introducing his study of individual defense techniques by saying, Since the beginning of intercollegiate football, offensive and defensive play have been a constant

^ Amos Alonzo Stagg and Wesley Winans Stout, Touchdown (New York: Longmans, Green and Company, 1927)» p. 189* E* R* Godfrey. "Individual Defense Techniques," Athletic Journal* 26:7-i3» September 1945* 2

2 challenge to each other, one stimulating the other to a higher level of development • . • each time a new offensive formation was uncovered there developed grad­ ually a defense to meet it. I. THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM Statement of the problem*

It was the purpose of

this study to describe, classify, and analyze the types of defensive football team play that have been used successful­ ly against the offensive T formation* Importance of the problem*

With a vast majority of

the teams throughout the nation now utilizing T types of football offense, it is increasingly urgent that coaches faced with this type of offense during the majority of their games be prepared to cope with it, lest their season be un­ successful* A survey on a nation-wide scale by the Athletic Journal^ showed that among high school teams, the T formation was the most popular*

Of the schools contacted in this

survey, 45*49 percent used the T formation in one of its forms*

The remaining four standard types of formations made

up the remaining 5^*51 percent*

This survey was conducted

during the 1949 season*

3 "Football Offense In High Schools,” Athletic Journal, 30•13-15» 37“38* December 1949.

3 Limitations of the problem*

Because of the compar­

ative newness of the T formation, there is relatively little literature on the subject*

Aside from partial and general­

ized references to defense that are to be found in books on football, and specific articles dealing with this topic in periodicals devoted to the coaching profession, published information is lacking*

Much of the information was obtained

by personal interview with experienced coaches in the field, and by attendance at coaching schools where authorities lectured on phases of the problem* II. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED 2 formation*

This is a type of offensive football

alignment that was widely used In the early days of American football, but gradually was replaced by newer and different formations*

It was revived by the Chicago Bears professional

football team in the late thirties, but did not gain new recognition until it was adopted by Clark Shaughnessy, coach at Stanford University, during the 1940 season*

Stanford

had phenomenal success with the T, going through the regular season undefeated, and climaxing their success with a victory over the University of Nebraska in the Pasadena Rose Bowl, January 1, 194-1. This formation is called the T because the position of the four backfieid men prior to the start of a play forms or resembles a T*

The following diagram will illustrate

4 this, and show the relative positions of all members of the team*

L

H

(V) .KE) (RT) (*&} fX )(Le)U-r)

Defense*

In football, defense pertains to the

attempt of one team to hinder and prevent its opponent from scoring*

The section following Definitions Of Terms Used

will be devoted to a description, with diagrams, of basic defenses used against the T formation* Converging defense*

This is a maneuver in which all

defensive linemen attempt to direct their charge toward one focal point in the opponent1 s backfield* Looping defense*

In this maneuver, one, or any

number of the defensive linemen, direct their charge around the adjacent offensive man rather than charge straight ahead* In most cases this is a pre-arranged stunt, with all men concerned knowing who is going to loop, and in what direction* Sliding defense*

This is a maneuver in which all

5 the defensive linemen slide either to the left or the right , whichever way the play develops, rather than to charge into the offensive line. Flanker.

A flanker is usually an offensive end or

backfield man who moves out past the defensive end in order to be in position for a flank or side attack on him, or to be in good position to move downfield on a pass play. Man-in-motlon.

This term refers to one of the back*

field men who, on specifio plays, runs toward the sideline slightly on a diagonal away from the line of scrimmage.

He

may run either to the right or left, as the case may be. The object of the man-in-motion is to force the defense to spread or open up.

He may be in motion at the time the ball

is snapped providing his motion is not toward the line of scrimmage. Overshifting.

When the defensive linemen do not

line up according to their conventional positions, but leave a wider gap than normal between their defensive spots. Quick*

The name given to a fast-developing play

into the line from the T formation.

The quarterback receives

the ball from the center, pivots, and hands the ball to one of the backs charging into the line.

It is given the title

of "quick” because the back ultimately receiving the ball reaohes the pivoting quarterback at the moment his pivot

6 ends, and hits the line of scrimmage only a fraction of a second after the snap of the ball by the center♦ Seam or slot#

Both seam and slot refer to the space

between the opposing offensive linemen# Slant or angle charge#

These terms refer to the

charge by the defensive linemen when they drive on a diagonal path toward an offensive man or slot, rather than the usual straight ahead charge# Stunting#

This term refers to unorthodox line play

such as two defensive men exchanging specific defensive assignments for a play or series of plays, as the case may be#

This is used to attempt to cross up the blocking assign­

ments of the offensive linemen# 111. DIAGRAMS OF BASIC DEFENSES USED AGAINST THE T FORMATION The following pages will illustrate by diagram and explanation the basic types of defenses that have been used over a period of years# The Illustrations are general in nature and do not include any variations, stunts and other unique features as used by specific coaehes#

They merely illustrate how the

assorted defenses are set up in general# A later chapter will take up each specific defense, and its variations as used by coaches who have been success­ ful in dealing with this problem#

A* The {£-2^2-1 defense#

This defense is set up

with a four man line, four men baeking up the line, two defensive halfbacks, and a safety man#

o o o o oo®oo o

o n

□

□ □

8 B • The Sri-Zri. defense#

This defense consists of

a five man line, three linebackers, two defensive halfbacks and a safety man#

o ° o □ □

0,

□

□

□

1ft' ' ■

9 C* S £ 5-4-2-defense*

This is another defense

utilizing the five man line, with four men backing up the line, and two defensive halfbacks or safety men*

o o o o o oo®oo o □ □ □ □□ □ u □ □ « ..V .

□

., .

□

rS '

10 3

S8 £r2 r2 .5s£25EL2.*

This type of defense adds a

man to the defensive line, with six men ap front, three linebackers and two defensive halfbacks or safety men*

o ° o o o oo®oo o □

□ ■ ■ □ □ □ □

□

□

□

□

□

11 E# The

6 -2 7 2 -I

defense#

This has been one of the

most widely used defenses of recent years, and is perhaps the most popular#

It consists of a six man line, two line­

backers, two defensive halfbacks and a safety man#

o 0 o o o oo®oo o

□ □ □ □ c □

H □

12 F# The £-2-2, or 7-box defense# old as the T formation#

This defense is as

It consists of a seven man line,

two men backing up the line and two defensive halfbacks or safety men#

It has been proven one of the most effective

defenses against the T#

It is not effective against a

passing attack or the man-in-mot ion#

o o ® 0 o

o ° o o c o □ □ □ n □ □□ □ □ □

□

13 G. The £-1-2-1, or 7-diamond defense.

This is

similar to the seven-box defense, except that in addition to having a seven man line, it has but one man backing up the line, with two defensive halfbacks and a safety man.

o ° o o o oo®oo o

□ □ □ □ □ □

□

□ □

14 E« The 8^2-1 defense*

This version uses eight men

on the line, with two llnebaokers, and one man back as a safety man*

o° o ; o o oo®oo o

15 IV. METHOD OF PROCEDURE AND SOURCES OF DATA While considering the above problem for research, it became apparent that the source of material would be very limited because of the comparative newness of the T formation and its variations as used by present-day coaches.

A check

of available library facilities revealed a very limited source in football textbooks, but a fairly voluminous source of articles written for athletic periodicals by men in the field, since 1940. The balance of the data used was secured by wftflna of personal interview with successful members of the coaching profession who were able to defeat T formation opponents, by notes taken at coaching schools attended by the writer, and by personal observation of practice sessions at pre-season training camps of the professional Los Angeles Dons at Ventura, Washington Redskins at Occidental College, and the Los Angeles Rams at Loyola University. All Information gathered from the above sources was broken down into defenses of similar alignment or fundament­ al procedure, and the resulting best or most successful defenses outlined in the forthcoming pages, with comment or explanation to aid in their clarification.

16 V. ORGANIZATION OP MATERIALS TO FOLLOW The following chapters will be made up of a descrip­ tive explanation of the types and variations of T formations that have brought about the need for research into this problem, a chapter reviewing the material secured through research, and five chapters containing a general report of the investigation*

The final chapter will consist of a

summary of major findings and conclusions formed from the data revealed in the investigation*

CHAPTER II THE

T FORMATION

There are two basic types of the T formation being used by coaches of football*

Many variations and innovations

make their appearance from season to season, but fundamental­ ly they fall under one of two categories*

These are the

Chicago Bears or Stanford T, and the Missouri or Faurot T* This chapter will endeavor to distinguish between the two, and also to describe and illustrate the major variations that are responsible for the widespread popularity and sue* cess of the T formation* The Chicago Bears or Stanford T Formation*

This

formation is also known as the Shaughnessy T because of the success Mr* Shaughnessy had with it after reviving it at Stanford University*

In this formation the line is balanced

with the ends split from one to two yards*

The fullback is

about four and one half yards from the line of scrimmage, directly behind the quarterback and center*

The halfbacks

line up about four yards directly behind their respective tackles*

Until Mr* Shaughnessy popularized this formation

during the 1940 season, the only exponents of the T were the professional Chicago Bears, who have used this system since the early 1930* s*

Mr. Shaughnessy improved the T by bring­

ing into play the man-in-motion method of keeping the defense guessing as to the development of each play.*

Following is

18

an illustration showing the relative positions of the players in the Chicago Bears T formation*

2

The ends (E) are split from one to two yards. The fullback (F) is four and one half yards behind the center* The halfbacks (H) are four yards behind the tackles The quarterback (Q) is directly behind the center.

George Dunscomb, "Shaughnessy Behind The Eight Ball," The Saturday Evening Post, 18-68, November 1, 19*1*1* o Dana X* Bible. Championship Football, (New York: Prentiee-Hall, Inc*, 19^7J> P* li!>*

19 The Missouri or Faurot T.

Named after Don Faurot,

ooach at the University of Missouri, who first made use of this variation of the standard T formation, it is fundament­ ally the same as the Chicago Bears formation except in the position of the seven linemen.3

coach Faurot split, or

separated his linemen varying distances apart in order to give them better blocking angles at the defensive linemen. In describing the Faurot T, Cravath

gave the split

or distance between the offensive linemen as follows, The distance between the center and the one foot. The distance between the guards tackles is two feet. The distance between and ends is three feet. Backfield spacing to the Chicago Bears T.

guards is and the the tackles is similar

Hargesheimer^, in his lectures, stated that the split T, as used by the University of Oklahoma, varied the splits to give their men better blocking angles, according to how the defense was lined up.

The tackle usually did the adjust­

ing, with the guard remaining stable with his one foot split. The end would keep a similar split, dependent upon how much the tackle adjusted. The following diagram illustrates the relative

3

Ibid.. p. 116

^ Jeff Cravath, "Defenses Against The Faurot T," Classroom Lecture Notes. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, July 1^46 • 5 Walter Hargesheimer, "The Split T," Lecture Notes Taken At Clinic For Visiting Coaches, University or1 southern California, Los lEgelesV ^tily

20

spacing and positions of the players in the Missouri or Faurot type of T formation.

The man-ln-motion.

Exponents of the T formation, in

order to spread the defense, use the man-in-motion to either side*

Any one of the four backs have been used for this

maneuver, although the majority of the time halfbacks are used*

The left halfback may go into motion to the left or

the right, as the case may be* right halfback*

The same is true of the

Sometimes the fullback is sent in motion,

and he may go either to the right or left*

On rare occasions

the quarterback is used when there is need of a quick kick by one of the backs, or in a case where one of the backs is going to get a direct pass from center for a forward pass,

21 end run etc# When a man is put In motion, his duties may be one of the following: a) as a decoy to draw a defensive back away from where the play is going to hit; b) receive a pass on a forward pass play; c) act as a flanker, and cut back on the defensive end, blocking him from the side; d) go deep downfield for a long forward pass# The maa-in-motion is utilized with other formations, and is not necessarily native to the T# In his discussion of the T formation, Bible ed some of the weak points of the T#

6

mention­

He stated these as

follows: a) it is difficult to get interference ahead of the ball carrier on direct plays; b) a good quarterback is essent­ ial in order to get a smooth functioning attack; c) it is a poor formation to quick kick from, but not impossible; d) perfect timing is essential for the plays to work well* The winged T formation#

This formation is an ordin­

ary T formation with one of the backfield men moved to the wingback spot, usually a yard back and a yard outside of either of the ends# or to the right#

The winged T may be either to the left

This formation is also used with the line

unbalanced to either the right or the left, as the case may be#

6

Bible,

0

£# cit## p# 116

22 The following diagram Illustrates a winged T form­ ation to the right, with the right halfback as the wingbaek*

CHAPTER III REVIEW OF STUDIES AND LITERATURE IN THE FIELD Of the many books written on the subject of football, relatively few have been written to include the topic of defensive play against the T formation*

Of course the prime

reason for this is the fact that the modern T formation is of such a comparatively new nature, and literature is just now appearing which covers this new era of football*

Very

few research studies have been made int this area, primarily because of the same reason stated above* The study by Seixas1 was very limited in its scope, covering but a small group of Southern California coaches, who were reached by means of a limited questionnaire* Forte

2 9

although not covering the defensive aspect

of the T formation game, did give some enlightment on the problem by revealing the offensive side of the picture, and how they would adjust to meet the defensive maneuvers* Six books were found that covered some aspects of the problem*

Two of these, Frank Leahy* s The T Formation?.

1 William Seixas, "How To Set Up A Defense Against The T Formation In Modern Football " (unpublished Master*s project, The University of SouthernUalifornia, Los lngeia% 1948* 2 Harmon W* Forte. "Directing The T Formation Against A Changing Or Shifting Defense," (unpublished Mhsterys Proj­ ect, The university of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1948).

3 Frank Leahy* The T Formation* (New York: PrenticeHall, Inc*, 1949), 244 p£T

24 and Forrest England* s Coaching The T Formation^ are textbooks written on how to play this style of football, primarily as a guide for those coaches who planned to use the T.

Both

authors devoted sections specifically to problems of defenses against the T* Two other source books were football textbooks, not however devoted wholly to the T formation, but to the game of football in general.

Dana X. Bible-*, one of the older

and more successful football coaches of the nation, devoted a chapter to individual defensive play, and another to def­ ensive team play in his book entitled Championship Football. Fritz Crisler , a coach who has been in the public eye in these postwar years because of his successful teams at the University of Michigan, wrote a book entitled Modern Football.covering his theories of the game.

Mr. Crisler is

one of the few topflight coaches who did not modernize his type of play along the lines of the T formation, but stayed with the single wing type of offense, and did an excellent job with it.

His text devoted more space to defensive foot­

ball than did the other authors.

Six chapters were used to

M

Forrest W. England. Coaching The T Formation, (Jonesboro, Arkansas: The Arkansas StateHToTlegb Pi*ess, 1948), 178 pp* 5 Dana X. Bible, Championship Football. (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 194f), 2/5 pp. ^ H. 0. Crisler, Modern Football, (New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc., I94V), ^79 Pfc*

25 cover all aspects of defense on an individual, line, team, over-all planning, and one chapter wholly on defense for the T* Of the remaining texts, both were widely read manuals of football that have been use by students of the game for many years*

However, both of these have been revised and

brought up to date on all aspects of modern football* Functional Football, written by John Da Grosa^, is a highly technical football textbook covering all phases of all types of football*

This work was organized into five

parts, one of which covered defensive fundamentals, and one which covered defense as a whole, with all its implications* Bernard F* Oakes8 revised his text on line play to supplement the ohapters on defense with the new trends that have come in with the new wide-open game that exponents of the T utilize*

This work was written in two parts, one on

offensive football, and the other on defensive football* Seven chapters are devoted to all phases of defense, begin­ ning with the very fundamental and Initial problem of the defensive stance, and progressing through to specialized team defenses*

John Da Grosa. Functional Football* (New York: A* S* Barnes and Company, 19^6J, 3 W PP« 8 Bernard F. Oakes* Football Line Play* (New York: A* S* Barnes and Company, 194&), pp*

26 The bulk of the data seeured for this study oame from two of the journals devoted to the coaching profession, Scholastic Coach and the Athletic Journal*

Both of

these periodicals print many outstanding articles, contrib­ uted to them by outstanding coaches and authorities on modern football*

Much information highly pertinent to this

study was found through these sources* Attendance at coaching schools at the University of Kentucky and Massillon, Ohio, clinics and lectures at the University of Southern California, and observation of prof­ essional football squads during their summer training periods provided other valuable sources of information* The following chapters will outline the findings as they were broken down into the categories of defensive form­ ations and theories*

Many of the ideas overlap, and some

tend to contradict eaeh other*

But all in all, the thought

is the same, a means of stopping the T formation from funct­ ioning at its best*

Jess Neeley^, coach at the Rice Instit­

ute made a statement that more or less was the key to solving the problem*

In discussing the T formation and how to defend

against it, he said, "Fundamentals of play and aggresiveness of players win, not formations * * * You must defend against your opponent1 s personnel, not their system of play." These

9 jess Neeley, "The T Formation," University of Kentucky Coaching School * Lexington, Kentucky* dto-Ly 19*1*7•

27 are good points to keep in mind in devising defenses against any attack*

No plan of action will succeed if it does not

have the manpower to see it through* The Godfrey report*

E* R* Godfrey10, a member of

the coaching staff at the Ohio State University , undertook a scientific analysis of the T formation, and came up with some very interesting observations*

It is a known fact that

the strong point of the T formation is the speed with which the ball carrier can reach and cross the line of scrimmage* Mr* Godfrey proceeded with this thought in mind, and in his report he said, Since the ball carrier reaches the line of scrimmage almost immediately after the ball has been passed from the center, any charge that a defensive lineman wishes to make is limited in time and depth* It is important that the defensive lineman playing against the T does not become engaged long with the offensive blocker * * • The time allowed the defensive man to set his charge is determined by the length of time it takes an offensive back to reach the line of scrimmage* Godfrey went on to explain that in preparing for the 19W

season, the coaching staff studied the effectiveness

against the T of two types of charges: a) a one-step charge with a forearm blow, and b) a two-step charge with a forearm blow* After many trials with a varied group of linemen on the squad, the following conclusions were drawn:

1

) with

1 0 E* R. Godfrey, "Individual Defense Techniques," Athletic Journal* 26:7-13» September 19^5*

28 the one-step charge, the lineman would invariably be in pos­ ition to tackle a back coming through his hole; 2 ) with the two-step charge, the back already was through his hole, and one to two yards past the defensive lineman by the time h© was prepared to make the tackle♦

The following diagram

illustrates the positions of the offensive backs and the defensive linemen at the time of the one-step charge, ONE-STEP CHARGE AND FOREARM BLOW

□ □

□

□

□ □

29 In the preceding diagram, the end of the arrow from the halfback shows the distance he would move forward during the time the defensive lineman took one step and hit the offensive lineman a forearm blow to ward him off, and put the defensive lineman in position to tackle* The next diagram illustrates the positions of both offensive and defensive men after a two-step charge and a forearm blow by the defensive lineman*

It will be noted

that upon the completion of the second step by the defense the offensive halfback is already through the line of scrim­ mage and past the position of the defensive linemen* TWO-STEP CHARGE AND FOREARM BLOW

H

© - - « —

H •

d)C5®ri □

rt

j□ □

30 From the above experimentation Mr. Godfrey concluded that if defensive linemen functioning against a T formation with its quick hand-offs into the line penetrated more than one step9 they would not be in position to tackle the ball carrier, as he would be past their defensive position9 and as a result of this reorganized his tactics of line play# In interesting addition to the above study was a statement by Fritz Crisler cited by Coffey1 1 in his discuss­ ion of the T formation*

Crisler maintained that there are

two spots where the T formation play develops.

These are

just behind and a little to the inside of both offensive tackles.

From these two spots the majority of all T form­

ation plays originate and develop.

It is imperative thenf

according to Crisler, to get one or more defensive men to these spots as quickly as possible.

1 1 Otis Coffey. "Hold That Line! Block That Pass!" A Report Of Fritz Crisler1 s Lecture On Defense At The Okla­ homa Coaching School, Athletio Journal. 27:7*32, November 1946.

CHAPTER IV FOUR MAN LINE DEFENSES The use of the four man line evolved from the sueeess of the quick opening T offenses, and their passing patterns. It is a sound defense for passes although it is comparatively weak around the flanks.

Like moat defenses that have been

devised for the T, it must be used with other variations, or as Svendsen^* stated in his paper on trends against T offenses, if it is played straight, it soon would be easy to solve. I. THE 4-4-2-1 DEFENSE Coleman#

2

In discussing trends in T formation foot­

ball Mr# Coleman spoke of the defense used by Coach Dewey Luster1 s championship Oklahoma team against the Texas Aggies1 passing attack#

This consisted of a tight four man line with

the defensive tackles lined up inside the offensive ends, and the guards opposite the guards#

The four linebackers were

spaced with two outside the offensive ends and two splitting the offensive guards and tackles. man played normal positions#

The halfbacks and safety

The following diagram illust-

1 George S. S vend sen, "Trends In Defense Against The Athletic Journal# 28:16, September 19^7* 2 E# P# Coleman, "Trends In The T Formation," Athlet­ ic Journal# 26:19-30, September 19^5#

32 rates this defense*

o ° o o Gr EL

0

H

The same authority in a later article^ described a defense used by Coach Matty Bell of the Southern Methodist University, in stopping Texas University1s great offense of that year*

It was set up to look weak to the outside and to

tempt Texas to run that way*

The linemen and linebackers

worked in pairs, and alternated their charge in and out* •3

E® P* Coleman, "Trends In Defenses Against The T," Athletic Journal* 29:12-13, October 1948*

The diagram below points out how this maneuver was carried out.

There were four different combinations on each

side of the center.

One of these is shown below.

o ° o

Ml

H

5 England.

One of the outstanding exponents of the

T formation, Forrest W. England has written much about this type of football.

He described a unique variation of the

4-4-2-1 defense.

It consisted of an overshifted 4-4 that is

almost an 8-2-1.

The four linemen are tight, with two line­

backers opposite the offensive ends, and two outside the ends. The four defensive linemen pinch tight as in the following 1L

Forrest W. England, "Defenses Against The T," Athletic Journal. 26:7-13, November 19^5*

34 illustration

O °

O

o

H

HJ S

In his book on T formation football, England^ showed another variation of this defense, which like the one above appears to develop into an eight man line with the snap of the ball.

\

It is strong against a passing attack, as the

offensive ends are not given an opportunity to go downfield for pass receiving.

The two middle linebackers charge into

their defensive area, without waiting for the play to devel­ op,

The next diagram denotes the set-up for this maneuver.

5 v Forrest W, England, Coaching The T Fom^tion, (Jonesboro, Arkansas: The Arkansas ^tatQHToTlege press, 1948), p, 105,

35

0

m

Higgins#

Penn State, coached by Bob Higgins, has

had one of the best defensive records of any of the top foot* ball powers in the country, particularly against T formation teams#

One of HigginsT pet defenses combined some of the

principles of Englandfs 4-4 in which he paired his linemen with a linebacker, and had them alternate their drive#

Hig­

gins grouped his defensive 4-4 into two groups of four, on each side of the center#

They could change off any way they

^ Bob Higgins* "Penn State Football*” Scholastic Coach * 18:14-15 > 49, 0ctober 1948•

36 liked, but he insisted that no matter what variation of the 4-4 was used* each group must send a man toward the middle, in order not to be caught on sneak plays.

One of these

variations is depicted in the next diagram.

O O o

□ Liegerot.?

□

□

Perhaps one of the most radical of the

defenses that have been devised was brought out by a man who is not one of the authorities in the field, but never-theless one of the profession deeply interested in the problem. In his article he stated that he thought he could stop the T with his radical man-for-man 4-4-2-1 defense.

He lined his

^ Giles F. Liegerot« "4-4-2-1, An-T-idote," Schol­ astic C o a c h 18:10, 47, September 194a.

37 defensive tackles off the outside shoulder of the offensive tackles, and the guards head on to the offensive guards. The objective of these four men was to charge directly over their opponents9 unless one of the four offensive men desig­ nated pulled out to lead a play.

If this happened, the man

opposite him on defense was instructed to do accordingly, and follow the offensive man# The four secondary defenders were matched with the opposing backfield, according to speed, power etc.

The

defensive linebackers were instructed to play opposite the man they were assigned to, regardless if he went in motion or played in a conventional position. On running plays each linebacker was instructed to charge in to meet his offensive man, then cover as the play developed.

On pass plays each defender was instructed to

play his man, regardless of the pass pattern, and to follow him a U over the field, playing the ball only after it was thrown. The defensive halfbacks were assigned the ends, and played from five to nine yards behind the line of scrimmage, head on to the ends.

They played the ends man-to-man.

The

safety man played the center, and never was further than ten yards behind the line of scrimmage. Mr. Liegerot intimated that he has had considerable success with a set-up of this type, although he admits that many aspects must be considered in using a radical change

38 of this nature.

No other evidence of this unique method has

been found by the writer to have been used by any of the prominent coaches.

The following diagram illustrates the

procedure against a team using a pitch-out play to the def­ ensive team?s left.

Svendsen.8

This authority mentioned the use of the

4-4-2-1 with several variations.

The first of these deals

with a normal defensive set-up, with the defensive tackles opposite the offensive ends, and the defensive guards oppos­ Q .... Svendsen, op. cit.

39 ite the offensive guards.

The four linebackers are evenly

spaced, with the defensive ends slightly outside the defens­ ive tackles, the fullback in the gap between the defensive left tackle and guard, and the center between the opposite tackle and guard. position.

The other defensive backs are in normal

With the snap of the ball, the defensive guards ' v 1*

*

•

‘

■*

.

•

‘

, ' /

slant charge to the left, the center charges into the gap, and the fullback comes over to fill in the middle gap.

The

result is actually a 5-3-2-1 defense after the ball goes in %

to play.

Following is a diagram illustrating this maneuver.

O O o

P§Q t T T

E

C

H

40 A variation of the same type of defense finds the defensive guards slant charging to their outside, with the defensive fullback hitting into the middle gap, and the center drifting over to cover as middle linebacker*

As in

the defense shown above, this again becomes a 5-3-2-1 upon the snap of the ball*

This is shown in the next diagram*

o 0 o J

G-

a A third variation deals with a man-in-motion.

Upon

noting that the offense has sent a man into motion, the def­ ensive linebackers, except for the one to the opposite side, shift over in the direction the man has gone in motion*

The

halfback on that side drifts out also to cover the man-inmotion* the safety man comes up to cover the halfback1s area

41 and the opposite halfback shifts over to cover part of the safety*s territory*

Thus this evolves into an overshifted

4-4-3 defense, as illustrated in the diagram below*

Suavely*** Mr# Snavely ranked with the top coaches of the country in the post-war years, putting his team in some of the top bowl games, including the Suguar Bowl classic in New Orleans*

One of his stronger defenses was a 4-4-2-1

that is identical with the set-up used so extensively by 9 Carl 6* Snavely. "Defense." Athletic Journal* 30: 10-11, 36-37, October 194$. “

42 S vend sen, as described above*

Coach Snavely described the

maneuvers of his defensive men as "stunts," referring to the work of the units on each side of the offensive cente,

He

also made an Interesting observation that was somewhat con­ trary to the beliefs of many of the other authorities.

He

stated that he did not believe It was sound football to shoot linebackers through Into the offensive backfleld. On the 4-4 defense Coach Snavely felt that his team was weakest between the defensive guards, and to compensate they spent additional time to help these men protect the territory between them, II, THE 4-3-1-2-1 DEFENSE lO Crisler, v

The lone mention of the use of a 4-3

defensive set-up was that used by Fritz Crisler at Michigan, In his book Modern Football, Mr, Crisler covered the use of this form of defense.

He lined up his defensive guards head

on to the offensive guards, and slant charged them to the outside.

The middle linebacker filled the gap between the

guards,

A man-in-motion was covered by the halfback on the

side to which the offense put the man Into motion. More Information was given by Coffey on this pattern. He compiled notes on Mr, CrislerTs lectures11 on defense at

^ H, 0, Crisler, Modern Football. (New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc,, 1^49), p, zu?, 11 Otis Coffey, "Hold That Line! Athletic Journal. 27:9 1 November 1946,

Block That Pass!"

43 th© Oklahoma Coaching School*

Crisler stated ,that he tried

moving his guards out so that they split the offensive guards and t a c k l e s , thus being in position to stop a l l plays directed at these seams, and also preventing any of these four offensive linemen from being released for downfield blocking*

The middle linebacker was placed only tw o feet

from the line of scrimmage, making it difficult for the offense to determine if he were to be blocked as a lineman or a linebacker*

Several variations of slant charging were

used off this set-up*

The diagram below illustrates the

basic organization of this defense*

a

44 III. THE 4-4-1-2 DEFENSE This version of a four man line defense was mentioned by but one of the sources of information.

Forrest W. England 12

made use of this type of formation, using his two inside linebackers to smash into the gaps with reckless abandon. The two outside linemen were used to hit the ends, prevent­ ing their deploying for passes.

The lone middle back played

a roving game, his only definite duty was to cover the manin motion, when used.

The two middle linemen and the two

middle linebackers alternated their charge, with the guards sometimes angling to the outside, and the linebackers crashing the middle.

The diagram following depicts the guards angling

in, with the linebackers angling out.

o ° o

0 12 England, op. cit., p. 104.

CHAPTER V FIVE MAN LINE DEFENSES Five man line defenses are more and more being found to cope most successfully with the T formation attack*

It

is well balanced, having considerable strength in all depart­ ments*

Against flanker and man-in-motion types of attack,

it can be used to advantage*

Strength is also apparent

against a forward passing attack, due to the additional linebackers and others of the secondary defense*

In describ­

ing the 5-3-2-1 defensive set-up, Bible^ said, "It is gener­ ally considered the best defense against the T formation*" I. THE 5-2-2-2 DEFENSE There was but one mention made of this method of stopping the T*

It was expounded by Bobert Griffin

article found in Scholastic Coach*

2

in an

Mr* Griffin felt that his

defense was sound against either the conventional T, the split T, or winged T offenses*

In setting up the defense,

defensive men were set head on to the offensive ends, the offensive taekles and the center*

The two linebackers were

set two and a half yards behind the line of scrimmage, and 1

Dana X* Bible* Championship Football* (New Tork: Prentlee-Hall, Inc*, lyr()» P# 2bY* 2 Robert Griffin, "Beat The T With A 5-2-2-2," Scholastic Coach* 17:42, June 1948*

46 about two yards beyond the defensive linemen.

The two def­

ensive halfbacks were placed five yards behind the line of scrimmage, and lined up behind the defensive tackles.

The

two safety men played about ten yards back, and lined up outside the linebackers.

Flankers and a man-in-motion were

covered by the halfback on that side, with the other defens­ ive halfback moving into the middle.

Coach Griffin felt

that if his defensive set-up could congest the area between the offensive tackles, it would control most of the Tfs offensive strength.

In the illustration below, the basic

defensive pattern is set up, and movements of the players is designated.

o ° o £

V

47

II. THE 5-3-2-X DEFENSE Bible.

Mr. Bible set up his defense to have the

line charge hard, and then concentrate on playing the ball carrier all over the field*

He put his outside linebacker

on the back in motion while in the defensive man1s zone, but when he left the zone, the man-in-motion was picked up by the defensive halfback to that side, who played him man-for* man*

The safety plays zone unless an end comes deep, where­

upon he is played man-for-man by the safety, as illustrated in the following diagram*

The other linebackers play zone

on passes*

(h a v-Foa- n a *)

^ Bible, op* cit*, p* 158.

48 Coleman#

4

Mr# Coleman made a survey of the types of

5-3-2-1 defenses utilized by Penn State, one of the strongest defensive units in the nation#

They used a changing five,

that is, it would start out with the basic five*three and utilize various planned stunts that would develop into a at the snap of the ball, or maybe a

7

*diamond or

6 *3

6*2

, as the

case may be# Basically, the defensive unit would line up with the defensive ends about a yard outside of the offensive ends, the tackles head on to the tackles, and a guard head on to the center#

The outside linebackers faced the offensive ends

about four or five yards behind the line of scrimmage# other defensive backs were in conventional position#

The Much of

the time this set*up would develop into a conventional

6*2

as the defense determined the direction of the play at the snap of the ball#

The linebacker to the opposite side of

the play direction would crash, with the linemen partially looping to the direction of the play#

The middle linebacker

moved to cover the area vacated by the crashing linebacker# On pass situations the Penn State team usually chose to rush the passer rather than cover the potential receivers, and sent both outside linebackers crashing around for the passer# Another similar version sent the linebackers, except for the 4

E# P# Coleman, "Trends In Defenses Against The T," Athletic Journal# 29:12-13, October 1948#

49 middle man, who protected his area, crashing straight in* The next illustration will show the basic defensive unit, and how it moved into a 6-2 with the start of play*

o ° o G-

Against plays utilizing a man-in-motion, Penn State presented a unique defense that sent the middle linebacker into the line on the side the offense went into motion.

The

defensive tackle and end on that side moved out laterally to cover the man-in-mot ion*

The linebacker opposite moved into

the middle to compensate for the move of the middle lineback­ er*

The resulting formation was an overshifted 6-2-2-1,

This movement is depicted in the following illustration.

50

Q O o o oo®oo

a s

0

a 3

A version of this defense that was used consistently at Penn State against plays down the middle, sent the middle linebacker, and the guard playing opposite the offensive center, knifing through the middle, with the outside line* backer moving into the spot vacated by the middle linebacker. The ends cut in sharply.

The defensive halfback moved in to

fill the gap left by the linebacker moving into the middle. The safety man rotated in to the defensive halfbacks spot, and the opposite halfback moved back to become a double safety.

This rotation evolved itself into a fairly tight

6*3*2 , which was very strong against plays into the middle

51 of the line.

This method is depicted below.

O ° O (

£ c

z

*5 Cravath, Coach Jeff Cravath of the University of Southern California mentioned the use of several variations of 5-3-2-1 defenses*

Using the orthodox 5-3# if the offense

sent out a man-in-motion, Cravath moved all three of his linebackers in that direction*

Another variation of this,

which subsequently evolved into a 4-3-3 is shown in the next illustration*

The man-in-motion is picked up by the half-

Jeff Cravath, "The T - Positions, Techniques, And Defense," Athletic Journal, 26:5-55# October 1945*

52 back covering to that side.

The middle linebacker is dropped

back to cover the halfback1s area, and the middle defensive lineman moves out as center linebacker.

An overshifted 5-3 defense is described by Cravath in which the three middle linemen pinch, and the defensive backs rotate.

As the offense puts the ball into play, the

left linebacker moves into the slot between the defensive end and tackle.

The middle linebacker is shifted over to

cover the left linebacker*s area, the defensive left half­ back moves up to cover the outside of this area, and the safety man moves in to cover both for the halfback and the

53 middle linebacker*

The defensive right halfback shifts over

a bit to cover for the safety man*

This maneuver is shown

in the diagram following*

o ° o

Coach Cravath also varied his 5-3 defense by having his middle linebacker hit into the middle of the line after the middle lineman slant charged out f forming a 6-2-2-X. This maneuver is identical with that mentioned by Coleman on the preceding pages.

Another variation of Mr* CravathTs

was to have the right linebacker crash straight in, with the other two linebackers covering, again making a 6-2-2-X with the snap of the ball*

5^ England

An overshifted 5-3 is described by Mr.

England in his book on the T.

The defensive line is arrang­

ed similar to a conventional six, with the right defensive end dropped back as an outside linebacker.

The right defens­

ive halfback plays behind the middle linebacker, and the safety man plays to the left of the mid-line.

The left

defensive halfback lines up behind the defensive end.

One

of the striking changes in this set-up is that there is no man playing opposite the center, usually the key spot for the five man line.

The next diagram Illustrates this.

o 0 o T

G-

F

^ Forrest W. England, Coaching The T Formation. (Jonesboro, Arkansas: The Arkansas State"77bTlege tress, 1948), p. 105.

55 H o l t •7

Holt advocated an orthodox 5-3-2-1 defense,

except that in most cases he kept his linebackers very close up to the line of scrimmage.

The defensive halfbacks were

back about normal, but the safety man usually played deep, coming up only according to the impending situation* Horrell*8

In describing the Rose Bowl game of 1941

between Stanford and Nebraska, Mr* Horrell described the 5-3-2-1 defense put up by Nebraska as being similar to the defense described in a previous paragraph by Bible*

The

prime difference was the position of the three linebackers* The coach of the Nebraska team kept his linebackers from two to four yards behind the line of scrimmage, and the two out­ side men were put in the gap between the defensive ends and tackles*

Mr* Bible placed these men behind and slightly

outside of the defensive ends*

In Nebraska*s set-up, the

defensive halfbacks were two to three yards outside the defensive ends, and only six to ten yards from the line of scrimmage, depending upon the tactical situation*

The

safety man laid rather deep, sixteen to eighteen yards back on runs, twenty yards deep on pass plays, and dropped back to about thirty yards for punt situations*

The following

illustration shows the general set-up as described by Mr*

7 Frank C* Holt, "Defenses Against T Formations En­ countered by San Luis Obispo Junior College," Interview Notes * July 1948* 8 E* C* Horrell, "Rose Bowl Game Technical Report," Scholastic Coach* 10:7# February 1941*

56 Horrell.

o ° c o

O O O ® 0 0 0 .. 0 @ 0 f]

z-w yps

m

fc-io )bH? yds.

a

H

'V, -,

Mollenkoft.

Jack Mollenkoft, for many years one of

Purdue*s coaching staff, discussed many types of defenses to stop the T#

He stated that the most common one in use that

was found in the mid-west was a tight-charging five that shot the middle linebacker to the opposite side of the charge of the defensive man playing over the center, which ended in a 6-2 with wide linebackers.

The defensive ends sliced in

sharply over the offensive ends, depending on the linebackers

^ Jack Mollenkoft, "Defenses Against The T," Ohio High S chools Football Coaches Association Coaching School. Massillon, Ohio, August

57 to cover to tli© outsid©. orthodox.

Th® rest of the secondary played

This maneuver is depicted in the illustration

below.

0 Svendsgn.10

This authority believed in overshifting

his men somewhat in meeting the T formation.

In lining up

this overshifted defense* he placed from left to right* his end head on or slightly inside the offensive end.

A tackle

was placed opposite the offensive right guard* a guard in front of the offensive left guard* and the other guard just

George S* Svendsen. "Trends In Defense Against The T,tt Athletic Journal, 28:16, September 19^7 •

58 inside the offensive left end*

The opposite tackle played

outside the end, as a defensive end on a six man line.

The

fullback was placed about two yards back* and three yards outside the end*

The center backed up the slot between the

defensive end and tackle, and the other end split the defens* ive guards. ally spaced*

The two halfbacks and the safety man were norm­ From the appearance of this defense, it was

designed to combat a strong man-in-motion attack*

The next

diagram shows the spacing of the defensive men in this defense.

o ° o o

OQ® F

a

59 Thajrer#1* 5 -3

Mr* Thayer stated that he thought the

-2 - 1 defense would work successfully against an ordinary

T formation team that is not exceedingly fast.

He maintained

that a man-in-mot ion should be taken by the linebacker on the side which the offense goes into motion toward.

It was his

belief that the linebacker should always play the ball on passes to the man-in-motion in the flat, and play the man if he crosses the line of scrimmage. III. THE 5-^-2 DEFENSE For some unknown reason, very few of the authorities mentioned use of the 5-4-2* among high school teams.

This is a widely used defense

Mention of it was made in an art­

icle dealing with the use of the T formation by Stanford University against Nebraska during the Rose Bowl game of January 1, 1941.

Nebraska went into a 5-4-2 defense at the

beginning of almost every play, and would change just before the ball was snapped into another defensive pattern, or at frequent times, remain in the 5-4-2. 1 2 Bible.^

Mr. Bible described his theories on the

5-4-2 in his book on football.

He stated also that the out­

side linebacker should pick up the man-in-motion, and play

Duke Thayer, "Is It t T t Time In The High Schools?” Scholastic Poach. 10:9-20, June 1941. Horrell, o£. cit. Bible, op. cit. p. 159*

60 him man-to-man.

The other three linebackers were shifted

over to cover for the linebacker who picked up the man-inmotion*

Actually this becomes a 5-3-2 with a loose man on

the back who went in motion*

The following figure will help

explain this maneuver*

oOo o o oo®oo T

(z o

«■ /v e 7 )

a

H /

\

I>

Da Grosa.

(z^e)

ill* In his revised book, Mr. Da Grosa added

a chapter dealing with the modern T formation.

In discussing

the 5-4-2 defense, he says, "Careful consideration has been

^ John Da Grosa, Functional Football. (New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, p* $23. *

given to the 5-4-2 defense and there is no question but that this particular defense is effective against the T formation with man-in-motion* n

The fundamental arrangement of this

type of defense as suggested by Mr* Da G-rosa is depicted below.

It will be noted that he recommends keeping his two

safeties very close, ordinarily only about eight yards behind the line of scrimmage*

O O o

CHAPTER VI SIX MAN LINE DEFENSES Defenses of this type have been predominant ones in football for many years*

With the advent of the modern

T formation, more emphasis was put on other defensive patterns but the six man line defenses are still widely, and in many oases, suceessfully used*

Crisler1 stated that in his opin­

ion the six man line could oope with the T formation if it was used with a hard oharging straight ahead line, with the defensive halfback responsible for covering the man-in-motion* It was his belief that the only problem that would arise would be the comparative ability of the personnel* I. THE 6-2-2-1 DEFENSE Bible* 2

Mr* Bible suggested an orthodox 6-2-2-1

defense in his book*

He also recommended that the defensive

halfback take the man-in-motion*

On pass situations the

opposite defensive halfback and the safety man play man-to­ man, with the two linebackers playing zone*

All of the

linemen were directed to crash in a converging manner*

This

H# 0* Crisler, Modern Football* (New York: McGrawHill Book Company, Inc., I 9 W J T P* zO/V 1

2 Dana X* Bible* Championship Football * (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc*, 19^7J$ P* i!>o*

3 Frank C* Holt, "Defenses Against T Formations En­ countered By San Luis Obispo Junior College," Interview Notes * July 1946.

63 same defense wets advocated by Holt^f except that he suggested that the defensive tackles should do a thorough job of delay­ ing the ends during passing situations.

Following is a

diagram illustrating this defensive plan*

Blott.

H

Mr* Blott outlined a 6-2-2-1 defense in

which the man-in-motion was picked up by the defensive end on that side, who faded out with him.

The tackle was moved

over half a man to compensate for movement of the end.

The

defensive linemen other than the end covering the man-in-

Jack Blott, Defense," Ohio High Schools Football Coaches Association Coaching School, Massiiibn, unio. August i w r * -------- ---------

motion* rushed the offense to hurry any potential pass play. An interesting goal-line defense* used anywhere within the ten yard line was also mentioned by Mr. Blott.

It consisted

of a tight six man line that converged sharply* with the two linebackers, two halfbacks and the safety man in almost a straight line of secondary defense.

The distance behind the

defensive linemen would vary with the closeness to the goal line. The next illustration is that of Mr. Blottfs 6-2-2-1 with the end covering the man-in-motion.

The tight six with the secondary covering close in a line, for defense within the ten yard line is diagrammed below*

rl

o ° o o eye

1

SV t

X

I/O e m C o l e m a n *^

0

0

In the same game Notre Dame came up with a tight 6-2-2-1 defense with the linebackers playing behind the ends, who were slicing in sharply.

All of the defense converged

sharply toward the quarterback.

Again, the defensive halves

72 and the safety played conventional positions. is illustrated in the next diagram,

This defense

it was mentioned that

this maneuver usually was used on third down#

o ° o

One of the defenses used extensively by Purdue, as described by Mr# Mollenkoft, consisted of an overshifted line, with a guard pulling, just as he would on offense, and hitting into another defensive hole.

Por pass defense the

ends were responsible for the flats, with the halves and safety man picking up the deep men.

The defensive line­

backer to the right played wide, opposite the offensive end,

73 and played him man-to-man until he went into the halfback*s territory*

The next illustration covers this defense.

o ° o \

F«-*T

T~

)

X

r

x.

\

\

\

\

0

1

' l

N

f } I ' i

X H

\

; v

Snavely,^

An interesting treatment of an offense

utilizing the flanker was offered by Coach Carl Snavely of the famed North Carolina Tarheels,

His team ordinarily

lined up in an overshifted six, as will be shown in the next diagram*

When the opposition sent a man into motion to the

defensive teamfs right, and he stopped outside the end as a

10 Carl G-* Snavely, "Defense,” Athletic Journal, 30: 10-11, 34, 36-37, October 1 9 * 9 . — —

7* flanker, the North Carolina line would adjust in that direct­ ion, and at the snap of the ball, would be overshifted again, opposite to the side they were originally.

The two line­

backers adjusted over also, but the halves and safety man remained in their original positions, as in the next diagram.

H

Mr. Snavely mentioned several stunts that his line used to aid in confusing the offense. were covered in previous paragraphs. units with the linebackers.

The majority of these They usually worked in

It is interesting to note that

the defensive ends would not charge across if the play was to the opposite side, but usually dropped back as pass defense,

75 In a discussion of various defenses found In the middle west during the 1946 season, the author of the article described a 6-2-2-1 defense whose purpose was to jam up the middle in order to force the offense to run the tackle slots, which were backed up by the two linebackers*11

The defensive

guards and tackles played opposite the offensive guards and tackles, making a very tight line from tackle to tackle* Following is an illustration of this defense.

England12

also mentioned the use of this set-up*

o ° o o /

11 "1946 Defenses In The Mid-West," Athletic Journal. 27:11* November 1946* 12 Forrest W. England, "Defenses Against The T," Athletic Journal. 26:7-13* November 1945*

76 n . THE 6-2-1-2 DEFENSE Coleman. ^

Coleman described a 6-2-1-2 set-up that

was used by Coach Matty Bell, the main for the split T,

This defense was formed in

The tertiary linebacker was five

yards behind the scrimmage line, with the primary task of stopping quarterback sneaks.

This defense has been used in

high school ranks fairly often. favor is pass defense.

The strongest factor in its

Bell used a zone type of pass defense

for his baekfield men on this, as illustrated below.

O O o

/

\

A H

3

Coleman,

op

,

olt.

77 III. THE 6-3“2 DEFENSE This type of defense was scarcely mentioned in the literature, although it receives wide usage in high school 14 circles. Holt , in discussing trends of high school foot­ -

ball in the state of California, mentioned two variations, one of these was a normal six-three with the linemen from tackle to tackle sliding to meet the play rather than using a charge, with the three linebackers shifting with the way V

the man-in-motion was sent.

The other variation was a tight

six man line that charged directly to meet the attack, in a pinching movement.

The sliding line type is shown below.

■O ° o o

tr

,

oa®ao GH

0 14 Raleigh H. Holt. "California High School Football," Athletic Journal. 26:12-13, November 1945.

78 Hickman* 15

A us© of a defense similar to that which

Holt described above was used by Navy against Army.

The

main difference was that it was overshifted to the side an opposing back went into motion*

The man-in-motion was picked

up by the linebacker on that side, and the other linebackers shifted over to cover his territory, just as in the defense above*

This variation is shown in the next illustration*

O O o r r

^ Herman Hickman, "The Army Defense," Athletic Journal. 28:49, October 1$47*

CHAPTER VII SEVEN MAN LINE DEFENSES Seven man line defenses axe being used more and more to combat the T*

Many coaches use this type of defense as

an initial one, and stunt into different variations as the ball is snapped starting a play. seven man defenses is the

7

The most popular of the

-1 -2 - 1 or

7

-diamond*

I. THE 7-1-2-1 DEFENSE Coffey*^* An orthodox 'J-dieaaondL was described by Mr* Coffey, as used by Coach Crisler of Michigan, in which the linemen from tackle to tackle looped either right or left, according to a prearranged signal* crashed in sharply*

The defensive ends

The defensive tackles lined up head on

to the offensive ends, and the guards did likewise on the offensive tackles* ive center*

The center played head on to the offens­

The linebacker played a yard or two behind the

center, and more or less roved as he diagnosed the play* The halfbacks played about six to eight yards back, and the safety about ten yards deep, according to the situation* The following diagram shows the manner in which this defense

1 Otis Coffey, "Hold That Line I Block That Pass!" A report Of Fritz Crislerfs Lecture On Defense At The Okla­ homa Coaching School* Athletic Journal, 27:7-32* November

1946*

“

------

80 was set up*

o ° o O/ \ frJ