GAM and the sweep

Derek:
I have seen many defenses and some that mimic exactly what you are describing. If the DE takes that deep path he is doomed. He simply cannot do anything but slow down a wide, deep sweep. And, if my TE and OT do their jobs the TB will have no difficulty stepping inside (1 step is all that is required) of the FB's block. I would expect that the CB and FS should be coming to the play. Otherwise there would be no reason to have this discussion. The CB is blocked by the Flanker AFTER the CB recovers from his bump & run, man technique. Remember your CB has to run with my wide out or suffer later.
And yes, I want my FS to run the alley and tackle inside out on the TB. That's the theory anyway. In practical application it doesn't get done all the time, and even when the FS makes the hit, it is usually for some sort of gain. If my TB makes him miss, it’s a big gain. And I am aware that you stress placing an athlete at FS who is an excellent tackler. All that being said, many, many times it doesn’t get done. We are talking football theory here. Practical application is yet another thing.

My point in all of this is that it doesn't matter what you name the defense, if the offense does a decent job of getting a body on a body at 3 or so points, the offense will gain consistent yardage. And I don't by any means refer to pancake blocks either. If everything works like I've said, and the 3 key blocks get done, it will be my best player against your best player, or one of your best players, one on one in open space. I'll take that match-up any day.

Everyone (Reed included) agrees that the weakness of this defense is the C gap. The play of the DEs does nothing at all to help there. In fact my point all along has been that the technique employed by the GAM makes the DE a one-dimensional player. And I have only spoken about one play. We haven't even discussed a simple double option; swing passes, outside veer, and Reed's admitted weakness - triple option.

Read what I posted earlier. The older the age group, the more likely teams will be skilled enough to do these more skill intensive things. Conversely, at the younger the age levels, it is less likely the teams will be able to throw these somewhat more sophisticated offenses at you.

And Derek, it has nothing to do with me liking you, or you liking me. The alignment you describe with the penetrating DEs, in my view, would allow me to consistently move the ball in the C gap (or expanded C gap after the DE made his sweep spot move), assuming our personnel was reasonably equal at those other described positions.

Further, looking at Reed’s GAM book, page 21, he shows examples of handling crack backs etc. But look at the diagram at the bottom of left column, page 21. First of all it only depicts 10 offensive players against the GAM’s 11 defenders. Secondly, one might suppose the offense could stick in its 11th player at FB right ahead of the Tailback to that dreaded I formation. The offense runs a toss sweep to its right (defense’s left). As I said before the CB will be run off by the WR and be busy for a while. The OT and OG on the play side will block down. The QB will reverse out and toss to the TB. The FB will simply take a slight arc route to the DE. There is no way in hell that that DE is getting to the “sweep spot” before that FB nails him right in the mouth. There should be one tremendous collision, which if nothing else will cause the DE to stop any further movement to that spot he has been taught to reach. The TB can run under or over the collision and be yards up-field before that middle backer or the FS gets to him. To make it even worse, if the OT cuts his split in half and brings the DE in some more, the play gets easier to execute.

This is just not sound defensive theory. If you don’t believe me, go ask your head coach at Tomales what he thinks of this play in this situation. Ask him if he would send his DE toward the other end zone at quick time to keep that FB from whacking him at or near the LOS. Ask him what happens if the De speeds up his movement t to the magic “sweep spot” and the FB hits him while he is on the move. Its lights out, at least for that play. And I’m not talking physical mis-match here. Put the same type athlete with the same type quickness, aggression, strength, etc., at DE and FB. Asking that DE to execute that technique puts him at a disadvantage. We are talking high school or higher level players in the youth system, not 9 & 10 year-olds or younger. Remember my point is that this can be done at the younger age levels, but breaks down as you move up in age.

Whew, this was long-winded. This probably won’t change you thinking one whit, but pose the question to your hs head coach and I’d be interested in what he might say. I wouldn’t even try that with mine because he would think I needed help.