The A-11 Offense (All 11 Potentially Eligible)

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Piedmont High School in California has developed a new spread formation to try to neutralize a disadvantage in personnel. The base set consists of a center flanked by two tight ends surrounding the ball, two quarterbacks in the shotgun, and 6 recievers (3 wide right and 3 wide left).

 

The school got a 7-4 record using the set about 60% of the time, and head coach and co-creator Kurt Bryan says he plans to use it 85-90% of the time this coming season.

 

Apparently, at least one of the quarterbacks must be at least 7 yards behind the LOS for the set to be considered a "punt formation." They've given all 11 offensive players eligible reciever jersey numbers, and mix and match which 6 players are eligible recievers on a given play (as 6 eligibles is the maximum). Not sure how a center can be considered an eligible reciever. Players who are ineligible on a given play "can take a reverse pitch or a negative screen or a hitch behind the line of scrimmage."

 

Here is an interesting article on Rivals.com, complete with a video package showing off some of the interesting things they've done with the formation. Bryan claims that 35-40 coaches from division I-A schools, from every conference, have contacted him (under the condition of anonymity). Steve Humphries, Piedmont's director of football operations and the other co-creator of the A-11, says that last season he saw San Jose State run multiple A-11 plays against Stanford, Florida run one against LSU, and Rutgers and the San Francisco 49ers run punt plays with "aspects of Piedmont's offense."

 

They've got a pretty informative site up at a11offense.com.

 

I'm thinking in the next year or two, we'll see some colleges use the set every now and then. Anyone else know more about this?

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

That's some crazy stuff. thanks for linking that. I'm sorta suprised it seems to be pretty effective as well. You would think a simple base stay home defense, while droping your lb's maybe have a spy on the field would neutralize this offense. A team who could play contain defense would probably serve well against this kind of O. Seems they let the d crash in and it exposes some easy matchups to pick apart. A little gimmicky for my tastes. It'll be interesting to see if this new offense catches on, or is caught up to.

[Arkady Renko]

I did not know you could do that. Very interesting.

[bills44]

Anyone have any clips? I'd like to see what that offense looks like in game situations. Sounds interesting.

[Lv-Bills]

Anyone have any clips? I'd like to see what that offense looks like in game situations. Sounds interesting.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Anyone have any clips? I'd like to see what that offense looks like in game situations. Sounds interesting.

This article includes a pretty interesting video package, and if you go to a11offense.com and click 'A-11 VIDEO CLIPS' you'll find a whole bunch of them.

[Ramius]

Seems to like a 4 man rush with a simple zone defense would effectively neutralize this offense.

[ans4e64]

There was a thread about this on the OT board a few weeks ago, anyone who wants info should go there.

[Astrobot]

Things not having to do with Bills Football should be on the Off The Wall board.

Like Brett Favre.

 

I consider A-11 germane to Bills Football.

All we need is two more tight ends, right?

[reddogblitz]

I'd blitz the pee-jeebers out of those guys. I wish I was a defensive co ordinator coming up against those guys this year.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

Things not having to do with Bills Football should be on the Off The Wall board.

Like Brett Favre.

 

I consider A-11 germane to Bills Football.

All we need is two more tight ends, right?

Oh, okay!

 

Sorry!

 

Thanks for the help!

 

It couldn't be that threads creating general football-related discussions have always been permitted here, as long as the majority of the conversations are about the Bills...could it?

 

If Simon, Lori, SDS and company don't see a problem with it, I see no need for the mini-modding.

[Bmwolf21]

That's some crazy stuff. thanks for linking that. I'm sorta suprised it seems to be pretty effective as well. You would think a simple base stay home defense, while droping your lb's maybe have a spy on the field would neutralize this offense. A team who could play contain defense would probably serve well against this kind of O. Seems they let the d crash in and it exposes some easy matchups to pick apart. A little gimmicky for my tastes. It'll be interesting to see if this new offense catches on, or is caught up to.

Same here. I think it will be caught up to, rather than catch on. Maybe it works well in high schools and possibly college where teams simply don't have enough talent to defend it, but I can't imagine it working past the lower college level.

 

Every offense can be slowed down or stopped.

[Pete]

Oh, okay!

 

Sorry!

 

Thanks for the help!

 

It couldn't be that threads creating general football-related discussions have always been permitted here, as long as the majority of the conversations are about the Bills...could it?

 

If Simon, Lori, SDS and company don't see a problem with it, I see no need for the mini-modding.

[Bleed Bills Blue]

...two quarterbacks in the shotgun

This is relevant for Bills football...

 

Trent and JP together on the field for every snap...everybody happy!

[OCinBuffalo]

I'd blitz the pee-jeebers out of those guys. I wish I was a defensive co ordinator coming up against those guys this year.

Ok, for fun I will play offensive co-ordinator. My biggest concern is time/space on the field and making sure my guys don't get in each other's way, or allow one of your guys to cover 2 of mine.

To stop this O you need 6, at least decent, cover guys who will be in single coverage the whole game unless they get help from one of the 5 remaining guys as a "safety" of sorts. I think that catches most teams off-guard in terms of depth at D-back. You need 8 DBs to play this right. If all 6 of my WRs are above average, and you only have 3 above average DBs, that creates a mismatch without having to do anything else. Are you going to keep that many DBs on your roster, just to play me once or twice a year, when you have a full schedule of traditional offenses to deal with? Instead of setting up mismatches with shifting and blocking schemes, this does it with the roster.

 

You could run a zone, and if you manage the routs right, it might allow you to cover 2 of the WRs with one guy, thereby freeing one extra guy to blitz. Timing would be critical though, because that coverage would only work for about 3 seconds at the most. Then again, I would think that unless you don't mind taking the risk on any one of the 6 cover guys falling down, getting beat badly, etc., you would want a safety on each side(hence the 8 Dbs thing I said above), which leaves only 3 guys to pass rush/stop the run vs. three blockers. If both my QBS can block/take a hit then I add the other QB as a pass protector as well.

 

It's tough to blitz consistently, and you'd have to do it with one of the DBs, while the safety came down to cover the CB's? man. So now it's blitzing DB vs. pass protector QB. I like my chances blocking a smallish DB with a normal sized QB every day of the week, especially since my QB sees you coming. I also like the fact that my QB is getting hit by a DB instead of a LB. Of course, all of this assumes that my O Line can block. But given the # of WRs, they would only have to be solid for about 3 seconds, if I use a "west coast" mentality.

 

In fact, I would teach my guys to try to read the blitz, have the QB from the blitzer's side head towards the sideline, and throw quick screens to him. Essentially laterals, that would get the ball away from your blitzer much faster than he can run. Then my "receiving" QB can either run behind his WR blockers, or he can throw to one of them. It sets up a very nice "keep away" game. Do the CBs try to cover their men, or do they go after my screened out QB? Don't forget that because of your blitz on this side, you have 3 DBs in single coverage. If I set all the WRs on that side on "fly" routes, you are looking at nobody in front of my QB for 10-15 yards when he receives the ball, and all your guys running away from him at top speed.

 

If I had a Lorenzen? (Big, fat QB used to be on the Giants, now on the Colts)-type QB who could block and run with the ball and who would be barely bothered by a hit from your DBs, and I also had a Flutie-type, quick QB who could also throw, then I think you'd be in a lot of trouble with your blitzes.

[robkmil]

Piedmont High School in California has developed a new spread formation to try to neutralize a disadvantage in personnel. The base set consists of a center flanked by two tight ends surrounding the ball, two quarterbacks in the shotgun, and 6 recievers (3 wide right and 3 wide left).

 

The school got a 7-4 record using the set about 60% of the time, and head coach and co-creator Kurt Bryan says he plans to use it 85-90% of the time this coming season.

 

Apparently, at least one of the quarterbacks must be at least 7 yards behind the LOS for the set to be considered a "punt formation." They've given all 11 offensive players eligible reciever jersey numbers, and mix and match which 6 players are eligible recievers on a given play (as 6 eligibles is the maximum). Not sure how a center can be considered an eligible reciever. Players who are ineligible on a given play "can take a reverse pitch or a negative screen or a hitch behind the line of scrimmage."

 

Here is an interesting article on Rivals.com, complete with a video package showing off some of the interesting things they've done with the formation. Bryan claims that 35-40 coaches from division I-A schools, from every conference, have contacted him (under the condition of anonymity). Steve Humphries, Piedmont's director of football operations and the other co-creator of the A-11, says that last season he saw San Jose State run multiple A-11 plays against Stanford, Florida run one against LSU, and Rutgers and the San Francisco 49ers run punt plays with "aspects of Piedmont's offense."

 

They've got a pretty informative site up at a11offense.com.

 

I'm thinking in the next year or two, we'll see some colleges use the set every now and then. Anyone else know more about this?

 

 

 

There is discussion about banning this offense in high school. if you read and understand the offense--numbering makes it allowable in college and HS-but probably not the nfl. Some colleges have used versions of this, especially in spread punt situations. the A-11 forum discusses these uses.

[reddogblitz]

Ok, for fun I will play offensive co-ordinator. My biggest concern is time/space on the field and making sure my guys don't get in each other's way, or allow one of your guys to cover 2 of mine.

To stop this O you need 6, at least decent, cover guys who will be in single coverage the whole game unless they get help from one of the 5 remaining guys as a "safety" of sorts. I think that catches most teams off-guard in terms of depth at D-back. You need 8 DBs to play this right. If all 6 of my WRs are above average, and you only have 3 above average DBs, that creates a mismatch without having to do anything else. Are you going to keep that many DBs on your roster, just to play me once or twice a year, when you have a full schedule of traditional offenses to deal with? Instead of setting up mismatches with shifting and blocking schemes, this does it with the roster.

 

You could run a zone, and if you manage the routs right, it might allow you to cover 2 of the WRs with one guy, thereby freeing one extra guy to blitz. Timing would be critical though, because that coverage would only work for about 3 seconds at the most. Then again, I would think that unless you don't mind taking the risk on any one of the 6 cover guys falling down, getting beat badly, etc., you would want a safety on each side(hence the 8 Dbs thing I said above), which leaves only 3 guys to pass rush/stop the run vs. three blockers. If both my QBS can block/take a hit then I add the other QB as a pass protector as well.

 

It's tough to blitz consistently, and you'd have to do it with one of the DBs, while the safety came down to cover the CB's? man. So now it's blitzing DB vs. pass protector QB. I like my chances blocking a smallish DB with a normal sized QB every day of the week, especially since my QB sees you coming. I also like the fact that my QB is getting hit by a DB instead of a LB. Of course, all of this assumes that my O Line can block. But given the # of WRs, they would only have to be solid for about 3 seconds, if I use a "west coast" mentality.

 

In fact, I would teach my guys to try to read the blitz, have the QB from the blitzer's side head towards the sideline, and throw quick screens to him. Essentially laterals, that would get the ball away from your blitzer much faster than he can run. Then my "receiving" QB can either run behind his WR blockers, or he can throw to one of them. It sets up a very nice "keep away" game. Do the CBs try to cover their men, or do they go after my screened out QB? Don't forget that because of your blitz on this side, you have 3 DBs in single coverage. If I set all the WRs on that side on "fly" routes, you are looking at nobody in front of my QB for 10-15 yards when he receives the ball, and all your guys running away from him at top speed.

 

If I had a Lorenzen? (Big, fat QB used to be on the Giants, now on the Colts)-type QB who could block and run with the ball and who would be barely bothered by a hit from your DBs, and I also had a Flutie-type, quick QB who could also throw, then I think you'd be in a lot of trouble with your blitzes.

 

I see your point. I thought of this too and you're right that the blitz might be risky.

 

However, I've seen teams try similar things where an offense has 4 or 5 wide receivers. When teams decide, like you, that they have to cover every guy or play a zone, what usually happens in the QB sits back untouched and picks the defense apart. I'm thinking like the Cowboys. Think of that MNF game against the Bills last year. The Cowboys had been doing that to teams up until then. Tony Romo sit back with tons of time and finding an open receiver. The Bills however, blitzed the pee-jeebers (for the first 3 quarters anyway) and it didn't matter if receivers were open or not, he didn't have time to make good passes resulting in picks and incompletions. I think that'd work against this too. Or, think of Tom Brady and the Pats last year with 5 wide outs passing every down. Worked great until they came up against a team (the Giants) that could bring the heat on Tom Brady.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

I see your point. I thought of this too and you're right that the blitz might be risky.

 

However, I've seen teams try similar things where an offense has 4 or 5 wide receivers. When teams decide, like you, that they have to cover every guy or play a zone, what usually happens in the QB sits back untouched and picks the defense apart. I'm thinking like the Cowboys. Think of that MNF game against the Bills last year. The Cowboys had been doing that to teams up until then. Tony Romo sit back with tons of time and finding an open receiver. The Bills however, blitzed the pee-jeebers (for the first 3 quarters anyway) and it didn't matter if receivers were open or not, he didn't have time to make good passes resulting in picks and incompletions. I think that'd work against this too. Or, think of Tom Brady and the Pats last year with 5 wide outs passing every down. Worked great until they came up against a team (the Giants) that could bring the heat on Tom Brady.

Wasn't the whole reason the Giants slowed down the Pats* that the Giants were able to apply pressure to Brady WITHOUT blitzing? Meaning they could get to Brady, but without ruining their coverage schemes.

[OCinBuffalo]

I see your point. I thought of this too and you're right that the blitz might be risky.

 

However, I've seen teams try similar things where an offense has 4 or 5 wide receivers. When teams decide, like you, that they have to cover every guy or play a zone, what usually happens in the QB sits back untouched and picks the defense apart. I'm thinking like the Cowboys. Think of that MNF game against the Bills last year. The Cowboys had been doing that to teams up until then. Tony Romo sit back with tons of time and finding an open receiver. The Bills however, blitzed the pee-jeebers (for the first 3 quarters anyway) and it didn't matter if receivers were open or not, he didn't have time to make good passes resulting in picks and incompletions. I think that'd work against this too. Or, think of Tom Brady and the Pats last year with 5 wide outs passing every down. Worked great until they came up against a team (the Giants) that could bring the heat on Tom Brady.

Sure that's true. You would think that there would be a safety rout called that Brady could get it to, and there probably was, but he couldn't get it there. That and in addition to the monster pass rush, they probably covered his primary safety valve with zone and he couldn't work fast enough to find the next guy = broke their system. I don't think Brady is anywhere near as good without his "system". You break the system, and/or you hit him enough times and Brady becomes the "JAG" he actually is, which is why he belongs nowhere near a discussion of Joe Montana, Steve Young, Marino, John Elway or Jim Kelly(the greats I've seen so far)-->the more you hit those guys the better, not worse, they played. Brady does belong in Warren Moon/Terry Bradshaw/Phil Simms land, however, because all of them were system QBs who had success.

 

Can anybody honestly say that they didn't come away from that SB thinking Brady was soft? What if that was Steve Young? Eli Manning looked more like an "all-time" QB in that game, especially on the last drive. Eli f'ing Manning?

 

Anyway, in this you have less pass rushers that my QBs have to think about. You don't have any LBs unless you are planning on leaving one of my guys uncovered, or splitting coverage outside/zone and hoping your guys get to my QB before my WRs can stretch the field. That's the thing = I see this largely coming down to how much ground(space) my 6 WRs can create and work in 3 seconds-->more space = harder to cover vs. giving your guys 3 seconds to get to my QB.

 

The other thing is: who has outside contain? Is there an outside contain? With only 3 pass rushers, there's a hell of a lot of extra room on the outside. If my right TE/T can get a good cut block on his DE, then there's nothing stopping my QB from running at least 5 yards to the outside. Is there? Your DE have to work extra hard to rush but also contain. Oh, and draw plays would be devastating if nobody is covering in the middle of the field.

 

That's why I said Doug Flutie-type or Vince Young-type QB. You want a guy that can improvise, get the yards, and get out of bounds so he isn't taking monster, 20 yard running shots from your DBs. Imagine if Doug Flutie had 5-10 extra yards on each side of the line of scrimmage, he'd run around all day. Obviously this is not Drew Bledsoe's offense, he would be quite possibly killed out there.

[bowery4]

It sure is interesting, I had thought of four on the line before because that would be legal and create a lot of space (didn't know you could do 3). What is funny that it looks like a defense, so for that reason alone I would guess it could work kinda well. I would want a option type QB to get most of the snaps though and the 2 TEs would have to be big ones. It might be interesting to have a running back in that backfield, as well.

No doubt this would be pretty hard to defense against with the right personal. it would work pretty well against teams not using a swarm type Tampa D (since it was invented to contain the spread) IMO. Definitely a good option on 3rd or 4th and long and it might be cool to use in a punting situation just to confuse and bewilder.

I wonder why great football minds in the NFL don't use more off the wall formations IMO, a T(with 3 backs) would work pretty well against the way the Giants play (they just might be hard pressed to stop 3 fast backs with options) for instance and a strong I formation like we used in the days of OJ) would work against most Tampas (just look at how successful the other teams ran up the middle against the Bills last year, bad example I know but....). I think that some strong run type stuff has to be put out there now as most Ds are fast and swarm zone based, I think bowling them over is a good idea. Think about the Eletric co. running a sweep against the Bills now.