Formations & Motions to Install in Spring

Over the last few weeks, I have been sharing my philosophies on building a spring install. We’ve covered the importance of having a true offensive system and what that means, what traits I’m looking for at each skill position on the offense in order to run the system, and this week, we’re finishing this series by deciding what formations and motions we want to use to run the plays we decided to activate from our system in alignment with the skillsets of our personnel. Like many facets of offensive football, I have some alternative views on using formations and motions to the mainstream.

Most, if not all, of us have probably seen/heard/read that “formations are cheap,” and “plays are expensive.” In how many industries or even individual products does cheaper = better? At some point, quality comes into the conversation. Yes, there is a give-and-take. Sometimes, I grab the choice grade ribeye. Maybe I’m solo at home for the night, and I just want a big slab of beef for dinner. Other times, maybe my son is spending the night at my parents’ house and I have an at-home date night with my wife. I’m much more likely to spend a little bit more and get prime because the quality of the beef is of a bit more importance in that setting. I make that example to say that if all we worry about with formations is their expense, or lack thereof, we could be missing out on a lot of quality by spending a little more time into developing more possibilities out of each formation.

I don’t believe defensive coordinators are as enamored by formations as they used to be. Formations alone aren’t enough to “hide” plays anymore. I know if I were a DC getting ready to make a hit chart for my opponent and I see 100+ “formations” over the course of a few games, I’m just going to assume there’s no pattern in relation to the specific formation, and I’m going to look for other similarities. What personnel are on the field (groupings and individual players)? What is the set (2x2, 3x1, 2x1; regardless of extended, bunch, etc.)? What is the backfield (gun, pistol, HB/FB split or stacked)? Simply switching which WR is on and off or changing who is the #1 or #3 WR in trips probably isn’t changing the overall scheme of a well-coached offense, which to me is pretty well-defined as being able to see the scheme play out, not changing schemes every week.

There’s a sort of triangle of information here. If an offense runs a ton of formations AND a ton of schemes, we won’t have much of a clue of what is coming, but the offense shouldn’t be great at it because they don’t get many reps at the same schemes. If an offense runs a ton of formations but only a few schemes, then we should have quite a few tendencies once we boil down what schemes get run from what personnel, set, backfield, etc. So back to the steak example, at some point, we have to spend some time investing into being able to execute multiple schemes out of multiple formations such that we can still execute our few plays many ways while maintaining the illusion of complexity to prevent the defense from overplaying too many tendencies (unless we’re setting up a shot, that is).

That is one of the extremes on the “formations are cheap, plays are expensive” spectrum. The other would be running one formation and needing plays that attack anything a defense can do to it. To me, this is more Wing-T, Flexbone type of offense. In the Wing-T, you have Buck Sweep that hits off tackle, Trap hits the strong interior, Belly the weak interior, and you get really good at those plays and their compliments from one base formation with a few adjustments. Flexbone is similar, with Veer being able to attack the interior, off tackle, and perimeter all in one play, so you spend hours every week just being great at that one play and a few compliments.

Long story short, I don’t view formations as a “cheap” tool to get Defensive Coordinators looking in the wrong places (because I think they’re smarter than that), and I don’t want to live and die in one formation with so many plays. There have been and will continue to be very successful teams at both ends of the spectrum, but my philosophy is a bit different. Formations, to me, are simply a tool. These are things I want out of a formation. The more boxes they check, the more we can run that formation or the more likely that formation is to be considered a “base” formation.

• Put the players we have decided to build the season’s offense around in an alignment to succeed

• Out-leverage the defense to create running lanes & passing windows for our base plays to be successful

• Narrow the possibilities of fronts & coverages a defense can play (put the defense into a box so we can know what to expect)

• Have the ability to motion to at least one other formation in the gameplan

Paid subscribers will have access to the rest of the article, where I will dive deeper into how each of these points appears and their specific application to spring install. It’s a little short notice, but out April premium monthly clinic will be tomorrow night! We’ll be talking with Coach Ian Tatum on Using Social Media as a Coach!