Thursday, January 17, 2013


As Alabama was scoring again...I wondered how did they get sooo wide open. As a Notre Dame fan,  it was difficult for me to watch the first time, but for the sake of learning (and writing a long overdue blog article) I RE recorded the game. I hate to admit, but I deleted the game as soon as the 4th quarter was finished... Not to confuse this with when the game was over, which could have been end of the FIRST quarter!

Most of the deep routes were a pretty typical CORNER route, but could it be the traditional SMASH CONCEPT that beats Cover Two? 

SIDE NOTE: I have always loved the SMASH CONCEPT and it had been a staple part of our offense. The problem we had was the Cornerback's drop. Some of the cornerbacks we faced were able to squat on the HITCH then rally to the CORNER or cloud the read of the QB just enough to frustrate us… Luckily we discover the SNAG or SCAT CONCEPT.

Okay, back to the game, or beat down… Alabama was creative in how they kept the coverage of the corner back low. Not a traditional HITCH route which is normally paired with the CORNER. They used a delay arrow (or flats) route and a pivot route.

The Tide also used three other components
  • PLAY ACTION: It seemed like almost every pass was PLAY ACTION. It helps to have an impressive run game. But they also utilized it on FIRST DOWN!
  • COMPRESSED FORMATIONS: Basic tight BUNCH set or 2x2 formation.
  • MOTION: They would motion from Bunch or TE Trips to a 2x2 formation. 
 So with pencil and paper ready, I was able to review the pass plays. Then I took some extra time to put them all in a short PowerPoint.

Some of the plays I was able to get the down and distance. I had planned to get some screen shots ala SMART FOOTBALL, but I am still a rookie when it comes to that technological savvy. 

One of the final pass plays wasn't the SMASH concept, but it looked like the backside WR ran a " Y CROSS " type route.



  1. Thanks for the post glad your back.

    What coverage was Notre Dame mainly playing?

    Also just a request, do you have some ideas/solutions to what ND could have done better offensively. Besides getting better players of course.

    1. Notre Dame was mainly playing Cover TWO. zone and man under.

      I was a bit disappointed in some of Gholson's reads...I would much rather have a first down and not a FADE that is incomplete.

      Also I would have liked to see Riddick and Wood a bit more involved in the offense.

      I did LOVE the VEER OPTION on the goalline!

      check out our FORUM too!