The philosophy of the Empty Backfield Offense.

For the last 10 years or so, I have been pondering and tinkering with the concept that all learning is a form of "copycatting." Generally speaking, whatever we learn, we learn from someone else. So it is with the Empty Backfield Offense. It is a mixture of all the offensive systems I have personally experienced. It began in junior high school, continued into high school and then with 43 years of coaching on each of these levels.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Reflecting back on my career, I began to realize that my football knowledge evolved from all of my copycatting other coaches. The Empty Backfield Offense emerges from what I have considered to be: the most successful system of offensive innovations I have been fortunate enough to learn and utilize over the years.

Early on in my coaching career, I discovered that one of the keys to winning football was to produce a system or scheme, whether offensively or defensively, that provided some kind of advantage.

This may seem to be stating the obvious, but in winning football games, as the learned reader is well aware, the concept of the obvious can be a chameleon of sorts. Achieving the ability to change is a goal--and hence, a huge advantage.

The eight alignments used in the Empty Backfield Offense forces the defense to defend seven gaps. All currently used offensive alignments only present five or six gaps to defend. Advantage Empty Backfield. To play Gap Defense against the Empty Backfield Offense requires at least seven defenders in the box. That leaves only four defenders to man the secondary against the five receivers that can be released into the secondary from the Empty Backfield alignments.

This factor is a clear-cut advantage for the offense. The very fact that the Empty Backfield has just a single back in the backfield invites blitzing from defenses and gives the offense the additional advantage of knowing what the defense will most likely do.

Unless the defensive alignments commit five defensive backs into the coverage scheme, the Empty Backfield alignments will always have a "mismatch" in coverage.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

This mismatch is expressed whenever you see a linebacker covering a receiver who can go deep. Until the defense alters its personnel to either blitz the quarterback or defend with more defensive backs, the playing field seems tilted in favor of the Empty Backfield alignment.

Football at most levels has clearly gravitated toward an increased number of passes per game. This phenomenon has brought on the advent of Spread Offenses; i.e., Empty Backfield alignments.

It is difficult for many coaches to control the quality and quantity of talent they have each year. But they can control how that talent is deployed. They must determine whether or not this deployment gives them the best, most consistent chance of winning.

Any offensive alignment that can be successful with fewer extraordinarily talented players allows for a reproducible chance of winning. This is the case with the Empty Backfield Offense.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

My coaching experience leads me to deduce that a greater number of players as well as more talented players are needed in order to run the ball successfully than to pass the ball successfully.

"DOWN AND DISTANCE"

For the most part, the type of play called is governed by the down and distance shown on the down box and the yardsticks. If it is third down and two yards to go, the play most often will be some type of run.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The mindset created by the Empty Backfield Offense allows an alternate view of down and distance decision-making. In the Empty Backfield Offense, the type of play called is determined almost always by the number of defenders in the box.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

For example, if the box shows seven, eight or nine defenders on third and two, the play called should be a pass. If the box shows four, five or six defenders, the play should be a run. The utilization of such play calling will enable the offense to capitalize on the defensive alignments presented to them.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Remembering that the eight Empty Backfield alignments present five, six or seven primary blockers (depending on the number needed) at all times and allows the offense to maintain a "numbers advantage" whether the play is a run or pass.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Defensive alignments have made the adjustments to the offensive alignments that employ the following:

1. One wide receiver to one side and two wide receivers to the other side.

2. Two wide receivers to each side.

3. One wide receiver to one side and three receivers to the other side.

However, two receivers to one side and three receivers to the other will force conventional defensive alignments to align with "mismatched coverage" (coverage of linebackers or receivers) or completely uncovered receivers on one or both sides of the formation.

If none of the above adjustments are acceptable to the defense, they are left with the decision to blitz or cover, using at least five defensive backs or a combination of both. At any rate, we can safely say that the offense definitely has the advantage as we view alignments and strategy.

At this point, we have come upon very radical adjustments facing the defense that are being forced by the innovative features of the Empty Backfield Offense.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

For many years I have been troubled by this football logic: If the forward pass is most often chosen as the primary means of moving the ball when we are behind, why not use the same approach when we are not behind, in an effort to win?

THE BUNCH SERIES

The Bunch Series poses a special problem to the defense because of the usual alignment. At first glance, it would appear to be a relatively easy task to zone the "bunch" of receivers. However, once we actually get into defending the alignment we find:

1. The pass routes defy zone-ing.

2. The run possibilities are almost endless; both toward and away from the bunch.

3. Four receivers to one side almost always puts an outside linebacker in the mix; this personnel can be a plus for the bunch series.

4. The bunch series forces the defense into special alignments and, very possibility, additional assignments that work a hardship on defenses.

5. With the 4-back in a tightened position on one side and a tight end on the other side, the bunch alignment can afford ample protection for the passer.