Offense 2 - Primary & Secondary
Soon after my first year in college ultimate, I tried out with Big Ass Truck which at the time (and still is) a mixture of AA, Lansing, and Detroit area. With occasional help from the western side of the state. When we (Karl + I) made it, it was largely Lansing + Detroit area, but soon the center of the team would move to AA.
Anyway, the offense we played was fairly simple. 3 handlers - with dump and swing mentality. Go from side to side. Once you swung the disc, you look upfield. I really don't remember much of what the downfield cutters were suppose to do. I do know we assigned Primary + Secondary. Basically, the priority of cutters downfield, man/buddy, #1/#2, etc. If you were primary, you were cutting on a dead disc after we got the turn. And if we received the pull, catch pull - center - primary - secondary was the role.
I do not remember if we discussed what the other 2 cutters were supposed to do. I don't remember the role after the sequence played out.
For college, we did not have much structure and we loss our main strategician b/c he was out of inelgibility. So, that responsibility fell to me and Karl since we played on truck and also I was co-captain that college season. What I am trying to say is we ran the same offense for the college season that we did during the fall with Truck.
What this offense did was attempt to play to our strengths. Risky throws. And few cut downfield so people would stay out of the way of our main offensive threats (not major offensive threats competitively, rather the main threats on our teams).
The majority of the hucking/risky throws came from the handlers even though they were rarely in position of gaining yardage. And the bulk of the yardage was the primary/secondary.
Initially with truck, it was great b/c we had more deep throwers and thus more opportunities to cut deep as a primary/secondary cutter. And that was my world the first year that I played, all hard/deep/break throws were made from the handler position. I focused mainly on being a cutter and gaining yardage/scoring goals.
It was not until Tune-up (97) that I realized the importance of this primary cutter (or really any cutter downfield) to be able to be an extension of the handlers. Meaning, throw deep, throw riskier throws (not just dumps and open downfield throws). We played against teams that had cutters who could do this. I remember watching this and trying to guard against this and thinking this was just amazing. It was unbelieveable that guys who were responsible for going deep and for gaining yardage could also turn around and throw it 40+ yards. Or break the mark, creatively, on the goalline. I remember getting back to AA and that week at college tryouts to really start looking to put it deep.
Playing against inferior opponents, you get in a turnover war. Or the couple throwers we had were too good for them, that cutting was easy. It was not until this tune-up that defenses could play and were used to playing against good cutters and throwers. Teams very early on realized I was a much bigger danger going deep then coming back to the disc b/c I probably had a completion %age in the 70s or 80s. Many teams would aggressively back me (or our other excellent deep cutters) allow the 10-15 yard gain and wait for the ensuing turn.
(Which against Z one year resulted in me getting point blocked twice in one possession of the disc. Good times.)
Or the other strategy was aggressive, close fronting with a much more aggressive mark then I ever saw on the thrower. Basically controlling the huck at the marking level and controlling the comeback cuts at the cutting level. This strategy was not so much at tune-up as Nationals that year. But it would stick with me and is basically the d philosophy that I believe in today. But that is another story.
Both of these strategies are good, but if you can put the disc in the hands of another excellent thrower downfield (not just in your handlers like our college team or even Truck), the defense will be on the heels. Incidentally, i think this is the biggest change in the game over the past 10 years, the ability of more versatile cutters, cutters that can make you look bad going deep and can make you look bad with your throws. It seemed like in 97, teams had 2 or so guys who could do this role. Now, it seems like every team at nationals has several guys who fill this role. And you have to play more honest defense on everyone.
From then on, anytime I thought about offense I thought about 2 key points. First, you want at least one cutter (preferably all 4) that can make a difference cutting or throwing deep. Of course, this seems obvious, but at the time I started playing, it seemed that only handlers threw the breaks and the hucks. And the cutters gained yardage and cut deep. From Tune-up on, I tried to become more of a deep throwing threat not so I could handle, but so I could punish people for playing behind me and waiting for me to dump it. If I could get the disc, turn and jack it for a goal, well, I would become much more dangerous.
If you center the disc to someone who is a deep throwing threat who then throws to someone for 15 or yards and that person is a deep throwing threat, well then, you got something. You shortened the field and still have the ability to score on one pass. And hopefully, your next cutter will be able to do that score on that next pass. Or sell it well enough that he gets another 15+ yards. 2 throws, at least half the field. What a revolutionary concept.
The second thing that stuck with me is that handlers do not have to be excellent deep throwers. If you can move the disc from side to side (who cares where the mark is), then you could get the disc to your one or two better cutters when they came underneath. And it seems to me that it is an easier bomb when you get the disc coming back or on a swing. As opposed to getting a dump and looking for the huck (again, something that is pretty obvious).
I really won't go into the weaknesses, but we never did talk about cutter 3 or 4. And both of these teams really did not have the cutters who could put it deep. Although we tried on the college team, it took a while to sink in.
Anyway, the offense we played was fairly simple. 3 handlers - with dump and swing mentality. Go from side to side. Once you swung the disc, you look upfield. I really don't remember much of what the downfield cutters were suppose to do. I do know we assigned Primary + Secondary. Basically, the priority of cutters downfield, man/buddy, #1/#2, etc. If you were primary, you were cutting on a dead disc after we got the turn. And if we received the pull, catch pull - center - primary - secondary was the role.
I do not remember if we discussed what the other 2 cutters were supposed to do. I don't remember the role after the sequence played out.
For college, we did not have much structure and we loss our main strategician b/c he was out of inelgibility. So, that responsibility fell to me and Karl since we played on truck and also I was co-captain that college season. What I am trying to say is we ran the same offense for the college season that we did during the fall with Truck.
What this offense did was attempt to play to our strengths. Risky throws. And few cut downfield so people would stay out of the way of our main offensive threats (not major offensive threats competitively, rather the main threats on our teams).
The majority of the hucking/risky throws came from the handlers even though they were rarely in position of gaining yardage. And the bulk of the yardage was the primary/secondary.
Initially with truck, it was great b/c we had more deep throwers and thus more opportunities to cut deep as a primary/secondary cutter. And that was my world the first year that I played, all hard/deep/break throws were made from the handler position. I focused mainly on being a cutter and gaining yardage/scoring goals.
It was not until Tune-up (97) that I realized the importance of this primary cutter (or really any cutter downfield) to be able to be an extension of the handlers. Meaning, throw deep, throw riskier throws (not just dumps and open downfield throws). We played against teams that had cutters who could do this. I remember watching this and trying to guard against this and thinking this was just amazing. It was unbelieveable that guys who were responsible for going deep and for gaining yardage could also turn around and throw it 40+ yards. Or break the mark, creatively, on the goalline. I remember getting back to AA and that week at college tryouts to really start looking to put it deep.
Playing against inferior opponents, you get in a turnover war. Or the couple throwers we had were too good for them, that cutting was easy. It was not until this tune-up that defenses could play and were used to playing against good cutters and throwers. Teams very early on realized I was a much bigger danger going deep then coming back to the disc b/c I probably had a completion %age in the 70s or 80s. Many teams would aggressively back me (or our other excellent deep cutters) allow the 10-15 yard gain and wait for the ensuing turn.
(Which against Z one year resulted in me getting point blocked twice in one possession of the disc. Good times.)
Or the other strategy was aggressive, close fronting with a much more aggressive mark then I ever saw on the thrower. Basically controlling the huck at the marking level and controlling the comeback cuts at the cutting level. This strategy was not so much at tune-up as Nationals that year. But it would stick with me and is basically the d philosophy that I believe in today. But that is another story.
Both of these strategies are good, but if you can put the disc in the hands of another excellent thrower downfield (not just in your handlers like our college team or even Truck), the defense will be on the heels. Incidentally, i think this is the biggest change in the game over the past 10 years, the ability of more versatile cutters, cutters that can make you look bad going deep and can make you look bad with your throws. It seemed like in 97, teams had 2 or so guys who could do this role. Now, it seems like every team at nationals has several guys who fill this role. And you have to play more honest defense on everyone.
From then on, anytime I thought about offense I thought about 2 key points. First, you want at least one cutter (preferably all 4) that can make a difference cutting or throwing deep. Of course, this seems obvious, but at the time I started playing, it seemed that only handlers threw the breaks and the hucks. And the cutters gained yardage and cut deep. From Tune-up on, I tried to become more of a deep throwing threat not so I could handle, but so I could punish people for playing behind me and waiting for me to dump it. If I could get the disc, turn and jack it for a goal, well, I would become much more dangerous.
If you center the disc to someone who is a deep throwing threat who then throws to someone for 15 or yards and that person is a deep throwing threat, well then, you got something. You shortened the field and still have the ability to score on one pass. And hopefully, your next cutter will be able to do that score on that next pass. Or sell it well enough that he gets another 15+ yards. 2 throws, at least half the field. What a revolutionary concept.
The second thing that stuck with me is that handlers do not have to be excellent deep throwers. If you can move the disc from side to side (who cares where the mark is), then you could get the disc to your one or two better cutters when they came underneath. And it seems to me that it is an easier bomb when you get the disc coming back or on a swing. As opposed to getting a dump and looking for the huck (again, something that is pretty obvious).
I really won't go into the weaknesses, but we never did talk about cutter 3 or 4. And both of these teams really did not have the cutters who could put it deep. Although we tried on the college team, it took a while to sink in.
posted by sometallskinnykid at 12:00 AM
2 Comments:
Basically controlling the huck at the marking level and controlling the comeback cuts at the cutting level. ...basically the d philosophy that I believe in today.
Was Buhl with you at this time? because this is the primary defense that he taught us at Rutgers. Though I'm sure he'd rather forget about that, I heard we were bad for his health.
No Buhl was only there for the first season, the horse & buggy o. He tried to be a handler sometimes there, but that did not work.
I am assuming he learned that with the much better than Michigan in 97 team in Santa Cruz
Post a Comment
<< Home