<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Defending the Spread Offense Shovel Option Play</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.football-defense.com/defending-the-spread-offense-shovel-option-play/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.football-defense.com/defending-the-spread-offense-shovel-option-play/</link>
	<description>Teaching Defense to Football Coaches who want to Dominate on the Field</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:09:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.football-defense.com/defending-the-spread-offense-shovel-option-play/comment-page-1/#comment-302</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:31:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.football-defense.com/?p=192#comment-302</guid>
		<description>Yeah our offense ran a little bit of the Tight End shovel play as well - though not quite as successfully.  In the spring we brought one receiver in to an H-back type position, kind of ducked down behind the tackle, and used him as the shovel guy too.  That was a very effective play when it was on, but we didn&#039;t stick with it.  The toughest part about those variations is that backers aren&#039;t reading those guys, so no one is recognizing there&#039;s a pitch man.  Like you said, the DE or Sam in an under front needs to follow him to really stop it.  But if you do that and the backer doesn&#039;t stay home for QB, you&#039;re open to a dart-type read on the TE.  Really love your blog, though... thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah our offense ran a little bit of the Tight End shovel play as well &#8211; though not quite as successfully.  In the spring we brought one receiver in to an H-back type position, kind of ducked down behind the tackle, and used him as the shovel guy too.  That was a very effective play when it was on, but we didn&#8217;t stick with it.  The toughest part about those variations is that backers aren&#8217;t reading those guys, so no one is recognizing there&#8217;s a pitch man.  Like you said, the DE or Sam in an under front needs to follow him to really stop it.  But if you do that and the backer doesn&#8217;t stay home for QB, you&#8217;re open to a dart-type read on the TE.  Really love your blog, though&#8230; thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spread Offense</title>
		<link>http://www.football-defense.com/defending-the-spread-offense-shovel-option-play/comment-page-1/#comment-300</link>
		<dc:creator>Spread Offense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:08:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.football-defense.com/?p=192#comment-300</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the reference... nice article on defending a great play. What Florida has done recently is use the TE (Hernandez) as the third or shovel option man. Alabama in the SEC championship game actually had the DE/OLB trail Hernandez on the one play when the Gators tried to run the shovel or &#039;crazy&#039; option.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reference&#8230; nice article on defending a great play. What Florida has done recently is use the TE (Hernandez) as the third or shovel option man. Alabama in the SEC championship game actually had the DE/OLB trail Hernandez on the one play when the Gators tried to run the shovel or &#8216;crazy&#8217; option.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

