The Pragmatics Of Punting

I

n punting, at least, the ends always justify the means. There are no style points given and the most ardent critic will only note the outcome. We are free therefore to revisit what we are trying to accomplish and consider any and all options available to us. First we must avoid the “game breaker” error of a block or big return. Next we want to put our opponent on the longest field possible. Finally we will look for the “game breaker” advantage of a recovered muff; successful fake or pinning our opponent inside his owns ten. The punting system of choice for the vast majority of colleges is essentially the same one used throughout the NFL. It is a good system, time tested and well understood by many. However I believe we should be open to alternatives for the following reasons: We do not have the same rules as the NFL where the system evolved. We are free to release into coverage more than the two ends prior to the ball being punted. As I stated above, the NFL system is well understood and used by most teams. Therefore opponents understand it and get plenty of practice attacking it. I am a long time defensive front seven coach and if I know you are going to throw the ball, know the protection, know the launch point and timing, I will find a way to make things exciting back there. Why is punt protection different? Offensive systems always have ways to change up pass protection and move the launch point. Long time college and NFL special teams coach Gary Zauner once said to me “Do not pretend you have a punter if you don’t”. We have all struggled through a season when we just flat did not have a guy who could hit a traditional, two steps, nose over spiral punt. There are other ways to get the ball down the field (rugby and “pooch” punts) and our system should accommodate them. For these reasons, and others I will touch on later, I suggest the following system. Protection Many if not most offenses have the ability to commit seven men to “turn back” their pass protection, blocking the edge with backs and rolling the quarterback at least as far as the inside leg of the play side tackle. This well understood protection has the following advantages in a punting situation: It gives the long snapper the necessary help with his protection responsibility from

both the hinging backside guard and the fact that the launch point is no longer directly behind him. It allows the front side of the protection to block aggressively. They attack their man, stop his initial charge and then use pass rush techniques to release into coverage, starting down field often in advance of the ball being punted.

The Pragmatics of Punting

Diagram 1

By moving the punter ’s launch point out behind these aggressive blocks he no longer needs to be as deep which means a shorter snap and better get-away time. This movement also aids the punter in his directional punt, getting the ball out in front of the quickest releasing linemen. This launch point takes pressure off the players’ blocks on the backside or zone side of the protection. While these players get into their coverage lanes slower the directional punt has taken them off the “hot seat” from a coverage standpoint. The protection can go either way, with the accompanying changes in launch point, direction the “gunners” release and direction of the punt, with no pre-snap “tips.” The depth of the wings need not be unique to this protection. I just believe it is easier to find and train people to align with the depth everyone is fighting to get on the snap anyway. The options in designing a “fake punt” this alignment creates in coincidental. The punter need only take an extra step of width to open up the possibility of a rugby or pooch punt with a reduced probability of striking a player at or near the line of scrimmage. On the contrary the opponent’s corner trying to hold up the gunner will be at increased risk of being hit by a bouncing ball while running with his back turned creating a live ball. Given the changes in direction and type of punt opponents will be compelled to put a second returner back to ensure that the ball will get fielded. This obviously takes pressure off the protection but also gives you the choice of which player will have to field and return the punt.

• AFCA Summer Manual — 2002 •

Rich Ellerson Head Coach California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo, Calif.

Diagram 2

By designating any defender on the front side at linebacker depth as No. 2 he becomes the responsibility of the personal protector. If he tries to time up a run through on the snap the personal protector can easily adjust to whichever gap he hits. If he is doing anything other than attempt to time up a run through he is no threat and the personal protector can release into coverage on the snap.

Diagram 3

If the opponent chooses to double team the gunner on the front side that inside man is designated as No. 2 and the wing may release on the snap and replace the gunner. As the wing releases he is in a perfect position to “eyeball” No. 2 and see that he does not sneak into the rush at the last instant. No discussion of protection would be complete or credible without addressing overloads (five potential rushers on one side). The simple answer, and the first employed was to go the other way and create a pile up on the zone side while moving the launch point away from danger. The

down side was now our opponent was dictating to us where to punt and eventually somebody is going to shift once more than we have time to change the direction. Another solution is when punting into the overload your snapper can now block front side and get a little help from the guard much like the old double bump up-backs. This was not as difficult as it first seemed due again to the launch point now being well out from behind the snapper. It does however slow down the release of the guard and requires a certain body type when making personnel choices. We have also considered blocking the backside wing into the front side “A” gap but now your backside tackle has no margin for error and your lanes have to adjust. It becomes a case of pick your poison. If however you have an athlete at punter and the reputation for being a little on the edge you can see how the table is quickly turned to your advantage. Coverage Lanes We have created a situation where we have players getting into coverage at very different rates. Also the rate for each player will vary based on the direction of the punt and on the threat the opponent presents. When combined with the directional punt the coverage pattern above takes advantage of these variances resulting in unique challenges for the opponents return game. Some of these characteristics are: The two interior linemen with the quickest release have the shortest path and can go directly to the returner. The result has been that these players need plenty of practice making decisions in regards to the two-yard “halo” and fair catches. The long snapper is in a less pivotal lane. Great coverage ability is not always one of this positions’ traits and his shortcomings are now more difficult for the opponent to take advantage of.

The lanes are not balanced but given the directional punt neither should the amount of field to be defended. The backside wing takes his time in protection and then folds into the role of plugger creating coverage in depth as well as width.

Diagram 4

There are, as with any system, an infinite number of details and possibilities. We have not gotten into sky punting, tight punting, or fakes but the few practitioners of this system have requested I not give away all the good stuff. Frankly all the bugs have not been worked out. Only a hand full of us have used it and for not very many years. It has however been a productive addition to our system here at Cal Poly and previously at Arizona. Some others who have used it with success and contributed greatly to its evolution are Bob Wagner now at UTEP, Kennedy Pola at USC, Gary Coston at the University of Idaho and Pete Alamar at Eastern Michigan. The evolution of this system is the result of staying focused on output rather than process and the courage to employ unique solutions and risk censure. Not my courage mind you, its relatively easy to draw this stuff up, but for a Dick Tomey, while the Head Coach at Arizona, to make the call to use it in prime time is a rare example of a courage our game needs and almost always rewards.

Copying Film/Videotape Without Permission is Unethical The Board of Trustees is concerned about the practice of some coaches who copy game film without permission of both institutions involved in the actual game footage. It is an unethical practice and violates the Association’s Code of Ethics. AFCA legal counsel has reminded the Board that copying film without permission is in violation of copyright laws and could become a legal matter if an institution wants to protect itself against such illegal copying of film. The Board urges every coach to get written permission from all schools involved before copying film.

• AFCA Summer Manual — 2002 •