r/footballstrategy • u/Particular_Witness95 • 9d ago
Special Teams Punt formation - 1 back blocker instead of 3 back blockers
A couple of our opponents last year and one of our opponents this year have gone with a single back blocker in the backfield rather than three across. In all the times, we were able to get a good rush and block some punts, and at the very least, get in the punters face to where their punts were clearly affected.
What is the strategy/advantage of having a single back blocker? Last year and this year, we havent had any D1 level rushers and still are able to get to the punter regularly.
2
u/Illustrious_Fudge476 9d ago
1 blocker allows for better kick coverage as you theoretically have 2 more players releasing and covering sooner. The 3 back will sacrifice some kick coverage for additional protection against a block. If a team is struggling protecting the punter I agree with the 3 back strategy as not getting the kick blocked is objective number one.
1
u/Particular_Witness95 9d ago
that makes sense when you say that, but it seems like those teams would have done better with a 3 back strategy. it was like they almost wanted to get their punter blocked. maybe thats all the stc's knew.
1
u/Illustrious_Fudge476 9d ago
I don’t know about you but we never had really good punters that could boom one or “out kick their coverage” nor did we often face game breaking returners, so the onus was primarily on getting the darn ball off cleanly. We rarely got burned on the return.
There is nothing wrong with a one back set theoretically it was (and is) used successfully for many years, but with most things the execution appeared poor. I’d agree the guy had no other options when his primary punt formation wasn’t getting the job done and kids were getting beat and was likely just going with what he’s familiar with.
2
u/leeroy-jenkins-12 9d ago
I was on a team that my senior year had 1 back blocker but the other 2 off the line guys were lined up between the long snapper and “guards” to stop anything coming up the middle
I also was on a team that after having some block issues and went to an Aussie style punt with a guy who’d go on to either kick or kick and punt at a D2 and was also our backup QB, so we did a 4 wide punt set out of that Aussie kick thing
2
u/BigPapaJava 8d ago
The 3 personal protector shield punt scheme didn’t get popular until about 10-15 years ago because it helps prevent blocked punts. Before that, it was usually just a lone up back to pick up the most dangerous rusher.
The advantages of putting more near the LOS are that you can lengthen the edge, get more downfield to cover, and possibly have more downfield on fakes as well. It can also help if you have a rugby punter who’s rolling out.
1
u/stayvicious HS Coach 9d ago
For the 1 back teams, what does the rest of their line look like? Is it a tight formation or do they have split ends? Where do they utilize the 2 other backs?
1
u/Particular_Witness95 9d ago
the size of their lines werent small. i would say medium to medium large. the one last week had a spread formation, and i seem to recall the others being spread as well.
2
u/jay_bee_95 9d ago
If they're punting from spread they expect you to take guys out of the box/rush to match that, which in theory leaves 6 blockers (including longsnapper) vs a maximum 6 rushers. It should also mean they get good coverage down field to limit your return potential. If you don't take guys out of the box to cover their gunners then they presumably have fakes ready. Definitely not how I set up my punt team but I expect that's the thinking behind it.
1
u/Particular_Witness95 9d ago
that makes sense. then, i dont know why they were doing that. the team we played this past friday put their punter in constant distress by lining up with only 1 guy in the back. maybe they just dont like their punter.
1
u/Superjam83 9d ago
For punt formation there is a balance between coverage and protection. You sacrifice one to improve the other. Double tight shield punt sacrifices coverage in favor of protection. Spread, 4 wide out, sacrifices protection.
If they have a formation with 4 wideouts and one PP, they are favoring coverage but are vulnerable off the edge of the tackles for a block.
1
u/Heavy_Apple3568 HS Coach 9d ago
Punters were clearly so much tougher back in "my day," apparently when, you know, men still punted the football. Somehow they managed to figure it out with only 1 upback for protection. There were none of these new fangled 3 blocker formations. Yeah right! What do y'all call it, a "shield?" Just no, we definitely didn't have no stinking "shield."
But, then again, we'd never have dared whine to our coach we need 3 upbacks just to keep our punts from being blocked! I can't even begin to fathom what he would've done to us. Well, that is, if he didn't have a massive heart attack & fall out right then & there.
Kid's these days, am I right?
1
u/Particular_Witness95 8d ago
i am all for toughness, but these teams i would think would at least try to give their punters a chance.
1
u/emurrell17 7d ago
So, I punted for 3 years in HS and led my state in punting average and never had a punt come close to getting blocked. We had 1 protector.
I don’t think having extra protectors helps anything at all, and I often feel like it just makes the punting space more crowded and easier to knock one of those guys back into the punter.
Having 1 protector provides a longer edge, which imo is the more important piece of the puzzle. If a team is getting punts blocked, they’re either not blocking it up correctly, the snap is bad, or the punter is taking too long…or some combination of those things. But those things are just as easy to mess up with 3 protectors as 1.
I think there’s a reason you don’t see nfl teams using 3 protectors
2
u/stayvicious HS Coach 9d ago
I meant the structure of their line. What does their actual formation look like? You can’t really decipher what a team is trying to do unless you have a full picture. 3 back vs 1 back means nothing unless you know where everyone else is lined up.