Zone Offense: The Basics
(No Ratings Yet. Click to Rate!)
Loading ...Goal #1 is, of course, to score (You can argue that “keeping posession” is a more relevant, process-oriented goal, but sometimes you need to embrace (or at least flirt) with the turnover to get where you want).
How you get it there is where you see splits in philosophy, and to some extent this will vary with conditions, personnel, and what kind of zone you’re faced with.
Big split #1 in zone O strategy:
How Many Handlers?
This makes the biggest fundamental difference in zone strategy. The two typical sets:
Your traditional set. The general tack is to work the side-to-side dump-swing motion of the three handlers, tiring out the cup and hopefully leveraging the poppers coming from around or through the cup to work the disc upfield.
Generally, zone defenses are structured with this offensive set in mind (witness my diagrams on the prior zone defense posts), and in bad conditions the last thing you might want to do is work the disc back and forth horizontally, risking the short turnover. However, you can leverage a 3-handler set in a number of ways to beat various D sets–running handler weaves, for instance–and having two dumps at most every instance provides some extra security. This remains a go-to set, with the right mentality.
Another strategic innovation I think can be attributed to DoG (check this article for a better explanation than I could ever offer). Dropping down to 2 handlers lets you move an extra body downfield, letting you split any backfield defense that uses 3 or more in the cup. Tends to eschew dump and swing action for over-the-top strikes–there’s more risk, but in the big picture, a high risk/high reward look can often be a better option than multiple moderate-to-low risk/low reward ones (and with practice, those high risks are lessened).
Obviously this set relies more upon a strong handler or two to make those risky looks. You’re usually not going to be relying on the dump as anything more than a bailout, so in addition to shifting more pressure on the handlers to make throws, there is more pressure on the backfield receivers to get open NOW. Poppers behind the cup tend to stay in the backfield and look for open space, rather than attempting to create openings by crashing into the cup.
You can reduce some of the pressure to make high-risk throws by allowing a popper or two to be a fill handler, coming around or crashing on high counts, but this generally defeats the point of the set (you’re mitigating the numbers advantage) and isn’t always the most effective strategy. I haven’t actually seen this used too commonly of late (’07-’08)–at least, not in New England ultimate. This set tends to do best in better conditions where those over the tops are more certain, so the mercurial New England weather might have something to do with this. Anyone have observations to offer here?
With either set, your mileage will vary depending on your personnel and the team you’re playing against. Either set, particularly the 3-handler, is flexible enough that you can incorporate parts of one into the other (having a handler push up more in a 3-handler set to make it play more like a 2-handler one), so in terms of strategy I’d say to pick one set and make adjustments within it, rather than flipping between the two.
I’ve heard of 4-handler sets, but generally these tend to be 2- or 3-handler sets with flex wings coming back as fill handlers. Generally speaking, the more players you have downfield (or with the option of being downfield), open for a gain yards, the better your O’s chances of scoring.
The next split in zone O strategy (a bit subtler perhaps):
Who are your playmakers?
Your handlers will carry a large part of the load in any set (esp. 2-handler), and everyone has to work to make zone O work, but typically you’re going to have an ideal play that you’re looking to make–what is it? Is it your primary handler throwing a big cross-field hammer/blade to a wing? Is it your poppers working together to get the continue off of a swing and weaving it up for 20 yards? Is it getting any handler open enough that he can jack it to your 6’8″ monster deep?
Think about what your strengths are and how you can best leverage them. If you’re looking to make that cross-field look, make sure your wing is really staying on the far sideline and that your other players in the backfield are pulling defenders away. If it’s cutter motion, make sure you’ve really rehearsed timing the cuts and set up your swings so that they’re ahead of the cup. If it’s jacking it deep, work on a good handler weave or other motion to try for an open shot (and go hard to recruit that giant freshman you’ve been eyeing). This is the sort of evaluation you need to do in order to develop a consistent, effective system–be prepared to improvise within (and outside of) it, adjusting as the D adjusts, but having that framework sets up the rest.
I’ll try and get more into specifics next week (backfield motion in particular). A little behind on writing–ironically I find myself writing less on spring break–down time with few options at work becomes down time with myriad other options (like cleaning my shithole of a house, finishing my taxes and applying for financial aid next year–anybody out there have opinions/experiences with Army/Navy/Air Force scholarships?).
Some comments on the two handler set, the primary zone O (developed by Adam Tarr previously) Purdue used my freshman year (05/06) and slowly worked out of the playbook for the more traditional three handler offense.
The set-up: Dump handler set up behind the disc, two wings (like the flex four handler O, but a little more downfield), two poppers, and a deep. When the disc needed to be reset, the handler behind the disc would crash the cup. This does a few things. 1) keeps the numbers advantage 2) if the cup does not collapse, the handler gains a few yards and has a look to the poppers through the cup 3) if the cup does collapse, the handler with the disc has the look to the open side wing who can look up the field, etc. This also removes the necessity to take the riskier throws over the top.
The issues: 1) To move the cup and open up holes, the handler had to essentially only rely on fakes to get the cup to bite since the disc movement was fairly stagnant, or as mentioned, go over the top. 2) Against a four man cup (or a very disciplined three man), the cup can collapse on the popping handler and cut off any look to the wings, leaving the handler with the disc stranded or with an option that doesn’t gain many yard and has no looks upfield after. (This could be solved by having the break side wing coming around for the dump and swinging to the force side wing (or vice versa), but…) 3) It’s not the simplest offense to teach, run, and coordinate on the college level because it does take a larger degree of field awareness compared to the more traditional 3 handler set.
I will say, once past the cup, the offense is generally off to the races because there is guaranteed to be a 2 on 1 advantage somewhere upfield. Far easier than the 3 handler set, especially when you know the deep is going to be bailing to cover the endzone, making it a 5 on 3 rather than a 5 on 4. I probably have more thoughts to offer, but it’s been awhile since I’ve ran the offense, let alone thought about it.
-Metz
With the two handler set, the popper’s role is emphasized more. You need a smart player for that role, one who can find the holes.
There is a lot of room behind the cup, including the area toward the sideline that might normally be considered the province of the wing. Poppers need to use whatever room is available.
2-handler definitely puts a good onus on the poppers. If you already have the handler(s) to make the over the tops (and you shouldn’t be running a 2-handler unless you do), finding space is the key. I’ll be putting up a bit more on this in the next post.
We only ran this at Dartmouth when Seigs was around and on a blade-happy kick; we leaned on him a lot that year. The year after that, our personnel (namely, having a few dedicated o-handler types) made the 3-handler set an easy choice.
There’s a reason behind the kick: speed.
Impact player.