:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/45701054/usa-today-8382276.0.jpg)
To start our conversation let's define scheme. Scheme includes the system that you use, such as the options on defense like using a 4-3 or 3-4, one-gap or two-gap, man, zone, or a mix of coverages, and other nuances.
On offense the choices can be things like using a route-tree or Earheart-Perkins style, and if they are going to be mostly a zone-blocking or power-blocking team or a combination of both. There are lots of other nuances that determine what kind of offense a team runs, as was explained in this article I wrote back in August of last year.
The most misused or misunderstood concept or word is "execution." Some people mistakenly think that if you execute perfectly on every play, then you will score on every play. Myself and some of my fellow FPW's discussed what the proper definition of execution should be since there seems to be a lack of one on the great world wide web as it pertains to football. All of the sites that had terminology definitions that I could find did not have 'execution' as one of them.
One of the best quotes I found was this one....
"Following a Tampa Bay Buccaneers loss in their early seasons, Coach John McKay was asked what he thought of his team's "execution." He replied, "I'm all for it."
When we are talking about execution, we are talking about two things: first, the individual player's execution and second, the execution by the team. When coaches are talking about execution, they mean did the play work as designed based upon the players "carrying out" or executing their assignments. You can have most of the players executing well enough that the play works as designed or desired, even if some of the players did not execute very well, perhaps because they were far enough away that they could not, and did not, affect the outcome of the play.
Just what part does scheme, talent, and play-calling have in the overall success of a play or game plan?
Let's start with defining execution. I posed the idea of defining it to my fellow FPWs and here is how the definition evolved:
First my attempt at a definition:
"The ability for a player to carry out his assignment as defined for a given play."
Next a refinement by O.C.C.:
"The ability for a player to carry out his assignment as defined for a given play and putting his team in a position to successfully complete the play."
"...every play has a purpose, and that purpose isn't always to score. It could be to pick up X yards, or even to set up a future play. Execution for the individual means winning their particular assignment regardless of what happens on the play, execution for the team means the play achieved its purpose regardless of what happens with the individuals."
"Down and Distance."
"Here's my overall logic in terms of execution:Every offensive play is intrinsically designed to be successful at achieving a specific objective (1st down, 5-yard gain, 4th and 1 conversion, whatever).When an offense or an offensive player achieves the desired objective with the designed play, they executed effectively.The defense's primary job is to stop the offense from executing effectively."
"We too often judge the process by the result."