NLL Insider

You hear it all the time. “We’re implementing a new system.” Or, “we’ve got some new players and they’re still learning our systems”. Or, from the players’ perspective, “we have a new coach and we’re just getting used to his systems.”

So just what are these systems everyone is talking about? Well, there are macro systems (the general template or structure a team uses) and there are micro systems (e.g. special teams systems used within the general structure). In this piece I’m going to discuss the macro systems used by today’s coaches.

Traditionally, in the modern history of the Canadian summer box leagues, the universal system was the 3-line system where each line of 5 players played a shift of offence and defense and then changed for the next line.  “Up, down, off” was the mantra.

Then the concept of the offence/defense system was introduced whereby, for the most part, 5 defense specialists would play defense then get off and let 5 offence specialists on to play offence. Although effective, the O/D system was also somewhat slow and plodding which led to the progression to today’s hybrid transition game.

There are a number of ways to structure the transition game within the 16-runner constraints of the NLL. (The Canadian summer league rules permit 18 runners, allowing for more flexibility). The most common sets are the 10D/6O, the 9D/7O and the 8D/8O. The 10/6 set lends itself well to the transition game in that you could have 1 or 2 transition (T) players with 3 or 4 O guys on O and 1 or 2 T with 3 or 4 D guys on D. The transition players fill the dual roles of leading the breakout from the D end and preventing it at the O end. The 9/7 and 8/8 systems are similar in nature although it becomes increasingly more difficult to transition well for long periods of time as you reduce the D number.

There are other less-widely-used common systems: the 5D-6T-5O pure transition system used by Walt Christianson in San Jose is one example. In this system, the 6 T are comprised of 3 pairs of transition players. On every O or D shift you combine 1 transition pairing with 3 core O or D players. The T pairs lead and prevent the D/O breakouts.

In their opener this year against Rochester, Buffalo’s Darris Kilgour experimented with a different form of the traditional 3 line system using a line of strong D orientation, a line of strong O orientation and a line of transition players utilized to press and up the game tempo at certain times. In the ’04 championship game versus Buffalo, as head coach of the Calgary Roughnecks, I effectively used an 8D/4O/4O system that maximized the strengths of our deep 2-man game on O (2 sets of 4O players) and designated a T man from the 8 D who would play with each 4O set to prevent Buffalo’s great transition game.

So how do coaches decide on what system to use when there are so many choices? Each has their strengths and weaknesses. Some coaches will implement one system and draft or trade players to suit it while others will employ a number of systems depending on the situation. Some coaches believe in a specific system and mould their players to fit the system while others pick a system they feel suits their personnel.

So, next time you take in a game, try a little armchair coaching. What macro system is each team using? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the systems? Do the systems suit the personnel? Would you do something different? Sit back and enjoy this great game.

Rate This Story:

(29 votes, average: 4.41 out of 5)

 Loading ...