FastBreak offense Topic

I've poked around a bit, but I'm wondering on the whole if any teams have had consistent success with this offense at D-I or D-II.



It seems to be the least favored of the 4 offenses in Naismith and I've always run it.

GENERALLY, it has led to higher FG % but more TO's(always near the top of D-II or D-III in FG% but near the bottom/middle of the conference in TO's) which is fine, I just try and beef up on BH and not run uptempo against pressing teams. However, this season I just can't score so I'm thinking about a switch because of the poor play and that FB just seems not to be favored around here.

Thoughts/ Observations?
1/28/2010 2:10 AM
oldave runs it w/his Syracuse team I think...but he's not a big promoter of it in D1

and cbriese used to run it with his Arizona team in a world and/or his Maryland team in another world I think

maybe they'll chime in here for you...or you could do a word search for "fastbreak" on this forum as there were some threads on this just recently
1/28/2010 2:25 PM
Quote: Originally Posted By grantduck on 1/28/2010

I've poked around a bit, but I'm wondering on the whole if any teams have had consistent success with this offense at D-I or D-II. - Yes - see my Seton Hall team in Knight and OR's Texas team in Knight.



It seems to be the least favored of the 4 offenses in Naismith and I've always run it.

GENERALLY, it has led to higher FG % but more TO's(always near the top of D-II or D-III in FG% but near the bottom/middle of the conference in TO's) which is fine, I just try and beef up on BH and not run uptempo against pressing teams. 99.9% of the time I run normal tempo. I only run uptempo against the very worst teams (just to see how many points I can score). I NEVER run uptempo against a team I think can beat me. Lots of other coaches have had success running fastbreak uptempo and I think I am in the minority here but it just doesnt seem to work for me. However, this season I just can't score so I'm thinking about a switch because of the poor play and that FB just seems not to be favored around here.

Thoughts/ Observations?

1/28/2010 4:07 PM
I'm not a great coach by any means, but have had decent success with it in the WCC. I always lead the nation in scoring, have pulled off some big wins, but can't seem to pull in enough talent to compete with the big name teams.
1/29/2010 1:33 AM
i also have not had success in general with the uptempo FB.

FB has its plusses and minuses, but i just think it is very difficult to sustain an elite type program that goes the sw16+ every year (in D1) with the FB. There are several minor reasons, but the major reason is the inability to slow things down in the years where your bench is not as deep. it would be difficult to field 10+ really good players every season, anyway, but when you factor in earlyentires... its pretty much impossible.

if you have 7 or 8 good players, that really doesnt hurt you much with the other offenses, but with the FB, its a death sentence.
1/29/2010 8:44 AM
Does anyone know if IQ means as much when running the FB? It seems like IQ wouldn't be quite as important and speed, athletic ability, etc. would be more important...
1/30/2010 1:26 AM
I have noticed that IQ seems to significantly effect my turnovers in FB.
1/30/2010 6:08 AM
Claytes runs it at Piedmont in D-3 Phelan and has won several NTs with it.
1/30/2010 12:44 PM
yeah, claytes has dominated D-3 Phelan running it. It's probably a better offense for D-2 and D-3 or a low level D-1 school because you need a deep bench and early entries will kill you if you run it
1/30/2010 1:22 PM
I run it on King's. I enjoy it and its the only reason I've stuck around in div III in that world.
1/30/2010 4:42 PM
FastBreak offense Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.