Prior to the late 1960’s, defense was split between zones and man-to-man just like it is today. However, the uniqueness of man-to-man defense was the fact that it was NOT zone. Some coaches might switch on picks while others didn’t and some would play tighter and tougher than others, but for the vast majority of teams, that was extent of man-to-man defense.

Then along came Dean Smith with his man-zone hybrid; split the court in two, creating “ball side” and “weak side”; deny one pass away on the ball side while those on the weak side assume a “zone” position on the midline. This was radically new and changed the way man-to-man defense is played by the majority of teams around the world. Presently, the majority of the coaching community (anyone born after 1970) looks at man-to-man defense without recognizing that it is Dean Smith’s scheme. Most of the community simply assumes that the way man-to-man is taught is the way it’s always been.

That’s not the case.

Within Dean Smith’s defensive scheme, (currently called “Man-to-Man Defense”) there are as many variations as there are coaches. My man-to-man defense does not look like your man-to-man defense, but they both are working from Dean Smith’s “base”.

What does this have to do with the Read & React Offense? To answer the question, I must lay aside humility and take a bold and brash position. Here it is: I don’t view my Read & React Offense as ANOTHER OFFENSE. I didn’t invent it to be something a coach “RUNS” in the same sense as a coach might “Run” the FLEX, or the UCLA High Post Game, or the Triangle Offense, etc. I invented it to do the same thing to offense that Dean Smith did to man-to-man defense. EVERYONE should “run” the Read & React because everyone should be TEACHING the Read & React, because in essence, everyone would be TEACHING OFFENSE. (It only strikes me now that I should have named it “The Read & React System of Teaching Offense” rather than “The Read & React Offensive System”. There’s a difference between the two.)

The difference between Set Plays, Freelance, or Continuity Offenses and “running” the Read & React is the difference between “everyone pick up a man” and the “ballside-weakside-denial-help-force-fan-switch-rotate” defensive schemes that are taught in today’s defensive game. In other words, it’s the difference between playing basketball in the 1930’s or 40’s and playing it today. No one in his or her right mind would go back to playing defense the way it was taught in 1930. But when it comes to offense, the basketball community is stuck in the past.

In just 9 short months, the paradigm shift has already begun. A few thousand innovative coaches have “bought in” to the Read & React, experiencing not only more offensive success than they’ve had in the past, but also experiencing a rejuvenation in their ability to teach offense in general.

Will variations grow out of the Read & React System?

It’s already begun. In just one season, since the release of the R&R, we’ve received hundreds of emails regarding the personal variations on the Read & React theme. Invariably, the coaches go through the same process:

1. They teach the appropriate Layers to their team.

2. They find points of emphasis, formations, use of personnel, etc. that works best against their opponents and fits their style of play, transition game, bench depth, etc.

3. With the team and the coach on the same wavelength, they experience a boost to a level they’ve not seen before.

4. The coach writes me and shares this “successful twist” on the Read & React.

5. I celebrate with an extra shot of espresso and everyone in the coffee shop wonders why the weird guy in the BB polo is smiling at his laptop.

Here’s my prediction: In a few years from now, the coaching community will not view the Read & React as “another” offense. With everyone teaching it as their offensive “base”, it will probably lose the title: “Read & React”, just as Dean Smith’s man-to-man defense eventually lost his name. When it is viewed as a fundamental way of teaching the offensive side of the game, then the name “Read & React” will lose its ability to define.

And that will be fine with me.

NOTE: Although I use Dean Smith in this analogy, by no means do I view myself as being even in the same room with Dean Smith. Coach Smith is one of the true innovators of the game, right up there with Bobby Knight, Pat Summit, etc. (I have to stop there, because the list of Hall of Famers would be too long!) All I’ve done with the Read & React is put together all of the tried and true fundamental actions of the game, in such a way that “team offense” can be taught in a layer-by-layer, fundamental-by-fundamental, progression. I didn’t invent “spacing”. I didn’t invent “the give-and-go” or balancing the floor or stretching the defense. I’ve simply found a way to put it all together that makes sense to coaches and cuts to the natural instincts of the players.