|
Post by brophy on Apr 14, 2008 8:48:54 GMT -6
Rationale behind what I just posted was...... A bulk of the time will be spent on DW core.The "air raid" stuff is the frosting, it is being 'added' by working rudimentary skills, that just happens to be all the skills needed for mesh/shallow.Getting kids to practice on time can be an issue, so why not do the stuff they WANT to do (play with the ball) early on? The kids aren't exactly beating themselves up to come practice handoffs or do calisthenics The end of practice (team competition) usually playing tag football, races, offensive script, something fast-paced that determines a 'winner' and 'loser'. Well, we can kill two birds with one stone by making 7-on-7 as a fast faced competition, working air raid skelly. ** We (program) ran POWER with just the O-block, and not with the BST & BSG. They believed it didn't lend itself to efficiency because the BST rarely made it to the POA. I'm not so sure of doing that again (this year) and would be in favor of using the true DW Power as-is. Again, the Tim Murphy stuff is pretty convincing and is practical. The other thing that I am a little 'confused' about with the merging of these two is the athlete types. The DW OT isn't usually as athletic as a spread OT. The DW TE is no where near athletic enough (traditionally) to be an X / Y. A possibility may be to move the TE's of DW to OT in a spread and just take out the 'big kids' that will likely be playing OT (in DW). I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel here. Just trying to find a way to make something work (that has worked before for these guys) a little more efficiently.... ...In a "normal" situation, the majority of the kids we'll be getting will have run the DW plays since the 5 year old level. Last year, I just got all the new kids to the program. Also, this is near the 6 grade level....the "program" is accepting 6th graders as their MS program, so some of the kids may be going onto the MS program ($3200 tuition) and run 4-days a week in their spread.
|
|
|
Post by raiderpirates on Apr 14, 2008 10:35:29 GMT -6
Quicker T can learn to reset for pass blocking better. The big OL would fit the play pass kind of offense, firing out at the rush so the QB can have better pass lanes for quick items.
Firing at the defense from up front stays consistent with many run looks but can let DL get clear quicker to put on a hit. If the Qb runs well enough just fire the interior out, layer those tackles and influence the rush away from where the later progressions will develop in throw windows.
Now, those quicker T might solve the problem you have on the BST items, and their movement in a trey action keys the play to where it going and also reduces some of your protection options on a boot. Can he just use the pull like a half slide and help seal the cutback at the A gap? Bring his aiming point for contact back closer and let him lead through a hole on the interior, it might look just like your dive efforts and he can lead the play or even layer his own posture to draw attention that way, he might take over for the C like combo action(without having to call it that).
The other item would be to layer all three backs off direct snaps, not off handoff fakes, but fake catching the snap and fold the arms and seal the hands and just pound the rock right at teams. Let the tackles learn to ride a player's hip upfield and have each of the three backs hit a hole to help influence who really has it. One attacks a counter look and one leads just inside to seal the first LB across the form to playside. Counter widens wike, lead fake seals him back to PS and draws a read DL away from the play hole, mike gets lost in the traffic like your series plays. Once the LB start coming straight downhill at shotgun snaps you can go with the play pass from your passing formation and really work the field.
As for lack of athleticism on the perimeter, hiding it unbalanced might give you some matchup help(others have shown some pretty good results).
I'd consider flaring each T out further so even if his man beats the block he's not as close to the ball. Split them 3.5 yards.
Wing the less athletic TE inside each T. Since they're more or less reserve OL, might as well start where most G pull from. Now you can pull two people like the DW's strength does because one always starts deeper. You can bubble all kinds of things, you've already created a hole to trap or iso a puller in, the option can read flow to the hole and the end can be blocked for a running QB, counters now have an extra puller and worked space to run an alley.
This would be one back offset, more like a spread, but the inner wing look basically copies the classic wing T, the blocker has time to read and the T has a really good wide angle for sweeps and the stretch. This could afford you true gun running.
As for the base look, split gun protects pretty well and the cross buck/midline fakes and flats can work fine from it. Cross fake those backs so the guys covering them in man run into one another.
|
|
|
Post by raiderpirates on Apr 14, 2008 10:46:52 GMT -6
If you OL aren't super athletic that punch can help them straighten or slow the superior player. Seek the contact first, hit them before they hit you. Describe more of the punch tech in this gun look and the DW and your speed ladder drill.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 14, 2008 11:01:39 GMT -6
thanks for the feedback. raiderpirate, no offense, and I am trying to decipher everything you wrote, but maybe its just me, but is there a way you can clarify your posts? They read like broken, staccato sentences with coach-speak and are not easily understood.
|
|
|
Post by raiderpirates on Apr 14, 2008 11:17:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 14, 2008 12:22:01 GMT -6
Thats not a bad idea Brophy.....using different skill sets of players....for different roles....rather than depending on the versatility of "kid" linemen, to perform mulitple tasks equally well? I've had to do this some in the past. We "had" to play the bigger(not always athletic) kids on the line, for the most part...... because they couldn't carry the ball anyhow, for weight restriction reasons.....they could block out of the backfield.....they could play TE...or even a WR position...but only as blockers.... if you had a bunch of them, in any given year.....you had to play them somehow?......so, as an example.....for situational purposes.....we might have a "heavy" skill set, on the field......our "normal" group.......or even a lighter, quicker group to increase the number of "eligibles"......each group could still run "most" any play......but were better at some than others......plus....you throw in different skill sets of backs/wr's/wb's etc...you're getting a lot of kids in the game on offense.....granted....it takes more organization and planning, to keep the offense effective.....but you seem like a very organized coach to me
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 14, 2008 12:34:07 GMT -6
Oh yeah....in case some are wondering..."why not just put them on defense, like this"......NOOO.....I wanted the 11 most athletic, best tacklers there.....and only subbed by position on defense.....if the bigger boys fit this job description....great...they were in the rotation.....
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2008 7:42:49 GMT -6
Well, I got two guys I know will be there and will have high-energy to do some of the things outlined. One guy is the probable QB's dad and will get to go over the shallow/mesh stuff with them a few weekends before camp starts.
I can't wait to see how bad I can screw this up.
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 15, 2008 9:54:41 GMT -6
Ha Ha....you'll do fine.....I screwed things up for 12 seasons, as best I could.......and the kids were still good enough to win some games every year
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2008 11:54:35 GMT -6
I think one of the biggest challenges with this is COACHING the impatience out of players. Many good [youth - college] players just want to muscle, over-power situations. This rarely is efficient or consistently effective. Learning football technique is very similar to learning how to dance, learn an instrument, learn to program.....systematic, rhythmic process....miss a beat, go back to the root note.
The goal is to get the QB's footwork in rhythm (the snap, the extension,crossover, and plant) to a comfort level where we are going through the easy progressions in a simple rhythm (R4). This shouldn't take more than 3 seconds. The QB will be at a depth of 6-7 yards, it takes roughly 3 seconds for a fastlineman to actually run that fast from the edge to reach him, let alone one that has to run around / negotiate a blocking tackle. It is when the QB is hesitant and doesn't know what he's looking for that you run into trouble. Nothing complicated.....the other thing is, we aren't using any stopping routes, just stuff where the receivers will be turning to the thrower to receive the ball. Simple pitch and catch stuff.
If it works great - if not, then the kids are learning how to catch, throw, run effective routes, become better coordinated, and have some fun.
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 15, 2008 12:31:31 GMT -6
Yep.....see...I knew you could figure this youth thing out.....great point about the pass blocking/pass rush.....often times in youth ball.....its more about....."what can we do, in "x" amount of seconds".....knowing...that about half the guys on the line(at any given time).....will probably whiff the block, lol......depending on the match-ups.....QB play and dependable blocking......seemed to be "my" greatest challenges, year in and year out....and you all seem to have a good plan for addressing these issues. Not that other stuff isn't as important.....but just seemed like running with the ball....or playing defense....(running and tackling)....were more natural and took less reinforcement?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2008 13:18:16 GMT -6
This is what I'm getting at......... When I was young, I wanted to play guitar. I started when I was 11. I wanted to be the next Eddie Van Halen. I started out with the Mel Bay books. The determination and desire got me through a few months, but it sucked all the passion out of me because "Mary Had a Little Lamb" and "Tom Dooley" do NOT kick {censored}. I stopped playing because it was boring and sucked. I picked it back up when I was 14 and picked up some lessons from a guy who could teach me Angus Young, Jimmy Page, and Duane Allman.....well, wowzers.....I could play the stuff I LIKED....., so I kept playing more and more. But when you added it all up, I wasn't really doing anything drastically different...it still boiled down to counting beats and fretting notes / chords........just utilized a more accellerated approach to learning the songs (tablature over sheet music). I didn't need to master the theory behind I,III, V chord progression before I could figure out how to carry a pentatonic scale Point is......(I'm assuming) kids WANT to throw and catch and run all over with the ball. Why not just equip them with something that will continue to spark their interest, that doesn't make it cheap, and it gives them an opportunity to learn something new that fits within the confines of the "system"....... (a 'receiver' that has little worth in the DW, finds a role in the spread....the big lineman that isn't very agile that doesn't help the spread, finds a role in the DW) And this is where we were hoping to get to..... The "skill" stuff we will be utilizing (specifically for 'air raid') are just basic skills needed for playing DB or stalk blocking on the perimeter. Finding a rhythm as a QB with the hitch steps, translates to reinforcing footwork on the power. Ball security as a receiver translates to running in the open field as a ball carrier (RB). The original dilema was "how do we merge these two"? I think we've gotten an answer (spend a bulk of the time on DW & defense, with peripheral time spent on skills of successfully utilizing mesh & shallow) that satisfies all parties.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 15, 2008 13:56:37 GMT -6
Matt, Interesting analogy. I hated guitar lessons when I was a kid too, same books. However I quit becuase no matter how hard I tried or practiced there was no way I was ever going to play certain chords. I didnt care much for the songs either I think you have just part of the equation. Kids like being a part of something bigger than themselves IF it is successful. If your QB averages 50 yards passing a game and ends up with 20 INTS and 2 TDS and your team loses all its games and isnt competitive, the kids wont define that as "fun" trust me. Those are the teams that have a problem getting kids to come to practice and the teams that start the season with 25 kids and end with 16. The next season, of the 16, 1/2 dont come back. Like guitar, kids want to have success and have fun. If you asked one of your kids to play the most difficult song in the world and they tried for 3 months to play the song/ Lets say predictably that they failed miserably on the song. They would probably quit, thinking "I suck at this I'm never going to be a guitar player" they then either do nothing or maybe take up a different instrument. Much like the football player that plays on a team that loses all the time and asks them to do things they cant possibly do consistently with their age and allotted practice time. The players in this situation thinks " I suck as a football player" they quit, end up doing nothing or go on to play another sport. Lots of choices in this day and age. I think it's important to put kids in a scheme where they can have personal success and team success reasonably soon. I know youth coaches can make it fun AND compete, we do. In the last 8 years Ive had a bunch of teams where we never lost a single kid and have averaged 95%+ retention to the next year. This year it was 39 of 40 back. We also average over 80% with perfect attendance etc and win too. There has to be a balance, but it can be done. We run the ball quite a bit and the kids seem to really love it.
|
|
CoachJ
Junior Member
Posts: 307
|
Post by CoachJ on Apr 15, 2008 14:16:30 GMT -6
Coach Brophy,
You can make both work. Tons of coaches are successful at the DW. Youth football players can throw and can catch, i have seen it done multiple times.
If it were my team and I was under your constraints, I would make sure they knew the DW cold and then add in the passing stuff. I would make sure however to work at least a 10 minute segment on passing/catching everyday so time wasn't lost.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2008 14:28:35 GMT -6
cool Where I am missing the disconnect? The pre-practice stuff / warmup stuff? Or is it the 7-on-7 stuff? I hate the way my last post made it seem like an absolute all-or-nothing approach (there is nothing wrong with running every down). It is not like we are intentionally trying to go out there and sling stuff, grip 'n' rip, hoping something sticks. My only concern with going ALL OUT DW (introduce passing later) for the first 3 weeks, was that it is like jogging (running one thing) then stopping....and trying to jog again (here is something we've never done before...) - you lose momentum. The rationale was to do the basic, simple stuff of offense, that translates to other areas, and ease it in once it has been repped consistently. For example, lets say we go full DW up until game 3, then decide to throw some "spread" stuff in there. Well, when do you think we'd actually get good at it? Maybe the last game of the season? Then what would be the point? It is kind of like any other football environment, where you don't just focus on one thing, you have to get multiple areas of your stuff in within a set period. The first days of camp aren't just devoted to one run play...but the base runs and quick passing (etc). By the time we get to camp, maybe we won't run any of it - maybe I'll talk myself out of it. The original question was; IF you could do it (make it work)....HOW would you go about doing it?
Are we saying it CANNOT be done? Cool.
If it CAN be done....HOW would it be done? When we get down to the scrimmage, we will be running off of (Franklin-style) Wrist-bands with play and assignment on them (not that it is really needed but....) Kids like being a part of something bigger than themselves IF it is successful. If your QB averages 50 yards passing a game and ends up with 20 INTS and 2 TDS and your team loses all its games and isnt competitive, the kids wont define that as "fun" trust me. Much like the football player that plays on a team that loses all the time and asks them to do things they cant possibly do consistently with their age and allotted practice time. David, Is there a way to explain something without using the hyperbole that; 1) if you run, you win and the kids come back 2) if you pass, you will lose, and the kids will hate you. We could run 100% of the time and STILL suck....so what would we gain? I don't think it is a physical impossibility to throw and catch at 11 years old. Maybe you do. Part of it, in my experience, is that throwing and catching are skills that can be taught, just like blocking and tackling. I know, I know,.....you have a DI QB teaching your guys and they can't throw, so therefore it cannot be done. We're not trying to set the world on fire here....I am under the impression that these are skills we can teach/coach.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 15, 2008 15:25:16 GMT -6
The coaches that are very successful with the DW are great at executing the DW and the rep and rep and execute and dont work on anything else. None that I have ever seen were GREAT at the DW, and good at anything else. Its pretty coaching intensive without slicing time away to try to get good at Air Raid, Option etc. Your last years team didnt consistently execute the power or wedge very well, just think about how much better they have to get at that BEFORE you take time away from that to run your other stuff. IMHO you just run your AR stuff and live and die with it rather than be very mediocre or below at both. Can it be done? I dont know, no one Ive seen has done it with 10 year old non-selects. Having coached the DW with kids OLDER than that I can tell you Im glad we didnt have to take any practice time away from getting great at the base DW plays. We were the usual youth team who didnt practice 5 nights a week, just like you guys, If it could be done and Im very sceptical that it can with 10 year old non-selects, then sure your plan makes a lot of sense. It certaily helps the QBS dad is the QB coach and you have 3 1/2 months head start. I thought the goal of the thread was to let those of us that have coached that age group and know what those kids capabilities are to poke holes in your premise of running both as well as your practice plans. The end goal being helping you make a better informed decision that would in the end benefit the kids. We look forward to seeing how this experment pans out, you could be the "trailblazer". Best wishes whatever route you choose. Ive never said 11 year olds CANT catch , what Ive said is most non select teams that age with normal practice time allotments can not consistently move the chains throwing the ball. Everyone loves putting word in each others mouths. By combining 2 vry coaching intensive systems Im doubtful the team would be able to conisistently move the ball and could end up doing quite poorly. Im a huge beleiver in wrist bands, my last 8 teams everyone had one.
|
|
|
Post by coachdoug on Apr 15, 2008 16:02:04 GMT -6
Your last years team didnt consistently execute the power or wedge very well, just think about how much better they have to get at that BEFORE you take time away from that to run your other stuff. IMHO you just run your AR stuff and live and die with it rather than be very mediocre or below at both. Just a point of clarification. Last year, Brophy had a team of all 1st year players and it was his first year coaching that age level as well as his 1st year with DW. This year he's talking about a completely different team - several years older with 3-5 years experience running DW already under their belts. That being said, I agree that it would be better to pick one system and run it all out, exclusively. In this case, given the player's age, the future system they will be going into and the expertise of their coach, I would counsel Brophy to run Spread/Air Raid from day 1. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2008 16:33:52 GMT -6
I thought the goal of the thread was to let those of us that have coached that age group and know what those kids capabilities are to poke holes in your premise of running both as well as your practice plans. The end goal being helping you make a better informed decision that would in the end benefit the kids. yes - and y'all have brought out a lot of great input and it is appreciated. It is early and I am rested....and maybe way too ambitious / eager to try some things that could wait. We'll see how good we can be at power,counter,wedge,trap first. This will come out wrong, but part of my skepticism/stubborness stems from not seeing a compelling argument against passing from people that have passed before. It is like trying to contemplate steak over fillet mignon and asking a bunch of vegans for advice......of course, they will say I should have neither. I dunno if that thought can even come out correctly without offending, but that is the best I could do at conveying a belief.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 15, 2008 19:51:10 GMT -6
MAtt,
MAybe it makes better sense to ask someone that has tried to run the DW well and the Air Raid Well at the same time with 10 year old non-select kids, and 2-3 days a week practice time. THAT would be valuable information.
From someone that has run the DW well with non select 13-14 year olds (me) Im sceptical much more can be added and executed well within those constraints. For the 10000000 time Ive NEVER said kids cant catch the ball, but moving the chains consistently ( not one game stats) is difficult to do with non select kids that age and 2-3 days a week practice. Add to it the time requirements to make the DW really work and not confident it can be done.
I would love to see the AR run exclusively at the is age by someone like you that knows it and can teach it. With the QB coach you have and the head start, etc who knows.
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 15, 2008 21:13:09 GMT -6
Guess I'm trying to look at it, as a challenge....or like we're being "forced" to run both.....and have to come up with a way to make it work? lol The easiest thing of course, practice and time wise (with group of 25 kids), and "if" you want to keep both systems in their purest form...... would be to have 2 separate units....one working on the dbl. wing...the other on the spread....leaving 3 kids to sub in and out? Then..... if you had 3-4 guys that were just essential to both units and versatile enough to play either.....you could work them in as a group? Some good points to this, would be....#1- you're playing everyone on offense(when it matters) during the game = good PR with the parents.....#2- kids will build confidence and keep interest being a "starter" on something....#3-Your defense can be bad@ssed, since most kids will get the playing time on offense and special teams?......On the other hand.....#1- The offense may or may not be as effective?(very bad if you like/need to score a lot of points)....#2 If too many kids quit during the season....because of grades or whatever, or just don't show up for some games = you'll need contingency plans? Thats one way to do it Brophy.....like I said before though....take a heck of a coaching up job.....great planning and organization.... Forgot my disclaimer......"If you (insert coach's name here) are trying to establish yourself as the winningest youth coach around, while breaking every scoring record, ever set in youth football.....WARNING...never try this at home"
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2008 8:17:54 GMT -6
here is the same question, with a different approach.
Would it be radically different if you do the DW core (Power,Wedge,Trap,Counter) and attempt at implementing A passing game. All from DW Tight formation, nothing fancy, just 1 simple concept.
Is it still a "no-no"? Is play-action boot okay, but 1-step too much?
I'm trying to comprehend (not challenge) the "DMZ" of too much in youth ball.
Again, I appreciate ALL the input, and I'm just throwing stuff out there....TRYING to make sense.
Just for some more preface, "this" program kind of sold themselves on the spread concepts when they ran up against a 'brick wall' defense (youth) and even as good as they were in the DW, just couldn't move the ball for whatever reason. They had a spread package (that they ran from and did a little pass) and were able to move the ball. THAT is what gave them a green light to mix in spread stuff.
I acknowledge my 'bias'/preference, and realize the limitations of underdeveloped players (and recognize the issues presented in the 2 other youth passing threads). I am not attempting to project my beliefs on the team, just trying to see how 'more' can be done effectively. I would agree that doing "one" thing is the simplest way to go. It has to stem with a "why not?" question.
We can always pare it down come August and cut entire sections from the practice plan.
It is kind of questioning how a practice could be run more intensively, with a variety of skills being taught.
Honestly, it doesn't take long to teach a kid to get to 'zero' and stay on his toes. I feel confident that in 4 practices (before camp) we can get a #1 thrower ready. Catching is another issue where we would take it step-by-step, with around (realistically) 30 1/4 speed catches (PER KID) in the first 2 blocks of practice.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 16, 2008 8:36:54 GMT -6
Matt,
Having 2 play action passes in your bag is a lot different than running an Air Raid package.
Great honest post though.
Maybe by working with this QB in the offseason you can figure out what your constraints are and make a decision from there.
BTW wih my 12-13 year old kids last night during our Spring 1 day a week FASST program we have 6 kids brand new to football and 2 of them catch the ball better than anyone we had last year. We are doing all the base catching progressions, but these 2 kids certainly have base potential ranges that are pretty good. With a group of kids that has gone 43-2 and averaged 35 ppg and know this stuff in their sleep, we feel we may be able to add a passing series in. The moral of the story: what you can do may depend on the base you have to start with. If the kids you have were executing the DW near flawlessly and scoring gobs of points AND your QB through the summer looked like Joe Monatana then maybe worth a closer look.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Apr 16, 2008 8:40:53 GMT -6
I like the idea of bridging th esystems like I said before but with that said. The way you are going about it now should work. Mesh will be an easy play for them and I am not sure if you need shallow. I like shallow but at this level there are some problems I have with it. It forces the 4 wide almost though you can adjust that. It can turn into a funny thing to read at times. The fade is easy it is when you get involved with the hunt.
I would go with Mesh and then tag the crap out of it, change the meshers that type of thing so it looks different but is not. Instead of check releasing a RB I would use DeMeo's 3 step boot systme where a player stays to block the edge for 3 count and then releases into some form of checkdown. I know some will not agree but Mesh and speed option can almost be an offense. When you start loading that speed different ways it causes issues. You can have a little PA which is just sprint out in this case. The kids know how to trap if the played in a DW system before
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 16, 2008 8:46:03 GMT -6
Guess I'm trying to look at it, as a challenge....or like we're being "forced" to run both.....and have to come up with a way to make it work? lol The easiest thing of course, practice and time wise (with group of 25 kids), and "if" you want to keep both systems in their purest form...... would be to have 2 separate units....one working on the dbl. wing...the other on the spread....leaving 3 kids to sub in and out? Then..... if you had 3-4 guys that were just essential to both units and versatile enough to play either.....you could work them in as a group? Some good points to this, would be....#1- you're playing everyone on offense(when it matters) during the game = good PR with the parents.....#2- kids will build confidence and keep interest being a "starter" on something....#3-Your defense can be bad@ssed, since most kids will get the playing time on offense and special teams?......On the other hand.....#1- The offense may or may not be as effective?(very bad if you like/need to score a lot of points)....#2 If too many kids quit during the season....because of grades or whatever, or just don't show up for some games = you'll need contingency plans? Thats one way to do it Brophy.....like I said before though....take a heck of a coaching up job.....great planning and organization.... Forgot my disclaimer......"If you (insert coach's name here) are trying to establish yourself as the winningest youth coach around, while breaking every scoring record, ever set in youth football.....WARNING...never try this at home" The goal of a youth coach IMHO is to teach great fundamentals and build a love and appreciation of the game into every player on his team. The problem is many of the kids are still figuring out if football "is their thing" or not. There are many choices today. If the kids are in a system where the team fails and they have little personal success many will not come out the following year. The hard core kids sure, they come back. But what about the fence straddlers? If they have some personal and team success they continue playing and who knows after puberrty may blossom into something, If not hey at least they get the life lessons the game teaches. The 70% of kids that play youth ball and NEVER play HS ball are the kids I want to reach. Matt IMHO feels that by throwing the ball around, that will build a love and enthusiasm in the game in his kids. I however think playing great fundamental football where the team and individual, no matter his skill set can have success will keep kids engaged. The BYPRODUCT of my approach is a lot of wins and lots of points, which the kids love (12 different kids scored TDs lat year on my older team) No need to ever apologioze for succeeding unless your'e from Cuba or Vermont A true "Atlas Shrugged" moment. Different approaches to hopefully the same goal. So far Im getting over 95% of my kids back and we get over 80% perfect attendance and very few if any drops during season. So those results seem to say we are doing a good job of meeting our goals with the approach we have taken. If Matt is forced to run both sure, excellent plan. But not sure that is the case.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Apr 16, 2008 9:16:58 GMT -6
There is no reason why Brohpy's approach would not do the following
"I however think playing great fundamental football where the team and individual, no matter his skill set can have success will keep kids engaged."
I know it was not the intent but the way that statement comes across is that by appraoching it his way the kids will not be fundamentally sound or as a team/individual. Will some might not have the skill set for the offense or to be great there are other phases of the game where this can happen. We have all had players that could only play onside of the ball or played one side of the ball better.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2008 9:19:56 GMT -6
If the kids are in a system where the team fails and they have little personal success many will not come out the following year. Matt IMHO feels that by throwing the ball around, that will build a love and enthusiasm in the game in his kids. If they have some personal and team success they continue playing and who knows after puberrty may blossom into something, If not hey at least they get the life lessons the game teaches. The 70% of kids that play youth ball and NEVER play HS ball are the kids I want to reach. I however think playing great fundamental football where the team and individual, no matter his skill set can have success will keep kids engaged. The BYPRODUCT of my approach is a lot of wins and lots of points, which the kids love. Im getting over 95% of my kids back and we get over 80% perfect attendance and very few if any drops during season. Davey, Without turning this into a competitive pissing match, am I the only that can see this is phrased in strawman hyperbole? Run things MY way, and there is peace on earth, kids learn football.
Do things differently, kids WILL lose and turn into thugs.
THIS is why it is difficult to receive feedback, because it is all-or-nothing without really addressing any of the causes to the effect. We could run every down and still lose.....won't the kids be just as disappointed? We could pass a few times and win.... will the kids somehow be cheated? What "wins" in youth ball (especially) is fundamentals, organization, and athletes (sometimes this can overcome the first two). The reason is because there is usually (by the general population of organizations) that the those qualities are in short supply. The thought process is questioning whether or not you could use ORGANIZATION to achieve a higher value of FUNDAMENTALS to utilize the roster? The answer isn't relegated to a playbook. Sure, simple schemes, limited concepts is the way to go. The less time on anything else, the greater the emphasis on specific technique. I frankly do not see what is taboo about an 11 - 12 year old body that throwing or catching or running. Does it take some more attention to details? I would believe so....but that is the challenge of coaching. I am not intending to sling it down after down, but if there is a way to expand on teaching some things that they could learn, why limit ourselves (staff & kids)?
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 16, 2008 9:24:27 GMT -6
There is no reason why Brohpy's approach would not do the following "I however think playing great fundamental football where the team and individual, no matter his skill set can have success will keep kids engaged." I know it was not the intent but the way that statement comes across is that by appraoching it his way the kids will not be fundamentally sound or as a team/individual. Will some might not have the skill set for the offense or to be great there are other phases of the game where this can happen. We have all had players that could only play onside of the ball or played one side of the ball better. Each Individual and team needs to have success, that is my premise. Not that MAtt cant teach good fundmentals. Im not convinced that by combining the two that each individual or the team will be successful.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 16, 2008 9:38:52 GMT -6
If the kids are in a system where the team fails and they have little personal success many will not come out the following year. Matt IMHO feels that by throwing the ball around, that will build a love and enthusiasm in the game in his kids. If they have some personal and team success they continue playing and who knows after puberrty may blossom into something, If not hey at least they get the life lessons the game teaches. The 70% of kids that play youth ball and NEVER play HS ball are the kids I want to reach. I however think playing great fundamental football where the team and individual, no matter his skill set can have success will keep kids engaged. The BYPRODUCT of my approach is a lot of wins and lots of points, which the kids love. Im getting over 95% of my kids back and we get over 80% perfect attendance and very few if any drops during season. Davey, Without turning this into a competitive pissing match, am I the only that can see this is phrased in strawman hyperbole? Run things MY way, and there is peace on earth, kids learn football.
Do things differently, kids WILL lose and turn into thugs.
THIS is why it is difficult to receive feedback, because it is all-or-nothing without really addressing any of the causes to the effect. We could run every down and still lose.....won't the kids be just as disappointed? We could What "wins" in youth ball (especially) is fundamentals, organization, and athletes (sometimes this can overcome the first two). The reason is because there is usually (by the general population of organizations) that the those qualities are in short supply. The thought process is questioning whether or not you could use ORGANIZATION to achieve a higher value of FUNDAMENTALS to utilize the roster? The answer isn't relegated to a playbook. Sure, simple schemes, limited concepts is the way to go. The less time on anything else, the greater the emphasis on specific technique. I frankly do not see what is taboo about an 11 - 12 year old body that throwing or catching or running. Does it take some more attention to details? I would believe so....but that is the challenge of coaching. I am not intending to sling it down after down, but if there is a way to expand on teaching some things that they could learn, why limit ourselves (staff & kids)? Matt, I see a pissing match is brewing, using several different renditions of my name, while I have remained very respectful. Ive not said anything about kids turning into thugs, please stop putting words in my mouth. Something many on the losing end of a debate resort to I think there is value in keeping kids engaged in the game simple enough, never said more than that. Most of the HS coaches I talk to just want kids that are still playing, have some descent fundamentals and have a love for the game. Their main complaint is of youth coaches running kids off ( low retention rates) > Think back to just the one year results, what common factors did the teams with high drop rates and low retention numbers have in common with one another? BTW the coaches I have that ALWAYS have low drop rates ALWAYS have them no matter what age group or team I assign them to. Through doing this for 15 years and running a large 400+ kid org , we were able to establish some cause and effect in this area and it came down to a number of factors. We did lots of exit interviews and researched other orgs. We have since addressed and solved the problem. I thought one of the main lessons you said you learned from your first year of coaching youth football last year was you tried to do too much. I dont see that lesson manifested in your ideas for this season. Does your plan make sense for the stated goal, of running both systems sure. But it doesnt mean the goal is not realistic even coming from your own personal words and experiences. But Im not sure you can do both and be reasonably competitive. If you ran every down and lost every game running the DW would the kids lose their enthusiasm for the game? Sure, but if they cant execute the DW what makes you think they can execute both? Only the worst coached teams lose most or all of their games in Youth Football, I watched several of the games you posted last season, even your inconsistent DW was able to win a few games, a good DW would have won a few more and you said you had zip players etc. IMHO opinion if you want to have a competitive team where the kids look forward to coming to practice, and are having fun and having personal and team success you have to decide what is the best way to get there. Im not sure this path can accomplish that goal, simple enough, Sorry I cant agree with you, thats all. Whatever path you choose, best of luck to you and the kids. Let us all know how it is going and maybe we change our personal opinions.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2008 10:44:49 GMT -6
THIS is why the board is so helpful.
Run it up the flag pole and shoot holes in it and see what is left. Separating the wheat from the chaff in that process is not always easy.
We will run nothing but the base stuff (tight - power,wedge, & counter) until the 2nd game. We won't progress until we can run it lights-out against all fronts.
If we can get any proficiency, we'll throw Mesh in.
Thanks for all the discouragement (what was requested) - I wanted to see this from all the angles.
This is a paradigm shift for me that I have not yet adjusted to, to be honest. My expectations are not realistic. Preparing for a variety of threats and requiring to have an 'answer' for a lot of different opponents...is no longer needed (different level of play). This is a major transition that I am not comfortable with.
The ONLY THING that would change is the last 30 min period....that WAS devoted to pseudo-spread implementation.
(right?)
So if you look at the pic at the top of the page.....what would need to change to be an 'effective' youth team (to get us on the right track)?
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Apr 16, 2008 12:25:55 GMT -6
Personally I would do significantly more Individual work. We divide up backs/Rec and line and we do at least 30 minutes of Indy Blocking and "team" work just with our line. Same for the backs. We feel we get a lot out of that and waste a lot less "team time" by doing so. My 13 week daily practice plan sets short and long term goals and has maybe 15 minutes of things we do every day. It changes daily. Kids like a variety even if you are getting to the same goal, but just in a slightly different way that day. But with the O-line we are doing a ton of first steps, first 2 steps, down blocking drills, crab blocking drills, pulling drills, base block, double teams, pass blocking, Rules Review, Fit and Freeze, Wedge fits, Power hours etc etc We are doing parallel stuff with the backs with different emphasis, open field blocking, kick out, ball control, chase drills (accelerating into the hole), power hour, skeleton, pass catching etc etc On defense we are doing a lot more tackling drills and a lot more def recognition and fit and freeze. Dont forget to get some fun "game time" stuff in there if practices are going well. Helps the conditioning and keeps em coming back for more with enthusiasm. But hey, what do I know
|
|