nannother
Sophomore Member
GREATEST RB EVER
Posts: 122
|
Post by nannother on May 30, 2008 10:43:30 GMT -6
If you're an HC and you have a coordinator that is exactly what you're looking for as far as dependability, trust, ethic, likability, ect... and you want to run a certain offense/defense and they're more knowledgeable and comfortable running something different, do you let him run what he knows. I know that the HC has the last say but most of you know that trust is bigger then anything else among your staff. If the coordinator's system is proven and he teaches it sound, as an HC should/would you make that compromise?
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 30, 2008 10:57:49 GMT -6
If you're an HC and you have a coordinator that is exactly what you're looking for as far as dependability, trust, ethic, likability, ect... and you want to run a certain offense/defense and they're more knowledgeable and comfortable running something different, do you let him run what he knows. I know that the HC has the last say but most of you know that trust is bigger then anything else among your staff. If the coordinator's system is proven and he teaches it sound, as an HC should/would you make that compromise? As a HC, I have a general idea of where my program is going, or at least should be going. If a certain scheme on O or D does not fit that idea, then it really doesn't matter how well someone does or does not know something. I allow my assistants to voice their views on things and I may elect to listen and implement their suggestions or respectfully tell them to shove it.. but they do know they can be open about whatever they need to. But, bottom line is.. if I as a HC go in without an identity that I want to accomplish for my team.. then I was doomed from the start.. If a guy can show me how his ideas can fit within that identity that I want to find.. then we can talk.. but for the good of the program.. I must stand my ground on any wholesale changes. |
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on May 30, 2008 11:30:04 GMT -6
Most wouldn't and I know I couldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2008 11:45:22 GMT -6
Why hire anyone to coordinate something if you are going to dictate that. I feel that is unfair to the coach in question, and to the team. If you want to be an "option guy" or an "airraid" guy, either run it yourself, or hire someone who is versed in that. (Unfortunately, that isn't always a readily available option in H.S. ball)
Schemes are so vastly overrated. Schemes are not identities, they are methodologies. They are simply an attempt to coordinate the actions of 11 players in attempt to achieve a goal (move the ball, stop the ball).
Do you have any reason why the certain offense/defense you are interested in should be run OVER the one the guy you want to run it likes? Do you have any valid reasons to ask him to do what you want? If you want to be the HC but run the offense/defense as well even though you have capable people there to do so, I suggest you make some calls, find them jobs where they can do what they need to go grow as coaches, and just be the HC/OC....
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 30, 2008 12:05:58 GMT -6
Why hire anyone to coordinate something if you are going to dictate that. I feel that is unfair to the coach in question, and to the team. If you want to be an "option guy" or an "airraid" guy, either run it yourself, or hire someone who is versed in that. (Unfortunately, that isn't always a readily available option in H.S. ball) Schemes are so vastly overrated. Schemes are not identities, they are methodologies. They are simply an attempt to coordinate the actions of 11 players in attempt to achieve a goal (move the ball, stop the ball). Do you have any reason why the certain offense/defense you are interested in should be run OVER the one the guy you want to run it likes? Do you have any valid reasons to ask him to do what you want? If you want to be the HC but run the offense/defense as well even though you have capable people there to do so, I suggest you make some calls, find them jobs where they can do what they need to go grow as coaches, and just be the HC/OC.... Basically because I am the HC and that's the way I want it..  but in all seriousness.. I disagree.. what we run on offense or defense is our identity.. Are we a SMASHMOUTH team.. or are we a finesse team?? Hard to be a SMASHMOUTH 5 wide team.. just like it is to be a finesse Double Tight Wishbone team.. First off, if I hire a guy, he will know from the get go that "I" control things in "MY" program. And that we are going to do things "MY" way.. If he accepts the job.. then there should be no question.. Now, "MY" way and his way may be on the same page.. But, if its not even in the same book.. then don't come asking about putting it in without being realistic about the outcome of the conversation. Now, if I were in a different situation.. at a school that has been established and I went after a guy.. I could change my views if he were a proven success and I KNEW he could handle the job with his own system.. But if I hire a guy to run my system and then he later approaches me with "well coach.. how about we switch to the 43?" I'm going to be like.. no thanks.. Because 1st of all.. if HE fails.. I do not know enough about the 43 to feel comfortable with myself trying to salvage the defense in the middle of the season. I hope that makes sense a little.. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2008 14:04:46 GMT -6
Why hire anyone to coordinate something if you are going to dictate that. I feel that is unfair to the coach in question, and to the team. If you want to be an "option guy" or an "airraid" guy, either run it yourself, or hire someone who is versed in that. (Unfortunately, that isn't always a readily available option in H.S. ball) Schemes are so vastly overrated. Schemes are not identities, they are methodologies. They are simply an attempt to coordinate the actions of 11 players in attempt to achieve a goal (move the ball, stop the ball). Do you have any reason why the certain offense/defense you are interested in should be run OVER the one the guy you want to run it likes? Do you have any valid reasons to ask him to do what you want? If you want to be the HC but run the offense/defense as well even though you have capable people there to do so, I suggest you make some calls, find them jobs where they can do what they need to go grow as coaches, and just be the HC/OC.... Basically because I am the HC and that's the way I want it.. but in all seriousness.. I disagree.. what we run on offense or defense is our identity.. Are we a SMASHMOUTH team.. or are we a finesse team?? Hard to be a SMASHMOUTH 5 wide team.. just like it is to be a finesse Double Tight Wishbone team.. First off, if I hire a guy, he will know from the get go that "I" control things in "MY" program. And that we are going to do things "MY" way.. If he accepts the job.. then there should be no question.. Now, "MY" way and his way may be on the same page.. But, if its not even in the same book.. then don't come asking about putting it in without being realistic about the outcome of the conversation. Now, if I were in a different situation.. at a school that has been established and I went after a guy.. I could change my views if he were a proven success and I KNEW he could handle the job with his own system.. But if I hire a guy to run my system and then he later approaches me with "well coach.. how about we switch to the 43?" I'm going to be like.. no thanks.. Because 1st of all.. if HE fails.. I do not know enough about the 43 to feel comfortable with myself trying to salvage the defense in the middle of the season. I hope that makes sense a little.. I disagree with your disagreement. An identity is not attached to a scheme. The identity of your time is how it carries itself. Disciplined. Knows how to practice. SPRINTS. Does not commit personal fouls. A Bobbie Knight team has an identity. It is NOT the motion offense. It is en emphasis on defense first, a team before me attitude, making free throws, not violating NCAA rules and graduating. Bob Huggins has an identity. His teams emphasize individual talent matchups over team, academic question marks, program integrity question marks, both teams have systems but they are not the identity. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on May 30, 2008 14:12:30 GMT -6
I think it all depends on the head coach. When I hear a Head Coach says this is MY Team that means he wants yes men for assistants and is so insecure inside that the thought of not being in control scares him.
My or Me coaches feel the need to control everything. MY coaches are not interested in advancing the careers of assistant coaches because deep down inside they figure they might lose their job to one.
I heard a old timer say that the success of a Head coach is not in state championships or wins but in how many people he has help fulfill their dreams.
I do not work for my or me coaches. I work for we coaches.
We coaches recognize the value of all the assistant coaches. We coach's are not afraid to hire people and let them do there thing.
For example, I have nothing to do with defense. I never had and never will. It is not my strength.
So I would hire or find some on already on the staff who is a capable defensive coordinator. I could careless what defense they run as long as they know how to install it and teach the defensive assistant coaches how to install it and it is successful at stopping people. now if they are not getting the job done then it is my job to find some one else to run the defense.
I do not want to be a king and have a court.. I want people who have opinions and an environment where they feel they can share their opinions and grow as coaches. I believe in teaching people every thing I know. If I would die today, my QB or wr or oline coach could teach and install the offense I run.
COL. Hal Moore trained his men in an interesting way.
Sr. officers taught Jr officers the Sr officers jobs
Jr officers taught the NCO's(Sargent's) their job. NCO's taught the Corporals their job and the carpals taught the privates there job. each private taught each other their job. This way when some one died getting off a helicopter, the next person could do that persons job. SO if the 1st Lt bought the farm, the platoon Sarge. could run the platoon doing the Lt's job.
I really believe this his how football coaches should train assistants.
now if you have total control over who you hire and fire then finding a coordinator which is of your philosophy should not be that hard. I fail to understand why people in this position hire people who are not what they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on May 30, 2008 14:36:35 GMT -6
If you're an HC and you have a coordinator that is exactly what you're looking for as far as dependability, trust, ethic, likability, ect... and you want to run a certain offense/defense and they're more knowledgeable and comfortable running something different, do you let him run what he knows. you'd have to ask if all things being equal, and so long as you are scoring points (offense) or preventing points (defense), why does "it" matter? If the guy knows his stuff and is loyal, what more could you ask for? If you score 40 points rushing or 40 points passing, does it really matter? it begins and ends with that question. Ask the guys that are coordinators who are wanting to be HC's, because "they can't run their stuff".... |
|
|
|
Post by coachdjenkins on May 30, 2008 14:57:55 GMT -6
I am an offensive coordinator who works for a longtime successful head coach, that had always been his own offensive coordinator.
I beleive it is to difficult to be someone else, if the Head Coach is not willing/does not trust to let the coordinators be responsible then he should never turn over the control. I do not think that we would have been as successful if I would have continued to run with a two-back/Pro offense, when I was more comfortable teaching a one back spread offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 30, 2008 15:55:28 GMT -6
I think it all depends on the head coach. When I hear a Head Coach says this is MY Team that means he wants yes men for assistants and is so insecure inside that the thought of not being in control scares him. My or Me coaches feel the need to control everything. MY coaches are not interested in advancing the careers of assistant coaches because deep down inside they figure they might lose their job to one. I heard a old timer say that the success of a Head coach is not in state championships or wins but in how many people he has help fulfill their dreams. I do not work for my or me coaches. I work for we coaches. We coaches recognize the value of all the assistant coaches. We coach's are not afraid to hire people and let them do there thing. For example, I have nothing to do with defense. I never had and never will. It is not my strength. So I would hire or find some on already on the staff who is a capable defensive coordinator. I could careless what defense they run as long as they know how to install it and teach the defensive assistant coaches how to install it and it is successful at stopping people. now if they are not getting the job done then it is my job to find some one else to run the defense. I do not want to be a king and have a court.. I want people who have opinions and an environment where they feel they can share their opinions and grow as coaches. I believe in teaching people every thing I know. If I would die today, my QB or wr or oline coach could teach and install the offense I run. COL. Hal Moore trained his men in an interesting way. Sr. officers taught Jr officers the Sr officers jobs Jr officers taught the NCO's(Sargent's) their job. NCO's taught the Corporals their job and the carpals taught the privates there job. each private taught each other their job. This way when some one died getting off a helicopter, the next person could do that persons job. SO if the 1st Lt bought the farm, the platoon Sarge. could run the platoon doing the Lt's job. I really believe this his how football coaches should train assistants. now if you have total control over who you hire and fire then finding a coordinator which is of your philosophy should not be that hard. I fail to understand why people in this position hire people who are not what they want. I agree completely.. but in MY situation.. I do not have anyone on staff that I feel comfortable turning any control or decision making over to. THAT is what has gotten this team in trouble in the past. "Yea I have this frat brother who is gonna come run our offense." and they end up scoring 7 points a game. Like I said.. in a different situation.. I am game for whatever.. I have paid my dues.. I was an OC running another coaches offense for 2 years.. Did I think during that time that I could open things up a bit?? Of course.. but other than just a few tweaks here and there.. I had no say so.. Like I said.. if the right person came along.. then sure.. I would turn it over to them.. But at the end of the day.. all that MY and I that you hate... whose name goes in the paper after losing big?? MY name.. |
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on May 30, 2008 16:25:24 GMT -6
I think the question is kind of mis-worded. A guy is not going to become an OC until he and the HC have got these questions sorted out. Until then he's just an assistant (or potential assistant) who is applying to be the OC. Like Brophy said, it begins and ends with that question. Years ago I was hired to be the OC at a very successful NAIA school by a head coach who wanted to add a passing scheme to their strong running game. We talked about EVERY facet before a decision was made. I REALLY wanted the job, but I also didn't want to walk into something that could blow up. Having all of those scheme, philosopy, game plan, down and distance and the like questions answered made all of the difference and it was a GREAT relationship.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2008 19:56:20 GMT -6
I think this thread...which originally started out very focused and organized, is starting to splinter out.
The original question was ... You have a highly qualified candidate (HC's own opinion) BUT that candidate runs a different scheme than the HC. Is this going to be a problem? (I mean, gosh...isn't coaching coaching. I remember on here when Calande was looking to uproot his entire family 1500 miles just so he could coach the dbl wing. Is a particular method of advancing the football that important?)
We are starting to get on tangents such as "identities" or discussing a different situation, which is..."I have nobody I feel is capable of being a coordinator" (Which makes me ask, is coaching that bad all over, because I see that statement a great deal. I know with clear 20/20 hindsight I would have been as competent a coordinator at 20 years old as some of the guys I have seen/worked with/spoken with)
I think it is important to distinguish those arguments, because there is a world of difference between "I am the HC, and we are going to run flexbone because that is our identity, even though I have Andrew Coverdale as my OC. " and "I am the HC, and I don't really think any of these guys have been prepared properly to coordinate (--note--if a coach has been on your staff for more than two years, and is not ready to coordinate..LOOK IN THE MIRROR) so we are going to be an Airraid team, because that is what I know best...and I am going to do the job.
Another interesting question that might come from this is (and we have discussed variations of it before) "how often does the HC do the OC duties, because "nobody is qualified" HOWEVER, they seem to think there are people qualified there to be DC's.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on May 31, 2008 7:25:27 GMT -6
I think that this would be a bigger issue if we were talking about an offensive coordinator. There are true philosophical differences there. If one guy's a Chuck-n-ducker and the other wants to run Power I that's an issue.
Defense? As Coachd asked, what exactly is a defensive system? Any sound defensive system is going to be gap-sound, have a solid run support scheme in the secondary, be sound in pass coverage, and have a stunt/blitz component. 3-3/3-5, 3-4, 4-3, 4-2, whatever. They all do the same thing. How big of a philosophical difference can there be? It's not like we're talking about a major issue like more taste/less filling.
You say that the guy is well qualified and that his system is sound. So, what's the problem? I am curious. What "defense" does he want to run and what do you want to run?
|
|
|
|
Post by schultbear74 on May 31, 2008 8:08:53 GMT -6
I think that it interesting that identity would come up. I think there is a whole lot of ego involved in a few of these responses. As a DC with several stripes, I turned down a job because the HC wanted me to run a defense that I did not feel competent to coach. I also thought that he wanted to run it unsoundly.
His ego forced me to make a choice that I have no regrets over.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 10:03:48 GMT -6
I think the direction of this thread is right where you would expect it to be. The ones who are strongly for the OC and DC to run their own stuff ARE coordinators.. Where as the two who said no ARE HC's.. On the coordinators side of things I wouldnt expect it any other way.. Because if you didnt have that drive to run your own system, then you probably wouldnt be very good at what you do..
Now.. there are SEVERAL people on this board that I would allow to come in and be the HC of the defense if they applied.. But.. In my current situation.. there is NO ONE that I could find to fill that type of role.
Any other job, you do it the way the man in charge wants it.. If I own an established chain of restaurants.. and I hire YOU to manage one of my restauranst... well I will tell you.. Ok.. this is how we do this.. and how we do that.. How far do you think you would get if you come in wanting to do it your way?
And the short answer to those demands would be.. get your own chain.. and you can call the shots..
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 31, 2008 11:28:18 GMT -6
Why hire anyone to coordinate something if you are going to dictate that. I feel that is unfair to the coach in question, and to the team. If you want to be an "option guy" or an "airraid" guy, either run it yourself, or hire someone who is versed in that. (Unfortunately, that isn't always a readily available option in H.S. ball) Schemes are so vastly overrated. Schemes are not identities, they are methodologies. They are simply an attempt to coordinate the actions of 11 players in attempt to achieve a goal (move the ball, stop the ball). Do you have any reason why the certain offense/defense you are interested in should be run OVER the one the guy you want to run it likes? Do you have any valid reasons to ask him to do what you want? If you want to be the HC but run the offense/defense as well even though you have capable people there to do so, I suggest you make some calls, find them jobs where they can do what they need to go grow as coaches, and just be the HC/OC.... Basically because I am the HC and that's the way I want it.. but in all seriousness.. I disagree.. what we run on offense or defense is our identity.. Are we a SMASHMOUTH team.. or are we a finesse team?? Hard to be a SMASHMOUTH 5 wide team.. just like it is to be a finesse Double Tight Wishbone team.. First off, if I hire a guy, he will know from the get go that "I" control things in "MY" program. And that we are going to do things "MY" way.. If he accepts the job.. then there should be no question.. Now, "MY" way and his way may be on the same page.. But, if its not even in the same book.. then don't come asking about putting it in without being realistic about the outcome of the conversation. Now, if I were in a different situation.. at a school that has been established and I went after a guy.. I could change my views if he were a proven success and I KNEW he could handle the job with his own system.. But if I hire a guy to run my system and then he later approaches me with "well coach.. how about we switch to the 43?" I'm going to be like.. no thanks.. Because 1st of all.. if HE fails.. I do not know enough about the 43 to feel comfortable with myself trying to salvage the defense in the middle of the season. I hope that makes sense a little.. 1. It is not YOUR program, it belongs to everyone involved, the school, the players and your assistants. Whether you realize it or not... 2. Why would anyone want to play or coach in a system that they have no OWNERSHIP over? Why put in the time, effort and energy into something that you have no original hand in?? You can't ask your assistants and players to be peons, they need to be stock owning partners in the program. You can't ask those in your program to do things YOUR WAY, it has got to be OUR WAY. 3. If you do things in a single minded fashion, you will lose the chance to learn from other points of view. Back to the original question. You have basically answered yourself by asking the question. If you feel that this is an issue, than you need to coordinate the offense. I would always be very open to sound input from everyone in the program, but I would quell any issues straight off of the bat by taking the offense. |
|
|
|
Post by airman on May 31, 2008 11:38:03 GMT -6
I think it all depends on the head coach. When I hear a Head Coach says this is MY Team that means he wants yes men for assistants and is so insecure inside that the thought of not being in control scares him. My or Me coaches feel the need to control everything. MY coaches are not interested in advancing the careers of assistant coaches because deep down inside they figure they might lose their job to one. I heard a old timer say that the success of a Head coach is not in state championships or wins but in how many people he has help fulfill their dreams. I do not work for my or me coaches. I work for we coaches. We coaches recognize the value of all the assistant coaches. We coach's are not afraid to hire people and let them do there thing. For example, I have nothing to do with defense. I never had and never will. It is not my strength. So I would hire or find some on already on the staff who is a capable defensive coordinator. I could careless what defense they run as long as they know how to install it and teach the defensive assistant coaches how to install it and it is successful at stopping people. now if they are not getting the job done then it is my job to find some one else to run the defense. I do not want to be a king and have a court.. I want people who have opinions and an environment where they feel they can share their opinions and grow as coaches. I believe in teaching people every thing I know. If I would die today, my QB or wr or oline coach could teach and install the offense I run. COL. Hal Moore trained his men in an interesting way. Sr. officers taught Jr officers the Sr officers jobs Jr officers taught the NCO's(Sargent's) their job. NCO's taught the Corporals their job and the carpals taught the privates there job. each private taught each other their job. This way when some one died getting off a helicopter, the next person could do that persons job. SO if the 1st Lt bought the farm, the platoon Sarge. could run the platoon doing the Lt's job. I really believe this his how football coaches should train assistants. now if you have total control over who you hire and fire then finding a coordinator which is of your philosophy should not be that hard. I fail to understand why people in this position hire people who are not what they want. I agree completely.. but in MY situation.. I do not have anyone on staff that I feel comfortable turning any control or decision making over to. THAT is what has gotten this team in trouble in the past. "Yea I have this frat brother who is gonna come run our offense." and they end up scoring 7 points a game. Like I said.. in a different situation.. I am game for whatever.. I have paid my dues.. I was an OC running another coaches offense for 2 years.. Did I think during that time that I could open things up a bit?? Of course.. but other than just a few tweaks here and there.. I had no say so.. Like I said.. if the right person came along.. then sure.. I would turn it over to them.. But at the end of the day.. all that MY and I that you hate... whose name goes in the paper after losing big?? MY name.. I realize that the head coach is the one who gets credit for the loss but he is also the one who gets the credit for the state championship. you do not see the oc and dc name in the papers ie offensive cooridinator airman leads acme high to state championship. no you see the head coach's name. The penality of leadership is that you will be held accountable. If you do not want that penality in your life say the JV coach. In most parts of the country(i am excluding the south) most coaches do not get fired for a few bad seasons. most quit cause they recognize they are not up for the job. SO this is not life or death like the pros or college. Having been a head coach I believe that it is the job of the head coach to develop his staff. I think a head coach who takes the time to teach the assistants his offensive or defensive philosophy are far ahead of those who just say" well I aint got no one" AL Maguire, former Marquette basketball coach trained his assistants to take over if he was not to be a practice. Al had a habit of taking drives out into the wisconsin countryside. He would come to a stop sign. If he went right he went back to milwaukee. if he went left he continued his drive in the country. I remember Al saying coaches egos think the world revolves around them when in reality caoches are just a part of the world. |
|
jlt
Junior Member
Posts: 313
|
Post by jlt on May 31, 2008 11:49:51 GMT -6
The way I see it is this. I am the HC. But I also run the OC (we are a small school). I have a DC and we both agreed on a system. He wanted a 4-3 I wanted a 3-5 but we settled on his 4-3. Our agreement is that he runs the defence how he wants until it stops working. At some points in games he has flustered in tight situations and I have taken over and helped dig him out. I also have him put his input into the offence. Bear in mind his input is normally ignored as he is a defensively focused player. We disagree on alot of things. So the point where it becomes a heated argument and we have to take it away from the players but it is healthy. It keeps us thinking. What kind of coaches would we be if we agreed on everythign and then couldnt work out why it went wrong?  If he calls something and it goes wrong and I see why we have a discussion and we sort it. If I saw it go wrong but we were too friendly to point it out then thats not good. I think that a HC must not dictate to his DC what to do but should always keep a close eye on what he is doing and make suggestions if thins arent going right. But only on rare occassions actually dictate what to do. |
|
jlt
Junior Member
Posts: 313
|
Post by jlt on May 31, 2008 11:57:44 GMT -6
I am the HC. But I also run the OC (we are a small school). Can I just say in reference to the post a few up is that the reason I have a DC and run the offence myself is because we were the only 2 with any coordinator experience. His was 10 years of D and none of O, so the choice wasnt too hard. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 12:12:15 GMT -6
I agree completely.. but in MY situation.. I do not have anyone on staff that I feel comfortable turning any control or decision making over to. THAT is what has gotten this team in trouble in the past. "Yea I have this frat brother who is gonna come run our offense." and they end up scoring 7 points a game. Like I said.. in a different situation.. I am game for whatever.. I have paid my dues.. I was an OC running another coaches offense for 2 years.. Did I think during that time that I could open things up a bit?? Of course.. but other than just a few tweaks here and there.. I had no say so.. Like I said.. if the right person came along.. then sure.. I would turn it over to them.. But at the end of the day.. all that MY and I that you hate... whose name goes in the paper after losing big?? MY name.. I realize that the head coach is the one who gets credit for the loss but he is also the one who gets the credit for the state championship. you do not see the oc and dc name in the papers ie offensive cooridinator airman leads acme high to state championship. no you see the head coach's name. The penality of leadership is that you will be held accountable. If you do not want that penality in your life say the JV coach. In most parts of the country(i am excluding the south) most coaches do not get fired for a few bad seasons. most quit cause they recognize they are not up for the job. SO this is not life or death like the pros or college. Having been a head coach I believe that it is the job of the head coach to develop his staff. I think a head coach who takes the time to teach the assistants his offensive or defensive philosophy are far ahead of those who just say" well I aint got no one" AL Maguire, former Marquette basketball coach trained his assistants to take over if he was not to be a practice. Al had a habit of taking drives out into the wisconsin countryside. He would come to a stop sign. If he went right he went back to milwaukee. if he went left he continued his drive in the country. I remember Al saying coaches egos think the world revolves around them when in reality caoches are just a part of the world. I agree with what you are saying.. but at the same time.. I have not had a chance to evaluate or teach anyone to run my system the way I want it ran. I am in the process right now of trying to find young assistants who can learn the things that I want to implement so that one day they will be able to take over and run the show without my hands on their shoulder.. Right now I am treating this program like a new born baby.. I do not feel comfortable enough in any of my assistants to just hand them the wheel.. If I was allowed to bring in the people I wanted and still could not trust them.. then its my fault for picking them.. But I came into a situation with spots to hire coaches, but with very limited teaching spots.. Hopefully I will find a guy that I can say.. ok.. here is what I want run.. and this is how I want it ran.. now get after it.. I do not plan on being involved in every aspect of the defense.. I just have a certain base plan that I want put into place.. If you guys see that as being overbearing.. sorry.. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 12:15:16 GMT -6
Basically because I am the HC and that's the way I want it.. but in all seriousness.. I disagree.. what we run on offense or defense is our identity.. Are we a SMASHMOUTH team.. or are we a finesse team?? Hard to be a SMASHMOUTH 5 wide team.. just like it is to be a finesse Double Tight Wishbone team.. First off, if I hire a guy, he will know from the get go that "I" control things in "MY" program. And that we are going to do things "MY" way.. If he accepts the job.. then there should be no question.. Now, "MY" way and his way may be on the same page.. But, if its not even in the same book.. then don't come asking about putting it in without being realistic about the outcome of the conversation. Now, if I were in a different situation.. at a school that has been established and I went after a guy.. I could change my views if he were a proven success and I KNEW he could handle the job with his own system.. But if I hire a guy to run my system and then he later approaches me with "well coach.. how about we switch to the 43?" I'm going to be like.. no thanks.. Because 1st of all.. if HE fails.. I do not know enough about the 43 to feel comfortable with myself trying to salvage the defense in the middle of the season. I hope that makes sense a little.. 1. It is not YOUR program, it belongs to everyone involved, the school, the players and your assistants. Whether you realize it or not... 2. Why would anyone want to play or coach in a system that they have no OWNERSHIP over? Why put in the time, effort and energy into something that you have no original hand in?? You can't ask your assistants and players to be peons, they need to be stock owning partners in the program. You can't ask those in your program to do things YOUR WAY, it has got to be OUR WAY. 3. If you do things in a single minded fashion, you will lose the chance to learn from other points of view. Back to the original question. You have basically answered yourself by asking the question. If you feel that this is an issue, than you need to coordinate the offense. I would always be very open to sound input from everyone in the program, but I would quell any issues straight off of the bat by taking the offense. Actually you are dead wrong.. this is MY program.. the asssitants that are here now.. were here 4 coaches ago.. IF I DO NOT PRODUCE.. I AM THE ONE that will be GONE.. I give ownership to my players and my assistants.. I allow them to coach or play their position to their liking as long as it is in line with my philosophy.. Maybe I should just let the players call the plays on friday nights?? |
|
nannother
Sophomore Member
GREATEST RB EVER
Posts: 122
|
Post by nannother on May 31, 2008 12:15:44 GMT -6
I think that this would be a bigger issue if we were talking about an offensive coordinator. There are true philosophical differences there. If one guy's a Chuck-n-ducker and the other wants to run Power I that's an issue. Defense? As Coachd asked, what exactly is a defensive system? Any sound defensive system is going to be gap-sound, have a solid run support scheme in the secondary, be sound in pass coverage, and have a stunt/blitz component. 3-3/3-5, 3-4, 4-3, 4-2, whatever. They all do the same thing. How big of a philosophical difference can there be? It's not like we're talking about a major issue like more taste/less filling. You say that the guy is well qualified and that his system is sound. So, what's the problem? I am curious. What "defense" does he want to run and what do you want to run? It was a debate on 4-3 vs 4-4 as a base. Our league goes from one extreme to the next. With mainly Wing T or Spread teams, I though the best base was a 4-4 because if little adjustments from week to week and He wants 4-3 for the same reason. |
|
nannother
Sophomore Member
GREATEST RB EVER
Posts: 122
|
Post by nannother on May 31, 2008 12:27:18 GMT -6
Any other job, you do it the way the man in charge wants it.. If I own an established chain of restaurants.. and I hire YOU to manage one of my restauranst... well I will tell you.. Ok.. this is how we do this.. and how we do that.. How far do you think you would get if you come in wanting to do it your way? And the short answer to those demands would be.. get your own chain.. and you can call the shots.. As a former owner of my own business I can tell you, with extreme confidence, that on of the best ways to find out how to run your business is to ask the workers on the ground level. They are the ones that actually put all of your theories to the test. Who better to ask? |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 31, 2008 12:27:32 GMT -6
For me, it's all about the frames of mind of the coaches involved.
I worked with a guy for many years in several different schools in several different capacities. We worked at the middle school and high school level together, with him as the HC/OC and me as the DC. We both have our philosophies and methodologies on both sides of the ball, sometimes they meshed, sometimes they didn't. When they didn't, we talked about it, presented both sides of the coin and generally came to a compromise. He gave me ownership over what we did, but when he put his foot down, the discussion was done and over with.
As long as the job got done, he was fine with whatever I did. If the job wasn't getting done, he didn't have to say a whole lot, because I would be on a mission to fix it.
He trusted me to do my job as DC and valued my input, not because we always agreed, BUT BECAUSE MY INPUT WAS SOUND. If it was on the offensive side of the ball, it fit his philosophy and methodology and it was solid input.
It went like this: "I think we need more yards in short D&D situations, I think we need to move the FB up and increase the line splits."
Not this: "I think we need more yards in short D&D situations, I think we need to kick into 5 wide gun and throw mesh packages."
If it was on the defensive side of the ball, he gave me free reign as long as it produced (i.e. DON'T GIVE UP POINTS).
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 12:34:39 GMT -6
For me, it's all about the frames of mind of the coaches involved. I worked with a guy for many years in several different schools in several different capacities. We worked at the middle school and high school level together, with him as the HC/OC and me as the DC. We both have our philosophies and methodologies on both sides of the ball, sometimes they meshed, sometimes they didn't. When they didn't, we talked about it, presented both sides of the coin and generally came to a compromise. He gave me ownership over what we did, but when he put his foot down, the discussion was done and over with. As long as the job got done, he was fine with whatever I did. If the job wasn't getting done, he didn't have to say a whole lot, because I would be on a mission to fix it. He trusted me to do my job as DC and valued my input, not because we always agreed, BUT BECAUSE MY INPUT WAS SOUND. If it was on the offensive side of the ball, it fit his philosophy and methodology and it was solid input. It went like this: "I think we need more yards in short D&D situations, I think we need to move the FB up and increase the line splits." Not this: "I think we need more yards in short D&D situations, I think we need to kick into 5 wide gun and throw mesh packages." If it was on the defensive side of the ball, he gave me free reign as long as it produced (i.e. DON'T GIVE UP POINTS). And coach, if I had you on my staff.. I might be more inclined to view the situation along the lines of everyone else here.. but I do not have anyone even close to that at this point.. So I am stuck doing what I feel I have to do. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 31, 2008 12:37:47 GMT -6
1. It is not YOUR program, it belongs to everyone involved, the school, the players and your assistants. Whether you realize it or not... 2. Why would anyone want to play or coach in a system that they have no OWNERSHIP over? Why put in the time, effort and energy into something that you have no original hand in?? You can't ask your assistants and players to be peons, they need to be stock owning partners in the program. You can't ask those in your program to do things YOUR WAY, it has got to be OUR WAY. 3. If you do things in a single minded fashion, you will lose the chance to learn from other points of view. Back to the original question. You have basically answered yourself by asking the question. If you feel that this is an issue, than you need to coordinate the offense. I would always be very open to sound input from everyone in the program, but I would quell any issues straight off of the bat by taking the offense. Actually you are dead wrong.. this is MY program.. the asssitants that are here now.. were here 4 coaches ago.. IF I DO NOT PRODUCE.. I AM THE ONE that will be GONE.. I give ownership to my players and my assistants.. I allow them to coach or play their position to their liking as long as it is in line with my philosophy.. Maybe I should just let the players call the plays on friday nights?? What kind of response to you expect when you use terms like "MY" and "MINE" within the context of coaching a team sport. Now if you want to fly off the handle (as you tend to do when people within this board disagree with you), that's your business. My two cents is in. Have a nice day. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 12:46:55 GMT -6
Actually you are dead wrong.. this is MY program.. the asssitants that are here now.. were here 4 coaches ago.. IF I DO NOT PRODUCE.. I AM THE ONE that will be GONE.. I give ownership to my players and my assistants.. I allow them to coach or play their position to their liking as long as it is in line with my philosophy.. Maybe I should just let the players call the plays on friday nights?? What kind of response to you expect when you use terms like "MY" and "MINE" within the context of coaching a team sport. Now if you want to fly off the handle (as you tend to do when people within this board disagree with you), that's your business. My two cents is in. Have a nice day. Well the bottom line is.. I am the HC of this team.. and what I say goes.. whether that is right or wrong has no bearing.. at the end of the day this is my team.. and no man involved will do anything outside the lines that I have set forth.. |
|
|
|
Post by FlexboneOne on May 31, 2008 13:15:06 GMT -6
What kind of response to you expect when you use terms like "MY" and "MINE" within the context of coaching a team sport. Now if you want to fly off the handle (as you tend to do when people within this board disagree with you), that's your business. My two cents is in. Have a nice day. Well the bottom line is.. I am the HC of this team.. and what I say goes.. whether that is right or wrong has no bearing.. at the end of the day this is my team.. and no man involved will do anything outside the lines that I have set forth.. You seem like a nice guy, coach. But I can say unequivically that I would not want to be on a staff with a HC that even thought like this. I've been down that road too many times with coaches. Yes, you are the one who gets his name in the paper win or lose, but to sit on a hill of your own making like Citizen Kane...?? Careful of how you fling around power, it tends to pack a whallop when it comes back and hits you. No offense. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on May 31, 2008 13:25:28 GMT -6
Well the bottom line is.. I am the HC of this team.. and what I say goes.. whether that is right or wrong has no bearing.. at the end of the day this is my team.. and no man involved will do anything outside the lines that I have set forth.. You seem like a nice guy, coach. But I can say unequivically that I would not want to be on a staff with a HC that even thought like this. I've been down that road too many times with coaches. Yes, you are the one who gets his name in the paper win or lose, but to sit on a hill of your own making like Citizen Kane...?? Careful of how you fling around power, it tends to pack a whallop when it comes back and hits you. No offense. Coach I am not of this view based on want to.. its have to.. I would LOVE to have someone that I could trust to do his on thing on defense.. but at this point.. I have to do what is best and control the whole thing.. I hope one day in the future that someone will either grow into that for me.. or someone whose name starts with a B and ends with an rophy will become a teacher so that he can come put in his defense.. |
|
|
|
Post by CVBears on May 31, 2008 14:49:23 GMT -6
I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about. It is the HC who has his butt on the line. If the HC wants something run a particular way for valid reasons, then the coordinators and other assistants should carry it out.
Should an HC be able to let his coordinators do what they are comfortable with? Yes. But that doesn't mean that the coordinators have carte blanche and never "get the stamp of approval" from the HC.
I thought I saw that the debate was whether or not to base out of a 43 or 44 (somewhere on page 1). Seems to me to be pretty trivial. If the DC is a "43 guy" and the HC is a "44 guy" (or even vice versa) the DC should have no problem convincing the HC what the DC wants to do is sound, logical and will accomplish the objectives.
|
|
If he calls something and it goes wrong and I see why we have a discussion and we sort it. If I saw it go wrong but we were too friendly to point it out then thats not good.
