|
|
Post by morris on Oct 7, 2008 5:35:45 GMT -6
I got this book during the spring www.humankinetics.com/products/showproduct.cfm?isbn=9780736051842The idea of the book is to isolate skills and concepts needed for players. The first section of the book goes over technical skills and CPs and the 2nd part goes over tactil skills and concepts to look for. Where the book is lacking is in the games section. The idea is to teach players through games. Now most of us do this in cases such as Oklahoma or putting a defender key in a spot and having the QB read him but the book suggests taking it further. Their example is a curl flat game. The Offense runs curl, spot, shoot trying to get a 1st down 7 yds down field. The Offense gets 1 pt for a completion and 1 for a 1st down. The defense gets 1 for an incomplete pass and I think 2 for a pick. I might have the scoring wrong but you get the idea. You play to ten with the loser doing something (that part is not the important part. It is the game itself that is important). This all takes place between the hash and a sideline. Now this whole concept is nothing new. They have been using it in soccer forever. In fact there is a huge book of it for soccer that just has different games that isolate skills and tactics. I think such a book for football would be amazing. If done right the games could be adapted to fit your offense. We are going to adapt the curl flat game to run Coverdale's Mesh and work on the R4 stuff together. So does anyone have any games they use to teach? If not could you make up some? How do some of you go about it? |
|
|
|
Post by morris on Oct 7, 2008 13:19:10 GMT -6
It is not a replacement for technical work. It is about isolating to create a response. What do you want to get out of it? That is up to you and the design of the response you are trying to get. This is done in part in the passing game all the time. People use defender keys all the time. They use it for QBs to know when to step up or RBs in IZ on playing tag out the backside. Instead of it being just a drill it uses competition to help th eplayer learn how to think tacticly during the game. It is training a response. In the curl flat example you are repping your offense. It is not games just to pass time.
Now I agree soccer in the US is what it is but international soccer is another issue. It is more complex than what you are giving credit for. It is not soccer moms and over rich kids. It is completely different. Apparently either I did not explain myself well or your missin gth ewhole pt.
The look at the armed forces they teach through designed excerises or games that are used to test and teach repsonse. To help drill response and reaction.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 7, 2008 20:12:33 GMT -6
I have done something similar at the very low levels in physical education 5th grade and below We played a game called "close/open" where we grouped in 3. Each group had one ball and two cones. Drill Looks like this
-----------------B--1- A------------------
--------------x.......x......x-------------
--------------------------2------------
--------------------------3------------
Player 2 starts with the ball. Player 3 runs between the two cones labeled A. Player 1 can EITHER step into that A section and tag Player 3, OR he can step into the B section. Player 2 either hands the ball to Player 3, OR he can keep the ball and run through the B section. Familiar concept anyone??
Shadow man.
Coach sets up different colored cones in a pre arranged pattern.
--------------Yellow---------------Blue--------------Orange------10 Yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------Red------------------------Green------------------Purple---- 5 yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------Sky Blue---------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------Lime-----------------------------
-------------------------------------x------------------------------
------------------------------------s-------------------------------
Students partner up, alternating between who gets to be the shadow, and who is the leader. The leader stars at the Lime colored cone, and the shadow is slightly behind and to one side or the other. The Leader starts running as fast as he can to the green cone, and then can chose to run to ANY cone he wants to. The shadow tries to stay right next to him.
Familiar concept??
|
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Oct 7, 2008 23:58:20 GMT -6
Here is one. Football baseball. Set up the bases and divide the teams up evenly. Batters run the bases and there is one defender, the pitcher, who rotates with each hitter.
On the cadence, the hitter runs to first and the the Pitcher has to make a tackle of drive him out of the baseline. If the runner makes it, he is safe. Next batter, new pitcher. Now, the pitcher must decide who to tackle, the man on first or the batter.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Oct 8, 2008 8:56:14 GMT -6
Morris, I agree that a book like that would be amazing.
I don't play too many games in practice, because I want drills that emphasize a specific skill or a set of skills that I am looking for. I attended a Coaches class, where you can become a "certified coach".
Their premise was that everything must be taught with a games approach; moreover, they taught that trying to inspire your players with enhusiasm, was a bad tactic. I felt the program was fairly void of any reality of coaching and I got very little from it. The trainer who ran the class did a great job and gave me better advice than the curriculum itslef did. Programs like this need to stay with soccer or in Communist China.
Every drill must have a reason. If I want to add a game, I will say in skelly. If you complete the next 9 out of 10 passes in a row, I we will be done with skelly. Other than that, I focus on the skills and the teamwork. I think the games approach can take away from practice time, however, I also believe it can be used lighten the air of the practice and get kids excited. But then again, most of my kids love playing football, so I don't need to use too many games.
All things being equal, this may be a situation where I need to see the trees from the forest. Maybe, this would be a way for me to improve as a coach.
|
|
|
|
Post by coveyboyz1 on Oct 8, 2008 9:42:54 GMT -6
DC OHIO is right by saying it will work at lower levels but, not because the coaches don't know what they're doing. The reason it is easier to teach with games because my 7-9 yr olds would rather watch Spongebob than learn to read guards. If they don't realize your teaching them a boring skill they stay on task because they just dominated Johnny and can't to tell there friends at school.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Oct 8, 2008 9:49:16 GMT -6
I don't think this concept is the end-all-be-all, but I do think it has merits. I think there is a way to get both the game and drill concept at the same time.
For instance, you want your 3 to not get reached, but you also want him to squeeze the down block and wrong arm the trapper.
Have two guards and one 3 tech. The play is either zone or trap. If he gets hooked or trapped, score for the o. If he doesn't, score for the d. Rotate the o and d lineman and first group to ten wins (or whatever). You could also add in pass rush to a cone in so many seconds or whatever. Then have some sort of reward and/or punishment.
This also helps your guard in be able to hook and trap block.
|
|
|
|
Post by morris on Oct 8, 2008 19:12:26 GMT -6
I think some are getting hung up on the term "game". silkyice is more along the right path. It takes normal drills and structures them to create tactical problem solving while incorporating game mechanics such as keeping score. In the end there is a reward/punishment. It is not that everything you do is used in this manner but it gets players to work tactics while using the technique they are taught.
You use it to isolate game events. The "games" are used to help create game intelligence. I completely agree that we must teach fundamentals, technique, improve the body but what do we do as coaches to imporve our players ability to adapt to improve game intelligence? That is the purpose of the mini games.
Use mini games to place our players in as close to real game situations. You shape the game in a manner to place the players in specific situations and also so all invovled can work on skills for their position. You focus the game with a specific objective. Enhance the game by teaching on the run the technical and tactical skills involved.
We can run drills all day long to try to condition a response. The closer the drill is to true in game choices, situations and have a specific goal/focus the better the conditioned response will be.
Look at all the debate we have on here about 7 on 7. Some people hate it because it is not realistic and others love it. Look at how 7 on 7 determine first downs and the coverages used. For most teams it is not realistic nor are the events in a 7 on 7. Even pass skelly often is not. Put a down and distance to it. Challenge the defense or the offense to achieve a specific goal. Instead of running just 15 skelly plays or even 15 scripted down and distance plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 8, 2008 22:17:03 GMT -6
I am with DC on this at the upper levels. The examples I gave are simple PE games that I use to incorporate some fun things at the lower levels to ALL students..not just those that like football...(the fact that they have football application....yay me)
Other than the competitive element, I don't see much of a use for the idea. I am having a hard time wrapping my head around the "game tactics" idea. Football is SO much less free flowing than basketball or soccer, and as such i believe mini games lose much of their value. In the example of the inside pod (guards and DT) being given, I really see much of a need for any game. Don't get reached, don't allow a free player to the second level...I agree with DCohio on this one. Maybe I just don't see any benefit (other than the competitive aspects, which I do do from time to time)
|
|
bhb
Junior Member
Posts: 259
|
Post by bhb on Oct 8, 2008 23:42:59 GMT -6
we do a little of this in our EDD's.. just to keep it lively- during o-line drills we usually line up and go juniors VS seniors to see who can push the heavy high jump landing pad further in a specified amount of time.. Or go left side of the line vs right side in cage drills..
In all honesty though I agree with DC- keeping score can be a pain, and stopping for punishment (for lack of a better term) is a waste of time.. For us the scoring is so simple that the kids just keep it .. I couldn't care less about the score but the kids have some pretty funny arguments amongst each other while they're awaiting their turns..The reward for the winners is usually nothing more than they get water first.. Amazing what those kids will do to get water first, helmet stickers, or a T-shirt.. Personally I think it's kind of silly but those kids will run through walls for that stuff..lol..
|
|
