Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2009 21:12:43 GMT -6
Had an interesting conversation today, though I'd ask the coaches here to get your take on the conversation, which has left me scratching my head.
Without going into specifics, I was told changing offenses from the Single wing was a mistake, for several reasons.
My question: Are we as coaches supposed to settle into a "groove"when we find success and never change, riding it to it's death making minimal changes along the way, or is it our job to constantly search out new things (or old) to give us the advantage, even if it's a complete change from what you do
Are we supposed to be put into a box with a label on it?
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Mar 30, 2009 22:22:36 GMT -6
Coach, I think that the you only want to be typecast IF you win. If you are winning alot of games, you might not mind being known as the coach who "believes" in the power running game, or as a wing-t coach. "Corky" Rodgers, a certain hall of fame coach here in Florida has been a wing-t coach since 1983, being Veer before that. He is known as that, also known as having 8 state championship rings. So, if you are losing a lot of games, it might be a good idea to try something else. I don't mean that if you are losing in the first couple of years of a rebuild-that's something else entirely. Another point: I know a number of really bad Shotgun Spread teams. I'm friends with a coach who is one of those, he knows more about pass patterns than I will ever know. If I want to know something about pass patterns, I'll call him. He also has won 2 games in three years. Another point: If you are running the Doublewing, you better NOT lose, or if you do, you'd better be running more than one formation. People will forgive you if you pass alot and lose. They will call you innovative, clever, up-to-date, and smart. However, if you are running an Odd-looking offense like the Doublewing, they will show you no mercy at all if you lose. Of course, that's not going to happen, because Doublewing teams don't lose football games...what was I thinking.
|
|
|
Post by coachmoore42 on Mar 30, 2009 22:42:33 GMT -6
If it's successful...don't rebuild...retool.
Don't change it for the sake of changing it. Make small, well-thought out adjustments to what is working.
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Mar 30, 2009 22:57:09 GMT -6
^Nailed it.^
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Mar 31, 2009 5:30:03 GMT -6
I worked for a Wing-T team for years who changed from the split-back veer to the Wing-T. The last few years they have not won games. I would argue it is because the athletes are down right now.
A guy came back from a clinic and had some spread-wing cutups. I personally thought the fundamentals and the execution from the cutups were down in comparison to what my former team executed at.
Long story short, since they are A) not successful right now and B) run a non-traditional offense (as in: it is not what you see in college or the pros, so people can't relate) people are not supportive. I ran many of the same plays that my former team runs, but I did it out of the gun and Pistol and I seemed so "innovative", however, the concepts were still: Belly, trap, fly sweep, down option waggle etc.
Coach, if I may be so bold. If you are successful, then keep the same system and just tweak it to your kids or to create excitement. Add some new formations, a screen game or perhaps some different ways to get to the outside like (jet, speed option, rocket etc.). I apologize for my lack of understanding of your system, but it sounds like you have a great program in place. Ironically, I am looking at becoming more singlewinglike.
Note: When I say people "don't relate", you can see what I mean when you sit in the stands and people say stupid stuff like: "why do they run the same play" (in reference to Trap, Belly, Down, Sally and Truck; hardly the same freaking play.)
|
|
|
Post by bigm0073 on Mar 31, 2009 5:32:50 GMT -6
You do what you see fit. You know your players and what you have coming up.... For example -
At my school our first year we tried to whole spread option stuff... The only problem was that my WR were "ok" and my QB was "ok"... The QB was not big and strong and he did not run a 4.5 forty (around a 4.85..)... Eventually teams knew it and just LOCKED up on our WR, played cover zero and brought 7 every play.... Can you say 1,2,3 punt.... OUr WR just were not that good... BUT we have very, very good RB (Probably 5-6 with some good young ones coming up...) and our OL is our strength... Hmmmm... Well we went to some Jet sweep double wing stuff (Ran it at another school). All of a sudden last game of the season we ran for over 330 yards and had TWO 100 yard rushers... Found our strenghth..
Yes these RB are good athletes but they just are not good wr... THey are tough, gritty, will block, have good speed but at WR they are average...
Moral of the story we are just trying to get the best players on the field and use them properly... If the single wing works for you then by all means...
In todays day and age the spread is good but just like any offense it has its limitations and weaknesses. Do what you think is best.. There are still PLENTY of coaches running double wing, wing T, Option, Flexbone today and many are doing very, very well.....
|
|
|
Post by jpdaley25 on Mar 31, 2009 6:02:08 GMT -6
I think there is plenty of room to be innovative and keep things fresh within a particular offense. Sometimes small changes to suit your tallent are necessary to propel you to the next level, but wholesale changes should only come when what you are doing is unsuccessfull and totally out of whack with the kind of kids you have.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 31, 2009 6:03:39 GMT -6
Success is EXECUTION BASED, not system based. If your staff has been successful in getting your players to execute an offense, why change?
There is no depreciation in football. You can't "use up" an offense and "ride it to its death"
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Mar 31, 2009 6:23:59 GMT -6
Very rarely do you have a chance to get good at understanding and coaching something if you are changing it every 3 years. The more you run somethng, the better you should get at it. Your kids will be better because they are used to it and there is consistency. You will be better coaching it because you understand the ins-and-outs, the defensive adjustments you can expect, the "progression" and curriculum that is necessary to properly teach and install it.
In my opinion, wholesale changes are usually more about the coach than they are about the kids or the program. It's "panic" or it's "we have to change to xyz to make better use of our personnel" rhetoric.
A speaker at the Glazier Clinic I went to a few weeks ago (Tommy Buzzo from Liberty HS VA) said it best:
"So many of you coaches go online or go to these clinics looking to CHANGE your offense or your defense. You're looking for that next great scheme, or you're looking to take advantage of that one great kid you have. Let me tell you something: If you are changing your offense to fit one great player, you're out of your mind. First of all, you better have at least TWO great players at that same position. If you're a wing-t staff through-and-through and you change to the spread to run zone read with a great QB and he goes down mid-season, and your backup isn't worth a $h!t, where are you now? And what are you going to do when that kid graduates?? Change again and again? THINK about it, men..."
I liked it so much, I wrote it down as best as I could remember it.
I love the quote coachd5085:
There is no depreciation in football. You can't "use up" an offense and "ride it to its death"
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Mar 31, 2009 6:27:28 GMT -6
Are we supposed to be put into a box with a label on it? No, but we ARE supposed to know our $h!t and be darn good at it, and that's tough to do when you are jerking around with different schemes all the time. That's just my take on it. I've never seen a "scheme jumper" team have much consistent success.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Mar 31, 2009 6:32:48 GMT -6
5085, keen sense for the obvious: "There is no depreciation in football. You can't "use up" an offense and "ride it to its death"" Amen.
"The more you run something, the better you should get at it. Your kids will be better because they are used to it and there is consistency."
Well stated loch.
"I've never seen a "scheme jumper" team have much consistent success." Nor have a seen too many "scheme creator" teams have much success. Why reinvent the wheel? Oh yeah, because coaches are a prideful bunch. The more of an innovator someone is, the better and more respected of a coach they are. Hey, they might even get asked to speak at a clinic.
|
|
|
Post by gdoggwr on Mar 31, 2009 7:05:03 GMT -6
Note: When I say people "don't relate", you can see what I mean when you sit in the stands and people say stupid stuff like: "why do they run the same play" (in reference to Trap, Belly, Down, Sally and Truck; hardly the same freaking play.) I know what you mean. Of course, the flipside is: is you are are getting 5+ yards when you run the play, why would you run a different play?
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Mar 31, 2009 7:32:08 GMT -6
Here is a portion of a Pete Carroll Clinic, I thought might be apprpriate for this thread If there are things in our program that we would like to do but we don’t execute well we don’t do them. We have to have all our schemes, clock management, and game plans in order. If we don’t have them in order we don’t attempt to do them on game day. I have found over the years that the more you try to do the thinner you spread yourself. The thinner you spread yourself the more apt you are to make mistakes and errors. To be a good football team you have to be hard to beat. That means you are not beating yourself with mistakes and turnovers.
To do those things well you have to have a clear vision of what you want your team to look like. You have to know that so well that you can convince your players and coaches of what they should see when they watch films of your team. If they can’t do that then they are still misguided by their vision.
My philosophy is real simple. I want to play football with a team that plays with great effort in all phases of the game. Players have to play with great enthusiasm. That type of play energizes your team, staff, and everyone in the stadium. The rest of it can be found here: trojanfootballanalysis.com/43_under_base_defense.html
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Mar 31, 2009 7:38:46 GMT -6
I could be wrong here (wouldn't be the first time), but it seems to me that the coaches who are typecast are the most successful ones. Just looking at Kansas prep football, I would say the the state championship coaches/programs for 2A, 3A, 4A, and 5A are all typecast. Smith Center, 2A state champ for 5 consecutive years, is known for the Barta Bone. Conway Springs, 3A state champ numerous times in the past decade, is known for the Single Wing. Topeka Hayden won 4A this year running Wing-T. Hutchinson won the 5A state title this year after dominating 6A for several years. They run the Flex Bone.
If being typecast is wrong, I don't want to be right!
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Mar 31, 2009 7:40:50 GMT -6
Develop an identity and make it a good one.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Mar 31, 2009 10:03:48 GMT -6
Didn't Barbara Madrell sing that song??
What is the Barta Bone??
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Mar 31, 2009 10:22:12 GMT -6
Barta Bone - a power wishbone belly offense
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Mar 31, 2009 11:56:53 GMT -6
Had an interesting conversation today, though I'd ask the coaches here to get your take on the conversation, which has left me scratching my head. Without going into specifics, I was told changing offenses from the Single wing was a mistake, for several reasons. My question: Are we as coaches supposed to settle into a "groove"when we find success and never change, riding it to it's death making minimal changes along the way, or is it our job to constantly search out new things (or old) to give us the advantage, even if it's a complete change from what you do Are we supposed to be put into a box with a label on it? Coachkell, Another point on this topic... It IS our job to constantly seek new things out and get better. But, in my mind, those "new things" are 1. Better techniques for blocking and tackling 2. More efficient practice structures 3. Player development stuff in the off season 4. Better "tweaks" to existing plays, schemes, etc. (example: "My Zone Read sucks...does anyone know how I can fix my QB footwork?") 5. Team and character building motivational tools 6. Weightroom program improvement stuff 7. What are the "new offenses" and "new defenses" doing so that I can understand and be better than them with my "old defense" and my "old offense" 8. How do I optimize my existing personnel within my base systems? These are the things I believe we need to constantly be getting better at.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Mar 31, 2009 12:57:35 GMT -6
Success is EXECUTION BASED, not system based. WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Funny, I was going to say that about this: Had an interesting conversation today, though I'd ask the coaches here to get your take on the conversation, which has left me scratching my head. Without going into specifics, I was told changing offenses from the Single wing was a mistake, for several reasons. My question: Are we as coaches supposed to settle into a "groove"when we find success and never change, riding it to it's death making minimal changes along the way, or is it our job to constantly search out new things (or old) to give us the advantage, even if it's a complete change from what you do Are we supposed to be put into a box with a label on it? Coachkell, Another point on this topic... It IS our job to constantly seek new things out and get better. But, in my mind, those "new things" are 1. Better techniques for blocking and tackling 2. More efficient practice structures 3. Player development stuff in the off season 4. Better "tweaks" to existing plays, schemes, etc. (example: "My Zone Read sucks...does anyone know how I can fix my QB footwork?") 5. Team and character building motivational tools 6. Weightroom program improvement stuff 7. What are the "new offenses" and "new defenses" doing so that I can understand and be better than them with my "old defense" and my "old offense" 8. How do I optimize my existing personnel within my base systems? These are the things I believe we need to constantly be getting better at. Loch's right, putting in a "new" offense is a headache. Emphasizing different things in your offense isn't. If we got a running QB, we will be about 50-50 in our spread Without a running QB, we will be about 35-65 PASS MODULAR is the buzz word. That's what you want to be...... Adapt to personnel....don't over haul.......... The over haul's happen when you have a change in philosophy. That's the damnedest thing about teams going spread. They go spread, but they don't have the philosophy to match it, which is why they suck. "Gee, I wanted to run zone read, but they play cover 0 and put everyone in the box." {censored}If your philosophy changes, then you are allowed to change, because you will have the fortitude and commitment to make it work. Philosophy begets Concepts begets Playbook NOT Playbook begets winning
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Mar 31, 2009 15:30:35 GMT -6
"Didn't Barbara Madrell sing that song??"
I think so, I tell my wife the same thing about Britney Spears.
"Hunny if Britney Spears is wrong, then I don't wanna be right".
Oh that one really ticks her off.
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Mar 31, 2009 16:02:40 GMT -6
We've been running the fly for about nine years, wing-t for about eight before that. People are so sick of us running the ball, it's visible at the games. Meanwhile teams in our league are spreading out, throwing the ball, making all kinds of motions and shifts, all that jazz. Most years, we win more than they do, they get new coaches, new offenses, and it starts again. We're just the goofy fly guys who keep doing the same ol' junk.
The truth? We're glad to be typecast because that means we're good at what we do. Our offense fits our personnel most years, with quick, athletic lineman and fast, tough, flexible skill position players. We don't run the fly because we want to excite the crowd, we run it because it fits our athletes, allows us to diminish theirs, and gives the best chance to win, which excites the crowd. We'll tweak our scheme, sure, some years we throw because we've a good QB, some years we feature our sweeper, some years it's the tailback, two years ago it was the fullback, but you can be darn sure that our offense is gonna feature that goofy little bugger going in motion nearly every play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2009 17:38:52 GMT -6
Are we supposed to be put into a box with a label on it? No, but we ARE supposed to know our $h!t and be darn good at it, and that's tough to do when you are jerking around with different schemes all the time. That's just my take on it. I've never seen a "scheme jumper" team have much consistent success. Coach I know of a few coaches that changed wholesale and had success,..I was one of them (DW-SW). I think it comes down to the talent you have and the coach. Another thing I've noticed that if you talk to most successful coaches it seems like they all went through an "evolution"' even if they were successful. I remember Hugh Wyatt telling me that, he said he ran Veer and a few other schemes throughout the years, and was very succesful running Wing T , but when he saw Markhams DW he immediately changed...though he was successful with the Wing T. I'm not talking about droping a scheme every 3 years, I'm not stupid, but I'm not sure if I've found "that" scheme yet. I think it's because of our experience with the DW, that I'm constantly on the move looking at new stuff. The same thing now is happening with the S/W, alot of teams (in our league) are running it.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 31, 2009 17:58:25 GMT -6
Coach I know of a few coaches that changed wholesale and had success,..I was one of them (DW-SW). I think it comes down to the talent you have and the coach. Actually, I would argue that the success came from working HARDER and being more detail oriented while installing a new offense. Also, an added bonus is that they are usually benefiting from another coach help them in the installation.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Apr 1, 2009 7:23:31 GMT -6
No, but we ARE supposed to know our $h!t and be darn good at it, and that's tough to do when you are jerking around with different schemes all the time. That's just my take on it. I've never seen a "scheme jumper" team have much consistent success. Coach I know of a few coaches that changed wholesale and had success,..I was one of them (DW-SW). I think it comes down to the talent you have and the coach. Another thing I've noticed that if you talk to most successful coaches it seems like they all went through an "evolution"' even if they were successful. I remember Hugh Wyatt telling me that, he said he ran Veer and a few other schemes throughout the years, and was very succesful running Wing T , but when he saw Markhams DW he immediately changed...though he was successful with the Wing T. I'm not talking about droping a scheme every 3 years, I'm not stupid, but I'm not sure if I've found "that" scheme yet. I think it's because of our experience with the DW, that I'm constantly on the move looking at new stuff. The same thing now is happening with the S/W, alot of teams (in our league) are running it. I think it is more healthy for a coach to go through that learning process you speak of by moving around every so often to coach in different systems, under established "experts" rather than making changes within an established program, especially if it is early in the coach's career. My first 5 years in, I coached: 2 years of wishbone 1 year of I-based stuff 1 year of pure deleware style wing-T 1 year of multiple pro I also spent a year in a pure "WCO" system a few years later when we had a buffoon 1-year HC come into a program that I was a part of. All of those systems were under HC's who were well versed in the system, believed in it, and knew how to teach it to me as a young coach. Most of this varied exposure was due to my moving to different programs as opportunities presented themselves early on in my career. I've never been on a team that has simply said "we need to change offenses next year," though. Not in 16 years. Maybe I'm just incapable of understanding any other way because I've never done it myself. Since 2001 though, I have changed my system and philosophy very little. I believe I have a solid base upon which to build, and I'm able to combine things I learned early in my coaching career to fit into the existing system and serve as "tweaks" and "adjustments" based on our personnel and the types of defenses we will see. I think the key to "finding that system" is finding something that fits your philosophy, is flexible enough to be "tweaked" with any new knowledge you may want to incorporate or to support personnel issues, and is easy to adjust based on what opponents are showing you. I'll tell you this...if someone ever "streotypes" me as a guy who always runs the Belly (double dive) Series down your throat with good blocking and a decent complimentary pass game...then I am happier than a pig in feces, because that's what I WANT to be known as. It's an identity that I've worked long to try to establish. If you were to write on paper the 3 or 4 things that are important to you with regard to offensive football...what would they be? Maybe that will help you identify something that you can be happy with / proud of? Keep up the conversation coach, I think it's an important one...!
|
|
|
Post by coachjuice on Apr 1, 2009 12:39:23 GMT -6
5085-PERFECT!!!!!! Success is execution based.
We have a team in this area that runs Split back Belly. They start in Pee-Wee's go undefeated. They run it in Juniors and Seniors, go undefeated. There HS program is always undefeated or almost there. They run 3 plays! When other coaches try to replicate it they can't. It is a site to see.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Apr 1, 2009 12:44:26 GMT -6
5085-PERFECT!!!!!! Success is execution based. We have a team in this area that runs Split back Belly. They start in Pee-Wee's go undefeated. They run it in Juniors and Seniors, go undefeated. There HS program is always undefeated or almost there. They run 3 plays! When other coaches try to replicate it they can't. It is a site to see. Coach, We run a ton of splitback and I-based Belly ourselves. Do you have any film you would be willing to share, or are there any posts on youtube, etc? I'd love to see how well they execute.
|
|
|
Post by coachjuice on Apr 1, 2009 13:09:35 GMT -6
Lochness,
Send me a PM with your email or your address and I will get you that stuff. Where are you located?
Juice
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2009 16:17:07 GMT -6
I always try to be different or "contrairian" for those of you that follow John Reed. I feel a large part of our success was due to the unfamiliarity that opposing coaches had with the offense. Back in 05 we were the only team in the area running the SW, now there's 5 teams within a 5 mile radius that run it 3 of our own teams within our organization now run it.
|
|