|
Post by lochness on Feb 1, 2010 13:25:52 GMT -6
Yes exactly that is 100% correct, and it is on me for it coming out the way that it did. I know that this has been a stickler between the HS coaches and the youth/MS coaches around here in the past; something that may have caused some animosity. When I coached MS and youth football, I wanted to win; every coach does. But, as it has been stated, it cannot be at the expense of the players' development. The kids have to play; if they practice, they get in there. When I was coaching youth, everyone played equally, assuming that they made it to practice. However, we coached the h-ll out of the kids; taught them the bare bone fundamentals and we were very successful; we went 7-1 and were basically platooning. It was fun, a lot of fun and not just because we won games. However, I don't like coaching youth and MS football because there are many coaches out there that are far more focused on winning, schemes, etc, than they are on developing the kids, getting them playing time and having fun. The team that we lost to had a roster of 22 kids; 12 of them played the whole game, the rest of the got one or two plays a piece. I'm not angry because we lost; I'm p-ssed because I had to sit there and watch a dozen kids ride the bench; all so that the other team could be the 'league' champion. But, again, that's where there's some issues between the coaches on this board. There have been more than a few youth and MS coached that have gotten very angry when they've been lambasted when they post about the importance of winning with 10 year olds... I agree with you here 100% I remember my second year coaching football I was the OC on a PeeWee team. We faced a defense that literally just blitzed 3 LB's through 1 gap. That was their defense. Nobody else did anything. They didn't have to, because they had 3 good LB's and all they did every single play was turn those kids loose and let them win or lose the game. All the other kids could barely even get out of a stance. But, they were very effective and we could hardly move the ball becuase our little guys had no idea how to handle the situation. Now, I remember being irritated that some lame-brain Vince Lombardi III came up with that "scheme" over pizza and Meister Brau at the local watering hole that July probably, and they'll end up slapping themselves on the back for being total geniuses...but they really weren't teaching their kids how to play DEFENSE. I think that's the point here. Don't sacrifice the basics at the expense of "doing what works." Sometimes "doing what works" is only handicapping the kids for when opponents are more sophisticated.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 1, 2010 13:43:53 GMT -6
One of the reasons why the Youth Boards were set up was to facilitate these kinds of discussions; playing time, appropriate schemes, drills, etc..
However, one of the issues that several of us have seen is the scheme side of youth football spilling over into the Offensive and Defensive boards. It's not that there are dumb questions in those sections, but the threads are not appropriate for the level of football that those boards were intended for.
I don't have any issue with a youth coach putting up a thread on those boards, but there are a few of us that have gotten several rude PMs from folks over there. Again, those of us that post on those boards a lot are by no means 'experts', but we are veteran coaches. We can provide you with information that we feel is valuable.
I guess, my strongest suggestion in terms of solving the internal strife would be to develop a thicker skin and for those inexperienced coaches to either post more on the Drills Boards or to ask questions that are about the fundamentals of the schemes and how to install them. Because, again, when you ask an open question about the _____ offense or _____ defense, many of your responses are going to pertain to the drills and fundamentals.
For example, I have always been a die hard, SBV cultist. However, I have been growing more interested in the Zone Read/Gun Veer offenses. So, I scour the site using the search engine and I post threads where I ask about the fundamentals of the offense; footwork, blocking schemes, reads, etc.. I have a dozen playbooks covering the Xs and Os of the offense, but I don't know sh-t about installing it correctly.
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Feb 1, 2010 14:19:58 GMT -6
Same here we talk so much about X's & O's but I really want to learn how people teach drills, or schemes the progressions and and nuts and blots. I can see from any playbook where the LB goes but I want to know what his read is what you teach and how you do it.
|
|
kahok
Sophomore Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by kahok on Feb 1, 2010 14:54:19 GMT -6
I don't mean blanced as in passing VS running I mean doing what is right for the kids in terms of fundementals. Hand blocking VS shoulder blocking you are teaching a fundemental blocking there is no rocket science there. Watch a NCAA game what do the kids need to be successful at the next level basic fundementals catching, blocking, sheding, tackling, throwing. These are all intregal parts of the game. That is what is important. I like wining don't get me wrong don't get me wrong but sometimes we get hung out a little in our league because our focus is not on the end product but the process. For example we run a variety of different coverages, more than most teams in our league we teach skills and spend a lot of time on the reads much like a University. In the last 2 seasons I have graduated 5 DB's all of whom play post secondary 2 of which started as freshman, we had 5 players make the U17 all star team 3 of them DB's. We have not won a Div 1 championship yet. The 2 teams that have won in the last 2 years have sent a combined 2 DB's to post secondary and 1 to a U17 all star team. The end product the number of championships you win does not justify how you get there. Bobby Knight comes to mind. Again this is my opinion not trying to start a pissing match just simply stating that a "system" is not always what is best for the players development. I do not understand the point you are trying to make here Coach. Sending guys to all star teams is more important than winning team championships? Maybe I'm confused, your wording leads me to believe you are coaching at the highschool level, and I would think the Championship would be WAY more important than placing kids on an allstar team or somewhere postsecondary. Skills are skills, if there is a team in America that wins a state championship without being good at the fundamentals of the game, I've yet to see it.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 1, 2010 19:07:54 GMT -6
I may have misunderstood because I wasn't clear on your perspective. I think you are saying that a youth coach shouldn't focus on just winning but on preparing kids to be successful at the next level as well. That probably changes from level to level. Yes exactly that is 100% correct, and it is on me for it coming out the way that it did. What do you mean by "preparing kids to be successful at the next level"? Because if you are saying what I THINK you are saying, I completely disagree.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 2, 2010 8:49:04 GMT -6
Yes exactly that is 100% correct, and it is on me for it coming out the way that it did. What do you mean by "preparing kids to be successful at the next level"? Because if you are saying what I THINK you are saying, I completely disagree. I can't speak for the original poster, but this statement tells me that the youth/MS levels need to be teaching kids basic fundamentals of football and focusing on playing the kids over winning. When I was in college I was coaching freshman football and taking a Sports Psychology class with two guys that coached in the MS that fed into us. They started b-tching in class one day because the professor was emphasizing what I talked about above. It was all about winning and schemes to them and they were vocal about it. I jumped them for it, in class; over half of the kids that played MS football at that school didn't come out the next year and those that did come out didn't know the first thing about football. I was the DC and I had kids that had no idea how to shed, tackle, man-turn/one turn in coverage, etc.. Most of them had been playing football for at least 4 years at that point, but they weren't competent at any of the basics. So, that's what I mean about preparing kids; teaching the basics, getting them playing time and just flat out instilling a love of football in all of them. You can't ask them to give 100% Monday through Thursday when they're not going to play on Friday. Or when they're all playing, but they're getting their a--es kicked all year because they're running around blocks and diving at the ball carrier's knees.
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Feb 2, 2010 9:20:48 GMT -6
OK lots of debate here so I will try to be as clear is possible. At the youth level the importance needs to be on skill and way less on winning and systems. The same argument can be made to an extent at the HS level. You can't sacrafice everything for wining. There are these teams that teach system system that has no roots in fundementals but all in gimick this doesn't help them improve as players. In turn they graduate and figure that this is how you coach it to.
Someone said that the championship in HS is more important than making it to postsecondary. I don't belive that at all sorry this is just one guy speaking. I can ask my guys that have graduated and gone on to post secondary, 3 of them could not afford it without football. Making it post secondary will probably improve their overall quality of life in the future.
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Feb 2, 2010 9:28:42 GMT -6
We run the Double Wing and don't throw much, but last year we had 8 kids sign to play at the next level. I don't think systems keep high school kids from having opportunities to play college football.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 2, 2010 9:31:18 GMT -6
OK lots of debate here so I will try to be as clear is possible. At the youth level the importance needs to be on skill and way less on winning and systems. The same argument can be made to an extent at the HS level. You can't sacrafice everything for wining. There are these teams that teach system system that has no roots in fundementals but all in gimick this doesn't help them improve as players. In turn they graduate and figure that this is how you coach it to. Someone said that the championship in HS is more important than making it to postsecondary. I don't belive that at all sorry this is just one guy speaking. I can ask my guys that have graduated and gone on to post secondary, 3 of them could not afford it without football. Making it post secondary will probably improve their overall quality of life in the future. But none of that has anything to do with the system that they ran in HS.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 2, 2010 9:37:24 GMT -6
OK lots of debate here so I will try to be as clear is possible. At the youth level the importance needs to be on skill and way less on winning and systems. The same argument can be made to an extent at the HS level. You can't sacrafice everything for wining. There are these teams that teach system system that has no roots in fundementals but all in gimick this doesn't help them improve as players. In turn they graduate and figure that this is how you coach it to. Someone said that the championship in HS is more important than making it to postsecondary. I don't belive that at all sorry this is just one guy speaking. I can ask my guys that have graduated and gone on to post secondary, 3 of them could not afford it without football. Making it post secondary will probably improve their overall quality of life in the future. So...what you're saying is we should structure our HS programs for the handful of kids (if we're lucky) who may have a chance to play college football - to heck with the vast majority of kids who will never play again, or finding the system that will give us the best chance to win as many games as possible?
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 2, 2010 10:02:51 GMT -6
Well, let's tie this back into the original post; we have had many discussions pertaining to the disparities between coaching at the various levels.
There is a wealth of information on the site, for all coaches, at all levels. If you're a youth/MS coach and you're upset at your perceived poor treatment, you need to take this into consideration. Outside of all of the 'thick skin' talk, this site is, far and away, the best football coaching site on the web. If you choose to go somewhere else and not to post here, that's fine, but you're missing out in a big way.
Personally, do I have an ego when it comes to coaching football? Yes, in some ways I do; I've been doing it for a long time, but I have done things the right way and the wrong way. I have learned from my experiences and become a decent coach.
Yes, there are going to be frustrations between the youth/MS coaches and the HS coaches and many of them tie into the points made on this thread. I have seen/been involved with all kinds of conflicts between the youth/MS level and the HS level, outside of this board. So, I, along with many other coaches, get their hackles up when we feel like a youth/MS coach has spoken outside of his frame of experience.
Now, many of the youth/MS coaches on this board are veterans; they've been coaching at that level for a very long time. I get all kinds of good information from these fellows; they know their stuff. However, when we get a youth/MS coach on the board that's been coaching for a year or two and they're a 'guru', in their own minds, they can bet on getting nailed on some of the boards. OJW is very good at being personable and I try to be. But there are other coaches on this board that are not going to be that way and it doesn't matter whether they're behind a computer screen or in your face.
Now, I going to take this to the next level. There are some very good coaches that I know personally and talk to regularly that got fed up with the opposite of what's being discussed here. The inexperienced coaches turned things into a 'battle on the chalk board' and it gets old when that stuff happens. Now, are they missing out on a lot of good information; YES. Should they have a thicker skin; YES. But, make no mistake this whole thing goes both ways.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 2, 2010 10:11:46 GMT -6
If you can't stand getting your ballz busted (mostly in a collegial way) you're probably in the wrong profession.
Coaching football not for the overly sensitive or faint of heart.
|
|
|
Post by bigdog2003 on Feb 2, 2010 10:23:24 GMT -6
As a ms coach, I have never taken anything said to me on this board as man he is a a-hole or anything like that. Sometimes I ask stupid questions on here, and people have given me the answer that the stupid question deserved. Do I think that there are coaches that think they are better than others, yeah, do I think they are on this board, no. If they are, I haven't seen it. Everyone here is so willing to share info with each other, and this is the greatest football board in the world.
I think a lot of the "attitude" that some show is because the same thing gets asked over and over at times, and it wouldn't happen if people would search for it before posting. I think that has a lot to do with some of the responses people get.
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Feb 2, 2010 14:46:20 GMT -6
There's always going to be a communication problem in internet discussions. You can't always gauge a person's demeanor, context or frame of mind through text. Add to that the different levels of operation between youth coaches and HS coaches and, yeah.... some egos may get rubbed the wrong way.
Another thing, it’s usually safe to assume that a coach knows nothing about HS football program just because that coach is an experienced youth coach. But, it is often assumed –sometimes, very mistakenly- that any coach that is a HS coach knows how to run a youth program.
I'm a youth coach. There are times that I've had to ask moderately sophisticated questions or, explained something that is on that level and have a HS coach immediately jump in with, "How you gonna get 10yr olds to do all that, coach?" or, "You shouldn't focus on stuff like that. Just coach the fundamentals and a few basic plays."
That can be irritating for some youth coaches. If I weren't sure that my players were sharp on their fundamentals or that they had no reasonable chance of learning or doing what I was posting about, I'd never had posted. I've had a 9>10yr old team that was more fundamentally sound and ran more sophisticated schemes than I've seen at the local middle school. It wasn't that I was so much better of a coach as the 7th grade coach. But, I had coached some of my players in lower levels. By the time they were 10yr olds they had basics and fundamentals down. They could move on to more sophisticated things. 7th grade ball is 'one & done' with your players as far as seasons go.
On the other hand, this season I've had to post a basic question like, 'How do I get my OL to stay low?" It wasn't because I didn't know drills or work on it in practice. It was because I just wasn't getting through to those boys. I was looking for new ways to communicate what I wanted them to do. And, answers varied from very basic tips on how to coach to more detailed answers from coaches that took it for granted that I knew what I was doing more or less.
LOL, and I know that youth coaches can wear on a HS coach’s nerves. Youth coaches can be super-fans and asking questions on how to install the Green Bay Packers offense. That’s no exaggeration. Had an AC want me to run the 10 plays that he saw the Packers run. And, there’s many other issues that youth coaches can have. But, that’s probably not a whole lot different than the variety of HS coaches that you could find.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Feb 2, 2010 16:30:04 GMT -6
It should be spelled Coaches', not Coaches. Geez man get it right......just kidding man. I would be the last guy to torch anyone. The great thing about this site is there are so many experienced guys who have a wealth of knowledge. I am slowly becoming a good coach, or at least the coach I have always wanted to be, because of all of these fine gents. Great site.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 2, 2010 18:48:39 GMT -6
OK lots of debate here so I will try to be as clear is possible. At the youth level the importance needs to be on skill and way less on winning and systems. The same argument can be made to an extent at the HS level. You can't sacrafice everything for wining. There are these teams that teach system system that has no roots in fundementals but all in gimick this doesn't help them improve as players. In turn they graduate and figure that this is how you coach it to. Someone said that the championship in HS is more important than making it to postsecondary. I don't belive that at all sorry this is just one guy speaking. I can ask my guys that have graduated and gone on to post secondary, 3 of them could not afford it without football. Making it post secondary will probably improve their overall quality of life in the future. That's what I thought you were saying and I completely and totally disagree. My job is NOT to "prepare kids for the next level". My job is to coach the kids I have and do the best I can with them. So what you are saying is that your program is geared towards the relatively small percentage of kids who will play college ball? Yeah...that sounds like a really sound way to run a program... Too bad for those kids who aren't good enough to play college ball...no sense wasting your time on them, right?
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 2, 2010 18:56:17 GMT -6
There's always going to be a communication problem in internet discussions. You can't always gauge a person's demeanor, context or frame of mind through text. Add to that the different levels of operation between youth coaches and HS coaches and, yeah.... some egos may get rubbed the wrong way. Another thing, it’s usually safe to assume that a coach knows nothing about HS football program just because that coach is an experienced youth coach. But, it is often assumed –sometimes, very mistakenly- that any coach that is a HS coach knows how to run a youth program. I'm a youth coach. There are times that I've had to ask moderately sophisticated questions or, explained something that is on that level and have a HS coach immediately jump in with, "How you gonna get 10yr olds to do all that, coach?" or, "You shouldn't focus on stuff like that. Just coach the fundamentals and a few basic plays." That can be irritating for some youth coaches. If I weren't sure that my players were sharp on their fundamentals or that they had no reasonable chance of learning or doing what I was posting about, I'd never had posted. I've had a 9>10yr old team that was more fundamentally sound and ran more sophisticated schemes than I've seen at the local middle school. It wasn't that I was so much better of a coach as the 7th grade coach. But, I had coached some of my players in lower levels. By the time they were 10yr olds they had basics and fundamentals down. They could move on to more sophisticated things. 7th grade ball is 'one & done' with your players as far as seasons go. On the other hand, this season I've had to post a basic question like, 'How do I get my OL to stay low?" It wasn't because I didn't know drills or work on it in practice. It was because I just wasn't getting through to those boys. I was looking for new ways to communicate what I wanted them to do. And, answers varied from very basic tips on how to coach to more detailed answers from coaches that took it for granted that I knew what I was doing more or less. LOL, and I know that youth coaches can wear on a HS coach’s nerves. Youth coaches can be super-fans and asking questions on how to install the Green Bay Packers offense. That’s no exaggeration. Had an AC want me to run the 10 plays that he saw the Packers run. And, there’s many other issues that youth coaches can have. But, that’s probably not a whole lot different than the variety of HS coaches that you could find. tiger, you may have some great points or being asking some great questions here. But I for one can't follow BIG BLOCKS OF TEXT like that. Please learn to paragraph your posts for maximum impact of what you're saying and to get helpful responses to what you're asking.
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Feb 2, 2010 20:37:13 GMT -6
BLB, It was paragraphed. I put spaces in to make it easier.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 2, 2010 23:14:26 GMT -6
Well since I believe I am one of the arsonists here, let me address a few things. First, no just because someone "torches" your post doesn't mean there is any EGO involved. If you examine some of the things you say, you might see where some of these "torch jobs" come from. but to some of you guys out there...get a grip man, this is high school football the majority of the time! I liken this to the equavilant in the busiiness world of managing a 7-11 and comparing yourself to Michael Dell or some other titan of industry. Not to say that what we do as HS coaches isnt' important to the kids and community, but come on. We already deal with most people outside of our profession thinking this, so why do you think it wouldn't tick some off when someone says this on one of our sites? These days everyone who watches a little ESPN is a schematic expert and can do as good a job as those who do the work can. With regards to the 4-4 to 4-2 post: You stated that you couldn't stop the run, and the solution being proposed was to change to a defense that is structurally the same as the one you were looking to change from. In layman's terms, you were changing a name, and looking for whiteboard solutions to green grass problems. Regarding the dlb wing post, Allisojh's post was fully deserving of any negative replies. Anyone posting things such as "They won't know what hit them if you just__________" or "We have never seen this, but I KNOW this would cream them" is just asking for criticism.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 3, 2010 7:16:36 GMT -6
Tough topic, always goes sideways a bit. Unfortunately we all know the one guy who is favoring his kid or only plays 12 of his 22, then everyone thinks that all youth coaches are that way. Around here that is the minority, unfortunately we still see a lot of guys who must be wasting a lot of practice time, because while their team looks functionally OK, they dont execute their fundamentals to any degree of consistent success accross their entire squad. You also have a lot of guys who know the game, played it before but just arent very good coaches. They dont have the communication skills, teaching skills or organizational skills to put together consistently competent teams. I judge coaches #1 by their retention rates ( ours are always 95% +) as well as if he was able to max out the individual and team potential of the group he is in charge of.
Like anything and maybe more so, you also have a lot of guys who go into CYA mode when they cant organize a group into a competent team, they like to blame others for their lack of success- the new American way. Demonize the successful to make those that didnt succeed feel better about themselves all so they wont get the dirty looks at the gas station or have to endure the whispers or cat calls from the stands. Or they are disappointed to see their "knowledge" didnt translate to good results on the field. Or they pretend that they werent really trying etc even though many of these type of teams practice FAR more than we do, coaches with matching shirts, film the whole 9 yards- but they arent trying?
I know from first hand experience, you can teach great fundamentals, have a whole lot of fun, play everyone (16 plays per game minimum), be great sports and win, these arent somehow mutually exclusive at all. These are mutually exclusive goals for poorly coached teams, hence the short cuts. It takes a ton of effort and patience to make that all happen. WInning is just a byproduct of doing everything right. The team that blocks and tackles the best almost always wins ie, the team with great fundamentals. With the exception of very weak rec YMCA type leagues, 1 player dominating just doesnt happen. I went to both the Pop Warner and AYF National Championships this year in Orlando, in the 15 games I watched just 1 was dominated by one kid. This year I was the HC of 28 games, I saw just 3 where 1 player dominated ( along with some pretty good fundamentals from that team as well) Our league has 3 age groups, the best fundamental team won the league title in each. At the Pop Warner and AYF National Championships I didnt see anything real fancy, the best Fundamental teams won. I posted some video here of several games that I shot etc Several games with just 1-2 missed tackles and great offensive line surge and fundamental blocking.
In the better leagues there are lots of non dad coaches. Ive coached for about 20 years and coached my own just 4 seasons. I dont think the HS coach is a "bad person" if his talent dictates that he not run a typical college or pro based offense.Nor do I think Paul Johnson is a "bad person" for not running an NFL based offense. If that is somehow the only "ethical" thing to do we should all run the NFL offenses starting at age 8, issue us all a standard NFL playbook and let the boredom begin. I guess all of us should be bowing down praying and paying homage to the NFL, it it the ONLY goal, in spite of the fact that less than 1/4 of 1% of youth players will ever play in the NFL AND the NFL and college teams will often find you and develop you if you have skills. BTW here in Nebraska you would be surprised at how FEW people bother even watching the NFL. Farve was a wishbone QB in HS etc. Barry Sanders was a Single Wing Tailback in HS etc One of my former youth league pulling guards now plays FB and is a DI recruit etc A buddy of mine played offensive guard for a HS Veer team, a DII Option team- University of Nebraska Omaha. He ended up playing 8 years in the NFL as a Center for the Giants and Chiefs. If you can play, they will find you.
|
|
|
Post by casec11 on Feb 3, 2010 9:54:03 GMT -6
There have been some great posts in this thread. (coachcb, Dave Cisar, to name a few) But there was something earlier said that has me thinking, it was about preparing players for the next level. Now I do believe as coaches', youth (myself 12-13) and High school, if a player wishes or has the ability to play at the next level, we should do everything we can to help them achieve that. But it can not come at the expense of "what ¡s best for the team". The 1- 8 who could go on are not anymore important then the 30-60 you are leading. Picking a system because 1 or 2 kids to may able to play in college sounds a bit odd (plus if they can play they will be found more often then not). That ¡s like saying these colleges running spread offences are hurting there kids because they don't run NFL pro style offense. If your goal is to send as many kids on your team to college then work on their grades, make it a priority (it should be anyway) Yes teach great fundamentals, blocking and tackling, how to get off blocks, pursuit, ect... I think this is all part of the statement below and winning comes with it, if done correctly (and some talent helps ) ---The purpose of extra curricular sport is to teach teamwork, discipline, work ethic, sportsmanship, humility, honor, self-esteem, achieving goals, among other things, while having fun in the process. They are kids for a short time in their lives, help them make the most of it. "All of them" I hope that came out the way I meant, I am not trying to come after anyone, and I am not saying that winning is not important. Just that the only system that realy maters, is the overall one, put in place to achieve the purpose stated above.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Feb 3, 2010 10:04:44 GMT -6
One of the best moments of the year was when our TE (who was getting recruited by a lot of D1s) comes up to me after a game...and on the same week he verballed to U of Arizona...and puts his arm around me. He says, "Coach. I wanted to tell you I really appreciate all you've done for me during the recruiting process". I enjoy coaching, but I enjoy giving the kids a chance to take their skills to the next level better. I'm talking JC to D1. No ego in the amount of extra time I spend on these young men making their recruiting videos, etc.
Trying not to thread jack, but I find that the Little League coaches I'm currently dealing with have way too much ego for me to comprehend. The football coaching fraternity...most guys understand what everyone goes through. The daddy coaching his kid Little League has a ways to go to check their egos in at the snack shack.
|
|
|
Post by hamerhead on Feb 3, 2010 10:15:18 GMT -6
The thing is, any offensive, defensive or special teams "system" or "scheme" that is fundamentally sound will teach the neccessary elements to be successfull at the next level. Fundamentals in football are needed at every level, that's why they're fundamental.
You can run any system and be fine because you're still going to need to block, tackle, etc to be successfull at your level and in the future. So to me, the discrepency comes when coaches at youth levels (under 9th grade IMO):
1) Don't play every kid/give every kid a chance. I'm not saying play them all equal minutes and give everybody a turn at QB, that's not my point. But teach them all how to block, how to tackle, etc and make sure they're all getting legitimate minutes and feel like they're part of the team.
2) Use "systems" that aren't fundamentally sound. Look, blitzing your studs off the edges may work every play in youth ball but not at any other level. Why? Because the system isn't sound, it's flawed. I don't care if you run 5-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-2, 6-1 or whatever....it can work if taught right. Same thing on offense. But just teaching the kids to rely on Johnny to go make the tackle is a waste.
3) The kids have to have fun. As a HS coach, don't run kids out of my program. That little bench warmer kid that you don't ever give any reps to may quit the program and go play soccer because you weren't giving him any love, all because you're too busy trying to stroke Johnny and his parents ego in the name of winning a youth league ball game. What happens when Johnny blows out a knee as a tenth grader? Then I'll need the other kid...who's playing soccer because you ran him off.
Football is the ultimate team game. One guy cannot win a football game (though at anything under 14yrs old it may be different). If you're not teaching the game, then to hell with you. If you're teaching the game, the way its played, and trying to instill a love for the game in every kid- then by all means, win em all coach.
Anybody can win with talented, motivated kids. But developing talent where there was little and motivating the disengaged is what shows a true coach and teaches skills neccessary to be successfull at any level, while simultanteously preparing kids for the next level (be that HS, College, whatever ) should they so desire and have the ability.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 3, 2010 10:38:04 GMT -6
I'm with tiger46 here (support). He had a lot to articulate, if you have problems reading, I guess you can stick to 7 word responses. I'm sure you'll get a lot of information out of that....
With regards to "coaches ego", take a cue from coachd5085's post above on clarifying just what, in particular, is the source of irritation.
It takes all kinds.
And one should be determined if a coach is; + Just a straight up AHole + Just seeking a deeper understanding/galvanization + Just has a different/contrary view + Just is offering sales pitches (send), and has no intent to receive anything (more to do with'ego' of selfish pride/prove himself to others)
I'm sure I fit the bill of the top 3 about 90% of the time. Not right or wrong, but I happen to value friction more than comfort when dealing with 'answers'. Defending a view/idea can be extremely beneficial in developing your teaching/game plan (rather than gaining false confidence to be proven wrong on game night).
I am learning to NOT POST. You can have the best of intentions, and still be received as advesarial by folks seeking replies, and get no where (when contrary/non-affirming input will NOT be received).
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 3, 2010 10:43:51 GMT -6
The thing is, any offensive, defensive or special teams "system" or "scheme" that is fundamentally sound will teach the neccessary elements to be successfull at the next level. Fundamentals in football are needed at every level, that's why they're fundamental. You can run any system and be fine because you're still going to need to block, tackle, etc to be successfull at your level and in the future. So to me, the discrepency comes when coaches at youth levels (under 9th grade IMO): 1) Don't play every kid/give every kid a chance. I'm not saying play them all equal minutes and give everybody a turn at QB, that's not my point. But teach them all how to block, how to tackle, etc and make sure they're all getting legitimate minutes and feel like they're part of the team. 2) Use "systems" that aren't fundamentally sound. Look, blitzing your studs off the edges may work every play in youth ball but not at any other level. Why? Because the system isn't sound, it's flawed. I don't care if you run 5-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-2, 6-1 or whatever....it can work if taught right. Same thing on offense. But just teaching the kids to rely on Johnny to go make the tackle is a waste. 3) The kids have to have fun. As a HS coach, don't run kids out of my program. That little bench warmer kid that you don't ever give any reps to may quit the program and go play soccer because you weren't giving him any love, all because you're too busy trying to stroke Johnny and his parents ego in the name of winning a youth league ball game. What happens when Johnny blows out a knee as a tenth grader? Then I'll need the other kid...who's playing soccer because you ran him off. Football is the ultimate team game. One guy cannot win a football game (though at anything under 14yrs old it may be different). If you're not teaching the game, then to hell with you. If you're teaching the game, the way its played, and trying to instill a love for the game in every kid- then by all means, win em all coach. Anybody can win with talented, motivated kids. But developing talent where there was little and motivating the disengaged is what shows a true coach and teaches skills neccessary to be successfull at any level, while simultanteously preparing kids for the next level (be that HS, College, whatever ) should they so desire and have the ability. I agree with this one 100%, exactly what we try to do every season. Once a kids falls in love with the game, he cant imagine NOT playing, our goal. The HS teams have him for 4 years and can make whatever they want out of him, we helped get him to the door with some basic skills, some good memories and a passion for playing. As to criticism/friction sometimes you can learn from it, sometimes it is sour grapes and sometimes it's just someone that for whatever reason has a need to try and prove he's the smartest guy in the room. Just have to shrug some of it off and not worry about it.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Feb 3, 2010 11:24:34 GMT -6
One coach in our area who had a 54 win streak at one point, never worked on fundamentals in practice, well not very much anyway. Most of the time was used to run plays. I have wondered about this.
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Feb 3, 2010 11:28:27 GMT -6
I have been coaching youth ball…2nd – 8th grade since 1983 with a 4 year stunt in there at the HS level which I did not enjoy. I also coached semi pro ball in a very well organized league for 7 years and did enjoy that very much.
If you are a student of the game then you get the respect you deserve. Learning requires asking dumb questions. When this site first started there were plenty of dumb questions and many of those came from me. Not one coach flamed on me. Matter of fact the flow of info via e-mail was staggering.
That doesn’t happen anymore.
Now if you spend a little time you will find a discussion on the topic in question at least. So maybe asking dumb questions is a sign of laziness anymore.
This site has become an encyclopedia as well as a forum for discussion. It seems though…the same questions are asked numerous times which would irritate me but I am not a major poster so I have no place to say so.
I appreciate the youth section here. There are other forums geared toward the youth coach that are far more active but I enjoy the HS coaches view on many topics. That has huge value.
Football is football so it is interesting to read about all of the different philosophies. My philosophy is to teach the kids the greatest game on Earth so that half of them will continue on and play HS ball. Winning helps that along. Those who don’t play to win are completely missing the point of sports.
How do you win at the youth level…teach sound fundamentals within a tight regiment. Do that and you can indeed play all of the kids without being concerned.
Finally, coaching requires some semblance of an ego. Coaching can be very empowering. You dictate a lot of things to the masses. I think you would fail if that didn’t drive you just a little bit. Its just too bad so many abuse that power.
Coach Mike
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 3, 2010 11:35:04 GMT -6
One coach in our area who had a 54 win streak at one point, never worked on fundamentals in practice, well not very much anyway. Most of the time was used to run plays. I have wondered about this. Ive found about 1/2 of our practice is indys/fundys and the rest is team after the first month. However when doing things like rapid rep fit and freeze team offensive reps, you can work on fundamentals a bunch if managed properly. We have 4 offensive coaches all coaching up 2-3 kids only. Player is only released from rep after he is touched on the top of his head- he freezes in place where he makes "contact" with his designated target. He is held accountable to blocking the right person, correct lead step, correct blocking fit/head placement, correct pad level. The backs, correct ball fit/protection, attack angle, blocking fits/resp, fakes, handoff fits,patterns, throwing mechanics etc Hard to do if you scrimmage all day ( we dont scrimmage much) all out. We do the same on defense and rotate in the remainder on every single rep ( helps kids to get great at subbing, conditions, forces you to coach everyone up and keeps everyone engaged) Just running plays and scrimmaging, probably not getting a lot of fundy development, but "team" segments dont always means fundys arent being developed in those segments IMO. When I did my 2 year study of the very best and worst teams in the area, the best teams ALWAYS did lots of fundys, the poor teams almost always did a TON of daily scrimmaging.
|
|
|
Post by iacoachq on Feb 3, 2010 11:50:59 GMT -6
I don't get why people get so upset over a board. It's like when I used to post on Rivals in college. People would get their feelings hurt over a kid you'll never meet.
Gotta have a thick skin to be in this profession. It's a message board, who cares if someone attacked you. Now if someone on my staff did it, that would be a different story
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Feb 3, 2010 14:49:23 GMT -6
Good post Dave. Thanks
|
|