|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 10:50:06 GMT -6
I've been watching our games from last season, and a pattern has been emerging.
Our offense gets in a groove easily, and gets thrown out of a groove easily.
We are no huddle team, and we try to run people........when our defense gets a three and out or a turnover, we can put up points quickly.
We had a game this season in the mud and rain, against an evenly matched opponent where we forced a couple of turnovers early, and BAM, we were up 22-0 with 6 minutes left in the first quarter.
Their next two drives, they got first downs and milked the clock, and our next two drives stalled........this theme repeated itself through out our season (keep away left our offense stagnant).......when we are forcing turnovers and getting 3 and outs, we avalanche a team.
It's like our offense rests too long, and they forget how to execute (this is not an inactivity thing, about 7 or 8 of the offensive guys ARE playing defense too).
So, in the interest of being the best team possible, I'm rethinking my defensive approach to the game.
Right now, I want to bend and not break, waiting for the offense to make a mistake. However, I'm starting to think about running something more aggressive.
I mean, have the philosophy of: "someone is fixin' to score"......either they punt or score in 3 plays.
Either way, we get to ball back and stay "in groove" offensively, as that is when we seem to be our best.
Also, with turnovers being the number one statistical indicator of which team will win, perhaps the calculus should focus less on how many points a defense yields, and instead place a premium on how many turnovers they can garner.....
(In case you can't tell, the large, embolden text is what I'd like to talk about........as in: perhaps this is a better measure of a defense?)
It's a theory, and I imagine this thread will take another avenue than what I intend (guess that's karma), but in the ever pressing effort to think outside the box........
..........whaddaya think?
|
|
|
Post by leighty on May 14, 2010 10:54:05 GMT -6
There's got to be a better way of addressing your offensive woes without changing your defensive philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by cnunley on May 14, 2010 11:24:18 GMT -6
Instead of totally changing your defensive philosophy, why not just emphasize turnovers at every possible opportunity.
One thing that we're doing for this upcoming season that we havent done before is really emphasizing turnovers. We barely caused any last year and we want to make that a focus.
We are begining our "Turnover for Hunger" campaign this fall which we stole from someone on Huey.
We are going to get the student body and community to pledge X amount of canned goods for every turnover we cause during a game. We cause 2 turnovers, everyone brings in the amount of food to our school on Monday. At the end of the season it will be taken to a local Food bank.
Because of this, we will have turnover circuits and drills EVERYDAY to show our kids how important this is to us.
Might not be anywhere near an answer you're looking for, JMO
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 11:27:34 GMT -6
Instead of totally changing your defensive philosophy, why not just emphasize turnovers at every possible opportunity. One thing that we're doing for this upcoming season that we havent done before is really emphasizing turnovers. We barely caused any last year and we want to make that a focus. We are begining our "Turnover for Hunger" campaign this fall which we stole from someone on Huey. We are going to get the student body and community to pledge X amount of canned goods for every turnover we cause during a game. We cause 2 turnovers, everyone brings in the amount of food to our school on Monday. At the end of the season it will be taken to a local Food bank. Because of this, we will have turnover circuits and drills EVERYDAY to show our kids how important this is to us. Might not be anywhere near an answer you're looking for, JMO That is cool.........VERY COOL
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 11:42:31 GMT -6
Guys,
I know this is a little against the grain, but I thought I would post this idea and see where we boiled it down to........
I appreciate all the comments so far.
Our offensive woes seem to come only after prolong periods of NOT having the football. A 7:00 minute drive just kills all the momentum we had offensively, and the thinking (not practice) is if we got the ball back, HOWEVER we got it back, it would be preferable to giving up 7 minutes and a score, only to go three and out and put our defense in a tougher situation.
I'm not giving up on defense, I just want to theorize about what their function ought to be.
|
|
|
Post by playsmart on May 14, 2010 11:48:47 GMT -6
I would repeat what the previous post have sad. Don't change anything philosophy. Just change the way you coach and what you are emphasizing. The only thing you can do is be you. If you are a bend but don't break guy then you are going to be a horrible aggressive guy. Just be yourself.
Emphasis turnovers more like stated before. Add more turnover circuits, when a gang tackle opportunity comes about in practice just start yelling "GET THE BALL", or add some type turnover thing at the end of every indy drill. Just little things that you emphasize will help out.
On the offense side of the ball, you could change practice up a little. get a structured practice going where the kids know whats is happening and when. Sometimes during the defensive time (when the players aren't expecting it), call out the offense and expect nothing less than perfection and be intense. Constantly changing things in practice could help an offense develop to where they can execute anything anyplace. I would probably suggest that your get your players execution to where you want it before you start to change things.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on May 14, 2010 12:11:22 GMT -6
Just a thought..Maybe you change your offensive philosophy..give the defense some rest..It is all connected..read anything by Parcells and Belechek..they are not quick scoring machines..The idea is to win the game..they can't score if the defense is on the bench..I'd rather win 10-7 then 48-45..but that's just me...not always the case w/ some OC's especially in college
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 12:43:36 GMT -6
Just a thought..Maybe you change your offensive philosophy..give the defense some rest..It is all connected..read anything by Parcells and Belechek..they are not quick scoring machines..The idea is to win the game..they can't score if the defense is on the bench..I'd rather win 10-7 then 48-45..but that's just me...not always the case w/ some OC's especially in college After the success we've had.....I don't see us changing offensive philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by unc31 on May 14, 2010 12:53:25 GMT -6
Coach, just a thought. Maybe the reason you can't get it going again on offense is the fact that you have as you said 7 or 8 guys playing defense as well as offense. Maybe they are simply fatigued, period. I am sure they are in shape, but still a long offensive drive can wear you down.
Maybe NOT being no huddle would be an advantage to you with 7 or 8 two way starters. The other alternative in my mind would be to find some quality backups to get them off the field on defense a little so the next offensive series will be a more productive.
|
|
|
Post by leighty on May 14, 2010 13:27:34 GMT -6
I agree with this guy. I don't know that there are a whole lot of advantages to being no-huddle if you've got 8 of 11 going both ways.
|
|
|
Post by hamerhead on May 14, 2010 14:03:12 GMT -6
In my opinion, there is only one measure of a defense. How many points did they give up? The end. Conversely, I also believe the only measure of an offense is how many points they score.
Trying to change a defense that is by definition successfull (ie, not giving up points) is a mistake in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by RENO6 on May 14, 2010 14:19:09 GMT -6
BEND DONT BREAK is best D. Philosophy in my opinion.
Turning the ball over on offense should not change D. Philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 15:57:44 GMT -6
Guys, I honestly appreciate the comments so far.
I guess to be clear: We are not trading offensive philosophy. That is not the problem.
We don't get tired.........what I am asserting is quite the opposite: our kids don't get tired, they get out of sync.
What this is ultimately about is controlling the tempo of the game whether we have the ball or not.
Why do basketball teams take a timeout in the middle of another team's run?
A team hits a couple of 3's and gets a couple of lay-ups in a row, and the coach calls a time out.........normally, there is not a ton of adjustments going on, it's just to break the mojo.
I'd proposing that MAYBE, it is a good idea to keep the mojo going.......at all costs.
Basically, I want to match an aggressive scheme with an aggressive scheme.............
Here's the best example I can give:
It's like the fast-break basketball team that also full court presses the entire game..........heck yeah they are going to give up some layups, but they force the other team to play their game...........
That's what I want......the game played on our terms........
And, this is not convential wisdom stuff I'm throwing out here.......it IS different..........
But, imo, it is worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on May 14, 2010 16:08:29 GMT -6
I've been watching our games from last season, and a pattern has been emerging. Our offense gets in a groove easily, and gets thrown out of a groove easily. We are no huddle team, and we try to run people........when our defense gets a three and out or a turnover, we can put up points quickly. We had a game this season in the mud and rain, against an evenly matched opponent where we forced a couple of turnovers early, and BAM, we were up 22-0 with 6 minutes left in the first quarter. Their next two drives, they got first downs and milked the clock, and our next two drives stalled........this theme repeated itself through out our season (keep away left our offense stagnant).......when we are forcing turnovers and getting 3 and outs, we avalanche a team. It's like our offense rests too long, and they forget how to execute (this is not an inactivity thing, about 7 or 8 of the offensive guys ARE playing defense too). So, in the interest of being the best team possible, I'm rethinking my defensive approach to the game. Right now, I want to bend and not break, waiting for the offense to make a mistake. However, I'm starting to think about running something more aggressive. I mean, have the philosophy of: "someone is fixin' to score"......either they punt or score in 3 plays. Either way, we get to ball back and stay "in groove" offensively, as that is when we seem to be our best. Also, with turnovers being the number one statistical indicator of which team will win, perhaps the calculus should focus less on how many points a defense yields, and instead place a premium on how many turnovers they can garner.....(In case you can't tell, the large, embolden text is what I'd like to talk about........as in: perhaps this is a better measure of a defense?) It's a theory, and I imagine this thread will take another avenue than what I intend (guess that's karma), but in the ever pressing effort to think outside the box........ ..........whaddaya think? So, on the basis of one game in crappy weather in which your offense didn't perform you want to change your entire defensive philosophy?
|
|
|
Post by phantom on May 14, 2010 16:57:44 GMT -6
Anyway, to answer the question I do believe that takeaways are an important component of a good defense. We work at it and think that it helps. I don't believe that you should hang your hat on it. IMO, there's a lot of luck involved in getting takeaways and I don't want to stake my season on luck.
|
|
|
Post by op4shadow on May 14, 2010 19:31:41 GMT -6
Guys, I honestly appreciate the comments so far. I guess to be clear: We are not trading offensive philosophy. That is not the problem. We don't get tired.........what I am asserting is quite the opposite: our kids don't get tired, they get out of sync. What this is ultimately about is controlling the tempo of the game whether we have the ball or not.Why do basketball teams take a timeout in the middle of another team's run? A team hits a couple of 3's and gets a couple of lay-ups in a row, and the coach calls a time out.........normally, there is not a ton of adjustments going on, it's just to break the mojo. I'd proposing that MAYBE, it is a good idea to keep the mojo going.......at all costs. Basically, I want to match an aggressive scheme with an aggressive scheme............. Here's the best example I can give: It's like the fast-break basketball team that also full court presses the entire game..........heck yeah they are going to give up some layups, but they force the other team to play their game........... That's what I want......the game played on our terms........ And, this is not convential wisdom stuff I'm throwing out here.......it IS different.......... But, imo, it is worth considering. to me, it sounds like you've made up your mind, and are not listening to what others are attempting to say (even if it sounds like they're talking offense). I would keep the Defense you have, sounds like they do a good job with it. you've got to play ALL phases of the game the way you know how. i would spend more energy trying to come up with an OFFENSIVE solution to the OFFENSIVE problem. this is just a classic example of what us prior military service guys call a "mind F*ck". the problem is in you're kids' heads, along with the solution. your possible solution sounds nice in theory, but i think you will be better off staying consistent schematically while fixing the mental issue with a more conventional approach. however, if you choose to go this new route, please pm after next season and let me know how it went, i'd be extremely interested in hearing about it!
|
|
|
Post by dacoachmo on May 14, 2010 19:35:32 GMT -6
Another factor...
After that long drive what causes your offense to bog down...what are you calling?
I know sometimes, if the offense is clicking then the OC has that "let's try this now" attitude, which in turn may result in a 3 and out...ugh!
So after that long drive by the opponent , go to your best plays to get the momentum back!
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:43:58 GMT -6
I've been watching our games from last season, and a pattern has been emerging. Our offense gets in a groove easily, and gets thrown out of a groove easily. We are no huddle team, and we try to run people........when our defense gets a three and out or a turnover, we can put up points quickly. We had a game this season in the mud and rain, against an evenly matched opponent where we forced a couple of turnovers early, and BAM, we were up 22-0 with 6 minutes left in the first quarter. Their next two drives, they got first downs and milked the clock, and our next two drives stalled........this theme repeated itself through out our season (keep away left our offense stagnant).......when we are forcing turnovers and getting 3 and outs, we avalanche a team. It's like our offense rests too long, and they forget how to execute (this is not an inactivity thing, about 7 or 8 of the offensive guys ARE playing defense too). So, in the interest of being the best team possible, I'm rethinking my defensive approach to the game. Right now, I want to bend and not break, waiting for the offense to make a mistake. However, I'm starting to think about running something more aggressive. I mean, have the philosophy of: "someone is fixin' to score"......either they punt or score in 3 plays. Either way, we get to ball back and stay "in groove" offensively, as that is when we seem to be our best. Also, with turnovers being the number one statistical indicator of which team will win, perhaps the calculus should focus less on how many points a defense yields, and instead place a premium on how many turnovers they can garner.....(In case you can't tell, the large, embolden text is what I'd like to talk about........as in: perhaps this is a better measure of a defense?) It's a theory, and I imagine this thread will take another avenue than what I intend (guess that's karma), but in the ever pressing effort to think outside the box........ ..........whaddaya think? So, on the basis of one game in crappy weather in which your offense didn't perform you want to change your entire defensive philosophy? I'm sorry I wasn't clear. That was a microcosm of a couple season long trend.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:49:55 GMT -6
Sorry if I sound like I've made up my mind.......I really haven't........
I just think this is an interesting concept, and it appears I need to play devil's advocate to keep the conversation going.........
I really just want to talk this thing out
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:51:13 GMT -6
Another factor... After that long drive what causes your offense to bog down...what are you calling? I know sometimes, if the offense is clicking then the OC has that "let's try this now" attitude, which in turn may result in a 3 and out...ugh! So after that long drive by the opponent , go to your best plays to get the momentum back! This is a great point........I'll have to go back and see for certain if this was/was not the case. That tendency.......good insight to point that out.
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 15, 2010 8:06:53 GMT -6
You're doing well on offense at outset.
Opponents have a long drive and get back in the game.
Now your offense begins to sputter.
Sounds like you just got "Ping" and didn't respond ("Pong").
What was opponents' DC doing during that long drive? Coaching his kids up on adjustments to what your offense had done to hurt them.
So when you go back on offense, your play-caller needs to anticipate or identify those defensive adjustments and have the answers or yeah, your attack will cough and wheeze.
|
|
|
Post by rpetrie on May 15, 2010 8:13:12 GMT -6
I think your issue is much like a pick-up game of basketball. If your on the court consistently you tend to stay in the groove. Lose a game, sit for two...you stand a better chance of not being as efficient when you re-enter the game. Seems like when on offense the kids are just having trouble switching their mindset. A spread no-huddle offense is not often perceived as being a "smash-mouth" style. Defense...even with a Bend-Don't Break philosophy still has very aggressive attributes with tackling at the POA. The D-philosophy is in how you accept yardage being accumulated and I must assume that if you do subscribe to this that you must also have good special teams to control field position and allow for this approach. Do you take chances with those situations as well to create big plays...perhaps that's the area you should approach with a different philosophy. Want a quick change scenario that can change the game IMMEDIATELY...special teams do that with much greater impact as they are really less expected than a turnover.
Now back to the original question...I wouldn't change your defensive approach, but maybe the application of more blitz packages to create big-plays/long yardage scenarios. Not sure what you do coverage wise but if spead passing is your primary attack, perhaps man schemes on defense will keep them in tune with the transition of offense to defense...much like a basketball player. Personally I think you are overanalyzing and need to understand that there will be lapses with HS kids period. Unless you are 2-platooning & they can stay dialed in on their tasks, some drop in concentration is inevitable. JMO
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 15, 2010 8:25:34 GMT -6
Another factor... After that long drive what causes your offense to bog down...what are you calling? I know sometimes, if the offense is clicking then the OC has that "let's try this now" attitude, which in turn may result in a 3 and out...ugh! So after that long drive by the opponent , go to your best plays to get the momentum back! This is a great point........I'll have to go back and see for certain if this was/was not the case. That tendency.......good insight to point that out. Or maybe your offensive play caller feels pressure from the head coach not to turn the ball over to give opponents' further momentum, and becomes overly conservative? They say Dean Smith was the only guy who could stop Michael Jordan. Maybe you're slowing your own offense similarly.
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 15, 2010 9:08:08 GMT -6
Additionally...
dub, I do think your fast-break basketball analogy has merit in that there should be a correlation between your offensive and defensive philosophies, which should reflect head coach's personality.
To wit - if you're a "bend but don't break" defensive guy, you'll probably be best served with a conservative, ball-control approach when in possession.
Conversely, if you're a "big-play" guy, you should implement that into your schemes on both sides of the ball.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on May 15, 2010 9:11:43 GMT -6
I think what is appearing here is the formula for winning consistently.
A defense who at worst is making the offense run a lot of plays and take up 8 minutes of clock is still doing a pretty good job. That kind of D is going to keep you in games.
Just like some other guys have stated the issue is with the offense. At some point you have to be able to possess the ball when you have a lead.
I think this is an inherent problem with a fast-paced type of offense that relies on "getting in a groove". What do you do when you're just not in the grove? What do you do with a 1 TD lead and you just need to grind 1st downs. Nothing wrong with that style of offense. I'm a fan of it, but its high risk, high reward. Do you always need to do it?
Look at the most successful college coaches over an extended period of time. Many of them are considered "conservative". No big plays vs the defense. Possess the ball offensively. BE IN CONTROL. These guys often get criticized for this type of "archaic" philosophy (Joe Paterno, Jim Tressel, Nick Saban, Lloyd Carr). Contrast these guys with a fella like Mike Leach (who I also like). Leach is going to bite some teams in the @$$ when his team is hot offensively but I think you lose a lot of control when you are trying to win games 45-41. The bottom line there is you HAVE to score a lot to win.
I guess what I'm trying to say is the safer bet is probably to try to keep the games lower scoring if you have a choice because in those kinds of games you will be in it have a shot more often than in a score fest.
Dubb you mentioned getting "hot" and jumping on a team 22-0 and then getting the wind taken out of your sails when the other team possesses the ball for a long time. If you change your defense, and your offense has a cold spell, you are likely to be on the other end of that score at times. Then you HAVE to get hot. IMO the answer is to make your offense "momentum proof". Maybe that means running the ball more, or a slower tempo.
I've been looking at the same kinds of things with our team. We have been fast paced offensively and very aggressive defensively. That has allowed us to upset some teams but more often than not is has gotten us in the position of playing from behind. When we are hot we can explode and get 3 and outs or turnovers but if we are not hot and the other team hits some plays BANG we are down 14. Too much rides on the offense, and more often, the QB being in a groove.
|
|
|
Post by op4shadow on May 15, 2010 11:04:13 GMT -6
I think what is appearing here is the formula for winning consistently. A defense who at worst is making the offense run a lot of plays and take up 8 minutes of clock is still doing a pretty good job. That kind of D is going to keep you in games. Just like some other guys have stated the issue is with the offense. At some point you have to be able to possess the ball when you have a lead. I think this is an inherent problem with a fast-paced type of offense that relies on "getting in a groove". What do you do when you're just not in the grove? What do you do with a 1 TD lead and you just need to grind 1st downs. Nothing wrong with that style of offense. I'm a fan of it, but its high risk, high reward. Do you always need to do it? Look at the most successful college coaches over an extended period of time. Many of them are considered "conservative". No big plays vs the defense. Possess the ball offensively. BE IN CONTROL. These guys often get criticized for this type of "archaic" philosophy (Joe Paterno, Jim Tressel, Nick Saban, Lloyd Carr). Contrast these guys with a fella like Mike Leach (who I also like). Leach is going to bite some teams in the @$$ when his team is hot offensively but I think you lose a lot of control when you are trying to win games 45-41. The bottom line there is you HAVE to score a lot to win. I guess what I'm trying to say is the safer bet is probably to try to keep the games lower scoring if you have a choice because in those kinds of games you will be in it have a shot more often than in a score fest. Dubb you mentioned getting "hot" and jumping on a team 22-0 and then getting the wind taken out of your sails when the other team possesses the ball for a long time. If you change your defense, and your offense has a cold spell, you are likely to be on the other end of that score at times. Then you HAVE to get hot. IMO the answer is to make your offense "momentum proof". Maybe that means running the ball more, or a slower tempo. I've been looking at the same kinds of things with our team. We have been fast paced offensively and very aggressive defensively. That has allowed us to upset some teams but more often than not is has gotten us in the position of playing from behind. When we are hot we can explode and get 3 and outs or turnovers but if we are not hot and the other team hits some plays BANG we are down 14. Too much rides on the offense, and more often, the QB being in a groove. i love this quote, and this is what i was essentially getting at. i'll take your defensive play at my school all day long. maybe the offense isn't getting out of a groove, maybe they just cannot MAINTAIN that groove. tough to do at any level. are we asking too much to demand the offense to stay HOT every possession? something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on May 15, 2010 13:43:40 GMT -6
I know there have been a lot of posts advocating for this or that so far on this post but just in reading some I have to ask have you considered the biggest X factor we all deal with as teachers/coaches and that is the students/players themselves. Maybe it has nothing to do with philosophy and scheme but the make up of the players themselves. Maybe it just had to do with the mentality of your players last year and not your schemes.
|
|
|
Post by lukethadrifter on May 15, 2010 17:38:02 GMT -6
If you are happy with how your defense is performing, then I wouldn't change a thing with it. I would find a way to not be no-huddle 100% of the time, so that you can burn more clock. I'm all for quick, easy scores. But you probably are not going to get quick, easy scores on every possession. In my thinking, as long as you are moving those chains, and you eventually score anyway, then:
a) you are keeping their offense on the sidelines longer, b) you are keeping your offense on the field longer, which is what you seem to be wanting, & c) you are giving your defense more time to rest (the ones not out on the field) and make necessary adjustments
**so I might look at a way to change speeds - maybe be regular no-huddle 70% of the time, and slow it down and maybe even huddle the other 30% of the time
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 16, 2010 7:28:04 GMT -6
The guy that I cut my teeth under was a no-huddle Veer aficionado. He didn't have much focus on offense or defense, but his offenses was fantastic.
He never moved out of his no huddle package; he was totally focused on continually putting up points, no matter how high his lead was. He didn't want to get out a rhythm and we never did. He ran the ball 80% of the time, so he still had ball control when he needed it; just as a different pace.
I'd stick with what you're doing; run your no huddle, keep the conservative defensive philosophy and go from there.
|
|
|
Post by coachmsl on May 16, 2010 8:23:47 GMT -6
Coach,
You know, at practice we are always trying to simulate game intensity, no huddle pressure, goal line, 3rd and long, other situations.... Maybe you could try a practice variation that includes an 7 minute layover. Could try to simulate your sideline huddle with all the dialogue and stuff. Just a thought.
msl
|
|