Is there a such thing as too much technique?

You mean like when my defensive tackle applies shutdown pass coverage to their guard?

I very much believe so..In my mind, it goes, assignment, motivation, technique....If a kid isn't TOTALLY confident in his assignment, it doesn't matter his technique....#2 I have guys that have great technique in drills and they just suck..they just don't have football sense

I think that you can over-coach and over-complicate techniqe as much as you can over-do scheme, certainly.

I also think that technique is but one part of execution. You can't have technique without an understanding of application. You need to understand how the technique fits into the scheme and the "team concept" and you need to understand how it works at full speed in a game situation.

I think over-attention to technique runs the risk of sacrificing these key elements in the teaching progression.

I've made the mistake of going crazy on technique as a position coach. I was not letting the position group advance in scheme until we mastered the previous skill (very stubborn). It may sound good in theory but it hurt us because we didn't get to rep our base stuff enough early in training camp (because it wasn't installed). I think team reps are extremely important to work on timing and cohesiveness even though technique may not be perfected.

Now I teach all of our base plays as soon as possible. The technique is sloppy at first, but we allot a set amount of time each practice to work on the fundamentals and techniques to master our base plays. As the season progresses, our technique in these base plays improves. We never waste time teaching techniques that aren't relevant to our system. Your drills must carry over to your game play.

It depends on how great a teacher you are.
Some would say that if the drive block has twenty coaching points, and I can get kids to learn and perfect that technique in a practice, then it's not over coaching it's great coaching!

With that said, I am with you in keeping technique simple. I focus on the key points of the technique. College and pro coaches can work on that stuff. I'm coaching basic technique, attitude, and effort. That's it.

I'm with you Coach. I think in terms of the following teaching progression:

1) Alignment - Where to start
2) Assignment - What to do
3) Technique - How to do it
4) Aggressiveness & Speed/Quickness - How hard and fast to do it

This basically summarizes my philosophy on this topic. We invest quite a bit of time in trying to get our players "TOTALLY confident" in their alignment and assignment. When I believe they have a true understanding of what they are trying to do, then we progress onto a more deliberate emphasis on technique or how to do it. Once they have that down, now we want them to fly around 100 miles an hour trying to get their assignment accomplished.

technique is a practical method or art applied to some particular task. it involves proficiency i.e. a skillfulness in the command of fundamentals. practice greatly improves proficiency.

the more you practice the better you get at the technique.

so, when one asks "can you have too much technique?" they are essentially asking "can you get too proficient at something?"

the answer, is obviously, no.

HOWEVER ... if one were to look at the methods used to practice the technique, then we have a discussion on our hands. a particular task can be broken down so much into smaller parts that it is harder to become proficient at it due to all the details & tasks involved - it limits practice, proficiency, and - bottom line - is inefficient.

so, one can never have too much technique. however, a person can limit their ability to achieve maximum "technique" because the process they are using is flawed in some form - either 'under coaching' or 'over coaching' ... but, there is no such thing as getting too much technique (getting too proficient)

I think most coaches and certainly I thought this is what he meant..it's almost like asking if you can have too much money..I think we all can get better at any any endevour we pursue..the question is, Is it worth the time spent for incremental improvements..Otherwise, why wouldn't we have 4 hour practices.... at some point we diminish our returns vs time spent

I agree. Never use technique over production when evaluating players.

I understand exactly what you mean coach. It's a teaching progression that evolves with the understanding and proficiency of the players as the season moves forward. Isn't the goal for the players to be as proficient as possible with their technique as early in the season as possible? We create a sense of urgency to learn sound technique in the summer (no spring ball in Michigan) with the guys that show up and obviously during the two weeks prior to our first game week. We need to be at our best as early as possible to be as competitive as we can be in Week 1 when it counts. We play a 9-game season in Michigan and every team that wins 6 games gets into the post-season so being competitive every week is critical.

With that said, you stated that you start teaching it by the numbers. So do we. Ultimately my question is...how many numbers is too many for any technique? Also, how many techniques can you teach by the numbers per position? We do not want to coach technique broken down so much by the numbers that the players become like dcohio said "mechanical."

We emphasize two steps for most techniques up front on both offense and defense. After that, we are either driving our man at the LOS/running to a 2nd level defender or destroying a block/getting into pursuit. I personally believe the the max for numbered footwork should be three. Anything more, I believe would take kids too long to become proficient at with the timeline we're on with no spring ball and three weeks prior to our first game. Not to mention these players are learning positions on both sides of the ball because we do not have the luxury of two- platooning.

I'm glad to be communicating with a coach about this issue that coaches in a similar situation. I believe factors like two-platooning and spring ball greatly influence how in-depth you can be with techniques within the various position groups. Another factor that will play into how much you can break the various aspects down is the number of coaching staff members you have? We have 5 total for the high school program (4 paid, 1 volunteer).

I understand that players do not need to be ready on the first, fourth, or eighth day of practice. But we have a scrimmage on the ninth day so I'd like them to be as prepared and as proficient as possible at that point. Consequently, the eighth day after practices begin is quite crucial. Our team obviously needs to be prepared and proficient for the first game which would be 3 practices and a pre-game practice away after the scrimmage. I understand that finding a balance between creating a sense of urgency to learn and execute yet being patient with the players as they develop is extremely important.

We coach our players until they have mastered it and then we continue to coach it. Early in the season, sometimes we have to move on because it's just not happening. There are certain times, however, that I don't easily subscribe to the "if they don't get it today there's always tomorrow." Like say during our first game week. We want our players to be proficient for every game which means we have from when practices begin to that first game to get them prepared for that first game.

Chances are if you have too many of those days, the coaching staff needs to reevaluate their teaching progression or the level of difficulty of the technique to begin with. Or they need to assess the level of focus of the team in general because if the players have the ability to master the technique on "before-the-first-game" timeline and they haven't, the environment at practice is clearly not what it should be to create proficiency.

But ultimately, from a technique perspective, we teach our players the skills they will NEED in order to execute their assignment within the scheme. More simply put, whatever it takes them to get the job done. Once they have that skill, we move on, once they have their entire skill set, then we work on those nuances that each position encounters in football. Understanding those nuances will allow our players to apply their skill set in more complex scenarios. Technique vs. this blitz or that stunt, etc.

To reiterate, you stated that you start teaching certain techniques by the numbers. So do we. Ultimately my question is...how many numbers is too many for any technique? Also, how many techniques can you teach by the numbers per position? We do not want to coach technique broken down so much and so often by the numbers that the players become "mechanical."

I don't think there can be too much technique, but there can be too much talking about technique. No player has ever improved his technique because I talked to him about it (or yelled, etc). They improved when I corrected them and had them practice the corrected technique over and over. I'm sure that most coaches have always know this, but it took my dopy a$$ years to figure out.

Another thing I had to learn through failure is you can't work technique in a vacuum. The kids need to know the application/reason for the technique. Sometimes its obvious (if you over stride and lose your base your get you a$$ knocked down), sometimes not so much.

I think where too many coaches go overboard, especially on offense, is the number of different plays, sets, looks, etc. They try to install 100 plays, only execute 10 of them well, and waste so much practice time trying to install more and more ...

In my book, as many people have taught me, less is more. Teach your basic plays and demand perfect execution. Simple but perfect execution. Repeat, repeat, repeat.

sportsleaderusa.blogspot.com/

Virtue=Strength
Vice=Weakness