|
Post by PSS on Mar 30, 2007 13:55:30 GMT -6
I've also had to it that way before in a smaller program. For the last 6 years I've been coaching in larger programs so I've been able to platoon and we've used a crossover period like someone else mentioned earlier.
We have had crossover guys, offense to defense and vice versa. Off limits are always QB, TB, and Center on offense. Defense is FS, SDE, ILB's. Usually only involves about 4 on offense (skilled typed kids) and 4 on defense. These cross over guys are used for certain match ups on defense or certain formations on offense. Example: Usually use one of my DT's as the power back in Power I in short yardage and goal line.
|
|
|
Post by calicoachh on Mar 30, 2007 14:10:42 GMT -6
we are in the process of decided wheter or not to platoon next season. i think that we have come to the conclusion of a platoon plus system. the plus refers to our plus players (maybe one or two) these guys are the studs of the team, and them tired in the 4th quarter are still better then the next guy.
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Mar 30, 2007 14:28:35 GMT -6
Ideally, how many coaches do you need to Platoon? I would say at least 3 coaches for each side of the ball, preferably 4. The situation I'll be in next year I will have a total of 4 coaches at the Frosh level and I want to Platoon if we get enough bodies out, in the 40+ range. I'm thinking along the lines of overlapping groups to create "extra coaches". Still, its a huge stretch coach to position ratio wise. This is kinda what I'm thinking as a overview of a practice format (everything will be scripted in 5 minute periods on a real practice plan), its taxing but I think its doable. I'm sure we'll have some players going both ways, with the overlapping in coaches/groups, it should be doable to cross train a few wr/db's, rb/lb, ol/dl etc.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 14:42:17 GMT -6
Ideally, how many coaches do you need to Platoon? I would say at least 3 coaches for each side of the ball, preferably 4. The situation I'll be in next year I will have a total of 4 coaches at the Frosh level and I want to Platoon if we get enough bodies out, in the 40+ range. I'm thinking along the lines of overlapping groups to create "extra coaches". Still, its a huge stretch coach to position ratio wise. This is kinda what I'm thinking as a overview of a practice format (everything will be scripted in 5 minute periods on a real practice plan), its taxing but I think its doable. I'm sure we'll have some players going both ways, with the overlapping in coaches/groups, it should be doable to cross train a few wr/db's, rb/lb, ol/dl etc. There's an argument that I have against platooning. Is this really making the team better or is it just a way to further an idea? If you have a completely separate offensive and defensive staff then you're entrusting a position to your 6th or 8th best coach. On a staff with 8 paid positions that may be fine. If you only have 4 or 5 that 6th guy may be a problem. This isn't specifically addressed to you. Just a general observation.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 14:46:00 GMT -6
I think you could realistically platooon with 4 coaches, IMO. 6 would be ideal.
OL/TE QB/WR/TE = OCoordinator
DL LB/DB = DCoordinator
Ideally,
OL / TE coach WR / RB coach QB coach (Coordinator)
DL coach LB coach DB coach (DCoordinator)
4 paid positions and 2 volunteers or split 2 Sophmore contracts between 2 sophmore assistants and 2 varsity assistants.
Of course, it goes without saying, these guys are expected to be coaching their balls off.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 14:52:25 GMT -6
I think you could realistically platooon with 4 coaches, IMO. 6 would be ideal. OL/TE QB/WR/TE = OCoordinator DL LB/DB = DCoordinator Ideally, OL / TE coach WR / RB coach QB coach (Coordinator) DL coach LB coach DB coach (DCoordinator) 4 paid positions and 2 volunteers or split 2 Sophmore contracts between 2 sophmore assistants and 2 varsity assistants. Of course, it goes without saying, these guys are expected to be coaching their balls off. Boy, that first looks tough. LBs and DBs would be really hard to coach together.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 14:55:08 GMT -6
I think you could realistically platooon with 4 coaches, IMO. 6 would be ideal. OL/TE QB/WR/TE = OCoordinator DL LB/DB = DCoordinator Ideally, OL / TE coach WR / RB coach QB coach (Coordinator) DL coach LB coach DB coach (DCoordinator) 4 paid positions and 2 volunteers or split 2 Sophmore contracts between 2 sophmore assistants and 2 varsity assistants. Of course, it goes without saying, these guys are expected to be coaching their balls off. Boy, that first looks tough. LBs and DBs would be really hard to coach together. Hence, coaching one's BALLS off!Coordinating the coverage can be one-in-the-same. It would take some juggling of teaching time, but I certainly wouldn't let a shortage of coaches rob the school of a quality varsity product. Pitching platooning to the AD is a great way to justify an additional contract.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 15:05:24 GMT -6
That only works in a one-HS district. If you have four schools, as we do, trying to get another paid coach is a big deal. Juggling of teaching time is fine as long as you consider it a given that platooning does create a better varsity product. I don't think that it necessarily does.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 15:19:49 GMT -6
As to platooning and not trying to win at the 8th-9th grade levels, nt sure I agree with that one. Im thinking platoon as much as possible, all the way if possible. But success breeds success, if I have a stud or 2 that can handle it with a beather here and there, that makes sense. If you look at the top programs like De La Salle and Bellevue, they win at EVERY level. The kids come in with a winning attitude and feel every time they step on the field somehow they are going to win. That counts for something. I dont think a kids can come off a 1-7 8th grade team, a 2-6 9th grade team and all of a sudden feel he's a winner. Also the more you lose atg any level the fewer kids you have coming back. On a much lesser scale where I live now the rural HS and local youth squads have very poor records, The youth team won something like 4 games the 5 years before we got here. HS not much better. No one believed we could win with a new program, we really had to convince the parents and kids we could. First year barely beat the worst team in league first game, next gam a little better, by seasons end, believers. Next 3 years this group lost 1 game, beat the best select teams in sstate etc The kids need to exprience winning to validate thier efforts and our techniques/schemes etc. If it isnt validated by wins, very difficult to get the kind of buy in and effort required. IMHO Our kids walk on the field very confident somehow we are going to be successful, there were just a handfull of teams and coaches I played for that I felt that way. BTW I play start more kids than anyone onthe league, but have 3-4 go both ways. It is a very powerful feeling, my guess it allows teams like De LaSalle and others to win games they probably shouldnt. I agree that success on the subvarsity teams breeds a winning attitude. I just don't agree that platooning is necessary to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Mar 30, 2007 15:25:40 GMT -6
Phantom, you are 100% correct, the quality of coaches will dictate whether it is feasible or not. This is my NUMBER ONE CONCERN, quality of coaches. If I've got 4 solid coaches, it will work, if I've got 2 solid and 2 questionable, then by overlapping the groups, I can pair strong/weak coaches and kinda bounce around a little to the group with the most people working in it. If its me and 3 limited coaches, I'm going to put my Excedrin in a Pez Dispenser. Regardless, I plan on coaching coaches all summer to get them on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by PSS on Mar 30, 2007 15:28:20 GMT -6
I think you better have a plan to play everyone on an A team, B team, C team, etc. Believe me, you never know when that scrawny kid or that pudgy kid is going to mature and become one heck of a player for you. Just because he's was on the B team in 7th and 8th grade doesn't mean anything to me because once that growth spurt hits and he learns to work in the program, he quite possibly could be a player.
So yes, everyone should play at the lower levels, even if that means dispersing your talent to get it done. You never want to lose anyone because you as a coach neglected to reach them.
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Mar 30, 2007 15:39:19 GMT -6
Also, your right about sucess breeding sucess. IMO, Platooning (If Possible= enough kids/enough coaches) will enable us to field a more complete team. As I mentioned, I'm sure there will always be key kids that will go both ways.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 15:44:18 GMT -6
I think you better have a plan to play everyone on an A team, B team, C team, etc. Believe me, you never know when that scrawny kid or that pudgy kid is going to mature and become one heck of a player for you. Just because he's was on the B team in 7th and 8th grade doesn't mean anything to me because once that growth spurt hits and he learns to work in the program, he quite possibly could be a player. So yes, everyone should play at the lower levels, even if that means dispersing your talent to get it done. You never want to lose anyone because you as a coach neglected to reach them. I agree. I think that, at the subvarsity level, every kid who's done what was expected at practice, should play some. You an spot them in. Put a kid at Nose when the other guys are on their own 20. Got a midget? Put him at LB on 3rd and 15. I don't think that all kids have to get equal playing time. I do think that you can work kids in without platooning. Before you ask, no, I don't feel the same way about the varsity. That's a different world.
|
|
|
Post by airman on Mar 30, 2007 15:50:54 GMT -6
the only reasons I could not see platooning are as follows
I have 4 charles woodsens I have 4 brian urlackers I have 3 warren sapps.
I figure I can win some games with guys going both ways.
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Mar 30, 2007 15:50:58 GMT -6
PSS, good point. Unfortunately, the school I'll be at doesn't have numbers for a B squad. Several local schools do though, they get 120+ out for Frosh. What kills me is that they dress 60 for each team and play maybe 15 kids. This makes your point more important in our case, the 40 or so that do come out, we MUST keep INVOLVED in the program. Even if #40 is chubby, can't move or tie his own shoes, he's important to our team and we'll take the time to develop him, and your right, he might just walk in the next year at 6'5 250 and decide to be a Bballer because the football coach didn't take time to work with him.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 17:19:39 GMT -6
a successful team that we adopted our platooning from did this at the lower levels;
8th - 10th
Every kid is taught an offensive & defensive position One is their "primary" position and one is their "secondary" position.
It was well-known that the Freshman squad (usually had TWO units) was where they put all the best coaches (since it was all about teaching).
Johnny's primary position is OT Johnny's secondary position is ILB
For sub varsity games, they play kids at their primary position for the 1st qtr or half in the 2nd qtr / half they play their secondary position.
So, Johnny is playing OT the 1st qtr/half then he's getting his reps at ILB the other (not at the same time), while the primary ILB is playing while Johnny is playing OT, etc.
Teaching, playing time / experience, coaching up, technique are what are stressed - winning is a by-product of this. Again, it all is based on your philosophy as the Head of the Program is......you may boast the 10-time defending City champion Freshman team, but if you never make the playoffs at the Varsity, who really cares?
It all depends if you put more importance on the CHICKEN or the EGG.
** I just came from an inner-city program that splits the talent amongst 3 other public schools a private school, and an out-of-district school that "recruits" - we did the Varsity platoon system with 3 coaches on each side of the ball (only one of them was a teacher in the school, the rest were paid assistants from other areas).
I guess what I'm getting at.......I'll try to shut up.....is whenever you have a less-than-perfect situation you can sit back and let temporary excuses limit you, or you can look to actively change your environment.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 17:28:21 GMT -6
If every kid plays and every kid learns fundamentals to make him successful, mission accomplished in my book.
You play to win the game - but winning should be a by-product of great TEAM effort and teaching the game.
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Mar 30, 2007 17:56:48 GMT -6
Coach Cisar, I gotta tell you that your Bellevue Youth analogy doesn't hold water. I've coached against them in the youth feeder league and at the ms level. Thankfully I don't coach against them at the HS level. You are right; there youth program wins and they have a winning tradition. Here's the catch; the youth league they play in mandates platooning! Kids cannot start both ways! Don't take my word. Here's the link: www.gejfa.org/rules_2006.htmI coached youth through freshman in that league and was mandated to platoon, by rule! We had to put 22 kids out. That'll teach you to coach em up. No draft, no select, first 32 kids who sign up! Maybe that is why Bellevue, Skyline, Bothell, Woodinville, Eastlake, who have feeder teams in this league regularly compete for state titles? Because they have to platoon? They are forced to develop all players at an early age? Just a thought!
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Mar 30, 2007 18:27:19 GMT -6
Agreed - winning begets winning.
The successful teams in that league are run like hs programs. They have solid coaching that is guided and highly influenced by the HS program and they average 6 to 8 coaches for 32 kids. really.
But a bench clearing rule, and 12 play mininum, changes your focus from just getting the "superstar" the football. I think it helped me in my early days of coaching.
In watching those kids grow up, it kept a lot of kids involved and I can tell ya it develops a lot kids who don't come into their own until later year. MOSTLY LINEMAN! Now that I coach HS line I realize that quality big kids are a premium and a real key to W-L at the HS level. We have more skill players than we have quality size.
Platooning is a good thing! You gotta make a commitment too it. All that being said we have a couple of "freaks of nature" that will be on the filed 70% to 80% of the time in close games.
|
|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Mar 30, 2007 18:56:37 GMT -6
I heard from over 2 coaches who have numerous state championships you take your best 15 players get them on the field starting out 2 of 3, offense, defense, special teams and then you fill in the blanks.
|
|
|
Post by PSS on Mar 30, 2007 19:19:43 GMT -6
Again, more great points being made. Especially Brophy pointing out teaching lower level both sides of the ball. Something I totally agree with.
I know of a top program here in Texas that will take their top 40 athletes on the varsity and will place them in a position either offensively or defensively. They do this every Spring. This is how they do things and they are successful. They will even take the time to reteach a kid a new position if necessary, whatever it takes to make the team better. Tog knows what school I'm talking about.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 19:25:00 GMT -6
maybe I should add that the biggest caveat that we were taught was that EVERY off-season you had to evaluate the talent (again, more work than some folks would care to do).......
EVERY coach had to rank each player (in the program) from 1 - 100 on the player's value (i.e. Charles Johnson is #1, Johnny Slapdick is the 100th best athlete in the program)
EVERY coach had to pick each players best offensive & defensive position.
Then the offensive & defensive staffs had to essentially "Draft" their roster each year (some are no-brainers), with the TOP QB going to offense and most of the pivotal studs going to defense (fill the critical components to the defense first).
Then you find out who you have to coach-up in the off-season (who you HAVE to make a starter by September). It gives the coaches a little more incentive to push certain kids in the weight room (as well as game plan, knowing their 'liabilities').
|
|
|
Post by PSS on Mar 30, 2007 19:37:42 GMT -6
And those meetings could get somewhat heated at times, at least the ones I've had the pleasure to be a part of.
Seriously, this is important because you have to know where your holes are and who will have to step up as a sophomore. Been fortunate to always have at least 1 each year start and do an awesome job.
Plus it also begins to the bonding of the unit both offensively and defensively, another critical stage of team development.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 30, 2007 19:46:45 GMT -6
FYI - at the last program I was at where we went from Ironman to platooning, the Sophomore & Varsity staffs worked together quite a bit. Especially during the first 4 weeks of football, so you essentially double-up the Varsity staff, if you will.
Sophomores get reps with the Varsity during Indy & some Group. By the time you get to TEAM, you don't need tons of coaches present, mainly the coordinators.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 30, 2007 23:15:13 GMT -6
Frankly, I think that a lot of this has to do with personal preference. I love coaching both sides of the ball. As a player, I loved having the opportunity to play on both sides. I can't imagine being 13 years old and spending ALL of my time being a guard.
|
|
|
Post by los on Mar 31, 2007 4:37:50 GMT -6
OK Brophy, you got some good pro's and con's for the platooning issue, now, if you decide to do the 2 platoon deal, how do you divvy up the talent pool, if say you got 15 players a cut above the rest "athletically speaking", but experience/ coached upedness etc.. being equal among a group of 30 jrs and seniors? Best 11 on defense, offense or split them up equally(including all special teams)? Remember, my theory/experience is "old school" puts them on defense/ko team = predominately low scoring games not very exciting for the fans to watch(unless you knew football), and the offense wasn't really expected to do much, except "just try not to screw up" lol, and if your offense could manage to score 6 points=you had a good chance of a tie or win, if you could make the 1 or 2 pt conversion as well= we won probably 75% or more, of these contests and when we scored at least twice(with or without converting ep's) = we won 100% of our games! Ugly but effective I guess? Just something to consider?
|
|
|
Post by sls on Mar 31, 2007 7:41:14 GMT -6
We are a school of 625, have had very, very little success. In 2006 we had 60 kids 9-12 and committed to 2 platoon, went 5-5, 2nd best season since in 25 years. We practiced as a 1 platoon team, most of #1's on 1 side were #2's. Made our scout teams better. We had 1 CB/WR who played both ways and each of my OLB's rotated at FB.
We played our better players on defense.
We will be committed to 2 platoon when ever possible. IT makes your scout teams better and makes more kids feel more involved.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 31, 2007 7:54:41 GMT -6
best 11 to defense after the QB is selected.
But again, it depends on "where can this kid make the best impact"?
We were a cover 3 team. We HAD to have the best athletes at OLB spots....we had a lot of guys we wanted at corner & FS, but being that we were a C3 team, they would've ended up making a bigger impact at TB and flanker.
It forces the staff to really hash things out together and forces your staff to get on the same page.......WE ARE DOING 'THIS' BECAUSE WE ARE DOING 'THIS'.........THIS is who we need (because he's going to do ____)
Cuts down on the whining about player placement, because EVERYONE gets an opportunity to air their beliefs and argue their point (that's what football is about).
|
|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Mar 31, 2007 10:39:39 GMT -6
It all depends as said. I would love to platoon but I wouldn't. My best 15 are going to play the most hands down, unless there backup is as good as better as the 1st starter is tired, if not. Then your going both ways. As my old coach would say you can rest on Saturdays
|
|