|
Post by goldenbear76 on Feb 19, 2011 12:51:28 GMT -6
In games decided..we sub'd in parts. On offense, the QB and RBs came out first. Then WRs, then Oline. We didn't wholesale sub. Defense..LBs/Safeties came out first..then DBs, then DL. We wanted our younger kids to have some success ..which is why we left DL/OL in till last. Our playcalling changed a bit obviously with mostly runs. The only thing that ticks me off a bit..is when we have a big lead and are just running the ball..and the other teams DC is just all out blitzing every play. I have thrown the ball in that situation..like a hitch to the TE. You can't expect me to let the other teams linebackers just tee off on our kids.
|
|
|
Post by hamerhead on Feb 19, 2011 13:37:28 GMT -6
I don't believe in hard an fast rules, I think there are always exceptions. For example, I don't want to say "starters play the entire first half" because I've been on both sides of 40 pts first quarters.
I will say that in, in general, I'd prefer to leave the starting defense in longer than the starting offense, I'd prefer to leave the starting OL in longer than the backs, and I'd prefer a "+1 TD" over the running clock, in case they stick one in, the running clock doesn't stop (as it does in our state).
I'd also prefer coaches not let their varsity D blitz the hell out of my JV offense. That gets me fighting mad.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 19, 2011 14:49:50 GMT -6
I don't believe in hard an fast rules, I think there are always exceptions. For example, I don't want to say "starters play the entire first half" because I've been on both sides of 40 pts first quarters. I will say that in, in general, I'd prefer to leave the starting defense in longer than the starting offense, I'd prefer to leave the starting OL in longer than the backs, and I'd prefer a "+1 TD" over the running clock, in case they stick one in, the running clock doesn't stop (as it does in our state). I'd also prefer coaches not let their varsity D blitz the hell out of my JV offense. That gets me fighting mad. Very good points all, in my experience.
|
|
scottc
Sophomore Member
Posts: 149
|
Post by scottc on Feb 21, 2011 20:14:39 GMT -6
[google][/google]I want the game to the point that if I put my back ups in they will finish the game so I dont have to put starters back in. I think this is the most vulnerable to injury when they have been cold and have mentally checked out of the game to have to put them back in the game.
Since we are listing pet peeves on the subject mine are these:
If Im beating you bad and my #2 or #3 Offense scores on you running our base stuff that is not our fault. Those guys get the hell beat out of them on scout team so Im not going to tell them to fall down if they break one.
If I am down 50 and you got your back ups in I am not going to blitz the crap out of your reserves if that is not my normal M.O. Also if my 1s start cheap shoting your reserves I am going to pull them and run the crap out of them on Monday.
If I am up 50 on you and I got my backups in and you get inside the redzone I am not going to put my starters back in to preserve the shut out. Those 2s and 3s will be in a situation one day where they will have to make a stop to win the game. This is good practice for this scenario
If I am down 45 and throwing still and throw a pick 6 I have no right to be {censored} at you for 'hanging 50' on me.
If I am down 45-0 and score to make it 45-8 I am not going to onside kick . If the situation is reversed I am going to put in my onside receive team and run it as practiced. Which means you should kick it deep and my deep guy gets it and gets as much as he can without contact and slides before he is tackled.
I never am going to run a trick play against your #2s or 3s.
Im sure there are others but these are mine.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 22, 2011 9:43:21 GMT -6
Our rule here is when they sub we sub. To me it is a white flag saying, "We give up.". We almost got burned a few years back because we were too nice to a team. Ever since then we wait for their subs to enter as a signal to send ours in. If the other team doesn't, it is their own coaches fault. It isn't my job to stop my team, it is their job to stop my team. Now, another thing that we have added, and we have found it works... We are a run first team. Sub in your 3rd, 4th, and 5th string RBs. It will slow the game down. The next time we're up by a lot and the other team makes wholesale substitutions will be the first. I've never understood this... It doesn't matter what side of the blow-out you're on; you're risking injury by leaving your starters in game. I got all over one of my assistants for this last year. We were on the bad end of a 56-14 blowout against the eventual state champions. We were looking at a running clock in the 3rd quarter and I pulled our starters and refused to use our time outs. He stated that he "knew we weren't going to win but we needed to score points". I quietly told him to keep his trap shut and then jumped him after the game. There is absolutely no point in keeping your starters in or prolonging the game when it has been decided. Our numbers were low enough without getting someone hurt so our #2s could score against their #3s..
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 22, 2011 10:23:36 GMT -6
I'm very sensitive to "coaching ettiquette" on some of these matters. I've been on both sides of the fence enought to have developed some thoughts.
Safety is #1. Keeping starters in on either side of a blow-out once substitutions have been initiated on the other side is a bad idea. Also, in a blow-out situation, tempers can sometimes flare up, particularly for the team getting waylayed. It's better to get those guys out before there's an incident.
I think it's important if you are on the winning side to do the best you can to preserve the other team's dignity. These are kids. There's no need to embarass and demoralize the other team. You want beat them, and beat them soundly...but not embarass them. I'm a BIG believer in the "what goes around" theory, and I'd NEVER want to give another team motivational ammunition against us in a future season. If they pull their starters in a blow-out, we start pulling too, even if it is before our usual "threshold."
Other than that, there's been some pretty good thoughts on this post, and I don't want to just repeat them.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 22, 2011 10:36:14 GMT -6
I think it's important if you are on the winning side to do the best you can to preserve the other team's dignity. These are kids. There's no need to embarass and demoralize the other team. You want beat them, and beat them soundly...but not embarass them. Agree with this wholeheartedly. Sometimes we football coaches are our own worst enemies in terms of what's best for the sport. Those other coaches and kids have to practice the next day, too. Maybe it takes being on both sides of a blowout few times for guys to "get it."
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 22, 2011 11:10:22 GMT -6
I think it's important if you are on the winning side to do the best you can to preserve the other team's dignity. These are kids. There's no need to embarass and demoralize the other team. You want beat them, and beat them soundly...but not embarass them. Agree with this wholeheartedly. Sometimes we football coaches are our own worst enemies in terms of what's best for the sport. Those other coaches and kids have to practice the next day, too. Maybe it takes being on both sides of a blowout few times for guys to "get it." Amen. I called the defense against a program that I had previously coached in. I really despised most of the coaching staff so I just kept coming with pressure well into a blow-out win. Our starters had been pulled but I blitzed the h-ll out of them until the end of the game. We popped their starting QB repeatedly and, once the fervor or the game wore off, I felt friggin' terrible. That poor kid. I was on the opposite end of the blow-out spectrum for the first time in my career this last year and it opened my eyes. I've never run a score anyone but I have pulled stunts like the crap described above. It's tough to get the kids' spirits back up after some j-rk-off decides to leave his starters in all game.
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Feb 22, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -6
If he dies he dies. I say run it up.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 22, 2011 12:52:06 GMT -6
If he dies he dies. I say run it up. Just remember that when you're down 54-6 and the other guy runs Hook 'n Ladder with 1s for TD (happened to a friend of mine). See if that influences your thinking on the subject at all.
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Feb 22, 2011 13:47:16 GMT -6
I've had the score run up on me. Actually it happened last year. And my opinion has not changed at all. It's a game. The object of the game is to score points. So I'm going to try and score points; I hope my opponent will as well.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Feb 22, 2011 13:53:41 GMT -6
The object of the game is to score points. Sportsmanship is also one of the objects of the HS game. No room for that in your world?
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Feb 22, 2011 14:21:47 GMT -6
I've found a few things out over the years. Younger guys like to have fun and will be trying out all kind of things that might look like bad sportsmenship. Cause they just don't know alot of things they think they know. They also haven't been raked over the coals by the AD as many times as we have yet. The real deal that I've noticed has nothing to do with age, but is the mental and emotional stability of your opponant really plays a big part into this. If you've got two older stable guys, they are going to pretty much act like they've got some sense. If you've got two young guys facing each other, who are pretty stable guys, they'll just laugh it off over a beer in the off season. But you get a nut-case, no matter what age, and he's going to either run "hook and ladder" in the 4th when up +50. Just has to do with mental stability is what I've found. Also, you have to be careful when facing a guy who is the HC "in name only." I've faced guys who you knew wasn't really in charge. Other guys were. Those are the dangerous games.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 22, 2011 14:29:59 GMT -6
Coaches had better be careful in these situations because it is attracting more and more media attention. You may be lucky to have a job of you're up 50 and try to jack up that score.
I coached under a sophomore level OC who thought it'd be practical to toss the starters back in during a 63-0 route of the other team. He wanted to keep that goose-egg on the scoreboard. The AD was in the stands and canned him the next week.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 22, 2011 14:47:26 GMT -6
The object of the game is to score points. Sportsmanship is also one of the objects of the HS game. No room for that in your world? Not only is it a sportsmanship issue, but it's a problem from a number of different angles. 1. I don't want one of my kids getting into a fight with a kid on another team because we're blowing them out and frustrations are flaring up. That helps nobody...it's bad for us all. Why even risk that? Becuase "the object is to score points?" I disagree. I always thought the object was to WIN. 2. How does "running it up" help your kids? It doesn't. Being a HC is about making the best decisions for your team. In the long-run, it's FAR better for the development of your program to get your backups and JV guys onto the varsity field and getting that confidence and experience than it is to have a "my D!ck is bigger than yours" complex and try to prove how many points we can score. 3. The negative attention amongst peers, the media, and the community is not worth the ego-boost of blowing someone out. You're in it to win...not to thump your chest and boost your own ego. 4. You can seriously damage a relationship with an opposing coach by running scores up, and relationships between coaches are pretty important by my estimation. I don't know how anyone could take the viewpoint of "running it up is good." I mean, I'm an old-school pr!ck about most football stuff...but this is one area I'll never budge, and I'll NEVER understand the opposite opinion.
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Feb 23, 2011 13:35:09 GMT -6
I have been on both sides of these types of games. It's no fun fro anyone but your subs and younger players.
When we believe we are going to have a roll over we discuss substitution patterns before the game. IF we have a few players that need to get healthy we give them limited action and get them out early.
Our approach has been to spot sub early. So if we are up 14 points on our first two possessions we are going to rotate in one player per position group out the next series. We love to get "next years" starters on the field and get them on film in live action. If we are up 3 or 4 TD's in the 2nd Qtr we go 50-50 starters to subs.
We always want to shut out the other team in the first half so we are less liberal in wholesale substituting on defense in the first half. On offense we try and light it up while subbing in the first half. We want to be up 42-0 at half. That way we can wholesale sub and turn the second half into a JV game for all of our kids that work there tails off in practice.
Unlike a lot of program we face. We could care less about second half stats in a rollover game. If the other team wants to keep their starters in and we get a 49-28 win. I could care less. Our backups work hard they are going to get a lot of time in these games. It really helps the morale of those kids and their parents, who are some of our biggest volunteers and donors to our booster club.
There are a lot of ways to look at this;
We played the #1 program in the state last year in a meaningless crossover game 7 last year. We were really beat up and sat a few players, because the following week was a rival match-up for our league championship. They put it too us! They had a Parade National Player of the Year, and four other D1 kids playing both ways into the start of the 4th Qtr.
So maybe I have it wrong.
|
|
JMC
Sophomore Member
Posts: 108
|
Post by JMC on Feb 23, 2011 13:43:48 GMT -6
Phantom was National Scoring Record team Hampton when they had Curry???
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 23, 2011 13:44:43 GMT -6
Phantom was National Scoring Record team Hampton when they had Curry??? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by k on Feb 23, 2011 14:21:11 GMT -6
I've had the score run up on me. Actually it happened last year. And my opinion has not changed at all. It's a game. The object of the game is to score points. So I'm going to try and score points; I hope my opponent will as well. Actually the object of the game is to score more points than your opponent not to score as many points as possible. A win by 1 or a win by 753 results in the same result. I think it has been pretty well said in here that leaving your starters in risks injury to vital pieces to your team when they are not needed to win the game. Which would in fact hurt the "object of the game" for the time that they are out due to injury while not in any way furthering the "object of the game."
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 23, 2011 14:45:40 GMT -6
I was chatting with my assistants about this thread today and they mentioned something interesting.
We got throttled by the #4 team in the state last season; lost 48-14. They left their starters in the entire game and threw the ball deep well into the fourth quarter. I wouldn't have any issue with them throwing the ball but they scored 28 points on us running Iso, Power, and Toss from the I-formation.They also picked on our weakest DB with their passing game; funny how they always found ways to get him locked up on their All-State WR....
But, my assistants over heard the opposing team's players after the game and they were furious with their coaches for doing what they did. Apparently, one of them even stated that "he couldn't believe that we kept throwing the ball.."
So, you run the risk of looking like an a-- with your kids or, even worse, having a sh-t, childish attitude spill over on them.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 23, 2011 15:22:33 GMT -6
The opposing coach just wouldn't accept that the kid made a mistake and it wasn't a fake punt called. That's just a bad, clueless coach blaming someone else for his incompetence. "Wouldn't accept"?!?! That's crap - he's an idiot with his head up his ass who simply wants to deflect attention from his complete lack of anything approaching coaching ability. Honestly, it's this kind of coach that bugs me far more than a coach truly running up the score. At least with running up the score you're just playing the game. You may or may not have class (there could be a decent reason for running up the score), but at least you're not sitting there pointing at everyone else.
|
|