|
|
Post by John Knight on Jun 17, 2012 20:09:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by coachbuck on Jun 18, 2012 9:35:52 GMT -6
I think those are good rule changes. Ive always kept my kids three yard apart or less when doing tackling drills. Kids can go full speed not get hurt and they build their confidence up. To many youth coaches line kids up ten yards apart and watch big collisions. Moron coaches like that suck. It makes the more timid kid timid. The rule package is just common sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachdennis on Jun 18, 2012 10:36:51 GMT -6
Those "ten yards apart, ram into each other head first at full speed" drills are beyond stupid. How many times do you see that scenario present itself in a game? Try never. In fact, you rarely get a square on tackle in a game. You have to teach it, of course, but the reality is that most of the tackles are angle tackles. If you want them running on D, teach them pursuit angles, which is definitely NOT instinctive in most kids.
It is unfortunate that you have to legislate common sense sometimes, but let's be honest - there are still a LOT of hammerhead coaches out there, so it had to be done if we want to promote and grow the sport going forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachrobpsl on Jun 18, 2012 10:55:20 GMT -6
Pop Warner needed to put some effort into educating the guys who still do stuff like that. A mandatory coaches tackling clinic would be a good idea imo. Put out a video and have each association show it to all coaches so everybody is on the same page.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Jun 18, 2012 11:00:46 GMT -6
Coach Hugh Wyatt's DVD "Surere and Safer Tackling" fits that bill for a great video.
|
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Jun 18, 2012 13:23:31 GMT -6
Pop Warner needed to put some effort into educating the guys who still do stuff like that. A mandatory coaches tackling clinic would be a good idea imo. Put out a video and have each association show it to all coaches so everybody is on the same page. So instead they pointed the finger at the game as the problem and ignored the real issue…poor coaching. They would never put the onus on themselves publicly. That would have been the responsible thing to do. Instead they mandate unnecessarily which only brings even more attention to the media hype that the game is just too dangerous. Dumb move. Bad technique is still bad technique whether you are 3 yards from contact….or 10. |
|
|
|
Post by coachrobpsl on Jun 18, 2012 16:11:12 GMT -6
Exactly. I was actually stunned. The best public relation move they could of made would of been to say that every coach must attend some sort of clinic on the issue. Not just tackling properly but on concussion awareness. The media and public would of been happy and the end result would of been safer football without causing harm to the game. I think this is what us coaches really want. I do think we are a very solid tackling team with good technique. But I have no control over the idiot on the other side line who encourages his kids to use poor and dangerous technique. This is more of an NFL problem because they DO lead with the head and ARE trying to hurt or injure the opponent. They are also such awesome physical specimens that being hit by an NFL linebacker is like being hit by a small car. I watch NFL games and I am always amazed at the amount of poor tackling technique, especially leading with the head and not wrapping up. How many kids watch the NFL and say "my coach doesn't know what he is talking about it. That's not how the NFL tackles"? I have had players comment on this exact subject before. Hopefully they see what happens when an NFL safety does not wrap, leaves his feet and leads with his head. He does not make the tackle!
|
|
|
|
Post by outlawjoseywales on Jun 20, 2012 22:09:42 GMT -6
Although it is a great idea, the reality of a "total" P.W. agreeing on one system of doing ANYTHING isn't going to happen.
The mian reason? Lawsuits.
Who actually wants to put their own "necks on the line" (no pun intended) to tell everyone else how to do THE most dangerous thing we do-tackle.
I just don't think that anybody could possibly have enough liability insurance coverage to fend off the lawsuits by "you told me nobody would get hurt" parents WHEN, not IF players get hurt tackling.
It's just not going to happen.
OJW
|
|
|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Jun 21, 2012 5:10:05 GMT -6
i cringe when i go by our little league practices -- tackling drills with the kids at least ten yards apart. They run full speed (which isn't very fast at that level) - hit each other and at least one falls down - get back in line and watch the other twenty kids do it...
|
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Jun 21, 2012 9:02:22 GMT -6
Although it is a great idea, the reality of a "total" P.W. agreeing on one system of doing ANYTHING isn't going to happen. The mian reason? Lawsuits. Who actually wants to put their own "necks on the line" (no pun intended) to tell everyone else how to do THE most dangerous thing we do-tackle. I just don't think that anybody could possibly have enough liability insurance coverage to fend off the lawsuits by "you told me nobody would get hurt" parents WHEN, not IF players get hurt tackling. It's just not going to happen. OJW Good point. Too me mandates open these cans of worms making these type decisions irresponsible. If rules are never written, you can’t break them. I’ve sat on a few rules committees. You really have to think things thru to include the absurd. Sometimes the best rule is no rule at all. |
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Jun 22, 2012 23:03:59 GMT -6
Can someone define "butt block" for me?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jun 23, 2012 7:32:50 GMT -6
Football Canada tried/is trying to implement a "national tackling technique", but it has a few major problems. First, it only works if the tackler is close in size to the runner, otherwise you need to use a totally different technique. Second, they keep hyping it as the ideal technique, but have changed it three times in a decade. Third, they can't agree among themselves what the technique is. Finally, they have an inflated opinion of their own importance, they're really not that influential. So I don't see PW pulling off the same thing with an even more decentralized system.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Jun 23, 2012 20:45:42 GMT -6
Can someone define "butt block" for me? Using your head as the primary point of contact. It was called conventionally spearing, but the rules makers reserved that word for a dead ball fooul. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jun 23, 2012 21:07:53 GMT -6
Sometimes the idiots don't even realize they're wrong. I got into an argument with a guy at a clinic who insisted that using the brow of the helmet as the primary point of contact was kosher, he taught way that for "safety reasons."
|
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Jun 24, 2012 10:12:49 GMT -6
Can someone define "butt block" for me? Using your head as the primary point of contact. It was called conventionally spearing, but the rules makers reserved that word for a dead ball fooul. Thanks Bob. |
|
|
|
Post by jrwarriorcoach on Jul 3, 2012 11:19:54 GMT -6
It's a shame that coaches aren't motivated enough to educate themselves. I do a lot of homework to pull off safe/successful practices. I know a lot of guys do but the ones that don't will always cast a big shadow on the rest of us.
|
|
