|
|
Post by coachtuck on Nov 7, 2012 10:54:22 GMT -6
Lets say if you had to choose a kid to play safety would you go with the football smart 5 foot8 kid who runsa 4.9 who can tackle or the athlete who's 5 foot 11 runs a 4 7 low football IQ who can't tackle
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedevil4 on Nov 7, 2012 10:58:15 GMT -6
For safety, we'll almost always take the smart kids first, then maybe in a 3rd and long, or obvious passing down, we'll put a more athletic kid in.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 7, 2012 11:15:14 GMT -6
Lets say if you had to choose a kid to play safety would you go with the football smart 5 foot8 kid who runsa 4.9 who can tackle or the athlete who's 5 foot 11 runs a 4 7 low football IQ who can't tackle If those were my only two choices I think I'd prepare three envelopes. |
|
|
|
Post by oriolepower on Nov 7, 2012 11:16:04 GMT -6
I've coached long enough to know that I don't EVER want a safety on the field that can't tackle.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 7, 2012 11:21:29 GMT -6
I don't EVER want ANYBODY on Defense that can't tackle. FIFY |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 7, 2012 12:17:32 GMT -6
The stupid athletic kids just end up in the wrong spot faster.
|
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Nov 7, 2012 12:29:53 GMT -6
Fast in the wrong direction hurts me way more than slow in the right direction...
Fast kid would play corner for me... hard to screw that one up.
Safety needs to be smarter
|
|
|
|
Post by fbsouth on Nov 7, 2012 12:31:37 GMT -6
At the school I am at we use a kid just like that. He is very intelligant and very football smart. He puts our defense in good situations when we have to check coverages. He can also come down hill and smoke people. He almost a for sure tackle. I think he missed like 3 or 4 tackles all year.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 7, 2012 13:05:04 GMT -6
Lets say if you had to choose a kid to play safety would you go with the football smart 5 foot8 kid who runsa 4.9 who can tackle or the athlete who's 5 foot 11 runs a 4 7 low football IQ who can't tackle If those were my only two choices I think I'd prepare three envelopes. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Nov 7, 2012 13:34:23 GMT -6
That is a WR guys.
Pretty simple, if a kid can't tackle he hasn't been coached very well, if he won't tackle, he has to play offense!
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 7, 2012 13:41:39 GMT -6
That is a WR guys. Pretty simple, if a kid can't tackle he hasn't been coached very well, if he won't tackle, he has to play offense! If he can't catch, he's a Corner. If he can't cover - he's a Soccer player. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 7, 2012 13:47:40 GMT -6
There is no such thing as a dumb GOOD Football player.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Nov 7, 2012 14:39:47 GMT -6
There is no such thing as a dumb GOOD Football player. Well, could play nose tackle... |
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Nov 7, 2012 14:45:32 GMT -6
If he can't tackle, he's not playing defense for me, regardless of intelligence or athletic ability.
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Nov 7, 2012 15:07:49 GMT -6
I think youve skewed the descriptions a bit to get the choice that you want.
The better athlete is slightly taller, though neither are tall. And slightly faster though both have good but not great speed. In other words they are fairly equal but there is nothing here to make me think neither could play.
Conversely the athlete has a low IQ while the other player is considered smart; its vague and allows people to come up with their own descriptions (one is a sack of rocks the other diagnoses plays before the snap). Then, you say the better athlete can't tackle. Once again too vague and allows for us to make him useless in our mind.
I think you should make the athlete better, and further describe the intangibles to get better judgments
|
|
|
|
Post by coachtuck on Nov 7, 2012 15:33:54 GMT -6
In both respects then would you rather put a LB or WR at safety
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedevil4 on Nov 7, 2012 15:39:33 GMT -6
In both respects then would you rather put a LB or WR at safety For us, it would be a LB. |
|
|
|
Post by 33coach on Nov 7, 2012 15:40:52 GMT -6
In both respects then would you rather put a LB or WR at safety The fs in my system is a deep linebacker who has to also play center field...its pretty easy for me to put an LB there. Sent from my DROID Pro using proboards |
|
kyle
Sophomore Member
Posts: 200
|
Post by kyle on Nov 7, 2012 22:17:52 GMT -6
Lets say if you had to choose a kid to play safety would you go with the football smart 5 foot8 kid who runsa 4.9 who can tackle or the athlete who's 5 foot 11 runs a 4 7 low football IQ who can't tackle I don't want a kid who can't tackle on game day, but I'm not going to have a kid who can't tackle on game day. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Nov 8, 2012 7:33:01 GMT -6
Fast kid would play corner for me... hard to screw that one up. You would be surprised what they are capable of screwing up! LOL Think I have some film I could share that would change your opinion. Take a smart kid any day. Won a state title and top 10 national ranking with a kid who wasn't a great athlete at FS but he knew where to be and how to line up and studied the defense. So he made up for it that way. |
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Nov 8, 2012 7:57:12 GMT -6
Didn't comment yet in this thread...just been lurking, but in almost every position, it is easier to work with a smart kid with average ability because I have the chance to help him possibly make up for his limited athleticism. Smart kid also will hopefully understand that he needs to get in the weight room to improve (if he isn't a senior).
More athletic kid would probably get the 1st chance to play throughout the pre-season practices. However, by the time we play our 1st game we need to have our best 11 on the field...the 11 guys that us as a coaching staff and the other 10 guys out on the field can trust and rely on to best do their 1/11th.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 8, 2012 8:16:39 GMT -6
I think youve skewed the descriptions a bit to get the choice that you want. The better athlete is slightly taller, though neither are tall. And slightly faster though both have good but not great speed. In other words they are fairly equal but there is nothing here to make me think neither could play. Conversely the athlete has a low IQ while the other player is considered smart; its vague and allows people to come up with their own descriptions (one is a sack of rocks the other diagnoses plays before the snap). Then, you say the better athlete can't tackle. Once again too vague and allows for us to make him useless in our mind. I think you should make the athlete better, and further describe the intangibles to get better judgments I agree. This is a no brainer - play the smarter kid. The choice is when you have another kid that runs a 4.4 and can tackle, but gets beat deep because he misread the play. Or went to tackle dive when the QB pulled it. Now you might have a decision. |
|
|
|
Post by olcoach53 on Nov 8, 2012 8:37:39 GMT -6
You play the smarter kid. We had a 5'8 150 pound sophomore start all season for us at SS. He probably couldnt run a 4.8 but he was smart, tackled efficiently and rarely made mistakes. He actually ended up making over 70 tackles on the season DESPITE his size and he will be a good football player for the next two seasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 8, 2012 9:24:11 GMT -6
Also, forty times are so overrated. Do not misunderstand me - SPEED is huge. But forty times are not football speed. We time forties twice a week during the off-season and summer. I believe 40's are very important. The reason - because if the kid improves his forty time - HE is faster which means he is better. But comparing forty times is useless within certain ranges. One runs a 5.5 and the other a 4.4, of course we know which one is faster. But if one runs a 4.9 and one runs a 4.7 - I bet the smarter kid is faster on the football field.
|
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Nov 8, 2012 9:51:32 GMT -6
Smarter kid will play faster than his 40 time because he will be going the right direction more often... football speed is what I look for (probably because my fastest player ran 4.7 last year)
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Nov 8, 2012 10:25:58 GMT -6
something we say often in our discussions regarding player positioning in off-season & preseason when looking at depth charts and level of play (team they may be on)
"smart players get better"
|
|
|
|
Post by 33coach on Nov 8, 2012 11:43:29 GMT -6
That is a WR guys. Pretty simple, if a kid can't tackle he hasn't been coached very well, if he won't tackle, he has to play offense! I don't know...we've had some years where offensive players had to be good tacklers too. Lol Sent from my DROID Pro using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by olcoach53 on Nov 8, 2012 12:33:48 GMT -6
This same argument can be said for the whole "you have to be big to play football" spiel. I tell my players that is the biggest load of crap ever. I would rather take a 5'10 190 pound lineman with great technique and tenacity over a 6'4 280 pound kid with bad feet and a lazy work ethic.
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadjet31 on Nov 8, 2012 16:33:22 GMT -6
I've got a bunch of smart, slow kids. I want me some athletes!
|
|
