|
Post by coachcb on Nov 28, 2012 13:19:41 GMT -6
I am wondering if the quality of football coaches has changed over the years. I'm only 32 so I don't have enough experience to answer the question but I'd like to hear opinions on whether the overall quality of the football coaching profession has changed (better or worse).
There have been a lot of changes in society over the last few decades that could impact the quality of the profession such as technology and increased player population (increased demand for coaches).
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 28, 2012 13:31:39 GMT -6
Here's an example:
I think that the increased access to information has improved the quality of coaches in the field. Well, it has the potential to do so, anyway.
I worked with a guy this year who was, for all intents and purposes, a screaming PITA. But, he did a fair amount of research on his own when I told him we were running Wing-T on offense. He was able to do so because of his access to the internet. He knew a lot of the terminology (Belly, Buck, Down, Waggle, etc..) and the basics of the offense before hand which did make life a little bit easier. Chances are, I wouldn't have gotten that ten years ago because it wasn't an offense you saw on TV or on Madden.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2012 14:27:18 GMT -6
I think at least in my state (Louisiana) the quality of coaching has gone down. I attribute this to consolidation of schools and the downfall of public school. Hardly anybody wants to work in a public school here anymore, so many of the potentially good coaches go do anything else instead.
|
|
|
Post by chi5hi on Nov 29, 2012 14:44:38 GMT -6
Quality, and knowledge may be two different things.
|
|
|
Post by emptybackfield on Nov 29, 2012 14:51:04 GMT -6
I think at least in my state (Louisiana) the quality of coaching has gone down. I attribute this to consolidation of schools and the downfall of public school. Hardly anybody wants to work in a public school here anymore, so many of the potentially good coaches go do anything else instead. Absolutely. The pain in the ass stuff teachers are being put through these days are driving good men out of the teaching/coaching profession.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 29, 2012 14:52:27 GMT -6
Quality, and knowledge may be two different things. IMO, knowledge is a prerequisite for quality. I figured I'd start this thread seeing as there have been several discussions about the quality of staffs people have worked on. In my limited experience, I feel like the quality of coaches has gone up in this area. There's just more information available to the people that actually want to put in the work. Ten years ago, you didn't have youtube clips of various offenses at your finger tips.
|
|
|
Post by Luther Van Dam on Nov 29, 2012 15:09:15 GMT -6
I think there is the POTENTIAL for a higher quality of coach do to the information and technology available today. I believe it is up to the individual to make the best use of those resources to improve his quality of coaching.
Those coaches that take advantage of the resources will be a higher quality coach. Those that do not will suffer, and the gap is bigger today between the two.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Nov 29, 2012 16:13:49 GMT -6
Quality, and knowledge may be two different things. IMO, knowledge is a prerequisite for quality. I figured I'd start this thread seeing as there have been several discussions about the quality of staffs people have worked on. In my limited experience, I feel like the quality of coaches has gone up in this area. There's just more information available to the people that actually want to put in the work. Ten years ago, you didn't have youtube clips of various offenses at your finger tips. Just playing devils advocate here..... Sometimes too much info is bad for a coach. I know some coaches who rely too much on their knowledge of stuff-they have every book, cut up, and drill outline imaginable- and think that makes them a good coach. They try to get the kids to do EVERYTHING they know, instead of effectively teaching something they overload them with everything (actually had a big talk with a buddy of mine who worked for a guy doing this). Moreover, Ive known some these same coaches to be very poor communicators. The kinda guy who say, "its my job to teach and their job to learn." As if merely presenting information is an effective and successful form of teaching. In any case, as I wrote its just a contradictory post. I think the potential to be better is brought on by technology and increased communication among coaches. But this alone doesnt make someone a better coach
|
|
|
Post by davishfc on Nov 29, 2012 22:38:51 GMT -6
I think there are more people out there with greater levels of football knowledge than there's ever been before because of how easily information can be accessed. However, knowledgeable football enthusiasts DO NOT necessarily mean highly skilled, quality coaches. There is so much more that goes into coaching. Is a plentiful and sound knowledge base a requisite? Absolutely. But there are so many other skills that must be refined in order to become a quality coach. Can somebody gain more knowledge of those skills like they do schemes and techniques? Definitely. But then they need to effectively put them into action. Some can...some cannot. There are great coaches out there and they certainly have the knowledge and skills to excel in the role and be, what is being referred to in this thread, as "quality."
|
|
|
Post by coachbuck on Nov 30, 2012 2:28:10 GMT -6
I think there are more people out there with greater levels of football knowledge than there's ever been before because of how easily information can be accessed. However, knowledgeable football enthusiasts DO NOT necessarily mean highly skilled, quality coaches. There is so much more that goes into coaching. Is a plentiful and sound knowledge base a requisite? Absolutely. But there are so many other skills that must be refined in order to become a quality coach. Can somebody gain more knowledge of those skills like they do schemes and techniques? Definitely. But then they need to effectively put them into action. Some can...some cannot. There are great coaches out there and they certainly have the knowledge and skills to excel in the role and be, what is being referred to in this thread, as "quality." I think this is spot on. I talk with many guys that can out x and o me. They can talk football up and down but they cannot apply it to the football field. Having knowledge and applying the knowledge are two very different things. The problem with the guys with alot of knowledge is when it goes bad it cant possibly be there fault. They know way to much about football. It kills me, its part of the reason Im leaving the staff Im currently on. Know football cannot apply it to the football field. My first coaching expeirence 10 yrs ago. I was assistant coaching a bobble head team. We had a coaches meeting. The HC talked up and down about football. I left the meeting super impressed. We get to the football field and it was over. Could not apply basic principals to the football field. To this day this guy still coaches and is lucky to win a game a year but he can out chalkboard you anyday.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Nov 30, 2012 8:37:29 GMT -6
Here's my deal, I would say that the quantity of coaches in down...which again IMO affects quality...the biggest problem I had BY FAR was attracting quality coaches..for instance, in our school only 2 of 6 gym teachers coach ANYTHING wtf..its like that all over our county..one of the reasons that is is that our pay around here is relatively good ..people bi!tch all the time but there is no way they could get a job paying what they make now..they are comfortable and don't need the extra pay...Another problem I had is that people did not have references..I mean they wrote them down, but when I checked them, I never got calls back or they were very vague..One kid came to an interview in bad jeans and a t shirt...GROW UP YOUNG PEOPLE
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 30, 2012 9:09:10 GMT -6
Here's my deal, I would say that the quantity of coaches in down...which again IMO affects quality...the biggest problem I had BY FAR was attracting quality coaches..for instance, in our school only 2 of 6 gym teachers coach ANYTHING wtf..its like that all over our county..one of the reasons that is is that our pay around here is relatively good ..people bi!tch all the time but there is no way they could get a job paying what they make now..they are comfortable and don't need the extra pay...Another problem I had is that people did not have references..I mean they wrote them down, but when I checked them, I never got calls back or they were very vague..One kid came to an interview in bad jeans and a t shirt...GROW UP YOUNG PEOPLE This is where lack of administrative support really bothers me. We're also seeing a lot of PE teachers who don't coach anything. That doesn't make sense to me. I understand that coaching isn't the top priority when they're hiring a teacher for an academic class but PE?
|
|
Coach H
Sophomore Member
Posts: 146
|
Post by Coach H on Nov 30, 2012 10:12:56 GMT -6
I think the quality of coaches is down a little.
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Nov 30, 2012 11:41:08 GMT -6
A good coach is a good coach no matter what era. Just because parts of the game have become more complex or advanced does not mean coaching has become better. It's all about applying and teaching that knowledge to the team/players. You can run the supper face melter offense that has 17 different options built into one play now a days, but the bottom line is if your players can't get into a stance, or block, or catch, or throw it doesn't matter how much knowledge you have.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 30, 2012 12:15:24 GMT -6
A good coach is a good coach no matter what era. Just because parts of the game have become more complex or advanced does not mean coaching has become better. It's all about applying and teaching that knowledge to the team/players. You can run the supper face melter offense that has 17 different options built into one play now a days, but the bottom line is if your players can't get into a stance, or block, or catch, or throw it doesn't matter how much knowledge you have. You're right, but there's more access to the information pertaining to coaching the skills in the game. It's not just Xs and Os stuff. I find all kinds of drills and tips on the web. I get a lot of stuff from watching Youtube. I pulled up Nevada's cut-ups yesterday and took note of all of the assignments, alignments and footwork in some of their pistol stuff. I broke it down enough that I would feel comfortable teaching the "Horn" (pin and pull) and Belly Option plays in the pistol right now.
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Nov 30, 2012 12:58:41 GMT -6
A good coach is a good coach no matter what era. Just because parts of the game have become more complex or advanced does not mean coaching has become better. It's all about applying and teaching that knowledge to the team/players. You can run the supper face melter offense that has 17 different options built into one play now a days, but the bottom line is if your players can't get into a stance, or block, or catch, or throw it doesn't matter how much knowledge you have. You're right, but there's more access to the information pertaining to coaching the skills in the game. It's not just Xs and Os stuff. I find all kinds of drills and tips on the web. I get a lot of stuff from watching Youtube. I pulled up Nevada's cut-ups yesterday and took note of all of the assignments, alignments and footwork in some of their pistol stuff. I broke it down enough that I would feel comfortable teaching the "Horn" (pin and pull) and Belly Option plays in the pistol right now. I guess what I was trying to say, and not directed at you in any way just in general, you can have all this knowledge and drills and techniques because of the easy of access to information. But can you translate to on the field success. There are all kinds of blogs and web sites that break down offenses and teams schemes to the most minute detail out there now a days. But could the guys who write that stuff actually step on to the field and coach it? I guess my point was you could pull a good coach from the 50's into to days game and if they studied the knowledge and info from today I would bet they would still be a good coach. Like wise you take a bad coach from that era and do the same and they would still be a bad coach. Knowledge of the game doesn't equal a quality coach. Being able to convey the knowledge to your players and have them execute it equals a quality coach.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Dec 1, 2012 7:37:34 GMT -6
I think in general coaches have more knowledge today for many reasons. Some have taken teaching their scheme or the game to a higher level such as Coverdale, Slack, and others that are using new tools to teach and improve players. Where I see a difference many other coaches aren't as good as teachers. In the past guys played in a system and then coached in that system. They knew how to teach all the little details. I think that's one reason TFS and things like it are popular. Not only are they teaching the x and os but how to teach all the little details.
There are a lot of things I know how it works. I know the information and details but I can't teach it so my kids can execute on a high level. I could take the time to be a better teacher of it but how much would my players suffer through my growing pains?
|
|
tgun25
Freshmen Member
[F4:464798950222428]
Posts: 33
|
Post by tgun25 on Dec 1, 2012 7:47:16 GMT -6
At my school, our header is retired, the OC doesn't work in the school system, the DC works at the Alternative school off campus and the OL coach is retired. I am the only varsity assistant in the HS...meaning I'm the only guy recruiting hallways, talking to players, etc. To top it off our admin's philosophy is to not advertise coaching when posting teaching positions, they just assume quality coaches will gravitate to our programs. IMO, every time you post a teaching position coaching experience should also be sought.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Dec 1, 2012 7:57:55 GMT -6
At my school, our header is retired, the OC doesn't work in the school system, the DC works at the Alternative school off campus and the OL coach is retired. I am the only varsity assistant in the HS...meaning I'm the only guy recruiting hallways, talking to players, etc. To top it off our admin's philosophy is to not advertise coaching when posting teaching positions, they just assume quality coaches will gravitate to our programs. IMO, every time you post a teaching position coaching experience should also be sought. Does recruiting the halls really work for you? I used to but in my opinion if I have to sale you in the hall you probably don't want to play that bad. Plus those kids end up being a disappointment most of the time in my experience
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 1, 2012 8:19:43 GMT -6
I think the answer to this is "yes and no". Not trying to ride the fence here but I see this both ways. As a HC I have noticed that a lot of younger guys don't like to put in the time but have an expectation that they will have a voice or "move up" without earning it. I do think this is a drawback from the information age. These young guys play Madden (yes, I actually had a guy during an INTERVIEW say he knew the game "forward and backwards because he played Madden all through out college", no lie that actually happened). So some of these guys get a little knowledge and think they are "seasoned" . In that sense I think it has gotten worse and good young assistants are hard to find. Especially when it comes to putting in the time and when it comes to the less glamorous side of things to, like helping with fund raising, tracking equipment, etc.
On the other hand, I think your ELITE programs are better coached than in the past b/c this game always has and will continue to evolve. It's just a fact that over time people find better ways to do things. Better ways to move the ball, better ways to play defense, etc. As time goes by evolution improves the product at the elite levels in my opinion. For example, a state champion from 1980 jumps into a time machine to play state champion today and I think many of them would be baffled by some of the schemes they are seing today because they did not exist back then. I also think on elite levels, the athlete is trained much better than ever before so you are putting superior specimens on the field that would dominate many athletes from decades past.
This is my experience anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Dec 1, 2012 12:33:35 GMT -6
recruiting the halls works with me for freshmen and sophs. Some of them are looking for an identity and don't do many sports so I try to build them. Many of my players have had to be made. Juniors and seniors that haven't played are not pursued. If they want to play and come to see me, I give them every opportunity but I don't get "excited". More often if I get excited about them I get burned. But...occasionally some of them have been great. In terms of the thread, as long as the coaches have been in education, they seem to be similiar to in the past in terms of good and bad. Occasionally, some school takes a chance on a parent or someone who was on a college staff somewhere. These tend to be big failures.
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Dec 3, 2012 14:16:28 GMT -6
So let's say you got a staff of two or three knowledgable coaches and 5 or 6 not so knowledgable ones....say in a new school....how would you develop these five or six at an incredibly fast rate?
|
|
|
Post by morris on Dec 3, 2012 15:36:30 GMT -6
So let's say you got a staff of two or three knowledgable coaches and 5 or 6 not so knowledgable ones....say in a new school....how would you develop these five or six at an incredibly fast rate? This is why some guys create position manuals and DVDs. You give them exactly what you want them to coach and how to do it. I think it helps if you can get the guys to be proud of the position they coach and take ownership of it. In the end it comes down to good those coaches want to be
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Dec 3, 2012 15:42:04 GMT -6
So let's say you got a staff of two or three knowledgable coaches and 5 or 6 not so knowledgable ones....say in a new school....how would you develop these five or six at an incredibly fast rate? 1. Make it real clear that they're teaching football, not playing Madden. I've had to have that conversation with experienced teachers. 2. When you're going through material with them, start with the basic drills of their position. Work with the more generic stuff to reinforce the teaching aspect. 3. Go through the Xs and Os of the scheme but stop to emphasize the drills each position will be using to teach the necessary skills. 4. Get into the thick of the skill specific drills and beat it into them. Set up an afternoon clinic and go to town.
|
|
|
Post by spreadopt on Dec 4, 2012 17:35:59 GMT -6
I think the quality of coaching has both increased and decreased over the years. While I cannot compare too many years or decades (only 31), I do know that access to information has drastically increased the knowledge of coaches who are motivated to learn more about the game. Can they coach it... that is to be seen...
I think it is getting worse at times (at least in my state) because of the lack of teaching jobs that are available to help get good coaches in the building working with the kids. We have lost out on several great coaching candidates because they needed a teaching job and our district was not able to provide it for them. I know this is a problem in a lot of districts/states.
|
|
|
Post by davishfc on Dec 4, 2012 19:49:38 GMT -6
Another problem I had is that people did not have references..I mean they wrote them down, but when I checked them, I never got calls back or they were very vague Again, you're checking for experience and, unfortunately, no amount of article reading, discussion board posts, or dvd watching can substitute for coaching experience. Though I know there are some supposed "coaches" out there that believe that. Coaches getting on grass and teaching the game to players and using articles, dvds, and discussion boards to refine their craft is one thing and I wholeheartedly support that. But individuals that claim to be coaches using those resources solely as a method for understanding the game more without coaching it is just absurd. Most importantly though, is that those resources cannot substitute for making valuable contributions on a staff with a head coach that feels compelled to give a glowing recommendation. Of course, the other side of this are "coaches" who don't try to learn and get better using the resources listed above. I believe they present another problem within the coaching field today. You know what I'm talking about. The polo, visor, and headset wearing clown that's yelling $hit like "hit somebody." Anyway, there ARE issues with finding quality coaches these days. Part of the problem is the popularity of football. It's trendy to understand the game for conversation purposes. It's easy to learn about the game especially with the way information can be accessed. But making a total commitment to coaching and applying that knowledge is tough...something only a select few do and do well. One kid came to an interview in bad jeans and a t shirt...GROW UP YOUNG PEOPLE What a dumba$$?! Kids are f-ing dumb sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by coachbdud on Dec 5, 2012 15:30:44 GMT -6
I personally can't stand young football coaches
They come in thinking they know everything, but have nothing to back it up. They see something on ESPN one time and think they can dominate the profession
They are rude, cocky and I can't stand them
I am in full support of coaching age guidelines, minimum age to be an assistant 30 years old, minimum age to be a coordinator 35, and minimum age to be a head coach 40!
These young fellas need to learn a lesson!
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Dec 5, 2012 19:40:57 GMT -6
My father in law is a grumpy old fart, great guy but all he does is biatch during baseball season about "how there aren't no good pitchers any more!". Well, what he doesn't take into consideration is how diluted the talent pool is in major league baseball. There are twice as many teams today as there were from back in his day.
I think the same thing is true of football. It is everywhere today and that has to have an impact on the talent level of individuals who can truly coach the sport.
I believe that coaching is no different than any other profession, it takes someone who can impart their knowledge in a way that is meant to inspire the recipient of that knowledge to improve their skill set. Whether it is apprentice plumber learning a trade from a journeyman, a broker teaching an assistant about finances, whatever, the coach/journeyman has to be good at what they do. Someone mentioned on here about bringing a good coach from the 50's back and they would be good today. They would because they knew how to coach, the material is irrelevant.
One thing I believe, and I don't want to high jack a thread, but it seems that a lot of good people and potential good coaches are turned away because they are not teachers. I can't believe there are actually states that mandate that a coach has to be a teacher (someone on here from Texas said that was a rule). Look at how you limit your potential pool of coaches when this happens. Quality people, strong work ethic, established in their community and profession are what is needed to be leaders of the young men we coach, I don't care what their profession is.
|
|
|
Post by davishfc on Dec 5, 2012 20:11:02 GMT -6
I personally can't stand young football coaches They come in thinking they know everything, but have nothing to back it up. They see something on ESPN one time and think they can dominate the profession They are rude, cocky and I can't stand them I am in full support of coaching age guidelines, minimum age to be an assistant 30 years old, minimum age to be a coordinator 35, and minimum age to be a head coach 40! These young fellas need to learn a lesson! Hmmm...I'm going to assume you're being facetious. Regardless, one of my mentors had a great phase to sum up a lot of young coaches. It's more appropriate to some young coaches than others. Mostly because some insist on being relentlessly arrogant longer and, consequently, tend to stay in the phase longer. The ones that embrace earlier that they're not as knowledgeable as they thought they were, get out of it much sooner. According to him, they all go through a phase of being "young, dumb, and full of cum." LOL! I about died when he shared that with me the first time.
|
|
|
Post by davishfc on Dec 6, 2012 14:08:28 GMT -6
I always say competent and committed coaches are what I'm after. Most of the discussion has revolved around competence. But dc, you bring up a great point that the competence may be there but the commitment is still lacking or even non-existent. So you can be a competent but a non-quality coach.
|
|