|
Post by brophy on Jun 14, 2006 13:57:32 GMT -6
[glow=red,2,300]SAN ADEMAS HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL RULES![/glow] itisverydifficulttoreadwhatyouaretypingbecauseyouhavethe keyonsoallthewordslookthesameanditisconfusing.
|
|
|
Post by tye2021 on Jun 14, 2006 14:03:45 GMT -6
I'm not trying to be an a_ _ about this but it sounds more like it benefits the varsity coaching staff not neccessarily the players. Try telling a 12 or 13 year old kid that winning doesn't matter until he gets to high school and that kid will walk right off of your football field.
I'm only asking the question because I came from an area where the town was divided into districts. I lived directly acrross the street from my best friend but was in a different school district. So after ms we were supposed to attend two different hs. So we didn't have feeder schools. The success of these schools falls 1.) on the talent of the kids in your district and 2.) the hs coaches ability to teach and coach. I'm not saying that feeder schools are a bad thing but I don't see where they are detramental to varsity success.
I believe that if the fundamentals are taught( blocking, tackling, footwork...etc) and the general understanding of the game. it doesn't matter what offense or defense the youth or ms schools run, a varsity coach can still have success. KNOWING THE TERMINOLOGY DOES NOT MAKE YOUR KIDS ANY BETTER. I will conside that it does make it easier in the fact that they will already understand your terminology and eliminate mistakes in relaying the plays in and out. But I also played under 3 different systems in hs(coaching changes) and neither me or my teammates had a problem adjusting to the new terminology.
And we also had some great success in our hs. I came from a small city or large town how ever you want to look at it. I'm not sure on the numbers but I know that at least 4 of the hs in that area have won state titles. And more have gone deep into the playoffs and are contenders every year. Now having said that I do believe that the quality of the varsity hs coaching in my hometown has fallen since I graduated back in 91.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 14:05:03 GMT -6
BROPHY- YOU CRACK ME UP...HEY IM HAVING FUN HERE...YOU KNOW I WANT MY OWN SHOW AND YES ILL HAVE THEM RUNNING THE BEST FEEDER PROGRAM AROUND (AS MY GOAL IS FOR THIS YEAR)....BUT HEY, SERIOUS QUESTION FOR YOU AND THE OTHER COACHES HERE....DO ANY OF YOU KNOW OF A LONG TIME LOSER COACH WHO SAID "WELL, WE TOOK IT ON THE CHIN ALOT THIS YEAR BUT WE HAVE A GREAT MIDDLE SCHOOL PROGRAM THAT RUNS OUR STUFF SO NICE THAT WE WILL BE OK IN THE NEAR FUTURE" (AND THEY WERENT TALKING ABOUT TALENT?) OR HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE HONESTLY EVER GIVEN CUDOS TO YOUR MIDDLE SCHOOL FEEDERS FOR "GREAT FUNDAMENTALS"....TELL YA WHAT, I BELIEVE THAT IF A MS COACH HEADS INTO EACH SEASON WITH A FEW SIMPLE GOALS HES DOING A GREAT JOB...
1) TEACH THE GAME, BLOCKING, TACKLING, CARE FOR THE FOOTBALL, PURSUIT AND HUSTLE. 2) TEACH THE KIDS TO LOVE AND RESPECT THE GAME AND EACH OTHER 3) KEEP THEM EXCITED ABOUT THE PROGRAM BY COMPETING WELL ENOUGH TO MAKE THE KIDS FEEL THEY HAVE A CHANCE FOR SUCCESS. *THEY WILL QUIT IF THEY ARE GETTING KILLED!* 4) USE THE SAME BACK AND HOLE NUMBERING AND GENERAL PLAY NAMES..IE "ISO" OR "POWER" ETC. A FEW OF THE CORE FORMATIONS. 5) TEACH CLASS, WINNING ATTITUDE, GREAT CORE VALUES.
I HONESTLY WOULD LOVE IT IF THE YOUTH PROGRAM WOULD DO THOSE THING FOR ME. ILL LET YA KNOW.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 14:13:38 GMT -6
"I'm not trying to be an a_ _ about this but it sounds more like it benefits the varsity coaching staff not neccessarily the players. Try telling a 12 or 13 year old kid that winning doesn't matter until he gets to high school and that kid will walk right off of your football field."
something to consider ....if a varsity staff is losing and the frosh or ms coach is winning...folks want to know why...rumors start, folks start asking that question "why isnt so and so the varsity coach?" and that bothers the varsity guys...in a big way...and it should. If a ms coach is left to run his own system he can learn the ins and outs of it, he can improve himself by learning his own systems strengths and weaknesses, he can grow and create...that also bothers some. ....typically, my experience is that no one cares if you are losing too(well the parents and players hate you when you lose)...win all the games and suddenly they want to know why you arent running the varsity offense (as if it was a surprise even though you practice on the same field all summer)...lol...
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jun 14, 2006 14:16:24 GMT -6
I do understand where the junior high guys are coming from- I was in a similar situation a couple years back. The varsity coach wanted us to run his stuff, but didn't demand it. He also wasn't exactly easy to get a hold of either. So, I got his playbook from him, photocopied it and then sat down with one of his offensive assistants to learn it. It worked out very well, I ran his splitback veer with great success. I also installed an easy short passing game that allowed us to have a little bit of balance.
I am a little quick to get frustrated with this subject, mainly because its been nothing but a problem.... The other middle school guys I worked with always had a "better way" and would pitch a fit when ever someone suggested that they run the HS system. One guy wanted to run the Wishbone, the next guy wanted to run the spread you name it...On and one argument after argument. The HS system at the time was very simple also, in fact they only had 10-15 running plays, a PA off of several of them, and a three step passing game. I was perfectly suited to the ms level, but as I stated earlier- these guys had so much ego tied up in running what they want to run.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 14, 2006 14:23:17 GMT -6
I'm not trying to be an a_ _ about this but it sounds more like it benefits the varsity coaching staff not neccessarily the players. Try telling a 12 or 13 year old kid that winning doesn't matter until he gets to high school and that kid will walk right off of your football field. who's telling the KIDS that winning doesn't matter? Who's telling the coaches that we don't want to win? I would think that playing ALL your kids (getting experience) and learning fundamentals is JOB ONE of those middle schoolers. I don't know that anyone has stated anything contrary to that. However, the point was raised because if you sell out to win at the MS level, and rely on one or two of your physically superior (early puberty) kids, then you are going to be shorting a dozen or so kids who COULD'VE gotten reps / PT.....and isn't that the point of playing sports.....TO PLAY!? Playing a lot of numbers (retaining the players) and teaching fundamentals.....bottom line of feeder / MS programs. Am I writing in Greek again, here? If you win, great....if not, it's not the end of the world. How many MS coaches got fired because of their record? None around MY parts. Same can't be said about HS coaches.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 14:32:59 GMT -6
I do understand where the junior high guys are coming from- I was in a similar situation a couple years back. The varsity coach wanted us to run his stuff, but didn't demand it. He also wasn't exactly easy to get a hold of either. So, I got his playbook from him, photocopied it and then sat down with one of his offensive assistants to learn it. It worked out very well, I ran his splitback veer with great success. I also installed an easy short passing game that allowed us to have a little bit of balance. I am a little quick to get frustrated with this subject, mainly because its been nothing but a problem.... The other middle school guys I worked with always had a "better way" and would pitch a fit when ever someone suggested that they run the HS system. One guy wanted to run the Wishbone, the next guy wanted to run the spread you name it...On and one argument after argument. The HS system at the time was very simple also, in fact they only had 10-15 running plays, a PA off of several of them, and a three step passing game. I was perfectly suited to the ms level, but as I stated earlier- these guys had so much ego tied up in running what they want to run. thats not a problem isolated to your level either. I have coached for long enough to run into those situations where a number of youth coaches have 120 plays in their 12 year olds playbooks, reverse, reverse pass, reverse throwback pass, reverse hook and lateral, halfback pass, halfback throwback, onsides double lateral or whatever...yet the kids cant get into a 3 point stance or block or tackle with their heads up. every coach wants to show that he is a winner, some do it with a small playbook and focus on fundamentals, others think they can "physical conditioining" their kids to be the best and still others think that if they can run every play in "Madden 2006" that they will take home the trophy and be promoted to the next varsity HC just in time to coach their son to the University of Miami. Seriously though, I am already hearing grumbling about our basic playbook...i gave my kids their playbooks immediately after physicals, we have a straight series, a split flow series, belly option and 3 step passing...we have two coverages on defense...we also have exactly 5 practices before our first scrimmage...yet some yoyo parent is whining to anyone who will listen that we arent running enough formations and passing plays to challenge his son and prepare him for varsity. his son stated to me "I know everything already"...yes, his exact words when I asked him if he learned any thing in our open gyms. Note, same boy also said "we key the ball on defense"...guess that explains the difficulty with the wing-t. So yeah, its not isolated to the level between ms to varsity, every level has to "fix" the "bad habits" (as if you could develop a "habit" in 9 weeks of football)...lol...i said it before, you come to my practice ...you will see us teaching stances and starts...but guess what, by monday we have to teach em all over again...the kids are goofy and uncoordinated so its not that simple sometimes. Tell ya this, i have seen some good players walk away from the game at the varsity level for the same things that you guys complain about. the kids go up there and are moved around from position to position every week...oh man, i saw a kid learn tailback, fullback, tightend, lber, de AND QUARTERBACK in the same season...yeah, he "learned" a ton...i think that team won 1 game.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 14:40:05 GMT -6
Hey Brophy- do you think that a varsity coach should play all of his players? We play everyone...but its not equal...what would it teach the kids if all players played equally yet didnt practice the same...perfect example, we have kids that cant complete the warm up lap at the beginning of practice...should they play? should they steal playing time from the kids WHO WILL EVENTUALLY START FOR VARSITY? what about the kids that "forget" their mouth peices or chin straps just so they dont have to do any contact drills? should they play and steal reps from the kids that wouldnt dream of missing a practice? How about the kids who cant stay out of trouble, miss practice time for bogus injuries or detentions or academic elligibility...do they play? I say no. Heres what I do and my kids ABSOLUTELY LOVE AND RESPECT THIS SYSTEM....
BLUE- TWO WAY PERFORMER, STUD, GREAT FUNDIES, KNOWS ASSIGNMENTS.
WHITE- ONE WAY PERFORMER, DEPENDABLE, GREAT FUNDIES, KNOWS ASSIGNMENTS, likely to get first reps on other side of ball if back up needed.
GREEN- ready to play, good practice habits, knows role, maybe not the best athlete but will get playing time from time to time. not guaranteed but will get first look.
YELLOW- some concerns, probably needs refreshers on where to line up or what his assignmetns are....perhaps is a poorly conditioned player. mop up duty, spot play. not guaranteed. needs some work.
RED- serious concerns, lack of practice time, poor fundies, lost...discipline or grades are a problem. not going to play until we see improvement.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 14, 2006 14:45:16 GMT -6
that's great, I'm impressed - you should work for Homeland Security.
Every kid that can come to practice will be taught - we'll find somewhere for him to play, even if it's a small role. If he has bad habits and doesn't put the time in, the PLAYERS will run him off, it's not my job to be a baby-sitter.
What is expected of MS program? What is expected of HS program?
I'm not slighting one or the other. I do not make these expectations. However, the expectations for a 14 year old kid ARE different than an 18 year old kid. The responsibility, maturity, and physical development are worlds apart.
If you have 30 fire-breathing football monsters at the MS level, that's great....but chances are, you may have one or two and the rest are thinking about how they can "score" with the ladies.....it's called puberty....most of them are playing because their friends are playing...not because they have some deep respect for the game. Which is why, all the coaches I've counseled with advocate playing ALL kids at that level, to keep their interest and expose them to competition / performing (my view on MS is shaped by the coaches who taught me....not 'right' or 'wrong' but it is their advice of what "works").
Here is a GREAT example, folks.
Where I grew up (or thereabouts), DIII coaching legend, Bob Reade at Augustana College (Rock Island, IL) rolled DIII during the 80's running his Wing-T. Guess what all the area feeder HS's ran? HIS Wing-T (taught by his assistants), guess what the feeder schools of those HS's ran? Same thing....One of Reade's coaches took over the local HS in Geneseo, IL.....guess what HE ran and what all HIS feeder schools ran? It's not the point of Wing-T working, it's the fact of all the staffs working together, keeping it consistent. I don't believe you HAVE to run what Varsity runs to be successful, but imagine running Wing T for 10 years.....it was a MACHINE (with the footwork / meshes) when these kids ran it at the HS level.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 14:52:38 GMT -6
ah baby sitter----yeah, been there and done that. One year i finally got fed up with two boys and booted them off the night before our final game. shame...real shame. speaking of baby sitting, heres one more thing thats a challenge to the middle school level...parents, they TAKE FOREVER to pick their kids up after practice...our kids dont drive and we have to stick around and BABY SIT until the kids are picked up...I send out a letter at the start of the season with my expectations for the parents "(toungue in cheek) I dont care if Missy's soccer game didnt end until 5:45, Johnnies football practice ended at 5:15 and you need to be there!"
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jun 14, 2006 14:56:40 GMT -6
I don't think you need to run exactly what the varsity runs play for play by any means. That would just be stupid, but using the same basic terminology along with the basic plays of the HS can't be a bad thing. At least at the junior high level, the youth level is kind of far fetched.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jun 14, 2006 14:56:46 GMT -6
MS coaches are sometimes loathe to run the HS coach's system for the same reason he wants them to: We all think our stuff is the best, that we have all the answers or at least know what we're talking about.
The HS coach has the added "mandate" of being top guy in the district.
We always tell our players to "Control those things you have control over," like effort, attitude, conditioning, etc.
Since I have little control over what our MS or youth teams do, I'm not going to worry a whole lot about it.
I have given all the coaches a playbook, video to one coach that asked for it, HS tees and shorts, invited them to sit in on pre-season staff meetings, and to work at summer camps if they so desire. Generally, I have told them I will do whatever I can to help and support them, and that I am always available.
So long as they are getting and keeping kids out (means they're having fun and are participating, not necessarily winning) and effectively teaching them the fundamentals, they are probably doing their jobs for us.
Would I like them to run the Veer and 4-3? Would I like to see them win every game? Sure, but we're not going to lose a game three-four years from now because they didn't, any more than we would because of the type of ball we used.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 15:00:16 GMT -6
"If you have 30 fire-breathing football monsters at the MS level, that's great....but chances are, you may have one or two and the rest are thinking about how they can "score" with the ladies.....it's called puberty....most of them are playing because their friends are playing...not because they have some deep respect for the game. "
well, i have never had 30 studs...i have had 2 maybe and 4 other dependable kids and a bunch that we had to hide....sometimes i have about 8 kids that play both ways and the rest should have played soccer lol...seriously though they all get on the field, not as much as they want because a) mercy rules shorten our games...dumbest thing ever to do to the kids and b) 8 minute quarters...we run the ball and 6 plays is a quarter ...its bad. Id love to think we had enough coaches to platoon the kids...we dont. we usually have 2 or 3 on staff including me. i wouldnt platoon anyhow probably because its too soon to tell where they will end up for varsity...they all learn two positions, its my rule. one offense and one defense...and a really smart kid might learn fullback and tight end for example. but what i find is that ms kids say " i only play defense" because he thinks a) hes jevon kearse and b) he wont have to look at a playbook. ...but we do it this way "defense is a reward" for what they know about offense. lol.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 15:07:27 GMT -6
MS coaches are sometimes loathe to run the HS coach's system for the same reason he wants them to: We all think our stuff is the best, that we have all the answers or at least know what we're talking about. The HS coach has the added "mandate" of being top guy in the district. We always tell our players to "Control those things you have control over," like effort, attitude, conditioning, etc. Since I have little control over what our MS or youth teams do, I'm not going to worry a whole lot about it. I have given all the coaches a playbook, video to one coach that asked for it, HS tees and shorts, invited them to sit in on pre-season staff meetings, and to work at summer camps if they so desire. Generally, I have told them I will do whatever I can to help and support them, and that I am always available. So long as they are getting and keeping kids out (means they're having fun and are participating, not necessarily winning) and effectively teaching them the fundamentals, they are probably doing their jobs for us. Would I like them to run the Veer and 4-3? Would I like to see them win every game? Sure, but we're not going to lose a game three-four years from now because they didn't, any more than we would because of the type of ball we used. thanks for posting that. Know something else...the veer is a system that alot of the "internet" coaches would run willingly for their varsity guys...but probably not the spread or the west coast of some goofy 101 formations offense...to me, there are "youth friendly" offenses that a) can be run with small staffs b) can be run with limited talent and c) can be adapted to the talent on hand and d) can be installed with 3 two hour practices a week and executed with some level of proficiency. I think of the following as youth friendly offenses and obviously there are specifics to each varsity coaches systems that can include or eliminate his stuff as youth friendly...(many offenses borrow from these essentially) 1) single wing 2) Markham style double wing 3) wing t those three are up there because they offer great angles, tons of power and misdirection and you dont need a billion formations or plays, its series football. 4) option offenses...again, a form of "power" in that there are double teams and reads on guys that you otherwise couldnt/wouldnt block. series football and again, you dont need alot of formations .... 5) variations of power offenses such as wishbone, power I, stack I, fullhouse T or whatever. For the record, we are running multiple I formation stuff and have enough power, misdirection and series football to make me think we can win every game AND teach the best fundamentals in teh county.
|
|
|
Post by tye2021 on Jun 14, 2006 16:16:49 GMT -6
b]provided the guy actually knows what he's doing [/b]) And isn't the most important thing for you as high school coaches is that when the kids make it to highschool he knows how to play football and understand and know the fundamentals of football and proper techniques? [/quote] This was in my original post. Please note that one of the things that I said was PROVIDING THAT THE COACH KNOWS WHAT HE IS DOING. I also talked about fundamentals in this post and the other post. If the coach is doing half the things in you posted, HE SHOULDN'T BE COACHING PERIOD! I SEE how it can help a varsity program....but I don't see how it would hurt a varsity program if the ms is doing something different.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jun 14, 2006 16:25:37 GMT -6
Wow... this thread has really evolved like Frankenstein's monster... all little girls by ponds look out.
I'm not sure I even want to (re)enter this arena... but there are situations that greatly benefit by feeder programs and there are situations where feeder programs would not be a good idea.
I alluded to this earlier... but for the bulk of my career, I've been at 2 schools: School A- enrollment 2200, no real football tradition, no real coaching longevity (I was the 3rd HC in 3 years) in a district with 4 other HS, 12 middle schools. 4 middle schools fed in to this HS, but none exclusively (on average no more than 50% from one MS would attend a certain HS). Feeder programs would have been counter-productive. MS coaches know- he is "where the buck stops"; the last place before students get dispersed throughout the city. SO the MS coach runs "his" program. In a situation like that (and one that several are arguing)- a feeder program would not only be impractical, it would almost be impossible.
School B- enrollment 70-80. 18 year consecutive playoff tradition, in a district with 1 HS, 1 MS (same building, actually...7-12 school) 25 mi. from another HS. Coaching stability almost defines it (3 coaches in last 38 years). Upgrades/adaptations to offensive schemes since 1988, but no major changes (ex: might be in a wishbone and not an I, but play calls are the same, blocking is the same, etc.; defense has been pretty much the same since '91). Now if this situation does not have the MS as a feeder... something is wrong. (We did not... that has since been fixed)
Varsity coaches who think situation A demands a feeder program are ramming their head against a brick wall and are likely to have an aneurysm.
Middle school coaches who think they will get autonomy in situation B will likely get most of their freedom after the season, when they are likely going to be free to look for a new coaching position.
Whatever side you are on, the argument works best from a myopic point of view, but there is no universal application from that point of view.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jun 14, 2006 16:35:53 GMT -6
I SEE how it can help a varsity program....but I don't see how it would hurt a varsity program if the ms is doing something different.
Tye, Apparently I missed your last one... so to answer this- in OUR situation, the reason I (as an AD) wanted across the board feeders for all sports was a few years ago, we had few boys in school, therefore low numbers in school. I had two freshmen who were physically ready to play. However, their lack of understanding of our system kept them out of games (on O and D anyway) until the 5th game. We started off 2-2... which ties for the worst start we have had since 1987 here. If the TE/DE knew our line calls and knew defensive reads, and the HB/LB would not have been so intimidated by the new terms on O (and knew reads)... they would have been ready to play. Would we have won? I don't know. But losing 28-24 on the last play and losing 33-26 makes me think if we had two more good players available, we win one of those. Now what you are suggesting would have worked great at my previous school... which is why I don't think there is a "right" answer to this question unless you look at more specifics involved.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jun 14, 2006 16:37:14 GMT -6
Maybe we can put a wrap on this over-drawn discussion with this:
These are the bullet points from a September, 1994 article in Scholastic Coach by Bobby Milam, freshman football coach at Chattanooga Red Bank HS entitled "Coaching the Young Player: Everything you teach young people should be designed for the long run" (I give a copy of this to all my new lower level coaches with their playbooks):
1. Teach good habits and stress the proper fundamentals.
2. Don't get wrapped up in tricks and gimmicks.
3. Make sure your team can do at least one thing real well.
4. Constantly praise good attitude and enthusiastic effort.
5. Emphasize the team concept and de-emphasize the individual.
6. Teach sportsmanship and self-control.
7. Teach personal responsibility and work ethic.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jun 14, 2006 17:10:52 GMT -6
To answer the base question about whether you need a feeder programI'd have to say no. We have no MS football and the youth leagues do not feed directly into any of the four city HSs. Three out of the last five state champions have come from our league. I have no knowledge about the feeder programs of the other two.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 14, 2006 17:47:27 GMT -6
Maybe we can put a wrap on this over-drawn discussion with this: These are the bullet points from a September, 1994 article in Scholastic Coach by Bobby Milam, freshman football coach at Chattanooga Red Bank HS entitled "Coaching the Young Player: Everything you teach young people should be designed for the long run" (I give a copy of this to all my new lower level coaches with their playbooks): 1. Teach good habits and stress the proper fundamentals. 2. Don't get wrapped up in tricks and gimmicks. 3. Make sure your team can do at least one thing real well. 4. Constantly praise good attitude and enthusiastic effort. 5. Emphasize the team concept and de-emphasize the individual. 6. Teach sportsmanship and self-control. 7. Teach personal responsibility and work ethic. Id say all that has been posted by now. hey fellas, im just having fun with this discussion I hope I wasnt stepping on toes. As i stated, I want to put my stamp on a program from 6-19 too. everyone running the power double wing, 8-9 plays to perfection, winning at every level, all one staff, all coaches working on all levels, the kids giving back...a true program.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jun 14, 2006 18:02:24 GMT -6
Well, Calande, it sounds like you have a program that any HS coach would want as a feeder- its good to see a MS coach that views coaching as a profession. The new HC we have is going to lay down the law with the two feeder middle school programs and I for one am glad to see it. Several of the MS coaches in this area won't like it but it will do them a whole lot of good. They need someone to tell them what they need to be running and what kinds of drills they need to do, because they sure aren't doing much on their own.
|
|
kakavian
Sophomore Member
Where's the ball, boy? Find the ball.
Posts: 175
|
Post by kakavian on Jun 14, 2006 18:46:13 GMT -6
Brophy- I disagree with you here... I think it IS important at eigth grade, because for many of those kids, they may NEVER play High School ball unless they have a good program that is a) fun, b) treats them with respect. But thats from a guy who has coached Youth, JV and Varsity. We find that so long as coaches are willing to try and talk our LANGUAGE, and teach fundamentals, we do well. We look at the programs that run the same thing from bobbles to seniors, and they lose ALOT of kids to burnout. Granted, the kids that remain are hard-core...but their numbers are not what they could be if the kids had a little more fun, and got exposure to more offenses and defenses. For me, especially on defense, I want my guys to have played in at least two or three different systems just so they can understand more football. If the only thing that they know is the Wishbone, how much tougher is it for them to grasp what a Shotgun Passing team is going to do on first down, than if they had played in a passing team as an eigth grader? Just one Fat guy's opinion, mind you.
|
|
|
Post by ticobrown on Jun 14, 2006 20:29:12 GMT -6
ONE OTHER POINT...SOMEONE SAID "ALL MS KIDS GO TO THE SAME HS"...NOT ACTUALLY TRUE. WE HAD 4 MIDDLE SCHOOLS FEED TWO OR THREE HIGH SCHOOLS WHERE I GREW UP..I PLAYED AGAINST MY MS TEAMMATES BECAUSE I LIVED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM...THUS WENT TO A DIFFERENT SCHOOL. Same here. Not counting 4 Catholic Schools in the area, the youth team I'm coaching have kids who live in towns/ cities that serves 3 different public HSs. So in my case, which HS's offense should I pattern mine after??? One runs the I, one is multiple, and the other is a flexbone team).
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Jun 14, 2006 21:25:28 GMT -6
Wow... this thread has really evolved like Frankenstein's monster... all little girls by ponds look out. I'm not sure I even want to (re)enter this arena... but there are situations that greatly benefit by feeder programs and there are situations where feeder programs would not be a good idea. I alluded to this earlier... but for the bulk of my career, I've been at 2 schools: School A- enrollment 2200, no real football tradition, no real coaching longevity (I was the 3rd HC in 3 years) in a district with 4 other HS, 12 middle schools. 4 middle schools fed in to this HS, but none exclusively (on average no more than 50% from one MS would attend a certain HS). Feeder programs would have been counter-productive. MS coaches know- he is "where the buck stops"; the last place before students get dispersed throughout the city. SO the MS coach runs "his" program. In a situation like that (and one that several are arguing)- a feeder program would not only be impractical, it would almost be impossible. School B- enrollment 70-80. 18 year consecutive playoff tradition, in a district with 1 HS, 1 MS (same building, actually...7-12 school) 25 mi. from another HS. Coaching stability almost defines it (3 coaches in last 38 years). Upgrades/adaptations to offensive schemes since 1988, but no major changes (ex: might be in a wishbone and not an I, but play calls are the same, blocking is the same, etc.; defense has been pretty much the same since '91). Now if this situation does not have the MS as a feeder... something is wrong. (We did not... that has since been fixed) Varsity coaches who think situation A demands a feeder program are ramming their head against a brick wall and are likely to have an aneurysm. Middle school coaches who think they will get autonomy in situation B will likely get most of their freedom after the season, when they are likely going to be free to look for a new coaching position. Whatever side you are on, the argument works best from a myopic point of view, but there is no universal application from that point of view. In districts like the one I am in now where there is ONE high school it makes sense to run it as a feeder program. We have been running basically the same system since 1980, and they have had two HC since 1970. I suppose in a big big distirct where the middle schools and high schools are not aligned it might not make as much sense. I coached in a big district with 3 large public high schools. There are 3 middle schools that feed each of the highschools...BUT there is not a middle school football program. It is run though the youth association and kids in the same area of the town are not necesarily on the same team. So there you really cannot have a feeder program at all. Like the Senator from Nebraska said the head coaches here would have an anuerism trying to get things aligned. Personally I believe you have to do your best to get one set up. You have to have as much continuity as possible between jr high and high school. And you MUST have good coaches at the lower levels. Part of the reason this program I am with now is so dang successful is the kids have been running the same base core of plays since they are 12 years old. And more importantly they have been treated right by their football coaches since a young age.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jun 14, 2006 21:51:30 GMT -6
Quick show of hands....for perspective shake. Of those who are really falling down on the side of "HEY, THEY NEED CONTINUITY, THEY NEED TO RUN OUR SYSTEM" How many are HS coaches?
|
|
|
Post by bulldogoption on Jun 14, 2006 21:52:10 GMT -6
If kids quit because of a feeder program then the school district would be better off without the system at all. Football is a numbers game. Varsity is dominated by seniors. The more seniors you have the better chance you have of winning.
Example: I have colleagues who have sons that recently were in a 5-6 youth program. They didn't get to play enough or were promised playing time and then when the game was on the line, winning took the front seat and player development took the back seat. Now they have a sour taste in their mouth. Both of these kids are going to turn out to be decent athletes based on the genetics of their fathers. If the program didn't exist at all then at the 7-8 grade level we could have those kids again.
Example: There is a football program in our area. They went three years undefeated. Coach was named HS coach of the year. Their Supt. wrote an article about how NOT HAVING a 5-8 program was a benefit. There were no bruised egos, scared kids, etc to deal with. They got the whole lot of them in 9th grade ready to be taught.
If a feeder program puts kids ahead of winning, then it is beneficial.
I've seen some of those 5-6 grade parents at their kids games and they are WACKED OUT!! Screaming at kids and refs. A little 'education' for the parents before the season starts letting them know that this is a learning experience would go a long ways.
On the flip side, if kids know plays and terminology etc by running it in the feeder program it can be a HUGE benefit. All those things become unconscious and you can spend practice time on technique, game prep, whatever else instead of trying to teach the basic schemes kids could already know.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jun 14, 2006 22:54:14 GMT -6
bulldog---you (and many others in this thread) have used the term beneficial...but nobody has ever made it clear WHO it is beneficial for. The kids at the Jr High level? The kids at the HS level (less kids)..the coaches at the HS level? The coaches at the jr high level...
|
|
|
Post by coachsky on Jun 15, 2006 1:19:45 GMT -6
I am proponent of Feeder Systems. The past few years I coached MS and Freshman in a Youth System that is strongly supported by the High School Staff. The kids at the Youth, MS, and Freshman level learned great fundamentals, HS terminology, and the basics of the HS Offense and Defense. Teams at all levels regularly compete for Championships.
The other strong teams in the Division have some level of feeder systems, the weaker programs generally don't have a good relationship between Youth/MS and High School.
This year I am coaching at High School that doesn't have a strong relationship with the Youth/MS program and it really shows. The difference between the readiness of the incoming Freshman is noticeably different. We have to reteach stances, blocking and tackling progressions and terminology. We could be a lot farther ahead this spring.
Our state 4a Champions have their 8th grade feeder team running the Spread and winning their division at 8th grade. 8th and 9th graders in our area are very adept at throwing the rock. Several of these kids are unbelievable - they attend Air Attack Camps throughout the year. By 8th Grade they are fundamentally and technically sound QB's. They shred any middle school team that tries to play straight Man to Man and put 8 in the box.
I'm not a Spread Coach myself, but to say it can't be effective at MS level just is not an accurate statement.
Feeder Systems wont work in every scenario, but when they make sense, it makes great football for all involved. I think the key is a Head High School coach with great people skills and vision. You can't force a feeder system, you have to grow one. It takes time and care.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jun 15, 2006 4:10:03 GMT -6
Quick show of hands....for perspective shake. Of those who are really falling down on the side of "HEY, THEY NEED CONTINUITY, THEY NEED TO RUN OUR SYSTEM" How many are HS coaches? My final point on this too is that I think its much more difficult for a losing high school coach to get the winning youth programs on his side. They dont want to lose and they fear that if they run the same poor system as the varsity guy, they too will lose. There is tremendous pressure to win AT EVERY LEVEL. At least where I have coached. Players and Parents dont want to sit thru hum drum seasons, year after year while patiently waiting for the benefits of the feeder system to kick in and spark the lame duck varsity to life. Speaking from my own experiences, I had a team with 55 boys, two coaches on staff. Our plan was to keep it simple, play everyone and teach good fundamentals. Id say we were poor coaches but at the time, did the best we could given our experience. The parents and youth kids were brutal to our kids. Many quit and even though they all played they never came back to the game because we went 3-6-1 and were not competitive in 3 or 4 of those losses. The midget team meanwhile went undefeated.... unfortunately, only 4 boys and 1 girl from that undefeated celebrated team came out for our jr high the following year, the others shyed away because of the comments made by their parents and friends. they figured wed stink again.(their coaches who wanted my job werent helping matters)..of course we learned and studied and got a whole lot better. (We put in the dw stuff too) and we went from lame duck to league bullies and powered our way to an undefeated season. What happened was we built a new core based on "our ideas" rather than someone elses. We got rid of the cancers and established work ethic, new discipline standards and tough expectations for playing time...we ended up with 34 players instead of 55 in year two...many from that core went on to become the core for varsity's first winning season in nearly 20 years. Btw, over 30 youth players came out for the team the following year...so, Its obviously very important to the parents and players in our area that the jr high is respectable and can win games. We now of course have over 75 players at that same jr high school....Varsity is now a winning program with a dedicated staff and year round work is the expectation. bottom line, winning is important, thats why kids play. fun is important, winning is fun. learning is important, teach fundamentals, use sound tactics and the kids will have a chance to win at every level. For the varsity guy who has trouble selling his program...win your state title and it should be alittle easier. ;D
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Jun 15, 2006 7:45:56 GMT -6
Quick show of hands....for perspective shake. Of those who are really falling down on the side of "HEY, THEY NEED CONTINUITY, THEY NEED TO RUN OUR SYSTEM" How many are HS coaches?
Point of this?? This has a direct impact on HS coaches (since it involves the players ENTERING the program). For the JH/youth coach, it (continuity) has no impact... as these are players who are EXITING their program.
HS coaches would vote based on direct impact...JH/youth coaches based on philosophy... so of course the # would lean heavily on the HS side.
Like the Connecticut Policy issue... this is going nowhere for me. It's like arguing what is better: Red or Blue?
What is your name: Senatorblutarsky What is your quest: To seek feeder programs in programs where it is applicable/possible, to not have them in others and to focus on the most important issue...teaching young players the great game of football What is your favorite color: Red.... no Blue... AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
I'm done.
|
|