|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 30, 2013 8:24:38 GMT -6
Wondering how many of you try to find your best players per position v. just finding your best 11 FB players and try to make it fit.
For example, we have 2 players in the same spot right now that are both better then some of the #1's in other positions. So I am looking at moving one of them to a spot he's not played before based on his athletic ability. Curious what any of your philosophies are on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluboy on Jun 30, 2013 8:39:47 GMT -6
We want the best 11 on the field; we have no problem moving a kid to another position. This mostly applies to kids who play defense, especially LB, OLB, DB. We evaluate the kids during workouts, 7on7's, and pre-season camp. Since we do not have spring football, we take a good look at the "moved kids"(they will get a ton of reps) the first week of pre-season camp. If the kid can do it, great. If he can't, we will move him back to his original position. We want all moves made by the time we get to our first scrimmage. No moves made once we get into games, unless we really have to.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 30, 2013 9:57:24 GMT -6
best 11, particularly on defense (because they all have the same function: block destruction & tackling)
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jun 30, 2013 11:00:18 GMT -6
Absolutely find your best 11, plug them in and coach them up.
One of the best offensive units I have been around had a FB and TB that both outweighed four of the starting five offensive lineman. We didnt focus on anything "position-specific"; we took the most athletic kids we had and got then going.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Jun 30, 2013 13:29:19 GMT -6
Yeah, if you have one kid who is better than another, he needs to play, regardless of position.
|
|
|
|
Post by coach2013 on Jun 30, 2013 13:37:04 GMT -6
Eh....depends.
If I have the desire to run the 353....but am weak and lber while strong and deep at the dline, then Maybe I just need to run a 44 ....
If I have the desire to run a 43 cover 2 as a base....but would be better off with a 44....I do that.
I think you have to put your best kids on the field but you DO NEED SOME DEPTH too.
Offensively, if we had two fullbacks and no guards...we might move one to guard. Then again, John Madden would say "If you have two, you have none" ha ha.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jun 30, 2013 13:41:11 GMT -6
Easy to say "Best 11" but you can't play a Corner at Defensive Tackle, a Wide Receiver at Center (or vice versa) as examples.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 30, 2013 14:07:07 GMT -6
Easy to say "Best 11" but you can't play a Corner at Defensive Tackle, a Wide Receiver at Center (or vice versa) as examples. prototypes don't win matchups, though we played a corner at DE and he was all conference with 17 sacks |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jun 30, 2013 14:12:02 GMT -6
Easy to say "Best 11" but you can't play a Corner at Defensive Tackle, a Wide Receiver at Center (or vice versa) as examples. prototypes don't win matchups, though we played a corner at DE and he was all conference with 17 sacks Was that because you had a dearth of DEs or had misdiagnosed his "skill set"? My prototypes will win matchups if they're better than yours. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 30, 2013 16:22:05 GMT -6
Wondering how many of you try to find your best players per position v. just finding your best 11 FB players and try to make it fit. For example, we have 2 players in the same spot right now that are both better then some of the #1's in other positions. So I am looking at moving one of them to a spot he's not played before based on his athletic ability. Curious what any of your philosophies are on this. We try to get the best 11 players but you do have to keep in mind that that doesn't mean best 11 athletes. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Jun 30, 2013 17:23:05 GMT -6
Not to take this too far off point, but I rarely go through a game with just 11 players (Im writing from a defensive perspective).
I Base out of a 353, and usually rotate 4-5 DL in a typical game. I get similar rotations at DB and LB; Often times my best non starter, with rest, can be more effective on a few series than one of my weaker starters. Moreover, Ive always had a player or two go both ways and need to catch a blow.
My point being, don't always try to fit a square peg into a round hole in the sake of starting your best players. Unless you have a significant imballance of talent slanted toward one position (ie 5 of your 10 best players are CBs) then I think you're best served by playing the kids based on position.
Also, not everyone is the same grade level. If I move my 3rd best DE (a Jr. behind two Srs.) to LB this year then I am robbing Peter to pay Paul in regards to his development for next season.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Jun 30, 2013 18:40:17 GMT -6
I will go with Brophy, we try to get our best 11 on the field on Defense. We are moving a safety to Will Lber to get another kid on the field at SS. We want our best athletes who can run and hit on Defense. Best linemen will play on Defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 30, 2013 19:17:24 GMT -6
Thanks for the replies. I agree w/ most of what was said here. In our particular case, we have many corners but only one that I really trust. None of the others seem to be playmakers. They are great at tackling a kid after the catch but never seem to come down w/ the ball when it's up for grabs.
My thoughts came to moving one of our OLB to the other corner spot b/c one, we have 3 solid OLB and only need 2, and the other reasoning is the kid I'm thinking of is the one that kept coming down w/ the ball (played receiver on scout O) when it was up for grabs. He seems like a playmaker in space but average at OLB.
I figure, it's better to try him there in June/July then August/September.
Thanks again for the replies.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 30, 2013 20:15:41 GMT -6
as a coach these dilemmas can drive you up the wall because it just does not compute.
Had a 2-year varsity started at db (small frame, but athletic) and decided to move him to WDE (he would have been our starting DB had we left him there, but there was nothing that could come close to his contribution at DE) and he shined. We were stocked with 'prototype' DEs, but did not have an output like this kid.
Had a short, 1 year varsity LB returning, but 2 decent sized underclassmen LBs who offered more (for what we asked from that position). Moved the short kid to CORNER (still makes me cringe), but he was a rock with 4 Ints that year.
Had a kid who came out late, wasn't very football smart, very wirey (he would be a-typical corner/fs)...but where he made the biggest impact was playing WILB in our 3-3. Moved him there and he blew {censored} up for us when our "prototypical" OLB couldn't stop getting personal fouls.
Had a 170lbs corner who cleaned 260lbs, squated over 500 and hit like an old Buick. We kept trying to move him to SS/OLB and make it fit (because he was THE prototype for the position)...but he was more comfortable at corner and even though we played C3 every snap and would be "wasted" at corner....he was great on an island and had 6 picks (3 for scores)
Had a 300lbs nose tackle (now playing for the Eagles) who we moved to offense because a 165lbs wrestler kid was just more explosive / more upside at nose than him.
just get some football players on the field and make plays, whether you call them badgers, rovers, demons, backers or bakers.
|
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Jun 30, 2013 21:04:19 GMT -6
I put our starting fullback at nose guard. Nobody thought of this. Which is why I did.  Therefore the guy has been a terror this summer. Why did I pick him? 1) he might be the strongest player on our team. 2) he fits the exact model out NG needs to have. 3) he will absolutely create a problem for you. I don't care if he was supposed to be an OLB. |
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 30, 2013 21:10:35 GMT -6
as a coach these dilemmas can drive you up the wall because it just does not compute. Had a 2-year varsity started at db (small frame, but athletic) and decided to move him to WDE (he would have been our starting DB had we left him there, but there was nothing that could come close to his contribution at DE) and he shined. We were stocked with 'prototype' DEs, but did not have an output like this kid. Had a short, 1 year varsity LB returning, but 2 decent sized underclassmen LBs who offered more (for what we asked from that position). Moved the short kid to CORNER (still makes me cringe), but he was a rock with 4 Ints that year. Had a kid who came out late, wasn't very football smart, very wirey (he would be a-typical corner/fs)...but where he made the biggest impact was playing WILB in our 3-3. Moved him there and he blew {censored} up for us when our "prototypical" OLB couldn't stop getting personal fouls. Had a 170lbs corner who cleaned 260lbs, squated over 500 and hit like an old Buick. We kept trying to move him to SS/OLB and make it fit (because he was THE prototype for the position)...but he was more comfortable at corner and even though we played C3 every snap and would be "wasted" at corner....he was great on an island and had 6 picks (3 for scores) Had a 300lbs nose tackle (now playing for the Eagles) who we moved to offense because a 165lbs wrestler kid was just more explosive / more upside at nose than him. just get some football players on the field and make plays, whether you call them badgers, rovers, demons, backers or bakers. I am of similar philosophy to this. Last year we had a HUGE kid on our team and periodically got questions of why he was not on the field while I started a 165 pounder at OT. The 165 pounder was tough as nails and doubled as our MLB and broke school record for tackles in a season while anchoring an O that broke all scoring records. The HUGE kid just could not move. I think as HS coaches the typical "prototypes" you hear about in the NFL IMO do not apply. Big guys in the NFL can all move. Few can do so in HS in my experience. I agree whole heartedly w/ your POV. I think we need to find kids that can play regardless of body type, position etc. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jul 1, 2013 5:30:29 GMT -6
"Prototypes" exist because of what attributes are required to effectively play different positions.
If a player is lacking in something it can be a weakness that could be exploited.
Of course a kid with size who cannot move is just a big target.
At the HS level the ability to make plays is most important. Depending on level of competition you can get away with "unusual" body types-abilities at spots you couldn't the higher up you go.
Our lower level coaches do a good job of identifying what positions kids should play (or will play) so they get maximum experience there before reaching Varsity.
This is not to say we never change positions because we do. Some kids change physically as they mature, sometimes we have a need especially with our numbers (low to mid-20s).
|
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jul 1, 2013 8:42:13 GMT -6
This is one of those years where we have some talent, but it is going to require us to think outside of the box some. We have SOME football players and we have some athletes that play football. Then, we have some kids who flat out stink.
I guess, where I'm coming from is get as many FB players on the field as I can, then get the best remaining athletes on the field.
I just don't want to be the guy who says, well.... we aren't good enough this year, so we'll take our lumps and start developing for next year. I think we can get it done, but it will take some unconventional moves on our part.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 9:13:17 GMT -6
Put your best players on the field.
Defence is easy: take your 12 best (Canadian rules) tacklers and put them on the field that is paramount if they can't takle they can't play defence. From there figure out who is better at secondary skills:
-block destruction, coverage, play recognition
Offence is a little different it is still your best 12 guys.
Honestly all the talk about scheme 3-5-3 or 44... who cares none of it matters. You need your best kids out there to play the game then you can fit them into the pieces after. As an example you could be in a 30 front but one year your OLB's are big monsters and your doing more 50 front stuff b/c of the people you have other years you are smaller and doing more schematic things to take advantage of that.
I firmly believe that you start to think about scheme first when evaluating players is backwards, you are going to end up with some kids who call play on your bench in favour of being stuck to a scheme. If you are coaching in the NCAA or NFL you go out an get what you need. In HS you get what you get. So take your best kids whatever that is and then make what you run work around those boys.
In terms of the best "athletes" your best athletes will hopefully develop into football players. Our best athlete is a 6'2 210lb OT, this kid is a stud he can our broad jump most of our REC/DB, he is strong and athletic. But last year he had no clue what to do it was his first year. He played all over learning the game. This year in spring camp he was our best OL.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jul 1, 2013 9:19:17 GMT -6
Put your best players on the field. Defence is easy: take your 12 best (Canadian rules) tacklers and put them on the field that is paramount if they can't takle they can't play defence. From there figure out who is better at secondary skills: -block destruction, coverage, play recognition Not discounting the ability to tackle (self-evident) but I wouldn't call block destruction a "secondary skill" - if a player can't get off a block, his tackling ability doesn't matter. First things first. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 1, 2013 9:20:10 GMT -6
Put your best players on the field. Defence is easy: take your 12 best (Canadian rules) tacklers and put them on the field that is paramount if they can't takle they can't play defence. From there figure out who is better at secondary skills: -block destruction, coverage, play recognition Offence is a little different it is still your best 12 guys. Honestly all the talk about scheme 3-5-3 or 44... who cares none of it matters. You need your best kids out there to play the game then you can fit them into the pieces after. As an example you could be in a 30 front but one year your OLB's are big monsters and your doing more 50 front stuff b/c of the people you have other years you are smaller and doing more schematic things to take advantage of that. I firmly believe that you start to think about scheme first when evaluating players is backwards, you are going to end up with some kids who call play on your bench in favour of being stuck to a scheme. If you are coaching in the NCAA or NFL you go out an get what you need. In HS you get what you get. So take your best kids whatever that is and then make what you run work around those boys. In terms of the best "athletes" your best athletes will hopefully develop into football players. Our best athlete is a 6'2 210lb OT, this kid is a stud he can our broad jump most of our REC/DB, he is strong and athletic. But last year he had no clue what to do it was his first year. He played all over learning the game. This year in spring camp he was our best OL. So how come he doesn't play defense? |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 1, 2013 9:22:57 GMT -6
Put your best players on the field. Defence is easy: take your 12 best (Canadian rules) tacklers and put them on the field that is paramount if they can't takle they can't play defence. From there figure out who is better at secondary skills: -block destruction, coverage, play recognition Offence is a little different it is still your best 12 guys. Honestly all the talk about scheme 3-5-3 or 44... who cares none of it matters. You need your best kids out there to play the game then you can fit them into the pieces after. As an example you could be in a 30 front but one year your OLB's are big monsters and your doing more 50 front stuff b/c of the people you have other years you are smaller and doing more schematic things to take advantage of that. I firmly believe that you start to think about scheme first when evaluating players is backwards, you are going to end up with some kids who call play on your bench in favour of being stuck to a scheme. If you are coaching in the NCAA or NFL you go out an get what you need. In HS you get what you get. So take your best kids whatever that is and then make what you run work around those boys. In terms of the best "athletes" your best athletes will hopefully develop into football players. Our best athlete is a 6'2 210lb OT, this kid is a stud he can our broad jump most of our REC/DB, he is strong and athletic. But last year he had no clue what to do it was his first year. He played all over learning the game. This year in spring camp he was our best OL. So how come he doesn't play defense? I'll also disagree that the best athletes will always be the best football players. I can't think of a year when we didn't have at least one guy who's a good athlete-run, jump, hit-but has no feel for the game. |
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 16:07:17 GMT -6
Put your best players on the field. Defence is easy: take your 12 best (Canadian rules) tacklers and put them on the field that is paramount if they can't takle they can't play defence. From there figure out who is better at secondary skills: -block destruction, coverage, play recognition Not discounting the ability to tackle (self-evident) but I wouldn't call block destruction a "secondary skill" - if a player can't get off a block, his tackling ability doesn't matter. First things first. Both are equally important. I guess you could make the argument that if you can't cover you can't stop the pass.... Chicken or egg? For us we look at tackling first, because it is pretty cut and dry in terms of evaluation, and every play should end with a tackle. There are lots of times a guy never has to even engage another player before making the tackle. Think of DB's there are plenty of examples where the guy is running free to the ball carrier. Sure DL / LB this rarely happens. I guess we start with the obvious... As for coverage / block destruction / play recognition: I termed them secondary skills because an the extent to which an individual successfully executes these skills can often determine what position they play. I have had kids who could cover well enough, recognized the play effectively and were stout enough to get off blocks so they played LB. Some kids had a hell of a time getting off the block but were great in coverage = DB's.
I wasn't trying to discount the need to be able to get off a block or cover just saying that the most evident skill on defense is the ability to tackle. |
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 16:15:03 GMT -6
So how come he doesn't play defense? I'll also disagree that the best athletes will always be the best football players. I can't think of a year when we didn't have at least one guy who's a good athlete-run, jump, hit-but has no feel for the game. He doesn't play defense because he is a horrible tackler and doesn't separate well enough to get off blocks, he also struggled to read / react to what was / is happening in front of him. But the biggest reason is that he can't tackle. I should add we like probably every other team here tackles with everyone each day so they all learn the skills needed. He has found "direct instruction" a better fit for him: "you go block that guy, you hear a whistle you stop, then line up block this other guy, you hear a whistle stop." This has allowed him to "turn off his brain" and just play. I agree 100% we have found the same thing we always have a few bodies that are great run / jump / lift kids but not great on the field. For some it is a time thing they are often our brand new players that have never played before. We have a kid plays corner for us, he has now played 2 seasons of HS ball and 2 of community spring ball. He is still struggling to learn the game. Ran a 4.55 40 through laser timing lights, the #2 ranked University in the country came to visit us the following week. This kid is legit fast, not HS fast but next level fast. He is your example of other kids being way better at football than he is.
In University I played with a dude who went to the Olympics in 2002 as a bobsleigh athlete he was a physical freak over 6ft 220lbs slot back fast strong but my 3 year old catches better than him.... He always made the team and they always worked with him.
I think you just hope that those kids figure it out and you keep working with them.
I guess that is your example of why you put your best football players on the field not athletes.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jul 1, 2013 16:31:26 GMT -6
Too many DB coaches spend too little time with their kids on taking on-defeating blocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 16:58:26 GMT -6
Too many DB coaches spend too little time with their kids on taking on-defeating blocks. I agree it is an important skill, no different than I would love to see LB coaches spend more time on the pass game. But I think we are also generalizing here a little as well. There are lots of coaches who do a great job coaching their individual groups. Some of it comes down to a ratio of: time VS skills needed At DB you need to be able to cover which means working those specific skills to death. The specific skills needed to play DL are different from playing DB once we get away from the base skill of tackling. I am just not sure how the above fits into this thread which is about do you stick your best players out there or is it all position specific. Essentially how do you evaluate who you stick out there. I find it interesting to see how other coaches approach this in their programs as well as how they approach evaluation. So in an effort to not incite a pissing match here with you BLB how do you guys evaluate your kids coming in? How do you determine who plays where? |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jul 1, 2013 17:07:12 GMT -6
Not interested in a "pissing match" but when the bad guys get the ball in the open field and they have blockers - however they do it - your DBs better know how to beat them before they can make a tackle, or it won't happen.
Corners are our best cover guys. Safeties are better run players (although FS must have range to be Center Fielder, "Eraser" or "Goalie").
Regardless - you can't give yourself up 1-for-1 or avoid blockers on defense, otherwise bad things happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 17:26:41 GMT -6
Not interested in a "pissing match" but when the bad guys get the ball in the open field and they have blockers - however they do it - your DBs better know how to beat them before they can make a tackle, or it won't happen. Corners are our best cover guys. Safeties are better run players (although FS must have range to be Center Fielder, "Eraser" or "Goalie"). Regardless - you can't give yourself up 1-for-1 or avoid blockers on defense, otherwise bad things happen. That didn't answer my question: How do you evaluate your players and determine who plays where? Agreed, and when your LB has to come out of the box and pick up a back out of the backfield he better be able to cover. See how that type of a debate is futile? We both agree with the fact basic defence skills matter. I think we are good there... However I'm still curious as to how you evaluate guys? |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 1, 2013 17:34:20 GMT -6
how did this thread get flipped into an "athlete vs skillset" discussion?
I thought it was "get the best 11 on the field vs depth chart"
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jul 1, 2013 17:49:03 GMT -6
My guess is that what it evolves to. So you make a decision OK here is how we are approaching this: get the best 11 (12 in our case) on the field vs sticking to the depth chart. The next question becomes how do you determine your "best"?
This has major value at least for me. We are a program going into our 3rd year. The school we are at moved locations it went from a population of 500 or so to 1400. We had till this coming year very few football players (community kids with experience) attending the school. So this has been a major initiative for us as a group. Even when I talk to the top team in our Province it is the same thing: how do we determine who are best 12 are and then how do we figure out where to fit the pieces. That is way more important that what scheme you run.
Hence why I think the thread morphed.
|
|
Therefore the guy has been a terror this summer. Why did I pick him? 1) he might be the strongest player on our team. 2) he fits the exact model out NG needs to have. 3) he will absolutely create a problem for you.