|
Post by groundchuck on Sept 13, 2013 12:31:53 GMT -6
Interesting discussion I've been having with some of my buddies about when is the right time to pull the trigger and fire starters for not performing. How many games do you give them?
At what point, if at all, do you say to a senior borderline starter....you're done I'm playing the underclassman who will start next year. We are not in that situation but I've been there before.
One year the seniors finally stepped up just in time and salvaged the season. I am glad I waited. A season or two earlier I should've said F-it y'all are done I'm getting ready for next year. If in gonna lose I'm gonna lose with guys who give a {censored}. So there is no right answer. Just interested in opinions.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Sept 13, 2013 12:36:22 GMT -6
We tell players from the outset that if an older player and a younger one are even, the latter plays.
It's all about performance.
I have never fired Seniors as a group.
|
|
|
Post by blockdownkickout on Sept 13, 2013 12:48:39 GMT -6
We tell players from the outset that if an older player and a younger one are even, the latter plays. It's all about performance. I have never fired Seniors as a group. I think this is spot on. I think we sometimes fall into the trap of saying "this senior class isn't getting it done." Is that really the case or is that some of the seniors aren't getting it done? I think a senior that has been a part of the program for 4 years deserves to be judged individually. As far as the original question, I like the idea of giving a kid a one game warning. "You're not playing well and not producing. This week will determine your future spot." Might be a lot of pressure but I think it's best to be up front.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Sept 13, 2013 12:54:43 GMT -6
Interesting discussion I've been having with some of my buddies about when is the right time to pull the trigger and fire starters for not performing. How many games do you give them? At what point, if at all, do you say to a senior borderline starter....you're done I'm playing the underclassman who will start next year. We are not in that situation but I've been there before. One year the seniors finally stepped up just in time and salvaged the season. I am glad I waited. A season or two earlier I should've said F-it y'all are done I'm getting ready for next year. If in gonna lose I'm gonna lose with guys who give a {censored}. So there is no right answer. Just interested in opinions. Best player plays no matter what grade he's in.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Sept 13, 2013 12:55:03 GMT -6
We are bringing up sophomores to create competition. Through our scrimmage and two games a lot of the seniors...to put it bluntly...aren't very good. We, as coaches, need to find better players. If it's another senior...fine...if it's someone else...fine.
I'm not going to coach a whole season waiting for a guy to step up. He's gotta show early.
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Sept 16, 2013 12:14:05 GMT -6
I agree with others who said that the best player plays, having said that though I think the original post was more along the lines of if the two players are close (or even if the senior is better), when do you start the younger guy?
Personally, I'm not ever going to give up on a team or player. A guy may lose reps because he's getting out performed, but never because of how bad our season is going. The seniors who've busted their tail deserve better than to go out like that.
|
|
orion320
Sophomore Member
"Don't tell me about the labor just show me the baby!"
Posts: 211
|
Post by orion320 on Sept 17, 2013 18:52:56 GMT -6
My HS coach gave up on our Senior class 3 games into the season because he had never lost to the team that we lost too. Nevermind they went to the State Championship game and on our Senior Night we beat the best team in the Conference because he started all of the Seniors.
This taught me to never give up on your Seniors. Now if the Seniors don't have skill you play an underclassman, but if it is a push, I say play a Senior.
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Sept 18, 2013 6:33:22 GMT -6
When (or if) you loose your first winnable conference game...and a senior has a horrible performance.
That's when they're pulled and made to work back into the lineup during the week.
|
|
|
Post by sweep26 on Sept 18, 2013 8:34:38 GMT -6
My belief has always been much like stated above regarding playing the best players available, regardless of seniority. However, if two players are equal, and one of them is a senior, I start the senior. I firmly believe that I owe it to the kid that has more time invested in the program to start him over the underclassman.
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 18, 2013 10:10:14 GMT -6
Well, since Thursday is pretty much a mental/walk through day, I give them 3 days.
"Johnny, as you can tell by my assessment of your play Friday night, we need to have improvement the XXXXXX position. Jimmy, if you prove you can do it, you'll start this Friday. Any questions"
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Sept 22, 2013 14:43:00 GMT -6
1. As far as a timeline goes, we'll give the kid one game to pull it together. We'll have a chat if he's playing poorly and let him know he needs to fix it.
2. The #2 will start taking equal reps at that point to light a fire under the starter and see how much drive they have. He's lost reps so he'd better take advantage.
3. This is all pretty relative. A kid that just absolutely isn't getting the job done will be benched without any duscussion. A kid that has more than one loaf (takes a play off) in a game will probably lose his spot as well.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 23, 2013 8:58:56 GMT -6
what about spot play during a game? When a kid is struggling (or just not performing at a high level) during a game, pulling him and putting his backup in becomes a real wake up call, because he'll hear it from his parents all weekend ("why aren't you playing?! How come that underclassman smaller and slower than you got your playing time?")
I've seen this make a MAJOR turnaround on some Seniors.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 23, 2013 12:02:58 GMT -6
We tell players from the outset that if an older player and a younger one are even, the latter plays. It's all about performance. I have never fired Seniors as a group. So you'd play the younger kid over the older kid if they're even? Really?!?!
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Sept 23, 2013 12:53:37 GMT -6
Yeah, if the young kid is just as good as the senior why wouldn't you play him and get the reps, he may improve and be better next year. Senior is done at end of this year and is no better than younger guy.
If he wants to keep his job he needs to get better than next guy not same.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 23, 2013 13:08:06 GMT -6
Because the Senior has been there, supporting the program, doing what he's supposed to be doing, is in possibly his last year of football ever, and in the end, aren't you supposed to be there for them, maybe?
Obviously applies to Seniors that have put in the effort.
And doesn't mean you can't work the underclassmen in.
But seriously - is the program about them or you?
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Sept 23, 2013 19:12:21 GMT -6
That young guy has a year or two of off season work to get bigger stronger faster. If you have a senior that has put in the real effort, He is a kid that has earned the edge. Many of them have been free meal eaters and give me a t-shirt, guys!
|
|
|
Post by blb on Sept 23, 2013 19:34:09 GMT -6
We tell players from the outset that if an older player and a younger one are even, the latter plays. It's all about performance. I have never fired Seniors as a group. So you'd play the younger kid over the older kid if they're even? Really?!?! Absolutely. The older kid should be bigger, stronger, quicker. Had more coaching, more experience. If he's not, been "resting on his laurels" - thinking he's going to play just because he's a Senior - no way. Otherwise how are you going to create competition? Get best kids on the field? The younger kid is going to be around longer, should get even better with experience. And next year will know if HE doesn't keep working to improve - there will be someone looking to take HIS position.
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 23, 2013 20:24:02 GMT -6
Roger this So you'd play the younger kid over the older kid if they're even? Really?!?! Absolutely. The older kid should be bigger, stronger, quicker. Had more coaching, more experience. If he's not, been "resting on his laurels" - thinking he's going to play just because he's a Senior - no way. Otherwise how are you going to create competition? Get best kids on the field? The younger kid is going to be around longer, should get even better with experience. And next year will know if HE doesn't keep working to improve - there will be someone looking to take HIS position.
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Sept 23, 2013 20:42:05 GMT -6
Because the Senior has been there, supporting the program, doing what he's supposed to be doing, is in possibly his last year of football ever, and in the end, aren't you supposed to be there for them, maybe? Obviously applies to Seniors that have put in the effort. And doesn't mean you can't work the underclassmen in. But seriously - is the program about them or you? It's not about them, or the coaches, its about The Program and it is about the guys before them, and the guys after them, and a set of standards that if they don't live up to the program hopefully finds somebody else that will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2013 0:21:09 GMT -6
Because the Senior has been there, supporting the program, doing what he's supposed to be doing, is in possibly his last year of football ever, and in the end, aren't you supposed to be there for them, maybe? Obviously applies to Seniors that have put in the effort. And doesn't mean you can't work the underclassmen in. But seriously - is the program about them or you? It's not about them, or the coaches, its about The Program and it is about the guys before them, and the guys after them, and a set of standards that if they don't live up to the program hopefully finds somebody else that will. Exactly. If you played a older guy over a young player of equal ability, you would be be helping one senior and hurting everyone else in the program.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 25, 2013 11:48:49 GMT -6
So far, most of the responses have not been indicative of the "all else being equal" factor. I get "resting on laurels" or "should be better". That's not all else equal.
"The PROGRAM"?!?!?! REALLY? Who IS the program? THE KIDS. Yes, those who came before, and THOSE WHO WILL COME AFTER, which by the way includes the younger kid you're talking about. And when a kid puts in the time, and ALL ELSE is equal, IMO you are doing a tremendous disservice to that kid and THE PROGRAM by not honoring that extra time and commitment he's put in over the younger kid, which by default of his age he has.
By the way - I'm not talking union shop here, where you grant seniority higher consideration than all else.
But I am talking about HS kids who are in most cases never going to set foot on a playing field after this season.
I think some of you have totally lost site of what this is all about. You are sacrificing the experience of a kid this year for some unknowable future that may or may not happen.
But that's just an opinion, I understand that.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Sept 25, 2013 12:05:56 GMT -6
So far, most of the responses have not been indicative of the "all else being equal" factor. I get "resting on laurels" or "should be better". That's not all else equal. "The PROGRAM"?!?!?! REALLY? Who IS the program? THE KIDS. Yes, those who came before, and THOSE WHO WILL COME AFTER, which by the way includes the younger kid you're talking about. And when a kid puts in the time, and ALL ELSE is equal, IMO you are doing a tremendous disservice to that kid and THE PROGRAM by not honoring that extra time and commitment he's put in over the younger kid, which by default of his age he has. By the way - I'm not talking union shop here, where you grant seniority higher consideration than all else. But I am talking about HS kids who are in most cases never going to set foot on a playing field after this season. I think some of you have totally lost site of what this is all about. You are sacrificing the experience of a kid this year for some unknowable future that may or may not happen. But that's just an opinion, I understand that. My problem with this discussion is assuming that this is an all or nothing proposition. If two guys are equal they can share the position. I tend to have a soft spot for seniors IF they've been in the program and have worked hard. If that's the case I'd start the senior but give them equal reps during the game. If the senior has a history of being a part-timer in the weight room I don't feel any sense of loyalty to him since he hasn't been giving us his best.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Sept 25, 2013 12:15:11 GMT -6
Original post
At what point, if at all, do you say to a senior borderline starter
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 25, 2013 12:26:38 GMT -6
So far, most of the responses have not been indicative of the "all else being equal" factor. I get "resting on laurels" or "should be better". That's not all else equal. "The PROGRAM"?!?!?! REALLY? Who IS the program? THE KIDS. Yes, those who came before, and THOSE WHO WILL COME AFTER, which by the way includes the younger kid you're talking about. And when a kid puts in the time, and ALL ELSE is equal, IMO you are doing a tremendous disservice to that kid and THE PROGRAM by not honoring that extra time and commitment he's put in over the younger kid, which by default of his age he has. By the way - I'm not talking union shop here, where you grant seniority higher consideration than all else. But I am talking about HS kids who are in most cases never going to set foot on a playing field after this season. I think some of you have totally lost site of what this is all about. You are sacrificing the experience of a kid this year for some unknowable future that may or may not happen. But that's just an opinion, I understand that. My problem with this discussion is assuming that this is an all or nothing proposition. If two guys are equal they can share the position. I tend to have a soft spot for seniors IF they've been in the program and have worked hard. If that's the case I'd start the senior but give them equal reps during the game. If the senior has a history of being a part-timer in the weight room I don't feel any sense of loyalty to him since he hasn't been giving us his best. This makes sense to me. That's all I'm saying. Work the kid in - both problems solved.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 25, 2013 12:31:58 GMT -6
Somehow my post got all messed up.
Coach Knight - yes, that was the original post.
I was responding to blb when he said "We tell players from the outset that if an older player and a younger one are even, the latter plays."
To me, the younger player needs to BEAT OUT the older player.
I don't often use the word "fair" - life isn't fair, work isn't fair, sports aren't fair. That said, when I have a chance to act fairly, I will do so, and when something under my control is unfair, I will try to rectify that.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Sept 25, 2013 12:33:34 GMT -6
Original post At what point, if at all, do you say to a senior borderline starterWhenever he's not clearly better than the next kid.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Sept 25, 2013 12:37:47 GMT -6
My point is the kid is borderline, in my book that means he is playing by default anyways, he has gotten his senior pass and when it is no longer good enough you run the younger guy out there.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 25, 2013 12:42:03 GMT -6
It's not about them, or the coaches, its about The Program and it is about the guys before them, and the guys after them, and a set of standards that if they don't live up to the program hopefully finds somebody else that will. Exactly. If you played a older guy over a young player of equal ability, you would be be helping one senior and hurting everyone else in the program. I just don't agree at all. You are sacrificing this senior's experience trying to "develop" an underclassmen for no advantage THIS YEAR when you have no knowledge of the future. You can get hit by a bus in the offseason. The underclassman can get hit by a bus...or get a girlfriend...or flunk out...or take his playing time to a local private school. You don't know. You can't know. So play the d*mn kid in front of you that has put in the time and hasn't been beaten out. THAT is good for the program. THAT sends the right message to the kids playing for you. THAT will keep kids coming back, when they know that their hard work won't be forsaken because the coach is always looking at tomorrow instead of today. Playing a kid over a senior when the kid hasn't plainly beaten out the senior sends entirely the wrong message, and IMO, damages the program.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 25, 2013 12:44:31 GMT -6
My point is the kid is borderline, in my book that means he is playing by default anyways, he has gotten his senior pass and when it is no longer good enough you run the younger guy out there. I see your point - the senior can "lose" his position. And I won't disagree with that as a concept. Again - my visceral reaction was to what (I think) blb was saying, which went a little further than this.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Sept 25, 2013 12:45:22 GMT -6
Playing a kid just because he is a senior often times sends the wrong message as well!
|
|