|
|
Post by davishfc on Dec 31, 2013 14:06:35 GMT -6
|
|
filmjunkie
Sophomore Member
[F4:@AlexJKirby]
Posts: 160
|
Post by filmjunkie on Jan 2, 2014 13:04:05 GMT -6
Couldn't agree more. Having to adjust every year to what we had when I was coaching HS meant that we were always going out and exploring different ways of doing things during the offseason. It definitely lends itself to being more creative as a coach.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Jan 2, 2014 13:10:09 GMT -6
Also agree. HS coaches know a lot about tweaking a system to play to the strengths of their personnel. I've seen one coach run option based Wishbone, power run based Wishbone, and toss sweep based Wishbone in different years because he had to adapt to the players he had while staying within the system. There's also the ability to experiment with more open minded approaches to the game without getting blasted in the national press.
|
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Jan 2, 2014 13:41:32 GMT -6
I don't think the difference between a really good high school coaching staff and a college coaching staff is as great as the average football fan probably thinks. Football isn't rocket science.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Jan 2, 2014 13:46:44 GMT -6
Right. I think the main differences would be in capability of players, resources, and time.
|
|
kakavian
Sophomore Member
Where's the ball, boy? Find the ball.
Posts: 175
|
Post by kakavian on Jan 3, 2014 7:38:05 GMT -6
Having coached at both levels, one of the biggest differences is often in the players, in that most of the guys at the college level are there because THEY want to be there, rather than because they feel they HAVE to be there. From a coaching perspective, yes coaching at the HS level forces a wide variety in your approach because you have so little control in most cases over your talent level, that you have to learn to adapt to be successful.
Not only that, but when was the last time a college coach had to go into a game with little or no scouting? Would make most of them burp purple kittens. Plus the great variety that you see in the HS game forces you defensively to be far more prepared in general. My favorite was explaining to a young GA at the college level that I had to prepare over the next four weeks to play a wishbone option team, a wing-t jet sweep team, a running spread team, and then a vertical passing four-five wide spread team, with all the same kids, no substitutions. You could see the twitch starting in his face. It took serious hold when I told him I was also not going to get film on any of them. So...yeah it can force you into flexibility, for certain.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jan 3, 2014 8:04:58 GMT -6
When you coach in HS, you have to deal with parents, and spend most of your time on-get paid for classroom responsibilities.
When you coach in college, you have to deal with beer and girlfriend issues, and spend a lot of time on recruiting.
Other than that, football is football, except there is more variety of schemes in HS.
BITD before teachers became unionized and started getting paid even big-time colleges hired successful HS coaches as assistants, and small colleges hired them as headers.
Now you pretty much have to go the GA route-get into it right out of college if you want to go that way. Briles and Malzahn are exceptions. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jan 3, 2014 13:37:55 GMT -6
I think every coach in the world would benefit enormously from working with youth kids in the grade 5-8 range, and the college coaches I know that have no HS experience definitely seem to have missed out on something. It's about coaching techniques and fundamentals instead of just scrambling to get the gameplan in.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Jan 3, 2014 13:52:46 GMT -6
An interesting read and an interesting point of view for sure. I wonder if we will ever see a day where guys like Malzahn and Briles aren't amazing stories or exceptions to the rule, and high school coaches being able to move into the big time will become more commonplace than it currently is.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 3, 2014 15:03:48 GMT -6
An interesting read and an interesting point of view for sure. I wonder if we will ever see a day where guys like Malzahn and Briles aren't amazing stories or exceptions to the rule, and high school coaches being able to move into the big time will become more commonplace than it currently is. It isn't ALL that rare. There are several I can name locally --Southeast Louisiana-- (they just haven't become head coaches at BCS schools yet) --- Jabar Juluke joined the La Tech staff this season after taking Karr High school in New Orleans to multiple state championship games. ---Tim Rebowe did the same about 15 years ago, after taking Destrehan High School (NOLA suburb) to the State Championship game, then moving to Nicholls state (1AA) then ULM and Now Louisiana Lafayette. (Pretty cool situation for Tim, as he has been working for a louisiana public school all of those years, so unlike many college coaches, I believe he may actually have a retirement). ---Frank Wilson currently the LSU RB coach and recruiting coordinator. Previously stops at Tennessee and USM, started his college career with Ed Ogeron at Ole Miss. Was very young HC at OP Walker in New Orleans, taking them to state and beating John Curtis in regular season Briles, Mahlzan, and my guys above all have some things in common. Except for Coach Rebowe, all played college football (opportunity). They all then coached in an environment where they could deliver players to colleges--making connections (opportunity) They were all hired (I am not sure on Briles, but pretty sure) as recruiters. Remember, Mahlzan wasn't brought in to ARK because of his offensive wizardry, it was because a kid signed with ARK and they were a "package" deal. I don't really buy the premise of this little short story. Just kind of a filler article on football scoop. |
|
|
|
Post by mholst40 on Jan 4, 2014 0:30:28 GMT -6
Getting into college coaching is mostly about who you know and then climbing the ladder.
Staying in college coaching is more about what you know and how good you are at doing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by td4tc on Jan 4, 2014 8:24:36 GMT -6
Interesting how many guys talk about opportunity being the key to a University job vs maybe your record in HS.
This is in contrast to how players are "recruited" at the next level by their HS success.Like going from Uni to Pro (eg Chip Kelly) I would think that coaches are "recruited" to some extent also by their records.But maybe not. How much of this is that many of the HS guys on here who have great success like fantom don't really put themselves out there for a job at the next level because they are happy. Certainly, it would be tough to jump from HS HC into a Uni HC job and being an assistant after being a HC is sometimes tougher than u think. Been there.
I think that moving up from HS to Uni makes more sense than moving down from Pro to University though. The Pro guys have a different mentality where they can just "get another guy" vs the Uni guys who are stuck with coaching up those that they recruited.They understand the whole student athlete thing better. Similarly, The HS coach understands the student-athlete thing better and is better suited to coach "kids" at Uni IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by coach2013 on Jan 4, 2014 8:26:21 GMT -6
That goes for any level. Guys who have a chance to develop their concepts, ideas, systems will have to experiment much less than a guy who takes over and has never once put his own offense/defense together (which I believe is why some coordinator experience is useful before becoming a HC).
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jan 4, 2014 8:36:40 GMT -6
Getting into college coaching is mostly about who you know and then climbing the ladder. Staying in college coaching is more about what you know and how good you are at doing it. At the D.1 level hiring coaches is similar to recruiting. If the 6'7" 300 pounder with 20 offers turns out to be a bust you can justify recruiting him. If a 5'11" kid is a bust the boosters look at it as a wasted scholarship. It becomes a black mark and if you have too many of them and not enough success the big money guys get your a$$ fired. The same principle holds for hiring coaches. If you bring in a guy with no college experience and it doesn't work out the HC can't justify it to the boosters. I agree that experience coaching in HS would make a guy a better coach. Because of the politics involved, though, I don't see a lot of colleges hiring HS guys in the near future. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 4, 2014 9:20:34 GMT -6
Interesting how many guys talk about opportunity being the key to a University job vs maybe your record in HS. This is in contrast to how players are "recruited" at the next level by their HS success.Like going from Uni to Pro (eg Chip Kelly) I would think that coaches are "recruited" to some extent also by their records.But maybe not. How much of this is that many of the HS guys on here who have great success like fantom don't really put themselves out there for a job at the next level because they are happy. Certainly, it would be tough to jump from HS HC into a Uni HC job and being an assistant after being a HC is sometimes tougher than u think. Been there. I think that moving up from HS to Uni makes more sense than moving down from Pro to University though. The Pro guys have a different mentality where they can just "get another guy" vs the Uni guys who are stuck with coaching up those that they recruited.They understand the whole student athlete thing better. Similarly, The HS coach understands the student-athlete thing better and is better suited to coach "kids" at Uni IMHO. I know it may same like I am contradicting myself here, as in one thread I state that it is very rare that someone "moves up" and in this thread I state that it is not that uncommon, so allow me to clarify. The "rare" part, is when looking at a macro-level. Total number of HS coaches moving up to full-time living wage jobs. However, when I stated above it isnt all that rare, I was speaking of a certain niche of coaches. HS coaches from talent rich areas that can deliver kids. Those guys have an opportunity to "move up" into position coaching roles because they have the potential to bring in talented players--which is the number 1 way to improve a college football team. td4tc The reason it isn't about a record in HS is because that really doesn't provide much evidence that you can benefit the College/University hiring you. Look at all the threads here that have listed the "most important attributes" of a successful program. Things like Off Season program, administrative support, community support, staff continuity, feeder systems etc. Having a successful record generally means you have those things covered, but how does any of that help the college/university? I also think we need to realize that there are two different situations here. One is a University hiring a head football coach... the other is a Head football coach hiring assistants. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jan 4, 2014 9:31:06 GMT -6
Gerry Faust and Todd Dodge experiments killed the HS coach to CFB HC hire, at least above D-II/III.
|
|
