|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 13, 2006 8:58:27 GMT -6
anything ever had you change your philosophy on offense / defense / special teams?
What spawned your religious conversion?
I know as a defensive guy, I used to be locked in to one style of football (what I knew), then after hearing and watching various styles at play (nickel...then the 33 stuff....then the Tampa zone-matchup stuff...) I began altering my way of thinking, while keeping some of the stuff that I thought worked.
I think sometimes that we get so caught up OR intimidated with terminology or methodologies that it is hard to grasp a total scheme, but picking and choosing bits and pieces that we can use help us keep from getting stale. The evolution is constant, but sometimes you don't notice it until you stop to take a look at where you CAME FROM.....
Used to think I-formation option was the only way to run an offense, now....heck, the sky's the limit.
|
|
dial51
Freshmen Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by dial51 on Apr 13, 2006 9:07:39 GMT -6
What I find hard for me personally, is there are so many solid offensive and defensive schemes in football its hard to stick with just one.
Personally I am an I formation, power football type of guy, however I also like the DW, veer, etc. But you just have to stick with what's best for you as a coach and your team makeup.
|
|
coachf
Freshmen Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by coachf on Apr 13, 2006 9:25:43 GMT -6
When I was a D-coordinator the only thing I thought would work was the old Illinois 44. After reading some books and talking to some people who made it work on the HS level, I switched to a 46. I now would hold that as my favorite defense. I think what made the change easy was seeing how flexible you can still be in it. I was worried that I would always have 6 or 7 guys rushing the QB and I would get annihilated in the passing game. I think that preconceived notions are what make it so hard to change schemes and philosophies. People think a Wing-T will make it impossible to pass or you can never run in a Spread offense. When you really look at each offense/defense you can see there are possiblities with all of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Apr 13, 2006 10:07:54 GMT -6
I used to be a I back down hill between and off tackle run game and tons of sprint draw pass and 3 step passing game. Have converted to all oneback and noback offense with zone run game. Got sick of trying to account for 9 guys in the box in the run game. Now we just count. 6 or less run and 7 or more pass. (unless we are in one of our 2 TE sets)
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Apr 13, 2006 12:18:35 GMT -6
anything ever had you change your philosophy on offense / defense / special teams? What spawned your religious conversion? I know as a defensive guy, I used to be locked in to one style of football (what I knew), then after hearing and watching various styles at play (nickel...then the 33 stuff....then the Tampa zone-matchup stuff...) I began altering my way of thinking, while keeping some of the stuff that I thought worked. I think sometimes that we get so caught up OR intimidated with terminology or methodologies that it is hard to grasp a total scheme, but picking and choosing bits and pieces that we can use help us keep from getting stale. The evolution is constant, but sometimes you don't notice it until you stop to take a look at where you CAME FROM..... Used to think I-formation option was the only way to run an offense, now....heck, the sky's the limit. I think you start off coaching what you know best. Usually that is the system you played in. Then as you learn more you expand. I know I have. While my overall philosophy has not changed, the methods have. How the personnel is deployed has changed. I played for a wing-t/52 monster defense in high school. Great scheme but I have evolved to an I-backs 4-4. Yeah a big step eh? LOL |
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Apr 17, 2006 14:01:07 GMT -6
Brophy,
I think good coaching is adapting new knowledge into your scheme of things, say your example of spot dropping to zone vs jamming and matching up..........no need to change the whole enchilada, just a technique change. Sometimes wholesale changes are necessary, but usually tossing out what you do and putting in something that is 100% new is difficult to do, the whole staff must be on board and up to snuff to teach it correctly.
We are constantly tweaking and looking at new ideas to fit into and make "our" scheme better, to us, using the same terminology and simply adding/deleting based on our teams talent year to year works for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by los on Apr 18, 2006 6:25:34 GMT -6
Hearing and seeing some of the things you all here on this board do, has shown me as much as playing in a hundred games!Getting my butt kicked by jh, tog, huey and others on the whiteboard has also made me realize that some of my ideas need a little modification! LOL!  |
|
|
|
Post by saintrad on Apr 18, 2006 6:32:19 GMT -6
hey los; just remeber whoever has the chalk last wins on the whiteboard.  lol |
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Apr 19, 2006 6:41:07 GMT -6
I used to think the triple option wishbone was the greatest thing...then i tried to coach it by myself essentially...and having kids making decisions on what to do with the ball on the field was something i soon learned to loathe. then i discovered the raw brute force and great misdirection in the dw and sw offenses. Its been a love affair ever since.
defensively, i wanted to play a stack 44 and stunt alot out of it...not enough pressure from the edges for all of the speed sweeping and boots that we saw, i also grew weary of being in a balanced defense against unbalanced power sets......i never wavered about playing one coverage really well...hence the 46 with man and man free. pressure defense is what im all about.
|
|
|
|
Post by stone65 on Apr 19, 2006 7:12:19 GMT -6
I think one basic philosophy should stay the same: your scheme should be revolved around your players. Personel is going to change year to year, so some things should be tweaked every year. Now, I'm not saying going from wing-t to spread, to power I from year to year. But tweak the system to feature your players.
|
|
|
|
Post by oguru on Apr 20, 2006 7:18:06 GMT -6
I went and coached at a school that was two back and when we were in a tight spot the OC would run the FB wedge we once ran it 25 times in a row.
However I am a spread guy for two main reasons.
I hate running plays into un blocked defenders which you do in most two back sets.
Running the spread gives us an advantage as we force teams to play in space. Which some teams are not sue to,which then allows us to take advantage of our skilled guys on their non skilled guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Apr 20, 2006 7:39:18 GMT -6
the biggest thing that forces evolution is personnell
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardslv on Apr 20, 2006 8:02:12 GMT -6
tog is very, very correct.
Other things that have caused my philosophy to evolve:
1) Defining what we need to run to win our "must win" games vs. arch-rivals. In 2001 we realized our current D wasn't the best scheme to run vs. our region arch-rival or the team that seemed to keep us out of the state chmapionship. In the off-seoasn prior to the 2002 season we evaluated and revamped keeping in mind those two teams. We won it all in 2002 and didn't lose a game in 2003 until the state chmapionship.
2) Getting my butt kicked by a certain O or D makes me look at what it has to offer. I wasn't a Wing-T guy until I was forced to defend it.
|
|
kakavian
Sophomore Member
Where's the ball, boy? Find the ball.
Posts: 175
|
Post by kakavian on Apr 20, 2006 8:33:07 GMT -6
Yeah, I played in a split back run, with a 50 monster defense.
My first coaching Job we were required to run a Slot-T with a 4-4 defense
Then I got to coach in a Wing-T/4-3 that 43 Defense from that year is the one I run today...with modifications of course
My next HC Job I had to run three different offenses in three years...
I-wing, Wing n Shoot, and Wishbone. We ran a flexible 50 front that I use on my youth teams to this day.
Offensively as an HC in my last couple of years I ran Bastardized Wing-T, some Shotgun, and started tinkering with the option. I am really growing to appreciate the opportunities that the option can give a smaller team. I am now pretty wedded to running the double slot option, with some core wing-T plays added in there. I like it because dependent on personnel we can adjust out play selection fairly easily, and we can run the same offense from goalline to goalline.
Defensively after running 4-4, 4-2, various 50 fronts, I am pretty much a solid 4-3 guy with multiple fronts. We can show a 50 look, a 4-2 look, a 60 look, all with the same personnel. Our system has Zone, Man, Rotational coverage, even includes a few DOuble teams in there. I dont like only having three men on the line of scrimmage, especially in our conference which is run heavy. But even against the passing teams, I prefer having four guys be able to pressure the QB and not HAVE to blitz if I dont want to. Thats a bit of an adjustment from my "Blitz or die" mentaility as a 50 coach in the beginning.
|
|
|
|
Post by shermdog on Apr 20, 2006 9:30:00 GMT -6
the biggest thing that forces evolution is personnell I have to agree on that. Coach 1A football in Texas. You will be adjusting for kids all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Apr 20, 2006 10:05:49 GMT -6
Don't confuse changing systems with changing philosophies. In the 18 years that I've been at this school we've gone from a Shade 50 to a 4-3 to an 8 man front. We haven't really changed our philosophy, though. We believed in multiple fronts and coverages, favoring speed over size, and playing an aggressive style then and still do today.
|
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Apr 20, 2006 10:15:24 GMT -6
My coaching philosophy hs not changed since I started, my schemes have.
Philosophy is BLUE COLLAR FOOTBALL (we will outwork our opponents)
Schemes have gone from Bone Triple Option to DW offensively
Always been an odd front guy defensively.
|
|
lol
