What's your philosophy?

Offensively, I like to run the ball. I feel that other than my QB/RB's fumbling I am in near complete control. This also requires having a consistent (I didn't say dominating) offensive line. I just have to know what each kid can and cannot do. When running the ball I can see everything coming from the D except slants, stunts, and blitzes. I can run away from strong players, and run at the D's weaker players. When we throw, I put the ball in the QB's hands and trust him to make the correct decision in what amounts to a tornado of things that can occur concerning both offensive and defensive personnel and playmaking.

A good run game shortens the game. Run the clock, gives the opponent and yourself fewer possessions to score. Aids if your conditioning, number of players, injury concerns or athletes' abilities are suspect. Quick hitting runs give you more attempts at shorter yardage from scrimmage and keep you from too many 3rd and long situations.

A good run game makes you tougher, it helps through tough times, tough games, short yardage situations, goalline offense and goalline defense.

Here's the way I approach the philosophy question:

1. my goal is to win as much as possible (given for all coaches)

2. what are the areas of a game I need to 'win' in order to win the game-----in other words, if I win the so-and-so battle, then I will mostly likely win the game---nothing in football is an absolute


3. Now that I have a philsophy of how to manage a game, what system gives me the best chance to accomplish my goal


Your answers to number 2 will give you your answers to number 3........


Examples:

Coach A, as an offensive coordinator, believes in controlling T.O.P. and in limiting turnovers.......likely, he will run some type of ball control WCO, under center triple option, or ground and pound style of offense

Coach B, as a defensive coordinator, believes in red zone efficency and limiting big plays (12+ yard runs, 20+ yard passes)........likely, he will run sometype of zone coverage with minimal blitzing (Tampa 2, pattern reading cover 4), making an offense drive on them until they make a mistake or are in the red zone, where, with a constricted field, the windows with which the throw the ball are constricted, allowing safeties to play closer to the L.O.S. for the run. He will probably spend a large amount of time on GL defense (10 and in), and on offensive tendencies in red zone and GL areas.


Currently, I have the following philosophies (remember that today is Tuesday, and these could change by Thursday)


Offensively

*Balance--Have the ability to take what the defense gives
*Execution---through simplification of offense and mastery of fundamentals
*Limit turnovers


Offenses that interest me:

*Flexbone triple option (gives me the ability to pass well)
*Zone Offense (3 or so running plays----1,000,000 formations and motions)
*Spread Shotgun Option (definitely take advantage of what is given by the defense)


Defensively

*Limit big plays
*Third down efficency
*Red Zone efficency
*Stop Run


I ran man coverage this year mainly because we played the run better when I did (I think because that got my FS over the TE----extra guy to the strong side), and I blitzed teams that couldn't handle the blitz...........

.........but I prefer Playing deep zone, getting good at getting our run fits, let em' throw short and make them not want to catch it.......and of course, being a better coached team inside the 20


In college we ran a 3-4 that youngstown state (and tressel led ohio state) runs. Very adaptable to whatever offense we faced, based on coverage looked like a 3-4, 4-3, 4-2, 5-2, 5-3, and we didn't learn anything new, we'd flip personnel to field or boundary, and even though we stayed in the same tech.'s (a 5 tech. was always a 5 tech.) it looked different



Something like that

I'm a marketing professional. This is very similar to strategy and tactics.

Essentially - You develop a strategy based on goals and a SWOT analysis.

Your tactics are how you put your strategy in to motion, meet your goals, keeping you strengths and weaknesses in mind.

To me, every philosophy (i.e. strategy) should start out with "To win football games by..."

I wrote the following and have it posted on the bulletin board above my desk:

Our defense is one that is complex by design, simple by rule, flexible by necessity, and applicable by practice. We believe that in making our defense easy to adjust with, we are able to control how we play the game and can teach our scheme with standing rules to all our levels. Finally, we believe that our scheme's flexibility allows us to align quickly, read with certainty, play fast, rally to the ball, and create turnovers. Finally, our end goal on defense is not to simply stop the opponent, but to score on defense.

Smashmouth offense

Attacking defense


Simple enough?

I hear ya.....but "Be more physical than our opponent" philosophy can convey a belief to YOU and be totally different to ME. It is a general idea, but there is nothing to clearly communicate that belief in practice philosophy

Win the game

Win the game + be physical

win the game + be physical + double tight offense

win the game + be physical + double tight offense + run triple option

win the game + be physical + double tight offense + run triple option + play-action passing = philosophy

WIN THE GAME ......which is why we all run different things, because we all believe in a philosophy of acheiving that end result.

Idea (concept) + rationale = Philosophy

There is your problem right there. Everyone knows you can't win with that stuff anymore! ;D


Run the ball (to keep the clock moving) + play conservative defense (we don't blitz much, play a lot of gc, and try not to play out of position (as backers)) + having a good kicker + working considerable time on kick coverage and pat's (especially lanes/ time fillers on pat's, etc) = keeping it close enough for us to have a chance at the end.



I bet if we added the triangle mesh and the 4-2-5 we'd be unstoppable.

On offense, I like to establish about 5-6 runs and 3-4 passes that are the "base" of the system. We must be able to execute these concepts, though, out of multiple formations--I, Power I, Trips, and 2 x 2. The number one priority on offense is ball control with the ability to hit a "home run".

On Defense, I don't like to blitz a whole lot, but if we are at a talent disadvantage, we must make something happen. I like 4-4 cover 3 as a base, but like on O, must be flexible.

On specials, tog said it best--KISS.

what?

Saintrad is really the one who got me thinking this way-----really is a good way to approach football IMO

Offensive Philosophy:

• Utilize offensive formations that are unique compared to the other teams in the conference
  
• Develop different ways to get the football to our top players
  
• Avoid "3 & Out"
  
• Don't turn the football over
  
• Big-time players make big-time plays
  

yes, I certainly did not mean to equate certain statistics to always winning.

Stats can come from different situations/variables, and some (like those situations you mentioned) leave the stat moot.

to try to answer some of your very good questions:

1-true, though the success of a play is almost always tied to the question: Did the OL block well? If a RB rips off 275 yards, we are not going to assume the DL dominated that game.

Perhaps the best answer to this question is something you do in addition to look at statistics----watch the game

2-yes, it is team success, but I don't think that matters. I mean if your philosophy is to control the ball, and you see a triple option team do that, it doesn't really matter that the FB and OL are doing all the "work" so to speak----what matters is triple option is a viable option (no pun) to achieve one of your philosophical goals

I hope I didn't misunderstand this objection

3-yes, outliers must be accounted for.......for example the Run and Shoot is known to put up big passing yards as well as rushing yards. It would seem, from that statistic, that whenever you want control the clock (like at the end of a game), Run and Shoot, with it's ability to run the football is a good choice. Not so. The runs of the shoot are like the PAPs of a power running team-----they catch the other team off guard, caught in a nickel package or something---further, they are usually explosive plays that pad the average..........3 yards and a cloud it is not

Da Shoot is a great offense, but if controlling the T.O.P. is part of your philosophy it is not your answer.

Understanding what statistics are is as important as knowing them.


Great point


Now, for the thousands of coaches I am sure are dying to know what I think ;D lol



1. Turnover battle. I think you should win it. That being said, I offer a few caveats

a. Running a defense absolutely predicated on takeaways is a bad idea------who cares if you get 3 turnovers if you cannot stop them from scoring TD's the other 8 times they have the ball

b. This is relative to the offense you run. Every coach wants zero, but in reality it is relative to the risk your offense takes. Air Raid turns it over twice, it is less of a big deal than if a DW turns it over twice.

IMO, a throwing team can be -1 in the turnover department (say 2 to 1) and still have "won the turnover battle", because that risk is inherent in their offense--------you still expect a two turnover Air Raid team to score 42 points

2. Red Zone Battle keep them out of the endzone, and find a way to get in it. Moving the ball between the 20's is pretty easy really. Finding a way to stick it in is the crucial part.

Defensively, if you make them kick field goals on 4 offensive possessions, and your offense scores 2 TDs on 4 possessions, you are ahead 14-12

3. Third Down this is tied to another idea: get/keep the defense off the field. Offense moves the chains, the defense gets another 3-5 minutes of rest (actual time, not game time). They get off the field, you get the ball back. Even if you are not a platoon squad, it is always better to have the ball in your hands.

I'm not as big into T.O.P. as other guys are, but if you got the ball they can't score, and the more times you have the ball, the better your odds of a successful drive, this is also linked to field position


Those are probably my big three, and if you can do those all 3 of those things, I think you will win...........if you win those three, and happen to lose, it is probably because you were outmanned. The other team was throwing fades into the endzone on first down, returning punts for TD's, etc.


jmo, and i'm sure there are better ones out there

Offensive philosophy

Move the football- take the football, play keep away until we score. I prefer to feature a punishing running game and play action pass attack- series football - my offense relies on the use of angles and double teams, accurate play calling and numbers advantages to accomplish this since I rarely have the fast kid to get it to out in space. sometimes a hammer is the only tool a guy needs however I do see an offense as a tool box. Do I have a bigger hammer? Maybe I need a chain saw? I typically want to control not only the ball, but the clock as well. I believe that a team with lesser athletes is wise to control both. Keep things simple enough that our execution never suffers. Be only as multiple as we need to be. Use the talent wisely. Its not how many plays or how much talent we have but instead its the plays we use to feature the talent we do have. Teams that do too much suffer penalties and miscues that kill their own team. Simply put, make the other guys beat us.

Same goes for defense, make the other guys out coach us, out execute us. Keep the alignment and assignments simple enough that we dont make mental errors that lead to quick scores. Shed, pursue and tackle well. Gang tackle and always try to create miscues and errors. Defense is also a tool box, be only as multiple as need be because too much thinking robs a player of aggressiveness and instinct. simply put, get the ball back as quick as possible. "Hang loose, one of us is fixin to score" can also be applied to defense.


LET ME ADD THIS, WHEN DESIGNING PLAYS, ALIGNMENTS, ASSIGNMENT, SCHEMES, ADJUSTMENTS, RULES ETC, I ALWAYS KEEP IN CONSIDERATION THAT IM DEALING WITH HIGH SCHOOL KIDS OR YOUTH PLAYERS. NOBODY IS RECRUITING, TRADING FOR OR DRAFTING TALENT. JUST WHAT AM I ASKING MY PLAYERS TO DO? THIS IS A BIG CONSIDERATION. ITS ALSO VERY IMPORTANT TO STAY CLEAR OF THE TRAP THAT "IF THE PROS DO IT..." OR "IF NOTRE DAME USES IT" THINKING. HOW MUCH PRACTICE TIME DO WE HAVE? THATS ANOTHER CONSIDERATION THAT EFFECTS PHILOSOPHY.