|
|
Post by kcbazooka on Mar 22, 2008 7:20:48 GMT -6
DO you ever get to the point where you think you are over analysizing your systems?
Last year we were relatively successful on offense but were not very good on defense. Looking for a change up scheme wise.
OK, now this may come off wrong, but I've been coaching 30 years and I am to a point where it you draw up a defense I can beat it. MAybe not on the field but on paper! (last man with the chalk wins).
Well, because of this, no matter what we draw up on the board as a possible defense, I shoot it down. I have the case of the "what ifs" too much.
Just wondered if other veteran coaches on board experienced this
I think they call it "Paralysis by over analysis."
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 22, 2008 7:59:24 GMT -6
X's and O's matter.
Jimmy & Joe's matter.
But, getting the Jimmy & Joe's to execute the X's & O's matter the most!
I do get "paralysis by over analysis", but just the opposite. I don't look at them and see their holes (although I know what they are), I see them and realize any sound system can work.
Our success is directly related with our ability to teach the fundamentals and getting the players to execute the schemes. No matter what the scheme is.
But, to avoid your "paralysis by over analysis" conundrum, ask a few questions.
1) What do you know the best and can teach the best?
2) What do your coaches know and can teach the best?
3) What scheme suits your players the best?
4) What is the simplest and easiest to teach and execute?
5) What scheme will stop your league opponents the best?
6) What scheme will stop the best team in your league the best or your top rival the best?
7) What will get your kids recruited the most and is the scheme on Madden 08? Just kidding.
|
|
|
|
Post by chaz111 on Mar 22, 2008 8:41:53 GMT -6
I am with you...I do it less than my DC...he just worries about every single possibility...where I am a guy who thinks stop what you need to stop and your scheme can do the rest.
I have finally come to 1 conclusion. I run proven systems that have had good success in other situations. I would like to think then it is up to my teaching execution and the kids ability. jmho
|
|
|
|
Post by warrior53 on Mar 22, 2008 14:19:39 GMT -6
I have been around DC's who do this, (sorry kcbazooka) and it is madening. There are holes in every defense. You have to know your weakness and learn how to overcome it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rbsuknow on Mar 22, 2008 14:51:24 GMT -6
the way we do x's and o's is:
the one on O will draw a formation upside down, so the D guys don't cry about drawing upside down
then the D draws their D
the O writes their play down on a piece of paper
the D then draws coverage, stunts, etc.
the O draws the play
then we discuss what we could have done better on both sides of the ball
we also make sure that we are talking about a specific down and distance, which hash, yard line, and quarter.
We will also put each other on the clock (you get 1 min to make a decision) to help simulate a more game like situation
And you can’t just make up a defense or offense, they have to be what you normally do or what you are trying to do (must have a call for it)
|
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Mar 22, 2008 16:51:53 GMT -6
I have been around DC's who do this, (sorry kcbazooka) and it is madening. There are holes in every defense. You have to know your weakness and learn how to overcome it.
I'm with warrior53 100%. We know where we are vulnerable... and what we are willing to give up and we are going to make you prove you can and will do it repeatedly. Basically, there are a few plays where you can exploit us and get first downs, but we are counting on most to not be patient enough to continue to do those things. When you are, we have plan B (C, D, etc.).
|
|
|
|
Post by toprowguy on Mar 22, 2008 18:02:02 GMT -6
I like the idea of the chess match between the OC and DC will have to try this after break. This seems to be a great way to learn the way a OC and DC thinks.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 22, 2008 18:13:16 GMT -6
Figure out who you have to beat. Set your defense to beat them and have adjustments for everybody else.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 22, 2008 18:15:06 GMT -6
sometimes it is as easy as a line dance
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 22, 2008 19:00:29 GMT -6
sometimes it is as easy as a line dance Umm... That was an actual line dance...  I was expecting something a little more football related.. Can a moderator shut this thread down please?  |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 22, 2008 19:45:15 GMT -6
bazooka--I would say what you are doing right now is PERFECT, considering the time frame. This is the time (actually, Late Jan/Early Feb to be more precise) to go over EVERYTHING in meticulous detail.
I think paralysis by analysis is more an inseason issue, when you spend so much effort trying to analyze the scouting data that you actually hamstring yourself and your players.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 22, 2008 20:22:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 23, 2008 0:01:13 GMT -6
I stand corrected... Don't trip... I had a young lady on my squad last year... And... never mind! |
|
|
|
Post by bluecrazy on Mar 23, 2008 8:40:25 GMT -6
I absolutely think this is the case for a good number of coaches. I think you tendency them out, formation, plays from each formation and all that, but in the end, you shouldn't change what you do to accommodate them. Now offensively that may mean running more of this play rather than that play, and I think it's possible to put in a "difference maker" play or 2, and the same thing defensively. But in the end, every coach should spend more time on their own offense or defense than the opponent. Execution is what wins football games.and you can have the chalk, those X's move on friday night. Well said! Yes you need to know what there best plays are, and practice against them, but "You need to do what you do" Don't go to whole sale changes and confuse the kids. {voice of experience} |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 23, 2008 11:06:44 GMT -6
I'm sure its been said already... but it sounds better when I type it... ;D
You can't base your analysis on the "theoretical"...
You base your analysis on "past performance."
"Theoretical analysis" is for your "call sheet", adjustments, and contingency planning...
Your previous years film, should detail your analysis. Not what they might do...
|
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Mar 23, 2008 12:53:40 GMT -6
I think the coaches who drive me crazy on this are the ones who ask "What if..." for every possible situation! Phantom's answer works for me - figure out who or what you have to stop to win (or at least be in the game) then have adjustments within your scheme for the other posibilities.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 23, 2008 17:18:11 GMT -6
I think the coaches who drive me crazy on this are the ones who ask "What if..." for every possible situation! Phantom's answer works for me - figure out who or what you have to stop to win (or at least be in the game) then have adjustments within your scheme for the other posibilities. But isn't that coaching? Isn't that your job? To have answers for every possible what if in February and March, so that you don't look like a JackA$$ in October/November? |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 23, 2008 18:03:53 GMT -6
I think the coaches who drive me crazy on this are the ones who ask "What if..." for every possible situation! Phantom's answer works for me - figure out who or what you have to stop to win (or at least be in the game) then have adjustments within your scheme for the other posibilities. But isn't that coaching? Isn't that your job? To have answers for every possible what if in February and March, so that you don't look like a JackA$$ in October/November? Nope... You have a limited amount of time and resources... As a coach, your job is to prioritize and strategize the most efficient and effective use of your team. From coaches to managers, to players, to parents, your job is to make your program a well oiled machine... And that doesn't mean winning every game... sometimes you just don't have the resources... The criteria of a good coach, is winning the games he's supposed to win, and being competitive in those he's not... and that doesn't mean having every answer to every question. That means having an answer for every important question. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 23, 2008 19:19:12 GMT -6
Again, we are talking about January-February...limitless time and "resources". I would agree, you can't reinvent wheels in October...you should have invented your wheel in February, installed it in May-June-July-August...and have it troubleshot by September...
|
|
tedseay
Sophomore Member
Posts: 164
|
Post by tedseay on Mar 24, 2008 4:57:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 24, 2008 6:51:46 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 24, 2008 6:52:34 GMT -6
I think I might buy one. This sound system is probably cheaper than Franklin's.  |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 24, 2008 7:17:23 GMT -6
Again, we are talking about January-February...limitless time and "resources". I would agree, you can't reinvent wheels in October...you should have invented your wheel in February, installed it in May-June-July-August...and have it troubleshot by September... I agree with this. The offseason is all about figuring out how to handle 2x2, trips, unbalanced....whatever. If you can't adjust it you have no business running it. |
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Mar 24, 2008 9:39:22 GMT -6
OK, in the Off season - YES, we talk what if everything to death - that is when you figure out how you're going to defense everything you might see. Putting kids in different positions and asking/seeing what they can do.
I was talking about the over analysis that happens during the season - during game week, especially as you're game planning. The "What if they line up in trips, run the reverse, throw the half-back statue of liberty pass, ...." You're never going to have the perfect defense for every play. You've got to look at what they DO and look at what they have DONE and then figure how to stop what they DO. Now if they do something different, your teaching and your scheme will have built in adjustments such as calling off an all out blitz if they go empty backfield. But I have seen Paralysis by OVER-analysis happen on a couple of different staffs and each time it was on the defensive side.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 24, 2008 10:10:22 GMT -6
DOC---ok, we are on the same page then...I was talking ab out offseason, because that is what the author of the thread was talking about.
I agree, in season, you really SHOULDN'T have to overanalyze...because you already did it in the offseason. You should have already troubleshot your defense, and so inseason, the actual attributes of the X's and O's are the crucial point. Player personnel matchups, team tendencies..those are the things that get factored in Inseason...
|
|
|
|
Post by coachmcgrath on Mar 26, 2008 21:24:22 GMT -6
Some things I learned from Tim Murphy in CA... know your scheme, practice your scheme (and of course the skills of tackling, pursuit, etc.) know what your scheme's weakness is... and focus the most practice on the weaknesses you expect your opponents to be most likely to attack.
For example, if you run a cover 3, one weakness is against what I would call an All Seams route... 4 recievers going deep with the intention of putting the safety in conflict... Coach Murphy (at least this is how I interpreted what he was teaching) focuses heavily on getting his players to recognize either pre-snap and/or quickly after the snap when a team is attempting to exploit the weaknesses... and he practices the reactions that are necessary from all players to compensate for these weaknesses... and he does it over and over until it is second nature.
You rely on the scheme's inherent strengths and your player's fundementals to deal with the majority of the plays... and your extreme preparedness for the inevitable attacks against your perceived weaknesses... which in effect become one of your strengths...
Hopefully, I explained it right and understood Coach Murphy right...
I had never thought of it this way, I always did the "chess" thing... trying to over analyze it and always have my guys in the right position... which I still try to do... but... Using this method, you also prepare for the inevitable, when that other coach makes the right call against your scheme/play... it seems to me that with Murphy's approach you're saying, I'm going to train my "bishop" to also be able to transform quickly into a "rook"so that he can get to where he needs to -quickly- when someone thinks they can take advantage of his percieved limitation of only being able to move diagonally...
|
|
|
|
Post by resnik77 on Mar 31, 2008 9:48:58 GMT -6
I think the coaches who drive me crazy on this are the ones who ask "What if..." for every possible situation! Phantom's answer works for me - figure out who or what you have to stop to win (or at least be in the game) then have adjustments within your scheme for the other posibilities. I agree doc. and I know what you mean. Theoretically every DC should prepare their defense for every formation, every motion, every conceivable shift against every team. What if that team comes out in 5 wide? They are wing-t, they won't. What if they double TE, bone? They are a spread team, they won't. What if my aunt had a set of nuts? She'd be my uncle. I'm with you I get sick of the "what if" questions. My Dline coach is great at those. "I'm afraid" or "that scares me" are the 2 most common phrases out of his mouth and it makes me want to shove a pom-pom up his arse so at least he'll have something hanging down. Every time I draw up an automatic blitz he says "Oh  I don't know coach, that scares me. What if they...." Well, what if they? |
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Mar 31, 2008 11:13:00 GMT -6
Then you line up in YOUR base and adjust based upon your principles and concepts. Its the same thing as asking, "What if the line up in Punt Formation on 4th down ... what do we do?" Well, you line up and play defense! Now, what if they line up in Punt formation on 1st Down? Its just as likely as the Wing T team going 5 wide, but again, IF they do, you line up and play defense!
|
|
;D
I don't know coach, that scares me. What if they...."