Post by coachnichols on Feb 14, 2008 8:30:25 GMT -6
HEAD COACH COORDINATING BOTH SIDES OF THE BALL?
So, does anyone do this or know of someone who does?
Let's assume for a moment no one on staff is "qualified" to be one of your coordinators...Is it better to just handle both sides of the ball yourself and deal with the problems that arise or put someone in charge of the offense/defense and deal with the problems? I would think coordinating both sides would be a huge workload, but...
One of the most consistent and successful teams in our state has a HC that calls offense, defense, and special teams himself. It is a great program, and they have a ton of state championships and state runner-ups over the last decade.
He bowls overhand. Cuba imports cigars from him. He makes downhill 2-back run schemes exciting. He is THE MOST INTERESTING MAN IN THE WORLD.
What do you consider "coordinating", and what do then consider "qualified" to coordinate?
Playcalling is one of the easier tasks on a friday night. You did all the work Sunday-Wed/Thursday
“As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.”-- ---Ralph Waldo Emerson apparently would have been a great football coach!
IF no one were qualified - it would be a necessary evil.
IF no one were qualified - then there is either no one else on staff (period), or the HC is a horrible person/teacher (to not be able to bring someone in - teach up a side of the ball to an 'apprentice').
"Coordinate" a basic special teams package? Teach them how to line up and when to get out on the field. Coach up the specifics (that NEVER change through the course of the season) and be done with it. The HC could spend the first 3 days of camp exclusively installing ST, then hand it off to someone (because nothing that you taught in those 3 days will change).
"Coordinate" a defense? Any monkey could blink through a season coordinating a defense. It does not REQUIRE you to be a geniac on defense, especially when 80% of the guys out there are calling ONE coverage and just dialing-up blitzes at random. Get a base defense and learn how to tackle and pursue, because the bottom line is - as long as the opponent's offense doesn't execute your defense will be fine. If you want a guy to run a defense correctly - go over situations of how to USE the defense to adapt to formations,field positions, and attacks....go over the vulnerabilities and liabilities of doing those things. Shape the defense to do its true job - stop them from scoring (not just lining up in a bunch of kooky fronts).
"Coordinate" an offense? If you want to score points and be effective and call the right plays.....there are no shortcuts. If the HC isn't 'qualified' to do this, he needs to bring someone in that is.
There is no ONE right way to do things to win. If you call 'strong-power', rather than 'strong-iso' will it be the difference if you win or lose?
So, the bottom line? If a HC is choosing to do this, he is
insecure in his abilities / scared of losing control (fear is driving the program)
is an ego-hound (feed ME!)
is not well-versed in motivation (of staff)
is not a good delegator
has a staff full of yes-man peons with no aspirations.
If the latter, then who the BLUEHELL is hiring these guys (and why)?
I know there are a few 5'6" NBA players in history, but that doesn't make it typical or practical.
The Head Coach is the CEO of the program. He is there to LEAD - not necessarily be a big-cheese middle manager. Bill Gates isn't out there writing code or setting up vendors.
Part of the 'burden of leadership' is selling the vision / training that promotes growth.
The HC should be training / mentoring the coordinators to be HCs.
The coordinators should be training / mentoring position coaches to be coordinators
The position coaches should be training / mentoring players to execute assignments.
Hording success / growth for yourself will eventually suffocate you.
Treating adult colleagues like children will get you incompetence. If the person is near the same page as the HC, give the guy the keys to the car and LET HIM DRIVE (and don't nitpick the minutiae).
A coach in our area does it and has won 3 championships in the last 5 or 6 years. He doesnt even meet with his staff on weekends. They show up on Monday and he hands them a copy of the scouting report/gameplan/list of things for them to coach. He says if he is going to get the blame for the losses then he is going to control what goes into them. The amount of time he puts in on the weekends doing all this is unbelievable.
A coach in our area does it and has won 3 championships in the last 5 or 6 years. He doesnt even meet with his staff on weekends. They show up on Monday and he hands them a copy of the scouting report/gameplan/list of things for them to coach. He says if he is going to get the blame for the losses then he is going to control what goes into them. The amount of time he puts in on the weekends doing all this is unbelievable.
sounds pretty efficient. I would love to be an assistant there
show up and get paid....YES!
Let me guess.........a kid screws up and this guy is balling out his assistants. Y'know, the guys that have really no investment in the program (nor is anything invested in them).
A coach in our area does it and has won 3 championships in the last 5 or 6 years. He doesnt even meet with his staff on weekends. They show up on Monday and he hands them a copy of the scouting report/gameplan/list of things for them to coach. He says if he is going to get the blame for the losses then he is going to control what goes into them. The amount of time he puts in on the weekends doing all this is unbelievable.
LOL, cannot even imagine being able to do this and still be sane by week 4.
Post by knight9299 on Feb 14, 2008 10:25:13 GMT -6
realdawg said:
A coach in our area does it and has won 3 championships in the last 5 or 6 years. He doesnt even meet with his staff on weekends. They show up on Monday and he hands them a copy of the scouting report/gameplan/list of things for them to coach. He says if he is going to get the blame for the losses then he is going to control what goes into them. The amount of time he puts in on the weekends doing all this is unbelievable.
This is all ego. But then again he's got rings so who am I to say anything. I've worked under 3 HCs that briefly talked me through how they want ME to coach their systems. So working for a guy that did all the work would be fine by me- IF he told me how to coach his systems. But if a guy isn't going let me help prepare, he's not exactly going to go out of his way to let me in on his secrets of running his system IMO. Brophy nailed. Sell me on your football vision. Then coach me up like I'm a 3 year old. If a HC doesn't want to develop his assistants it's because he's afraid they'll become better than he is. His power is kept by keeping the assistants in the dark..
the number one acid test for any football decision boils down to;
"WHAT IS BEST FOR THE PROGRAM?"
weigh that logic out there ....what do you have?
"Yes, it is in the best interest of the program that as the head coach, I, Richard Head, make every single coaching decision.....so when I am not available, that nothing will work. It is imperative that as the HC, I take all the credit for any succes we have".
Does the decision have the best impact for the PROGRAM (players, teachers, community, administration)?
COULD it be done? Yes Is it the most efficient use of resources? HELL,NO
If it isn't the most efficient use of resources....if there is a better way, why aren't you utilizing it?
Post by rideanddecide on Feb 14, 2008 11:02:42 GMT -6
Not all schools have the same resources. If you are tied by the teachers union when hiring coaches and those coaches aren't willing to do the work, you can't do much.
Post by coachdawhip on Feb 14, 2008 11:11:39 GMT -6
sometimes Brophy, you have to find coaches to help you if not then what, you have to call both sides.
I agree that in a normal situtation it's wrong.
But i know of an extreme case. I know a friend of mine who got a JOB in July as a HC and th out of the four teachers in the building that coach football all four were coaching at other schools.
Post by flexspread on Feb 14, 2008 11:23:04 GMT -6
I agree with Brophy. Unless you are the only coach grades 9-12, you can probably find a DC. If for whatever reason, nobody on your staff wants the added duties and time, I would do it for a year and either look for a new staff the next year or look for a new job for myself, where the district allows me to hire my own asasistant.
If it were me, I would figure out who on my staff is willing to put in their time (ideally all assistants will be this way, but in smaller schools sometimes you can't be as picky). From there I would take the guy with the most defensive knowledge and teach him the defense. I don't care if the guy has never played football in his life, if he is willing to put in the time and willing to learn and wants to make the program better I can show him on paper, film and chalkboards what the defense's keys and responsibilities are as well as adjustments we will have to make. I have enough confidence in myself as a teacher that I believe I can do this. I would keep a close watch on him to make sure everything is getting done that needs to get done and let him know that I am always available to talk/help at home or at the office. Having someone who can make a defensive game plan so you only have to make the offensive game plan will save many hours, although you will probably have to walk him through this process the first few times. I will say that it is obviously a lot easier if you can get a guy who is motivated with knowledge and experience who can come in, you tell him what you are looking for, come up with a plan together and turn the reigns over so you can focus on the offense and other organizational/day-to-day issues that arise. Either way, the motivation has to be there. As far as not even including assistants during film breakdowns and gameplans, that seems crazy to me. Why would you want to be a part of a program where your opinion doesn't mean anything?
Post by rideanddecide on Feb 14, 2008 11:33:34 GMT -6
I'll still disagree.
At smalls schools you can do both efficiently and effectively.
My experience comes from calling offense as HC, but helping an assistant to coordinate the defense, working with both coordinators and letting them play their role on Fridays, and firing a d-coordinator which put me back in the role of calling/coordinating defense and working with a very capable OC. I have coached in a small school conference (enrollments under 250) moved to a conference slightly larger (enrollments 270-550) and watched game film of many schools from larger conferences. I've seen the differences.
Small schools tend to be less sophisticated in most cases. Due to low numbers, low number of coaches, quality of athletes, etc... packages are easier to scout and dissect in most cases.
Clearly there are exceptions to every rule, but I have found in our area that this is the case.
There is a lot of hyperbole responses - the author is suggesting the CHOICE to coordinate everything because the definition of "qualified" is called into question by coachd5085. What "qualifies" anyone to be considered a coordinator? What "disqualifies" anyone from being a coordinator?
If you have people on staff, what is the worst case scenario if you TELL them they are "IN CHARGE" of a unit?
Post by coachnichols on Feb 14, 2008 12:40:40 GMT -6
I didn't mean to cause conflict here...just wanted to throw out an idea.
I don't want to coach both sides of the ball, but there are situations that might exist where the assisants are not ready to "run" one side of the ball or might not be willing to put in the time to get this done. I agree with brophy's assertion, this is not a good situation, but it probably works for some.
ok, having been in the situation to coordinate both O and D twice, I feel like I can offer some thoughts. I was at a small school w/ about 200 or so kids 9-12. the first time I did this we had 20-25 on the team the second we had 18-23. I agree whole heartedly with Brophy that it is not what one would WANT to do.
without going into specifics, I would agree that it IS do able at the small school level where schemes and planning has to be kept simple. However, I would also add this: Never underestimate how hard it is to find qualified, capable people who are willing to put in the time and energy required to coach high school football. This is increasingly difficult when you are new to an area, and have NO contacts whatsoever, and an admin that simply says go find some coaches. The inability/unwillingness to hire on campus coaches also aided in this. the first time i did both it was out of necessity when the DC quit mid year to take another job, and I was left w/ one other coach. the 2nd time, i was the one doing the bulk of gameplanning, evaluating, and scouting on the weekends, and got fed up with it, so I took the reins completely the last week of the season. This time was done almost completly based on EGO, and was not the best decision, but both were done b/c I thought it would benefit the program.
the lesson I learned from this was that I had/have a long way to go in motivating and teaching adults. (Thankfully I'm not an HC anymore). As Brophy, put it the buck stops and starts w/ the HC. However, it takes help from the admin to hire people on campus.
I think that's all for the rambling I have for the moment. I could write a book on the lessons I learned from my last job.
Last Edit: Feb 14, 2008 13:22:29 GMT -6 by amikell
i've done it myself......small 1A ball.... it definitely kept me in the flow of the game....i didn't have time to get unfocused
after the game was tough....it's absolutely the most tired i've ever been after a friday night....
i didn't have a choice..... 1 assistant was a first year guy...he wasn't ready....the other assistant was a volunteer guy that never showed up on time....he really didn't contribute that much....
IF no one were qualified - it would be a necessary evil.
IF no one were qualified - then there is either no one else on staff (period), or the HC is a horrible person/teacher (to not be able to bring someone in - teach up a side of the ball to an 'apprentice').
"Coordinate" a basic special teams package? Teach them how to line up and when to get out on the field. Coach up the specifics (that NEVER change through the course of the season) and be done with it. The HC could spend the first 3 days of camp exclusively installing ST, then hand it off to someone (because nothing that you taught in those 3 days will change).
"Coordinate" a defense? Any monkey could blink through a season coordinating a defense. It does not REQUIRE you to be a geniac on defense, especially when 80% of the guys out there are calling ONE coverage and just dialing-up blitzes at random. Get a base defense and learn how to tackle and pursue, because the bottom line is - as long as the opponent's offense doesn't execute your defense will be fine. If you want a guy to run a defense correctly - go over situations of how to USE the defense to adapt to formations,field positions, and attacks....go over the vulnerabilities and liabilities of doing those things. Shape the defense to do its true job - stop them from scoring (not just lining up in a bunch of kooky fronts).
"Coordinate" an offense? If you want to score points and be effective and call the right plays.....there are no shortcuts. If the HC isn't 'qualified' to do this, he needs to bring someone in that is.
There is no ONE right way to do things to win. If you call 'strong-power', rather than 'strong-iso' will it be the difference if you win or lose?
So, the bottom line? If a HC is choosing to do this, he is
insecure in his abilities / scared of losing control (fear is driving the program)
is an ego-hound (feed ME!)
is not well-versed in motivation (of staff)
is not a good delegator
has a staff full of yes-man peons with no aspirations.
If the latter, then who the BLUEHELL is hiring these guys (and why)?
I know there are a few 5'6" NBA players in history, but that doesn't make it typical or practical.
The Head Coach is the CEO of the program. He is there to LEAD - not necessarily be a big-cheese middle manager. Bill Gates isn't out there writing code or setting up vendors.
Part of the 'burden of leadership' is selling the vision / training that promotes growth.
The HC should be training / mentoring the coordinators to be HCs.
The coordinators should be training / mentoring position coaches to be coordinators
The position coaches should be training / mentoring players to execute assignments.
Hording success / growth for yourself will eventually suffocate you.
Treating adult colleagues like children will get you incompetence. If the person is near the same page as the HC, give the guy the keys to the car and LET HIM DRIVE (and don't nitpick the minutiae).
I would not want to wear all the hats on a team. I want nothing to do with defense so for me to coach defense would do more harm then good.
as for the guy who does it all and shows up on monday with the plan, I would not want to coach for him. I am only good to him for practice and not the games.
if he is so good then he really does not need a staff IMO. He should be able to coach it all.
I heard Don Markham at a clinic speak this way with regard to his offense. he coaches every aspect.
In my way of thinking, it is the head coaches job to teach assistants what he wants done. most times a new head coach inherits a staff. so if the head coach does not teach them what he wants done he is really only biting the hand which feeds him.
the best staff i was on as an assistant we each had a area which we were responsible for.
Been there, done that. Tried giving the keys to one side or the other over to one of my assistants, but they turned it down. They're great position coaches, but they didn't think they could manage a whole side of a ball yet. So I wasn't gonna push, don't need guys freakin out cause their running a whole team and can't do their job at their positions. I've brought it up again this year, and I think one of them is ready to step up and run with the O.
Out of Football San Jose, CA
If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.
LOL! If ya'll think H.S. asst. coaches can have it bad.
I’m a youth coach. I’ve been on the other side of this. I have two asst. coaches. Good guys. But, they just didn’t seem to catch on last season. I run the single wing offense. I have videos, books, urls, etc… available to my asst’s. I preach the SW. At the start of the season, I explain what their jobs are, their duties, what I expect. I felt like Will Smith talking to Tommy Lee Jones in Men in Black II.
W.S.- The De-neurolizer. In a matter of moments transverse magneto energy will surge through your body, unlocking information that could be the key to earth’s very survival.” TLJ- Ohhhh, okay….(Points)What’s that thing? W.S.-(Pause)…... The De-neurolizer….(sigh)
That’s how I felt last season. Me- We run the SW. It’s got speed! It’s got power! It’s got deception! We can pass! I’ve got books! I’ve got DVD’s! It’s the very foundation of our offensive philosophy. Let’s all get on the same page. Sit down and I’ll chalk it up on the whiteboard. Any questions? Them- No. No questions! A week later during first practice. Them- Hey, Coach. There’s no QB! And, what’s that crazy, unbalanced formation they’re in called? Me- (Pause)….. It’s called the Single Wing..... (sigh)
CEO my rear end. The Reason you get mentioned as a head coach canidate is for your playcalling abilities. From my view the HC who get fired are the ones who are no longer involved in game day decisions such as playcalling....
Playcalling abilities? It isn't like it is magic.
“As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.”-- ---Ralph Waldo Emerson apparently would have been a great football coach!
But I am not talking about just "calling plays." I am talking what it is an "OC" does to put himself in a position to call plays. I am talking the involvement in the game planning stages. And part of that is staying in tune with what is happening on the x's and o's side of things.
OK, that has a little more validity, but I would still argue that the skills necessary (organization, critical thinking, teaching/mentorship) for coordinating are the same for leading an entire program.
I think the issue at hand is the "size" and scope of the program. It might be a bit much to have a HC just oversee a program of 42 kids 9-12 with no feeder programs and such. In that case, I don't know if that is a big enough program to have someone CEO.
A program with a 120-150 kids 9-12...that wants to have separate frosh, soph, jv and varsity teams...has one or more feeder schools, I think there is plenty there to CEO.
“As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.”-- ---Ralph Waldo Emerson apparently would have been a great football coach!
I once worked for a HC who was a complete control freak. While I was "officially" the O/C, it was not "my" offense. I had NO input in the practice schedule, and had very little to no say over who played where, and very little of my philosophy was incorporated into the offense.
This carried over to all aspects of the football program...off-season training, uniforms, leadership development, motivation and incentive programs, etc, etc. Every time I would present an idea to the HC, it would get shot down in flames along with a lengthy response about why the idea was stupid and wouldn't work.
The thing is, that gets REALLY old...when you are trying to make an impact on kids and trying to positively contribute to the program but the HC is going to do it "his way" come h e l l or high water, it really grinds you down when nothing you suggest is considered.
Eventually, I just completely shut down. When the HC would present new ideas or suggestions, I would siimply agree and sign off because it didn't really matter what I thought anyway. I also stopped giving suggestions and recommendations even though the way we did certain things was ate up beyond belief.
Is that wrong? Probably. But, like I said, there has to be SOME give and take. I understand that the head coach has final say, but when every one of your suggestions and recommendations is reduced to a smoldering pile of rubble, that is the natural order of things.