|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 8:03:25 GMT -6
I didn't want to hijack another thread but have been thinking about this.
You are a sub par or even middle of the road program. Let's assume the school is open enrollment like the case in the other thread that I referenced.
Do you "run what you know" (double wing, wing t, veer) that is considered unconventional, or do you run something a little flashier in hopes of getting athletes your way to get over the hump?
Is it beneficial to be unconventional if it is dissuading good athletes from wanting to play for you?
Is it wrong to sell out and run 4 wide sets and chuck the ball around just in hopes of getting athletes that still aren't guaranteed to come?
I know when I was at a school a few years ago and we switched over to flexbone we lost quite a few kids who just didn't want to play in that system.
Just thinking aloud here guys. Hopefully some more experienced coaches than myself can chime in with some wisdom.
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 8:16:11 GMT -6
Obviously what's better for the team, hence I said team and not program,... is run what you know as long as your personnel can handle it. I also know sometimes running what you know may not be well liked by the parents, fans, even the players sometimes. So one could argue running what you know may not be best for the program if you can't sell it to the team.
One of our former freshmen volunteer coaches was hired in a pinch last minute in August as the varsity HC of his Alma mater a town over from us. He knows the double wing very well yet is running spread over there. I'm not sure it would have made a difference but they aren't doing well at all....what would people expect anyway from a new coach hired last minute with no significant varsity coaching experience, but I think he should have run what he knew best.
Our new HC has always been a spread guy, but he had the balls to realize it didn't fit our personnel and in mid August made the decision to go all in on the single wing. We have been sub par at best for about 8 years. We are off to a great start this year and things have turned around. Our HC went away from what he knew and hired a single wing OC he had never met before August. Gamble has paid off.
|
|
|
|
Post by **** on Oct 16, 2016 8:22:51 GMT -6
We run UBSW and there are maybe 2 kids (sophomores) walking the halls that could help us but not at the varsity level. We have low 40's this year which is the most we've ever had since I've been here. We have roughly 250 kids in the school.
IMO kids don't watch football on TV anymore. They don't care what the system is, let alone know what it is. They just want to win. We've scored 21 - 56 points in all our games this year. We can put up points.
The best team in our classification has roughly 400 kids in the school and about 70 kids on the team, and they run DTDW. Why do they have so many kids running DTDW? Because they've won the state title for 5 years in a row. Winning cures everything.
If a kid doesn't want to 'play in the flexbone offense' he can play defense. If he doesn't want to do that either, he has no value to the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Oct 16, 2016 8:29:51 GMT -6
I know this doesn't really answer the question, but lately high school spread offenses are so boring. Went and watched my nephew play two Thursdays ago (we played on Friday). He plays for a team that was in Alabama 7A championship last year. Playing another good 7A region foe. Both teams in gun and spread. Offenses boring as could be. I am not saying boring is bad. But obviously the conundrum is to try and be flashy. I would say to add some stuff in to your offense to help your offense. If you never throw, that will mean you won't get good receivers and a good throwing qb to transfer in. But if you never throw, that is bad offense, not just boring offense. About the flexbone comment above from ****. I agree!! But let me make another point. Flexbone vs spread as far as personnel goes. QB - really about the same nowadays. You run option and you have 4 deep threats! FB - go to running back. You will get the ball, just like you do if you are the single running back. The two SE's - these guys will be your two best receivers from the spread. Let's face it, most teams only have two guys that they really throw to. I know, I know, that is not 100% true. But it isn't 100% true in the flexbone either, because you can also throw to the hb's! I would rather be a SE in a flexbone offense that is willing to throw, than a receiver in the spread. HB's - would much rather be a HB in the flexbone than the 3rd or 4th best reciever in the spread where you get 10-20 catches in a season. You could easily get 10+ carries and a couple of catches per GAME! I realize that the HB's aren't the 3rd and 4th best receivers from spread. Just making a point. Main point, coach what you know and what gives you the best chance to win. But, also be flexible enough and learn enough abut your offense so that it shares the ball with as many guys as possible and you can throw. This will make you better and tougher to defend and hopefully get guys to want to come to your program! Side note, we threw 20 first half td passes in 2012 out of the wing t!!! We share the ball and are willing to throw it! |
|
|
|
Post by bignose on Oct 16, 2016 8:42:51 GMT -6
Winning tends to attract talent.
You may end up attracting the type of talent to match your system.
So, if you are, say, a Double Wing team, and winning, you may not attract the top flight QBs and Wide receiver types, but you may end up with some dominating linemen who can run block, and backs who can pack the mail.
Or, as the talent level improves, you can adjust your play selection to what the talent can accomplish, i.e. DW programs adding a Spread series to take advantage of a talented throwing QB.
I do not buy into "prepare them for the next level" argument. The Colleges are going to recruit athletes and fit them into their system. Your first and foremost job as a coach is to find the best way to have your team win.
If you change systems to something sexier, and lose, you aren't helping yourself in the recruiting battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Oct 16, 2016 8:51:39 GMT -6
We are Wing T, we aren't losing kids because of it. We lose athletes because football is hard and they'd rather play easier sports and burn up on the weekends.
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 8:56:50 GMT -6
Winning tends to attract talent. You may end up attracting the type of talent to match your system. So, if you are, say, a Double Wing team, and winning, you may not attract the top flight QBs and Wide receiver types, but you may end up with some dominating linemen who can run block, and backs who can pack the mail. Or, as the talent level improves, you can adjust your play selection to what the talent can accomplish, i.e. DW programs adding a Spread series to take advantage of a talented throwing QB. I do not buy into "prepare them for the next level" argument. The Colleges are going to recruit athletes and fit them into their system. Your first and foremost job as a coach is to find the best way to have your team win. If you change systems to something sexier, and lose, you aren't helping yourself in the recruiting battle. This is our goal. As I said in my previous post, our new HC loves the spread, knows it very well, started to install it over the summer, but come late July we were looking for something else. We felt that if we ran spread we could be a 6-5 team (we haven't won more than 5 games in about 5 years), but if we ran a more hard-nosed heavy run, smash mouth offense we could win 8 or 9 games this season. We chose to go the smash mouth route. Our first stop was North Haven HS in CT. They ran a morphed offense of the tradional UB Single Wing and spread. They had a FCS/DII QB, yet 75% of the time ran UBSW. When they ran this he was the weak side TE. At any time without changing personnel, they shifted into spread sets. Our goal is to eventually have the ability to do this and we think we can start next season. North Haven was/is so good at this is because they practice spread 80% of the time in practice. They don't need to spend a ton of time on the SW in practice because their youth teams along with their freshmen all run the single wing. By the time they hit JV and Varsity they know the single wing like the back of their hand. |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 9:10:31 GMT -6
Good comments guys. Not trying to turn this into a which offense is best pissing match either.
I have run pro-style, spread, and flexbone offenses in the past. If I was named HC tomorrow I myself would look at my athletes and probably run some semblance of a triple option system depending on a few other factors.
Right now I am at a school where we run a multiple offense, but tend to be more spread. I have the dudes to throw the ball 30+ times a game on most teams, and for me to watch and call the offense it is boring as hell. We are winning though, and the kids are having fun.
I agree with above that kids just want to win. At my flexbone stop I just don't think they understood what we were trying to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by morris on Oct 16, 2016 9:18:04 GMT -6
You can be a hard nosed running team in a spread look and you can sling it all around the field in a wing-t. You can dress up what you do and make it look flashy while doing what you do. Hugh Wyatt now runs his DW stuff out of a gun but everything else is pretty much the same. Wing-t, I, DW can all be adjusted. It's the blocking schemes that drive the offense. Granted with each offense there is a little more like the wing-t ball handing and multiple threats or SW/DW using some devotion or massive numbers but all those things can either be kept to a degree or replaced.
|
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Oct 16, 2016 9:18:47 GMT -6
IMO it's hard to win if you run a system that you're not familiar with because when you play a good team, you won't know how to adjust to what they're doing to you which means you'll lose to teams you're supposed to lose to, but it can also mean you lose to teams you're supposed to beat because you don't have solutions to the problems you're facing.
|
|
|
|
Post by CanyonCoach on Oct 16, 2016 11:23:17 GMT -6
This is a slippery slope. We spent the entire off-season getting ready to make the switch to a pistol wing-T offense. We had been a pistol zone team that was about 50/50 run pass. We put in time and energy and worked with the athletes as much as we are allowed and felt pretty good about it during camp in the summer and when the fall practices started up still looked pretty good. Game 1= 31 carries for 94 yards only completed 4 passes for 67 yards. Game 2 22 carries for 28 yards and down 2 scores in the fourth quarter and aired things out to end up throwing for 260. Game 3 27 carries for 56 yards and passed for 40. OK getting the idea...
Reverted back to zone schemes and start putting the ball in the air---comfort level goes through the roof with athletes and coaches..Won the last 2 games and rushed for over 350yds in those games and threw for over 575. Do what you know and what the kids/coaches are comfortable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Oct 16, 2016 13:35:05 GMT -6
We run UBSW and there are maybe 2 kids (sophomores) walking the halls that could help us but not at the varsity level. We have low 40's this year which is the most we've ever had since I've been here. We have roughly 250 kids in the school. IMO kids don't watch football on TV anymore. They don't care what the system is, let alone know what it is. They just want to win. We've scored 21 - 56 points in all our games this year. We can put up points. The best team in our classification has roughly 400 kids in the school and about 70 kids on the team, and they run DTDW. Why do they have so many kids running DTDW? Because they've won the state title for 5 years in a row. Winning cures everything. If a kid doesn't want to 'play in the flexbone offense' he can play defense. If he doesn't want to do that either, he has no value to the team. What!? I thought kids today only cares about looking like guys on tv and their own stats and they're selfish and don't care about the team? |
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 16, 2016 13:45:55 GMT -6
Always run what you know and believe in. If you think you need to go in another direction offensively - and most of us have been at the crossroads before - then go learn another system in the offseason and implement it.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 16, 2016 14:16:36 GMT -6
Is it wrong to sell out and run 4 wide sets and chuck the ball around just in hopes of getting athletes that still aren't guaranteed to come? First--why does one assume "athletes" will choose to play football if they are running 4 wide, but not if they are running Wing T Second-- keep in mind football games are most often won by good FOOTBALL PLAYERS as opposed to just good athletes. My sample size might not be as big as other's here, but in my experience the "athletes" that had to be recruited to come out for WR positions didn't pan out. And if you aren't successful running 4 wide sets, the pack it in anyway, and you are further behind. Lastly, and I know this sounds like a "who has the chalk last" argument, but (again, just in my experience) it seems like avg to bad 4 wide spread teams are just SO easy to defend. |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 14:28:33 GMT -6
Is it wrong to sell out and run 4 wide sets and chuck the ball around just in hopes of getting athletes that still aren't guaranteed to come? First--why does one assume "athletes" will choose to play football if they are running 4 wide, but not if they are running Wing T Second-- keep in mind football games are most often won by good FOOTBALL PLAYERS as opposed to just good athletes. My sample size might not be as big as other's here, but in my experience the "athletes" that had to be recruited to come out for WR positions didn't pan out. And if you aren't successful running 4 wide sets, the pack it in anyway, and you are further behind. Lastly, and I know this sounds like a "who has the chalk last" argument, but (again, just in my experience) it seems like avg to bad 4 wide spread teams are just SO easy to defend. I think it is all in how you sell the system. If those athletes watch football, they still have probably never seen the Wing T. I think that the Wing T is a great offense. That's a tougher sell on the 6'4 WR and his parents though, or on the 6'5 QB who is a gunslinger and getting looked at by B1G schools. |
|
|
|
Post by nstanley on Oct 16, 2016 16:00:16 GMT -6
I have always subscribed to the following when selecting a scheme:
1. Be good or be different. If you don't have the personnel, expertise, resources to run a system and be the best at it in your area, find something that makes you tough to prepare for.
2. My experience with having less talent/numbers than the competition, is that wing offenses allow you be flexible with your talent and help you out-execute the opposition. Misdirection and deception is also a big advantage to Wing schemes.
We run the single wing and one draw back has been that we're not flush with traditional QB's and receivers (one reason we went that direction in the first place). The question is whether we lack them because of the system we run or do we have to run the system we do because we lack them?
I do know that there are spread teams in our league that are struggling with numbers despite the fact they've been running their systems for several years. There are so many moving pieces to building a program that the offense you run is just one part of why kids come out and why you're successful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 16:03:20 GMT -6
I didn't want to hijack another thread but have been thinking about this. You are a sub par or even middle of the road program. Let's assume the school is open enrollment like the case in the other thread that I referenced. Do you "run what you know" (double wing, wing t, veer) that is considered unconventional, or do you run something a little flashier in hopes of getting athletes your way to get over the hump? Is it beneficial to be unconventional if it is dissuading good athletes from wanting to play for you? Is it wrong to sell out and run 4 wide sets and chuck the ball around just in hopes of getting athletes that still aren't guaranteed to come? I know when I was at a school a few years ago and we switched over to flexbone we lost quite a few kids who just didn't want to play in that system. Just thinking allowed here guys. Hopefully some more experienced coaches than myself can chime in with some wisdom. Could go either way, it depends on whether or not you have the kids now that can make that transition or not , then the issue is is that you still need to get wins with it I personally wouldn't id just find a way to maximize what we already have I've seen jobs go vacant not too long after a complete transition in scheme. A "flashier" scheme is no guarantee you'll attract more talent, but in my experience the old saying still holds true "everybody loves a winner", but there's a caveat with that The best programs I know of don't change much year in and year out , they just kind of do what they do , and focus on their kids and doing better , they my add a wrinkle here and there , but they rarely go wholesale change...I mean look at schools like De La Salle You put a winning program out it probably won't matter what you run all that much, youll most likely attract at least a few more players, but....... depending on what it is you may dissuade a few as well, primarily with less popular schemes . I know its "new school" with the parents nowadays but I know a parent or 2 that have chosen not to play for certain schools for what they run (IE their son is an outstanding QB, but the local HS is running Single wing, or junior is a very talented pocket passer type with a bad knee, but the HS runs option, Good WR but the team is a old school full house team etc...) I agree with some of the other coaches, stay with what you do maybe open it up some |
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Oct 16, 2016 16:09:39 GMT -6
personality can be far more important than scheme...great program in ohio runs an unconventional offense, rarely throws but their HC sells that program makes it all about the kids and gets a crazy amount of athletes to buy in and sell out to it all
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 16:15:33 GMT -6
We sold the single wing to the team really well this year. Besides it fitting our personnel and style better than the spread, a big selling point was the amount of players that will actually play on Friday nights. Our spread depth would have been very thin. Maybe play 13 kids on offense. In the single wing we get in 17 or 18 kids on fridays.
|
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Oct 16, 2016 16:22:41 GMT -6
used to be a DTDW team.
Really hard to get athletes into the school (Your Wr's are your Db's, so not splitting out WR's meant not having an athletic secondary)
Being one dimensional and having a Run:Pass ratio of 99:1 solidified this.
The system added a special mentality to the team, we were able to beat up on bigger teams by grinding them with the double wing, (which was very effective when the spread craze hit our league)
imo, have a system that will cater to your personnel, but more importantly bust your a$$ on getting better personnel in the first place.
Right now we are a spread team.
The great thing about the spread is that we adjust to personnel, who says we can't go double tights and pound the rock if we have the guys for it?, and once they crowd the box we can have the flexibility to chuck it on the soft coverage, versus being the double wing team we used to be and continuing to run into the wall and waiting for it to break.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolverine55 on Oct 16, 2016 16:28:52 GMT -6
We run UBSW and there are maybe 2 kids (sophomores) walking the halls that could help us but not at the varsity level. We have low 40's this year which is the most we've ever had since I've been here. We have roughly 250 kids in the school. IMO kids don't watch football on TV anymore. They don't care what the system is, let alone know what it is. They just want to win. We've scored 21 - 56 points in all our games this year. We can put up points. The best team in our classification has roughly 400 kids in the school and about 70 kids on the team, and they run DTDW. Why do they have so many kids running DTDW? Because they've won the state title for 5 years in a row. Winning cures everything. If a kid doesn't want to 'play in the flexbone offense' he can play defense. If he doesn't want to do that either, he has no value to the team. I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I totally agree with this. I think winning and personality of the HC is largely what draws kids out. An example I have is a school in Western IL (approximately 2000 students) that has always been a basketball power and very poor at football. There program numbers have swelled--as well as wins--over the last five or so years...and they run double tight Wing T as their base offense. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 16:33:15 GMT -6
used to be a DTDW team. Really hard to get athletes into the school (Your Wr's are your Db's, so not splitting out WR's meant not having an athletic secondary) Being one dimensional and having a Run:Pass ratio of 99:1 solidified this. The system added a special mentality to the team, we were able to beat up on bigger teams by grinding them with the double wing, (which was very effective when the spread craze hit our league) imo, have a system that will cater to your personnel, but more importantly bust your a$$ on getting better personnel in the first place. Right now we are a spread team. The great thing about the spread is that we adjust to personnel, who says we can't go double tights and pound the rock if we have the guys for it?, and once they crowd the box we can have the flexibility to chuck it on the soft coverage, versus being the double wing team we used to be and continuing to run into the wall and waiting for it to break. From being on this site for so long, every aspect of high school football is different from state to state, even district to district. When you say it was hard to bring in kids when you were DW....what does that mean because I have heard it a lot on here when this topic comes up. If you're a private school then I obviously understand what you mean, but if you're a public school what other choice to kids have that live in the school district besides leaving for a private school? If you're a public school don't you just get the kids that live in that town or district? We are a public school and no matter what offense we run, we're getting the same kids no matter what. |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 16:34:51 GMT -6
used to be a DTDW team. Really hard to get athletes into the school (Your Wr's are your Db's, so not splitting out WR's meant not having an athletic secondary) Being one dimensional and having a Run:Pass ratio of 99:1 solidified this. The system added a special mentality to the team, we were able to beat up on bigger teams by grinding them with the double wing, (which was very effective when the spread craze hit our league) imo, have a system that will cater to your personnel, but more importantly bust your a$$ on getting better personnel in the first place. Right now we are a spread team. The great thing about the spread is that we adjust to personnel, who says we can't go double tights and pound the rock if we have the guys for it?, and once they crowd the box we can have the flexibility to chuck it on the soft coverage, versus being the double wing team we used to be and continuing to run into the wall and waiting for it to break. From being on this site for so long, every aspect of high school football is different from state to state, even district to district. When you say it was hard to bring in kids when you were DW....what does that mean? If you're a private school then I obviously understand what you mean, but if you're a public school what other choice to kids have that live in the school district besides leaving for a private school? If you're a public school don't you just get the kids that live in that town or district? We are a public school and no matter what offense we run, we're getting the same kids no matter what. Not every where. We aren't, but a lot of neighboring districts are open enrollment. While athletes technically can't transfer for reasons related to athletics, good luck proving it. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 16:39:57 GMT -6
From being on this site for so long, every aspect of high school football is different from state to state, even district to district. When you say it was hard to bring in kids when you were DW....what does that mean? If you're a private school then I obviously understand what you mean, but if you're a public school what other choice to kids have that live in the school district besides leaving for a private school? If you're a public school don't you just get the kids that live in that town or district? We are a public school and no matter what offense we run, we're getting the same kids no matter what. Not every where. We aren't, but a lot of neighboring districts are open enrollment. While athletes technically can't transfer for reasons related to athletics, good luck proving it. Most of our towns here have 1 high school, and the ones that have multiple public schools, I don't think it's open enrollment. So someone moving to a different town or district just to switch football teams is very rare. I can see the point in districts that have open enrollment. If the kids can choose between 3 schools without any other part of his family's life changing, like moving, then it's not surprising they choose what they think is the best option whether it be for a perennial power house, or because of a particular offense, coaches style etc. |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 16:41:02 GMT -6
Not every where. We aren't, but a lot of neighboring districts are open enrollment. While athletes technically can't transfer for reasons related to athletics, good luck proving it. Most of our towns here have 1 high school, and the ones that have multiple public schools, I don't think it's open enrollment. So someone moving to a different town or district just to switch football teams is very rare. I can see the point in districts that have open enrollment. If the kids can choose between 3 schools without any other part of his family's life changing, like moving, then it's not surprising they choose what they think is the best option whether it be for a perennial power house, or because of a particular offensr, etc. I am talking even in the next town over. If we run double wing, nothing stops them from commuting over 1 town. The next town over is only a 15 minute ride to school. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 16:43:38 GMT -6
We run the pistol wing T and we're good at it. We don't have a quarterback that can throw worth a darn and haven't for many years. We've had running backs show interest in the school but receivers and quarterbacks keep walking. Two years ago we had a middle school quarterback that was a phenom but also a headcase. When he graduated middle school he left for a nearby private school with a huck & chuck offense and started as a freshman. Recently talked to his coach who loves the kid's talent but is already questioning if the juice is worth the squeeze.
Our offense may chase some kids away but brings others in. My $.02.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 16, 2016 17:35:03 GMT -6
We run the pistol wing T and we're good at it. We don't have a quarterback that can throw worth a darn and haven't for many years. We've had running backs show interest in the school but receivers and quarterbacks keep walking. Two years ago we had a middle school quarterback that was a phenom but also a headcase. When he graduated middle school he left for a nearby private school with a huck & chuck offense and started as a freshman. Recently talked to his coach who loves the kid's talent but is already questioning if the juice is worth the squeeze. Our offense may chase some kids away but brings others in. My $.02. Without sounding like an a$$hat have you tried COACHING a quarterback??? Spend $200 Invest in the Darrin Slack materials. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 16, 2016 17:50:53 GMT -6
Most of our towns here have 1 high school, and the ones that have multiple public schools, I don't think it's open enrollment. So someone moving to a different town or district just to switch football teams is very rare. I can see the point in districts that have open enrollment. If the kids can choose between 3 schools without any other part of his family's life changing, like moving, then it's not surprising they choose what they think is the best option whether it be for a perennial power house, or because of a particular offensr, etc. I am talking even in the next town over. If we run double wing, nothing stops them from commuting over 1 town. The next town over is only a 15 minute ride to school. How can they go there legally if they don't live in the town? Use a false address of a friend? |
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Oct 16, 2016 17:52:15 GMT -6
Most of our towns here have 1 high school, and the ones that have multiple public schools, I don't think it's open enrollment. So someone moving to a different town or district just to switch football teams is very rare. I can see the point in districts that have open enrollment. If the kids can choose between 3 schools without any other part of his family's life changing, like moving, then it's not surprising they choose what they think is the best option whether it be for a perennial power house, or because of a particular offensr, etc. I am talking even in the next town over. If we run double wing, nothing stops them from commuting over 1 town. The next town over is only a 15 minute ride to school. Because they can. If a school is open enrollment you can go as long as you live in the county. |
|
|
|
Post by morris on Oct 16, 2016 17:52:56 GMT -6
personality can be far more important than scheme...great program in ohio runs an unconventional offense, rarely throws but their HC sells that program makes it all about the kids and gets a crazy amount of athletes to buy in and sell out to it all What's the offense? The simple answer is if you win games you get kids. Every example I see just about can be adapted. A really good wr in the wing-t can be just as dangerous if not more than in the spread. Same thing with a full house offense. People are being short sighted |
|
