|
Post by fantom on Jan 26, 2017 12:18:45 GMT -6
The "Chalk Wars" thread got me thinking. I find that I'm less and less interested in putting my Xs against somebody else's Os, especially as a strictly hypothetical exercise. That's not to say that I don't care about Xs and Os. I'm heading to a clinic next week and I'm excited. I'll even go to hear the NFL guys. I'm interested in schematics but not in a vacuum. Do others feel that they've become less interested in chalk wars as they've been in the business longer?
|
|
|
Post by hsrose on Jan 26, 2017 12:24:15 GMT -6
As they say, the X's and O's are the easy part.
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Jan 26, 2017 12:32:29 GMT -6
The easy answer for me is yes a little bit but, a big reason for that is as I've gotten older and more experienced I've realized that X's and O's have a lot less of an impact on winning than I thought when I was younger.
As for chalk war type exercises....I've never really held much weight in those because most of the time we're drawing up stuff knowing what the other guy is drawing and vice versa. It's like both teams knowing what the other is running on the next play. I can do that by myself.
What I think would be pretty cool, but kind of dorky I guess, but if both coaches draw up an O and D play without the other seeing it, then show eachother. See who theoretically would have won the play then discuss.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jan 26, 2017 12:43:25 GMT -6
The easy answer for me is yes a little bit but, a big reason for that is as I've gotten older and more experienced I've realized that X's and O's have a lot less of an impact on winning than I thought when I was younger. As for chalk war type exercises....I've never really held much weight in those because most of the time we're drawing up stuff knowing what the other guy is drawing and vice versa. It's like both teams knowing what the other is running on the next play. I can do that by myself. What I think would be pretty cool, but kind of dorky I guess, but if both coaches draw up an O and D play without the other seeing it, then show eachother. See who theoretically would have won the play then discuss.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 26, 2017 13:04:08 GMT -6
Given equal talent and coaching, Chalk Wars is nothing more than Tic-Tac-Toe.
|
|
|
Post by fshamrock on Jan 26, 2017 14:01:33 GMT -6
I think it loses it's mystique like anything else, so often we find that something that we think is a little bit new and different is the same stuff called by different names. ultimately, the X's and O's boils down to "I will get six people here against your five" "well then I will move TWO people over there, now I have more" "then I will do the OTHER thing where you have less people" "I will move other people there"
it's awesome the stuff that really helps me that i need a ton of help with is the way that things are taught, always trying to find better ways to communicate to players and make concepts simple to them. for instance, we had a way to complicated way to spin our safety to the seam or the flat against motions/formations
so then I heard about how at Bama they have Rhonda, Rita, Loura and Lisa
Lisa - left safety spins inside of #1 to the seam Rita - Right safety spins inside Rhonda - right spins outside (flat) Lori - left spins outside
that's the good stuff right there simple, communicable, effective.....drawing up a safety spinning down to motion doesn't much move me anymore, tell me how ya teach it so they get it right all the time and play fast.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Jan 26, 2017 14:04:51 GMT -6
Like most here, after I coached for a while I realized its not about having 50 million ways to move your Xs or Os and out scheme everyone. In regards to Xs and Os its more important to have a sound, executable scheme that can answer whatever the opponent throws at you while being diverse enough to not let them zero in on any one thing you do. You coach long enough and you eventually develop the system that you like; it doesn't mean you stop learning or adjusting, rather you just tweak here or there.
Also, as HS coaches (which most of us are) we realize that talent and technique are far more important than X & O type stuff. The NFL and big time college coaches that Ive worked with put a lot more emphasis on X & O, I think partly because talent is more homogeneous, partly because techniques are a lot more developed, and partly because they buy into their own BS.
Lastly, and I hope this part doesn't come up as me being a know it all (because I certainly do not know it all) but there really is only so much you can do with Xs & Os. I've been drawing up plays for fun since I was 10; and while its fun to do you get to a point that there are only so many ways they can move- offense gets 11 Os, 7 on the LOS and 5 eligible; defense gets 11 xs to stop em. There are only so many ways to move them around, after a while you've gone over darn near all of them; and more importantly I don't need my players trying to remember all of them.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Jan 26, 2017 14:53:26 GMT -6
When I first started I wasn't that much into the X and O then for a number of years I really was..these last few years not so much
|
|
|
Post by coachluey on Jan 26, 2017 14:57:36 GMT -6
Given equal talent and coaching, Chalk Wars is nothing more than Tic-Tac-Toe. Thats my thoughts, its awesome if the x and os have the same passion, skill, strength, and speed then everything is equal. Unfortunately when you hit the field of play this O is twice a strong as this X, This X is just out there because dad said so, This X is D1 and his Opposite O is just in love with the game. I love to sit there and chalk talk but at the end of the day its not the end all be all to winning. Creating a culture, building a program, and go daddys make the winning
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jan 26, 2017 15:09:12 GMT -6
When I first started I wasn't that much into the X and O then for a number of years I really was..these last few years not so much
Feel similar to jg.
At the end I was weary of feeling like I had to outcoach our opponents on game night to have a chance.
Wished we could just line up, run some basic stuff, and be better than other guys, not have to count on my great coaching (!).
Part of that was because I had only "daddy coaches" and former players helping, so I was doing virtually everything myself. And personnel-wise we weren't very good.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 26, 2017 15:33:14 GMT -6
Given equal talent and coaching, Chalk Wars is nothing more than Tic-Tac-Toe. Thats my thoughts, its awesome if the x and os have the same passion, skill, strength, and speed then everything is equal. Unfortunately when you hit the field of play this O is twice a strong as this X, This X is just out there because dad said so, This X is D1 and his Opposite O is just in love with the game. I love to sit there and chalk talk but at the end of the day its not the end all be all to winning. Creating a culture, building a program, and go daddys make the winning Chalk talk is rarely constructive because most defensive coaches tend to plan for worst case scenarios while offensive coaches are planning on best case scenarios. "D-mn... I really don't like C1 in this situation because they run slants well. That could be be a huge gain.." "D-mn, I LOVE slants against ANY man coverage because WE'RE GOING TO SCORE!!!"
|
|
|
Post by 53 on Jan 26, 2017 21:08:47 GMT -6
Way more interested in time management, practice structure, and drills.
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Jan 27, 2017 7:03:11 GMT -6
What 53 said plus athlete building and building the culture at the school are always more interesting to me than the X's and O's. At times I love the x and O stuff but not enough to do it ALL the time. I'd have pursued college coaching if I wanted to think about them all the time.
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 27, 2017 13:39:33 GMT -6
I lost my interest in Xs and Os in college when a group of fellow players tried to tell me the goal of every single play ever ran on offense is to score a touchdown. I said if it's 3rd and 1 you run something to move the chains. They disagreed. I said that you may hope they all break, but some play calls should depend on situation. They said I was an idiot.
All of these players were in the college's football coaching course taught by our HC. It was at that point I realized a lot of things about coaching. 1. Just because you have a certain job, it doesn't mean you know what you're talking about 2. Why we ran a lot of the plays we ran in certain situations in college 3. There's more than 1 way to skin a cat 4. Trying to prove your dick is bigger usually is an exercise in futility
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Jan 27, 2017 13:45:33 GMT -6
As I get older i'm not any less interested in x and o's. I want to improve mine by weighing and measuring the best and I want to understand yours. What has changed is i'm more interested in every other aspect of coaching now than i was 24 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jan 27, 2017 14:04:26 GMT -6
The "Chalk Wars" thread got me thinking. I find that I'm less and less interested in putting my Xs against somebody else's Os, especially as a strictly hypothetical exercise. That's not to say that I don't care about Xs and Os. I'm heading to a clinic next week and I'm excited. I'll even go to hear the NFL guys. I'm interested in schematics but not in a vacuum. Do others feel that they've become less interested in chalk wars as they've been in the business longer? Have you lost interest or have you been around long enough to have a good idea of how to run each type of system so you already feel pretty good about x and o type stuff? At this point I'm probably not going to get anything out of listening to a guy, at any level, tell me how to block power; but a younger guy could come away with a lot of good information.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 29, 2017 9:07:02 GMT -6
The "Chalk Wars" thread got me thinking. I find that I'm less and less interested in putting my Xs against somebody else's Os, especially as a strictly hypothetical exercise. That's not to say that I don't care about Xs and Os. I'm heading to a clinic next week and I'm excited. I'll even go to hear the NFL guys. I'm interested in schematics but not in a vacuum. Do others feel that they've become less interested in chalk wars as they've been in the business longer? I think schemes are interesting but not comparing them in a vacuum as you say because who the Xs and Os represent, and how they move greatly change things.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Jan 29, 2017 11:55:35 GMT -6
As they say, the X's and O's are the easy part. I am more interested in TEACHING X and O's than learning about them
|
|
|
Post by aceback76 on Jan 29, 2017 12:01:38 GMT -6
The "Chalk Wars" thread got me thinking. I find that I'm less and less interested in putting my Xs against somebody else's Os, especially as a strictly hypothetical exercise. That's not to say that I don't care about Xs and Os. I'm heading to a clinic next week and I'm excited. I'll even go to hear the NFL guys. I'm interested in schematics but not in a vacuum. Do others feel that they've become less interested in chalk wars as they've been in the business longer? It is TRULY the Jimmy & Joes rather than the X's & O's!
|
|
karjaw
Freshmen Member
Posts: 35
|
Post by karjaw on Feb 28, 2017 4:38:22 GMT -6
Gentlemen What you are all talking about is: FOOTBALL BEING LIKE CHESS.
This is where X and Os come into play, but the problem with comparing Football to Chess is that both players have the same game pieces at the start. Same game pieces means: 1. Strategy is a huge key.
The experienced Coach learns that not only does he start with different game pieces then his opponent he also knows that he can make his pawns into Bishops or Knights and maybe even into Queens.
IMAGINE YOU STARTING A CHESS GAME WITH ALL QUEENS AND YOUR OPPONENT HAD A PAWNS. Even with the best strategy (X and Os) it will still be tough to lose to that opponent.
IMAGINE YOU STARTING THE GAME WITH ALL QUEENS AND YOUR OPPONENT HAD PAWNS AND WHEN HE TOOK ONE OF YOUR GAME PIECES YOU WERE ALLOW TO TAKE IT BACK JUST ONE TIME. Some coaches has more advantages coming into the game then others not just the better players. (Better support system...more money in budget... best assistants etc.)
We as coaches understand two things: 1. Not every Coach who walks on that game field on Friday night comes on there with the same set of circumstances. A. You might have a program where ADMIN fights you all of the way and your opponent has all of the support. B. You might have a program where your sharing athletes with other sports and your opponent has them in the off-season and has money to go to Spring camps and summer training. The list goes on.
So what Coaches do are: 1. See if there is a way despite these circumstances strategically that can overcome (latest and greatest X and Os clinic) 2. See if there is a way to take a pawn and make it into a higher level piece (weight room, team building, mental training, practice routine and techniques.)
We has coaches have to do what is necessary for us to be able to look ourselves in the mirror and be able to say: Have I exhausted everything I could in order to not only come up with the best strategy, but also make my pieces better than when I got them? If the answer is yes then we need to be happy with ourselves and sleep just fine knowing we did all we could to help these kids win. Hope it helps Coach Wright
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 28, 2017 8:13:24 GMT -6
I like to share and read shared information on Xs and Os. Talking about them is fine as long as it's a discussion and not a Chalk War. The ol' white board room here was fun for awhile but too many coaches were a--es about it. In one evening, I would learn that the "spread" was unstoppable, the Double Wing was a true Facemelter, the 3-4 was a terrible defense against everything and the 4-3 could stop anything and everything...
But, I am far more interested in the intricacies of schemes: how they're coached (drills, cue words, etc..), what they ask their players to do, etc..etc.. Basically, I always looking for ways to make schemes simpler to teach and learning how to teach them properly.
|
|
|
Post by eaglemountie on Feb 28, 2017 8:56:27 GMT -6
If my Xs are bigger, faster and stronger than your Os they really don't matter that much. When they are close to equal is when they matter more...
|
|
|
Post by coachfloyd on Feb 28, 2017 9:08:19 GMT -6
I think this describes what most of you are talking about and why it means different things to different people. from shutterfinger.typepad.com/shutterfinger/2011/02/in-martial-arts-as-in-life-you-dont-win-the-trophy-without-a-fight-before-i-learned-the-art-a-punch-was-just-a-punch-an.html"Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick." -- Bruce Lee One of the major influences throughout my life has been the years of martial arts training I took during my twenties. I first studied under Steve Sanders (now Sifu Steve Muhammad), one of the foremost practictioners of American Kenpo Karate as developed by Ed Parker. I then studied the Filipino arts of Kali, Escrima, and Arnis from Dan Inosanto, who was a friend and protege Bruce Lee. That's when I first heard the quote above, which I must confess didn't make much sense to me at the time. My moment of enlightenment didn't come until a few years later, when I began studying Zen and Tai Chi Chuan. Maybe you're wondering what any of this has to do with photography. Patience, grasshopper. The simple explanation is this: Before you begin learning an art such as photography, the techniques it takes to practice the art are undifferentiated to you. All cameras and lenses look pretty much alike, you're not aware of differences in quality and direction of light, and differences in visual style appear subtle at best. As you begin to learn the art, however, your mind and awareness begin to expand. You see things you never noticed before. Things that were once unimportant become extremely important. It's easy to become obsessed with a particular style or technique, the Right Way to do something, or owning The Perfect Lens. You might even look down on photographers who lack your refined knowledge and sensibilities. If you're fortunate and you stick with it long enough you'll find yourself coming out the other side. Where you were once focused on differences you now begin to look at things more holistically. Equipment and techniques are simply means to an end and your vision is far more important than the tools it takes to achieve it. A camera is just a camera, a lens is just a lens, and software is just software. In short, the path to mastery is to integrate what you learn so that it becomes as much a part of you as the way you walk, the way you talk, and the way you sign your name. You do them all without thinking and without effort, yet they express more about who you really are than all the clever tricks you know or masks you wear.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Mar 2, 2017 8:35:47 GMT -6
I think this describes what most of you are talking about and why it means different things to different people. from shutterfinger.typepad.com/shutterfinger/2011/02/in-martial-arts-as-in-life-you-dont-win-the-trophy-without-a-fight-before-i-learned-the-art-a-punch-was-just-a-punch-an.html"Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick." -- Bruce Lee One of the major influences throughout my life has been the years of martial arts training I took during my twenties. I first studied under Steve Sanders (now Sifu Steve Muhammad), one of the foremost practictioners of American Kenpo Karate as developed by Ed Parker. I then studied the Filipino arts of Kali, Escrima, and Arnis from Dan Inosanto, who was a friend and protege Bruce Lee. That's when I first heard the quote above, which I must confess didn't make much sense to me at the time. My moment of enlightenment didn't come until a few years later, when I began studying Zen and Tai Chi Chuan. Maybe you're wondering what any of this has to do with photography. Patience, grasshopper. The simple explanation is this: Before you begin learning an art such as photography, the techniques it takes to practice the art are undifferentiated to you. All cameras and lenses look pretty much alike, you're not aware of differences in quality and direction of light, and differences in visual style appear subtle at best. As you begin to learn the art, however, your mind and awareness begin to expand. You see things you never noticed before. Things that were once unimportant become extremely important. It's easy to become obsessed with a particular style or technique, the Right Way to do something, or owning The Perfect Lens. You might even look down on photographers who lack your refined knowledge and sensibilities. If you're fortunate and you stick with it long enough you'll find yourself coming out the other side. Where you were once focused on differences you now begin to look at things more holistically. Equipment and techniques are simply means to an end and your vision is far more important than the tools it takes to achieve it. A camera is just a camera, a lens is just a lens, and software is just software. In short, the path to mastery is to integrate what you learn so that it becomes as much a part of you as the way you walk, the way you talk, and the way you sign your name. You do them all without thinking and without effort, yet they express more about who you really are than all the clever tricks you know or masks you wear. wow
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Mar 2, 2017 11:58:13 GMT -6
Wax on, Wax off!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2017 16:49:35 GMT -6
When I first started I wasn't that much into the X and O then for a number of years I really was..these last few years not so much
Feel similar to jg.
At the end I was weary of feeling like I had to outcoach our opponents on game night to have a chance.
Wished we could just line up, run some basic stuff, and be better than other guys, not have to count on my great coaching (!).
Part of that was because I had only "daddy coaches" and former players helping, so I was doing virtually everything myself. And personnel-wise we weren't very good.
Shoot I'd move back to Michigan to coach with blb running that split veer
|
|
|
Post by Tooch43 on Mar 14, 2017 17:16:52 GMT -6
As I get older i'm not any less interested in x and o's. I want to improve mine by weighing and measuring the best and I want to understand yours. What has changed is i'm more interested in every other aspect of coaching now than i was 24 years ago. I agree with this whole-heartedly, but I still love X's & O's! I now realize that there are no magical schemes, but there are sound schemes. I believe film study never lies. I believe that culture is way more important than I could've imagined as a young coach and I realize that I have a long way to go in terms of understanding development of leaders and culture of success.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Mar 15, 2017 9:40:57 GMT -6
couple thoughts, didnt read the whole thing, but a good portion.
i love chalk wars. but, last guy with the grease pen wins. or whiteboard marker. lol. doesnt matter what facemelter defense is drawn up, i can draw a bodymelter offense to defeat it. whatever offense you draw up, i can draw a defense to beat that 1 too. its not the chalk wars, its the coaching talk thats going on. thats the real fun of the whole thing.
X and O, not jimmies n joes. until my jimmies n joes are so dam good, your X and O can eat a D.
up until last fall I truly thought that we could win a game or 2 by scheming, out coaching, busting our tails. it never came to frution. really didnt. we worked tirelessly with less talented kids and just knew that we could steal a game becuase we were that dam good. last fall, on a new staff, we had some talented kids that had won a total of 6 games in 3 years. we worked our butts off on the whiteboard, on the field, in the video room, etc.... and won 2 games we shouldnt have, because we out schemed and out worked our opponent. Xs and Os FINALLY MATTERED AGAIN!!!! our jimmes were not better than either of the Joes that we played and beat. so what was it? dumb luck? nope,
|
|
|
Post by BrendanQB on Apr 11, 2017 12:00:49 GMT -6
The easy answer for me is yes a little bit but, a big reason for that is as I've gotten older and more experienced I've realized that X's and O's have a lot less of an impact on winning than I thought when I was younger. As for chalk war type exercises....I've never really held much weight in those because most of the time we're drawing up stuff knowing what the other guy is drawing and vice versa. It's like both teams knowing what the other is running on the next play. I can do that by myself. What I think would be pretty cool, but kind of dorky I guess, but if both coaches draw up an O and D play without the other seeing it, then show eachother. See who theoretically would have won the play then discuss. I'd be interested to hear more on this perspective. I'm still that young coach who spends a lot of time on X's and O's because I see a lot of value in that.
|
|
|
Post by eaglemountie on Apr 11, 2017 13:09:25 GMT -6
It's a necessary evil to understand scheme, if not you will get out-coached on Friday nights when talent is close or close to even...
Otherwise, the jimmies and joes dictate all...
|
|