|
Post by huddlehut on Mar 30, 2017 6:19:25 GMT -6
I never said that academics wasn't important! I said that there are a lot of staff's that waste time in the way that they handle academics. Read the thread. This thread that we are currently on is about EFFICIENCY. There are a lot of coaches on that thread who are making "academics" too time consuming and inefficient. It ain't that hard to get kids to do schoolwork. I would not have survived for almost three decades as an AD if my athletes were not having success in the classroom. Kids in Texas grow up knowing that they HAVE to pass their classes or become ineligible. Again, in my opinion, it comes down to expectations. Remind me how you get them to do the school work. They won't do their school work? How about allow them to fail? Let them learn a real life-lesson...or continue to coddle them. Babying our kids is why we have twenty-somethings that need "safe spaces" on college campuses.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Mar 30, 2017 8:34:33 GMT -6
Remind me how you get them to do the school work. They won't do their school work? How about allow them to fail? Let them learn a real life-lesson...or continue to coddle them. Babying our kids is why we have twenty-somethings that need "safe spaces" on college campuses. Looking at the ideas in the "Academics" thread I'm curious about your definition of coddling.
|
|
|
Post by fshamrock on Mar 30, 2017 9:14:08 GMT -6
not to move in a whole other direction, but I think us defensive guys could probably narrow down our breakdowns a bit. I don't mean to sound like a sour grapes guy, but I once worked under a DC whose philosophy was that "if hudl created a column for it..we are breaking it down"....nobody ever told him you could make our own columns or lord knows how long those saturdays might have been
I mean how specific do you need to get in order to get the information that helps you call good defenses on Friday night? I think you could be fairly effective against most teams with a much more basic breakdown
down and distance tendencies formations- but only put the formations into broad categories (ie open/closed/) personnel
I think you could get actionable data on those three categories, and save yourself a ton of time......I mean does it really help to know that when they go gun R twix left B on the right hash...they are 60% pass....
is that going to impact how you call it?
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 30, 2017 10:02:17 GMT -6
not to move in a whole other direction, but I think us defensive guys could probably narrow down our breakdowns a bit. I don't mean to sound like a sour grapes guy, but I once worked under a DC whose philosophy was that "if hudl created a column for it..we are breaking it down"....nobody ever told him you could make our own columns or lord knows how long those saturdays might have been I mean how specific do you need to get in order to get the information that helps you call good defenses on Friday night? I think you could be fairly effective against most teams with a much more basic breakdown down and distance tendencies formations- but only put the formations into broad categories (ie open/closed/) personnel I think you could get actionable data on those three categories, and save yourself a ton of time......I mean does it really help to know that when they go gun R twix left B on the right hash...they are 60% pass.... is that going to impact how you call it? Yeah, I worked with a guy who got so in depth with how he broke down formations that he lost out on the big picture. "Gun Near Ace Slot Left" would be one formation, while "Gun Near Ace Slot Right" would be a completely different one (the HUDL reports were massive and rendered virtually meaningless). You've heard the saying "you have to see the forest for the trees", well you also have to see the trees for the forest- in other words see how something small fits into the big picture. What I've found works best is to label the formations however you do, but then have a separate created column where you group them by the larger picture; ie: 11 near or 11 far. Its when you start to paint with this broad brush that tendencies with a significant sample size start to come up; moreover they are tendencies that are easily recognizable by players in a game. That being written, I wouldn't have the time to do such regrouping (let alone have time to do so with the aforementioned 15 hour limit) if I didnt plan out and delegate film breakdown work in the offseason. Thats the key, plan out an effective and efficient way to get the grunt work of film breakdown done, follow that plan; and that leaves time for the part that requires more thought.
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Mar 30, 2017 11:40:49 GMT -6
Mentioned earlier about "coddling" kids. My idea there is to push and give them opportunity to pass and be successful academically but after a while I'll cut them loose. If they can't work on grades on their own even to a minimal ability, not sure they will help me enough. I don't run any study halls. I guess I lean more towards the "hard knocks" philosophy. I am old fashioned but I want kids that want to be there, not sort of want to be there. But that's why numbers are down from 30 years ago, I guess. That being said, now that I'm at a small school will I stay true to myself.
|
|
|
Post by huddlehut on Mar 30, 2017 11:56:51 GMT -6
Mentioned earlier about "coddling" kids. My idea there is to push and give them opportunity to pass and be successful academically but after a while I'll cut them loose. If they can't work on grades on their own even to a minimal ability, not sure they will help me enough. I don't run any study halls. I guess I lean more towards the "hard knocks" philosophy. I am old fashioned but I want kids that want to be there, not sort of want to be there. But that's why numbers are down from 30 years ago, I guess. That being said, now that I'm at a small school will I stay true to myself. Amen, brother!
|
|
|
Post by 3rdandlong on Mar 30, 2017 12:21:17 GMT -6
not to move in a whole other direction, but I think us defensive guys could probably narrow down our breakdowns a bit. I don't mean to sound like a sour grapes guy, but I once worked under a DC whose philosophy was that "if hudl created a column for it..we are breaking it down"....nobody ever told him you could make our own columns or lord knows how long those saturdays might have been I mean how specific do you need to get in order to get the information that helps you call good defenses on Friday night? I think you could be fairly effective against most teams with a much more basic breakdown down and distance tendencies formations- but only put the formations into broad categories (ie open/closed/) personnel I think you could get actionable data on those three categories, and save yourself a ton of time......I mean does it really help to know that when they go gun R twix left B on the right hash...they are 60% pass.... is that going to impact how you call it? Yeah, I worked with a guy who got so in depth with how he broke down formations that he lost out on the big picture. "Gun Near Ace Slot Left" would be one formation, while "Gun Near Ace Slot Right" would be a completely different one (the HUDL reports were massive and rendered virtually meaningless). You've heard the saying "you have to see the forest for the trees", well you also have to see the trees for the forest- in other words see how something small fits into the big picture. What I've found works best is to label the formations however you do, but then have a separate created column where you group them by the larger picture; ie: 11 near or 11 far. Its when you start to paint with this broad brush that tendencies with a significant sample size start to come up; moreover they are tendencies that are easily recognizable by players in a game. That being written, I wouldn't have the time to do such regrouping (let alone have time to do so with the aforementioned 15 hour limit) if I didnt plan out and delegate film breakdown work in the offseason. Thats the key, plan out an effective and efficient way to get the grunt work of film breakdown done, follow that plan; and that leaves time for the part that requires more thought. Sounds like we once worked for the same guy. Problem for me is now I do things like that.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 30, 2017 13:46:52 GMT -6
Yeah, I worked with a guy who got so in depth with how he broke down formations that he lost out on the big picture. "Gun Near Ace Slot Left" would be one formation, while "Gun Near Ace Slot Right" would be a completely different one (the HUDL reports were massive and rendered virtually meaningless). You've heard the saying "you have to see the forest for the trees", well you also have to see the trees for the forest- in other words see how something small fits into the big picture. What I've found works best is to label the formations however you do, but then have a separate created column where you group them by the larger picture; ie: 11 near or 11 far. Its when you start to paint with this broad brush that tendencies with a significant sample size start to come up; moreover they are tendencies that are easily recognizable by players in a game. That being written, I wouldn't have the time to do such regrouping (let alone have time to do so with the aforementioned 15 hour limit) if I didnt plan out and delegate film breakdown work in the offseason. Thats the key, plan out an effective and efficient way to get the grunt work of film breakdown done, follow that plan; and that leaves time for the part that requires more thought. Sounds like we once worked for the same guy. Problem for me is now I do things like that. I think its fine (and at times beneficial) to go that in depth; the issue is when you put them all in the same column. If the whole formation is: surface formation, backfield, strength, shift, and motion, then when you get your reports you end up not being able to see big picture type stuff. You can have all that information, just break it down into categories: Ace Slot (or Gun Ace slot if you really wanted) can be the formation, Gun Nr the backfield, then Lt or Rt the strength. This way you can filter through the variables, and search for broader trends more easily.
|
|
|
Post by coachmonkey on Mar 30, 2017 14:02:20 GMT -6
not to move in a whole other direction, but I think us defensive guys could probably narrow down our breakdowns a bit. I don't mean to sound like a sour grapes guy, but I once worked under a DC whose philosophy was that "if hudl created a column for it..we are breaking it down"....nobody ever told him you could make our own columns or lord knows how long those saturdays might have been I mean how specific do you need to get in order to get the information that helps you call good defenses on Friday night? I think you could be fairly effective against most teams with a much more basic breakdown down and distance tendencies formations- but only put the formations into broad categories (ie open/closed/) personnel I think you could get actionable data on those three categories, and save yourself a ton of time......I mean does it really help to know that when they go gun R twix left B on the right hash...they are 60% pass.... is that going to impact how you call it? The problem I have is a lot of times tendencies don't matter. Teams always try to attack us differently with the exception of 1 or 2 teams. It's more like throw a lot at the wall and see what sticks. I've already cut out a lot to answer the original question. We cut out tackling circuit. Got rid of blocking circuit. Got right of agility stations. We cut out conditioning (and just practice at a high tempo). Take practice time to go over printouts of what an opponent will do rather than asking kids to watch film (they are students and need time for homework, family, and work). I personally don't feel players need a ton of film time. If they execute properly, we will be just fine. So I work on execution. We will know how to react to anything an opponent throws at us and adjust accordingly.
|
|
coachood
Sophomore Member
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence. -Vince Lombardi
Posts: 173
|
Post by coachood on Mar 30, 2017 21:17:37 GMT -6
I'd say:
10 hours practice
2 hours to break down our film(I'm more concerned with how well we execute than what the other team's doing)
2 hours to break down opponents film(delegate as much as humanly possible, one guy charts formation, another charts play, one does field position, down and distance etc.)
1 hour to come up with a game plan and make cards for practice (again, delegate responsibility)
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Mar 30, 2017 23:05:44 GMT -6
Does each coach get 15 hours? If so can they be shared among staff? If that is true I'll just take hours from a few guys on staff who don't plan jack and I'll be fine.
|
|
|
Post by funkfriss on Mar 31, 2017 9:07:03 GMT -6
Sounds like we once worked for the same guy. Problem for me is now I do things like that. I think its fine (and at times beneficial) to go that in depth; the issue is when you put them all in the same column. If the whole formation is: surface formation, backfield, strength, shift, and motion, then when you get your reports you end up not being able to see big picture type stuff. You can have all that information, just break it down into categories: Ace Slot (or Gun Ace slot if you really wanted) can be the formation, Gun Nr the backfield, then Lt or Rt the strength. This way you can filter through the variables, and search for broader trends more easily. This is why I mentioned in another thread I have found it extremely beneficial to go old school and watch the films before I break them down. I was that guy. I would get new film and immediately break them down by the smallest factor, and I found many good tendencies doing it this way and was able to call good games because of it. What I realized, subsequently from moving to the other side of the ball, is that if I watch the games first I get a good feel for exactly what teams are doing and why. What looked to me like 50 different formation and backfield combinations before now looked like a few ways to shift the strength of the formation. Even little things like wasting time to put "Gun" into the formation name when they run everything out of the Gun. What's the point? Also, after going through film I stopped worrying about being exact on formations and plays. Before, I would waste time watching and rewatching the same play over and over to try to dissect every blocking scheme or route combinations exactly to see the play and then find out later that either a) many times 17-year old kids will block a play wrong or run the wrong route on a play they run 25 other times, or b) there were random plays that the coaches must've just put in for that week because they didn't run them again in the other tapes. Lastly, it's important to remember that numbers and stats are just numbers and stats unless you put context to them. Sometimes I would make assumptions from the numbers without context. For example, I could find that a team is 75% run away from formation strength and game plan accordingly by putting my studs to the weak side. What I would miss is that their opponent was a team that flipped it's DL to strength and they were running away from a good DE. So, by taking the time to watch the games first, I have become more efficient on the back end.
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Mar 31, 2017 10:16:05 GMT -6
On film watching,
have people seen this
spoiler, you should watch the video before reading the rest of the comment
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Anyway, I notice this concept all the time when watching film, if I'm watching sort of casually, I notice all sorts of interesting things that I miss when I'm trying to categorize the game off a check list
such that I wonder if watching the game with a check list in front of you isn't a pretty inefficient use of finite attention spans and man-hours at your disposal
or at least, you should think hard about whether the things on your checklist are things you make actionable decisions on
brainstorming -
it might be better simply take notes on a higher level of abstraction
1) what was the offense trying to do
2) what was the defense trying to do
3) if all the players were robots of equal ability, given 1 & 2, what would I expect to happen?
4) what did happen?
5) what accounts for the difference between 3 & 4?
and then ultimately, what do we want to do? what am I going to see at 5, that's going to change something that we do?
I think that's where a really tight playbook, and a really well conceived idea of what are our constraint concepts [1] is a real asset, because what you're really looking for is, do I see anything that breaks our constraint concept, where we need to change what we're going to do if we see (whatever) -----------
the other problem I have with charting plays, is that even after 4 or so games, you're working with statistically pretty insignificant sample sizes for most scenarios
[1] smartfootball.com/offense/why-every-team-should-apply-the-constraint-theory-of-offense
|
|
|
Post by funkfriss on Mar 31, 2017 11:53:48 GMT -6
On film watching,
have people seen this
spoiler, you should watch the video before reading the rest of the comment
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Anyway, I notice this concept all the time when watching film, if I'm watching sort of casually, I notice all sorts of interesting things that I miss when I'm trying to categorize the game off a check list
such that I wonder if watching the game with a check list in front of you isn't a pretty inefficient use of finite attention spans and man-hours at your disposal
or at least, you should think hard about whether the things on your checklist are things you make actionable decisions on
brainstorming -
it might be better simply take notes on a higher level of abstraction
1) what was the offense trying to do
2) what was the defense trying to do
3) if all the players were robots of equal ability, given 1 & 2, what would I expect to happen?
4) what did happen?
5) what accounts for the difference between 3 & 4?
and then ultimately, what do we want to do? what am I going to see at 5, that's going to change something that we do?
I think that's where a really tight playbook, and a really well conceived idea of what are our constraint concepts [1] is a real asset, because what you're really looking for is, do I see anything that breaks our constraint concept, where we need to change what we're going to do if we see (whatever) -----------
the other problem I have with charting plays, is that even after 4 or so games, you're working with statistically pretty insignificant sample sizes for most scenarios
[1] smartfootball.com/offense/why-every-team-should-apply-the-constraint-theory-of-offense GREAT post!!
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 31, 2017 12:02:37 GMT -6
I think its fine (and at times beneficial) to go that in depth; the issue is when you put them all in the same column. If the whole formation is: surface formation, backfield, strength, shift, and motion, then when you get your reports you end up not being able to see big picture type stuff. You can have all that information, just break it down into categories: Ace Slot (or Gun Ace slot if you really wanted) can be the formation, Gun Nr the backfield, then Lt or Rt the strength. This way you can filter through the variables, and search for broader trends more easily. This is why I mentioned in another thread I have found it extremely beneficial to go old school and watch the films before I break them down. I was that guy. I would get new film and immediately break them down by the smallest factor, and I found many good tendencies doing it this way and was able to call good games because of it. What I realized, subsequently from moving to the other side of the ball, is that if I watch the games first I get a good feel for exactly what teams are doing and why. What looked to me like 50 different formation and backfield combinations before now looked like a few ways to shift the strength of the formation. Even little things like wasting time to put "Gun" into the formation name when they run everything out of the Gun. What's the point? Also, after going through film I stopped worrying about being exact on formations and plays. Before, I would waste time watching and rewatching the same play over and over to try to dissect every blocking scheme or route combinations exactly to see the play and then find out later that either a) many times 17-year old kids will block a play wrong or run the wrong route on a play they run 25 other times, or b) there were random plays that the coaches must've just put in for that week because they didn't run them again in the other tapes. Lastly, it's important to remember that numbers and stats are just numbers and stats unless you put context to them. Sometimes I would make assumptions from the numbers without context. For example, I could find that a team is 75% run away from formation strength and game plan accordingly by putting my studs to the weak side. What I would miss is that their opponent was a team that flipped it's DL to strength and they were running away from a good DE. So, by taking the time to watch the games first, I have become more efficient on the back end. Thats interesting because I am the complete opposite; I breakdown film first before I watch it. Of course there is a caveat- I delegate breakdown duties for different categories; one coach does D&D hash, another does formation, motion, and backfield, another play type, play, target....and so on. I demand breakdown be done first because as a group I can't move on to do the full scouting report until everyone's job is done. So if I get one coach trying to pick out tendencies and thinking he sees something then the rest of us are waiting on him to get his work done so we can get ours; and nobody gets in the way of my efficiency! I guess if I were doing it all on my own it would be different, but even then there have been times where I thought I saw something, but when I check the actual numbers of the scouting breakdown it doesn't hold true. Maybe I am not good enough at scouting tendencies with my eyes (as opposed to the numbers) but I do know that the least reliable witness is an eye witness- so I trust the numbers.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Mar 31, 2017 12:42:49 GMT -6
15 hours to prep?
What am I going to do with the extra 5 hours?
|
|
CoachSP
Sophomore Member
Posts: 212
|
Post by CoachSP on Mar 31, 2017 13:33:39 GMT -6
15 hours to prep? What am I going to do with the extra 5 hours? How do you prep? I'm a new DC. This post has been helpful thus far!
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Apr 3, 2017 8:15:12 GMT -6
15 hours to prep? What am I going to do with the extra 5 hours? How do you prep? I'm a new DC. This post has been helpful thus far! Lean on your assistants and focus internally. My theory goes like this: The guy you are going against is game planning too. There are little tweaks and changes he is making to attack you. Therefore, the iteration of the team you are going to see on Friday night has no video on them. In game adjustments are likely, so we find it easier to come in playing base, and make sure we have developed solid answers for anything we may see.......answer that we started working on in May. So, if we have a July camp and are doing inside run, we will see a base front AND an engage 8 front. Defensively, we will have a base trips check, and then a check to stop frontside bubble, and another to bracket X. For game planning purposes, we like to see safety structure, how they play 3 skills to one side of the center (whether that is FB/TE/SE or 3 WR), do they run a pressure front or read and react? That takes not long at all, and those things rarely change.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Apr 3, 2017 9:31:01 GMT -6
When I was an HC, we monitored the kids' academics closely because many of them were failing classes. The school already had a study-hall in place and the kids had to attend it after school (miss practice..) if they were failing a class. Now, I have often wondered what I would do if the kids were ineligible and there WASN'T a mandatory study hall in place at that time. We'd either approach the administration about getting someone to run a study hall for our kids after school (maybe they'd do it in detention?), block off half of a Monday and make it study hall for EVERYONE, or just let natural consequences set in (i.e. no pass=no play..).
Tough call, one way or another.
|
|