|
|
Post by StraightFlexin on Mar 15, 2018 6:58:32 GMT -6
Wondering if anyone has had experiences where they have major differences in philosophy and scheme among their staff/HC. If you were stuck in your spot, did you just bite the bullet and teach something you felt/knew was wrong? Not saying like wing-t vs spread, but things that you felt were fundamentally wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by rosey65 on Mar 15, 2018 7:10:44 GMT -6
We've had blow-ups with assistants joining our staff. And I think every coach on staff has brought up a desire to change some aspect of what we do. My HC is very open-minded, says he'll try anything if we can convince him. If he's not convinced, we get a hard "no." Some guys havent been able to handle the "no," and they didn't last...sometimes not even the rest of that week
I'm the OL coach. My first few years, I was under pretty constant supervision. Not micro-managing, just everything I coached and taught was monitored. After 9 years, I have pretty good autonomy with my unit. I'm told a play or protection, I'm told to solve it, then let everyone else (RB, TE etc) know what their role is. I still run everything thru the HC, we draw up and talk it over. He will still say "I want *this*," at times. It's up to me to determine the constraints of plays and schemes. We still have our differences of opinion. He wins cuz he's the HC, and we do things his way until it doesn't work...then we do it my way. It's a pretty fluid setting, and it's taken several years to reach this level of coaching relationship. Egos on both sides have been swallowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Mar 15, 2018 7:48:10 GMT -6
Wondering if anyone has had experiences where they have major differences in philosophy and scheme among their staff/HC. If you were stuck in your spot, did you just bite the bullet and teach something you felt/knew was wrong? Not saying like wing-t vs spread, but things that you felt were fundamentally wrong. I have been in this situation several times in my career. I pipe up about the problem, with solutions in mind (drills, change in techniques, etc...) and if they listen, they listen. If they don't, they don't, and I avoid beating a dead horse. One year, I was the DC and we didn't tackle well because we weren't repping it enough and the tackling technique we were teaching was chit. I kept hearing about it in staff meetings, I provided a variety of solutions and the HC still didn't listen. I finally pulled him aside, one-one, and told him that we either needed to take steps to fix our poor tackling or we needed to stop talking about it. He got p-ssed off and I told him that there was no point in talking about it if we weren't going to fix it. |
|
|
|
Post by funkfriss on Mar 15, 2018 7:49:58 GMT -6
Yes, a few times. Ultimately, it is the HC's or coordinator's decision and you have to teach it the way he wants it. That said, I think it would be egregious if that coach wouldn't at least give you the opportunity to explain or try it your way. That has been my experience.
Some things I've disagreed with have been minor and not a big deal, like how the HC wanted us to play kickoff lanes. Both of our ideas would work, I just felt more comfortable with the way I was teaching it.
The ones I've taken greater issue with have been differences in technique coaching the OL and DL. One issue was with the HC on OL footwork, the other with the DC on get-offs. In both cases, I gave my side, they listened and said no. So I did it their way, not that big a deal. They gave me a great deal of autonomy and were constantly taking my opinion and ideas, so I wasn't that heartbroken.
The biggest problem was with the OL footwork when the players said, "Why are we doing it this way? This isn't right." I had to bite my tongue and say it was the right way and it was the way we were doing it. It would've been really easy for me to say, "I know guys, but the header wants it this way, so we gotta." IMO you have to avoid that at all costs and maintain loyalty to the boss first and foremost. If you can't, then you need to get out.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigcoach39 on Mar 15, 2018 8:25:19 GMT -6
As far as teaching technique etc, everyone should be open to ideas, like everyone else has said, ultimately its up to the HC or Coordinators to have the final say. Scheme wise, usually not as much discussion, especially a coach joining a staff. They run what they run and should be aware of that before you take the job...I was interviewing a position coach (I am a DC), I was telling him about our scheme, he said that what we did, did not fit his philosophy....he was not hired.
|
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Mar 15, 2018 9:14:00 GMT -6
Wondering if anyone has had experiences where they have major differences in philosophy and scheme among their staff/HC. If you were stuck in your spot, did you just bite the bullet and teach something you felt/knew was wrong? Not saying like wing-t vs spread, but things that you felt were fundamentally wrong. If it's unsafe for the kids, then it HAS to be brought up. If it's safe for the kids but there are better ways, then it can be brought up, but it isn't the end all be all of it. Regardless, if you're bringing it up make sure to ask WHY they want it done that way, they may have a very good reason (or not). |
|
|
|
Post by planck on Mar 15, 2018 9:42:05 GMT -6
Yes, and sometimes you just have to accept things for what they are. You can make suggestions (in a tactful way) and see where that takes you. If things don't change, can you accept things and work with them? If not, can you accept that the job isn't what you want and leave? I've done both. I was far happier just leaving a job that wasn't going to meet my expectations and standards than I was while I was there. I was also quite happy to have my voice heard, be told "no", and then move on to take care of the business at hand.
Frankly, a lot of it comes down to trust and not having an ego. If you don't have trust that there's leadership and direction, it's a lot harder to accept things that you don't agree with.
|
|
CoachSP
Sophomore Member
Posts: 212 
|
Post by CoachSP on Mar 15, 2018 10:06:28 GMT -6
It depends on the disagreement.
More than one way to skin a cat. Is it a blatant right and wrong or just difference of opinion? Will two different ways accomplish the same goal?
Also, consider your kids. Sometimes we have to adapt things to make it where a kid can have the potential to be more successful.
Example: I coach LBs. There are many ways to teach key reading. We key guards because (typically) our kids are best at that.
|
|
|
|
Post by planck on Mar 15, 2018 10:17:29 GMT -6
More than one way to skin a cat. Is it a blatant right and wrong or just difference of opinion? "Drop your eyes and lunge!" |
|
CoachSP
Sophomore Member
Posts: 212
|
Post by CoachSP on Mar 15, 2018 10:20:25 GMT -6
More than one way to skin a cat. Is it a blatant right and wrong or just difference of opinion? "Drop your eyes and lunge!" Perfect example of right and wrong lol |
|
|
|
Post by stilltryin on Mar 15, 2018 10:31:40 GMT -6
My guess is everybody's had situations where they disagreed over some aspect of what we're doing: technique, systems, coverages, disciplinary stuff, whatever. Bring it up, mildly suggest, make your case, argue it out ... but do it in the privacy of the coaches' office, out of earshot of the kids. But at the end of the day, the HC gets the final say ... and once you leave that room, everybody has to be on the same page, teaching it the same way, and selling the hell out of it. If you ever let on to the kids that you think you've got a better way, you've let your ego get in the way of what we're trying to accomplish, and undermined the program far worse than playing the "wrong" coverage.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Mar 15, 2018 10:41:27 GMT -6
Human beings as a species do not like to be given advice, no matter how well-intentioned, unless they ask for it. Implies that they're doing something wrong and not smart enough to fix it themselves.
So if you do be prepared to get some pushback.
If you perceive a problem with your area and have a "better way" to do something, you need to be very tactful how you broach the subject if you want to get it done unless asked about it by HC-coordinator or in context of staff discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 4:32:17 GMT -6
I just dont get involved then, one of the best pieces of advice i can offer ANYONE .... seek out the like or atleast the open minded
I turned down 2 OC jobs because the HC,and i couldnt come to an agreement on the scheme.
1st one was on his 3rd or 4th year, they have been historically a sub .500 team parents, alum getting tired of it, was looking for a boost. He wanted something "better", had me come in do a 2 hour clinic on what we do, tells me then and there i got the job
But....he but absolutley could not let go of the reigns, when i get home he emails me his playbook then asks how i would blend what i do with his plays
Now he already had over 225 plays, wanted me to change the verbiage to his, didnt use a numbering system, i asked which 215 plays we were dropping he laughed, till i told him i was serious. He says he put so much time into it he just couldnt let it go....
The other one was coming in as a new HC of a really bad program,said he loved what we do, but he wanted to be in the gun 2x2, 3x1 read option RPO 75% of the time or more, thats not what i do, he even tgen offered me the DC spot , but again he wanted someone to run his stuff
Philosophically youll find yourself dealing with egos more than anywhere else.
I just avoid it, ill be a position coach, if you want my input ill gladly sit and discuss
|
|
|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Mar 17, 2018 8:56:12 GMT -6
IF YOU CAN NOT FOLLOW THE HC PHILOSOPHY YOU SHOULD QUIT!
Point Blank...Period
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 17, 2018 11:10:44 GMT -6
Yes I have been there, but I would much rather coach for a guy running the wrong stuff (ie not the stuff I like), then for a guy who tries to run everyone's stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 17, 2018 13:01:59 GMT -6
Wondering if anyone has had experiences where they have major differences in philosophy and scheme among their staff/HC. If you were stuck in your spot, did you just bite the bullet and teach something you felt/knew was wrong? Not saying like wing-t vs spread, but things that you felt were fundamentally wrong. All. The. Time. I'm usually the junior of the staff, even when I have experience elsewhere, so I just go along. I tell them what I think is wrong, they say OK, but this is how we're doing it. Funny you mention wing T, because that's how it came up last season with the Newton Braves Youth Football League (club). Splits much too wide, crowding the line instead of recessed, I think it hurt our OL's mobility & effectiveness. Even the manual the HC sent me had it the way I wanted, rather than the way they were doing it! (Also weren't teaching shoulder technique the way both the club & I wanted.) Also wasted times on drills I thought were boring the kids and not too relevant to learning technique for either O or D. Plus the actual league we competed in (Morris County) was far too restrictive and dumbed-down on the rules for 9 YOs. So I'm looking to jump to another nearby club that plays in another league, even though for 10 YOs this fall most of those league restrictions on play would come off. |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 17, 2018 18:21:20 GMT -6
The biggest problem was with the OL footwork when the players said, "Why are we doing it this way? This isn't right." I had to bite my tongue and say it was the right way and it was the way we were doing it. It would've been really easy for me to say, "I know guys, but the header wants it this way, so we gotta." IMO you have to avoid that at all costs and maintain loyalty to the boss first and foremost. If you can't, then you need to get out. Why can't you maintain loyalty w/o the appearance of agreement? What's wrong w telling those players, "Different coaches have different ideas about how to do these things. I agree with your way, but since we have to work together and someone has to be in charge, we're going along with the way that coach wants it. To me it's not even loyalty if you always agree; if you agree, you don't have to be loyal. Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 17, 2018 21:42:42 GMT -6
The biggest problem was with the OL footwork when the players said, "Why are we doing it this way? This isn't right." I had to bite my tongue and say it was the right way and it was the way we were doing it. It would've been really easy for me to say, "I know guys, but the header wants it this way, so we gotta." IMO you have to avoid that at all costs and maintain loyalty to the boss first and foremost. If you can't, then you need to get out. Why can't you maintain loyalty w/o the appearance of agreement? What's wrong w telling those players, "Different coaches have different ideas about how to do these things. I agree with your way, but since we have to work together and someone has to be in charge, we're going along with the way that coach wants it. To me it's not even loyalty if you always agree; if you agree, you don't have to be loyal. Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them. I am not saying that your line of thinking can't work, but from what I've seen it most often will lead to discention; which in itself can be overcome by enough talent but is not really conducive to winning. Word will spread that you, an AC, are openly telling players that you think what the coach is doing in wrong: all the players will know, then the parents will know. This will become fodder for parents who are against the HC (and no matter how successful a program these parents exist). " Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them." Moreover, by telling them that you disagree it comes off as you wanting to disavow responsibility from the technique in case it fails or is in anyway attached to failing. In essence by telling them you disagree it comes off as working "together" then actually having said nothing at all. No two coaches will agree on everything, but as far as the players are concerned whatever one coach says all coaches say. If you can't feel that way about your HC then you probably shouldnt be coaching as their AC. |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 18, 2018 11:17:17 GMT -6
" Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them." Moreover, by telling them that you disagree it comes off as you wanting to disavow responsibility from the technique in case it fails or is in anyway attached to failing. What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 18, 2018 11:51:51 GMT -6
" Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them." Moreover, by telling them that you disagree it comes off as you wanting to disavow responsibility from the technique in case it fails or is in anyway attached to failing. What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. If you have already pointed out to the HC in private that you disagree, and he didn't listen, then I doubt disavowing responsibility for it to your players will increase the likelihood that the problem gets fixed. I think it will most likely divide the program into two (and eventually more) camps; and yours will be the one opposing the HC which most likely won't bode well for you being on the staff longer. Once again, not writing not to disagree in private, but when it comes to outside the coaches office you gotta put on a united front, otherwise you promote a system of 'too many chiefs and not enough indians'. A whole group of people pulling in the same direction (even if that direction is slightly off track) will get to their destination faster than a group of people all pulling their own way (even if some of those people are right on track). |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 18, 2018 12:46:52 GMT -6
What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. If you have already pointed out to the HC in private that you disagree, and he didn't listen, then I doubt disavowing responsibility for it to your players will increase the likelihood that the problem gets fixed. I think it will most likely divide the program into two (and eventually more) camps; and yours will be the one opposing the HC which most likely won't bode well for you being on the staff longer. Once again, not writing not to disagree in private, but when it comes to outside the coaches office you gotta put on a united front, otherwise you promote a system of 'too many chiefs and not enough indians'. A whole group of people pulling in the same direction (even if that direction is slightly off track) will get to their destination faster than a group of people all pulling their own way (even if some of those people are right on track). Then this is a fundamental difference between us in human psychology. When I coach, I'm not just trying to advance the team over the season, I'm also trying to develop the children's appreciation of the game. When I find a kid who's thinking, who asks why something is done this way & not that, I encourage such thinking. Where it goes wrong is when it doesn't stop at discussion, & they stop playing their proper roles. In 2015 we had a QB-BB who was smart (which is good -- except he was also "smart" w his family) but then didn't run the plays we called. If I can disagree w the HC & still carry out their instructions, why can't our players? |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 18, 2018 14:27:34 GMT -6
If you have already pointed out to the HC in private that you disagree, and he didn't listen, then I doubt disavowing responsibility for it to your players will increase the likelihood that the problem gets fixed. I think it will most likely divide the program into two (and eventually more) camps; and yours will be the one opposing the HC which most likely won't bode well for you being on the staff longer. Once again, not writing not to disagree in private, but when it comes to outside the coaches office you gotta put on a united front, otherwise you promote a system of 'too many chiefs and not enough indians'. A whole group of people pulling in the same direction (even if that direction is slightly off track) will get to their destination faster than a group of people all pulling their own way (even if some of those people are right on track). Then this is a fundamental difference between us in human psychology. When I coach, I'm not just trying to advance the team over the season, I'm also trying to develop the children's appreciation of the game. When I find a kid who's thinking, who asks why something is done this way & not that, I encourage such thinking. Where it goes wrong is when it doesn't stop at discussion, & they stop playing their proper roles. In 2015 we had a QB-BB who was smart (which is good -- except he was also "smart" w his family) but then didn't run the plays we called. If I can disagree w the HC & still carry out their instructions, why can't our players? No difference in psychology as you wrote, we all like to "develop the children's appreciation of the game." The difference is you can tell them about various techniques, schemes, etc without saying you don't think what the HC has decided to do is the best for the team. That is where we differ. Heck, running scout team is a lot of teaching of various schemes and techniques, and its always fun to pique interests, but as you wrote "...it goes wrong when it doesn't stop at discussion, & they stop playing their proper roles." As an AC your proper role is to show deference towards what the HC has decided for the program when working with players. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Mar 19, 2018 8:40:59 GMT -6
" Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them." Moreover, by telling them that you disagree it comes off as you wanting to disavow responsibility from the technique in case it fails or is in anyway attached to failing. What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. I agree with this. In my earlier post, I described a situation where I was the DC, the HC turned into a micro-manager and we started doing some extremely unsound things. The HC was very set in his ways, he wouldn't listen or have a discussion about things and I basically threw my hands up and handed the defense to him. We were horrendous on defense after he took it over.. I had two evaluations following the season; one by the HC and another by the AD. The evaluation by the HC went badly and I refused to sign it (hence why I had to talk to the AD). I refused to sign an evaluation where I was taking the blame for the HC's screw-ups and I told him as such. When I sat down with the AD, he was livid with me but calmed down when I explained laid out what had happened during the season; the lack of game planning, the poor fundamentals being taught, the lack of practice time on defense, etc..etc.. And, I told him point blank that the chit was not going to roll downhill in this situation. The HC was responsible for the mess and that he needed to own up to it. So, the AD watched film of the three games where I was actually the DC and he evaluated me based on them. The evaluation was fair and I agreed to sign it. |
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Mar 19, 2018 12:33:55 GMT -6
" Showing the players you can disagree & still work together is the better lesson to teach them." Moreover, by telling them that you disagree it comes off as you wanting to disavow responsibility from the technique in case it fails or is in anyway attached to failing. What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. One of the problems with your line of thinking here Bob is that kids are not mini-adults. They don't think like adults. They don't process like adults. They don't see all of the different sides of things like adults. It can be beyond them to understand that wrong in this doesn't necessarily mean wrong in that and the other thing as well. They tend to see things more black and white. If you question the HC in front of the kids, they aren't going to understand the context and limitations of that questioning, they are liable to apply it to EVERYTHING the HC does. Been there, done that. Not pretty. Made a mistake with my son in 8th grade. I was not a fan of some of the things his coach was doing, and expressed that to my wife (NOT to my son). Unfortunately my wife then openly discussed it in front of my son. Driving home from practice one night, he starts blasting his coach, and most of what he was saying was dead wrong. After I read him the riot act, it dawned on me that my wife talking sh*t about the coach caused my son to apply that to everything the coach did, and basically come to not respect him. He simply didn't have the experience and maturity to understand the context of what was being said. I have to say - I had really bad coaching in pretty much every sport I played in HS. Rural area, pre-Internet, no big clinics, they were just guys coaching. I am really, really glad in hindsight that I didn't know how bad they were. I couldn't have done anything about it, and in this case ignorance was blissful. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 19, 2018 18:38:25 GMT -6
What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. I agree with this. In my earlier post, I described a situation where I was the DC, the HC turned into a micro-manager and we started doing some extremely unsound things. The HC was very set in his ways, he wouldn't listen or have a discussion about things and I basically threw my hands up and handed the defense to him. We were horrendous on defense after he took it over.. I had two evaluations following the season; one by the HC and another by the AD. The evaluation by the HC went badly and I refused to sign it (hence why I had to talk to the AD). I refused to sign an evaluation where I was taking the blame for the HC's screw-ups and I told him as such. When I sat down with the AD, he was livid with me but calmed down when I explained laid out what had happened during the season; the lack of game planning, the poor fundamentals being taught, the lack of practice time on defense, etc..etc.. And, I told him point blank that the chit was not going to roll downhill in this situation. The HC was responsible for the mess and that he needed to own up to it. So, the AD watched film of the three games where I was actually the DC and he evaluated me based on them. The evaluation was fair and I agreed to sign it. The difference being you kept it in house with the coaches and admin, not going to the players with it |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 19, 2018 19:46:30 GMT -6
Then this is a fundamental difference between us in human psychology. When I coach, I'm not just trying to advance the team over the season, I'm also trying to develop the children's appreciation of the game. When I find a kid who's thinking, who asks why something is done this way & not that, I encourage such thinking. Where it goes wrong is when it doesn't stop at discussion, & they stop playing their proper roles. In 2015 we had a QB-BB who was smart (which is good -- except he was also "smart" w his family) but then didn't run the plays we called. If I can disagree w the HC & still carry out their instructions, why can't our players? No difference in psychology as you wrote, we all like to "develop the children's appreciation of the game." The difference is you can tell them about various techniques, schemes, etc without saying you don't think what the HC has decided to do is the best for the team. That is where we differ. Heck, running scout team is a lot of teaching of various schemes and techniques, and its always fun to pique interests, but as you wrote "...it goes wrong when it doesn't stop at discussion, & they stop playing their proper roles." As an AC your proper role is to show deference towards what the HC has decided for the program when working with players. But if you don't tell the players about your disagreement, you're not showing them deference, you're showing them nothing -- if you're a good enough actor! |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 19, 2018 20:05:49 GMT -6
What's wrong w that? Nobody should take the blame for somebody else's mistake. Doing so makes it less likely mistakes will be fixed. One of the problems with your line of thinking here Bob is that kids are not mini-adults. They don't think like adults. They don't process like adults. They don't see all of the different sides of things like adults. It can be beyond them to understand that wrong in this doesn't necessarily mean wrong in that and the other thing as well. They tend to see things more black and white. If you question the HC in front of the kids, Who said anything about questioning the HC in front of the kids? This is about what to say if questions come up when you're coaching, not to question the HC at that time. There actually have been times when I've had to question the HC in front of the kids, because they were absolute head-scratching moments due to failure of the HC to explain something beforehand. Like, "Did you really mean that?!" or, "I don't know what you mean by that." But that's different from a situation where you know what the HC wants, & deliberately call him out on it in front of the players. I didn't want to be understood as favoring that. I think you drew the wrong conclusion. If you'd had the discussion with your son directly, instead of having it filtered thru your wife, he'd've then heard it in context & had a chance to understand it. Kids aren't mini-adults, but if we keep babying them, they'll never become adults. By 8th grade, he should've been able to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Coach Vint on Mar 19, 2018 20:33:35 GMT -6
I have not worked for a head coach that did not let coaches run their position group. With that said, great head coaches want to have a handle on what you are doing, why you are doing it, and want to know if it is the best way. If they want me to teach something a certain way that is the way I teach it. Every head coach I worked for would listen and discuss if I had an issue with what they wanted. When we walked out of the office we were unified. As a coordinator I always let guys coach their position, but everything had to fit our system. If I don't understand a drill you are doing I am going to ask you about it.
Coaches need to do their discussing before they walk out of the office, and when they walk out of the office they should be unified. There is nothing worse than a coach who bitches on the field because they don't agree with something. Say your piece in the office and get it worked out. If you can't get it worked out, you are in the wrong place.
If I ever found myself in a position where I couldn't be all-in I would leave. Great coaching staffs don't argue in front of the kids and they don't backstab each other. They handle disagreements like men. They figure it out in the office and once the decision is made they go full speed for each other. There is no room for personal agendas and temper tantrums if you want to be a championship program.
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Mar 19, 2018 22:55:51 GMT -6
I have not worked for a head coach that did not let coaches run their position group. With that said, great head coaches want to have a handle on what you are doing, why you are doing it, and want to know if it is the best way. If they want me to teach something a certain way that is the way I teach it. Every head coach I worked for would listen and discuss if I had an issue with what they wanted. When we walked out of the office we were unified. As a coordinator I always let guys coach their position, but everything had to fit our system. If I don't understand a drill you are doing I am going to ask you about it. Coaches need to do their discussing before they walk out of the office, and when they walk out of the office they should be unified. There is nothing worse than a coach who bitches on the field because they don't agree with something. Say your piece in the office and get it worked out. If you can't get it worked out, you are in the wrong place. If I ever found myself in a position where I couldn't be all-in I would leave. Great coaching staffs don't argue in front of the kids and they don't backstab each other. They handle disagreements like men. They figure it out in the office and once the decision is made they go full speed for each other. There is no room for personal agendas and temper tantrums if you want to be a championship program. I don't have as many years as a coordinator or HC as some on here, but this is how I always do it: I have my list of drills (completely written out and explained) that we use to teach those skills which fit into our scheme. If an AC believes they have a better way (drill, skill, or scheme) then we meet around this time of year (late winter or early spring). We talk about it and if I agree a change would be better then we implement it, if not then we don't. But they have to keep in mind that we are not going to just pile on multiple schemes, techniques, and or drills to make everyone happy; often times if something new is added then something old will go away. Also, if I am uncertain as to whether or not the new idea is better I tend to default to the old idea; this is not to imply we don't change (because that would hinder progress) rather that if it is equal we will stick with the already practiced method because our players are already skilled at it. The point being that this is all completely outlined prior to spring ball (scheme, drills, technique, implementation schedule, etc) so there is little reason for conflict throughout the season. The plan is in place by April, all ACs knew the plan, if they did not like it then they had an opportunity to voice the concern already; if they are still unhappy with it then they had time to leave. For us, the hay is in the barn in regards to what we will do before we practice, then it is just a matter of implementation. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Mar 20, 2018 8:00:56 GMT -6
I have not worked for a head coach that did not let coaches run their position group. With that said, great head coaches want to have a handle on what you are doing, why you are doing it, and want to know if it is the best way. If they want me to teach something a certain way that is the way I teach it. Every head coach I worked for would listen and discuss if I had an issue with what they wanted. When we walked out of the office we were unified. As a coordinator I always let guys coach their position, but everything had to fit our system. If I don't understand a drill you are doing I am going to ask you about it. Coaches need to do their discussing before they walk out of the office, and when they walk out of the office they should be unified. There is nothing worse than a coach who bitches on the field because they don't agree with something. Say your piece in the office and get it worked out. If you can't get it worked out, you are in the wrong place. If I ever found myself in a position where I couldn't be all-in I would leave. Great coaching staffs don't argue in front of the kids and they don't backstab each other. They handle disagreements like men. They figure it out in the office and once the decision is made they go full speed for each other. There is no room for personal agendas and temper tantrums if you want to be a championship program. That nails it on the head. Unfortunately, there are many staffs that haven't learned how to communicate in an adult, professional manner. A good staff can have it out in the office, come to a solution and implement it on the field during practice. A poor staff will drag the argument out onto the field. They may not let the kids hear them fighting over something but they don't try to solve the problem in practice. I will admit, there have been times when I have been a coordinator or HC and I have walked over to a position group and taken a drill away from the AC in practice. On one occasion, the AC and I had talked ad-nauseum about how the WRs need to be running routes. We went over the number of steps they need to take, their breaks, the timing, etc..etc.. One day during practice, I'm working with the OL and I see the WRs juking and jiving on their routes and dropping ball after ball because the timing was off. I talked to the QB coach and the WR coach about it after practice and went back through what I expected to see from the WRs. There was an argument because the WR coach felt that we needed to "shake the DBs off before running a route". I told him that what he was teaching wasn't sound and to knock it off. He continued to argue and I ended it at "you can either do this correctly or I will take the WRs away from you". Sure enough, the WRs were break-dancing at the LOS before running their routes the next day. I had the OL go with the backs to to inside run with the RB coach, went over to the WR/QB drill, took over and coached up the proper technique. The WR coach got p-ssed off, tried to bark at me, I pulled him aside and told him to leave practice for the day. |
|
