bighit65
Junior Member
Make a statement without saying a word.
Posts: 397
|
Post by bighit65 on Dec 26, 2018 14:29:46 GMT -6
Here's a question. What would be the drawback to a league disallowing platooning? If there were a rule that said you can't march out a whole new offense to get their 4 plays for the half, would that be all bad? On the surface, I don't see the bad in this. It would force coaches to truly prepare every player equally and to be more strategic with subs. What do you all think?
|
|
|
|
Post by hsrose on Dec 26, 2018 15:34:36 GMT -6
My limited youth coaching is probably not going to help here other than to expose yet another approach to dealing with the minimum play situation.
I coached in a youth league, non-Pop Warner, "non-competitve", that had a 4 play per quarter rule for all players. But we did play 10 and 12 minute (upper level) quarters so there was a bit more time to get everyone in. The 3 years I coached there we had the league limit of 35 players on the roster. The O/D squads had to be platooned so there was no more than a 1 player difference in the sizes, so it was 18-17 if the roster was 35 active players. Players could go between O & D each week so we did train every player on positions on each side of the ball. But they could not switch in the game unless there was a series of injuries and the players were not available.
We ran our players in on a near constant rotation and at different positions so we didn't have a specifically weak team out there, and so the opponents couldn't know where we were weak at any given time. The folks that counted the times a player was in generally gave up on us and just took it for granted that we had the players getting their plays. They couldn't keep up with the kids coming off and on each play.
I was also the rules guy for 2 seasons and I quickly came to realize that every rule in the book was there because some coach figured some way to get an advantage. The minimum play rule(s) were a result of a coach or two that figured out how to meet the letter, but not the intent, of the original MPP rules. The league then had to get really hard over about it and so you ended up with folks carrying clipboards marking every time a kid got a play.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Dec 26, 2018 20:22:19 GMT -6
Here's a question. What would be the drawback to a league disallowing platooning? If there were a rule that said you can't march out a whole new offense to get their 4 plays for the half, would that be all bad? On the surface, I don't see the bad in this. It would force coaches to truly prepare every player equally and to be more strategic with subs. What do you all think? I've seen the type of platooning you mean -- a scrub squad for offense -- discussed, but never seen it used anywhere I've coached, so in the leagues I've seen, such a rule would have no effect. The rosters I've coached were never enough for even a full O & D platoon, except for one JPW team with 23 enrolled -- but far fewer than that suiting up in games. Hardly any opposing rosters were long enough for full platoons either. I wonder how teams who do use such a tactic practice. If they segregate that squad for practice, I'm not sure whether those players get a better experience or a worse one. I think worse, but not sure. How would you word the rule against it? Would you do like the NCAA used to: set a limit on the number of substitutions you could make between downs, barring injury or change of possession? |
|
bighit65
Junior Member
Make a statement without saying a word.
Posts: 397
|
Post by bighit65 on Dec 27, 2018 5:15:50 GMT -6
Bob, in our area most teams have around 20 or so kids but it seems they only play 12 or 13 of them. All of the "scrubs" piece together a second offense and I have seen it happen multiple times where that whole second unit goes in only for 2 point conversions, or only the first drive of the half to insure that they get their minimum plays in. Other than that they don't see the field. If you send in your second unit this way(unfortunately, we did this also) you will see the defense shift into a goalline front and just maul the center. In reality, I am trying to find a way around having minimum play players. Our numbers are waning. I would love to think outside the box to improve numbers through policy.
I guess the rule could be written limiting the number of players substituted at once? I am not sure exactly on that part yet. I am just thinking out loud, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 27, 2018 12:47:30 GMT -6
My youth experience was that everyone has to play a position, either offense or defense. The better players play both ways, but each kid plays "the whole game" at either an offensive or defensive position.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Dec 27, 2018 20:49:14 GMT -6
Bob, in our area most teams have around 20 or so kids but it seems they only play 12 or 13 of them. All of the "scrubs" piece together a second offense and I have seen it happen multiple times where that whole second unit goes in only for 2 point conversions, Oof! The score is lopsided enough that 2 points more or less makes no difference, yet they're not putting in the 2nd string? |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Dec 27, 2018 21:00:52 GMT -6
My youth experience was that everyone has to play a position, either offense or defense. The better players play both ways, but each kid plays "the whole game" at either an offensive or defensive position. That's the simplest minimum play rule I've encountered -- easiest to keep track of, easiest to enforce. As long as it's a roster of 22 or fewer. Some places have that rule for a quarter, some for a half, not often for the whole game like that. Where I used to coach, they allowed a 12th player if you were shuttling them to send in plays, but then you had to do it the whole game, while otherwise the mandatory platooning applied only to the 1st half. The circuit I'm coaching in now has no MP rule, but the teams in our club are very fair in giving everyone playing time. But we've had rosters of only 15-16 on our team. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 28, 2018 7:11:06 GMT -6
My youth experience was that everyone has to play a position, either offense or defense. The better players play both ways, but each kid plays "the whole game" at either an offensive or defensive position. That's the simplest minimum play rule I've encountered -- easiest to keep track of, easiest to enforce. As long as it's a roster of 22 or fewer. Some places have that rule for a quarter, some for a half, not often for the whole game like that. Where I used to coach, they allowed a 12th player if you were shuttling them to send in plays, but then you had to do it the whole game, while otherwise the mandatory platooning applied only to the 1st half. The circuit I'm coaching in now has no MP rule, but the teams in our club are very fair in giving everyone playing time. But we've had rosters of only 15-16 on our team. Most of the rosters were 15 to 20 kids. Some of the more "win at all" coaches tried to run off the lesser players so that more of the better ones would play both ways. I have never understood anything less than that in a pay for play youth league. You are paying to play ball, you should play ball. |
|
bighit65
Junior Member
Make a statement without saying a word.
Posts: 397
|
Post by bighit65 on Dec 30, 2018 15:04:47 GMT -6
I could not agree more with the statement "pay to play" so everyone should play. With young kids, the return on investment must be there. Once they are older, earn that time. Youth football is tough as a coach. Everyone has an agenda, I feel. It is either win or get my kid the ball a million times. Rarely do the 2 ever go hand in hand. This is the fact lost on a lot of people.
|
|
