|
|
Post by utchuckd on Apr 15, 2007 7:29:39 GMT -6
Just sitting here drinking my coffee and trolling around through some old threads and got to thinking. Every so often we as a staff kick around going 2 platoon. We're starting to get enough players out where it's a possibility but here's our biggest issue: We can pretty well make out an offense/defense starting lineup and feel ok with it but our problem comes with the backups. I know that going 2 platoon will bump some kids that are 2nd stringers up to starter, but they will be getting more reps and become better players, and I like that idea. But it seems like it will also bump 3rd and 4th string guys up to 2nd on the depth chart, and for a lot of our 3rd and 4th guys it doesn't matter how many reps they get it would be a scary proposition to roll them out there on Friday night. They are either pretty young or just inexperienced and need some more development. I'm assuming that if you're platooning then your 1's are gonna play every snap outside of an injury, but it scares me to think that if somebody tweaks an ankle in the middle of a drive then we're gonna have to run a kid out there who can't make it through an agility ladder without kicking it across the practice field. Is this a valid concern? For you guys that platoon how much do your twos play not counting injuries?
|
|
|
|
Post by jackedup on Apr 15, 2007 8:42:09 GMT -6
How would you practice your 2 platoon? Have an offensive and defensive practice every day? We were two platoon at the last two schools I was at. At both schools we evaluated regardless of O or D and created a list. I had 2 people playing both ways. And a few of my Def players were backups on Off. I think that's the way to go for me... Also, here is a question for everyone? When creating your depth chart, how deep do you go? For the offensive line, I only need 7, 3 guards, 3 tackles. Everyone else fills in where ever needed. Opinions? THoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Apr 15, 2007 9:34:14 GMT -6
How would you practice your 2 platoon? Have an offensive and defensive practice every day? We were two platoon at the last two schools I was at. At both schools we evaluated regardless of O or D and created a list. I had 2 people playing both ways. And a few of my Def players were backups on Off. I think that's the way to go for me... Also, here is a question for everyone? When creating your depth chart, how deep do you go? For the offensive line, I only need 7, 3 guards, 3 tackles. Everyone else fills in where ever needed. Opinions? THoughts? Yeah, I think the problem is, you're trying to develop 2nd stringers into varsity starters, and they can't be splitting time between O and D. Now, you could target your studs and have them be the number 2 on defense. For example, have your FB once a week go through indy with the LB's and have him know the defensive calls. So, if your Mike LB goes down, then your FB has to become a two-way player the rest of the game. Our problem with this is a limited number of coaches, but I like the idea. |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2007 10:01:28 GMT -6
if you're going to platoon...... you have to SELL OUT in the off-season.
It is not an overnight thing.
The only reason I say that is..................YOU NEED JV GAMES!!
Contact other teams in your league (hopefully you haven't p---sed EVERYONE off) and see if they would be willing to have a Tuesday (wed/thur) night game.....pretty informal during the season.
Play your Juniors, your Sophomores and bring up Freshmen (everyone NOT starting on Varsity) --- nothing that is going to get kids killed, but they get some needed experience there
Let the freshmen / soph coaches take charge of the game (coordinators/etc) and let the Varsity coaches SERVE those coaches during the 'scrimmage' JV game.
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Apr 15, 2007 10:06:46 GMT -6
We would do offense and defense every day. I also think there's gonna be one or two or three kids that go both ways, but I think that could be worked out.
What we do now is split it up as much as possible, especially on the line, with the starters on one side a lot of the time being the seconds on the other side. The past two years we were lucky and only had one starting o-lineman playing both ways (as a LB), and no DL played both ways. Plus we had a couple of extra guys that were right there with them so we had a rotation going to keep them fresh as well as a couple of OL would rotate into the DL.
Another thing we have talked about is split the team into two units, one primarily offense and one primarily defense and split the staff into offense and defense. Then during practice that week the offense/defense groups would spend 60-70(?) per cent of the time with that group of coaches, and then spend the remaining 30ish percent with the opposite group of coaches to get some work and at least the game plan installed on that side of the ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 15, 2007 12:42:08 GMT -6
utchuckd---that is a great concern of going to a strick O and D platoon system. Just keep in mind that everyone at ALL levels, MS,HS, DIV1, BCS, NFL...all think their backups are hopeless.
I think the best thing is to two platoon, but let it be known up front that "2nd string" doesn't necessarily mean "next guy in". For Example Slappy Mcdougal might be your 2nd string OT, but if the game was in doubt, Frank the Tank your 3tech would be playing if injury caused your 1st stringer to get hurt. Now, if you are winning and clearing the benches, Slappy, get in the game boy.
I guess the big decision is whether 2 platooning helps your kids prepare better. If offense practices on one side of the field and defense the other, versus 2nd string scouts, then you get lots of reps, but the quality is lower. What degree of "low quality" are you comfortable with?
If that isn't the way you are going to practice, then I would suggest just teaching everyone an offensive and Defensive position, but start as many different cats as you can.
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 15, 2007 12:43:21 GMT -6
Why go through the trouble?
These are high school kids... its already been proven that stud kids can handle the rigors of staying of the field...
Why purposely dilluet your talent? Platooning never made sense to me... teach up an inferior kid to take the position of a superior kid, to have that superior kid watch from the sidelines?
Definitely solidify your depth chart, but you were going to do that anyway... All coaches prepare all of there players because they never know when they are going to need them... but to purposely give an inferior player a position... just because....
I don't get it!
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 15, 2007 13:06:23 GMT -6
I think it depends on what is meant by PLATOON though Khalfie.
To me, two platooning means two separate units. Offense and defense. The are taught by different coaches, they practice separately (against scouts from the other platoon), they meet separately etc. Obviously some kids might have to work with both units, but the fundamental philosophy is that we have an OFFENSIVE unit and a DEFENSIVE unit. This is vastly different than simply "coaching up an inferior kid to take the position of the superior kid". It is a method of running a program.
What you seem to be disapproving of is the practice of trying to start 22 kids, simply for the sake of starting a lot of kids. One could argue the pros and cons of that but I wouldn't call that platooning. I would say that is playing a lot of kids and the reason to do that would be to develope program strength. You might lose a battle but you are doing it to win the war.
In High School, especially at levels with enrollments under 600 or so, chances are you have a team such that the best 14 are HEAD AND SHOULDERS above the rest. Following this logic, every year, you are going to play 14 kids, and have the "inferior" kids sit? I dont know about you, but that might win you a few battles, but chances are the program will be stagnant kids will lose interest and EVERY YEAR you will end up only feeling good about playing 14 kids.
I would try to play as many kids as possible..start as many kids as possible..build through off season and (hopefully) smart scheduling to pick up a few wins while PLAYING these so called inferiors. I would also have a "gold" team that could execute a few critical plays that I would use in critical situations. This gold group would be the best 11 players on my team.
|
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Apr 15, 2007 17:46:30 GMT -6
If you have the ability to platoon then by all means do it, I would think it's a no brainer.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 15, 2007 18:47:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 15, 2007 20:00:24 GMT -6
The Law of diminishing returns is not applicable to football. 1. It can be argued that in most games, the point of diminishing returns is never met. Teams sit their starters early, games usually aren't close, and even if they are close, these are teenagers, engines running a 100 mph, most can handle it, with proper substitution. 2. If that point is met, it does not mean that the diminished performance of player A is still not heads and shoulders above that of player B. 3. The better kids on a football team usually aren't the best because of their athleticism, though there are always 3 that just run faster, jump higher, and throw better... but the other 11 starters are usually kids that understand the game better... and there is no diminishing return on knowldege. Here's the deal... kids are not equal... there are tangible quantifiable characteristics that separate kids... once you decide who your best players are... play them... to do otherwise does not make sense to me. If you have 22 comparable kids, more power to you, impressive, and you are either going to be world beaters, or you're in a world of trouble. However, if you are like most teams across America... you have a solid 14 kids... play them. To do otherwise sends a very bad message, the best 11 should get on the field, any other criteria creates a subjectivity that will readily become the demise of the team. ""If you have the ability to platoon then by all means do it, I would think it's a no brainer."""Define ability... because that is a huge "if" |
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Apr 15, 2007 21:48:37 GMT -6
Fair enough khalfie
The team I coach for will most likely only have 1 guy going both ways, and we run a spread offense. That kid will be a Safety/Slot WR (When he needs a blow it will come on Offense)... Plain and simple we have enough talent to do this; We want our kids going full speed all the time, and a kid who is playing both ways the whole game can simply not do this. Our expectations on both sides of the ball are just too high. You can't expect your WR's to be coming off the ball hard every time the entire game if they also have to double as a cornerback. Also last year our starting DE was also our starting C because we had no one else who could play Center at his level. That being said, he was a 1st team DE and maybe the worst Center in our league because he took offense off basically (but was still better then our #2).
These kids that we have going 1 way are all talented, I guess it's a luxury. We did not platoon last year BTW because we simply just didn't have the talent to do so. And we wore down in the 4th quarter like every other team in our league did because no one platoons. That's why I'm very excited about this upcoming season.
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Apr 15, 2007 21:54:55 GMT -6
wish I had the 'nads to platoon.
Our goal is 22 starters, the closest we got was 20. A FS/REC went both ways. Normally it's 14 to 16 kids going both ways.
Does anyone platoon successfully that has enough players but in truth has marginal talent in the trenches?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 15, 2007 22:51:28 GMT -6
Khalfie, I don't know about brophy and his diminishing return example either. Obviously all teams will wear down with a bunch of two way players, but I agree, that probably wouldn't be a factor in most games.
However, if you are consitently only playing 14 to 15 kids a game, and not looking vigorously for opportunities to play more kids, I can't see how that blueprint will ever lead to a championship caliber program. You may have years where the talent of those 14 or 15 could take you deep into the playoffs, and maybe even get a state title, but I can't see the program developing the program strength to be a solid contender on a yearly basis.
Obviously it depends on your team #'s and your enrollment numbers. If you have 80 boys total in the school, and only 28 play football, then chances are you need to have many two way guys, and platooning isn't a good system.
But if you have the coaches and enough players to platoon, I think you really need to look at having completely different units.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Apr 15, 2007 23:25:51 GMT -6
I don't think that teams shoot to only play 14 kids, but sometimes thats all you have. now you speak of not getting kids to come out and what not, but you shouldn't put kids out there that are a liability when you have a kid that can go both ways and do the job. I know we try to work as many kids in on special teams and have improved at getting kids ready to go where they can start and give our starters a blow.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2007 14:06:16 GMT -6
Tom--Obviously I am not advocating just playing kids to play them. However, I think everything possible should be done to two platoon. It develops program strength and depth, increases kid involvement, and allows for learning and improvement at a much greater pace
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2007 14:19:06 GMT -6
However, if you are consitently only playing 14 to 15 kids a game, and not looking vigorously for opportunities to play more kids, I can't see how that blueprint will ever lead to a championship caliber program. You may have years where the talent of those 14 or 15 could take you deep into the playoffs, and maybe even get a state title, but I can't see the program developing the program strength to be a solid contender on a yearly basis.
that's what I'm talking about.
Regarding "diminishing returns" comment;
If "bobby" can get 260 minutes of instruction each week strictly on his position.......he can really shine and fully understand his assignment and know how to execute.....35 min individual, 70 min group, 155 min group TOTAL for the week.
Now if "bobby" plays two different positions (offense & defense), now he is getting 130 minutes TOTAL every week on his asignment.....17 min individual, 35 min group, 78 min group TOTAL for the week
So, by all rights, this ONE player gets twice as much work / instructional time during the week to be prepared.
Now work those Products to the context of a game
....a typical HS game averages 60 plays per unit......
120 snaps divided amongst 260 minutes of preparation time
or
60 snaps with 260 minutes of preparation time
(not counting take home work ...ie. DVDs etc)
4 1/2 minutes preparation per play for platooning squads versus 2 minutes per play for two-way programs.
Show me a coach that says he gives ALL his players equal reps during the season, and I'll show you a coach thats full of it.
In addition, now you actually have a TRUE scout team to go against your no.1s in group time, instead of turd holding bags.
Platooning, requires you coach the hell out of your kids.
I have coached two-way systems, and it is a complete pain in the butt to try and put in anything other than your base plays because you have to juggle the roster, trying to accomodate enough time to put something in (okay...okay...."bobby" is the tailback.....now, now...if you're playing DE on THIS adjustment....etc). Now if "bobby" gets injured or has to come out of the game.....now you have to figure out how that affects special teams and the other side of the ball...you may have to make a series of adjustments that requires three other players.
In addition to that, you get virtually ZERO production from your 2nd string during the season. With platooning, you can create specific role players as well as challenge your starters for playing time.
From the number example, if you had two weeks to prepare for an opponent as opposed to one week.........
DO YOU THINK YOUR PERFORMANCE WOULD BE ANY DIFFERENT?
(would you game plan any differently)
If you say no, then by all rights, platooning won't be your bag.
When you platoon, you really have a ton of time to game plan, make adjustments,
You will always have two to three complete monsters that can go both ways and handle it all, but they are the exception to the rule.
PLUS, it really promotes the numbers in your program ....more players playing = more parents taking involvement = more parents taking involvement = more money.
in addition, I think we are creating straw-man arguments by saying that your 2nd tier players are the class nerds. If the player can't run 10 yards, he shouldn't be out for football, let alone starting. The 2nd tier player are kids that are 2nd string players whom we are making an investment to COACH UP......you'd be surprised at how much a kid will do in the off-season when he knows;
1) he has a shot to start
2) he is being counted on (no, seriously) to produce (or get his job taken by an underclassman)
The Law of diminishing returns is not applicable to football. 1. It can be argued that in most games, the point of diminishing returns is never met. Teams sit their starters early, games usually aren't close, and even if they are close, these are teenagers, engines running a 100 mph, most can handle it, with proper substitution. 2. If that point is met, it does not mean that the diminished performance of player A is still not heads and shoulders above that of player B. 3. The better kids on a football team usually aren't the best because of their athleticism, though there are always 3 that just run faster, jump higher, and throw better... but the other 11 starters are usually kids that understand the game better... and there is no diminishing return on knowldege. Here's the deal... kids are not equal... there are tangible quantifiable characteristics that separate kids... once you decide who your best players are... play them... to do otherwise does not make sense to me. If you have 22 comparable kids, more power to you, impressive, and you are either going to be world beaters, or you're in a world of trouble. However, if you are like most teams across America... you have a solid 14 kids... play them. To do otherwise sends a very bad message, the best 11 should get on the field, any other criteria creates a subjectivity that will readily become the demise of the team. ""If you have the ability to platoon then by all means do it, I would think it's a no brainer."""Define ability... because that is a huge "if"
If football was a bunch of kids running successive 40 yard dashes, I'd completely agree with you.
However, if you can prepare an athlete properly, you can train him to think / react faster on the field to complete his 1/11th responsibility on the field.
Conversely, I can take your 4.4 athlete and turn him into a 4.9 athlete if I throw enough things at him to make him indecisive on the field.
11 athletes going balls out in the humid months of September & October for 48 minutes versus 22 athletes in the same 48 minutes......one of those groups is going to remain 'fresh'.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2007 14:38:30 GMT -6
2nd point (gee, can you tell this is about the one thing I actually have an opinion on?) , platooning will NEVER make sense, if all you look at is one-season.
Platooning is a switch you make for the benefit of the entire PROGRAM, not just a one season fix. It NEVER is the 'right time' to platoon based on your numbers / talent.
Regarding the ORIGINAL question (sorry)
it depends....we sub the DL & WRs plenty to keep them fresh throughout the whole game.
Some times situational players come in (pass rushers / blitzers / etc). Some guys come in for reward time ( competent players who put in work during practice who aren't liabilities ).
When you have guys go down with injuries, you don't want to have to start from scratch (and coach up in just one week) with a player who is his backup.
In a nutshell, TRUE No.2s get about 15 - 17 % of the seasons game time (not counting garbage time).
Why? because, again, platooning isn't about ONE season....it's about the program. Giving your underclassmen reps (experience) ....getting your seniors reps (who weren't starters EVER)...getting kids invovled in the game.....THAT is what the program is about, ALL the players (not just the studs)
|
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Apr 16, 2007 14:58:16 GMT -6
We are a small school (3A in Kansas - about 270 students in grades 9-12 and about 50-55 out for football in 9-12 with just a 4 man staff - including me- last season), but we are really striving to become a platooning system. Last year we only had 4-5 kids who went both ways, and it made a big difference for us. Our offensive linemen didn't play defense, so they were fresh and we could coach them on the sideline. Our QB didn't go both ways either. Our fullback, both wings, and both TEs did go both ways most of the time.
One of the big benefits next season will be that we didn't graduate all eleven starters. Because we are at least attempting to platoon, we played a large number of younger kids who will be that much better in the fall.
It really did pay big dividends with player and parent buy-in as well. More kids starting leads to more kids really paying attention and working hard at practice; and more kids starting means fewer parent complaints as well. And in the off-season all the returning kids are busting their butts in the weightroom because they all believe they have a chance to start or get significant playing time next season.
One other benefit is that we had very few injuries. We didn't lose a single player for a whole game. Now we did have a couple of two-way starters get injured, and the following week we just played them on one-side of the ball.
And I should mention that our #1s practice against mostly #1s. That is so much better than our #1s beating up 2s and 3s all week and then having to face #1s on Friday night. In fact, this might be the best part of the platoon system.
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Apr 16, 2007 15:55:06 GMT -6
Good point brophy. Although I do have some of those kids that can't run 10 yards. And when I put together a 2 platoon depth chart they creep up it real quick. But if I take the top 6-7 linemen and use them in a rotation looks a lot better than going 2 deep across the line. That way you've got a starting 5 and a couple of guys to rotate in to keep guys fresh and in case of injury.
How do you do this if your platooning? Aren't your offense and defense #1's on separate ends of the field?
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Apr 16, 2007 16:20:38 GMT -6
How do you do this if your platooning? Aren't your offense and defense #1's on separate ends of the field? About the only time we are separate is during Individual time. We go No.1s (offense) vs No.1s (defense) during INSIDE DRILL / SKELLY / 7 ON 7 / 2 MIN DRILL / GOAL LINE then when it's TEAM time........it's balls out No.1s vs No.1s in DAILY scripted scrimmages. offense gets 15 plays defense gets 15 plays then offense gets 15 more plays defense gets 15 more plays ** we run OUR defense adjusted / modified to look like our opponent. .....we run OUR offense adjusted / modified to look like our opponent. (you can pepper in your subs in any of those 30 plays) then, you can go into any situational work you want to go into. this is a LOT more better than going against your make shift turd scouts squad . |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2007 16:25:42 GMT -6
ut--i think he means that when they do group work (inside, skel, team) that they go 1's v 1's. This is a good benefit, BUT obviously it is even better if you can get a good look from your 2's, then you don't need to spend time "servicing" the D or O by having your 1's run scout.
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 16, 2007 16:53:56 GMT -6
In theory...
the Platoon method sounds great...
In reality...
Finding 11 players is hard enough...
Last year I assistant coached 6a ball, pretty big football, 1500 - 1700 kids in the school.
Due to a talent deficiency, we had a Sophomore and Freshman battling it out for starting QB...
Stud Senior HB/LB and a Stud Senior WR/TE/DE, both went down with injury, and had to be replaced by another Freshman and Sophomore duo. There weren't a plethora of kids ready to be moved into those places... no way did we have 4 kids to replace those 2...
Had a total of about 90 kids within the entire program... and at the time, I was a huge proponent of Platooning... it just wasn't a reality that year... and it made me realize, that if I were ever blessed with 11 prototypical players... why would I ever take them off the field, besides the occassional breather to keep them fresh?
Everyone likes to talk program development... well that's Freshman and JV ball. That's where everyone gets to play, regardless of skill level... That's where we make sure to give kids time, to see if they've earned the right to see Friday Night Lights.
Varsity ball is all about being the best. You've had 3 years to EARN your spot... if you have'nt earned it by then... then shame on you.
Again... in theory, Platooning makes a lot of sense... but tell me this...
If my QB's a stud / shouldn't he also be my FS... who reads coverages better, recognizes routes better?
If my HB's a stud / shouldn't he be a LB... who better to run it down from the backside, read the open and closed door?
If my FB's a stud / shouldn't he be my MLB... obviously the toughest kid on the team... with feet good enough to stay mobile...
If my D-line are my most agile and aggressive big boys / shouldn't they be on my o-line so that I can pull and trap, and know, if I'm not successful, it wasn't because I was out manned?
And my best WR's... how could they not be my best DB's?
I think its really just the opposite... There ARE NOT 3 to 4 kids that have to go both ways... but more like 3 to 4 kids, that DO NOT have to go both ways... Most of your Kids probably have to go both ways! Let's take a vote... by a show of hands...
Here are the KIDS THAT ONLY GET TO GO ONE WAY!
There's that possesion WR, slow as death, but great hands and always gets open.
The speed burner DB, not too smart, horrible hands, but quick enough to make up for bad decisions.
That big OL/DL that has no cardiovascular, but is a heck of an immovable object.
The QB, as non-atheletic as can be, but throws a mean ball, and just mobile enough to turn and hand the ball off...
Tell me I'm lying...
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Apr 16, 2007 17:46:02 GMT -6
I hear what your saying khalfie. But say I've got 8 lineman type kids, 2 of which are beasts that probably should play both ways,and 6 that are in the 5-11 to 6-1, 200 to 230 lb range, some a little taller, some a little wider, but basically the same kid. Outside of the 2 studs, would I not be better teaching half the kids offense and half the kids defense all the time? Just choose the line as an example, like if I have 6 kids that are 6' to 6-3, 180-190 lbs, why not teach half of them to be wings and half to be SS/OLB's? Does that make sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2007 17:46:41 GMT -6
not lying--just short sighted in my opinion, and not really looking at the best way to build program strength. I just don't see your recipe equalling years of success. It might get you some wins one year, but long term, I don't think that will benefit you, your kids, your program, or your school. Again, just one opinion.
What i see in your post is lots of kids quitting. I can not forsee a senior class of 30-32 kids, if it becomse well known that the HC is going to play 14 kids, and the rest can cover special teams. (Incidentally, this makes special teams a WHOLE LOT LESS SPECIAL and therefored viewed that way by the kids)
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 16, 2007 18:27:28 GMT -6
not lying--just short sighted in my opinion, and not really looking at the best way to build program strength. I just don't see your recipe equalling years of success. It might get you some wins one year, but long term, I don't think that will benefit you, your kids, your program, or your school. Again, just one opinion. What i see in your post is lots of kids quitting. I can not forsee a senior class of 30-32 kids, if it becomse well known that the HC is going to play 14 kids, and the rest can cover special teams. (Incidentally, this makes special teams a WHOLE LOT LESS SPECIAL and therefored viewed that way by the kids) Hill Larry Us... Hey, my 14 play special teams also... But here's the rub... word won't get out that I only play 14 kids... word should get out that Coach puts the best 11 on the field... why can't that be the message? Heck... if I get 22 ballers... I'll play 22 ballers, but on average, you only see about 14. It is my obligation to teach my kids the love of the game... the love of practice, the competitive spirit to be the best... that is fostered Freshman year to junior year... come senior year... its big boy ball... and you have to bring it... to get it. What's your opinion on loyalty to seniors? If they are equal to an underclassmen, who do you give the start to? All I'm saying, is my loyalty is to the best... |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Apr 16, 2007 18:31:30 GMT -6
I hear what your saying khalfie. But say I've got 8 lineman type kids, 2 of which are beasts that probably should play both ways,and 6 that are in the 5-11 to 6-1, 200 to 230 lb range, some a little taller, some a little wider, but basically the same kid. Outside of the 2 studs, would I not be better teaching half the kids offense and half the kids defense all the time? Just choose the line as an example, like if I have 6 kids that are 6' to 6-3, 180-190 lbs, why not teach half of them to be wings and half to be SS/OLB's? Does that make sense? Right... Can't argue that at all... as a matter of fact... if we play out your numbers... 2 stud linemen going both ways... QB, Halfback, Fullback, TE, and 1WR going both ways... that's a total of 7... add the 8 going one way... and you my friend are playing 15 players... That's all I was saying... that's all i was saying...  |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Apr 16, 2007 18:41:36 GMT -6
not lying--just short sighted in my opinion, and not really looking at the best way to build program strength. I just don't see your recipe equalling years of success. It might get you some wins one year, but long term, I don't think that will benefit you, your kids, your program, or your school. Again, just one opinion. What i see in your post is lots of kids quitting. I can not forsee a senior class of 30-32 kids, if it becomse well known that the HC is going to play 14 kids, and the rest can cover special teams. (Incidentally, this makes special teams a WHOLE LOT LESS SPECIAL and therefored viewed that way by the kids) I don't think that that's necessarily true. We play kids both ways and we've had quite a bit of success. In fact, most of the successful programs here play a fair percentage of their players on both sides of the ball. We don't have great numbers. We have about 1400 students and maybe 70 players varsity and JV. We don't worry abut numbers, though. All of our kids know what's expected and do it. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2007 18:46:15 GMT -6
But khalfie...OBVIOUSLY you are going to have 11 kids better than everyone else. Florida has 11 kids better than everyone else, and I would argue that most DL in BCS ball would be better OL in BCS ball than the OL playing. That doesn't mean that they are just going to play those kids.
This isn't about playing kids just to play them. It is about realizing that for your team to WIN THE WAR...and become highly competitive on a year in, year out basis..rather than just surviving and winning 2 or 3 games a year (and going 6-4 in a great one) The thought processes must be what gets MY PROGRAM to the next level.
|
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Apr 16, 2007 19:49:07 GMT -6
I understand but I guess I didn't make my point clear. I meant to extend that all the way through the lineup. I think we're saying close to the same thing. I agree that there's gonna be 2 or 3 or 4 guys that pretty well should go both ways, but past them if I have about 18 guys that are roughly equal (given that those numbers break down and even out into each postion group), wouldn't you be better off splitting them in half and teaching each side offense or defense exclusively?
|
|
