|
Post by indian1 on Apr 16, 2009 13:09:27 GMT -6
at tri-pod deer stand would probably be your best bet. They are safe and probably light enough to move when you need to.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Apr 15, 2009 19:14:19 GMT -6
just win the f%$cking game
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Apr 13, 2009 18:48:57 GMT -6
This show sucks.
If I had to choose between FNL and watching frogs mate, I'd watch the frogs mate even if the picture was fuzzy.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Apr 8, 2009 19:05:15 GMT -6
You're an expert the first year. After that you realize you don't know $hit, and spend the rest of the time learning realizing you'll never be an "expert".
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Apr 7, 2009 19:34:25 GMT -6
Brophy, Great thread.
I discuss this concept with my staff a lot. I always tell them that with film reps, practice reps and game reps they will begin to see a wider and wider view of what is happening. Our job is to understand what should happen, see what did happen, diagnose it as good, bad or ugly and make the necessary corrections/ adjustments.
This can be a tough sell for the rah rah guys or guys who consider themselves "old school" who think that football is just a "who has bigger balls" contest.
These guys want to say "I put my stud at Mike LB and he is going to make stops".
I want my staff to be able to tell me who should make the tackle based on the players' alignment and assignment vs. any play out of any formation. The fact is no matter how good our stud is on defense there are going to be times when its the worst guy on the field's job to make the tackle.
I'm learning that there are thousands of variables at work during a football game. As coaches we need to get a certain number of those variables working in our favor to produce a win. No one knows just how many variables that is and the number can change every game, so we must constantly try to get more of those variables in our favor and hope that its enough.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Mar 6, 2009 21:53:17 GMT -6
this is a great thread because this concept is the right approach. We coach these boys not just to win games or compete but to contribute to the "greater good"
Love IF by Kipling (thanks Brody)
and love: A man does what needs to be done, when it needs done, the way it needs done, and he does it that way all the time. (my college coach always used that one)
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Mar 4, 2009 13:50:02 GMT -6
LB
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 26, 2009 20:09:50 GMT -6
That's the point. You hear coaches saying on here that they're doing a good job but nobody can win there. I'm looking for reasons why.[/quote]
You already know the answer. Those guys who say they are doing a good job are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 26, 2009 19:40:38 GMT -6
This thread is a list of things that a coach can't control so they don't matter.
The responsibility lies with the HC and his staff period. All of these other issues do exist. They are a pain in the @$$, but in the end the coaching staff has to figure out a way to succeed.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 20, 2009 19:46:07 GMT -6
Football is a way better learning environment than a classroom. Classrooms have been so bastardized and watered down by politics its pathetic.
I tell people all the time that I learned a hell of a lot more playing college football than I did in any classroom. Football is exacting. There is no place to hide when you don't know whats going on, no extra credit to turn in after you screwed up, and when your assignment is due, its due. Turning in late work won't stop the other team from scoring.
School should be that way but its not.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 20, 2009 13:27:49 GMT -6
I'd tell that golf coach that its not his place to evaluate YOUR program or team. He doesn't get to decide what helps your team or program. If you think that track helps your players and you encourage your guys to run track, thats your business. He can encourage his golfers to do whatever he wants them to.
Throwing that 0-8 thing in there would royally pi$$ me off.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 17, 2009 11:01:08 GMT -6
ditto dcohio
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 13, 2009 7:09:00 GMT -6
totally agree with phantom on this one.
However, if you wanted to make some sort of compromize, test them. Make them come in for testing once a month and see if they are getting stronger. I think this would expose them. Usually guys who say they are doing this don't really workout like they say they are going to.
Then when they come in for testing and aren't stronger cut them. Or the other scenario is they won't show up for testing : cut them.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 6, 2009 7:10:45 GMT -6
Love the article. Totally agree with the idea that we should use analysis of statistical evidence to make decisions. Like someone posted earlier, all good business work this way. I'll go one further and say all good organizations work this way.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Feb 5, 2009 7:02:17 GMT -6
I went to college to become a teacher. I played college football but had no real interest in coaching. I landed my first teaching job (at 22) in part because they wanted me to be an assisstant on their varsity staff. I did that for two years and the HC position opened at my high school alma mater. (by this time I had realized I loved coaching). I applied, and got it. I became a head coach at age 24 with no clue what the hell I was doing.
That was four years ago. I can't believe how much I have learned. (Mostly what I have learned is that I still don't know $h!t.)
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Jan 27, 2009 14:19:38 GMT -6
you have to decide if you can change the situation or not.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Jan 27, 2009 7:26:51 GMT -6
The discussion about how many numbers you need versus trimming the fat is good but that in itself does not build a program.
You could have all of the best kids out and still screw them up if they are not given proper direction. You need a sound weightroom philosophy, scheme, teaching progression, and its important to stick to these over time to give your players a chance to develop. Make decisions about changing these based on FACT not feeling.
We have all seen coaches with a lot of good kids completely screw them up by playing "defense of the week" or running an offense that no one can understand.
I think some of the guys who are posting about trimming the fat are making the assumption that all of the other variables of building a program are in place.
Program development=player development. (this takes time and stability)
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Jan 24, 2009 10:29:12 GMT -6
dcohio, great post.
One thing that I think is critical to building a program is giving your schemes, weightroom philosophy, practice philosophy TIME TO WORK.
A lot of times its easy to try something and scrap it quickly if it doesn't seem to be paying off right away. You see guys scrap an offense or a defense after a season or two, or jump on the next trend in weight training. Really what they are doing is forcing their program to "restart" each time they change something.
For me, a big part of program building is having the patience to allow the program to build. Giving schemes and systems time gives your players a chance to develop and become confident.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Jan 20, 2009 18:27:29 GMT -6
Sometimes you have to get their attention.......
|
|
|
Losing
Jan 20, 2009 18:25:22 GMT -6
Post by indian1 on Jan 20, 2009 18:25:22 GMT -6
What were the Eagles players supposed to do after they lost? Throw a fit? Stomp around like a mad little kid?
They are PROFESSIONALS. Its a JOB.
What do you guys do after a hard day's work? I like to RELAX. That's what the players were doing after the game.
Those players compete at a level that few of us can imagine. They can act however they want when they are finished. We are talking about grown men here.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Jan 13, 2009 7:06:15 GMT -6
tv you are way off. Read anything about John Wooden. He NEVER talked about winning, only performance and execution.
If you talk about winning you take the players' minds off of the task in front of them which is PERFORMANCE. They need to stay focused on what they are doing to have a chance to win. Players have to be focused on the process, not the outcome. If they focus too much on the outcome they forget to take care of the process.
You see this all the time with bad teams. The players subconsciously want to find out if they can win or not BEFORE they decide to play hard. They will never admit that even to themselves but it happens. A bad team gets a little momentum early in a game and they start playing harder than they played all year. Or, the other team makes some plays early and it looks like it will be hard to win and they fold. This mentality comes from being too focused on the outcome (winning/ losing) instead of the process (executing, playing hard).
|
|
|
Heroes
Dec 28, 2008 12:02:01 GMT -6
Post by indian1 on Dec 28, 2008 12:02:01 GMT -6
I don't need reasons to have heroes.
Woody Hayes may have been an SOB but at least in Ohio he was OUR SOB. Like I said before if a guy seems to good to be true he probably is. I can admire someone if I know is faults. I have faults too. Its easier to relate.
|
|
|
Heroes
Dec 27, 2008 21:04:10 GMT -6
Post by indian1 on Dec 27, 2008 21:04:10 GMT -6
Woody Hayes.
Yeah I know he punched a player. Still my hero.
Delta,
Lou Holtz still a hero.
Martin Luther King still a hero. Credit where credit is due.
If you want you can tear anyone down. The best men in history have been flawed in lots of ways but that does not mean that they weren't great men.
Besides that if a guy is too squeaky clean I don't trust him. All that means is no one has found him out yet!
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 19, 2008 11:13:50 GMT -6
Posted by irishblitzer on Today at 9:31am If it's coaching that brings you up to higher levels than you thought possible then the argument exists that coaching can likewise bring you down when you fall short.
Absolutely. Don't shy away from the responsibility. The great programs are not accidents and neither are the failures. Just like any organization. The leadership from the top is what makes or breaks it.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 18, 2008 21:19:19 GMT -6
right on the nuts delta
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 18, 2008 20:48:08 GMT -6
You guys who mention that its coaching are exactly right. The reason more guys (coaches) won't say this is because if those great successes come from coaching then the programs who fail are also due to coaching. This is a pretty exacting business.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 16, 2008 21:19:37 GMT -6
Bob Rotella (SP?) is pretty good. Most his books are geared toward golf but he is a sports psych. and the material can easily be related to any sport.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 9, 2008 14:05:12 GMT -6
In Vanderlinden's book he says that they keep track of plays given up over 15 yds (he calls them explosion plays). His best defenses gave up less than one +15 yd play per game.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Dec 8, 2008 17:38:24 GMT -6
This is a good article but it isn't a passing vs. running thing. Osbborne talks about innovation and the evolving of offenses. Of course that's going to happen.
Florida is a good spread team and they can run the ball. T-Tech had a good team this year and Leach said he thought they were better this year because they could run the ball better.
Is Oklahoma a spread team? They line up in shotgun with one back most of the time but they are so effective offensively is because they can do both. They have a great line, great QB. They can run and pass to lots of threats. Sounds like a good offense to me.
|
|
|
Post by indian1 on Nov 20, 2008 21:26:03 GMT -6
terminate his command with extreme prejudice.
|
|