|
Post by windigo on Jan 29, 2014 13:27:40 GMT -6
Well lets look at the explosive play.
Take a game our team had against a very good T formation team.
This teams explosive play was trap. Our defensive game plan was to stop anything off tackle and give them trap. Was this carzy? No because the as is usually the case with misdirection running teams the reason trap is such an explosive play is because the off tackle stuff has been hurting you so your players over play off tackle and trap catches them inside. By shutting down the off tackle game through alignment and forcing them to run trap the trap never surprised us and it never broke for big yards.
Now if you looked at everything by stats you would go in like most teams do thinking 'we have to stop trap we have to stop trap'. You play to stop the big play, they eat you up off tackle, and when your players over adjust to the off tackle game boom trap breaks for 60.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 29, 2014 12:17:26 GMT -6
I think that is what we see with Chip Kelly's approach no single plays but concepts for each modular unit of the offense that are practiced over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 28, 2014 12:32:23 GMT -6
As someone who boxed when I was younger this has always been a tough one for me. You see guys who are punchy so its hard to say that it doesn't have an effect.
With studies coming out that say there is no greater occurrence than the general population I'm stating to form a hypothesis that it is both nature and nurture. Simply put those who are prone to develop it do so sooner in life but would have anyways.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 28, 2014 10:27:50 GMT -6
I think those stats can be a reminder for coaches to practice things that directly affect these stats. The things that directly effect those stats are blocking and tackling. You can look at each of those 11 points and equate them fundamentally to the blocking and tackling of each team.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 27, 2014 12:52:09 GMT -6
I saw that in college football the best predictive stat of the kind of season a team would have is the cumulative starts of the offensive line.
All that stat represents is how well your team blocks.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 27, 2014 10:38:29 GMT -6
If you are blocking well and tackling well those "stats" are usually very good.
Stats are just a reflection of your execution.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 24, 2014 11:13:41 GMT -6
While the national championship argument is specious Alabama doesn't exactly race teams out of the stadium.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 23, 2014 10:51:14 GMT -6
Stanford isn't faster than the teams they play. They simply run you the hell over.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 22, 2014 18:27:04 GMT -6
I'm not talking about players coaching. I'm talking about players leading. In my experience too many coaches and there isn't enough of a power vacuum for players to step up and lead. You might disagree. But address directly and not make some bogus strawman argument about players teaching technique. Without player leadership a team will never reach its full potential. I don't know how it is in your program but in our program all of the coaches coach. They all teach technique. We don't have anybody hanging around shouting slogans. I really don't understand your argument. What is there not to understand. You need a leadership vacuum for the natural leaders to stand up and lead. With too many coaches its hard for that vacuum to form.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 22, 2014 17:48:22 GMT -6
Simple question what in the world made you think that my post had anything to do with players teaching technique? My post was about leadership and the necessity for there to be somewhat of a leadership vacuum. Address the point dont talk around it. I didn't talk around a damn thing. Coaches coach and players play. If that's not clear enough for you feel free to ask for another clarification. I'm not talking about players coaching. I'm talking about players leading. In my experience too many coaches and there isn't enough of a power vacuum for players to step up and lead. You might disagree. But address directly and not make some bogus strawman argument about players teaching technique. Without player leadership a team will never reach its full potential.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 22, 2014 17:37:43 GMT -6
I disagree with as many as you can. A team needs a leadership vacuum for players to fill. Too many officers and none of the enlisted will men stand up and take charge. Couldn't disagree more. I don't expect our players teach technique. That's what coaches are for. Simple question what in the world made you think that my post had anything to do with players teaching technique? My post was about leadership and the necessity for there to be somewhat of a leadership vacuum. Address the point dont talk around it.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 22, 2014 14:35:57 GMT -6
I disagree with as many as you can. A team needs a leadership vacuum for players to fill. Too many officers and none of the enlisted will men stand up and take charge.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 22, 2014 14:30:32 GMT -6
I think it has to do with how you approach it. We strive to me masters of techniques not plays. We have basic fundamental techniques. Our run blocking is 3 techniques down block, pull kick out, pull lead up.
That is it.
We build plays off of these techniques. We run many concepts off of this and we adapt concepts to fit these techniques. For instance if a concept calls for a double team like power we just down block it. But if a concept doesn't fit with our techniques we don't run it. We will not add a technique just to run one concept.
A fundamental flaw of a big playbook isn't the plays as much as it is the different techniques needed to run them. Indy practice time becomes diluted with way to many different drills teaching different things.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Nov 15, 2013 14:53:45 GMT -6
Here is what you do.
On your hudl account for the team you are playing that week put up a game plan of full house T formation.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Nov 15, 2013 14:49:23 GMT -6
We were told the same crap.
Two state championships later...
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Nov 15, 2013 14:43:28 GMT -6
Been a lot of talk about this in the strength and conditioning forums.
There is no evidence that cold stretching before a workout does anything to reduce injuries. There is a lot of evidence that stretching before a workout makes you weaker. The stretch reflex temporarily weakens the muscle.
What does reduce injury and what does make you a better athlete is flexibility. Which is the product of a long term established stretching routine that is best done when you are warm.
IMHO a good dynamic warmup to start practice and a nice stretch to end it.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Oct 3, 2013 11:08:11 GMT -6
Taking over a losing program that has not won a league game in 3 years. I'm trying to change the program but 2 seniors and 1 juniors are cancer. They have days where they go full speed and other days where they give no effort at all. Sadly enough I need them to win games and possibly change the program. Few questions: -Is philosophy more important than winning? - Is winning important to change a program and then you change philosophy? - Thoughts? Ideas? It's ALWAYS the talented ones. 1) responsibility is more important then winning. 2) winning is a by-product of a good program... Not an ingredient I can guarantee you that they are not the only players loafing. You just notice it because they are more talented.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Oct 1, 2013 15:19:49 GMT -6
I cant say for other positions but I'm very careful with the line. From my own experience as a player when you are hyped and the adrenalin is flowing explosive strength activities like drive blocking will drain you quick. If anything I see it as more calming them down and getting focused than warming up.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Apr 29, 2013 15:02:44 GMT -6
The key to remember with statistics is that its kind of like Schrodinger's cat. You cant look into the box. Once you do the experiment is broken. Once the undervalued statistic becomes valued it loses much of its predictive nature. This is what has been seen in baseball. Once those stats become valued players and teams start trying to maximize those stats. A new equilibrium is reached and the value of the stats change.
Stats can only be assigned a value in the present equilibrium. Once that equilibrium changes as a result of that value the value too will change.
The best stats are the ones that are the toughest to game. The most predictive team stat for collage ball is the cumulative starts by the offensive line. And it keeps its value because its not something that can be gamed. But at the same time that does us no good as we cant do anything about it the experience we have on the line is primarily chance.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 12, 2012 13:10:56 GMT -6
Its just a fluke thing.
This wasn't a wide receiver diva. It was an offensive lineman. I guarantee you that his helmet is well strapped on and even then he gets his chin strap pushed into his nose, which really hurts BTW, at least once a game. He also is never going to quit or worry about his own safety. If his quarterback is in trouble he is going to earhole the defender helmet or not.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Sept 29, 2011 16:30:02 GMT -6
We just don't have enough time or kids to that kind of stuff, even if our kids could handle it. Well say you have them run a trick play during walk thoughs like swinging gate. It doesn't take much time they have some fun. You dont really care if you run it perfect. Thats not the point. Once you get it on film every other team has to spend about 20 mins of real practice time practicing against it.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 12, 2011 11:48:43 GMT -6
NCAA 12 is out today. That is always good to get the comrades back in swing.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 12, 2011 11:40:22 GMT -6
Its never bothered me. It is more why the fight occurs. I expect OL/DL to come to blows from time to time as they establish their boundaries. If there are no fights on the line something is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 7, 2011 9:10:34 GMT -6
Your first paragraph makes complete and total sense to me. As for your second paragraph, I'm not sure I buy that, but I'll defer to those more knowledgeable than I. Regardless, I can't fathom any of our guys are near the point of being so flexible they're risking injury. The military has done studies on the subject. They have found that the highest rates of injury occure in the least and most flexible groups. But it does take a lot of work to get that flexible. But comming from a judo background I can attest that the guys with the best hip throws have the most flexible hips and also suffer from the highest rate of injury because they move their hips well beyond the normal human range. Case in point Toshihiko Koga.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 6, 2011 16:03:56 GMT -6
Stretching isn't what reduces the risk of injury. Being flexible is what reduces the risk of injury. Flexiblity is achieved through a stretching regimen done over a long time. Better results will be achieved stretching a warm muscle after practice than before.
Note: You can be too flexible and be able move the joints beyond the their normal range of motion also increacing the risk of injury.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 6, 2011 15:44:51 GMT -6
To continue Mora:
And some times you think its good but some opposing coach watches the same film and sees all sorts of weakness in your own team you never saw.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 1, 2011 9:48:49 GMT -6
Excellent post. Most of the time this scenario isn't really discussed, but I think you hit the nail on the head. I believe that when coming into a situation like this you need to recognize your biggest asset and use it. Your biggest asset when coming into a winning program is the graduated players who still live in the area or in the case of college are still on campus. Once again this is where experience can trip up coaches who are use to coming into losing programs. When you come into a losing program those graduated players are usually poison. You don’t want them anywhere near your team. If keeping those guys away from the program has become your modus operandi over the years then when you come into a winning program you are denying yourself a great asset. Those guys not only have the right attitude and the respect of the upperclassmen who’s respect you are going to have to earn, they also know the previous system better than you do and they can help you transition the team over time instead of trying to do everything in one massive fell swoop. In my case we had about a half dozen players who had used up their eligibility still living on campus, two of them All-Americans. When the new HC came in he didn't approach any of them to come help because his experience taking over losing teams had conditioned him not too. That was a big mistake. Those guys would have really helped. Imagine the effect it had on the upperclassmen when we found out that our All-American was coaching at one of our rivals while still living on campus because the HC didn't want him on his staff or even around the program. For us upperclassmen to hear that from our friend and captain was like a punch to the gut.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jun 29, 2011 11:45:28 GMT -6
I already gave mine in another thread. Ours was the fundamental problem that many coaches face when coming to a winning program instead of a losing one. And yes he brought in a new staff. It didn't make a lick of difference. Most of the time you come into a program the reason you were brought in was because the team was losing and it was time for a change. In this situation its easy to get your players to buy into a new system because they want a new identity. Coaches who have a history of comming into losing programs get set in their ways of how they approach a new job. The problem is that not all new coaching jobs and programs have that atmosphere around them.
Its is not always taht the team was losing that required a new coahc. Sometimes you are brought in because the team was doing so well that the head coach or OC/DC got snapped up by a bigger program offering more money. Or said person was winning but had personal conflict with the admin. In this situation adopting a new system will most always be a disaster because the players aren't looking for a new identity. They are looking to get better at what they do. While your freshmen may not care your upper classmen already know that they have only a short time left and they are not interested in learning a new way to skin a cat when the one they know works just fine. If you try and force a new system on them you will lose them and with them the entire team. Once more you might not have the skill set on the team to play at the same level that the team was previously playing at if you switch. This is a sure fire recipe to have a short stay at your new job.
So we need to fundamentally recognize the situation we are coming into. You can’t force the players into accepting change. The environment needs to be there for them to be ready to accept change. If we misjudge the situation or are just down right suborn and obstinate about our system we stand a good chance of getting fired in short order. You can bring in a whole new staff of people who will back your play 110% of the time. It wont make a lick of difference if you cant win over the players that are already there.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jun 23, 2011 17:24:25 GMT -6
What type of drills and team activities do you do that helps your team to overcome adverse situations during the course of a game or a season. In our program we have been very successful but we still have break downs when things go bad. Please give me your team drills to overcome bleak situations? I wish I knew. I'm not sure that there is such a thing. If a coach has any I'd be happy to learn but I'm not sure there is. It happened for us but it was a process that was naturally learned. We had games last year where we as a staff had to come in and refocus the team. Fast forward to the state championship game, we've just played our worst first half of football all year and I fully expect that we as a staff are going to have to go in and refocus our players per the usual. But we get in there and the players are 100% focused with an attitude of 'ok we've been here before lets go out and win this {censored} thing' as a staff we really had to do nothing. If anything it was being in those situations before and overcoming them that got us to that point. I'm not sure it can be coached.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jun 23, 2011 17:11:55 GMT -6
Sometimes you need to go in an change everything. Sometimes you dont and shouldn't. I've been in both situations.
1st situation.
A flexbone option team with a strong winning record and great athletes loses its coach just before August to a better offer from a larger program. The coach that comes in has no opportunity to recruit and has that team and it’s a very good team.
But he wants to run his system. His system is pro style power football and he is going to put it in that year come hell or high-water. He didn't get to recruit anyone to come play in his system. He has no one on his team with a tight end skill set. He has no fullbacks on his team. Half of his skill players are A backs who's skill set has no role in his offense. He has no true one cut half back. His guards aren't pulling guards. His all-conference quarterback is the best runner in the conference and his offense has no QB runs.
It was a disaster. He totally lost the upper class as we couldn't for the life of us figure out why our best player was handing the ball off 30 times a game to running back by committee as the coach searched for that great half back that wasn't on the team. We knew full well that our QB needed to have the ball in his hands if we were going to win. Our team goals going into the season were to win the conference and go undefeated. We were at that level. Our goal was not to spend the season trying to find a new offensive identity because we didn’t' need one. We were {censored} good at what we did and there was total rebellion.
Contrast that to where I'm at now. Coach was fired I don’t want to get into the details. The area is urban with great athletes but for some reason we had always been a run heavy team. New coach comes in and recognizes the athletic ability that we have and we go spread.
It was a total success.
There are times you should change and there are times you should not. No matter how good your system is sometimes you simple cant run it because it will fail and you will be fired. It aint the Xs and Os it’s the jimmies and the Joes. Your Xs and Os may not be right for those jimmies and Joes. You also have to get your players to buy into your new system. It is very hard to down right impossible to get a winning team to buy into a new system. Winning players are not interested in finding a new identity. They are interested in perfecting what they are already doing.
|
|