|
Post by coachks on Oct 18, 2016 8:43:47 GMT -6
I really don't understand the premise of this argument. Atleast anywhere I have ever been, kids could not identify an "offense" or an offensive system. They are worried about their role in the offense. Most good, skilled, "football kids" identify themselves as RB and want to carry the ball. Some big lineman kids want to be a TE instead. The QB wants to throw. You might get 1-2 kids who are "real" WR types (lanky and athletic, can't play RB).
Being in a run-based, 3 back offense (Wing-t, DW, Flex ect...) doesn't stop you from throwing the ball 15-20 times. That might be more pass attempts then most spread teams have. Your QB can throw it and run around and put up stats. You can make a skilled big kid happy by letting him be a TE. You can give the ball to 2 or 3 different RB. You can throw plenty of deep balls to a true WR.
If you choose to only throw the ball 2-3 times.... sure. But that isn't an offensive system issue... thats an overall strategy issue.
For what its worth, what value are kids who want to be "spread" WR bringing your program? Do they want to go out and tackle on kickoff team? Are they going to play defense? Are they going to block? If they are willing to do those things, why does your offensive system matter? If they aren't going to do those things, are they really the kids you want to build your program around?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Oct 15, 2016 10:06:10 GMT -6
Breaking down film is fine. I actually enjoy it. Putting the crap into HUDL is a nightmare. I used to be able to (on average) watch a tape 4 times in about an hour and 20 minutes and get Formations, Plays, Right / Left, Strong / Weak tagged and have the basic breakdown done. Writing things down and putting stick marks on a legal pad. if it was somebody who ran a grab-bag or 150 formations it might slow it down a bit... but hardly every over 2 hours (of actual breakdown). HUDL takes me almost twice as long because I have to wait for clips to load - go back and delete things that it "auto fills" for me. I might still be writing the previous clip when it goes to the next clip and when I finish the input it takes it back a clip. Can't watch it in fast forward (when when you are doing Right / Left (or even strong weak) you can do on a tape. The breakdowns you get are great. Having all that data so accessible is great. It is definitely a tool and that is why I still input the crap. Overall it probably saves time because you don't have to make physical copies of the tape and drive to a tape exchange.... but man does it suck sometimes doing a job in 3 hours that used to be done in 1:30. Why not just put your data into excel then import into HUDL then? I really did not know you can do that. I knew I could export to excel, did not know I could import. I'll have to look into that.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Oct 14, 2016 19:16:46 GMT -6
So basically what I've read is that a bunch of people in here don't like watching film, nor breaking it down, yet on other threads the same people are tired of finishing .500 or less every year. Lets put 2 and 2 together here... Breaking down film is fine. I actually enjoy it. Putting the crap into HUDL is a nightmare. I used to be able to (on average) watch a tape 4 times in about an hour and 20 minutes and get Formations, Plays, Right / Left, Strong / Weak tagged and have the basic breakdown done. Writing things down and putting stick marks on a legal pad. if it was somebody who ran a grab-bag or 150 formations it might slow it down a bit... but hardly every over 2 hours (of actual breakdown). HUDL takes me almost twice as long because I have to wait for clips to load - go back and delete things that it "auto fills" for me. I might still be writing the previous clip when it goes to the next clip and when I finish the input it takes it back a clip. Can't watch it in fast forward (when when you are doing Right / Left (or even strong weak) you can do on a tape. The breakdowns you get are great. Having all that data so accessible is great. It is definitely a tool and that is why I still input the crap. Overall it probably saves time because you don't have to make physical copies of the tape and drive to a tape exchange.... but man does it suck sometimes doing a job in 3 hours that used to be done in 1:30.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Sept 16, 2016 9:40:13 GMT -6
Scout O is bad, as a rule....
but JV scout O? That is torture. That is the sort of thing to make someone hang up the whistle. Our staff coaches both teams, so when we are JV defense I'm with D along with our DL coach. I draw up nice cards - big spacing on a manilla envelope - different blocks are color coded, ball carrier is color coded. Name of the play is on the top of the card. I'll write little notes (Motion is behind QB ect...), label the depth for passing routes. I'll even get in the Huddle and tell them the name of the person to block. We get a o.k. look on Varsity....
That JV crew though.... I had to end the session early one day last week so I didn't go batsh*t crazy on some poor scout teamer "Johnny, what did the card say"... "pull right"...."why didn't you pull?" .... *mouth-breathing, shrug, head drop*.... "Ok, lets run it again. This time pull and block so and so" .... "ok".... "You didn't pull?!?!?!?!" .... Repeat 15 times with 10 different kids.
Where did the card say to lineup? "I don't know".... what position are you playing ... "Tight End".... so where is the one labeled "TE".... "oh"....player goes to lineup..... on the wrong side.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 9, 2016 14:36:42 GMT -6
Do you have a a JV team? If you do, keep the Freshman down. You don't want a young kid to develop bad habits because he is over matched and overwhelmed. Let him dominate on JV and go from there.
Give #1 a special wristband that says what play to run until #2 is reliable enough to take his job.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 7, 2016 19:48:47 GMT -6
I'm not really sure where the disconnect is coming from what I'm writing and how you're taking it, but I'll try again here. If there was a non-school avenue and all I see about this kid is that he's talented, plays his butt off, works hard at practice, weight room, coaches and teammates have good things to say about him, etc. why wouldn't I "risk millions on him"? I'm not saying that kids at colleges shouldn't have to do the work, I'm saying that in pretty much every other sport in the world there's a path to professional play that doesn't involve being required to get a higher education. Yeah. Totally agreed. Under the current system, the way it works is that a kid can exchange his skill as a football player for a free college education. Well, that's great if what the kid is interested in is a free college education. But for kids who don't want a college education but still want to pursue a professional football career, there is no avenue. For those kids, there should be some kind of competitive track they can take that is parallel to the traditional NCAA route. There is a parallel route. You can play oversees, semi-pro, Arena or CFL for 3 years and then attend an open tryout or get enough film to get noticed. Nothing is stopping them from making the NFL if they have enough talent. Guys from those settings get invited to NFL camps every year (Didn't the 49ers just sign a rugby player with hardly any football experience).
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jul 25, 2016 20:47:58 GMT -6
Its a lie; in the context that he is presenting it (too people in that field, in order to sell a product) it's an exaggeration meant to imply he is more experienced then he is. He wasn't a college coach anymore then I coached for the Detroit Lions when I worked some youth camps. I mean, my check did say "coach" and came from the Detroit Lions..... do I list have NFL experience on my resume now? I mean, I worked with NFL players (they showed up to the camps....). To me, the answer is pretty cut and dry - Who did you coach for? If that answer isn't Position X for School Y for Years Z... then he wasn't a coach. I once coached with an "intern" who REGULARLY drew up scout cards or showed us plays that his school ran with the wrong number of players on the field and talked about all the guys they had recruited that ran Sub 4 40s. With all that said - If the articles are good then it shouldn't matter if he has college experience or not. But It's a lie meant to separate people from their money. I definitely have a problem with that. I disagree with such a generalized statement. I as mentioned above, I broke into Division 1 ball as a "student asst" at an FCS school. By the 2nd week of camp I was running the defensive scout team as well as cutting up offensive and defensive film, making film exchanges, coordinating all the video etc. By 1st game I was meeting separately with Centers and Guards, monitoring their academics working separately with them during parts of individual time, and had my own recruiting area. I was still "a student assistant" in title. In reality, I was an unpaid position coach 6 weeks into my first college experience. The other student assistant was setting up equipment for the d-line at practice, holding up scout cards while a position coach directed the offensive scout team and charting plays in the press box during games. So I disagree with your thought process SPECIFICALLY because of guys like the intern you worked with. I did not see myself as an "student asst" because most identified student asst as what the other guy was doing. This author might not see himself as a guy like you worked with. It is a matter of perspective. If you were putting it on a resume - What would you list? If they called your Head Coach, would he say you were an intern or the assistant OL coach? That is really the only question that matters here. If you would list - Interior OL Coach - Blank University - 1998-1999 then I don't have an issue with it. To me, that is not a matter of perspective and it does not matter if you see yourself as better then the other Interns or not. Most people see themselves different from how everyone else sees them - Thats why people get titles and positions that can be verified - so I can't "basically be the Head Coach" because I think I know more then the other guy. The "ethical" portion of the question is why is he doing it? To make money, by claiming to be more then he was.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jul 25, 2016 19:46:49 GMT -6
Its a lie; in the context that he is presenting it (too people in that field, in order to sell a product) it's an exaggeration meant to imply he is more experienced then he is. He wasn't a college coach anymore then I coached for the Detroit Lions when I worked some youth camps. I mean, my check did say "coach" and came from the Detroit Lions..... do I list have NFL experience on my resume now? I mean, I worked with NFL players (they showed up to the camps....).
To me, the answer is pretty cut and dry - Who did you coach for? If that answer isn't Position X for School Y for Years Z... then he wasn't a coach. I once coached with an "intern" who REGULARLY drew up scout cards or showed us plays that his school ran with the wrong number of players on the field and talked about all the guys they had recruited that ran Sub 4 40s.
With all that said - If the articles are good then it shouldn't matter if he has college experience or not. But It's a lie meant to separate people from their money. I definitely have a problem with that.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 27, 2014 21:09:26 GMT -6
So much of this research is based on narratives. Former football players commit suicide, so do a large amount of non-football players. In fact, NFL'ers have a suicide rate at about 25% of the general population (As in, the rate of NFL suicides is significantly lower than the general population). Former football players suffer dementia, so do plenty of individuals who have never played a down. In fact, based on a recent article posted (It was on SI.com) NFL'ers do not suffer from CTE at a rate significantly different from the general population.
In fact, a lot of what it really boils down to is they examined the brain of former players - Found differences and declared football to be the cause of serious brain injuries later in life. This supports the narrative of some former players and is a sensational story that probably has a root in truth. However, to point, I have not read a single study that compares the rate of dementia (and associated issues) between that of former players at different levels (NFL, NCAA, High School) with that of the general population. If anybody has a that data available I would like to read it.
Concussions are a separate issue - There is a litany of scientific data regarding the effects of "2nd concussion" syndrome and similar complications that can arise - especially for young players.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 24, 2013 14:55:05 GMT -6
- Playing the percentages - This ties in with point #2, and it's been talked about before, but the math favors going for 2 point conversions and being aggressive on 4th down. If the other team has more talent aren't they still better on 4th down? Yes. They are also better on 1st down, on special teams, when they have the ball and any other situation. Their are several different questions here though: - What are the odds you convert. - What are the odds that your conversion increases your probability of winning (are you going to score? shorten the game?) - How likely are they to score if they were to take over the ball at the current spot? - How likely are they to return the punt? Block it? Where do you expect them to take possession on a punt. - How likely are they to score from their expected starting field position? What is the difference between that spot and the current spot? If a team is going to hang 50 on you, it probably doesn't matter where they take the ball. If a team will struggle to get two scores, field position matters a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 24, 2013 7:58:54 GMT -6
I only have a passing knowledge, but I get the gist of Sabremetrics. I think in order apply the concepts to football, you have to look at unit metrics instead of individual ones. IE a really good QB won't statistically be as good if his WRs can't get open, or his OL can't protect. Now I am sure that there under valued units like ST that jump off the page, but maybe there are other under valued terms/metrics for units already valued in another way AND how do we go about quantifying them in term of creating values and standards for these values that are not the norm. IE what is the 'Mendoza line' for any unit vs. being a '.300 hitter'? Does anyone quantify these aspects of your team/units and if you do, what are the bench marks? - OL What is the average amount of time for created for the QB in the 3 step/5 step/7 step passing game? - QB How quickly can he move through his read progression Option 1, 2, 3, etc...? - DL How successful is a 4 man pressure vs. 5 man protection/6 man pro/7+ man pro? - LB How does the insertion of a LB into the pressure scheme affect the value of the 4 man pressure?* - WR How often are they targeted vs press coverage alignment vs off alignment? - WR How long does it take the WR to quickly/efficiently get to the 'get open' point against 1 high zone coverage structure vs. 2 high? *Then again the argument could be made that is it the LB himself or the particular pressure scheme?* Then again I don't know if you can accurately define and set values for any of these type of terms when scheme plays a significant roll. I think the best correlation that a coach could take is finding HOW they should value a particular player or unit. For a: - RB are YPC more important that YAC? - QB is Comp. % more important than Yds/Comp? Or Yds/ATT - DB are INTs more valued that # of attempted passing towards Rec. in that DB's area of responsibility? - DL are Sacks more important than TFL? or maybe the number of times they get trapped? - OL are sacks allowed more important than false starts? or false STEPS? I would be interested in the boards experts breaking down the graded values of their particular unit and assessing whether or not these are true measures of value for that unit. Should I be counting the number of steps a CB back pedals before he has to flip his hips, or should I just count the number of times he gets beat deep or gives up a catch? To backtrack a a bit and get into Sabermetrics, it starts with the "godfather" of the movement (Bill James). What James basically did was attempt to isolate why teams win, he found a few things of importance, the most important being that there is n accurate and predictable relationship between run differential and end of season record. He (and others), then ran regression analysis and found that the stat most highly correlated with runs scored was OBP. Using this data, and some other stuff, he and other SABR guys were able to develop the formula for runs created which is very pretty accurate. The pitching stuff is a little more complicated and developed much later. To bring it back to football, you would need to isolate which statistics are most positively correlated to winning. This has been done at the NFL level, but not all that well IMHO. Once you identify which variables are most positively correlated to winning you would then be able to judge your effectiveness at that variable.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 24, 2013 7:02:39 GMT -6
I have watched this movie probably 100 times since it came out, and I flat LOVE it!!! Why? I like anything that's "outside the box". Now I know, Beane is still waiting to win the last game of the season, but you have to admit, that his way of thinking, and his bravery for putting it all together, did change the game of baseball. What I've been thinking of for a while, is how can this thought process be applied the game of football? We have stats like baseball, yes, but they are not as telling IMO. I may be digging too deep here, but what the hell, we could all use some dialogue right?! Anyhow, I'm always looking for a way to fit the round peg in the round hole, and if the peg is square, can we sand on it enough to make it round (I do analogies can you tell?). Do you think this is even possible to translate over, or are the game to drastically different in nature for something like this to be effective? Hell, I don't even know how you would translate the stats, I mean, what is on base percentage in football? I think the biggest difference is a guy can have a GREAT OBP in baseball and still be on a crappy team, whereas a rarely do you find a team in football with a terrible OL that has a RB with a great avg. yards per carry. Anyhow, that's been rolling around in my upstairs for the past few months, maybe getting it out on here will now keep me from thinking about it as much as I have! Lol... Duece The concept of moneyball is/was to identify undervalued assets. In Baseball in the 90s, HRs and steals were overvalued, while simply getting on base was undervalued. After the release of the book and the increasing popularity of Baseball Prospectus and the SABR movement in general OBP became overvalued and defense and speed became undervalued (the Devil Rays were one of the first teams to pick up on defense). From a football standpoint I see a few things that can really be applied: -Player evaluation. One of the big aspects of the book, not so much in the movie, was how inefficiencies in the draft. Teams drafted players based on their physical appearance; that's where you get the "We're not selling jeans," line. High School prospects, and especially pitchers, were drafted too high based on potential while college players were underrated. The idea of objective evaluation based on ability rather than potential has a lot of applications at our level. - "Field Position.Ball Control" - Maybe the main theme of the book/movie was that Oakland, as an underdog, could not use the same strategies as the Yankees. That same lesson can be applied in football, and in my opinion, that is in the form of field position and time of possession. Put broadly, if both teams were to play "field position" football, eventually the better team will win through attrition, by virtue of being better. This can apply to special teams philosophy (kicking deep vs onside), play calling while you are backed up, going for it on 4th down, run/pass ratio ect... - Playing the percentages - This ties in with point #2, and it's been talked about before, but the math favors going for 2 point conversions and being aggressive on 4th down.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 10, 2013 13:16:27 GMT -6
I was thinking about how to put healthy weight on some of our players but was wondering if it is even possible to get them to change their diets positively. Watching all of our kids period after period destroy hot cheetos and what ever pop or sugary drink they can get their hands on and come from home with fast food and junk food as breakfast/lunch/post school snack I am starting to think that there may be way too many variables to control it. Has anyone had success at least altering the diets or is it an uncontrollable and energy would be focused elsewhere? I just hate thinking our players main fuel is a garbage reincarnation of junk food that stains their fingers red. Alter. Yes. Change. No. You can get kids to make some simple changes: Getting them to drink more milk and getting them to bring PB & J are two things that can be done with only a moderate amount of hassling. For the most part you are fighting a losing battle trying to get them to eliminate junk food.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Dec 13, 2012 15:48:51 GMT -6
I recently purchased a book about the nfl for .99 called game plan. I don't recommend it. But it states that kids who play madden all the time are better game strategist than nfl coaches. That isn't really what the book said. In fact the book did not say anything different that what can be read all over this board, on Smartfootball and in a few other places about how many coaches mis-manage the end of the game (spiking the ball ect...). It also went into punts being used too often and coaches going for FGs to frequently. You can disagree with that all you want, but it is an issue debated among football coaches as well and have serious academic backing. The Madden portion simply referred to the advantage that video game players have in recreating specific scenarios absurd amount of times. More specifically, running the 2 minute drill and handling goal line situations. It was not a great book; it's quasi-academic without sourcing enough and it has some circular logic. It had some interesting chapters and made some interesting arguments, even though there were some flaws. I thought it was well worth the dollar.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Sept 21, 2012 10:22:03 GMT -6
I feel like you guys are picturing some type of dickish villain here, and all I did was say the word "win". lol No, that isn't all you did. But you sure as hell are making an effort to make yourself think that is the argument.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 29, 2012 10:00:53 GMT -6
We might not get so many repeat questions if everybody wasn't racing to make a sarcastic post about universal terminology and thinking up new and funny names for the force defender.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 23, 2012 11:02:15 GMT -6
How about the buck lateral series (video stolen off of Smartfootball.com)
Is that somehow not a packaged play? In fact, it looks pretty similar to flash/dash inverted veer stuff.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 23, 2012 10:57:16 GMT -6
The mural sounds pretty awesome. Post pictures if you get it done.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 21, 2012 7:19:02 GMT -6
The problems that would create the solutions had yet to come around. I disagree; a stacked box selling out to stop the run is a problem. Stacked boxes selling out to stop the run were a common feature of defenses 40 years ago because most offenses ran the ball. It is the year 2012. 40 years ago puts us in 1972. How do you plan on blocking all those defenders selling out for the run. Blocking with your hands was still illegal for 6(?) years at this point, and that was a confusing rule allowing half extension of the arms as long as you were moving backwards. A few years later you could take a true pass set and use your hands (can not slide pro and use your hands). It wasn't until 1985 that you could truly use your hands blocking. Are you going to shoulder block Inside Zone? Are you going to take those nice wide splits and try and shoulder block in pass pro? Your QB is going to get killed. In 1972 you could still cut WR's off the line, that wasn't outlawed for a few years still. How about actually catching the ball. Those Nike gloves put stick-em to shame. How many extra drops are we going to have without sticky gloves and modern footballs. Coaches were not sitting around going "I run ball, prove I manlier." Not to mention a few other little details that had just ended. Coaching from the sideline was illegal until 1967 (sending plays in) and unlimited substitutions were not reinstated until 1964. Using 1972 as our date, you have given coaches a whopping 5 years to completely invent the Air Raid offense from scratch including all of the techniques to go with it.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jun 14, 2012 14:41:05 GMT -6
Start benching kids during practice. If they do not feel there is competition from the backups, show them otherwise. What is more important in June, setting a tone for the entire season, or a few reps for the probable starter?
Your going to get 2 responses. Either they will pout, start b*tching about the program/coaches/teammates and reveal their character. Or they'll get the message and fix it.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 4, 2012 8:35:43 GMT -6
If the shells weren't hard, they'd stick and twist people's necks. The hard shell disperses the impact to make it less localized, the padding diffuses it, absorbing energy and prolonging the duration of transfer. It's not a conscious fashion choice. Come on. Really? I am truly amazed at these conversations. Many smart guys really miss the big picture. The issue is the equipment; how it (is not) worn, how it's designed and how to improve it. Lets look at mouthpieces to start. From a concussion standpoint, it's the 2nd most important (maybe THE MOST important) piece of equipment after the helmet. A quality mouth guard absorbs a ton of shock because it gives all that energy from a blow to the chin/top of the head to go (your jaw clenches, and instead of simply transferring that impact, the gel can absorb it. But they are not even mandatory in the NFL and a lot of players don't use them. At the high school level (maybe college, but I do not know) most teams give their kids the 50 cent strips of plastic that do nothing but protect the teeth. We'll hand a kid a $150 dollar helmet, $80 shoulder pads and a pair of $40 dollar jersey's....but there's no room in the budget for a $10-$20 dollar mouth guard. Next you get the other non-mandatory padding, knee pads and thigh pads. Obviously those pads do not do much for guy wearing the pads but they do provide padding for the defender who is hitting you. Taking a padded knee (or thigh) to the head is better than a un-padded one. But, in the name of speed/comfort we just skip that part of safety. Then you get to the design of the safety equipment. Hard plastic, which is going to increase the impact. You want pads that can absorb the impact, then a hard shell that can diffuse the impact. It's the same concept behind car safety. You used to have steel boxes that were safe because they were heavy and didn't dent, unfortunately, the people in the car got tossed around. Now you have cars with crumple zones that will absorb an impact. Going back to mouthpieces, if you go and buy a quality one they have a thick gel covering a plastic structure. The gel absorbs impact and the plastic provides protection by diffusing the impact. We need helmets and shoulder pads that can do the same thing. An absorbent outside, a hard inside. If I hadn't taken so many hits to the head, and was a little smarter I'd develop that stuff myself, but alas by brain is a worthless pile of mush after my HS football career.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 14, 2012 9:11:16 GMT -6
I'll play Devil's Advocate here.....
How many school employee's are under 24/7/365 supervision? Would you accept a job with those parameters? EVERYTHING you do makes you subject to suspension.
Lets look at what that really means. I know the focus here is on kids who get caught, but is that really fair? So one player gets busted drinking, but you KNOW that there were other students at that party and you know the kids he hangs out with (guilt by association). Unless you have your head buried in the sand, it's almost impossible to not over-hear some stuff you do not want to hear.
Are you going to suspend every student (from every sport) that you heard was at a party? Good luck (legally and with your administration).
Would you tolerate that in your personal life? Somebody said they saw you drinking at the bar, saw you get in your car and drive home. Now you are fired/suspended.
Of course not.
My personal opinion is that I wish schools would spend all the time, energy and resources they spend on kids who get in trouble at home on improving the school. It's an impossible fight, I personally think it's an over-reach of the role of education and I think it's somewhere between sanctimonious and hypocritical.
That's not the same as saying a coach should ignore these issues. Have a talk with the player, have a talk with the parents. If a player gets busted in-season, now he is easily punishable for missing practice/school.
But some uniform, CYA policy that treats students like pieces of property are BS. That doesn't help anybody, except the rep of some administrator who can talk about how tough he is on drinking/drugs.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 9, 2012 17:49:42 GMT -6
Overall, offensive installation is the primary goal of summer work.
If the offense is ready to play by day 1 of pads (from an installation standpoint), it really makes things a lot easier. The tempo of practice improves and you get a lot more reps. This lets the defense get more work and makes defensive installation a lot easier. Broken plays hurt the defensive practice just as much as the offensive practice in that early period. Lineman that pull slow, blow assignments and plays that hit too slow allow the defense to get away with sloppy reads and technique. An offense that can play makes the defense get up to speed (or, get beaten like mule).
Defensively, the most important thing in the summer is formation recognition. If the defense is slow to align, or is misaligned, that hurts offensive practice. The defense needs to be able to align to any formation (our) offense is going to throw at them during doubles so we can get quality practice in.
I like to introduce a good chunk of my drills during the summer as well. That way, I don't have to waste practice time teaching how to perform a drill during practice. Ditto with practice tempo. It should be ingrained during our summer work.
In Michigan we get 9 days (IIRC) of 7 on 7 work and 3 days of "team" camp. Then we have 3 non-padded days to open doubles. If we can end that period with the offense installed, the defense able to line-up to everything and our kids ready to practice than we are in pretty good shape.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 19, 2012 17:45:32 GMT -6
As has been danced around, correlation =/= causation. Especially in a game like football with teeny tiny sample size data to look at.
Just for a quick anecdote about turnover margin. Since this statistic is largely formed using NFL data (teams that win the turnover battle win 75% or whatever), how many of those turnovers occurred at the end of the half and at the end of the game in "Hail Mary" scenarios.
If the Browns are playing the Patriots, they are considered the underdog. If they get a chance at the end of the half to take a shot at the endzone on the final play, they are probably going to take it because the risk/reward is in their favor (the benefit of the extra points outweighs the risk of a returned INT). If the Patriots are in that situation, knowing they are the better team, the risk of the INT return (or the hit on Brady ect ect.) outweighs the reward (since they view themselves as the favorites, in all likelihood).
This same premise applies at the end of the game. If the Pats are up 20 points, they probably just hand it off a few times and punt. If the Browns are down 20, they probably keep throwing it around because they have "nothing to lose."
How do those scenarios skew the numbers. With the relatively low number of turnovers (on a statistical scale, when we are talking about a +/- turnover ratio in single digits) a few "junk" turnovers like skew the data.
As for numbers that really "matter". I think big plays (However you choose to gauge it, be it over 10 yards, 15 or 20) and big plays as a ratio of plays is one of the better indicators. I believe that is a consistent number (teams that are explosive remain explosive, teams that are porous remain porous...and vice versa).
EDITED TO ADD: I also think negative yardage plays is also a decent indicator. Teams that consistently make plays in the backfield are likely to continue to do so, and teams that regularly have their plays blown up in the backfield are likely to continue as well.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 14, 2012 17:39:24 GMT -6
I believe this is a quote by Casey Stengal, but someone correct me if I'm wrong
"The key to managing is to keep the guys who hate your guys away from the guys who haven't made up their mind yet."
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 27, 2012 22:49:26 GMT -6
Maybe I'm weird....
What I'd really like out of a clinic would be this: You get a speaker going over his position group, lets say he is the DB coach. He goes over his stuff in 1 or 2 sessions (lets say 2 hours).
After that he goes over an entire game tape with you. Instead of 6 or 7 select clips, he takes a 2 hours (or whatever increment) and just goes through an entire game just like he would grade it post-game.
Lets say it's a Cover 4 team in a "glazier" format (3 sessions). The first session goes over their techniques. "This is how we play Cover 4. This is how we play Cover 3. This is how we play man". The 2nd session is a touch of review and the next 2 sessions are the coach going over film against an opponent. He can explain the game-plan, how he coached his guys that week and then grade the film. Show us the good, the bad and the ugly. How does the game unfold? What adjustments did you make during the game? What adjustments did the opponent make?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 20, 2012 14:20:53 GMT -6
Heard Noel Dean (Head Coach, Lowell) talk about his practice Org at the Grand Rapids Glazier this weekend. They are one of the top 5 programs in michigan (IMO).
They do not have doubles. They are highly integrated from atleast the middle school on up, and they do most of their installation in the spring and summer.
His opinion was that why do you need 2-a-days if you can install everything before the start of fall practice.
I think there is a lot of merit to this approach. If our expectations are to attend weights, camp and 7 on 7 in June and July, why do you still need 2-a-days in August? Most of the installation should be done before you strap on the shoulder pads.
I imagine there must be a nice benefit in terms of keeping the legs fresh and overall health.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 19, 2012 14:27:16 GMT -6
High School special teams. I think that is the one area that has the biggest difference between the upper levels and the high school level.
Hearing that you need to find a kicker who can put it inside the 5 with atleast a 4 second hang-time isn't helpful. Our kid struggles to kick a line drive inside the 20. We have opponents who are in the same boat, so we can not base our KOR on the assumption we are going to have a deep, high kick either.
Learning how to train a kicker and how to utilize "weak" legged kickers and return against squibbers and what not would be far more useful.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 9, 2012 14:28:30 GMT -6
We also used to do morning, but we'd have anywhere from 10-20 kids miss because of summer school and summer driver's ed so that was a big reason we moved to afternoon. We do mornings 3-days a week and 2 afternoons. If you can't make the morning, you should be able to make the afternoon. If you can't consistantly make either time, then either football isn't that important to you or you won't be able to play during the season anyway. (obviously, reasonable exceptions apply).
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Dec 21, 2011 11:53:34 GMT -6
DVR is such a great feature to have. Instead of spending last night watching 30,000 beef-o-brady's commercials (I don't even know what it is, but it's not around here), I would just rewind some plays I found interesting (especially the FIU stuff where they were using the blocking back). Rewind just enough to miss the replay's, skip over the challenges, injury timeouts and half-time show.
|
|