|
Post by option1 on Jun 16, 2019 5:45:31 GMT -6
Is there a way to combat kids that want to play but do not EXPECT to win, AND are ok with it? How do we "talk" them out of it? If this is their mentality and riding them makes the experience not fun for them, is it even our job to try and force the "winning" issue?
REAL SCENARIO:
Coach: Gets on player for attendance and then half @ssing in the weightroom.
Player: (To teammates) **c* this s***, I don't even need to play football.
Teammate: Then don't, expletive...
Player: Naw, I'ma play, but I'm juss sayin'. I got grades, I know I ain't D1 so I'ma take my Bright Futures scholarship right where I wanna go. Plus my Moms got me on pre-pay, I'm straight.
Teammate: Man if you don't work your @ss getting juiced.
Player: (Lovingly) B***h, you play on 2 special teams, 1 of em' exp/FG and we don't even kick. Anyway I'm just tryna' have fun and all this other s***t too extra.
END.
We got a tough road ahead of us this year and a bunch of these type of kids on our team. We can compete with a great effort but the issue is getting that great effort out of this group. They won't do more than they will do and most of what they will do is going through the motions just trying to get bye.
I almost feel as if players are desensitized from meaningful, thought provoking correspondence by all the motivational quote tweets, etc we send hoping that just one sinks in and makes a difference.
What do you do, or have you done in these situations that either worked or didn't work?
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jun 2, 2019 5:35:25 GMT -6
I haven't read the entire thread yet and maybe what I'm about to write has been posted... I can't help but think about this inversely from the way the OP has presented it, particularly because our team, community, etc continues to battle it. Our "culture" is affected by our scheme and therefore prevents us from reaching our maximum potential. I believe kids are more savvy than they used to be. There's more information being passed around which allows kids, etc to form ideas and opinions of their own. In short, it's hard to explain to a group of kids, parents, etc that absolutely hate running/watching old school wing-t when they know there are modern variations that are "cooler" and more successful/relevant. We're talking about players that can cite the Auburn's of the football world and question "why we don't?" Our players are true 2 way guys and I'm just the DC but I can tell you it is way more challenging managing the psychological mind F@#$ these kids face during games because we struggle on offense AND they hate playing in it at the same time. All this to say I definitely believe that there are times when your culture better be in order or your job will be a lot harder and even risk possibly losing your team altogether. try reading first, then responding you'll gain a lot in terms of the framework of the three page discussion K
|
|
|
Post by option1 on May 27, 2019 13:46:49 GMT -6
I haven't read the entire thread yet and maybe what I'm about to write has been posted... I can't help but think about this inversely from the way the OP has presented it, particularly because our team, community, etc continues to battle it. Our "culture" is affected by our scheme and therefore prevents us from reaching our maximum potential. I believe kids are more savvy than they used to be. There's more information being passed around which allows kids, etc to form ideas and opinions of their own. In short, it's hard to explain to a group of kids, parents, etc that absolutely hate running/watching old school wing-t when they know there are modern variations that are "cooler" and more successful/relevant. We're talking about players that can cite the Auburn's of the football world and question "why we don't?" Our players are true 2 way guys and I'm just the DC but I can tell you it is way more challenging managing the psychological mind F@#$ these kids face during games because we struggle on offense AND they hate playing in it at the same time. All this to say I definitely believe that there are times when your culture better be in order or your job will be a lot harder and even risk possibly losing your team altogether. Interesting, we found that a recent switch to the Wing-T helped IMPROVE our offensive production, culture and the excitement around the program. There were definitely several other factors at play in our Program's growth, but I think the Wing-T has facilitated this growth rather than hinder it. Yeah, my post wasn't about a specific scheme as much as it was to that if the players aren't happy with said scheme, then you better have something else.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on May 27, 2019 6:56:43 GMT -6
I haven't read the entire thread yet and maybe what I'm about to write has been posted...
I can't help but think about this inversely from the way the OP has presented it, particularly because our team, community, etc continues to battle it.
Our "culture" is affected by our scheme and therefore prevents us from reaching our maximum potential. I believe kids are more savvy than they used to be. There's more information being passed around which allows kids, etc to form ideas and opinions of their own. In short, it's hard to explain to a group of kids, parents, etc that absolutely hate running/watching old school wing-t when they know there are modern variations that are "cooler" and more successful/relevant.
We're talking about players that can cite the Auburn's of the football world and question "why we don't?" Our players are true 2 way guys and I'm just the DC but I can tell you it is way more challenging managing the psychological mind F@#$ these kids face during games because we struggle on offense AND they hate playing in it at the same time.
All this to say I definitely believe that there are times when your culture better be in order or your job will be a lot harder and even risk possibly losing your team altogether.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Apr 15, 2019 10:52:37 GMT -6
Mine are not sending!
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Apr 13, 2019 19:02:17 GMT -6
Meaning I do not see any record, etc of them sending or even existing.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Apr 12, 2019 7:33:56 GMT -6
When I try to send a PM they are disappearing. Is this happening to anyone else?
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 7, 2018 16:09:12 GMT -6
To answer the original question... I would check the commitment level of the admin. Ask yourself what you need to run your program the way you want. Is it about winning? Impact? What kind of coach do you want to be? Are you what the admin needs? Remember that this is the Principal's school. It's about their vision of education. The football coach is just one of the principals tools to achieve THEIR vision. Find a principal that is a match for your vision. I don’t have an interview anywhere as of yet, this is preparation type stuff. There is one school I hope to get an interview and land the HC gig there. The principal is a former HC and an awesome guy. I think he would be very supportive and would be an awesome guy to work with/for! Again, I do not know what state you are in but do not put too much into Admin being former HC, coaches, etc. I have experienced coaches I believed to be "real guys" change their tune once they become and administrator. In many states, like mine, the reason for the switch from coach/teacher to administration is money, and once the key to keeping that 6 figure salary and potential to move downtown is dependent on overall school grade, the coach hat almost completely forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 7, 2018 6:33:39 GMT -6
Accountability is going to be the largest part of whatever grade monitoring procedure you adhere to. It's great if they monitor themselves and each other but it's also not always realistic. In the grand scheme of things what you really have over them, your best tool, is the team and playing time. Are you willing to make things uncomfortable for them, and maybe even possibly remove them if they cannot follow suit?
In the early days of electronic grade monitoring (we use Edsby) we still also had the players take around grade sheets every Thursday. We had a teacher that assigned a specific grade to one of our players each week. He then gave the student a much, much lower grade on his report card. Needless to say our HC kept these on file for the semester and he was able to get the players grade changed to show an average between his weekly reports and his final grade, which I thought was still unfair. Anyway, per our admin. we are no longer permitted to send the grade sheets around on a weekly basis. We have to set up a team account in Edsby to track the players.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 7, 2018 6:14:17 GMT -6
Where, as in what State, are you interviewing in? Just curious.
I do not have a specific list of topics that may come up in your interview. I believe the best way any interviewee can be prepared is to devise and answer their own questions. As a HC candidate I'm sure you have a set of core values and a program plan in place. Use those elements to map out a course for building your program. Your overall plan is more important than what/how you will answer individual specific questions. A good plan has answers and addresses the peaks and valleys of long term sustainability.
If a program is "struggling" assume all the reasons why it may be happening and see how your plan addresses those elements. I think it is useful to be "general" and specific at the same time. Take winning for example. Winning games, district, league, etc is very specific. However, defining what winning is and the process behind it is general, relative, and subjective and can be more applicable to struggling programs. Increase participation and retention (win), foster positive relationships in your school (win), increase GPA, grad rate, etc (win), be visible and have a positive effect on the community regardless of current community involvement i.e. toys for tot's, adopt a platoon, food/clothing drives, adopt a highway/coastline, etc (win). I could go on but I'm sure you get the point.
You should be able to outline what your program is going to do for that senior who's parent is on the interview committee and anyone else in the room. What are you going to do to positively impact his/their life in a short period of time? Very little of it needs to be about specifically winning games and if that's all they want to hear it's probably not a great place anyway. Now, that being said, YOU need to believe and know that all these factors will lead to wins on the field and have an effect on the other things you need to be competitive, weight room and all that.
It can be helpful and show that you have done your homework to tailor your plan to the specifics at that school. If you can, know who's going to be in the room. There's almost nothing you can't find on the internet. School demographics, school grade, grad rate, admin. Alma maters, current roster numbers, team history, community demographics, all those elements can be useful to you if strategically place in your presentation.
BTW, I'm not a fan of cliche rhetoric like "community" and "culture". However, Admins love this ch!t and the words do often have a way of saying a lot with just one word. I almost guarantee that the schools improvement plan for the year has one of these "catchy", cliche buzz words/ buzz phrases. Embrace it and use it to your advantage.
How bad do you want it?
Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Aug 1, 2017 5:08:59 GMT -6
...I agree about blowing it off. However, what % of NFL brains does the average reader think is donated? What % of these brains were donated from players that played in concussion denial era or earlier? More importantly, how many brains that were donated were from individuals who were experiencing CTE symptoms. NC1974 a truly objective article would have framed it that way. Rather than using percentages (where 99% is a VERY sexy number) they article could have framed the story as : Out of 20,000+ ex professional football players 112 donated their brains to this study. The majority if not all of those 112 complained of having symptoms related to CTE. Brain exams confirmed the plaque associated with CTE in 111 of those brains. That said, the NFL is not doing itself (and therefore the sport) any favors by reportedly pulling out of its agreement to help fund research. Lets face it, the NFL is going to go the route of the tobacco companies when it comes to head trauma. This is a good point. The sport would not cease to exist if the obvious was stated by the highest level of the game, just like millions of people still smoke after those facts were revealed. The NFL could save time by admitting that at the very least "running into hard things with your body increases the likelihood of head trauma." At the same time why would the NFL spend money for research? What exactly is being researched? I'm a slow blinker but even I could almost undoubtedly predict what the research findings would be, and that is, if you run into hard things with your body you increase the likelihood of brain trauma. Free of charge. There's nothing to hide. The cure, from a football standpoint, is unlikely because people will still choose to play football. I don't understand the point to all this.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 28, 2017 17:58:30 GMT -6
Kids are too "dumb" to be savy for the most part. They tell it like it is the best way they know how. As professional adults even the worst learn to manipulate the best. As far as the shows perspective, I don't put much into what we see from the coaches. You see what they want you to see. In today's day and age I reserve judgment on cursing, etc. I'm not going to pass judgment on a staff when I don't know what's really happening.
It's a tough situation because at the end of the day you have two seperate entities that are trying to use each other and both have a different sense of urgency. Buddy can't keep his job if they suck. I don't believe that's entirely true of D1 cast offs and prospects. For example, even though you can't see much of the game clips there are glaring tendencies shown from some of the players when they don't, or think they dont have a chance to make a play that's going to land them an "opportunity". How would you coach a team like that?
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 28, 2017 15:50:14 GMT -6
Finished watching. My last impression was that MS Wagner, on her last day, said goodbye to the custodian and secretary. Buddy fired a coach on the field during a game. All in all I have to concur with Ronald Ollie. One side of me says "sometimes that say's it all", the other side says "exactly what they're dealing with". These kids interviews show a lot about them. Rivers, Johnson, Allen (High level) Wright (Medium level, emotional) Cam (Medium low to low) Ollie (Lowest of low)
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 27, 2017 18:14:11 GMT -6
dubber, you may be right. I know our HC does a very good job making our team a presence at the school. We our "cool" and relevant. We recruit our halls and are visible in every department.
Our numbers are average for the county. Few have more and many have less. We are the 8th largest district in the U.S. but school sizes and classifications vary. That being said the district/state caps how many we can travel in regular season and less for playoffs. Like I said, we field 80ish and we have roughly 100 sets of equipment. So even if we had over that we would have to cut to below 10% of our male population.
Specialization is a big factor. Basketball and baseball are literally year round. They actually play and dont really practice out of season which is something kids most definitely want. We lose more than a few when kids figure that out every year.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 27, 2017 9:26:35 GMT -6
We have passing leagues around the county that are good. It's real work. No running routes where OL/DL would be ETC. Tournaments can be fun with the right mind set but are BS.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 27, 2017 9:22:05 GMT -6
What do you do to try and retain them? We don't lose many that can play.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 27, 2017 9:12:07 GMT -6
We have 2300+ and will probably dress low 40's and really only about 25 of those would survive on the field. Is this 9-12 and only expecting low 40s?! Not to pick on you coach, because I know that's tough but this does make me feel better about my post: We are a school of close to 600 kids and last year we dressed 40 9-12. We had a very successful year as we went 6-3 (coming off a 2-7 and 3-6 previously) and were picked to be 6th out of 7 in our district. Heck, most of our senior parents admitted at several points during the season they only expected to win 1-2 games! However, instead of building off that-as others have said in this thread--we're unfortunately going the other way with numbers. If we have anything over 30 this year, I would be surprised. Yes, 9-12. We will dress low 40's for varsity games on Friday and approx. another 40 for Thursday JV games. Approx. 80 total. @ dubber, that 40 is a varsity number. We will have another 40 or so on JV. JV is 90% 9th graders. So 36 freshmen? About that. Many of them won't make it though. We start with 85-100 kids each year depending on how many 9th graders show up after school starts. The 80ish number is where we end up through JV. We only keep a handful of players after JV season. We dressed 42 for our final varsity game last season.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 16:20:41 GMT -6
@ dubber, that 40 is a varsity number. We will have another 40 or so on JV. JV is 90% 9th graders.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 10:01:27 GMT -6
We have 2300+ and will probably dress low 40's and really only about 25 of those would survive on the field.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 9:52:57 GMT -6
I was told to take "I do not respond to ebonics" off my syllabus.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 9:28:26 GMT -6
I'm sure she, or anyone with this type of information would be held accountable in a negligence law suit if something happened to a player though. I'm not a lawyer but I'm not sure that this is correct in a college setting. My wife is a para-legal and while we were watching she said that anyone with knowledge at the school could be subpoenad in a case against the institution, and could very well be sued individually. That's what I meant by "accountable."
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 9:23:02 GMT -6
We have to in our state or no supplement. Concussion in sports, heat illness prevention, PCA (Positive Coaching Alliance), and Heads Up or no supplement. Every phuckin year! The first two are online. The others are 2-4 hour training we do in person. . We almost got out of Heads Up this year because concussions have actually gone up. PCA is general "don't cuss kids out", "the game doesn't relate to real life so don't take that negative approach to coaching", "don't make under classmen clean the field".
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 9:14:05 GMT -6
Wasn't there a 10 minute segment in one episode where she and the DL coach talked to a kid? As for going to the HC about an injury, that's not her job. There was. I think it was that Kam kid? Like I said, I'm sure it happens more than that and gets edited out. Is reporting injuries to the coach in her job description? Probably not. The kid had a head injury though. Her job IS to be an advocate for those kids and she failed. Plain and simple. I'm sure she, or anyone with this type of information would be held accountable in a negligence law suit if something happened to a player though.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 26, 2017 4:01:45 GMT -6
What is the point?
Safer protocols and acknowledgement, end of story. Let's play ball!
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 24, 2017 17:16:12 GMT -6
Concussion in sports?
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 24, 2017 7:05:54 GMT -6
Try not to forget that the show is edited for a purpose and with an agenda. Imagine being surrounded by people that constantly undermine you. Im not saying that happens at EMCC, but it could. It would be very easy in that environment for people to have widely contrasting philosophies on how to handle such a volatile situation.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 23, 2017 6:45:42 GMT -6
]3. This could be a long answer, but in short, because the NFL is a private enterprise. Aren't private enterprises profit seeking by way of the best product possible? I think we can all agree that there are MANY, MANY athletes that are not legitimate students. Why do they exist? Because the NCAA is looking for the best product also. For historical reasons and the draft rules the NCAA (college sports) is the NFL's R&D department. If college sports ceased to exist, do you think the NFL would close shop? No. Are they going to put 18 year old kids on the field? Not for the most part. I could go on but hopefully you see the point. The part of my original post about alternatives was in reference to other post suggesting something similar. By en large I believe everyone's "product" would be just fine without the few that tarnish the system. But that just begs the question of why bother with them to begin with. Does a kid who can't read on a HS level deserve paper from North Carolina, or anywhere for that matter? Why in the heck is there a sliding scale for athletes, among so many other exceptions? The answer is easily traceable and for the most part has nothing to do with "saving lives", or opportunity. IMO, there is a trickle down effect all the way to small ball parents and coaches. Last Chance U puts making the sausage on display and magnifies the inherent problems of the entire system. "Why bother with them to begin with?" I don't know if you played college football, but for every "just there to ball" guy, there is a guy who would not have gone to college otherwise and accidentally ends up learning and furthering themselves. This show focuses on the stars, but there a bunch of guys going D2 and getting an education. Hell, I got kids on my high school football team who SHOULD QUIT HIGH SCHOOL RIGHT NOW and start working on the farm, cause that's the end of the line for them anyway.....but every now and then, one of them ends up deciding to try something different......and hell, they would have never gotten the chance if we wrote them off at 15. Probably shouldn't write a kid off at 20 either. Yes, does what you're describing go on....absolutely JC uses kids, kids use JC.....NCAA uses kids, NFL uses NCAA, etc....... But you can't discount all the good that comes from chasing the league and accidentally finding a degree and your purpose. I completely agree with this. But I don't know about the trade-off because for every "just there to ball" guy there's a kid who might not be as good, but deserves to be there, that gets left out. "Zero tolerance" evens the playing field and I believe in time could dramatically clean things up. We're talking about giving chances just based on athletic ability. We're talking about entitlement. Yes I did play college football and I was "that kid". Not because I was good but because I was stupid. Getting booted out of school saved my life. Because of that experience I can't help but feel as if I am a small part of directly enabling the "system" and it bugs the crap out of me. As coaches we see it on all levels, from the ones that deserve it and don't get it and vice versa. If you have started watching season 2, #6 from Jones (DE) was our kid. He went big D1, ended up at Jones and now is at a D2. We also have a kid at UNC right now and while I love him, and he will make it, probably doesn't deserve to be there. He is a "just there to ball" guy but will never get into trouble. During his recruiting process I had a soccer player with all world grades, SAT scores, community hours, etc. She didn't care about college soccer and is in school for all the right reasons. She got put on a "wait and see" list to go to UNC and got accepted at the last minute. You know all this stuff happens but to witness it first hand hits home. Then I see these guys at Last Chance U and it's just frustrating all over again.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 22, 2017 16:38:51 GMT -6
If you break any rule 3 times in what I consider a privileged community, you're out. The NFL shouldn't spend their money as long as they get it for free. It was all hypothetical.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 22, 2017 9:14:51 GMT -6
No, that was your interpretation. We're not on the same page here but that's cool. Im not even asked for a gameplan, little lone overridden. I do go over with the HC as a professional courtesy and because I think he should know. Like I said, I've experienced the doffetence between the 2 on widely contrasting levels.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jul 22, 2017 8:54:02 GMT -6
Along the lines of being a coordinator but running the HC system, the coordinator has a title and is a puppet. I disagree. While surely this can potentially be the situation, the idea that it always must be the situation absolutely misses the idea of what a coordinator is supposed to do. A coordinator is not the "system designer" but system coordinator. They coordinate the defense. Some high profile examples : Kirby Smart was absolutely the defensive coordinator when he was at Bama. Prior to that Will Muschamp was absolutely the defensive coordinator. If an assistant coach organizes the efforts of other asst coaches, runs the meetings, plans weekly practices, coordinates the scripting (either by writing it themselves, or ensuring others write it within defined parameters and reviews it) etc. they are the coordinator. Doesn't matter if HC taught him the system. By your definition, If you learned defense as a 24 year old from a coach, and all you knew was Palms, Blue, Special, blah blah (I don't know all of the TCU terms, but you get the idea) and 5 years later you go to another school and coach, you are the original coach's puppet? There is some validity here. However, by your last example we are all puppets. I guess the overriding principle for me then is the autonomy of being the architect, and creative freedom, not just the role/job of being a manager. To me, I'm not the architect or the coordinator if I can be overridden by someone else that "controls" the system. Been there, didn't like it, will never do it again for the sake of having a title.
|
|