|
Post by s73 on May 4, 2013 9:31:33 GMT -6
I am currently studying for my CSCS test and came across some really interesting reading that I think really promotes the KISS principle.
According to the reading the author states that when an athlete is in the process of learning a motor skill he progresses through 3 stages:
The cognitive stage - Effortful and conscious thought about the movement about to be performed. In other words, the athlete has to think about the task being performed.
2nd stage - the associative stage - The athlete focuses on the task but is less concerned with details.
Finally, AUTOMATICITY -During which the skill is performed without thought and becomes "automatic".
"Assuming proper instruction and coaching, the relaxed mind focuses only on what is irrelevant to the task at that moment and, at the same time, automatically filters out all irrelevant cues".
I thought this was fascinating as I believe it's a fancy, "sciency" way of saying that confidence is built through repetition. That's something I think I aleady knew, but it took me several years to develop my program (am still a work in progress like all of us) in a way that my athletes can play w/o thinking to a certain extent.
I think that can be a difficult task in this sport more so than any other b/c their are so many ways to skin a cat. I think a clear vision of what you want to do and sticking with it can develop more confident and effective athletes.
Anyway, just thought it was good food for thought. I know earlier in my career I was always in flux about what I was teaching and how I wanted my players to perform certain skills, plays etc. But I've noticed that as I've narrowed my scope on how I want tcertain things done, our success has improved tremendously.
In other words, as the playbook has shrunk the execution and results have grown.
Just thought I's share. Found it very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on May 4, 2013 7:19:53 GMT -6
You know what, we're all thinking it...so I'll say it... Defensive guys are way smarter and it's not even close. Other than the Oline coach, wtf do the rest of the guys do? I mean seriously, I've seen QB's in INDY period...on a knee playing pass...Coach saying "thumb to thigh" or whatever, condition piece of their drill is 3 and 5 step drops. OK Jimmy, read the flat defender... Not to mention the QB coach is almost always the most metro guy on staff, showing up to coach in flip flops, has the beach boy/surfer look to him most of the time. Always has some kind of phuked up hat or visor that no one on staff would ever wear. RB coaches...HEY..YOU COACH THE BEST PLAYER DON'T F HIM UP. But this is the number one go to guy if you need to BS some practice time with some kind of cone drill. WR coaches...run 5 yards, plant on your inside foot and turn around...really? And they don't even have to be good at it, we've all seen how sloppy most receivers run their routes... TE coach...the #1 BS job in all of football. That's why for 90% of college staffs, this guy is the recruiting coordinator. The OC is more like a baby sitter, which could be accomplished by just about any 14 year old girl. I don't even understand why this is a question...I mean chit, that's why zone blocking came along - Laziness and stupidity. I bet this is how the concept was first born: Guys, are kids aren't smart enough to chip the 3 and work up to backer, but we can get them to learn right and left so how about this...how about we all just take off and run to the right when we run right and we'll just block whoever shows up to our right, and if we run left, we'll all just run left... (the spelling of "our" as "are" was intentional) I mean for Christ's sake...how hard can it possibly be to run an offense? You just have to know 3 things: Well they are a 3 man front team...well they are a 4 man front team...well they are a 50 front team... what is that...3 fronts? Seriously? A whole 3? Sweet Baby Jesus don't hurt yourselves there fellas. Is the Dlineman inside, head up or outside of you? Again...3 Coverage? HeII we even call one of them cover 3 to help you guys out...But there are only 2 real coverages, man and zone. But 2 zones...1 high or 2 high. AGAIN 3. and eventually all coverage is man coverage anyway...I realize this could be a source of confusion for offensive guys. Like we are in zone, OC sees zone, but then like someone dropped Ninja dush, a big puff of smoke and HOLY CHIT THEY ARE MAN!!! Yea...its freakin magic. In addition to all of that...the #1 priority of every DC is to make an offense drive the ball. No big plays. Make an offense take 12 plays to score and the odds are they will screw it up on their own. They will turn it over, they will outsmart themselves and get tackled for a big loss because they finally think they have us set up for their boot pass. Not to mention defensive staffs are so much more fun to go out/hang out with. Ya know, I'm sorry if some of you offensive coach's self-esteem has been damaged by my words, I hate that I had to break it to you guys like that, but that's just how I am sometimes, it's love, but it's a tough love. **Oline coaches - you are more than welcome to hang out with the defensive staff at any time. How 'bout NEITHER? I think many of us are guilty of acting like we're performing neurosurgery when discussing this great game. Maybe the above post is spot on (tongue in cheek or not) this great game is not as complicated as we'd like to make it. Just a thought. Great thread. PS - I coach offense currently and still love the above post. Why? Because it's partially the truth.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on May 3, 2013 20:11:26 GMT -6
If he's truly interested, he knows where to find you.
It's kind of like trying to score the hot chick in college. If she were interested she would return your calls. If you keep calling you look like a tool.
He knows you have a football team, if he's interested HE WILL find you.
It truly is the same kind of thing.
Just my advice.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on May 3, 2013 8:52:37 GMT -6
I have coached both sides of the ball. A few thoughts on the subject... 1) I believe offense allows for more creativity and (because of that) probably attracts more coaches who at least think they're smart. 2) In my opinion, defensive prep work is a helluva lot harder. 3) But offensive playcalling is more critical on game day. 4) Getting stuffed on offense isn't as gut-wrenching as your defense getting pushed all over the field while the scoreboard lights up like a pinball machine. I could tolerate winning/losing a game 7-0 as an OC better than winning/losing 49-42 as a DC. I really agree with a great deal of this post. As someone who has coached both sides of the ball I truly believe that M- Th is much more difficult on a defensive guy. But game days are tougher on offesive guys. IMHO. I know this answer doesn't really apply to the question, but I think the question was a bit tongue in cheek anyhow. I just feel it's harder to prep a defense during the week, but game day play calling is more challenging offensively. Again, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on May 1, 2013 9:57:37 GMT -6
One thing we've always done is organize some helf line time. That way the defense may be inferior but at least they are tipped off what direction the ball is going. It gives them a pretty solid advantage that way.
Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 30, 2013 5:56:02 GMT -6
good points, s73. Again, I don't care what folks do. There is no right answer. I thought I've reiterated several times in this thread that there are perfectly legitimate reasons for doing either. There are perfectly valid reasons for not platooning. The OP asked a question and I've chimed in along with others on some of the challenges/benefits of the topic. In my experience, conclusions on platooning are often met with short-term answers. That doesn't serve the OP's question. I just wanted to raise the issue of platooning, and the programs that commit to it, have thought long and hard about the cost. It isn't an easy solution by any means because it requires some really hard questions to be answered. Reducing it all down to simplistic absolutes doesn't help anyone, though ("we really can't commit to passing the ball, because then we will never be able to run the ball", "we can't platoon because then we'll never win - we'll give up on this season"). Lets not be pedantic or simple, here. There are costs associated with each decision we make for the program. The goal at the end of the day is to have both immediate, short-term, and long-term plans for where you intend to lead the program. Brophy, I agree that their are no simple absolutes. I just took your original post about coaching year to year v. coaching the program to mean that if you're not 2 platooning then you're "livin' paycheck to paycheck" and don't have a long term strategy and I profoundly disagree with that is all I meant to really say. Not angrily mind you. For example, at my HS we have established a youth camp, a feeder program, the best off season buy in I've ever experienced in my career, we have an ultra experienced quality head frosh coach and we practice our varsity and sophomores together. These are just some examples of the things we do that I feel show long term strategy and I think it's silly to suggest, in light of what I've stated above, that I'm not thinking long term b/c I don't 2 platoon. Again, no anger here just something I fundamentally disagree with. BUT.... I do completely understand your point that not 2 platooning could hurt my numbers in the long run. I do get that as I notice each year that I have a close relationship with some, but kids who are less likely to play much tend to fade away from me some as time goes on. In that sense I NEVER rule it out if the talent is their. I just don't feel it is. LIke I said earlier, we are much smaller than several of our opponents, as a result I feel like 2 platooning would be like lining up 3rd stringers v. starters some weeks and that I can't see being good for us. But I do try to find ways to get kids "some time" when I can and always in blow outs, schedule JV games, etc. Good discussion and much food for thought. This is something I am going to continue to monitor in my program. Thanks for the insight.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 29, 2013 18:39:13 GMT -6
Not to overkill this thread but I think their are 2 other really important points to make here.
The first being, 2 platooning assumes that you have competent coaches on the other side of the ball. I certainly know it's my job to coach the coaches & I think I do that pretty well and my staff is awesome. But what about the guy who's in the middle of trying to turn a program around? Or what about the guy who works for a tight wad district tht won't give him enough stipends to 2 platoon?
Or even worse, what about the guy that just took over a crap program and old Coach GEEZER who's been in the district for 30 years and is counting his days and you can't get rid of him cuz the union's got his back doesn't like your defense and doesn't want to coach it the way you want it done and gets to spend 2-3 hours a day away from you while your trying to coach up the offense?
Or even the guy who works in a low paying stepping stone district who always has coaching turnover (that's where I started my HFC career). He's trying to teach a new coach every year and then sends him off on his own.
I know a lot of guys who are or have been in these spots and they are tough to platoon in b/c your not around the other side of the ball as much as you would be in a 1 platoon scenario.
The 2nd point I think worth mentioning is the COACHING "IT FACTOR". Some of us have it and some of us don't but it's that ability to just KNOW when something is going to work and when it isn't. For example, some guys can just look at a player and you just know a kid doesn't have it despite benching 3 bills. It's nothing you c an measure. You just KNOW this kid's not a player.
Likewise, some of us can just look at a team and just KNOW that platooning is or is not the way to go. No tangible measurement. Sometimes it's the INTANGIBLE of just KNOWING. You can't explain it, you just KNOW this is or is not going to work. It's what makes us all unique and why some guys can thrive in one place and not another.
Anyway, sorry for the overkill, I am just a believer that we are all the BEST QUALIFIED to know what WE should be doing in OUR programs.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 29, 2013 16:20:04 GMT -6
Brophy,
I get what you're saying and do not completely disagree.
However,
You are also assuming that if I am "gearing up for future years" and "coaching the program" that eventually the platooning thing will pay off. WHAT IF IT DOES NOT? What if I play all these kids and coach them up to THE BEST OF MY ABILITY and it does not work? We have a couple of losing seasons. Now maybe I don't have to worry about getting "buy in" from everybody b/c their aren't many "bodies" to work with anymore b/c nobody likes losing.
Bottom line is I tell my kids if you want to play you have to work hard to earn it b/c the best players will play PERIOD!
Furthermore, while you are focusing on 2014 what are you telling the seniors of 2013? Hey guys, bite the bullet for the program so we can be better overall for years to come (despite their being no guarantee of that) even though this is your one and only senior year?
Not looking for a fight but I learned in this game their is NEVER one way to do things EVER. If their was EVERYONE would be doing it. Some teams can platoon and it works for them, It does not work for me. Furthermore, I flip my lineman so now with platooning I would all but evaporate any depth at all what so ever. With next years group Im not even sold on having a great core of starters to begin with.
Also, you mentioned EVERYBODY has 4-5 studs. Umm.... I'm still looking. I might have 3 maybe next year and one of them is highly injury prone.
Again, not looking to fight, I just believe that different strokes for different folks. MY program wins and numbers have improved dramatically in the last 3 years and we have not 2 platooned.
We use special teams and smart substitutions to get more kids on the field and I always remind them when they get the chance to get in their MAKE THE CASE FOR YOURSELF TO STAY ON THE FIELD!
I respect your POV but every situation is different and I feel I am coaching up my team and my program. We went 21 -8 as a program last year.
Just my 2 cents.
PS - You are also insinuating that playing time guarantees greater motivation to work hard. Some kids don't work hard b/c they won't start BUT... SOME KIDS DON'T START B/C THEY WON'T WORK HARD. The more positions available means less depth at each spot which also means less COMPETITION. At my school we are not talented enough to not have stiff competition w/ one another year in and year out. Again, like the concept but the situation has to be appropriate. IMHO it is not when your school is smallest in the conference.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 29, 2013 5:56:44 GMT -6
One thing that I think is a MAJOR factor in this decision making process has to do with who your opponents are.
I bought into the idea that if you 2 platoon lesser talent will grow due to extra reps and as a result, we will compete. And I have seen this work for many schools before, so I know the thought process is not faulty, but...... I think under certain circumstances (ours being one of them) this is not a good approach.
We 2 platooned about 4 years ago for 5 games and went 0-5 and it was not a "good" 0 - 5. We got smashed. The reason why I believe was because we are the smallest enrollment in our conference. Many times playing schools 1.5 to 2 x our size. Two platooning for us just widened an already existing talent gap.
We stopped doing platooning the last month of that season and went 2 -2. Then we stopped doing it all together and have made the play offs ever since. Last year we played 8 kids both ways due to our senior class being small but much more talented than our junior class and we had our best season in school history.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not against it. I just don't belive it's for a smaller school that plays larger schools. That's a tough situation regardless but 2 platooning IMHO is not appropriate for THAT type of situation.
I just feel many factors must be considered when looking at this approach and who your opponents are needs to be one of those factors. If we were the same size or bigger than our opponents I would 2 platoon in a heart beat. But we need the most talent we can muster on the field at all times b/c most of our opponents from top to bottom are more talented than us. Ironically, that's why we platooned in the 1st place, thinking that we will overcome the talent gap with fresh kids. This did not work for us. We widened the talent gap too much to overcome.
This has been my experience for what it's worth.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 22, 2013 18:39:05 GMT -6
We play whoever we need to play to get it done.
Even though this is a tough strenuous game, the reality is that in a 48 minute game their is something like only 5-6 minutes of actual activity. My thoughts are that my guys better be able to be tough for 5-6 minutes regardless of how many of them are playing both ways.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 17, 2013 6:10:49 GMT -6
Cursing is the exception and not the rule for us. B/c I am not perfect it slips from time to time but we really try to stay away from it.
With that being said, I will usually drop a word or two let's say 1 minute before kick off in the end zone after the national anthem for example, only b/c saying let's get out their and kick some a$$ sounds a whole lot more GENUINE to me than let's kick some butt when trying to rile up some 17 year olds who are about to engage in controlled violence.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 10, 2013 11:50:58 GMT -6
There is no excuse for a man to wear a visor... PERIOD Also never wearthose stupid jackets baseball coaches wear... Light windbreaker jacket that has short sleeves... Bdud, Thank you for having the courage to say what I was thinking:)
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 10, 2013 7:06:00 GMT -6
I might take some heat for this one but.... don't be the sweater vest/ visor guy. We always make fun of that guy.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 6, 2013 8:59:19 GMT -6
I concur w/ BLB on that one. I find our better defensive performances have come when we actually did NOT draw up every play the other team ran but in fact focused on their best 5-6 runs and 5-6 passes. Usually can derive that with 2 films.
Just my experience.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 4, 2013 17:33:51 GMT -6
Kudos to Coach Knight. Could not agree more.
What we specifically shoot for in our program is a small but sound playbook which allows fundamentals to be a priority.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 3, 2013 7:52:13 GMT -6
I agree w/ fantom. I am getting older and the joints can't handle regular lifting anymore. I'm in decent shape so I'm not copping out (elliptical/ or insanity workout several times a week). But, to say I need to workout to have credibility w/ my kids is silly.
If anything, I would say the OPPOSITE! My job is to COACH these kids to lift properly when THEY are in the weight room, not get paid to work out myself. That's why when we run the weight room I do not workout until they all leave. I personally feel this is the most appropriate way to run a weight room.
Furthermore, I will NEVER play a single down of football for my school. So my lifts are irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Feb 14, 2013 6:50:01 GMT -6
Nothing worth having ever comes easy.
The more you sweat in preparation, the less you bleed in battle.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Feb 13, 2013 6:26:16 GMT -6
You're still in charge coach. Let him come out. If he isn't fulfilling expectations get rid of him. It's his responsibility to fit the team. Not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Feb 6, 2013 5:54:29 GMT -6
I would not attend the wedding. I'm telling you from experience that this will cause a "funk" in your season. Several years ago I had a QB miss a game for his brothers wedding and our team was never the same. Cost us a play off berth by one game. Want to know which one we played the worst?
Also, it puts you in a terrible position the next time a kid wants to miss something and you don't think he should.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 21, 2013 9:20:21 GMT -6
Agree with many previous posts. I think a GREAT coach is also one who has the foresight to plan for the unexpected and the worst case scenarios.
In other words, a great coach is prepared for the expected as well as the unexpected. I think a great coach routinely prepares for what he thinks he will see as well as the stuff he doesn't want to see. He's rarely caught without an answer.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 21, 2013 9:05:47 GMT -6
For me it's been a combination of 4 things. 1 - My own experiences and preferences. 2 - Reaching out and networking with extremely successful coaches who were like minded. 3 - Coaching what I know and can teach the best. 4 - Combining the top 3 into a system that my kids can execute.
Also, I am always attending clinics or reading boards like this to continue to grow and evolve.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 17, 2013 14:48:25 GMT -6
I look at it slightly differently but a little easier for us "not so good at math" guys.
Our school has approximately 900 students in it.
That makes for about 450 boys.
Our program finished last season with about 90 players. That means 20% of the male population in our school played football last year. I would like to see that number be 25%.
I figure if 1 out of every 4 plays we are doing something right.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 15, 2013 17:52:01 GMT -6
I agree with bucksweep. I posted some of the reasons why kids might be unmotivated today above b/c that's what the post was about but I agree more with bucksweep than anythng.
Think about it. When we were playing (in my state anyway) we never had year round lifting (80's). Never had summer camp. Never had 7 on 7 competitions. We ask kids today to do more than we ever did in HS. Some do and some don't. But kids are kids, I agree. I think the reasons change why some are unmotivated, but the ratios of motivated v. unmotivated are probably the same in most eras.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 15, 2013 13:41:10 GMT -6
I believe it is never just one factor b/c every kid is different, hence different reasons for different kids.
However, I do think that "instant gratification" is a HUGE part of this. Nowadays, you don't have to wait fro information, food, communication, etc. So I think kids find it tempting to sit home and develop a mastery over a video game in a few short hours, rather than go to the weight room and bust their @sses for several months for a sport that is 3/4 of a year away.
In short, I think kids (and many adults for that matter) struggle with long term goals due to the ease with which things can be quickly acquired nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 24, 2012 13:39:49 GMT -6
It is the school's job (administration) to have a policy in place for this. We have a policy that all athletes MUST sign in order to participate in any sport. It is a district wide policy that states that as an athlete you agree not to use drugs/ alcohol or behave in any way that is considered a violation of our athletic code of conduct (theft would be another example) and you will be held accountable in season or out. Once something like this occurs (tweeting about smoking weed for example) the AD calls the kid in and suspends him for half the season. That's it.
I could not imagine being held responsible on my own as a coach for enforcing these things. I think that is a sign of failure by your school district. MY heart goes out to you. Your drinker and smoker would have both been suspended by our policy (if season was over it would carry to next sport). As for the kid ripping the coaches, I handle that with what I call a POP (plate of pain). Kid carries a 45 lb. plate for a mile and can't set it down until he's done. If he does, he starts over. If he refuses he does not play until he finishes it. He cannot rest it on his head or shoulders he must carry it with his hands. Those fingers will be far to sore to tweet anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 23, 2012 8:32:56 GMT -6
I would say we are unorthodox in that we no longer do 2-a-days and we don't condition. That's a bit of a misnomer I will explain.
First, no 2 a days b/c I have always found after lunch and an hour of air conditioning the 2nd practice always sucked. We would have a great 1st practice and a terrible 2nd practice and always ended on a down note. My 1st 2 years as HC we did 2 a days and went 0-2 for season opener. The last 8 years with no 2 a days we are 6-2 in season openers. If I feel I'm not getting everything done I trim the playbook rather than extend practice.
As far as no conditioning we feel our whole practice should be conditioning. We want all drills at game speed. We want team to be high paced to the whistle. Everyone jogs everywhere, 2 whistles on defense first to end play, 2nd everyone sprints and touches ball carrier, etc. The catch is we tell the kids if we are unsatisfied with their effort, tempo, intensity then we condition at the end and extend practice. We probably conditioned 4/5 x last season. They have to jog to water break and back as well. Water breaks are 1-2 minutes. We try to have almost no down time ever.
Our average practices during the season are about 230-240 long. Just what we do. It has worked for us and our kids are usually pretty fresh.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 21, 2012 7:01:43 GMT -6
Friday after game:
1 -Go to my house (I live across the street) 2 -Download game and set up hudl exchange 3 -Drink beer
Saturday Watch opponents films as staff and breakdown 9-noon No kids - I find meeting without them and focusing on opponent is more productive then when they are here. They have to watch 1 hour of film before Monday or they condition extra. I monitor them through hudl.
I spend the rest of Saturday at home periodically commenting on hudl our previous game and commenting on opponents defense while my DC does the same about their offense. I do this while watching college football. No time frame. I just do it periodically through out day until I'm done.
Sunday I try to have family day. I will comment on film after they go to bed if I feel I need to.
Monday - Thursday Practice (again watch film at night after family goes to bed if I feel I need to).
I agree with Silky. We work on us. I read a book by Bob Reade who is a coaching legend here in Illinois with 3 state titles and 4 D3 national championships and he stated they don't worry about what they cannot control. They worry about themselves. I have adopted this strategy.
Our plays and strategies will be tweaked but not changed. We are who we are. This has been successful for us.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 12, 2012 8:51:18 GMT -6
I couldn't agree more with what Lochness said about working smarter and not harder. That is the epitome of our program. In fact, that slogan is printed on the 1st page of our playbook.
As a result, I have crafted every aspect of our program to fit this mantra. Just one example, my first 2 seasons as a HC I ran 2 a days because you are "supposed to". I lost both season openers. The last 6 seasons as HC we have not run a single 2 a day and we are 6-0 on opening day.
On a side note I have competed against a coach who "wears the workhorse badge" as lochness stated earlier. This guy told me he SLEEPS OVER at school 1 day a week during the season to get more film time.......we have never lost to them:)
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 2, 2012 7:16:46 GMT -6
I took over a struggling program about 10 years ago (2-43 in 5 previous seasons). The first 2 seasons were disastrous. I installed a complicated system of option football that looked great..... ON PAPER! I could not teach the system to the kids. We went 3-15 my first 2 seasons as a HC. I simplfied the system, probably inferior on paper, but it became a system I could teach much more thoroughly and the results were much better. From 10 pts/ game to 25. From 3 wins in 2 seasons to 15 wins over the next 3 seasons and the 1st play off appearance in 15 years. I learned the hard way that it's not what you KNOW but what you can TEACH that really matters.
As I became more seasoned as a HC and did more research and NETWORKING (sites like this, sitting down with local successes, clinics, etc.) I have expanded what I can teach and now my offense resembles much more what I intended to run in the 1st place and the results have been the best I've ever had. Through experience I can now TEACH more concepts to my kids. I believe whole heartedly teaching and experience are key. Many assistants can't wait to be HC but I believe very few are ever truly ready in year 1. For me anyway, it was a baptism by fire.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 1, 2012 8:19:43 GMT -6
I think the answer to this is "yes and no". Not trying to ride the fence here but I see this both ways. As a HC I have noticed that a lot of younger guys don't like to put in the time but have an expectation that they will have a voice or "move up" without earning it. I do think this is a drawback from the information age. These young guys play Madden (yes, I actually had a guy during an INTERVIEW say he knew the game "forward and backwards because he played Madden all through out college", no lie that actually happened). So some of these guys get a little knowledge and think they are "seasoned" . In that sense I think it has gotten worse and good young assistants are hard to find. Especially when it comes to putting in the time and when it comes to the less glamorous side of things to, like helping with fund raising, tracking equipment, etc.
On the other hand, I think your ELITE programs are better coached than in the past b/c this game always has and will continue to evolve. It's just a fact that over time people find better ways to do things. Better ways to move the ball, better ways to play defense, etc. As time goes by evolution improves the product at the elite levels in my opinion. For example, a state champion from 1980 jumps into a time machine to play state champion today and I think many of them would be baffled by some of the schemes they are seing today because they did not exist back then. I also think on elite levels, the athlete is trained much better than ever before so you are putting superior specimens on the field that would dominate many athletes from decades past.
This is my experience anyway.
|
|