|
Post by s73 on Jan 1, 2020 17:32:37 GMT -6
Are we really about to have this discussion? Hopefully the Michigan University football players are trained enough bu the weight room, Winter, Spring, and Summer conditioning. Along with in-season weights and conditioning. If the Michigan players need extra gassers, then they ALL need extra gassers. This is 100% a mental/emotional ploy by Harbaugh. Sounds cool and all that but I bet by the 10th practice when the 350 pound o linemam just whipped someone and now has to run an extra gasser cause he just whipped that ass, he thinks it is pretty stupid also. While team success is not always a measure of whether something is good or not, maybe if JH could beat tOSU once, it would have a little more respect. Let’s play one on one basketball. If you win, you run 10 line drills. Let’s do that every day. How do you think you are going to feel about that on day 10. 10 gassers.. that would be stupid. A little something extra, with intrinsic pride attached to it which may lead to embracing training / work a little more? Much different scenario. Kind of like the story you told of the kids who hit the weight room when the bus got back from winning the state basketball championship.... Not saying I would necessarily implement it. But I don't think it is cause for alarm or wrecking the UM program. It is just a physical trophy. Not punishment. One thing I am not opposed to doing and have done in the past, and believe it or not, has some value to it, is determine whether to condition or not based on the quality of practice. TBH, I've even asked kids what they think. To eval themselves. Haven't done it in a long time but when I did I almost always got an accurate response. Usually they were in agreement w/ coaches. At least then they see it as "yes we earned the break or no, we didn't". It also has helped me as a coach to really grow my respect for the kids when they are taking responsibility for a poor practice.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 1, 2020 10:58:20 GMT -6
Thanks for the input gents.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 1, 2020 10:38:52 GMT -6
I always struggle when HS coaches compare themselves and what they do to D1 colleges, or use what they hear a D1 guy is doing. It's apples to oranges. You want to make the winners run? Go ahead Jim H, you have them by the balls b/c you hold their scholarships. You also tend to wear out your welcome more than anybody I have seen and usually leave most places in infamy. As for ME, I can't really justify it. . I dont think it is that big a deal. The logic behind it seems to be that by winning, they earned the right to work harder to improve “for Michigan “. The loser doesnt get that right Mindset is that work /running isnt a punishment but an opportunity- I understand the mindset. I just don't believe the method would be effective for more than a very short amount of time. Eventually kids will get tired of "winning". JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jan 1, 2020 2:16:45 GMT -6
Anyone subscribe to his defensive stuff? Any good? Worth it?
Thanks in advance for any insight.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Dec 31, 2019 10:38:00 GMT -6
It was like his first practice at Michigan. They had a competition and the winners “got” to run sprints while the losers “had” to watch. I don’t agree with the logic I always struggle when HS coaches compare themselves and what they do to D1 colleges, or use what they hear a D1 guy is doing. It's apples to oranges. You want to make the winners run? Go ahead Jim H, you have them by the balls b/c you hold their scholarships. You also tend to wear out your welcome more than anybody I have seen and usually leave most places in infamy. As for ME, I can't really justify it.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jul 14, 2019 7:57:25 GMT -6
I also think another solution is to look at what you do, what we have always done, and question: Is it necessary? Does it make sense?
I scrapped 2 a days a decade ago. Why? B/c the 2nd session always sucked. The kids worked hard, then they sat in the AC for an hour, came back out after lunch & proceeded to dog it and throw up. I decided "just b/c it had always been done" didn't make it smart or good practice.
In my state when I payed ball, we had no summer camp so 2 a days made sense. Now we do, so what do we need 2 a days for when you have a summer to prep? I would argue if you still need them then your summer plan is probably not very organized. JMO.
Another thing I have scrapped for 10 years now is conditioning. It is MY GOAL, to make my practices organized enough that what we do DURING the practice conditions our kids. We run a tackle / block destruction circuit that has them wheezing when they're done. We run 7 on 7 and live pass rush drill. We make them carry out all ball fakes for 10 yards. They are gassed by the end w/o the DREADED "alright, everybody on the line".
I have scrapped taking guys to the ground. It only seems to get kids hurt and IME, has very little carryover to actually improving tackling. We pursue hard and wrap up, we take our opponents to the ground. In fact, I will say this, the FASTER we are the better we tackle regardless of how often we drill it. So....why get kids that much more beat up? JMO.
I also believe it is advantageous to look at how many contacts you NEED rather than how many you get. If you don't need to do extra days, don't "invent stuff" that requires extra days. I think sometimes we hear about opponents do "X" number of contacts & we feel if they are doing that then I need to keep up with them. Personally I feel this can be foolish and unnecessary.
These are my solutions and I feel have helped us to keep numbers when others have struggled. It ain't perfect but at least I can say I'm doing something rather than just whining about it. I think giving kids a portion of their summer is a good thing. I think that "morale booster" supersedes and is more beneficial than extra days of work if......you are organized and have a plan.
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jul 11, 2019 13:15:18 GMT -6
So I know there has been a number of posts on here about 'how much is too much' etc. etc. But I read this story on ESPN today www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27125793/these-kids-ticking-bombs-threat-youth-basketballTo sum up, its about how yearlong AAU basketball has worn out a lot of the top athletes, so by the time they reach college/NBA their bodies are falling apart and they are seeing an increase in injuries. Now I recognize this article is about basketball, and that the injuries are really impacting athletes who are at a level many will never come close to reaching. Still, I felt it was relevant to us in athletics, and to possibly discuss how much is too much from a physiological standpoint. On average how much work can you ask from a kid before you are harming his performance, and possibly his health? This may not be a "scientific answer" but I know from MY EXPERIENCES that I can tell when it's too much by morale, body language and decline in performance during practice. If that kid that used to explode off the ball seems much less so now, it's not usually b/c everyone else go so much better. It's b/c he doesn't feel his best. Also, I base when too much is happening based on how I feel. If I'm not "feeling it", then...they sure aren't. That's just my experience / opinion.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jul 5, 2019 20:18:30 GMT -6
well, they’re ours and we’re theirs. They are just as stuck with us as we are with them. We all want better/tougher/ whatever players, but let’s keep in mind that they could have better coaches too. Maybe just keeping focused on holding up our end of the bargain is the answer. Have coached w/ guys who when they win they pat themselves on the back and when they lose "they have no talent" or " our kids just suck". But.....if kids say that about us, well they must be entitled little pricks. Bottom line, kids come & go, but if you never look in the mirror and develop YOURSELF, then you are at the mercy of your talent. Yes....we all are to some extent, but my goal is to try and take every team I have to +1 or better than what they are probably capable of. 3-6? I'm pushing for 4+. 5-4 I'm pushing for 6+. Maybe I can and maybe I can't but one thing I know for SURE. $hitty attitude and excuse making has no shot. Getting after it gives you a chance. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jul 3, 2019 12:28:27 GMT -6
Here's what I find myself and my staff doing EVERY YEAR!
"I wish this group was like our group from 5 years ago. Those guys really GOT IT! They were so tough and hard nosed and good workers and great all around kids. Loved coaching them!"
Flashback to 5 years ago:
"I wish this group was like our group from 5 years ago. Those guys really GOT IT! They were so tough and hard nosed and good workers and great all around kids. Loved coaching them!"
IMO the reality is we ask more of kids then by far whatever was asked of us. All groups have ones that are more willing than others and some groups have more of those than others. I suspect that's always been the case and just like history, the most accurate assessment of each group usually comes after the fact b/c when you're going through a season you only see snapshots and the stress of the job often times causes us to focus on the negative more than the positive b/c we have to intervene and fix the negative so it gets more attention.
Hence, during frustration and seasonal lows it becomes "kids nowadays" but once the season is over & you can reflect w/ clear mind, MOST times (definitely bad groups from time to time) the kids are as good as we were & some probably better.
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 29, 2019 10:37:48 GMT -6
I recently heard a podcast on USAFB on doing away with scout cards and just calling the play how our team would call it. I think this is a great idea. I think it will speed things up and allow our younger guys to learn our offense. My question is... if you are spread team and you are playing a wing-t team... how do you make it work? Have any of you gone away with scout cards? My DC tried to make scout wrist coaches w/ blocking rules directions for everybody on the scout O thinking it would speed things up tremendously b/c no huddle, etc. But.....it sucked. Kids still did things totally wrong and he said the wrist coaches actually took longer than to just draw stuff up. I just don't see any better way around it.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 24, 2019 12:44:22 GMT -6
I haven't done Saturdays in over 10 years. I believe, right or wrong, that the benefits of a kid getting rest after beating up his body for 5 days playing the game of FB far outweighs any benefit he would receive from me bringing him in an extra day. IMO, recovery is one of the most underrated and overlooked parts of our profession. Kids only come in if they need to see the trainer or want to ice bath. Otherwise, they are granted the day off and we share our break down w/ them on hudl. JMO. Do you believe your athletes seem more rested? You think they enjoy football more with the extra day off? I can say w/o hesitation that I feel enthusiasm for football at our school seems to be pretty good where as when I've coached at other places where I was an assistant kids seemed to drag more as the season wore on & I think Saturdays played a role in that. As far as being better rested, I can only say that we have performed better in the 4th quarter than many of our opponents despite them being bigger schools w/ better numbers more often than not.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 23, 2019 21:49:41 GMT -6
I have been thinking of getting rid of Saturdays for Varsity players. Varsity lifts Monday and Wednesday (JV Tuesday Wednesday). I guess the only thing I bring Varsity players in for on Saturdays is for a recovery lift and film, which totals to an hour. JV plays on Saturdays as well. I do like knowing who is hurting and potentially out from an injury, but I could find that out fairly easily in 2019. Benefits of no Saturdays and benefits of keeping Saturdays? I haven't done Saturdays in over 10 years. I believe, right or wrong, that the benefits of a kid getting rest after beating up his body for 5 days playing the game of FB far outweighs any benefit he would receive from me bringing him in an extra day. IMO, recovery is one of the most underrated and overlooked parts of our profession. Kids only come in if they need to see the trainer or want to ice bath. Otherwise, they are granted the day off and we share our break down w/ them on hudl. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 23, 2019 21:36:27 GMT -6
So......My son just started summer camp in HS for my program this year. He, played last year for the 1st time in youth ball. So far, he has said that youth ball was more fun but that he's learned more in a day then he did all last year. What I gather from that, we are an instant gratification society, kids in the short term enjoy the "fun & games" of youth ball. But, if they are willing to stick w/ it they will learn to enjoy and appreciate the discipline of a well tuned unit and hopefully the success that follows it. Some will not be willing to accept "good things come to those who wait". I wouldn't attach much social significance to this. Some guys love football (or any pursuit, for that matter) and are willing to work at getting as good as they can at it. Some just like playing games and but for them it's just fun and games. Nothing wrong with that. Probably right.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 23, 2019 12:46:38 GMT -6
So......My son just started summer camp in HS for my program this year. He, played last year for the 1st time in youth ball. So far, he has said that youth ball was more fun but that he's learned more in a day then he did all last year. What I gather from that, we are an instant gratification society, kids in the short term enjoy the "fun & games" of youth ball. But, if they are willing to stick w/ it they will learn to enjoy and appreciate the discipline of a well tuned unit and hopefully the success that follows it. Some will not be willing to accept "good things come to those who wait".
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 21, 2019 7:48:34 GMT -6
So I coach down here in Texas at a VERY small private school. We have won 2 state Titles 2013, 2014. Those were the good old days... but basketball has just ran over our school. Don’t get me wrong our school is great at basketball. But we have slowly declined the last couple years. Including a 1-9 season this year. And the first time not making the playoffs in 7 years. I can almost guarantee we would’ve be contenders for State if at least 5 of our top Basketball boys came out and played with us. But their “afraid to get hurt” and ruin their chances at a college basketball scholarship. And now all I’m hearing around the school is that the reason kids don’t wanna play now is cause “no one wants to play for a losing team”... which just pisses me off. Cause if more people would play we wouldn’t have this problem!! And just clear up some confusion. We’re a 6 man team. (Texas plays either 11 man or 6 man). And as you small school coaches know. NUMBERS MATTER. I guess my whole point of this rant is to ask this question. How on earth do y’all get more kids to come out and play football? I have said this before and I will say it again, particularly at small schools I feel it is the AD's job to intervene as it HIS job to try and ensure ALL athletic success. If I were the AD I would have a meeting w/ all coaches to ensure they are all promoting multi sport athletes and would make that part of their evaluation. Then I would hold a coach - player - parent meeting and have all coaches speak on the importance of playing other sports. I would MAKE them sell the importance of the multi sport athlete. That's all he can do. Then continue to market yourself. If your AD is not currently doing this then I would APPROACH HIM w/ the idea. If he is unwilling then maybe you need to look around or consider resigning and maybe assist somewhere else. I think we as coaches forget that this is supposed to be fun for players & US. Otherwise, what is the point? Sounds like you're not having much fun b/c you don't see any "light at the end of the tunnel". IMO it's the AD's job to make sure he gives all programs the best chance to succeed.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 19, 2019 10:17:34 GMT -6
I was an assistant for 7 years and then became a HC at 2 different schools for the last 16.
First place I took over hadn't won a game in 3 years and only 8 games over the previous 7 seasons. Also smallest enrollment by far on the schedule (next smallest was over twice our enrollment, but I wanted to be a HC, so....) 1st 2 years I took my lumps and got "in the hole" as far as coaching record goes (put me 12 games under .500 right off the bat). By 3rd year we were respectable and 4th year we made play offs for 2nd time in school history.
Got my 2nd gig at a start up school and we had to play our first varsity season w/ no senior class in the building and enrollment less than half the size of our opponents. Took lumps again for 2 seasons and put me another 14 games "in the whole". That's 26 games under.500 during the build process.
Since then we have won a conference title and made the play off's 5 times in 8 years. Narrowly missing 2 other times.
My point is not that I'm "such a great coach" but that records can be misleading as to coaching performance and ability. My overall record is not great, but I feel myself and staff have accomplished some pretty good things regardless of our starts in both places.
Hence, I really value the opinions of others who coach similar systems under similar circumstances and manage to be competitive. I can learn a lot from guys who "have been there before". FOR ME, at a small to mid level school hearing how they adjust for practices based on small numbers, less stipends than ideal, etc teaches ME a whole lot more & is much more beneficial than the guy whose at a huge state power w/ kids and resources coming out of his ears.
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 18, 2019 14:21:38 GMT -6
How much weight do you attribute to the success of a coach when it comes to listening to them, purchasing a system from them, or purchasing some other product like a DVD or a book. If you see a coach went 1-9 last year and he's selling his offense for however much money, are you going to consider his success when thinking of purchasing that product or are you a believer that the product is not dependent on the coaches results but more so the structure, organization, terminology, etc. Similarly, when it comes to taking advice, or implementing advice that has been given to you, or presented on this forum and that you are able to see, again how much weight do you place on wins and losses, and do they play a role in your implementation of that advice. To try and answer my own question. I think when it comes to advice or tips that are being freely discussed i think the wins and losses of that coach dont cross my mind as being so important, however, when someone is trying to sell something especially an offense or a defense i look at their wins and losses much more closely and they seem to have a large impact on my opinion of the product. Additionally, i heard a saying a while back that went something along the lines of "a coach with a bad record is just as important to study as a coach with a great record, you study the guy with the great record to see what he did well so you can emulate it, and you study what the guy with the bad record did poorly so you can avoid it". Anyways just looking for peoples two cents i suppose. I agree whole heartedly w/ this post. The big "smell test" for me is guys who maybe aren't the winningest guys in the world bit who win at places others could not. Maybe they are only a few games over.500 but the previous years the school has been really bad. That goes a long way in mind. Shows the guy isn't loaded and prob has won with effort and intelligence. As for buying stuff? Honestly, IMO, compared to what you can get on the net nowadays? I don't buy anything anymore. Too many products have been a disappointment in terms of topic depth and just not worth the $. And again, IDK if they are any good or not, what their level of competition is or whether or not they are just loaded. Nope, just give me a consistent dude who wins where other couldn't. Then I know coaching had something to do with it. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 15, 2019 7:25:10 GMT -6
Okay, I admit that I have not read all of the posts here, so if I touch on things others have, please forgive me. I think football faces a number of serious challenges in the near future; and I'm not sure how the sport will fare in the medium to far future. Over the past few years I've had the opportunity to go through the youth soccer experience with my daughter. She will be playing her first year of competitive next year after three years of academy. From the perspective of a coach, the produce youth soccer offers players is exponentially better than the one offered at the high school level on down. It is especially notable at the youth levels. The quality of coaching is better because all of the coaches are certified and many of them go and get their "A" level certifications in Europe. This shows all the time on the practice field. Most of the coaches only coach. Most make enough coaching soccer with their club and doing camps in the summer that they do not need to do other things. Put differently, they are not coaching for a stipend. Obviously, this comes at a cost. Soccer, which should be an incredibly cheap sport to play, is very expensive. This year we spent well over $3.000 on tuition, coaching fees, travel, tournies, uniforms, etc . . . and we are not crazies like some of the parents that I see at practice and at games. That's the huge downside of it, and I have huge problems with it. That said, the quality of coaching on the field is stellar. My daughter never played soccer until three years ago and now she's an incredibly capable player that plays Forward, Center Mid, and Center Back. What I'm trying to get at is this: the idea that you coach because you love the game is great, I'm done it for manyy years, but football needs to create a certification process with levels and commensurate pay grades associated with it to ensure that football players are being coached by real coaches who are technicians on the field. And this has to start from youth all the way up. I sometimes wonder whether out model has become antiquated and that it's served its purpose. By this, I mean that we are the only major country where sports are tethered to schools. This has clearly has done a lot of good - please do not get me wrong. I came out of this system and coached in it for many years. But this year when we were in Russia and my daughter was playing for her Club I saw the difference, and it was even greater than the club experience. Her coaches there were all professionals who coached not 5 teams a season but 1 and usually would coach the same team for 2 years. This is par for the course throughout most of Europe. When I hung out with the coaches they all wanted to now why we do it the way we do in the US. I gave all the reasons that we usually give - community, family, etc - but as they pointed out, the club there provides all of those things too, but with one difference: consistent coaching from youth to the national level. Anyway, I'm just trying to think outside the box here. I think football has some serious structural and instructional issues that need to be confronted. First and foremost, the standard for coaching has to go up. IDK if it requires an entire structural change but I cannot argue w/ any said regarding youth ball. My son played FB for the 1st time last year as an 8th grader (his choice) and it was not a good experience for either of us. The coaching was abhorrent. Cannot tell you how many times I saw 10 dads standing around watching 2 kids beat on each other while the other 18 stood in line. 10 coaches, 2 kids active running a drill I did not recognize, 18 kids watching and doing nothing, waiting to participate in an unrecognizable drill. That about summed up my kids season. With that said, I thought several (not all) of our opponents teams looked sharp and well coached. So, maybe not total structural changes but definitely develop stronger criteria to coach youth sports. Or dare I say, no tackle ball until middle school?
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 14, 2019 15:07:17 GMT -6
You said you were playing devil's advocate. Fair enough.
Referring to your last line - do you believe that the level of competition and meritocracy ("best players play") shouldn't be different at varsity than lower levels?
From a purely objective point of view, can you tell me why it should be different? I don't have solid stats on total "youth" (nebulous term) tackle football participation numbers. Statista.com reported (but I couldn't find their source) that a little over 5.2 million people over the age of 6 participated in tackle football. About 1 million of those are HS kids (according to the Federation Stats) and about 70,000 play NCAA ball. So out of that means that 4.1 of the 5.2 million only play youth ball. So why should HS varsity coaches get to say "This is 'what counts, you sit the bench" but the coaches of around 80% of the participants don't get that same stature? It would sound pretty ridiculous to hear Swinney or Saban or Harbaugh to lament HS's not focusing on developing players but rather on winning, but is it all that different other than just the mindset of HS coaches? Pardon me while I butt in if that's okay. I think it should be different for several reasons. The 1st, because as we age and become more cerebral and mature, a normal part of that maturation process is becoming more competitive. If you play everybody on the youths level I rarely if ever hear kids complain about losing b/c you played so and so. But you start playing everybody in a varsity game and lose as a result, most of the seniors are never going to play organized FB again and they want their careers to last as long a possible. Winning games = play offs = glimmer of hope for another game. 2nd - Could have scholarships on the line. If a kid has a legit shot at getting one and paying for school, he ought to get the PT he needs to market himself. Furthermore, the more consecutively we make the play offs the more college coaches sniff around. has been an obvious trend for our school. 3rd - Coaches at HS / Varsity level are getting paid to coach. With that, like it or not in this era of HS ball, that comes w/ expectations from admin and community. Coaches in HS these days get fired for not winning. Just facts. 4th - IME anyway, we as Varsity coaches spend a TON BY A LONGSHOT more time coaching then our youth guys, So, in my mind, if I'm gonna spend that much time away from the family for a measly stipend, I feel like I'd like to experience some success as a result. 5th - Again IME, winning varsity FB sets the tone for school spirit for the YEAR. Winning a youth game sets the tone for going to Dairy Queen. Come to think of it, so does losing. Basically either way the youth team is going to DQ. The school on the other hand tends to be more effected by the big time rivalry win or loss. Again, IME. Yeah, varsity HS football in 2019 is about winning, no doubt about it. At least where I coach it is.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 14, 2019 13:42:32 GMT -6
Definitely a big part of it. I think we sometimes say "kids are soft, when I played they chewed my butt ran 3 a days and blah blah blah". Sometimes I wonder, are kids soft or were we just stupid? Prob a little of both. Bottom line is, I see programs in our area having all time success and still struggling to get kids out b/c as a result of their "success" they start to request / require more and the kids must figure I guess it isn't worth it.
A little from column A and a little from column B. Our profession is sorely lacking when it comes to qualified coaches but I do see parents becoming more veracious and enabling when it comes to lack of discipline and bad attitudes. The backlash that we get from many parents is unbelievable at points and their gripes show us exactly why their kids are the way they are.
Can't argue w/ you there. I have been fortunate to have pretty supportive parents for the most part. However, once in awhile you get the knucklehead. I generally try to be preemptive w/ those people. If I feel like a parent might be a pain, I will make sure I email home every time Johnny misses a practice or a lift just so I have that in my back pocket so when Johnny isn't playing I can recall all the communications I gave through out the off season. That has been helpful and really takes little time and effort. I always say something to the effect of "hey, I know you have been concerned about PT, just FYI Johnny isn't committing to the off season & giving himself the best chance to be successful". Then add in something like we really value him & blah blah. I find it doesn't give them much room to wiggle. JME.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 14, 2019 9:09:42 GMT -6
"We have met the enemy, and they is us." Very often we football coaches are our own worst enemies. Forget the parents, baseball-basketball coaches, etc. Definitely a big part of it. I think we sometimes say "kids are soft, when I played they chewed my butt ran 3 a days and blah blah blah". Sometimes I wonder, are kids soft or were we just stupid? Prob a little of both. Bottom line is, I see programs in our area having all time success and still struggling to get kids out b/c as a result of their "success" they start to request / require more and the kids must figure I guess it isn't worth it.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 14, 2019 7:47:25 GMT -6
Kids are different when it comes to football.
No longer are they willing to work nine months in the Off-Season just to sit on the bench-be a team member.
If they do not see themselves as starting or at least getting significant playing time, they will find something else to do. And there are more options now for them than BITD.
More kids now are specializing in search of the Scholarship Grail, playing other sports year-round (fall baseball for ex.)
Some kids, after playing youth football for several years, have had enough by the time they get to HS ("burn out"). Or they had bad experiences, including losing. They don't see the value in working all year when the result will likely (in their eyes) be the same. They have already decided whether or not they are good individually and as a class, and whether the time is worth it.
There have always been kids-parents that used the "dangers" (injury potential) of football as an excuse not to play, but the concussion hysteria has no doubt had some affect on participation.
Most kids will not respond well to old-school authoritarian coaching style any longer. It will have a negative affect on their attitude-performance, or drive them away altogether.
They are not as motivated by intrinsic rewards of football as before. They play mostly for fun and camaraderie (for many football is not even their favorite sport, just what they do in the fall). If it is not fun or camaraderie with their buddies and-or coaches isn't there they will not play. blb I think you are the guy who posted on here a couple years ago something to the effect of "football is not as important to the kids as it is to us (coaches)". That has stuck with me. Profound observation. I think if more coaches recognized that fact, more kids would want to play. I have always said the same. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. I think given our technological advancements kids "have been changed" to some extent b/c they can hang w/ their friends w/o even getting out of bed nowadays via social media , etc. I would argue many of us would be similar had we grown up in this era. However, I also blame adults for not pushing more kids away from that stuff and setting stricter boundaries. I also blame coaches to an extent. I'm 48. NEVER had to give as much time to FB as most of us expect nowadays. But...we are in a pickle b/c you need to do more than in the past to keep up w/ opponents. Would like to see states scale summer time back w/ strict policies for violations. I think that would help numbers IMO. As it stands, we have allocated 25 contact days every summer. I purposely don't use them all & try to build in a couple weeks off in the beginning, middle and end. I also did away w/ 2 a days 15 years ago. Honestly, we have improved as a result and while our numbers are declining like everyone else's I would say not as severely. Much more a result of the concussion climate then I think what we are doing. JMO of course.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Jun 11, 2019 14:15:00 GMT -6
Alright! Let’s hear it what’s your go to. I’m 35 now and a former player but man, weight training is great but it’s hard for my beat up body (former college player) to do that more than twice a week. I modeled my plan after Coach Vogt (google it) and it helped me a lot but like I said, my body has some wear and tear. I got on a Yoga kick over summer and it did wonders for me mentally and physically. I’m still in pretty good shape, but being first year Head Coach it’s tough to be consistent and I’ve put on a few. Anyways, let’s hear it. What do you do? What works for you? What doesn’t? I'm 48 and I have found the following to be pretty good for me. Full disclosure, I need to lose about 20 pounds. But, that's not b/c I'm out of shape, it's b/c one of the only things I do better than working out is eating:) What has been good for me has been to workout 4-6 times a week but short and intense. Examples: Monday - Legs Walk to school ( 1mile) Deadlift 1 x 10 Squat Thrust 1 x 10 Run stairs 20 minutes Walk Home Tuesday - Upper Body Walk to school Row 2, 000 Meters (8 minutes) 1 Set Push ups until failure 1 set fat man pull-ups Heavy Rope Throw downs for 1 Minute Walk Home Then basically repeat each day. When I get sore or busy I take my day off. Doing 1 set of heavy dead is more than enough. Especially 10 reps. Just have to be careful when I'm getting tired not to wrench my back. Also, the stairs is great b/c I step 2 at a time and it mimics an easier form of step ups. I do 4 flights x 2 then walk to the end of the hall, get a drink and walk back & start over. Each trip takes about 3 minutes. So 6 - 7 trips in about 20 minutes. Has been hard enough to feel results and stay in shape but not so hard I can't do it continually.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 28, 2019 10:04:16 GMT -6
I will say this, almost every other sport (at least in our state) takes just about every team into the post season, but you must qualify for football.
And many non conference champs have gone on to win state titles. I like having to earn it but having to have basically a winning record b/c sometimes you have really good teams that suffer injuries, etc.
Furthermore, if you make the play offs super exclusive yu are going to have teams petrified to play anybody outside of their region, challenge themselves, etc.
I like it the way it is (in our state anyway).
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 12, 2019 19:27:32 GMT -6
Maybe it’s just me, but I really don’t see the same level of thought put into other sports as I see in highschool football. I.e.: their lack of respect for strength and conditioning I'm going to completely contradict my self here when I say.......you cannot generalize all other sports like that. But....in general............... yeah. In other words, always exceptions but for the most part and IME it's very true. Just the other day I had our BB coach ask if we could adjust our S & C program (of which he offers no insight, help or effort) b/c he feels his players are to bulky and it effects their shot. First off, I thought the 1970's thought process of BB players don't lift anymore died about 3 decades ago when half the NBA started looking like FB players. Secondly, to call our BB team a starving 3rd world village would be an insult to starving 3rd world villages. I can floss my teeth w/ most of these dudes. Lastly, this year is the MOST any of our BB kids have lifted (saying absolutely nothing) and it's the 1st winning season in our school's HISTORY! They were a whopping 1 game over 500.
But hey.....they're too BULKY. Yeah, way bigger than that LeBron guy. He only weighs 270.
He was met w/ a stern NO by our AD before I could even open my mouth. Was nice for a change. PS - I jus think FB guys are a different breed. The game has more moving parts and as a result requires more thought process, research, networking, etc. I think you are either drawn to that challenge or you're not. FB coaches who stick it out long term are drawn to it, others coach something else. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 5, 2019 13:24:56 GMT -6
I've had some decent ones. mostly rah-rah crap like using the other teams nutsack as speed bag type of stuff.
But......one I think is worth noting and a high school tribute to Jackie Sherill (oldtimers know who I'm talking about) dude faked his own death during lunch on game day by staging a student from the school carrying out a fake shooting of himself in the school cafeteria. He used blood packets, the whole 9 yards.
His whole idea was to motivate the kids to win the game in their "dead coaches honor" and then he was going to show up right as the game started.
This was before school shootings were a common thing but.........
it gets better, the coaches kid was on the team as well & was present when the "shooting" went down.He really thought somebody murdered his father. Kids were sent home, counselors were brought in, the game was canceled and obviously he was fired.
So yeah, there's that.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 4, 2019 16:21:00 GMT -6
With all due respect you sound exactly like what you are preaching against.....entitled. Your first example is what if you have a STUD WR & a coach who chucks the ball 40 times & then you change to a SW. Well, let me ask you this: Let's say you have stud WR & coach who chucks the ball 40X & the coach stays but decides to run the ball a TON the following year b/c his QB graduated & the next kid up has silly string for an arm? Or just doesn't make great decisions w/ the ball? I'm guessing, again w/ all due respect, that you are on the upside of things right now as a program so your thoughts are, why shouldn't kids get to transfer here b/c we're awesome! But if you were on the other side, and kids were leaving you'd feel different. Furthermore, what you're preaching is, if you don't like the way things are going, just leave. Is that what you're going to tell your players when they marry? What your wife gained a little baby weight after your 3rd child was born? You didn't sign up for that? Meh, trade her in for a younger model. Thank God our military doesn't subscribe to your mentality, or we'd all be speaking German. Sometimes things aren't what we always want, but it's awfully hard to fix them by "outworking the other guy" when your program is a revolving door. Maybe a coach retires and a new guy comes in, should everybody leave immediately & not even give him a chance b/c it might be hard? Can't coach ghosts. I suspect however, no matter what is said you will not change your mind. The only thing that will change it is life experience. JMO. So a lot of assumptions here coach...guess you missed the part where I said...I don't know if I am for or against the idea. As for my program, nope not on upside at all, in fact moved from a very good program to one that went 1-8 the year before (I don't live in the district, I don't get paid and my kid plays in another district). I didn't preach anything, I simply provided the other side of the argument. Here are the facts gentlemen, Parents are voters, parents can influence and if the only argument against letting parents do whatever they want and transfer kids all over is "its bad for the coach". Well guess what, nobody gives a flying frog's butt about you...so this little experiment was to see how you will argue either for or against it, as it is coming and will be coming your way...if it hasn't already. So you better be able to argue your point from logic and not cause your butt hurt you may loose your job. Parents vote.... There are extremes to everything and yes you could have kids move because of being butt hurt. As for the military comment....There is an EGA hanging on my wall... The part that I did not miss is the part where you said "change my mind, prove me wrong". Also, you are making MANY assumptions my friend. 1. Why is winning the ONLY thing that makes a program good for kids? I have been to the play offs 3X in a rom 5 / 8 years and have a couple of nice play off runs under my belt & I do not believe this. 2. Parents vote and.....parents pay taxes. Why should some kid get to go to another program down the road when all the people who LIVE their are paying taxes and the kids family is NOT paying taxes in that community? 3. What about the kids who would LOVE to go to the "great program" down the road but can't afford to transport their kid b/c its' out of disctirct? So....they get stuck behind while kids w/ advantage get yet another leg up? 4. You are looking through the most narrow of scopes as if a year or 2 of HS football should be a major consideration concerning a kids schooling. 95% of kids will not receive anything other than typical financial aid that they would probably qualify for anyways b/c of football. But.....we should allow kids a choice to go where they want, not knowing if they will fit in socially, academically, b/c they want a chance to win more games which isn't even a guarantee but based on the perception of a previous season or 2? I think that's a really immature way to view things. JMO. 5. Would you think this is a good idea if "Johnny Pinhead", non athlete who has been busted for drugs, has a disorderly conduct record for throwing a desk across the room b/c a teacher asked for his phone (true story fro me) and has been busted for lewd acts b/c he thought it was "funny" to stick his junk in some freshman's face while changing in the locker room (true again) was placed in you classroom b/c "that other school doesn't understand our child and is targeting him" (true story everywhere)? Are you willing to open that box b/c if kids can go wherever they want due to athletics, then so should anybody else. 6. What coaches are butt hurt by this? I'm not hearing of any. I don't really know where this is an issue. The only issue I have seen related to any of this is where private schools w/ no "real" boundaries keep siphoning kids around our state to the point that they become almost impossible to compete w/ in the state level series. And even then the only "butt hurting" I hear is when the those coaches who have 11 D1 kids on their roster come off as arrogant, like it's all them and not the boat load of talent they have been gifted with. That's about the only time it's an issue. 7. Lastly, kids have age restrictions on voting, driving, alcohol etc, b/c life experience is the best teacher & they are not always able to make good responsible decisions at a young age. Hence, some kid thinks he wants to go to school A, but once he gets there he decides he made a big mistake. So.....then at semester he ants to come back. Or....he wants to play FB at school A, BB at school B and run track at school C. What kind of a cluster would that be? How would any of be able to build any consistency w/ a revolving door of students on an annual basis? Not trying to be a d!ck. really I'm not. But to hear this kind of nonsense to me sounds like another voice championing the "it's all about me cause". I think loyalty to a coach who has coached his a$$ for a kid should matter. I think teammates who have sacrificed beside that same kid should matter & I think communities who have supported that kid, sometimes all way from Pop Warner up, should matter. Relationships should matter. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Apr 4, 2019 6:56:22 GMT -6
So most of us coach student athletes. And I will bet all of us say things like, "its about the kids, its for the kids". Is it really? Most rules governing our sport in regards to non game day activities are about US, protecting US. Take transferring/recruiting. Those rules are about protecting the coach, there not whats best for the Kid. Example, your a stud WR and you go to a school that chucks it 40 times a game. Next season your coach leaves and the new guy is single wing, is this whats best for the kid? But if the kid leaves in most states without actually picking up and moving, the kid sits. So is it about the kids? Lets just say you are a kid who just hates his coach, kids are people to, and sometimes you just dont get along. So the kid can stay in a toxic relationship with hopes he will play or what? Quit? he cant transfer or open enroll because he will sit. These rules also serve to protect bad coaches. Bad coaches know they wont loose kids to a cross town rival, why, well because the kid cant play. This is a mostly true fact, kids dont transfer from good programs to go to a bad one, they transfer a bad one for a good one. So again is it for the kids? Is staying at a bad program whats best for the kid? Why are we afraid of allowing recruiting and transfers? In Corp America if you are good, people will recruit you all day, you stay if the place you work is a good one, you leave if it is not. Sure money may play a factor but if your happy , you will most likely stay. Coaches can come and go as they please, but not the players? Again if you are in a system that plays to your strengths and the coach leaves and a new coach puts in a system that doesn't, why should a kid have to stay in that system. Why should the kid sacrifice for the adult coach?? Oh I know I am in the minority here. But if you stop rationalizing whats in your best interests and actually believe what we all say, you cant argue against this. by allowing this does this make our jobs harder, YEP sure does, and it makes all of us better, which will make the kid better. Work hard or fail, isn't that what we all preach to these kids? But instead we pass rules under "its fair" umbrella....life aint fair, suck it buttercup... Want to keep your kids, its pretty easy, out work the other guy and build a program that kids want to be a part of. Sorry but if you are phoning it in and your kids want to leave, well thats on you. But lets stop pretending it's bout the kids and "fairness", its about US, its about you. Change my mind, prove me wrong! With all due respect you sound exactly like what you are preaching against.....entitled. Your first example is what if you have a STUD WR & a coach who chucks the ball 40 times & then you change to a SW. Well, let me ask you this: Let's say you have stud WR & coach who chucks the ball 40X & the coach stays but decides to run the ball a TON the following year b/c his QB graduated & the next kid up has silly string for an arm? Or just doesn't make great decisions w/ the ball? I'm guessing, again w/ all due respect, that you are on the upside of things right now as a program so your thoughts are, why shouldn't kids get to transfer here b/c we're awesome! But if you were on the other side, and kids were leaving you'd feel different. Furthermore, what you're preaching is, if you don't like the way things are going, just leave. Is that what you're going to tell your players when they marry? What your wife gained a little baby weight after your 3rd child was born? You didn't sign up for that? Meh, trade her in for a younger model. Thank God our military doesn't subscribe to your mentality, or we'd all be speaking German. Sometimes things aren't what we always want, but it's awfully hard to fix them by "outworking the other guy" when your program is a revolving door. Maybe a coach retires and a new guy comes in, should everybody leave immediately & not even give him a chance b/c it might be hard? Can't coach ghosts. I suspect however, no matter what is said you will not change your mind. The only thing that will change it is life experience. JMO.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 31, 2019 8:59:43 GMT -6
Because the kids still need to understand the concept and context of the math they're doing and how it applies. Those apps are invaluable to those kids who use them to check their answers and work through problems. And, right now, I can only name a handful of students in my classes who don't plan on going on to SOME kind of higher education. Even those kids going to two-year vocational schools are going to end up taking some kind of mathematics when they get there. And, they won't be able to use a phone app there.
Yes, I understand the concept that one has to learn the fundamental concept , but (and this is a broad based curriculum comment, not one directed at individual classes) short of technological meltdown or some type of post apocalyptic environment, they will always have the ability to use the apps. Do the apps have a disadvantage, such as taking longer than traditional methods? For example simple one digit and perhaps two digit arithmetic operations. You can show students how much faster (and easier) than pulling out the cell phone and using the calculator or asking Siri. The same isn't true for dividing polynomials or something similar. Just my opinion, but I think at this stage of the game, using the apps for real life application purposes would be the lower levels and then advanced students would perform the higher level theoretical calculations. I think in a different way you are basically asking the age old question "when am I ever going to use this?" W/ tech the way it is I think it's valid question. My concern is, w/ these apps now, if kids don't try to still work this stuff out in there heads, will they lose the abilities to problem solve altogether? I am a PE guy, so math was never really my thing. But as I've gotten older, I've come to appreciate the problem solving application of math/ Particularly as a FB coach where I feel the whole job is basically problem solving. Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Mar 28, 2019 19:20:45 GMT -6
I am probably a little older than you, but I do remember when people use to take smoke breaks and it was ok. When I was in high school (1988-1992), there was a "smoking lounge" for students. Ok...it wasn't actually a lounge. It was about a 15'x15' marked-off spot right outside an exterior door. In order to access the smoking lounge, you had to have a pass that was signed by your parents. Having a smoking lounge pass basically made you nobility among the burnouts and metalheads. NICE!!!! I was 85-89 and we had a spot called "smokers corner". I'm not sure what the prerequisite was to attend but based on what I saw I'm sure most of them fit the criteria. With that said, I do like metal heads. Used to watch head bangers ball when MTV actually played music. Good ol days.
|
|