|
Post by jg78 on Nov 13, 2014 14:23:20 GMT -6
How else do you expect him to pay for his annual November beach trip? Duh. my thoughts exactly. He even had the gall to post Facebook pictures of himself and his wife hanging out at some beach patio restaurant during the middle of the game while we were freezing our ass off and getting murdered. This guy sounds like a selfish prick.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 13, 2014 11:20:59 GMT -6
Man, that's ridiculous. And this was a full-time coach, not some volunteer, right?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 9, 2014 9:36:56 GMT -6
Boy, I would blow up over that. What did you do?
In my opinion, I think a coach who has been around the block a few times should be able to see what is and isn't effective without formal input from players. I like exit interviews but more from the perspective of where each player stands and what he needs to focus on improving in the offseason.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 8, 2014 5:52:58 GMT -6
What is the one thing you did as a coach that made you a better coach that you would recommend another coach to do? I would contact the best coaches I know who are running the kind of schemes you want to run and ask if I could meet with them and talk football. After a rough season three years ago I decided to change offenses and called the best coach I knew who ran the offense I wanted to run. I met him at his school and we drove over to a camphouse and spent the day talking football. Learned a lot from him that day and we proceeded to score 500+ points the next year and made it to the state finals. What I learned that day was the basis of our turnaround. We wouldn't have done it had I not taken that step. Books, videos, and clinics are good and all, but if you can get some extensive one-on-one time with a really good football coach, that's invaluable.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 2, 2014 8:34:30 GMT -6
I want to start attending coaching clinics to get better at coaching does anyone know where I can go about this or I would love to go to a nfl coaching academy any help? I recommend Glazier Clinics. Mostly high school coaches and they have clinics all over the country. There's a good chance there's at least one reasonably close to you. Here's a link to their clinic sites and dates: Glazier Clinics 2015
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 31, 2014 12:06:55 GMT -6
As some others have said, I think there's a lot of better ways to spend money on your program than alternative uniforms. Now if you have money to burn and are looking for an excuse to splurge and spend it, maybe so. But if your budget requires you to prioritize, then I would never consider something like alternative uniforms.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 23, 2014 16:30:35 GMT -6
If talent is all the same, I prefer smart, high character kids who play with a lot of heart. I have had players that I would consider "mean" and that's perfectly fine as long as they do the right things, play under control, and there are no attitude issues. I like that a lot. But a good kid with an engine is what I like best.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 21, 2014 18:18:13 GMT -6
Thanks for the responses. I am going to answer my own questions...
1. Defense. I say that because there are so many possible styles, formations, motions, etc. that you can face against a given opponent. More possible adjustments.
2. Defense. Film study, scout cards, tendencies, etc. All of that stuff is more tedious on defense.
3. Offense. I think a bright OC with 2-3 good skill guys and mediocre talent everywhere else can work some magic and move the ball against superior personnel. However, if you're short on talent defensively and a team decides to line up and pound the ball at you, well, there are fewer answers for that.
4. I have mixed feelings on this one. If it's 4th and goal at the 3 with the game on the line - or any big individual play - I would say definitely offense. But if you lose a game 42-35, the defense is probably more likely to face blame than the offense will for losing 14-7 so long as it's not a turnover fest. And while this may not be a "pressure situation" (just a bad situation) when you're outmatched it's more difficult to watch an offense march 80 yards in 12 plays and score on your defense than it is for your offense to go 3 and out every drive and punt. It's like a quick death vs. a slow death.
5. I think coaches generally like offense better and play calling is more likely to scrutinized on that side of the ball.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 21, 2014 9:55:01 GMT -6
Just curious as to how some of you think coaching offense and coaching defense compare:
1. Which side do you think is more challenging?
2. Which side do you think is harder in terms of work?
3. On which side do you think superior coaching makes the biggest difference?
4. Which side do you think experiences more pressure?
5. Why do most HC's (or so it seems to me) coach offense while someone else coaches defense?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 18, 2014 4:38:58 GMT -6
There is a coach about 40 miles from me who runs the power I and has been to the finals twice running about 4 plays. He has a cool saying. "Make them put all 11 of their guys in the box with you, I guarantee a couple of them don't want to be there". Ha! As a guy who loves the running game, this is a great quote. As for the question, I don't know what the optimum number of plays is, but I do know there is something to be said for running a simple, sound scheme that the players know inside-out and can execute with virtually no mental mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 15, 2014 11:58:06 GMT -6
get them excited, lay out the rules, procedures, calendar, and paperwork. its your first contact with players and parents as a group so your basically selling yourself and your plan. I realize all that. I'm looking for any particulars that you like to stress.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 15, 2014 5:20:50 GMT -6
Alright, here's the question: A school has just hired you as the new HC. What is your outline for the points you intend to make in your first team meeting?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 12, 2014 11:24:59 GMT -6
To me, one key thing is having your JV/JH (whatever you call your middle school team) run at least a basic version of your Varsity offense and defense. That way they have had a lot of reps in your system before they ever move up to Varsity and it's easier to insert them and have them know what to do with minimal reps. You may already do that, but it certainly helps any Varsity program.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 9, 2014 18:35:40 GMT -6
Definitely weight lifting. Although I think film study with the players is very important, I feel like I could still teach things well enough on the practice field to do the job. The film just helps. However, there is no substitute for weight lifting when it comes to making your team as good as they can be.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 4, 2014 16:13:14 GMT -6
To me, time efficiency is important. I like to get 'em in and get them started quickly and keep them moving in a productive direction with as little wasted time as possible. Couple of reasons why: 1) I think kids work better when you limit the time they have to horse around and 2) I love football, but I want to have time for other things as well. Things need to be done right and thoroughly, but if there's 2.5 hours of actual work needed to accomplish that, why not be efficient and get it done in that amount of time instead of piddling around and doing it in 3-3.5 hours? And then when practice is over, tie everything up that needs to be done, keep the small talk to a minimum, and then head to the house.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 27, 2014 12:36:42 GMT -6
I'm in my 10th year of coaching, in every single one of those seasons my primary (and usually singular) role has been to coach and coordinate the defense. I don't pretend that I know everything there is to know and I don't think I've got the magic bullet. I'm a good defensive coach, I produce good defensive units. I know there's room for improvement in how I do things. But that said, I'm finding myself less and less interested in coaching the defensive side of the ball. Anyone ever go through this? I have coached both sides of the ball (coaching defense right now and have primarily coached D throughout my career) and feel the same way you do. I prefer coaching offense for a few reasons: 1) I think you get to be more creative. 2) You get to play whatever style you want. On defense, you have to adjust to the other team's style and strengths. 3) I think there's less of a grind in terms of film study, etc. 4) In blowout games, you get your 40-50 points (whether it's in the first half or fourth quarter) and everyone's satisfied. On defense, you may play an offense that couldn't score on your first group if they had all night. But once the game is in hand the scrubs come in, the offense leaves its first group in, and they score a couple of garbage TD's while gashing your benchwarmers. That's a lot more frustrating than a few three and outs by the young guys on offense. And if the scrub offense does anything really bad like throw a Pick 6 or fumble on their own five, hell, that just makes it worse for your D. 5) Another blowout point, we played a team last night that was really bad. Never a threat to score and it felt like a TD any time they got a first down. We ran one defensive call all night. There was no reason to do anything different. It was boring. At least on offense you get to see your boys run 60-80 yard TD's. That's fun. I like coaching defense, but I prefer offense for the reasons above.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 26, 2014 10:42:09 GMT -6
I have never understood long warmups. Stretch it out a little bit, throw it and kick it a time or two, and then play ball. If you don't warmup for 40+ minutes before getting after it in practice, why would you do it for a game?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 25, 2014 17:59:43 GMT -6
In football, kids choose to be there and want to do well. If they don't, you can punish them or boot them off the team all together. They are also getting recognized for their efforts by the whole community. It also pays you much, much less. In teaching, your kids are being forced against their wills to be there and do something they don't care about and may hate. You can't really punish them for lack of effort and, at the end of the day, you are probably stuck with them in your class because they need the credit. It's no coincidence that this job constitutes the bulk of your income. Good point.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 25, 2014 17:22:29 GMT -6
Public exams that have the results posted in the paper. To respond to my own question, I will second what you said. A lot of teachers do all they can to teach and prepare their kids, of course, but do you think the ones who slack more than they should would do so if every Friday night their classes had to compete head to head with another school in front of all parents and administration and the results will be printed in the newspaper? Probably. So I would say pressure would be the biggest difference. I teach five classes as well as coach, but I don't feel the same pressure in the classroom (and I take it seriously) that I do on the field.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 25, 2014 10:05:39 GMT -6
What would you folks say are the biggest differences between teaching and coaching?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 2, 2014 10:39:33 GMT -6
I wash all of my players practice cloth and workout clothes every day. Makes it easy and kids don't forget to wash it or even worse leave it at home. How long does it take you to do this?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 2, 2014 5:50:35 GMT -6
So what do you do about practice uniform cleanliness? Do you... 1. Wash the team's practice uniforms yourselves. 2. Require the players to wash them, either at school or home. 3. Don't care if their uniforms are clean or not. 2. Players take home, but we do have a washer and dryer at school to use if they want. Do you have consequences if a player shows up for practice and his uniform is filthy?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Sept 2, 2014 5:28:47 GMT -6
So what do you do about practice uniform cleanliness? Do you...
1. Wash the team's practice uniforms yourselves.
2. Require the players to wash them, either at school or home.
3. Don't care if their uniforms are clean or not.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 31, 2014 13:39:11 GMT -6
I think you'd rather take your chances on varsity success with a team that was pretty good in junior high vs. one that wasn't. However, there are a lot of factors involved when making the transition to varsity. If your team remains the same from junior high to varsity and the competition they beat remains the same, then in that situation it tends to be pretty indicative of success in my experience. But if your competition is in a better position to pick kids up or you had stud RB who was shaving and driving himself to school in junior high and maybe his peers caught up to him later on (or maybe he just went down the wrong path somewhere along the way and was never the same again) then you probably won't do as well.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 17, 2014 13:38:42 GMT -6
Doesn't nearly every former player think things were much tougher, and their old coach was much more demanding when they played?? Man, yeah. Everyone thinks they were better and tougher back in their day than they really were. That's common. One thing I would like to point out is that doing something harder or longer doesn't necessarily mean better. I remember at one point as a young HC we ran stadium steps endlessly, flipped tires, used sledgehammers, etc. Things that (now) I think were overkill and would not have done if I were to go back to that time. Now, I would have kept to a conventional workout and nixed all the tough guy stuff that probably did more to wear them out than make them stronger and tougher. Sometimes less is more.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 16, 2014 19:56:15 GMT -6
In what way do you think he's soft?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 16, 2014 11:20:03 GMT -6
If I could only choose one, it would be hands down to see their offense. I would be absolutely shocked to see anyone else say something different. For the sake of discussion, why would you prefer familiarity with an opponent's offense rather than its defense?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 16, 2014 7:09:48 GMT -6
If I could only choose one, it would be hands down to see their offense. I would be absolutely shocked to see anyone else say something different. I agree.
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 16, 2014 5:59:22 GMT -6
Would you say studying film on your opponent is more valuable for the offense or defense? Or put another way: If you had to go into a game having only seen film on your opponent's offense or defense and being completely unaware of what they do on the other side of the ball, which would you choose?
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Aug 7, 2014 15:42:33 GMT -6
On basketball vs football. Agreed that you have to teach the basketball players how to work together better on the fly. But it is only 5 players. And more importantly, if it isn't there, they can just pass it back up top and reset instead of get drilled by someone. Just quoted myself. LOL One more point on basketball, I can take 5 better basketball players that have never practiced as a team and beat a well coached team with decent athletes. Of course there are limits and exceptions to my statement, but you get the point. You can't even begin to do that in football. I was about to make a similar point. You could probably give a good basketball coach five good players and 30 minutes to organize them and (at the very least) put up a respectable performance (and very well may win) against a well-coached team with an established system but average talent. Same with baseball. Football? Not so much.
|
|