|
Post by dsqa on Oct 17, 2007 16:43:09 GMT -6
Worked with over privileged, under worked kids my entire Head Coaching career. Some of the smartest, best kids I have come in contact with as a whole. Like Coach Huey said...
A problem I ran into with the unmotivated was that they often lack a basic maturity, or sense of manhood and responsibility in their character. They are good kids basically, but their sense of leading others is weak, weak, weak. I couldn't get a good breakdown out of them for a whole season - EVEN ON GAME DAYS. (For many of them, I knew it was hard to cheer when their sphincter was frozen shut.)
One of my assistant coaches once said of working with these kids, "Coach, you spend half the time playing Dr. Phil, and half coaching." That was a bit of an over statement, but if I wanted to stay, I had to go get them and bring them along.
I know this sounds basic, but generally speaking, their lack of motivation comes from their poor assessment of their experience.
A few different types of kids I have run into:
If it isn't entertaining, they get bored with it, because, of course, it is about them. Warn them, Challenge them, then Run them.
Or, they are so over stimulated with opportunity for "fun", that looking forward to anything that involves really hard work, even if they will benefit, isn't something they will show emotion for. Just let them be on the outward emotion thing. Change what you look for. They may be trying very hard, and just not be very good, and they are beating themselves up over it inside. Read your kids - that isn't motivation, that's self-condemnation. I got good at reading kids, and was able to get them back all the time, with a simple chat during a water break, or a switch up of personnel to let them cool down. OR, I would keep them in the drill until they got it. Each one is different, you have to read them.
Or, they are extremely intellligent, and the idea of cultivating animalistic tendencies, and tapping into their assertiveness, is just beyond their basic sensibilities. They just have no concept of it. They haven't had to fight for anything in their lives. In order to reach these guys, you have to find a moment to explain it to them. They are starved for a good reason, and without it, they will take a beating. On the other hand, a simple intellectual explanation, has resulted in vicious hits that showed no more emotion than the previous, they just understand now. That is coaching.
Or, they are just intimidated. They will mask it in a jaded arrogance, or smug reaction to things. It is their version of staying "cool." Here again, their basic immaturity, coupled with their lack of physical development (weight training,etc), just leaves them posing. Play to their arrogance, put them up first in hitting drills. Put them up against the toughest guys on the team. Play it up, and encourage it, and in the background just hope the beating they are taking really is producing something. Unfortunately, it doesn't always, but they don't trash talk much after that hit.
This is the culture they live in. It isn't right, wrong, whatever, it just is. This is who you coach. Coach them. You need to know your kids.
Now, I had a few kids that made it all worth it. They got it. Understood it, and regularly communicated apologies for the weak minded kids among them, hoping I wouldn't quit on them. They are the ones I think about and smile, as all of us do, but the rest require you to be a better coach, not a better talker.
This isn't something to complain about, it is something to be understood, just like it is incumbent on a coach to understand a kid's poverty. It isn't what we want, but we have to deal with what it.
Here are some responses I used regularly:
If they had to miss practice and it was out of my hands: "Hey, this is your team, your friends. You have to miss, you are putting them in a position to have to make up for you. Do what you have to, but understand on Friday night, this will cost your team, not me. You will run makeups, but there is no makeup for not making this a priority." I know it sounds like a guilt trip, but it wasn't communicated that way. I genuinely worked to help them understand the problem with their absence. Parents and Kids in this context, DO NOT CARE, or understand how one practice will hurt the team, they really, really just don't care. The player believes they already know what you want, they are too immature, and marginally committed to understand the cost. To run them in a punishment context is to only confirm to them, this isn't where they want to be. I am not saying you don't give makeup conditioning, but you have to educate them and inspire them to be better men, and be there. I always tried to win their hearts, not just their heads. It may be too idealistic, but the more kids who played with their hearts on Friday, we won more games. That takes time to win, and you have to talk to them to get that. No way around it.
If they were sheepish, or passive, in a hit: Pull them aside, keep the drill going, speak under your breath, "There isn't anyone on this field who understands more than I do, how much that hurts to do that. It is something over 90% of teenagers will never feel. But, as bad as it hurts, I need you to find a reason to get up off the ground, and accelerate on the next rep. Tell me why you need to do it harder? Why does it matter?" Get them to say it. Get them to buy in. They really are afraid. They really are crying. It really does hurt them. They don't know pain all that much, it isn't on them for being raised so weak, so don't berate them. Inspire them to play through it. I trained over 90 kids through their "football diapers" in an over privileged environment, and I don't remember one, who at some point, wasn't fighting back tears, or was overwhelmed. My own sons have both gone through it, and it was hard work. My freshman son "quit" 4 times after games because he was just so emotional. Now, he is lighting it up and trucking people. Stay with it, and coach'em up.
For an athlete who won't give you a good effort: Pull him aside, "You okay? Something outside of football bothering you today? Any bad news, girlfriend dump you? Okay, anything I said, or the coaches? Do you understand what we are trying to do right now? Okay, then since you said no to all of this, I am just going to assume you think it is okay to disrespect my leadership and this team, by giving a horrible effort. Is that right? - They say something like a mumbled NO...then tell them, next time I see you dog this drill I will publicly humiliate you, the way you are publicly humiliating me and this team. Got it? You go soft, I go public. Period."
Make it your life's ambition following an effort to motivate an athlete, who responds and comes your way, delivering in the smallest measure, to ENCOURAGE THAT ATHLETE LOUDLY AND PUBLICLY AND DEMONSTRATIVELY. Condition them to positive reinforcement.
If the team is not motivated, understand these kids don't have the discipline of their emotions. You will know before you start, what their mindset is. Be willing to shift what you are doing in your practice to bring them back. It doesn't always have to be discipline, weren't you ever bored in a HS practice? I don't care how good a coach you are, everybody struggles. I even got bored at some of my own practices, for pete's sake.
I often told them that if they didn't give me a great effort we would just hit all day. The ones who were going hard already, loved it. The ones who were struggling, got pasted for their lack of commitment. I was a satisfied coach.
I just found that working with young men like this, and it is true anywhere you go, each day is different, so you have to be ready to mix it up at a moment's notice. Inflexibility and a lack of creativity can hurt your progress with kids.
Keep your plan, but plan your backup plan, and have a third one in your hip pocket. That is true as HC, and a position coach. You are dealing with kids, and go figure, you are not the most important thing in their life.
Sorry so long, just got me remembering those moments...
|
|
|
Ego's
Dec 20, 2007 18:51:55 GMT -6
Post by dsqa on Dec 20, 2007 18:51:55 GMT -6
Ego, the arrogant part, is difficult to identify in yourself. It is present in everything we do, just checked at different levels based on our level of respect for who we are talking to. I just wished I respected more people in my life, then I would be better at humbling myself, I guess that is a chicken/egg - circular argument) The best way I have found to keep the ego in my life in check is to realize that coaching, like teaching, is a matter of the heart. If you truly desire to make a positive impact in a young person's life, then that sincerity will eventually carry the day. It is incumbent on us to continually embrace a growing humility, which isn't as hard now that I am getting older. However, when a person loses touch with their own tendency towards self adulation, thus losing sight of why they "coach" to begin with, then the "checks" come off, and they expose the underbelly of this insidious animal in themselves. The ego is only an effective tool in us, when it functions under authority (an awareness that we will have to answer for what we say - parents, administration, boss, HC, God, etc), within accountability (an intentional, continual pursuit of corrective input from those close to us, that we trust, and who know us), and is saturated in a sincere desire to make a difference, and not a name for itself. My ego is bigger than anyone's on this board,(even that statement is an arrogant one! Actually, I am just saying it as the most arrogant person I am aware of at the present time - should you eclipse me in that honor - all the best to you in your miserable life )and I am sure there are nodding heads and amens all around, but the presence of the things I mentioned above in my life, has made it possible, at least in small part, for me to function in spite of its interference. just my two cents, and Happy Holidays to everyone - It truly has been a great year on this board. What a privilege to participate - many thanks Coach Huey and tog, for your vision of such a place.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 7, 2007 8:43:53 GMT -6
I am assuming you mean passing stance.
Elbows, are level below the ball. Tent the fingers even with the back shoulder and make a triangle with your forearms, elbows level. Now, drop the right forearm down, leaving the left one in place, and put that arm on the bottom line of the imaginary triangle you just made. The tips of the fingers on the right hand should be pointing at the inside of the left elbow, with the forearm running parallel to the ground across the bottom of the chest. Now the left elbow should be one hand's length from the tip of your middle finger on your right hand. If the elbow is too close the wrists will curl, if the elbow is too far away, they are fanned too far increasing the chances that the ball separation will be too low, and the throw elbow will elevate too fast in the back.
Essentially you want the elbows flared slightly to create hair trigger in the medial delt of the throwing arm. We need to engage the rotation of the shoulder as fast as possible, and the mildly sustained tension on the middle(medial) delt focuses that explosion. If the shoulder is relaxed too much, the QB can have a tendency to get lazy and windup more than usual. We want a short stroke and this mild tension helps. The front elbow flare controls the speed at which the front elbow will clear, acting as a lever to release energy in the turn. The faster is clears, the faster energy is released, and slower, etc. The fingers tented with the apex at the clavicle insures you don't weaken the move, by taking the ball too high prepass. Speed of release is in the throw elbow's rotation, not the ball movement. Being in a slightly lower position allows the wrist to load properly, and encourages the stroke of the throwing arm to pickup the momentum of the turn more effectively.
Sorry to go on, but I think it is important to communicate reasonable "whys" for what we do, so it isn't just opinions or parroting what I heard someone say. Thanks for your patience, I hope that helps.
Coach Slack
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Aug 17, 2007 10:26:05 GMT -6
slipscreen
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 19, 2007 5:46:03 GMT -6
True that tog. I would say that having parent volunteer assistants was as close to anything like that I have seen.
I spent more time coaching them, than the players, but it is hard in a small school to find good people who aren't busy at 3;30 everyday.
Hell would be sideline passes with "assistant coach status" for every parent in the program. I am not sure a play would ever be called.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jan 17, 2008 9:46:29 GMT -6
Did this for a while and learned you cannot play football until you build football players. My biggest challenge in the small school wasn't building a killer scheme, it was getting kids to understand and "play football."
Yes, I am aware of the question - scheme, scheme, scheme? This is the scheme - scheme as many ways as you can to build football players who hit with abandonment, play for each other, will go after a ball in the air, will put in the extra time to improve and study the game, and will learn their craft. That is the scheme that will win at that level.
I know this sounds brutally basic and its a, "yeah I know that, but."
However, davecisar wants xyz - how did you do it - really?
This is it.
It isn't flashy, although I had one of the "flashiest of flashy flash" offenses in the county - I still had to hold kids hands through tears, boo-boos, moms picking them up early for tutors, birthday parties for classmates, etc.
In a school of 100 athletes, you don't have the luxury of picking who and what you like, nor are you in a position to dictate policies that you cannot enforce, or you won't have a team. You have to win with what you get, and while the multiple offenses suggested are all great, your friend has the unenviable task of needing to build around his football players - and that being only a few. I ran a multiple scheme that included elements of all kinds of offenses, but only so I could get the ball to my "football players," and away from my non-football players.
Games at the small school level are won and lost by the "football players a team has, not super athletes mind you, players who "get it" when it comes to the game and how it is played.
In my experience, the coach that uses his "football players" the best wins. There are still 22 people on the field, but usually only 10 of those, if you are fortunate, can play. And only less than 5 have the motor to go both ways and make the plays you need.
When it comes to actual scheme, Spread the field with formations, isolate defenders, misdirect with your average speed to gain a competitive advantage, run option with a lead where you can so it becomes a sweep, throw the football effectively and efficiently, and PLAY DEFENSE.
So, in conclusion, run the Spread Triple Veer Zone Double Slot Wing I Power Offense, but remember that to win you should spend 60-75% of your time practicing blocking, tackling, catching, running, and throwing, from every place on the field.
The athletes will do what they do, what you need is to get the freakin' spectators in jerseys on the field with them to get after somebody instead of having to charge them $5 admission to watch the game go on around them.
I did it for 8 years, ran multiple looks with success, but anything only worked because a handful of kids decided they were going to be "football players."
Crack the code on expanding this understanding amongst the troops and your friend could run Jeff the Expert's Offensive Secrets of Football scheme and they would win. ;D
I'm just kidding, scheme is a mission critical part of it, but it is a lot more fun building a scheme, when there are "football players" on the field.
Just my rantings...
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Dec 3, 2007 15:01:17 GMT -6
Both have similarities that may not be immediately obvious. Both move in the pocket well with a pursuing mentality. In other words, they are "attacking" in their mindset, not avoiding. They pursue space to make a throw, not avoid defenders.
They both have great extension in their release, that overcomes whatever issues they may have in a particular throw with their feet. Their lightning fast decision making is probably the most impressive similarity. They are completely unafraid to pull the trigger in tight spaces. They can locate away from defenders and throw their receivers open.
Both get their elbow to similar launch points(zero position), but the largest difference is in the wrist angle to the elbow in the motion. Brady is wider than Manning. Peyton has seen the value of being compact in getting his wrist through more vertically. The reason he is more vertical has to do with his prepass wrist position being loaded or "co$cked". This loading of the wrist carries a wealth of benefit that helps Peyton overcome some of the athleticism issues he gives up to Brady(mobility, quickness, etc) But, that angle creates the opportunity for this type of release(more compact, etc.). The benefit to this approach is the increased speed of release, consistency of rotation, and immediate velocity(zip). Brady will lose
Peyton's footwork is more frantic, or footfire, than Brady's wider stance and shuffle approach. I believe both concepts are effective and should be taught based on the route package called. Brady goes down the field more consistently than Manning, and he is served by the movement he makes. Manning's footfire and compact release fits the "get rid of the ball faster" offensive concepts.
My point is that in teaching concepts of arm control, you can get the QB to understand how to support that with a few concepts, namely the footfire, and timed shuffle approaches. Joe Montana, was probably the only one I have seen that could seamlessly go back and forth between those two concepts. I would say Steve Young would be there as well. Since the WCO is served by the timing of release to drop speed, the rhythm of the footwork ties in to that. So it makes sense that these guys are similar.
The disciplines of both of these players is impressive - Peyton and Tom are both mentally tough on a level that reminds me of the previous generation of great QBs in the 80s.(Montana, Young, Marino, Elway)
Just my take.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 11, 2006 0:41:00 GMT -6
coachf, It was great to hear from you as well. I am so glad your QB had a great time. It is very encouraging to know we are giving the athletes real value for their investment. I look forward to giving more athletes an opportunity to experience what your QB did. Your story along with redbudfan's will go a long way to letting people know wath is available.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 6, 2006 16:26:40 GMT -6
redbudfan, Thanks so much for your kind comments. I am so very glad your QB found the camp helpful. We are endeavoring to make a difference, and I am very excited that it is working. I just hope we can spread the word to so many others who have need of similar help. Take Care coach, and thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 14, 2007 8:57:39 GMT -6
Yes, he is a system QB, who makes the system better because he is fit for the system.
Another way to look at this, without getting caught up in the "who is he playing with" debate, is to consider the athlete physiologically.
The NFL QB will always benefit from an O-line like Brady has, a receiver corp like he has, etc.(the system) However, before you get to play at that level, Tom Brady needs to be physically able to compete at that level - to meet the standards a system like they run demands. That incorporates a whole ton of factors in talent and fitness.
The NFL is considering the general fitness of the athlete a lot more, in addition to the skills they bring. It is a synergistic relationship. The system benefits the physically fit(NFL physically fit, not presidential fitness) QB who has the tools, and the QB makes the system look good, because of his fitness and ability. It can be a chicken or the egg argument.
Chris Leak was not physically fit enough to play at the NFL level. Now, understand, it does not mean he couldn't run a mile faster than most, or do 40 pushups. NFL fitness is whole other ball game. It means his technique, arm strength, quickness, speed, agility, reads, response time, psychological makeup, etc. wasn't up to NFL standards. It just goes to show you that the separation between the leagues has as much to do with fitness, as skills.
A great system supports a physically fit QB(NFL level fitness), and vice versa. Hence, there is no separation. A physically fit QB in a subpar system will struggle. Both parts have to be amping at a high level.
Get the mix of fitness, personnel, and scheme right, the whole thing is a system that kicks...and takes names.
You can never separate the QB from the system, his contribution makes or breaks it. You can argue about how much he contributes to the system as a whole, but if you are going to evaluate a QB, you evaluate his "fitness" - the whole package. If they are successful, it could mean the QB is fit in areas, but everyone is getting better - that is why we play.
To try and say a QB is totally a success because of a system can be as accurate as saying, he is what makes the system. It is a circular argument.
If you want to evaluate the QB, break him down in "fitness." I think you will start to find the breakdowns in a lot of systems that way, and you will find the phenomenal contributions a Brady, or Manning is making in their systems because of their preparation.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Dec 25, 2006 5:55:31 GMT -6
Coach, We will be at Jenks HS in Oklahoma in Mid-June. We would love to have you there. Please feel free to call me personally with any questions you have about what we do. Here is the website and you can click on camps to get the info and registration details. My phone number at the Darin Slack Quarterback Academy facility is 407-657-3772. Call me anytime, I look forward to partnering with you in the development of your QBs. Darin Slack www.quarterbackacademy.com
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Mar 27, 2008 23:01:30 GMT -6
We have some incredibly effective training material and some really cool stuff fixing to break in simulation, competition, online learning, mental training, vision training, and the like, before summer.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 14, 2006 9:18:04 GMT -6
Thank you Coach Blair. Very kind of you to say that.
I too love the quality discussions on doing things well. There is always spirited views on the right way to do it, but it makes everyone better. Thanks to all the coaches who don't hold back in this outstanding forum of ideas.
I wish I had more time these days to devote to this board, hopefully it will lighten up a bit more soon.
Coach Slack
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jan 16, 2007 7:00:35 GMT -6
I run this in my fake punt scheme. Usually from the 30 and in, when you would pooch punt. I have the punter step once to show punt, and then the line surge blocks him from view. He throws it at either upright as high and as far as he can into the endzone. The deep back calls fair catch and dutifully stays at the 10 yard line as he is taught not to back up, and the gunners run the ball down on deep posts. We have fun practicing the play, but your punter has to have a good arm to be convincing.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jan 17, 2008 17:41:03 GMT -6
my eyes hurt...I guess a few nerves were piledriven in this thread...Wow!
I ran small school offense(less than 150) starting 2 programs from scratch.
I started in Double Wing and gradually spread it out, without abandoning any part of what was best for the kids year in and year out. Point being, you better be constantly prepared to adapt to more variables then you can possibly imagine at that level. I had a rationale for everything I did, and added it progressively as best I could.
I like to think of scheme development at this level, the same way I do about passing - CONCEPTS. Not for the kids, but for my development of the scheme. There are concepts in scheme development at the lower level that seem to draw answers from more than 1 source.
Being pretty creative I was able to tie it all together into a system that has a great deal of flexibility, but didn't lose the kids. Not worried about the kids multi-tasking in offenses, they couldn't tell a sprint option from an Iso. We just kept the blocking very vanilla up front, and got creative with those overly intelligent, but undersized skinny kids.
I thought I knew a lot, but ended up coaching a lot, and I certainly learned a lot...that is all I know about that.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 5, 2007 8:37:38 GMT -6
Another thought is on any big momentum shift toward your team. Fumble recovery, interception, long punt return. You can also look at 3rd and medium, behind the 50 yard line. Just make sure it is something that happens outside the box, because you anticipate penetration deeper - run the trick play that will hurt the blitz. The D will be looking to gain field advantage in this situation, and is ripe for the picking. The missed chance just sets up a punt.
One other thought, in my experience, trick plays are only "tricks" to coaches who don't run those plays regularly. An end around is not a trick play. A reverse doesn't have to be a "trick play." The Hook and Lateral, thanks to Boise State is going to become a good 3rd and long staple. It is all a matter of perspective. The key to any good trick play, is setting it up with your offense, limiting ball exchanges where possible, move the pocket if you can( be careful of too much razzle dazzle between the tackles - that is like kissing your sister), and practicing what you will actually run in the game. Don't practice something you won't run, it is demoralizing to the kids. They love to try, and they deserve the chance. My FB thought I was crazy to put in a FB pass. I expressed my confidence in him, he hit every one in practice, and we ran it and scored. I check every skill player I have for an arm, and I will use it if it is there.
He is one trick play I love for you Wingers.
You run buck sweep out of a wing set. X receiver to the left. TE to the right with wing. Can be run out of conventional Ace with an open TE. QB fakes FB and Buck sweep, and continues turn after HB sweep, and QB gives the ball to the TE coming behind the HB heading weak. The FB slips along the line and circles back under the attacking OLB and prepares to wall him when he realizes he has been reversed. It usually leaves quite an impression on the OLB. It is a highlight film. The TE continues around weak with the Run/Pass option with X. The X receiver sloughs to the Corner and attempts a weak lunging block, the corner seeing he has him beat flies up, and the TE just pops it 20-25 yards over his head to the X all alone. If the X sells it right and is patient, the corner will bite every time. If he stays deeps the TE will just run the ball.
Ran it 5 times against one team, and they still haven't figured out how to play it. One thing, if the OLB gets too much depth, he will hit the play right in the mouth, so the TE and QB need to work on connecting a little deeper and just after the sweep move, and the QB needs to be working toward the TE a bit, to give him a second to react if the OLB plays it right. Usually, he will under shoot it, and the TE goes right by. Obviously, you can flip it over and run it both ways. Good play.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 26, 2007 18:52:27 GMT -6
pantherpride
For what its worth, Matt Flynn had a first degree shoulder separation on the two point play in the early part of the game, (14-14) had to be injected to continue playing with numbing meds. That is why the end of the half pass fell so short - major pain. Not saying he needs to be your favorite, but sometimes, more info can paint a different picture. Perilloux may run better, but his throwing decisions and accuracy just aren't on the same level at this point.
I think it is tough to lay the faliure on him when LSU needed to score to tie at the end and he made the plays constantly then and in Overtime. The pick on the last 2 point play was the fourth consecutive double slant Crowton called with 5 wide- not sure about that call - Crowton is usually more creative.
I lay this one off on the Defense of LSU that has continually asked the offense to make up for their lack of plays throughout the season, and especially the other night. McFadden controlled the LSU defense, much like Tebow in the Florida game.
I was at the game, and painfully watched repeated opportunities to stop Arkansas go by the wayside, much like Kentucky and throughout the season. McFadden, Jones, and Hillis was quite a combo when McFadden was at QB - Looked like Single wing shotgun - deadly stuff - LSU had no answer. Arkansas went to motioning Jones and Hillis toward Mcfadden in the gun like the jet, ala WVU, and it created all sorts of problems. The repeated look with different plays was very effective.
Being there I was able to pick up on some pretty ineffective pass combos against Arkansas' man coverage. LSU didn't call the out route until the 3rd quarter, and the DBs were 8 yards off playing inside leverage the whole game! They kept trying to get underneath inside, and it didn't seem to be there.
The LSU receivers got little to no separation from the Ark DBs the whole game, and LSU only went deep( sort of) 4 times in the first half. Hardly a threat to Arkansas.
The point I am making, is that being there gave me a different vantage point than TV, and kudos to Arkansas, they are tough in the secondary. But, the route packages weren't that effective in my opinion. Matt has had his moments this year, but I think the Identity thing threeback mentioned makes sense. They run some funky stuff, LSU does - really strange screens, etc.
Just my take from being there...
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 19, 2007 12:32:05 GMT -6
Thanks utchuckd. I am confident there is a zero in golf. It would involve the position of the body, hands, and arms at impact.
Not sure if there is a legitimate correlation to baseball. I am not a baseball expert. I have spoken to many coaches who feel that there is some benefit to the concept, but the dynamics are different on some level for sure. I understand there are some baseball pitching coaches who have incorporated these concepts. Paul Nyman wrote some articles about it, and that is about as close as anything I have seen before to what I teach.
I am sure a coach who knows what he is doing with a baseball player can use it. The alignment concept works, because of body design. I will be looking into it more this fall, so I can speak to the baseball coaches more intelligently when they ask. I am sorry I don't know more about that, but I don't want to represent something I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 19, 2007 5:23:50 GMT -6
Ideally, we just suggest 7th grade for a standard 2 day camp as a minimum. In terms of individual coaching, the younger they get, the more I am coaching the Dad rather than the son. I see my role as serving you, no matter how old the kid is. Many dads are frustrated that they don't know how to insert mechanics training with their kids, so I teach both of you to put you on the same page, so it minimizes confusion.
To the question, the youngest where I have seen the most stuff stick when it is taught from me is 12 years old. I coach younger ones, but I intentionally limit the sessions with me, and try to position the father as the primary coach until around 12-13.
The most important training that young man needs is character, in my opinion, not passing mechanics. My own son throws a pretty decent ball, but he will tell you that while we played catch and he was around my camps, etc. I didn't start heavily inputting to his mechanics until he was 13.
When he was younger, we would play with the drills I teach for a few minutes( I knew they would do the work for me if I explained them properly) and then we would just play catch. I would ask him what he thought he did wrong, and let him try to work out what he was hearing. I believe it is one of the few things I have done right by him.
NEPOTISM ALERT! Do not read past this point if you are offended by the mere possibility of nepotism...
He might be one of the sharpest young QB coaches I have ever seen. He is 15. I know he is my kid so that disqualifies my opinion, but believe me, I am tougher on him than anyone both in expectations and evaluation.
However, when he gets with someone to teach them, he regularly is not only able to explain it effectively for change, but I am using references he uses at his age with the kids I train. He is explaining it to his peers in language they get. That is a valuable resource for me. He doesn't put himself out there, I often send him into situations, and the reports often humble me-"Hey coach, I don't even need you, Michael has me throwing gas!"
My point is that more is caught, than taught, and that is what my son has shown me. He has played with it so long, that he can articulate the concepts out of his own feel, rather than just regurgitate information I have said. He has his own set of convictions he can teach from, and that makes him so good. That is what I would want for any young man. To develop convictions about this material early on for confidence.
These throwing concepts are easy enough for your son to understand now, and as he grows, he will get better at feeling how to fix what's broken. What he needs is the sounding board of acceptance to bounce off ideas and repetition.
I am really needed most when "the change" starts to happen in them in the early teen years. Their body grows, their arms lengthen, angles change, and it can get confusing. I can still keep it simple, but effective, through those strange years.
One of the nice things about my son, and believe me I am experimenting on him for all of this, is that when we talk about his mechanics, he is so in touch with the language and what he feels, we can discuss a concept and he can actually do it.
Now, he isn't done by any stretch, he is still undisciplined, but he is constantly working toward maturity in mechanics, as well as maturity to manhood. You just can't lose there. So, get your son talking about the videos with you and what he feels when he throws it.
Get him to be able to use the language to explain it. Once you get on the same page, he will grow up in this stuff much faster. Hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Jul 18, 2007 16:52:35 GMT -6
Thank you men. Unbelievably kind of you both! Brophy, I will get that check for those great props out tomorrow! Are you sure you will really need ALL the money I made on the camp for those thoughts? I understand you set the price, but Can I keep some to take my kids to Mickey D's(ha ha) Now that I can put a face to the name - this will be fun. I really enjoyed getting to work with Ronnie and Curtis. They were great! I wish you the best this season. Please keep me posted on their progress.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Oct 25, 2006 19:57:06 GMT -6
LOL Chris! Talent, may well be the word!
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Oct 25, 2006 19:21:55 GMT -6
CONVICTION
Great stuff Coach Huey. I love that word - Passion! Ok, fellas this thread is in my wheel house, so forgive me as usual for expounding a little.
Another way I try to build on this concept of passion and Conviction:
PASSION - "passio" latin root-- sufferings of Christ desciption of what He suffered on behalf of those He loved and sacrificed for.
Something I highlight to the athletes without trying to be preachy, or religious, is the question that arises from this intense example of self-sacrifice.
In light of this other concept of passion, "suffering on behalf of those we love,"
"Gentlemen, evaluate the true depth of your passion by asking yourself, What are you willing to suffer on behalf of those you claim to care so much about on this team?"
Little heavy I know, but passion is a powerful word and you guys started it.
I think a high standard should be held in defining it, because while emotion is a great asset, and certainly is an evidence of passion, I think, on a deeper level, it is borne of adversity,and has a significant volitional[act of the will] element.
Hence, That word CONVICTION is a critical part of your definition.
I understand the brute power of feeling, but all too often, I see many of my players living more off the flash fire of momentary explosive emotion fueled by petty ambition, anger issues, and stupid offenses, rather than the deeper understanding of being willing to suffer on behalf of their brothers. That is a decision based on thought and consideration of the cost of real passion. A conviction about what matters most in the heart. I tell them that then, and only then, can their real emotions run free, because the decision to "sell out" has already been made for reasons beyond emotion in the will, and those emotions cannot be thwarted by circumstances, bad calls, or the like.
Conviction, the core of passion.
I'll take raw emotion as a start, but I am going after their hearts. If I can get them to take that next step to decide for conviction, then, in a sense, my passion, and conviction will have been fulfilled. That to me is success. They will take that conviction and passion into their lives as men, and hopefully all the way to the grave.
Thanks for your patience as I went beyond the "one word."
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on May 1, 2007 11:22:41 GMT -6
On second thought, NFL analysts are usually not coaches, and have not been. Kind of interesting, that many of those who are criticizing haven't been coaches themselves at that level.
I changed my post because I didn't even understand it. That is when you know you need to "step away from the keyboard."
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 6, 2007 13:35:04 GMT -6
back to the "how committed are you to the policies you make" thing. Truth is, this is a situation where the program is better for the kid, than the kid is for the program. If the kid produces, does his time, and serves the team, and then pushes the other players for their spots, I don't struggle. Just because a kid was there on day 1, doesn't mean I am getting a worthy effort out of a kid. A lot of my starters in the small school were only starting for lack of someone to test them. A new kid tends to stir the pot a little and that isn't bad for anyone. It has to be reasonable, obviously, but competition never hurt anyone. Just what I found.
No matter how you slice it, the passivity of teenage athletes today just sucks.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 5, 2007 8:54:14 GMT -6
Good call senator and wolverine....This is one of those times when the team and captains need to decide something. As coaches, we tend to take the high road on everything, and sometimes we hamstring ourselves with our "policies," leaving no room for "adjustments." There are situations where compromise is appropriate. As long as it doesn't compromise your control. That is why you use captains. I also started and coached two small school programs, and the first thing I learned was, don't make a policy out of something, if you aren't willing to lose a game over it.(kids missing stuff, can't play, etc.)
I am not suggesting anarchy and no discipline, but we are developing men here, and men need to learn how to govern themselves.
When I struggled with a decision, I would repeatedly go back to the undeniable fact, that his team is not mine, it is theirs - I merely have the privilege to serve them. So on those weird calls, I would get the captains involved as was suggested. I have the final decision, everyone knows that, but they enjoyed being involved in the process. It matured them.
That service requires authoritative discipline as necessary from the school's mandate and the parent's expectation as the people who have final responsibility for that child. I am also required to assume full responsibility to field the best team possible to win games, and compete, and therefore, the playing time and system we will run is entirely on my shoulders.
However, when it comes to students playing on my team, that are friends in the school hallway all day, and they have been working a guy to play for weeks, I am not going to deny them their excitement of seeing that friend contribute, as long as reasonable expectations of the staff are met: That he show his commitment by practicing for a few weeks without playing, that he learn the offense and defense schemes required to play, that he show proper conditioning and willingness to make up that conditioning he missed, that he in no way, disrupt the team with disciplinary failure, and that he earn his spot. Beyond that, get him a jersey! Chances are, if he enjoys it, he will attract a few more "friends" from his circle, and that can be exciting, because athletes usually hang together.
Just my opinion. Good thread.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Oct 4, 2007 14:24:03 GMT -6
One other approach I had to take, and this one was more painful, because of my pride.
I had to lower my expectations of myself and the kids in areas I could afford to.
Much of the pressure I felt in "carrying the load", was self inflicted. The administration was never really unhappy with my effort, I was. Parents were generally happy, and I continually held out a greater expectation on myself, while working with less, and in the end, the only one looking back at me for what wasn't working was me. I wouldn't get to the sleep until late, late after a game, I was so wired in working through all I did, or didnt' do.
Now, I had my critics, but those people didn't know me, and didn't know football. However, I knew both, and I could be relentless on myself.
You ARE the right guy for that program, WHY? Because you are there now. The marriage is done, just the honeymoon is over, and you have to find peace in yourself with what you have now. It is a conscious decision at first to catch yourself going to the dark side, but with practice, and some reasonable self talk, your perspective can change dramatically in no time. Worked for me all the time, once I recognized when I would do it.
Just something to think about. When I stopped trying to be everything in my own mind, was a bit more honest about the challenges we were facing as a team with reduced coaching, and started enjoying the kids more, it created a much different environment.
I got more into their heads with less effort. I got more creative with practices and what we did as a group, those 8 on 8 free scrimmages I came up with were GOLD!...They seemed to respond better to input, because I wasn't being so driven in my communication. I was able to teach more, and yell less. They played better, because they weren't so worried I was going to lose it.
Now, I didn't give up the expectations about effort, etc. Just in what I could accomplish reasonably in the situation I was in. I had to learn to accept that I wasn't going to get everything just the way I wanted it, but if I got it where it was critical, we could still be effective. Only you know what that looks like, but when I cracked the code on that, things looked a little brighter.
I was just a better coach when I chilled out about things I couldn't control...for what it's worth. I may be way off the mark here, but oh well...
Just my experience.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Oct 4, 2007 8:32:59 GMT -6
I have been where you are. Twice. I started two programs from scratch on a negative budget. Had to coach both teams at least one season by myself.
It is extremely difficult to find qualified people, who know football, who are available at 3:30 in the afternoon. Period.
A couple of suggestions I tried...
Recruit a few guys who know football, they may be Dads, but believe it or not, there are mature fathers who know enough football, and can help. If the schedule is a conflict. Flip flop your practice time to include a required study hall, and film, at 3:30 -5:00, and start practice at 5:30. Reduce the length of practice, you just don't need the longer practice if you are organized, and you know what you want to accomplish. Go 90 minutes with drill coaches who understand what you are looking to do. Get fathers with a loyal spirit, and an even demeanor, that compliment you.
Another way, and the way I did it most, to handle things is if you cannot change practice times, is to start your practice with conditioning, then run through your Offense team practice with a line emphasis for 45 minutes to an hour. Release the line early, keep the backs and receivers, and go over play schemes on air, to tighten up the spacing and timing. Depending on what needs more work(running and passing), release the backs or receivers, and work the running/passing game until the end.
If you need special teams work, we did one/two element(s) per day at the start of practice to bolster conditioning.
On defense days, I relied heavily on the QBs to call plays on the cards, and I would run the defense. Our defense days began with heavy STeams, team tackling( two groups alternating- open field tackling and angle tackling), team pursuit drills, team defense against scout.
Don't be afraid to shorten practice, you get more from the kids. And you can use it as an incentive for hard work. You can always keep them longer if they don't produce, but creating an environment of personal responsibility and incentive on the team ups the ante for everyone.
I did it for years, and while it wasn't easy, I have some great coming of age stories to tell about boys becoming men.
Good Luck.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 22, 2007 23:09:53 GMT -6
Meaningful ownership in decisions at critical points is always helpful, as well as the variety of experience created by your approach.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 22, 2007 23:01:53 GMT -6
....."How many of you make your practices and atmosphere fun? And, how many of you do that in such a way that the kids have fun, but do not have too much fun?"
Thought they were talking about our experience with HS kids out of the comment about the NFL teams, sorry I missed that.
However, on the NFL level it is all the more reason for effective leadership that gets the right kind of "buy-in" to the process. You can't legislate FUN. Grown men appreciate the same things, but you have to be able to get them to "want" to be great for themselves, and more importantly the team. You get a coach that can do that, you pay him.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Nov 22, 2007 22:21:59 GMT -6
thought about this one a bit...thought I might take a shot at it...
Fun is cultivated in the program in & through the hearts of the athletes and staff, by psychologically establishing an atmosphere that rewards and positively reinforces the right things, while maintaining a strong peer pressure to "do your part" to keep it going. Every man does better in an atmosphere where they feel they are contributing and are wanted in the mix of the big picture. They understand the role they play, the value of their effort is communicated to them by the leadership, and it is supported by their peers.
A three-fold cord is not quickly broken - You need a bold, audacious vision, with monitored and achieveable short term milestones/goals;(Focus) a meaningful role given to each person that is verbally encouraged, and supported by quality leadership; (Unity) and an organic peer-to-peer relationship & morale structure that brings the necessary peer pressure to sustain the passion and discipline needed to remain at the highest level.(Nexus-"A connected group")
Focus Unity Nexus
A big outworking of these component parts working in concert is quite the opposite of what you would expect - you get a relaxed, often humor filled, environment that can be mistaken for distraction and overt looseness, when you are really observing supreme confidence in the parts. How else could you be so "loose," in such a pressure cooker, unless you were so sure of what you have to do, who you are doing it with, and more importantly "why."
Teams that lack this balance, often suffer in one of these three things, and quite frankly it falls to the leadership to identify and develop what is lacking.
In established programs, like Gagliardi's, it is much easier to maintain because you have had time to get everyone on board and its a proven process, and the pressure to conform is at its peak. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. However, I most admire the coaches who can go into a new situation and change the "weather" in a program in a short time, through their leadership, and create the "FUN" necessary to win.
The problem I see for those coaches who have a challenge with goof offs who call that "fun," are like some parents who are afraid to lead their children, because they lack the character, and genuine resolve, in themselves to sustain the fortitude/discipline needed to control their emotions, make good decisions, and operate in the "tough love" necessary to remove the wrong mix, and instill the right mix.
This isn't so much about blaming their knowledge of the game, it goes to the heart of the coach and the genuineness of their passion. Passion is willing to do whatever it takes, and that just isn't present in all leadership. If it were, there wouldn't be the few great ones who consistently show us, that they have what it takes, to do what it takes. You know what it funny about that, they make it look easy because they appear so laid back, and often have a great sense of humor. Well, it is because they are supremely confident of where they are going, who they are going with, and "why." I think the players reflect, on some level, the leadership they are receiving. Most coaches don't have FUN, because they are still unsure of where they are going, whether or not they can trust anyone on the way, and "why" they are doing it.
I have found in my short life of 42 years, that this gift of leadership in coaches, or any man for that matter, that is framed by humor, and the best kind of FUN, is found most readily present in the hearts of those who are: very wise, very friendly, and very humble.
While I can't seem to fully "crack the code" on those concepts in my life, I desperately hope to - for my athletes yes, but mostly for my wife & children's sake.
Just my take...FUN to talk about FUN.
|
|