|
Post by dubber on May 26, 2010 20:15:27 GMT -6
You are as old as you feel and most days I just wish I was dead. I do think age is just a number in some areas like romance, I mean my wife is 13 years my senior. However when it comes to athletic pursuits I have come to realize that the best years of my life have past me by if they ever were even here. Physiologically, that'll work out great for you all. Men hit their sexual peak in the 20's....women in their 40's......... Hell, now that I think about it, I probably don't need to tell you........
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 26, 2010 8:24:08 GMT -6
Does anyone else have a problem with the way coaches were portrayed in the Blindside?
All the SEC coaches (played by themselves) seemed to be ready to fill that stereotype on single-mindedness, car salesman persona......
And what about the high school coach?!
Would you allow a player's mother to watch practice and then come out on the field and huddle up your players without you?
I would've lost my job.......
I bet Michael Oher's high school coach was appalled that his role in Michael's life was trivialized.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 25, 2010 16:40:23 GMT -6
Dubber, You are totally and completely crazy. I love it. This is an awesome thread. You're giving us some good things to think about. Phantom is right, none of this original.......I just wonder what it would be like to live like this........ BTW, as I understand it, the phrase "somebody's fixin' to score" comes from Bobby Bowden. He was refering to being aggressive when you are in a "Coming Out" situation (backed up against your own endzone), because the odds are if you punt out of your endzone, the opponent will score based on the good field position they will have........ So, instead of being conservative and running 3 times a punting, it makes more sense (from Coach Bowden's perspective) to try get a chunk of yardage.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 24, 2010 12:51:01 GMT -6
Special teams provide the bigger collisions.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 24, 2010 12:49:38 GMT -6
The thing is, Wins are the only way to justify such lunacy! I watched 3 of the best teams in OH this past Dec in the state finals run 2 or 3 plays over and over an over and over until eventually one broke for a TD. They played the field postition game and punted and played great defense and offensively were very boring. All 3 won state titles. They had the talent to probably play any style they wanted but they played to JUST win! Agreed.....the whole idea is to win, and a coach would have to be convinced this lunacy would give his team the best chance to win. Lots of ways to skin a cat.......the traditional way is with a knife.......this way is like sticking a garden hose up it's butt and waiting for it to explode..........
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 24, 2010 11:43:56 GMT -6
If you lose, be upbeat when you shake hands
If you win, be somber and gage their response first
I coach against a guy who is a fraternity brother.......I send him a text message in the middle of the week asking what he's doing Friday night and if we wanted to go grab some beer after work.........funny stuff.
We are always cordial, even after we got shalacked by them this season.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 24, 2010 11:40:03 GMT -6
I'm a box guy..........I've learned the hard way.
I give D & D, coverage structure, and where the 3 technique is.....
I'm pure information when we are on offense.....I only give play suggestions when we are not on offense, unless I'm asked.
Our DC doesn't wear a headset........he wants to be left alone to work the game......he's one of the old school coaches with "that eye" where he can see everything at field level.
We just STFU and let him work.
Lots of BSing too..........
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 24, 2010 11:32:55 GMT -6
John, It's that kind of radical thinking I'm talking about. Have an insane, unorthodox philosophy across the board. Offense-----hurry up, no huddle........2 minute offense the entire game Defense----sending massive pressure, trying to stress all 11 guys, short drives ending one of three ways. Kick-off----multiple on-sides Punt--------never Return Game-----big emphasis, best skill players returning That is a crazy way to play football..........it's very different. And you know, it is a formula to get yourself down 28-0 in the first quarter......I guess your philsophy is you have the pieces in place to make a comeback, and that the pressure, the unorthodox manner in which you approach the game, will pan itself out over the course of 48 minutes. You would have to place a BIG emphasis on sudden change for your defense.......it would be a matter of pride........your OL coach has to build that culture of "we know who gets the job done", and in this philosophy, your DC needs to build the same philosophy with his kids....... "Hey, our dumb@$$ HC just gave their offense the ball back in the red zone, now we have to bail them out, let's go save the day!" Not saying I would ever do this (if I even ever have a chance to set policy like that), but it is interesting to think about.......
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 23, 2010 20:31:56 GMT -6
Dubber, 1. It's mid-May. Can you and your staff learn this new system in time? 2. Do you have a Plan B? You said that only one or two teams on the schedule can handle serious pressure? How about the playoffs? Do you have something for them? 3. Are all involved parties- HC, OC, and DC- really ready to play track meets? I think that when people consider the "somebody's fixin' to score" they envision themself scoring. Are all of you really ready for what happens when it's the other guy? Will you stick with it after a 45-42 loss? The worst thing you can do is go balls to the wall on something and change mid-season. 4. Are there a lot of teams that have had sustained success with this philosophy? I know that some have but how many? I'm not trying to talk you out of it but these are some of the practical questions that you have to answer. Phantom, those are all worthy considerations. First off, I'm not in a decision making position (at least in terms of team philosophy......my HC would probably not go for this.........maybe he would........ This is all theory. I have to move this from the thinking realm to the practical realm in order to answer your other questions: I would only suggest/implement this if I was the HC. Unless I have the authority to make everyone get on board, it won't float. My DC would understand the situation going into the season.......and he will accept the defense's role in the vision for the program, or he won't be my DC. The only point I don't care about is the success or failure of other teams who have tried this approach. I think that isn't a good indicator of how well something will work, and I'm not afraid of doing something new. I think if you do something new (and do it well) in relation to what your schedule is use to, then you have an advantage.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 23, 2010 20:17:21 GMT -6
From reading this, it sounds like Dubber simply doesn't want to play defense. I don't mean that as a negative, as it seems that he is searching for the BEST way to play a limited # of defensive snaps against ball control type teams. If getting the ball back, rather than preventing scores is the primary objective, there are 3 ways to do it: 1. Turnover by taking possession of the ball 2. Turnover on downs/punt 3. Allowing the other team to score. Dubber, correct me if I am wrong here, but what you seem to be searching for is a defensive philosophy and corresponding scheme to facilitate getting the ball back as its primary objective, hopefully through methods one and two more frequently than method 3. Essentially, you are looking to mimic the basketball philosophy that Paul Westhead employed at Loyola Marymount. You shoot fast, and you pressure them to shoot fast. They may get wide open looks, but they will get them quickly. Now, here are some potential issues I have with this mindset. 1. It hangs one side of the ball out to dry. If all your coaches coach both sides, this issue is mitigated somewhat, but if you have coaches who are primarily concerned with defense, I think this could become a problem. 2. As others have mentioned, it seems to really rely on the "rhythm" of your offense. A couple of 3 and outs combined with a couple of busts rather than booms on D and you are fighting uphill. 3. If a team really hangs its hat on "warp speed" tempo on offense and "one of us is fixin to score" on defense then as the game conditions change, it can only control its TEMPO, and not the game . Just my opinion. Up by low margin, less than 3 minutes in the game.... 4. I don't agree with many of the posts here that Fast tempo offense matches well with the high pressure defense, and a ball control offense matches with bend, don't break defense. I think the inverse makes more sense. 5. I don't know if it fits H.S. ball well. At the H.S. level, so many teams lose games rather than win. I haven't seen many schools consistently put together long drives and win games. As usualy coach, this is one helluva post. #5 is really where "I am at" in regards to philosophy........I want to let them hang themselves. However, I'm a wonderer, and I'm not afraid of radical ideas........this idea is out there, and I wanted input on it. After I noticed our drive failure rate was higher after longer drives by the opposition, I thought I'd roll this around. You're right, I can't stand the slow death.....
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 22, 2010 5:15:41 GMT -6
I keep reading that Dubber's defense should be more aggressive. What exactly does that mean? Dubber, once again, if your defense will be more aggressive how exactly will that change what you do? To be honest, I'm not really sure. I think the 10-1 would be unique in this area, and I would consider that a defense that is only on the field for 3 plays, as the proximity of defenders to the LOS makes it boom or bust. Basically, on our 9 team schedule, there is not one that I think has it in there tool box to handle heavy pressure and press/tight man. We do well with it, but we're devoting a day a week to press man, and repping it all summer, etc. Part of the carry over is this too: I want to beat press man, so we practice a lot versus press man......so why not make press man a base for us, if no one has the tool box to call us on it? When I say "press" man, I really mean "catch" man I like (like what allisjoh runs)........able to jam and get a run read before bailing. That coverage lends itself more to INT's imo than press man does. Those are really more my unorganized thoughts than an answer Phantom, but it's the best I could do. And again, this is something I haven't completely bought into yet myself......
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 21, 2010 12:26:34 GMT -6
Who on here coaches at the hs or college level and doesn't hold a teaching job? I was wondering what other jobs possibly mesh for those who would like to coach but do not want a teaching job. I bet CPA works well for this........
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 21, 2010 12:25:55 GMT -6
I run my own business. I make my hours.
So, it's up at 5 AM and seeing clients after practice during season.
Sometimes I am sprinting to the field in my shirt and tie, but I've never missed a practice........
Basically, you need a sweet gig (our DC works for UPS and his manager use to play ball, so he can get his 40 when he needs to), or you need to run your own show, which is scary.
Also, you probably need to be realistic about advancement. Either at another school or even on your own staff.........
My situation is a little unique (I have some opportunties, though all I want is to be a coordinator someday, NEVER an HC), but for the most part, you take what you can get.........
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 19, 2010 20:50:39 GMT -6
I invented a pass play where I send all 4 eligible receivers down the field into 4 zones equidistant from one another creating a vertical stretch on the FS.........
I'd love to tell you more, but I have to go, I'm giving a clinic talk on repackaging ideas as your own.......
Creativity, imo, is less about scheme, and more about the ability to see and foster potential in your players
It's saying, "Hey, you know what, Johnny looks like he can play Guard for us".....and Johnny's played FB since 3rd grade.......
It's having the vision (and balls) to play a 135 lb kid at 1 tech over a 220 lb kid.
And to move a 2 time all-conference DT to LB.
How efficent and "creative" you are when it comes to personnel is where it counts.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 19, 2010 20:01:51 GMT -6
Captain,
You're getting beat up in this thread, but I bet everyone has been there.
Play the kid.......eat the crow......make friggin' sure you are in line with the boss.....move on......
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:51:13 GMT -6
Another factor... After that long drive what causes your offense to bog down...what are you calling? I know sometimes, if the offense is clicking then the OC has that "let's try this now" attitude, which in turn may result in a 3 and out...ugh! So after that long drive by the opponent , go to your best plays to get the momentum back! This is a great point........I'll have to go back and see for certain if this was/was not the case. That tendency.......good insight to point that out.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:49:55 GMT -6
Sorry if I sound like I've made up my mind.......I really haven't........
I just think this is an interesting concept, and it appears I need to play devil's advocate to keep the conversation going.........
I really just want to talk this thing out
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 15, 2010 7:43:58 GMT -6
I've been watching our games from last season, and a pattern has been emerging. Our offense gets in a groove easily, and gets thrown out of a groove easily. We are no huddle team, and we try to run people........when our defense gets a three and out or a turnover, we can put up points quickly. We had a game this season in the mud and rain, against an evenly matched opponent where we forced a couple of turnovers early, and BAM, we were up 22-0 with 6 minutes left in the first quarter. Their next two drives, they got first downs and milked the clock, and our next two drives stalled........this theme repeated itself through out our season (keep away left our offense stagnant).......when we are forcing turnovers and getting 3 and outs, we avalanche a team. It's like our offense rests too long, and they forget how to execute (this is not an inactivity thing, about 7 or 8 of the offensive guys ARE playing defense too). So, in the interest of being the best team possible, I'm rethinking my defensive approach to the game. Right now, I want to bend and not break, waiting for the offense to make a mistake. However, I'm starting to think about running something more aggressive. I mean, have the philosophy of: "someone is fixin' to score"......either they punt or score in 3 plays. Either way, we get to ball back and stay "in groove" offensively, as that is when we seem to be our best. Also, with turnovers being the number one statistical indicator of which team will win, perhaps the calculus should focus less on how many points a defense yields, and instead place a premium on how many turnovers they can garner.....(In case you can't tell, the large, embolden text is what I'd like to talk about........as in: perhaps this is a better measure of a defense?) It's a theory, and I imagine this thread will take another avenue than what I intend (guess that's karma), but in the ever pressing effort to think outside the box........ ..........whaddaya think? So, on the basis of one game in crappy weather in which your offense didn't perform you want to change your entire defensive philosophy? I'm sorry I wasn't clear. That was a microcosm of a couple season long trend.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 15:57:44 GMT -6
Guys, I honestly appreciate the comments so far.
I guess to be clear: We are not trading offensive philosophy. That is not the problem.
We don't get tired.........what I am asserting is quite the opposite: our kids don't get tired, they get out of sync.
What this is ultimately about is controlling the tempo of the game whether we have the ball or not.
Why do basketball teams take a timeout in the middle of another team's run?
A team hits a couple of 3's and gets a couple of lay-ups in a row, and the coach calls a time out.........normally, there is not a ton of adjustments going on, it's just to break the mojo.
I'd proposing that MAYBE, it is a good idea to keep the mojo going.......at all costs.
Basically, I want to match an aggressive scheme with an aggressive scheme.............
Here's the best example I can give:
It's like the fast-break basketball team that also full court presses the entire game..........heck yeah they are going to give up some layups, but they force the other team to play their game...........
That's what I want......the game played on our terms........
And, this is not convential wisdom stuff I'm throwing out here.......it IS different..........
But, imo, it is worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 12:43:36 GMT -6
Just a thought..Maybe you change your offensive philosophy..give the defense some rest..It is all connected..read anything by Parcells and Belechek..they are not quick scoring machines..The idea is to win the game..they can't score if the defense is on the bench..I'd rather win 10-7 then 48-45..but that's just me...not always the case w/ some OC's especially in college After the success we've had.....I don't see us changing offensive philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 11:42:31 GMT -6
Guys,
I know this is a little against the grain, but I thought I would post this idea and see where we boiled it down to........
I appreciate all the comments so far.
Our offensive woes seem to come only after prolong periods of NOT having the football. A 7:00 minute drive just kills all the momentum we had offensively, and the thinking (not practice) is if we got the ball back, HOWEVER we got it back, it would be preferable to giving up 7 minutes and a score, only to go three and out and put our defense in a tougher situation.
I'm not giving up on defense, I just want to theorize about what their function ought to be.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 11:27:34 GMT -6
Instead of totally changing your defensive philosophy, why not just emphasize turnovers at every possible opportunity. One thing that we're doing for this upcoming season that we havent done before is really emphasizing turnovers. We barely caused any last year and we want to make that a focus. We are begining our "Turnover for Hunger" campaign this fall which we stole from someone on Huey. We are going to get the student body and community to pledge X amount of canned goods for every turnover we cause during a game. We cause 2 turnovers, everyone brings in the amount of food to our school on Monday. At the end of the season it will be taken to a local Food bank. Because of this, we will have turnover circuits and drills EVERYDAY to show our kids how important this is to us. Might not be anywhere near an answer you're looking for, JMO That is cool.........VERY COOL
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 10:50:06 GMT -6
I've been watching our games from last season, and a pattern has been emerging.
Our offense gets in a groove easily, and gets thrown out of a groove easily.
We are no huddle team, and we try to run people........when our defense gets a three and out or a turnover, we can put up points quickly.
We had a game this season in the mud and rain, against an evenly matched opponent where we forced a couple of turnovers early, and BAM, we were up 22-0 with 6 minutes left in the first quarter.
Their next two drives, they got first downs and milked the clock, and our next two drives stalled........this theme repeated itself through out our season (keep away left our offense stagnant).......when we are forcing turnovers and getting 3 and outs, we avalanche a team.
It's like our offense rests too long, and they forget how to execute (this is not an inactivity thing, about 7 or 8 of the offensive guys ARE playing defense too).
So, in the interest of being the best team possible, I'm rethinking my defensive approach to the game.
Right now, I want to bend and not break, waiting for the offense to make a mistake. However, I'm starting to think about running something more aggressive.
I mean, have the philosophy of: "someone is fixin' to score"......either they punt or score in 3 plays.
Either way, we get to ball back and stay "in groove" offensively, as that is when we seem to be our best.
Also, with turnovers being the number one statistical indicator of which team will win, perhaps the calculus should focus less on how many points a defense yields, and instead place a premium on how many turnovers they can garner.....
(In case you can't tell, the large, embolden text is what I'd like to talk about........as in: perhaps this is a better measure of a defense?)
It's a theory, and I imagine this thread will take another avenue than what I intend (guess that's karma), but in the ever pressing effort to think outside the box........
..........whaddaya think?
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 14, 2010 10:24:37 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 12, 2010 12:18:02 GMT -6
This thread really is doing a service, I would hate to see it go. If I go back and edit my posts, can we keep it up? It's still up, isn't it? Just trying to nudge you guys to find someplace else to debate tax politics. I mean, what I wrote is a little incendiary, so by editing the posts (and eschewing that material), we could avoid someone responding to those comments........ .........which would close the thread.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 12, 2010 12:12:15 GMT -6
This thread really is doing a service, I would hate to see it go. If I go back and edit my posts, can we keep it up?
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 12, 2010 12:11:29 GMT -6
What if you were traveling to Florida for an "interview"? With a letter saying so, could you deduct the trip? I would think so
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 12, 2010 7:46:48 GMT -6
I personally believe we should tax the poor more. it would be a strong force to move them out of poverty. ben franklin warned about making the poor to comfortable in their poverty. I believe we should use the death penalty on tax frauds for a first offense and go back to the pre-80s tax brackets. =) To quote George HW Bush: Voodoo Economics. Sounds like you run like a Kenya........uh, make that Keynesian That's cool........I would say something about how that model worked out for Greece, but I won't............. I'm kidding..........I mean, I really believe that, but I'm not that serious about it. Man, I'd really hate to get an informative thread like this one shut down, so I'm going to bow out........anyone want to talk economics, PM me. Other than that, be smart, get a CPA.
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 11, 2010 19:18:44 GMT -6
PM me if you need the name of a good CPA Sounds like somebody's in BNI.......... ;D
|
|
|
Post by dubber on May 11, 2010 19:00:33 GMT -6
Airman, what's your point? my point is simple this, If everyone had to write out a check each month to government we would then have a flat tax which is much fairer and equitable. say 7% of your income goes to taxes you keep the other 93% to do as you wish. a consumption tax would be even more fair then a flat tax. according to the tax policy center only 47% wage earners pay taxes into the federal government. so 53% live off the other 47%. I personally believe we should tax the poor more. it would be a strong force to move them out of poverty. ben franklin warned about making the poor to comfortable in their poverty. Your numbers are off, but I agree with the concept. Give me more of my money, and I'm hiring someone to make my business bigger.............or spending it to boost other businesses. But, dude, look at your numbers........ONLY 47% pay federal?! That is definitely wrong. Also, I disagree with the poor people comments......it ain't that simple. And, like phantom said, in the end, this belongs on a libertarian website, not a football one.
|
|