|
Post by blackbear on Apr 7, 2013 11:59:32 GMT -6
Gone and got me all teary-eyed. Just made a Husker fan out of this guy.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Nov 8, 2011 16:47:10 GMT -6
Yea, I'm interested to how much time you guys are using to discuss these with your players...is it significantly more time than you would use during film review or practice? or similar? Staggering the information or all at once? Excuse my curiosity, thanks guys.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Jan 15, 2010 23:25:19 GMT -6
Wear 'em. If it's not already required, tell the other schools you won't play any other way. Watched a player take a knee to the jaw diving for a pick, knocked him out and led to a series of concussions that stopped his playing career. Too dangerous not to, and it's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Nov 24, 2009 8:34:07 GMT -6
Hopefully the other schools in the northern CAA don't consider similar actions given their economic situations. There's great football being played in that conference, would hate to see any other schools follow suit.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Apr 14, 2009 19:22:04 GMT -6
Although I'm an inconsistent poster/lurker, I really enjoy this site and the great insights and stories that all of its members share here. It's a gold mine of information and knowledgable peers and I really appreciate all the hard work that you've all put in. Also, spreadattack, your blog is second to none. Thanks to you all
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Mar 5, 2009 11:19:49 GMT -6
In the context of moving positions to help the team vs helping the player, I actually think that playing qb will showcase the player's talent a heck of a lot more than playing receiver. I know college coaches who purposefully oversign players who were qbs in high school with the intent of changing their positions. They understand the limitations of high school rosters, and that kids who play qb gain a knowledge for the game they might not have while playing another position. Do what is best for your team, and colleges will do what is best for theirs. If the kid can play, he'll get a shot.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Dec 15, 2008 9:37:36 GMT -6
What an impressive piece. I've gained a tremendous amount of respect for Coach Carrol from seeing his interactions with the young men he coaches and the way he handles that job, but this is on another level. Makes you want to work a little harder to be that type of a leader of young men.
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Sept 2, 2008 20:46:30 GMT -6
The "G" front I am familiar with, is an inside shade to the TE (6i), outside shade on the guard-TE side(3), inside shade on guard away from the TE(2i), and a wide outside shade on the tackle opposite the TE(5). Typically see Cover 3, with two SS/OLB types responsible for force, and playing the flat. Inside backers play hook to curl.
Other forms of the "G," I've encountered offer two 2i's, a 1/5 look away from the TE, or inside backers lined up 1 yd off the ball. Also, man free, and robber coverages are common coverages that I've seen from teams that play this front. Don't know if that helps at all..probably not
|
|
|
Post by blackbear on Apr 26, 2007 11:25:48 GMT -6
Assuming that you are the oline coach, one coach works with the rb's and one with the rec's, I would say that the Rec's coach should be working with the qb's whenever there is indy time for throwing, and if you plan on using the QB as a runner, he could also get some coaching from the RB's coach during exchange/run indy periods. If I had to make a choice, I think that more attention should be given to the QB than the Rec's. QB play has been the most important factor for us in running the gun spread. Rec's can be coached up more quickly than the QB. Just my thoughts.
|
|