|
Post by lochness on Nov 20, 2007 10:32:44 GMT -6
Was it a Thanksgiving game when Leon Lett fumbled it away vs. the Dolphins in the snow in Dallas? Yes it was.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 12, 2007 8:38:42 GMT -6
Change from a multiple 2-back offense (Belly Series, Lead Series, Quick Passing Game, etc) to Wishbone Option.
I won't...but if I HAD TO....
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 15, 2008 9:15:39 GMT -6
Looks like an offset power-I.
Interesting, but I've never seen it before.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 10, 2008 9:41:57 GMT -6
I just got back from a clinic. The very first session I walked into was a 3-3-5 session (I ended up in the wrong room) where the guy was talking about his "Ponies" and how they needed to play in a Max Dawg technique etc. etc.
I thought I was going to have to gouge my eyeballs out with my car keys.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 2, 2008 11:48:05 GMT -6
Form another point of view, I get more irritated about it on the board than I do in clinics.
I can't stand when somebody is like, "Hi guys, I need some drills for my dawgs and stingers." I mean, what the hell is that?? What in the name of god are these positions you are talking about? I know it makes us all feel good to use our terminology and sound creative, but wtf? Is it really that hard to say "outside LB" or something like that?
It's the same with scheme names. I get irritated when someone is like "Can anyone tell me how to better run Apocalypse Coverage?" Then you respond with "Coach, what in all of creation is that?" and they say something helpful like "Well, it's a version of West Virginia's Nuclear Winter coverage, except with a Spur playing in the OLB position."
Honestly, how the hell are most of us supposed to know what cute little names your favorite college coach uses for cover 2?
This is, of course, just an example of something that might frustrate me. But honestly, just say what you mean and stop using all of these wonderfully creative and smart-sounding terms. I've never seen a TV announcer saying "Tyrone Jackson is starting today at the BUTCHER position." I mean, just, arrrgghhh....whatever.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Aug 15, 2007 4:36:22 GMT -6
Sometimes it just takes a little "wake up" speech, too...
"MEN don't run the ball like that. That's what children and old ladies who are afraid do. MEN hit the frigging hole called and if someone is in their way, they run their a$$ over. We don't play children or old ladies on this team...we only play MEN. So, you need to decide what you are going to be. If you are going to run afraid and undicsiplined, it's not going to be RB."
Something to that effect should awaken him to your style of thinking.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Aug 14, 2007 10:54:59 GMT -6
In addition to the suggestions already out here...
Show him film about where seams develop in your blocking scheme and how important it is to hit them hard. Sometimes kids need "visual proof" too.
OR
Put him at FB where he doesn't have to time or space to "dance" very much.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 9, 2006 5:14:23 GMT -6
thurman,
Sounds like you and I have nearly identical careers. I just turned 30 and going into my 13th season. I also coached youth ball for 3 years. Have been varsity OC for 8 years.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 29, 2006 18:12:27 GMT -6
Mugzy,
You're lucky we work together, or I'd have no mercy on you dawg!!
Give me a call sometime. Just because it's the dead of winter doesn't give you an excuse to be a stranger!!
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 29, 2006 8:38:36 GMT -6
Hey, damnit, I'm pretty funny too.
|
|
|
A11-In
Apr 1, 2008 11:48:02 GMT -6
Post by lochness on Apr 1, 2008 11:48:02 GMT -6
Coaches,
Also I want to make sure that it is clear that I am not attacking or condemning anyone else's philosophy or personal beliefs. We all care passionately about the kids and about our programs. My post was just intended as an explanation as to why I personally do not gravitate toward certain brands of offense or defense. I want to make sure that people understand that it isn't because I fear change or because I'm incapable or unwilling to learn something new.
Everyone has to do their own thing...that's what makes football (especially HS and youth football) so awesome.
|
|
|
A11-In
Apr 1, 2008 9:21:56 GMT -6
Post by lochness on Apr 1, 2008 9:21:56 GMT -6
I will say this, the A-11 is a very innovative and interesting football offense. I think it is a huge credit to coach Bryan and his staff for having the guts and the perseverance to install and advocate for such a system. It is truly a well thought-out and well intended system. My hat is genuinely off to those guys for what they are doing.
However, I think there are some interesting arguments here that illustrate why the "A-11" or the "5-wide" styles of football will never be for me. It's not fear, it's not "DUGH...I DUNNO WHAT EYEM DOIN IN DA PASSIN GAME," and it's not laziness. It's purely my philosophy and beliefs in what football is all about.
Now, hear me out on this and try not to get too wound up...
Football is a special sport. I don't think anyone here will argue about that. But, one of the many reasons it's a special sport because of the diversity of the "types" of players that can be involved. Football has always (to me) been a game that is characterized by physical play, the strategies and uniqueness of linemen play, and mental / physical / emotional toughness.
It seems like every time we talk about "innovations" in the game, it's all about how to compete with weaker kids and / or about getting "athletes" on the field. People come out and say stuff like:
1. We can't compete with the bigger schools 2. We can't get the basketball kids to come out and play 3. Our kids are outweighed across the board in every game 4. Our offense is more "fun" for the athletes 5. It is safer and less physically demanding on the kids etc. etc.
In my mind, fellas (oh crap, here comes the $hitstorm) these are excuses. It's so easy to say "we don't have the players," as an excuse for lack of success. It's also easy to say "we don't have the players" because then, when your innovations work, you look like a coaching genius and are well set-up to take all the credit.
My question is why are coaches not trying to be "innovative" and get your kids tougher and more physically prepared to play the game? Obviously it IS possible because your oppoenents are capable of doing it, or otherwise you wouldn't be so dang outmatched in every game.
I never thought I would see the day that we need to make football more accessible to weaker and smaller kids. There are already sports for weaker and smaller kids. Go to a soccer game and you'll see what I mean. Our sport is for bigger and stronger and tougher kids. In fact, I used to tell our kids about how I felt about the bumper stickers that you see around town that say "Soccer: The Sport For All." I'd tell the kids that it is true that soccer IS the sport for everyone and that's very nice, but WE have pride because WE know that only a special type of athlete can play football.
We talk about how "fun" the sport is when you're throwing the ball and getting into wide, spread-out formations. I wonder who we are talking about when we say this? Certainly fun for the WR's and QB's...no doubt! But, I have yet to talk to any offensive lineman that says he wants to spend all week pass blocking and zone blocking for 2-3 run plays. Offensive linemen think that double teams, pulling, trapping, and power blocking are fun! So, why are we shifting philisophically toward sacrificing the "fun" of these guys (who are the most unique and under-appreciated athletes in all of sports) for the "fun" of the guys who already get to score all the TD's and touch the ball?
"Well coach, we don't get any linemen and TE types out in our program."
Well, I would say that you DEFINITELEY won't get any of those types of guys out now, if your philosophy has shifted toward making these guys a glorified picket fence.
Again, what are you doing to get these types of guys out...to develop them...to make the game fun for them? Someone in the "5-wide" thread argued that coaches won't run that offense because they are "afraid of change" and they "don't know how to coach the passing game." I think the same can be argued for those who simply throw their hands up and say "our program has weak kids!" Well, what are you doing to be creative and innovative to get those kinds of guys out? What are you doing to turn that 205 lb offensive linemen into a 230 lb offensive linemen in the weightroom? What are you doint to motivate FOOTBALL PLAYERS to get out there and play football? THAT'S innovation too, and it is just as possible and it is just as much hard work as any scheme or system.
We went from having 2 seasons in-a-row where we didn't have a single OL that averaged over 200 lbs. One year, our biggest guy was 220, and everyone else was in the 180-lb range. As a team, we didn't fare so well, especially being the lowest-populated school in our league. We stuck to our guns, we emphasized weight room and off-season participation, we rewarded tough, physical play, and we made our "big guys" feel special...and 3 years later, we were one of the biggest teams in our division, with a line averaging over 230 lbs (including several gifted TE's that were basketball-type guys and all between 210 and 230 lbs). We weren't slugs...we were physical, big, and nasty...like football players are supposed to be. Granted, it is a long-range strategy, and it takes time to turn things around, but it is where we want to be.
This is why I always argue for balance in an offensive and defensive philosophy. Everything else becomes a self-fufilling prophecy. But, to me, it's more important to keep football accessible for these special and unique athletes and to maintain the unique football mentality rather than saying "we don't have that, so we're going to move on," for the sake of short-term competitiveness.
Football is a special game because of the types of players the game demands. It requires toughness, discipline, teamwork, and a selfless attitude. I know that's not "fun" for a lot of selfish and weak kids out there. Well, that's too bad. I don't want selfish and weak kids on my teams. I want tough kids who care about winning and will do what it takes to be competitive in the off-season. We try to breed that...burn it into the fabric of what the program is all about... Are we successful every single year? NOPE! But, when we aren't "successful" we are still "competitive" and we have kids having fun.
Anyway, I've rambled quite a bit. I'm not a former Offensive Lineman (I was actually a RB and a DB), but I feel like those kinds of guys (FB's, OL, TE's) are what make our game unique and special. We should always try to have "innovative" ways to get these kids out and develop them into football players, and have a system designed to allow them to contribute and flourish just like anyone else. I don't see basketball trying to change itself to allow for 5'6 kids to play because they "need more athletes", and I don't see soccer coaches trying to develop systems to allow big slow kids to play because "we need more size." Those games aren't designed for kids like that. Just like football isn't designed for kids that aren't tough and strong.
If that's the future of football ("athletes," basketball on grass, QB-dominated, etc.), then so be it, but then it becomes just another game, and not the unique and special game that it has always been.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 5, 2008 9:33:42 GMT -6
We were down 35-12 with 7 minutes left in the game against the defending champs who were 6-1 coming in to play us. We were 3-3 at that time. In 7 minutes we scored 3 TD's (1st with a regular PAT kick, last 2 with 2-point conversions) all on clock management, execution, and FINALLY playing defense. No trick plays, no onside kicks, no fumble recoveries or INT's to help us.
We scored the final TD with less than 10 seconds, no T.O.'s left (used them all on defense) and no way to spike the ball because it was 4th down. We tied it up 35-35 and went into OT, which is a 10-yard fight scenario.
We got the ball first and scored on a run play up the gut on our first play. We went for 2 (obviously our PAT kicker was having a bad night...he was 1-for-3 at that point and we didn't want to put the game in his hands) and got it, so we're up 43-35 and we go on defense. Our opponent scores in 4 plays and also gets their 2-point conversion.
Now, because we went first in the first sequence, our opponent goes 1st in this next sequence (this is now double OT). We stop them on 4 downs. We get the ball back and score in 3 plays...GAME OVER! 49-43 upset in double OT...
Best game I've ever been involved with as a coach or as a player. It's considered one of the best come-back upsets in state history.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 2, 2006 9:54:31 GMT -6
Coach,
First and foremost, you can create match-ups that the other team doesn’t like. For example, if our opponent runs a 43 defense and their philosophy is to put a big run stopper at the 3 technique and a rush / disruptor type guy at the 1 technique (plus their stud LB at SAM), a simple TE trade or flop of strength will completely put them at a disadvantage in the run game. Also, the example I gave earlier about gaining match-up advantages in your opponent’s coverage packages is legit. These are the types of things you look for on film and plan for.
Second, if the defense is spending a great deal of time and effort on deciphering and preparing for your shift game, that is time taken away from their efforts to practice against and stop your base plays. Any time you can do this, it is always good.
Third, you can certainly create a great deal of defensive confusion and possibly outflank them at the same time if they do not adjust properly. We play all kinds of games with our shifts. You always have to note what their adjustments (or lack of adjustments) are to your shifts. This is sometimes hard to predict, but if you have a guy upstairs designated to watch this, then you have a shot at coming up with a way to exploit them. If you catch them trying to flip their whole defense, there is a way to hurt them there too. If you’re shifting a lot and the defense is becoming passive when you first get up to the ball (waiting for the shift to happen), snap the ball on touch or first sound. This will give you a quickness advantage.
Half of your shifting is done due to what you’ve picked up on film. The other half is to create confusion and to make mental “game time” notes of their reactions so that you can exploit those variables that you otherwise could not have predicted.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 2, 2006 5:45:08 GMT -6
We started pretty heavily experimenting with stemming and shifting offensively this season. It was somewhat benificial, but we were really just tinkering. It is only valuable if you can get a really good match-up out of it. For example, we played against a 46 Bear team that lived in "Man Free" coverage. They would walk both CB's over onto our X and Z receivers if we put them on the same side in a 2-RB formation. So, we had a package where we'd put two weaker receivers out there and start in an "I". We'd then have our 2 best receivers lined up at FB and TE respectively. On the shift, they flanked out to the opposite side (and sometimes we'd put the TB out there too) isolating themselves away from the two best pass defenders on the team. Often we had a SS and a LB covering these two guys. Because of their rules, there was nothing they could do to recover.
Anyway, here is our shift philosophy:
We will only shift OUT OF our more commonly used formations. In other words, if we don’t run “Straight T,” we are not shifting out of “Straight-T!” If the defense doesn’t believe that you may actually run a play out of your original set, you may as well just be huddling up twice, because they’ll be waiting for the shift. Also, if you always shift out of one certain look, they’ll again be waiting for the shift.
What we did was take two of our more basic formations and create terminology in the shifting game for them. So, it worked like this:
“ONE STEM”= Pro I Lt (or I7Lt in our system) “TWO STEM”=Pro I RT (or I8Rt in our system) “THREE STEM”=Wing Splitbacks Lt (or B5Lt in our system) “FOUR STEM”=Wing Splitbacks Rt (or B6Rt in our system)
This was easy for the kids to remember, because these are two fundamental formations in our system. Also, it is logical because in our system, we number holes using “odds left and evens right” philosophy, so they know that “one” and “two” are both pro-I sets, and that since “one” is an odd number, it is to the left and “two” is an even number so it is to the right. Each position need only know how the shift pertains to them.
So now, from there, we can call a play with a wholesale shift like this: “3 Stem, N8Rt-36 Belly” and everyone knows their assignments.
We also had special shifts, most of which were designed to quickly change strength or play games with the TE. These shifts had special names:
“TRADE”= TE trade from left to right or vice-versa.
“FLOP”= TE lines up at FB and the FB lines up at the TE position OPPOSITE of the called formation. On shift, the FB shifts into the backfield, and the TE shifts into the called formation. It’s a quick way to change strength without having a TE cross the formation
“TEX”=WB lines up on the same side as the TE to start, with the Z on the opposite side as the WR on the LOS. On shift, the WB goes in motion to the weak side, stops, and sets on the LOS in the opposite TE slot. The Z backs off the LOS to make it a legal formation. Nice way to get into a double TE look quickly, and the defense never knows if he is going to stop and set as the second TE or if he is going to continue in motion, so they can’t adjust too early.
We then may have one shift specially designed for each opponent, depending on how we have determined we may take advantage of them. For example, the shift I described above that we used against the 46 Bear team we could simply call “Cougar Rt” or “Cougar Lt” with “Cougar” being the mascot of our opponent.
That’s pretty much it. It took a good deal of practice time and concentration this season, so it wasn’t something we really used frequently. But, we may have used it on 20% of our snaps. This season, I plan on using it much more now that it is not a new concept to the kids.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 14, 2008 8:42:39 GMT -6
One of the most consistent and successful teams in our state has a HC that calls offense, defense, and special teams himself. It is a great program, and they have a ton of state championships and state runner-ups over the last decade.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Mar 23, 2007 15:43:46 GMT -6
Disgusting, disgusting, disgusting. "Sue everyone" right? Then we wonder why the poor kids are so soft and the administations are so weak and helpless.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Dec 3, 2006 11:49:05 GMT -6
Couldn't agree more with you coach, good post.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on May 15, 2007 8:22:47 GMT -6
A few years ago we (as a staff) went to go scout. We sat in the stands of the team we were scouting (Lets call them team A) and they were playing a team (B) that should have beaten them soundly. Anyway team A was running the ball really well against team B and getting pretty good yardage on each carry needless to say team As coach stayed with the run and ran the same play a few times in a row. Now the stands at this field sit pretty close to the sidelines near the end of the first half I think their was a timeout a parent from team A yelled "RUN SOMETHING ELSE" everyone on the sidelines turned around and the coaches just shook their heads. We just looked at each other and laughed..... Mugz, The best part of that was that Team A was a SERIOUS underdog playing the 2-time defending state champs (team B) and Team A WON in overtime running that scheme. We heard some classics that day: "Throw the ball, coach!!" That's always a very creative one!!
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 14, 2007 5:53:27 GMT -6
We lost our 3-year starting QB the night before a playoff game to a DUI stop. He was also our starting punter and strong safety (which is like our QB on defense, too!). This is clearly not good for team morale.
Our backup QB was adequate at best, and young, and we had to deal with having him play the biggest game of the season on basically no notice or preparation time. During the first half, we had a ton of trouble running the ball, and we were down 21-8. Because of the trouble we had running, we were forced to throw the ball a lot more than usual (probably 10-12 times that half). Leaving the sideline at halftime, a mother (I LOVE when MOTHERS yell, by the way) yells "C'mon coach, let's get creative and throw the ball, huh??!!"
I'm thinking:
1. We have a young backup QB who just found out he's going to be starting the biggest game of the season that same morning
2. We're actually throwing the ball more right now than we did all season
3. What the hell does this person know about football???
Another time, were in the "grey zone," where the field position and game situation dictate that you can't risk going for it, but also if you punt, it will most likely roll into the end zone. We took an intentional "delay of game" to back us up and hope we could drop the ball in close to the goal line. A parent screams from the stands "C'mon coach, you've got to get the play in quicker than than!!!!"
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Oct 29, 2007 6:14:40 GMT -6
Take the chains down to practice and, for 10 minutes, run a little 11-on-11 drill with the coordinators calling plays just like in a game (making substitutions from the sideline, etc., etc.,) and assistants officiating.
We did that maybe once or twice a season, and our guys loved it. Just control it with a quick whistle.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Aug 9, 2007 15:04:43 GMT -6
Ones I get real tired of hearing (excuse cliches)
"We don't have the horses."
"It's not the X's and O's, it's the Jimmy's and Joe's"
"That was all weight room" (when the other team slaughters you)
"Can't make chicken soup out of chicken {censored}"
"You can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"
"We're young and rebuilding"
"We are as sharp as a box of wet hair"
"We just got out-atheleted"
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 16, 2006 11:48:29 GMT -6
I can't tell you how happy I was to see them stink the place up in the "big game" yet again. I'm not a big Steeler's fan either by any means, but I'll take Pittsburgh's style of football over Indy any day of the week.
And yes, I'm horribly sick of Manning.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jul 24, 2006 4:40:56 GMT -6
Line up 3-4 huddles in "conveyor belt" style and run a perfect play drill. Team breaks the huddle, runs to the line, executes the play "on air," and sprints 20 yards. Immediately re-huddle. The next group is off and running behind them. Run it all the way down the field and turn it around coming back.
If you are a no-huddle team, go 5 minutes of no-huddle either on air or against a base defense. That's a good work-out too.
Lots of teams do conditioning circuts and tackling circuts...so why not try BLOCKING circuts? Have one station be the 7-man sled, another be "open field blocking", another be kickout blocking, and another be 1-on-1 form blocking...
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 28, 2007 8:16:49 GMT -6
Selflessness Discipline Heart / toughness Athletic Ability
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jun 25, 2007 8:12:51 GMT -6
Firehose is the way to go. Measure it out in terms of what you use for splits, and spray paint them.
We have about 10 of 'em. They are the best FREE football coaching aids I've ever used. You can use them to run backfield plays off of, for training DL and LB alignments and reads, for pass skelleton drills, and even for sidelines or boundary markers in your tackling drills.
They're great!
|
|
|
Post by lochness on May 25, 2006 6:57:43 GMT -6
I think hawkcoach was being sarcastic.
That is really bad. I mean, what the hell is that all about? I NEVER would advocate running the score up on anyone, but that practice seems extremely severe.
If your business burys my business in profitability, does your CEO get suspended because you weren't playing nice???
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 29, 2007 10:39:54 GMT -6
panthrpride... I think motioning/shifting against teams that do NOT run a whole bunch of man is pretty much worthless...no need for it. Coach, I've always believed it works great in both situations, you just have to strategize and perhaps execute it a bit differently between zone and man coverages. It's funny, but most of what we do is based on the front, not the coverage. Do they have strong side vs. weak side players? A simple TE trade is extremely effective in this case (for example).
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Nov 29, 2007 7:26:54 GMT -6
We use a lot of shifting and motion in games where we feel it will give us a sound and measurable advantage. We hardly ever shift or motion just for show, although we will usually do it once or twice each game EARLY to see if the defense reacts in a way we did not expect.
We will most often design a specific shift for an opponent's defense that we know we can get a fundamental advantage on.
Our last game of the regular season this year, we played a 4-3 defensive team that had some pretty good athletes. They ran base 4-3 (3 tech, 1 tech, and 3 ILB's) and that's it. Their Sam was a pretty good player. We traded our TE on about 70% of our plays. The defense never adjusted, not even after halftime. That meant we had a 1 Technique, a head-up DE, and the weaker Will LB on our strong side. We had (I kid you not) 3 backs go over 100 yards each in rushing that night.
The great thing is, we may play very balanced and straight-up defenses some weeks, and we will hardly shift or motion them EVER. BUT, everyone knows we do it, so they have to waste practice time showing it and they have to try to study it to see if we have tendancies, etc.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Feb 17, 2006 15:57:59 GMT -6
No matter what, we will never do anything to embarass an opponent. We respect our opposing coaching staffs too much. We will run our offense and our defense, and we will substitute if it is mutual. But, if we move to pull our guys and they do not, we are back in with the firsts until they see our way.
Our division is VERY competitive so this is a tough one to speak from experience.
I don't believe in embarassing anyone (even if they're poorly coached, because that's not their kids fault) ever, though. It's not worth it.
|
|