|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 20, 2012 12:47:33 GMT -6
Airraider,
While I've grabbed a kid's jersey a million times, I do think that these days, the safe thing to do is keep hands off. Now I agree that this kid was way out of line and I would have benched him the entire game. The fact is, he and his parents now have an opening to make a complaint. I'm not judging at all because I've been there, just sharing my thoughts. I hope everything works out okay.
FCC
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Aug 19, 2012 19:27:21 GMT -6
i'm curious about what level of football you play and where. Your posts indicate that you are quite mature. First off, I'm sorry for your situation, but what about getting the OL together at a restaurant or whatever and hashing things out on your own. Obviously as a coach, I respect coaches, and wouldn't want to encourage any sort of mutiny, but as I often tell my players, it is your team. You're the ones sweating and hitting etc. If the coach isn't getting it done, might you be able to. Or as another plan, how about approaching the coach and sharing your concerns?
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jul 25, 2012 17:10:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jun 17, 2012 20:08:55 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jun 15, 2012 21:14:47 GMT -6
What pisses me off is the only people who are coming forward are the ones who have had problems due to concussions and injuries, and not the ones who are perfectly fine. It's like the fear of flying....people that are scared to fly are that way bc when a plane crash happens, it's plastered across the media...well, what if the media gave an everyday report on the number of flights that landed safely? Same goes for football....the silent majority are the ones that need to start coming forth. Well it begs the question, are there a bunch of NFL veterans out there that are "perfectly fine"? Maybe there are, maybe there aren't....but maybe there are alot more unsaid problems among NFL vets that keep them from rushing to football's defense. That being said, I do echo what others have said in regards to comparing NFL vets to high school players. They are two different worlds in terms of intensity and frequency of injuries.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 24, 2012 12:53:10 GMT -6
What does it mean to be tough coach?
If you: -verbally abuse a kid -physically intimidate a kid -physically abuse a kid -belittle a kid - etc
Then you're a bully. You might be a tough coach, but you're a bully too.
If you: - demand excellence from yourself and players - demand mental discipline from yourself and players - practie and model self control - demonstrate that the team's goal are more imprtant than your own
Then you're a tough coach imo.
It always bugged me whan a coach would try to get in a player's face and physically intimidate....it is a classic abuse of power...most 15 - 18 yr olds are going to back down to a grown man who is in a position of power...so the coach isn't acting tough IMO, he's hiding behind his status.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 15, 2012 18:38:26 GMT -6
My brother was unable to play his final 8 games his JR season and his entire SR season due to concussions. Family decided that football was not worth the risk any longer so he did not play. It is not the fault of football or a coach or a school that he had these issues. He does not blame football, helmets, coaches, or anything for what happened to him. He is a football player and knew the risks involved and chose to play. Once the risks outweighed the rewards, cut your losses and move on to the next thing. I love it when he is coaching and in coaches meetings says, "this kid is freaking soft... he needs to get in there and hit somebody". God knows he would if he could. All-State QB/LB as a sophomore in high school who loves the game still. If you don't want to risk concussions from football... DON'T PLAY FOOTBALL!!! CQ, I'm sorry to hear that about your brother but "Once the risks outweigh the rewards" can you keep knowingly coach kids to do something that can have more severe effects than we first thought? I'm not saying we're at that point, but that is my concern in the future.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 4, 2012 12:35:37 GMT -6
Let me see if I understand this correctly... Its bad to bump your head. Playing football causes you to bump your head? Prolonged bumping of head "may" cause serious issues, including death? Parents may stop their children from playing football in the future, as there are so many ways one can bump there head, why add to it? The argument is... should kids be allowed to bump their heads or not? The argument is... should we legislate how much a kid can bump his or her head? The argument is... should football be outlawed? What is the argument? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 3, 2012 21:47:17 GMT -6
The question is, for me anyway, how do you want to live. If you want to live having been safe and secure your whole life..being confident that you won't have health problems as a result of playing football (or any other contact sports), then that's fine. But most people would wither away and "die" if they didn't have the opportunity to be the warrior, to take those risks, to experience the thrills of those activities. It's part of LIVING and feeling alive for a lot of people. Nothing that's worth anything comes without risks. Football falls into that bucket. Lochness, I generally agree with you, but the part that concerns me a bit is the age of the kids we coach. For the most part we all coach minors. There is a certain implicit trust that is put in our hands to do everything we can to protect them. Besides football, I've done dozens, if not 100s of unhealthy things to my body from when I was 18 yrs old until the present. If one of those things ever catches up to me, I won't blame anyone but myself...I chose to those things, and had alot of fun doing them. But IF there is conclusive evidence in the future that "subconcussive hits" can lead to brain damage, I don't know how comfortable I will be encouraging 13-17 yr olds to "get after it" and do something that might not just be unhealthy, but might be much more unhealthy than we ever knew in the past. I guess my point is, if an adult wants to take risks, I'm fine with that. it becomes a little more complicated when we're talking about minors.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 3, 2012 12:51:48 GMT -6
A quote from the article I linked:
The most plausible route to the death of football starts with liability suits.1 Precollegiate football is already sustaining 90,000 or more concussions each year. If ex-players start winning judgments, insurance companies might cease to insure colleges and high schools against football-related lawsuits. Coaches, team physicians, and referees would become increasingly nervous about their financial exposure in our litigious society. If you are coaching a high school football team, or refereeing a game as a volunteer, it is sobering to think that you could be hit with a $2 million lawsuit at any point in time. A lot of people will see it as easier to just stay away. More and more modern parents will keep their kids out of playing football, and there tends to be a "contagion effect" with such decisions; once some parents have second thoughts, many others follow suit. We have seen such domino effects with the risks of smoking or driving without seatbelts, two unsafe practices that were common in the 1960s but are much rarer today. The end result is that the NFL's feeder system would dry up and advertisers and networks would shy away from associating with the league, owing to adverse publicity and some chance of being named as co-defendants in future lawsuits.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 3, 2012 12:47:51 GMT -6
And the handwringer nannystaters will have succeeded. Life is hard. I can get hit by a truck crossing the street. Therefore I choose to never cross a street again? The day football dies, is the day this country dies. Maybe we can be a dominant world power with our most radical "competitive" cheer teams? Funny you mention cheerleading. Kids are actually much more likely to get injured from cheerleading than football or even martial arts. But it's not governed as a "sport" for legal and business reasons. Football is too much a part of the culture. It's being sensationalized now as dangerous, but it's always been dangerous. Even if it does fade behind basketball, soccer, and MMA (demographic trends indicate this may happen in 20 wears), it won't "disappear" anymore than boxing, horse racing, and (to a lesser extent) baseball has--most of their fade had to do with poor oversight or bad business decisions by the elite governing bodies, not concerns over injuries. Americans like to play football, watch football, and talk about football. As long as that's true, the sport will never die. I see your point but in the litigious world we live in, all it takes is one big court case to start a domino effect as eluded to in the following article www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7559458/cte-concussion-crisis-economic-look-end-football
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 3, 2012 10:51:45 GMT -6
Based on what I've read on this issue. It's not just "big hit" concussions that are the problem,. it is the hundreds of "subconcussive hits". This fact makes football different than soccer or cheerleading etc.
In terms of the former players suing...if it turns out that the NFL had an inkling that "subconcussive head injuries" and concussions were leading to more drmatic problems than generally understood at the time, than that was dishonest and wrong of the NFL.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Nov 11, 2011 12:10:49 GMT -6
TVT50,
I'm not trying to compare the severity of the situation at all. I think I made that pretty clear. But the idea of tolerating certain things got me thinking about this. I would honestly like to know how other coaches have dealt with these things.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Nov 11, 2011 11:33:03 GMT -6
Okay,
This Penn State things has really made me think about some things. I'm going to pose a question below, but before I do, I want to make it very clear that I am not trying to make an apples to apples comparison to what is happening at Penn State.
How many of us have ever witnessed a fellow coach cross the line in some way or another. I'm mot necessarily talking criminal activity, but doing something inappropriate such as: -verbally belittling a kid -trying to get in a kid's face and intimidate him.
These kind of things seem wrong to me, and yet in my experience, some times they are tolerated and chalked up to "old school" coaching.
Again, not trying to say it's the same as tolerating rape, but I'd be interested to hear thoughts on this.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 23, 2011 19:28:48 GMT -6
Wow Coachfd,
One of the best posts I've ever read.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 19, 2011 11:16:29 GMT -6
For those who are saying the linemen don't get as many concussions, the latest research is saying the thousands of sub-concussive hits on the line might be more damaging then the big hits. Now whether or not a 3pt stance contributes to that...I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Nov 8, 2010 13:45:46 GMT -6
I agree with the other response that basically said being tough/hard does not necessarily equal yelling/screaming. I have no problem with yelling and screaming, but what bothers me is hypocracy. If you are in a program that preaches: self control, no swearing, respect etc. Then I believe you have to model that as a coach.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 23, 2010 16:38:05 GMT -6
I've never been a an HC, but I think the kind of things you are talking about can be taught BUT it takes a couple of years. I think alot of this is built in the weight room in the off season.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jul 7, 2010 11:31:22 GMT -6
I think this is a great topic. Her are some thoughts
Worst Case Scenario: This guys comes in with the attitude that he knows everything and does his own thing which undermines your authority and hurts the integrity of the program.
Here is how you avoid that IMO: Everything starts withe the HC. The HC should be very clear about what skills, techniques, etc are being taught at each position. Then it is the job of the asst. coaches to teach those skills period. If you have this kind of understanding, it solves alot of problems. Imagine this scenario below:
New Guy: When I was with the Dolphins, we were taught to run a speed out instead of a square out. It was better because it gets you into the route quicker.
Norcaldiaz: I'm sure that worked well, but our HC and I agree that we are going to teach the square out.
New Guy: But my way is better.
Norcaldiaz: Well, our job as assistant coaches is to teach what the HC wants us to teach. Not what we think is better. If you feel really strongly about, why don't we find time to mention in to the HC. IF he likes the idea, we can go with it. If not, it's our job to teach what he wants taught.
Now of course the best case scenario is that this guys already understands this stuff and he comes in humble, and energetic.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 11, 2010 21:24:10 GMT -6
Coach, My thoughts are with your dad. And I would say you were a great example to your players. There are things that are more important than football.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on May 3, 2010 10:55:51 GMT -6
I think as coaches, it's our job to prepare every kids as best we can. In the above example, I think the smartest most dedicated kids will pick things up eventually, but there will be plenty of others that will get lost. IMHO, football needs to be taught with specific, sequential progressions. This gives you the most chance of getting everyone on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Apr 23, 2010 12:40:45 GMT -6
at some point people have figure out that their is more than enough money for education....MORE MONEY has not helped education since it became an idea. Another way to kill violence ala football and push europe, soccer, onto us. Huh? ?
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Feb 12, 2010 22:07:13 GMT -6
I'm going on memory here so I might be wrong. But I think I recall Hugh Wyatt having some sort of benchmarks kids needed to meet before he would let them participate in doubles. A certain amount of workouts, certain times in certain runs, etc. Maybe someone on here could fill us in more if they know what I'm talking about
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Feb 9, 2010 11:11:07 GMT -6
I don't know that you need to apologize TOO much. I do believe that steroids complicate the concussion issue. Not to mention that the helmet Webster wore is probably equivalent now to what you buy at Toys-R-US for your 3 year old to wear. Unfortunately, a better helmet might no be the answer. The Impact on the brain comes from the brain crashing into the skull. So an argument can be made that a more protective helmet could make things worse because people feel safer making head contact at higher speeds.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Feb 9, 2010 10:55:07 GMT -6
Neck injuries hardly ever happen to OL and DL at the point of attack. That is nothing but sticking a solution to the problem that has nothing to do with the problem. The problem is these pencil neck DB's running into a ball carrier with their head down and trying to take legs out. That is what causes the injuries. Apparently that is the cool thing to do if you are a defensive skill guy. Nothing against defensive guys, but please teach players how to tackle. As I understand it, the concern for the OL and DL is not neck injury. It is repeated head trauma that some believe have negative effects later in life. The TIME magazine article, is NOT about neck injury but rather brain trauma.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 22, 2010 14:15:07 GMT -6
For you guys who don't practice on Saturdays, do you bring the kids in on Sundays? Also, for those of you who don't practice on Saturday, do the coaches meet on Saturday, Sunday, bith, or neither.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 10, 2010 16:55:46 GMT -6
This came up in another thread...thought it might get some discussion...
Here is the bigger question to me. How much total weekend time is needed? As I look at these posts, there is a pretty big range of total time spent by programs on weekends. Here are just a couple of comparisons: Redandwhite - 1.5 hours on Saturdays + 6-9 pm sundays = 4.5hrs
cwood - 7-2 on saturdays + 1-5 on sundays = 11 hrs
Now I'm just using these two posters as examples but this is a huge difference in time commitment. What gives? Are some programs just more efficient? Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 10, 2010 16:51:39 GMT -6
I would like to know different coaches ideas of what really should be realistically expexted from our assistant coaches from the end of the game Friday Night to the time we go to bed on Sunday. When i was an assistant coach i had no problems doing film break down early sat morning and all day, and doing game prep, and that made me a good asst coach and loyal to the program i felt. My wife understood that it was the way i was going to do things. It seems that guys today do not want to put the time in , and sometimes when you have them there doing film breakdown its like you are asking them to give up their first born, or if they are there, its not like they have a whole lot to offer I would love to come up with a reasonable list of expectations of our assistant coaches for the up and coming year as to what they should do, and what they need to do on the weekends. Would love to hear other coaches thoughts. I also wanted to comment on guys not wanting to put in the time. I can only speak for myself, but coaching football and the time commitment has been a major stressor on my family life. In fact, so much so, that I did not coach last year. Now I'm not complaining, I'm just stating the fact. Just like every adult I had to make some tough decisions, and last year that meant not coaching. But getting back to not wanting to put in the time, to me it's more about not wanting to shirk my responsibilities on the homefront as a husband and father. Now this is just my opinion, but I think one of the reasons that you may be seeing more young coaches "not wanting to put in the time" is because of how the dynamics of the family have changed. Many of us coaches today have wives who work full time and therefore they need to do alot of things that might traditionally have been considered the job of the wife. I also think that our culture has also changed. When I was growing up, I don't recall my parents attending many of my little league games. Now there seems to be much more of a pressure for parents to make it to all of these games and commitments(which of course are on Saturdays and Sundays). So I think that is where some of the resistance comes from. And then add to that, as others have stated, sometimes there is alot of wasted time during weekend work for football(not in all programs, but many). I'd actually love to hear from some old timers on whether or not they agree or disagree. p.s. two quick stories that demonstrate how are society has changed. 1.The second head coach I ever worked for had 2 kids, by the time I was working for him his kids were grown. I had a newborn at the time and we were talking about parenting. He comes out and tells me he has never changed a diaper...I was astounded. How is that possible? You have two kids...he just looked at me and said "that's the wife's job" 2. This one I heard from a buddy of mine. A baseball coach he used to work with would brag about how he walked out on his wife during labor to go scout. Now maybe it's just me, but that's not something to brag about.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 10, 2010 16:25:53 GMT -6
Saturday morning: Report at 7am to wrap up any grading you need to do from the night before. We try to get as much done as we can by 1pm then we are gone until Monay. Each guy has his own assignments and are required to submit their assignments, including scouting report materials then by email or in person to the Head Coach by 6:00pm Sunday night. We don't meet Sundays. We feel that we need at least 24 hours away from the office to keep fresh. Now we will still do work on both days but we do it at home and our HC expects us to get it done. We trade films either late Friday night or early Saturday morning at 6:30am. Here is what the assignments are for our staff (school of 500 students, 45 on roster 9-12) Head Coach:-Special Teams Game Plan =Opponent Special Teams Breakdown -Draw up Special Teams Scout Cards -Breakdown opponent offense and co-develop defensive game plan -Make any adjustments to this week's practice plan -Put together scouting report Asst. Head Coach / Offensive Line / Defensive Line Coach:- Draw up Opponent Fronts and Stunts - Calculate Blitz % by Front % - Draw up opponent's offense run game scout cards - Copy, edit our game and opponent game DVDs for players and coaches - O-Line, D-Line individual practice schedules for the week - JV Offense Call sheet - Team website Defensive Coordinator (and Running Backs):- Chart all opponent's offense films we have from this season - Calculate formation, down & distance %'s - Co Develop Defensive Game plan with Head Coach - S&C coach for JV - Defensive Practice Plan - JV Defense call sheet Linebackers / S&C :- Develop strength and conditioning workouts - Chat opponent offense - S&C for Varsity - JV Special Teams - Assist with equipment issues Offensive Coordinator / QB's:- Chart defenses - group & team offensive scripts for the week - QB practice plan for the week - Assist with laundry duties Defensive Backs / Wide Receivers:- draw up opponent's offense pass game - Calculate pass by formation % - draw up opponent coverages for scout card - assist with equipment issues - DB & WR individual practice plan for the week Sorry I am sure I am missing more to each guy's list but this is without seeing a paper in front of me and going off memory. So then does the HC put the gameplan together by himself on Sunday night?
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Jan 10, 2010 16:23:54 GMT -6
Here is the bigger question to me. How much total weekend time is needed? As I look at these posts, there is a pretty big range of total time spent by programs on weekends. Here are just a couple of comparisons: Redandwhite - 1.5 hours on Saturdays + 6-9 pm sundays = 4.5hrs
cwood - 7-2 on saturdays + 1-5 on sundays = 11 hrs
Now I'm just using these two posters as examples but this is a huge difference in time commitment. What gives? Are some programs just more efficient? Any thoughts?
|
|