|
Post by carookie on Oct 14, 2013 22:41:22 GMT -6
I was talking with some coaching buddies of mine who have lost a few games lately. One of the complaints theyve had brought up is that some of the coaches on their staff want them to simplify their scheme (they have a lot of pro/D1 experience and are running that stuff).
Now the coaches I was talking to agreed that it would be bad to simplify their stuff because that would not help prepare their players for the next level.
I have never thought of it that way, and those who know me know that I make it my goal to simplify schemes and terminology the best I can, so I was wondering how many of you take this into account? Should we make our stuff more complex so that kids are better prepared for the complexities of the next level?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 14, 2013 23:57:17 GMT -6
what percent of your roster goes on to the next level?
dumbest thing I've ever heard.
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 15, 2013 4:37:49 GMT -6
Very dumb. We haven't had a kid go D1 for football in many many years. We have one or two play D3 each year.
You get players ready for the next level with fundamentals. Do you think college coaches care about the NFL? If they Did, they would all run pro style schemes
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Oct 15, 2013 6:27:09 GMT -6
And once again dc has expressed my opinion in ways I could never express it myself. "prepare kids for the next level" what a joke line that is. Also looking back at the OP I see "lost a few games lately" maybe they should start preparing kids for THEIR level and not the next.
|
|
|
Post by coach3517 on Oct 15, 2013 6:33:21 GMT -6
The fundamentals that you teach will prepare them for the next level...Your offensive scheme is not going to prepare them for the next level...If you are teaching them good fundamental football, you will be fine. Also you conditioning program will help get them ready for the next level. We run an old school split back veer offense...We use it because it is simple up front and it gets our athletes the ball in position to make plays. JT Curtis high school also runs this system...each year they send tons of kids to D1 schools nad they have guys playing in the pro's like Joe McKnight. Your system should be at the level of the athletes you are coaching...We would not be able to execute a fancy and confusing offense
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Oct 15, 2013 6:47:29 GMT -6
Going back to fundamentals....I want to stress this because when I went and played college, they teach a lot of different techniques than we used in high school, but the fundamentals are all the same. Many HS offenses now a days are similar or try to copy college offenses, but the good teams simplify them for high school kids.
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Oct 15, 2013 8:59:59 GMT -6
I don't see it as us "simplifying the offense and defense" run at the next level. I see it as us developing a solid base upon which you can add at the next level. Is an algebra teacher "simplifying the system" in contrast to his calculus counterpart? We teach kids how to block, tackle, identify fronts and coverages, adjust within the confines of a system, etc. Those are all universal things. I teach my kids as much as they can handle. I don't start with a full fledged pro offense and then whittle it down. I start with stance and step and then work my way up. If they're all blue chippers with 100+ IQ's then we'd be running the Bill Walsh West Coast. But, they're not, so we don't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2013 9:03:32 GMT -6
What gets kids ready to play at the next is ability. Shocking. What happens with a lot our kids is they go to college and they find out the time requirements for football is a major step up..The step in film in work, preparation, weight room demands is simply a shock to the system. And a lot of them simply cannot handle it. I don't know how you get that offense in and cannot see that it is not working in fall ball. The execution alone would be an alarm. Start with the fundamental,absolutes of the offense and defense and nothing more...until the execution is where it should be.
|
|
|
Post by newhope on Oct 15, 2013 9:57:22 GMT -6
Previous staff: very complicated stuff, kids struggled with it. Our stuff: Simpler, kids do better--AND we have a lot more of them "at the next level". Either they have the size, speed and playing ability that they are looking for at the next level or they don't---how sophisticated and complicated a scheme in high school has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Oct 15, 2013 17:36:39 GMT -6
I have two former NFL players on my staff. Former national champions at Alabama. All they do is coach and teach fundamentals. One of them is my DC. I can't get him out of individuals to get to team. LOL. That is how much he cares about technique. Of course he schemes each week. But always he wants if for our kids to know what they are doing and how to do it. He wants them playing fast.
We are never complicated. We always try to make it simple.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Oct 15, 2013 17:56:14 GMT -6
Previous staff: very complicated stuff, kids struggled with it. Our stuff: Simpler, kids do better--AND we have a lot more of them "at the next level". Either they have the size, speed and playing ability that they are looking for at the next level or they don't---how sophisticated and complicated a scheme in high school has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with it. Scheme has nothing to do with prepping kids for the next level. If your kids are used to working hard in the offseason and practicing hard every day they have a leg up when they get to college.
|
|
|
Post by planck on Oct 15, 2013 20:15:13 GMT -6
I have two former NFL players on my staff. Former national champions at Alabama. All they do is coach and teach fundamentals. One of them is my DC. I can't get him out of individuals to get to team. LOL. That is how much he cares about technique. Of course he schemes each week. But always he wants if for our kids to know what they are doing and how to do it. He wants them playing fast. We are never complicated. We always try to make it simple. Awesome. It's enough to make a grown man weep! There is NEVER enough Indy time for technique!
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Oct 15, 2013 21:59:30 GMT -6
over under on the OP chiming in again?
|
|
mc140
Sophomore Member
Posts: 218
|
Post by mc140 on Oct 15, 2013 22:00:13 GMT -6
The easier it is, the less they think and the faster they play.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 16, 2013 2:34:45 GMT -6
c'mon, why would we want to simplify stuff? How are we supposed to sound cool like this guy if we're not making this as complicated as humanly possible?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2013 4:35:31 GMT -6
c'mon, why would we want to simplify stuff? How are we supposed to sound cool like this guy if we're not making this as complicated as humanly possible? to me that is not complicated......
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Oct 16, 2013 4:53:55 GMT -6
Green Right Slot Spider 2 Y Banana!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 16, 2013 4:56:35 GMT -6
to me that is not complicated...... superfluous, unnecessary, verbose, inefficient = making things more complex than they need to be (complicated) then get {censored} when the kids don't readily adapt to it and not getting the calls out fast enough
|
|
|
Post by planck on Oct 16, 2013 5:21:22 GMT -6
Once again, coaches make of the mistake of thinking that because they understand it the kids should find it easy to do.
News flash: you're not on the field, they are. What YOU know and understand really doesn't matter. It's what you can get THEM to know and understand. That's why simple schemes tend to succeed while relatively few complex schemes work well. Can you use a complex scheme? Sure. You might even be able to make a go of things and have success. However, the impetus to simplify things should be blindingly obvious here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2013 6:14:44 GMT -6
It is not the kids who don't understand the complexity, very rarely is.
|
|
|
Post by kad02002 on Oct 16, 2013 6:37:48 GMT -6
I always try to make it as simple as possible. You know what helps kids to get to the next level? Having great fundamentals, playing fast, and being great athletes. Thats how you get noticed - not by playing indecisive because you are confused. Colleges can do whatever they want with them once they get them - thats why there are redshirt years if the kid has trouble learning. Lets be honest, football can be complex, but it is never rocket science to learn.
My goal as a coach is to get our guys executing whatever schemes I've put in at 100% perfection so they play 100% on second nature (okay, so 100% is impossible, but you get the idea). If I've installed 20 plays and they are running them at 50% execution, I'm gonna take away 10 of those plays. If they start executing those 10 plays to perfection, maybe I add a few more. If they can execute 50 plays/tags to perfection, great! They can get that and more done in college and the NFL. Most high schools cannot.
|
|
|
Post by joris85 on Oct 16, 2013 6:52:52 GMT -6
I always try to make it as simple as possible. You know what helps kids to get to the next level? Having great fundamentals, playing fast, and being great athletes. Thats how you get noticed - not by playing indecisive because you are confused. Colleges can do whatever they want with them once they get them - thats why there are redshirt years if the kid has trouble learning. Lets be honest, football can be complex, but it is never rocket science to learn. My goal as a coach is to get our guys executing whatever schemes I've put in at 100% perfection so they play 100% on second nature (okay, so 100% is impossible, but you get the idea). If I've installed 20 plays and they are running them at 50% execution, I'm gonna take away 10 of those plays. If they start executing those 10 plays to perfection, maybe I add a few more. If they can execute 50 plays/tags to perfection, great! They can get that and more done in college and the NFL. Most high schools cannot. ^This!
|
|
|
Post by joboo59 on Oct 16, 2013 6:58:02 GMT -6
it is never a bad idea to make things simpiler. Do you really want a 17 year old thinking his way through a football game or hitting his way through a football game? I don't want a 17 year old thinking much at all, they don't make good choices in general.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Oct 16, 2013 11:16:39 GMT -6
over under on the OP chiming in again? HAHA, Why? I just wanted to see if anyone considered simplifying things a mistake in that it doesnt fully prepare the kids for the next level (as the other coaches I talked to felt). I have no dog in the fight just, just seeing if there were others who felt the same way as they do.
|
|
|
Post by IronmanFootball on Oct 16, 2013 11:29:50 GMT -6
We're an ironman team of 30 (20 that see any PT). We had a typical varsity offensive scheme for a roster/school our size. After figuring out we were battling time, not intelligence (our OL has a crew of guys with 3.5+ GPAs). We simplified our calls and it's done wonders. Old system we were 1-2 with a W that was more luck than anything else. We've gone 2-3 in the new system but you can see the lightbulb is on and kids are 9/10 times making the right block. If we get out athleted that's one thing, but outschemed because I want to be some guru is just plain DUMMMM (sic).
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Oct 16, 2013 12:02:36 GMT -6
over under on the OP chiming in again? HAHA, Why? I just wanted to see if anyone considered simplifying things a mistake in that it doesnt fully prepare the kids for the next level (as the other coaches I talked to felt). I have no dog in the fight just, just seeing if there were others who felt the same way as they do. Ha.......I was pointing that, obviously, everyone in this thread has the same opinion, and that there really isn't a discussion going on.........which can scare OP's away.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Oct 16, 2013 12:21:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 16, 2013 18:09:15 GMT -6
so why not just call it Brown Boot Rt? How retarded is it to keep such a verbose add-on vernacular? Why not just consolidate (simplify) what you run?
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Oct 16, 2013 18:13:59 GMT -6
or battleship!
|
|
|
Post by planck on Oct 16, 2013 18:21:15 GMT -6
What a ridiculous play call. A simple set of boot rules could summarize that in 3 words. It's just lazy to use that kind of system.
|
|