|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 21, 2008 8:23:02 GMT -6
Fellas - I'm working on getting our playbook transferred from paper to powerpoint. A little history...we are transitioning from a Wing-T team to more of an I formation. Additionally, we are returning a player this fall who was the conference offensive player of the year last year (1000 total yards of offense, led the conference in TDs, and was the leading kick/punt returner). Also, our head coach is not really big on giving single-word formation names like "Blue" or "Texas" or anything that really isn't descriptive and that the kids just have to "know" where they line up. (that point is non-negotiable) So, what I wanted to do was to create a playbook for our running game that addressed these issues: 1) Keep simple formation names from last year (Wing Rt/Lt, Ace Rt, Lt, Unbalanced Rt/Lt) 2) Easily be able to move our playmaker to any position on the field 3) Use simple tags to change the alignment of specific players from a base I formation 4) Preserve our system for putting a player into motion. 5) Use shotgun formations without having to tag our under center formations with the word "gun" I would like you guys to take a look at what I have so far and give some constructive criticism. Specifically, what I want feedback on is: 1) Are the word tags simple and easy for kids to understand? 2) Is this a workable system or is it just something that might look good on paper? 3) What else do I need to add to the playbook? (I still am going to add slides showing the blocking rules for all of our concepts. I have Buck Sweep in there and 1 slide of Toss, but still have to do the others). 4) Is there anything that is "fluff" and really doesn't need to be in there? 5) Any other points you have that may be helpful Here it is: www.savefile.com/files/1453936 Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 21, 2008 12:22:33 GMT -6
Flew through it real quickly... and in all honesty, I didn't like it.
1. Why do it in power point, if its just a static presentation? You could have done that in word perfect, and got the same result. I was expecting some animation... some sound... something to keep my attention, as well as the teenagers that I assume you are going to give this too.
Don't get me wrong, it is apparent all the hard work you've put into this... but again... if the key is to get KIDS to digest all of that info... then you'll need some bells and whistles, which powerpoint provides, but I don't see you utilizing.
2. I'm not sure if you stated your coach wants this... this complicated, or you want it this complicated to move stud around... but as a coach... I found that to be a lot of information, and it would take me a minute to digest it...
A few things just seemed overkill... Like the PRO and Con... why not just left and right? Motion is indicated by the numbers?... Doesn't every play have numbers... its just the 3 digit numbers? There aren't any other three digit numbers? Just asking, becaue I can see that becoming an area of confusion.
Why not the typical names, (those used in Madden and NCAA,to to give the kids a legitimate starting point?)
Pro, Twins, Flex, Ace, Dub Slot, Trips... etc., with a right and left tag?
It may just be foreign to me, because we do ours so differently, but I like the concept of taking your tight formation and working away from that... be it names or tags or whatever.
3. Again... those were a lot of slides, and you hadn't begun to really get into the play book... so I'd say, hit the drawing boards again, simplify the info, and put more on one slide, so a person doesn't feel like they've been looking at it forever... not to mention... bells and whistles.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Mar 21, 2008 12:52:08 GMT -6
I felt kind of the same.. at first glance.. I was confused.. once I examined it closer the coach in my came out and I started to understand.. but.. its not what you and your coaches know.. its what you can get your kids to learn.. In my offense.. the hardest part is learning where you line up in certain formations.. and learning a hand full of concepts for our passing game.. everything else spelled out for you.. keep it simple.. use word association and KEEP using powerpoint no matter how basic.. word is for people who punt on 4th down..  |
|
|
|
Post by ghscoach on Mar 21, 2008 12:57:12 GMT -6
2. I'm not sure if you stated your coach wants this... this complicated, or you want it this complicated to move stud around... but as a coach... I found that to be a lot of information, and it would take me a minute to digest it... Why not the typical names, (those used in Madden and NCAA,to to give the kids a legitimate starting point?) Pro, Twins, Flex, Ace, Dub Slot, Trips... etc., with a right and left tag? It may just be foreign to me, because we do ours so differently, but I like the concept of taking your tight formation and working away from that... be it names or tags or whatever. I flew through it quickly as well but came away with the same impression as khalfie. Maybe because it is foreign to me or maybe I just did not take the time to totally understand things. I also feel that you would benefit if you give the formations more common names like slot, wide slot, pro, and I and then giving it a left or right tag. Another thing is why make up formations to move your stud around? I understand you wanting to do this but why complicate things by making it a whole different formation. Just teach your stud all the positions you want him to know. Then when you send the play in just have the QB tell him to switch with the Z, Y or who ever you wish. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 21, 2008 14:04:00 GMT -6
Flew through it real quickly... and in all honesty, I didn't like it. 1. Why do it in power point, if its just a static presentation? You could have done that in word perfect, and got the same result. I was expecting some animation... some sound... something to keep my attention, as well as the teenagers that I assume you are going to give this too. Don't get me wrong, it is apparent all the hard work you've put into this... but again... if the key is to get KIDS to digest all of that info... then you'll need some bells and whistles, which powerpoint provides, but I don't see you utilizing. This is just a draft. I didn't figure I would need bells and whistles for coaches to look at it. If this is what we go with, all of that stuff will come later. 2. I'm not sure if you stated your coach wants this... this complicated, or you want it this complicated to move stud around... but as a coach... I found that to be a lot of information, and it would take me a minute to digest it... A few things just seemed overkill... Like the PRO and Con... why not just left and right? Motion is indicated by the numbers?... Doesn't every play have numbers... its just the 3 digit numbers? There aren't any other three digit numbers? Just asking, becaue I can see that becoming an area of confusion. Very good points. Will not argue there. However, those things are beyond my control. "Pro" and "Con" came from the head coach as did the motion system. This is the best I could do given those parameters. Why not the typical names, (those used in Madden and NCAA,to to give the kids a legitimate starting point?) Pro, Twins, Flex, Ace, Dub Slot, Trips... etc., with a right and left tag? See above response. ;D It may just be foreign to me, because we do ours so differently, but I like the concept of taking your tight formation and working away from that... be it names or tags or whatever. Sounds good...can you give me an example? That is essentially what we have here...base formation is the "I" and we work away from that. 3. Again... those were a lot of slides, and you hadn't begun to really get into the play book... so I'd say, hit the drawing boards again, simplify the info, and put more on one slide, so a person doesn't feel like they've been looking at it forever... not to mention... bells and whistles. Yeah...there are a lot of slides here. The thing is, I'm not really sure how to pare it down yet. If we go with something like this, my guess is that we would have to give the kids a copy that is significantly reduced...maybe break it up by position or whatnot. As far as the bells and whistles go...well, that will come later if this is what we go with. Don't really want to put a ton of time into animating this stuff if the head coach doesn't like what I have. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 21, 2008 14:06:30 GMT -6
Another thing is why make up formations to move your stud around? I understand you wanting to do this but why complicate things by making it a whole different formation. Just teach your stud all the positions you want him to know. Then when you send the play in just have the QB tell him to switch with the Z, Y or who ever you wish. Is that how most people do it? I always figured that there was a little more to "Have Jimmy switch with Joey on this one" but, if that is easiest, I'm all for it. |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 21, 2008 17:41:27 GMT -6
This is just a draft. I didn't figure I would need bells and whistles for coaches to look at it. If this is what we go with, all of that stuff will come later. Don't bring me a draft... Yes, I need the bells and whistles too. And adding them in later is biatch... If you are going to do it... do it right the first time!  Sounds good...can you give me an example? That is essentially what we have here...base formation is the "I" and we work away from that. Yeah... we dabble in the Single wing right... our base formation is called Wing Rt... Wing Rt... Double tight, wing to the right... Pro Rt... Same as Wing Rt, except TE Opposite the Wing Splits out Lt. Split Rt... Same as Pro Rt, except both TE's are split with the Wing to the Rt. Flex Rt... Same as Split Rt, except the Wing splits half the distance between the TE and OT on the Right Side... Twins Rt.. Same as Flex Rt, except Single Side TE comes back in Tight... So on and so forth... So our kids are really responsible for learning the order in which we break down Wing Rt... Wing to Pro to Split to Flex to Twins to Trips to Unbalanced... provides nice visual imagery of the one person moving to help with the memorization of the formations. ] Yeah...there are a lot of slides here. The thing is, I'm not really sure how to pare it down yet. If we go with something like this, my guess is that we would have to give the kids a copy that is significantly reduced...maybe break it up by position or whatnot. Stop trying to teach everything... Kids only learn the bold print anyway... I'd go like this... First two slides... Philosophy & System... Slide 3... Formations Slide 4... Motion Slide 5... Reads etc... If you can't get it on one slide... you are saying too much. The playbook is just a guide... its not the actual teaching. You can addendum a study aid later... when you fix your bells and whistles. As far as the bells and whistles go...well, that will come later if this is what we go with. Don't really want to put a ton of time into animating this stuff if the head coach doesn't like what I have. I say to hell with the HC... make it up how you would do it... if the HC doesn't like it... put it on the hard drive and wait till you become the HC to unleash it. So don't waste time creating some stuff the HC doesn't even want... create your ultimate playbook... make it worth your while... then no matter what happens, you won't be wasting your time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2008 18:16:36 GMT -6
'Cat, I hate the formation names, but we've been over that  I liked it actually. The idea has got me re-thinking the use of playmaker pro for my playbook. |
|
|
|
Post by coachdalton on Mar 21, 2008 20:48:15 GMT -6
The most important thing for any playbook you use is that you and your staff believe in it and completely understand it.
One thing on your "toss" play. You have the pulling Guard blocking the CB and your FB blocking scraping LB. Do you think a Guard can really get there?
I personally prefer to take my FB out to the CB because a FB is typically more athletic and therefore more able to actually make an effective block on a typically fast CB. I then have my pulling Guard look inside out (once he turns the corner on the pull) for scraping LB's.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 22, 2008 4:57:16 GMT -6
The most important thing for any playbook you use is that you and your staff believe in it and completely understand it. One thing on your "toss" play. You have the pulling Guard blocking the CB and your FB blocking scraping LB. Do you think a Guard can really get there? I personally prefer to take my FB out to the CB because a FB is typically more athletic and therefore more able to actually make an effective block on a typically fast CB. I then have my pulling Guard look inside out (once he turns the corner on the pull) for scraping LB's. I like that, Coach! I have made that change. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by ghscoach on Mar 22, 2008 5:01:14 GMT -6
Another thing is why make up formations to move your stud around? I understand you wanting to do this but why complicate things by making it a whole different formation. Just teach your stud all the positions you want him to know. Then when you send the play in just have the QB tell him to switch with the Z, Y or who ever you wish. Is that how most people do it? I always figured that there was a little more to "Have Jimmy switch with Joey on this one" but, if that is easiest, I'm all for it. This is the way we have always done it. In my opinion it is easier to teach a few kids multiple positions than it is to teach all the whole team multiple formations. It has always worked well for us once your backs know the formations they should know where to go no matter what position you put them at. |
|
fish
Junior Member
Posts: 485
|
Post by fish on Mar 22, 2008 14:34:55 GMT -6
we use similar ideology in our playbook
we have simple names for for different formations to put people in different locations
it may not make sense to outsiders, but for us it works
it also helps keep the verbage down in the huddle
it doesn't have to be from madden to make sense to kids, if you know it and can teach it, the kids will get it
for example:
blue is our 2x2 set (we do add the word gun if we want gun)
we have right and left for our basic i formation
black is pro twins with the fb as the twin
green is pro trips
we also never say the word right. if a formation strength is not called, it is automatic right.
i guess as far as how to move around your playmaker, i think for one specific play then go ahead and just move him
but for functionality and future uses of the playbook then you should have a specific formation set that would put that player in that position.
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 22, 2008 14:48:00 GMT -6
for example: black is pro twins with the fb as the twin green is pro trips This is something I never understood... And I'm not saying its wrong, and recognize its just the way you do it... But I have to ask why? If your formations has to be explained, via another terminology... why not just use that terminology? And whom goes to FB on Black? Interesting... |
|
fish
Junior Member
Posts: 485
|
Post by fish on Mar 22, 2008 14:59:35 GMT -6
for example: black is pro twins with the fb as the twin green is pro trips This is something I never understood... And I'm not saying its wrong, and recognize its just the way you do it... But I have to ask why? If your formations has to be explained, via another terminology... why not just use that terminology? And whom goes to FB on Black? Interesting... how do you explain right? we explain black the same way... we line up in our base and move the players where we want them and tell them 'this is called black' the only time i use another terminology is to explain it to other coaches... in black, the fb does not line up in front of the tb, he lines up in the twins position, between the wr and split tackle. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Mar 22, 2008 15:25:23 GMT -6
I'm wondering the same thing....because saying blue, red, black, whatever doesn't shorten the wordage. Why not just say Ace for 2 x 2, Trips for trips, Slot for slot, Twins for twins??
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 22, 2008 15:56:23 GMT -6
I agree on everything with Khalife.......verbose, busy, a lot of flash, little substance.... get to the point with as little words as possible. Is it Christmas? All the bright colors nearly gave me a seizure. Is it possible to keep the concepts grouped together? And similar concepts on ONE page (so you can see how it relates)? 0301.netclime.net/1_5/H/S/5/Shreveport.ppt |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 22, 2008 16:46:30 GMT -6
Thanks for the brutal honesty, guys. That's what I was looking for.
Back to the drawing board.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 22, 2008 17:39:10 GMT -6
just an idea, but this is what I meant; 0304.netclime.net/1_5/000/000/5da/b93/example.pptjust clean it up - so it is not so busy (distracting the eyes) or a hodge podge of ideas thrown together. Compartmentalize the offense / playbook. that is a *$%load of formations to digest and nothing really tying them together. What is the REAL 'base'? Just a suggestion, but if the TE is always oriented to the RIGHT, is there really a need to call it? Calling out what is not 'normal' (we will always be in 'right' unless we tag it with '_____'), to cut down on all the verbiage? |
|
fish
Junior Member
Posts: 485
|
Post by fish on Mar 22, 2008 17:53:53 GMT -6
I'm wondering the same thing....because saying blue, red, black, whatever doesn't shorten the wordage. Why not just say Ace for 2 x 2, Trips for trips, Slot for slot, Twins for twins?? there's more than one way to skin a cat... ace isn't 2x2 for everybody for some people ace is two-tight, one back for some people doubles is 2x2 we all have different lingo that we use for our stuff |
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 22, 2008 18:04:12 GMT -6
I'm wondering the same thing....because saying blue, red, black, whatever doesn't shorten the wordage. Why not just say Ace for 2 x 2, Trips for trips, Slot for slot, Twins for twins?? there's more than one way to skin a cat... ace isn't 2x2 for everybody for some people ace is two-tight, one back for some people doubles is 2x2 we all have different lingo that we use for our stuff that's what ace means to me 2tight-oneback up north and in florida they call ace something else lol we don't run two tight and oneback so call it whatever the hell anyone wants to people this is all semantics fish and wildcat are both good coaches at good schools with systems in place that have some thought behind them if it isn't like how you think, then fine, wildcat at least has the guts to ask for some constructive criticism while acknowledging that it isn't the way he would necessarily do it, but that he is under orders from his hc to keep certain things i think we have all been there to some degree so semantics is as semantics does |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 22, 2008 18:22:55 GMT -6
just an idea, but this is what I meant; 0304.netclime.net/1_5/000/000/5da/b93/example.pptjust clean it up - so it is not so busy (distracting the eyes) or a hodge podge of ideas thrown together. Compartmentalize the offense / playbook. that is a *$%load of formations to digest and nothing really tying them together. What is the REAL 'base'? Just a suggestion, but if the TE is always oriented to the RIGHT, is there really a need to call it? Calling out what is not 'normal' (we will always be in 'right' unless we tag it with '_____'), to cut down on all the verbiage? Thanks, Brophy...Good stuff! I like that format much better. |
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Mar 23, 2008 9:54:27 GMT -6
wildcat, this thread is hard to follow with those massive images in your sig...
|
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 23, 2008 11:03:32 GMT -6
Huh? What does his picture of the Greatest Football team and coach every created have to do with the thread? I like the signature... reminds me of everrything that is good in this world! |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 23, 2008 16:22:44 GMT -6
wildcat, this thread is hard to follow with those massive images in your sig... Careful...Ron Zook might be reading your posts! |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 24, 2008 1:04:22 GMT -6
OK, guys. I leaned some things out and have taken a different approach. Would like to know if you guys think I am on the right track. www.savefile.com/files/1459563 |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Mar 24, 2008 6:49:55 GMT -6
Now that's hot!
Add me a button so that I can repeat the same slide... and you've got it!
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 24, 2008 17:14:58 GMT -6
Now that's hot! Add me a button so that I can repeat the same slide... and you've got it! Ahhh...good call, Khal! I like that! |
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Mar 24, 2008 18:23:53 GMT -6
Wildcat, I think it's fine. We all might do a thing or two here differently, but this works out well. The only note I had was you might want to make clear on your motions whether you motion into our out of the called formation. For example in "Z-Jet" and a "Pro Rt" formation (just a generic one), would Z start to the left in a twins look and motion into the Pro Rt (that's how I would do it), or does he start in Pro and Jet motion into twins? Your HC might have an opinion. Your example uses your "Rice" motion so the issue isn't directly addressed. The other Q is if you have a "move-the playmaker" call, say a Z call, then you call Z-Jet, is it the old Z or the new Z that is "jetting"? I.e. is R/3 still R/3 or is he actually Z now? I'm probably making this more complicated than it is but I'm trying to think like the typical Rhodes scholar everyone has  Otherwise it looks totally fine. The Y, Z, X thing is kind of a cumbersome way to do it, but I think your kids will get used to the fact that "Z" means R becomes Z and Z becomes R (or the kids playing those positions) will swap. I also think the powerpoint looks good and is understandable. Good luck with everything! |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Mar 24, 2008 20:33:28 GMT -6
Chris - Thanks alot! I appreciate you taking a look. The only note I had was you might want to make clear on your motions whether you motion into our out of the called formation. For example in "Z-Jet" and a "Pro Rt" formation (just a generic one), would Z start to the left in a twins look and motion into the Pro Rt (that's how I would do it), or does he start in Pro and Jet motion into twins? Your HC might have an opinion. Your example uses your "Rice" motion so the issue isn't directly addressed. Good point...I will clean that up. What I intended was to start in a particular formation and then the motion would create a different formation. The other Q is if you have a "move-the playmaker" call, say a Z call, then you call Z-Jet, is it the old Z or the new Z that is "jetting"? I.e. is R/3 still R/3 or is he actually Z now? I'm probably making this more complicated than it is but I'm trying to think like the typical Rhodes scholar everyone has Nope...I don't think you are making it complicated at all. If someone with your football acumen was confused by it, I'm sure that some of my kids would be confused by it. What I intended was that the "playmaker" call would basically switch those two guys. So, if we had a "Pro Z Jet" call, "R" would line up as "Z" and then go in motion because he is now the "Z". I will have to do a better job explaining that. Otherwise it looks totally fine. The Y, Z, X thing is kind of a cumbersome way to do it, but I think your kids will get used to the fact that "Z" means R becomes Z and Z becomes R (or the kids playing those positions) will swap. I'm up for any suggestions...Last year, we basically used the "Switch Jimmy with Joe on this play" approach and that didn't really work well...looking for a more efficient way to do it than that. The other thing is that this kid I talked about...he's a special kid...kind of player you are lucky to have made a handful of times in your career. So, I think he would be the only guy we would move around. If he's not in the game for some reason, there really is no reason, in my opinion, to move people around. But, I am interested to see how other coaches move people around. I have The Bunch Attack and like that system, but our head coach shot that down. I also think the powerpoint looks good and is understandable. Good luck with everything! Thanks again. I appreciate all the feedback. |
|
I liked it actually. The idea has got me re-thinking the use of playmaker pro for my playbook. 
