|
Post by blb on Jan 27, 2017 8:14:22 GMT -6
i dont think this is a generalization, i think its fact. kids cant catch, why you throwing the ball? qb cant throw, same thing. you dont run read option with a frail qb, that wont make the read or cant run/take a hit. you dont run I formation pound the rock, with small OL kids, no fullback etc. so yes skill is relative to scheme. square peg round hole philosophy. you change O/D to fit your kids. dont force it, it wont work. maybe in spurts, but in the long term no.
So you change your offense (and-or defense) every year depending on your personnel?
What about your Sub-Varsity teams - do they run whatever fits them in a given season?
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Jan 27, 2017 8:41:33 GMT -6
i dont think this is a generalization, i think its fact. kids cant catch, why you throwing the ball? qb cant throw, same thing. you dont run read option with a frail qb, that wont make the read or cant run/take a hit. you dont run I formation pound the rock, with small OL kids, no fullback etc. so yes skill is relative to scheme. square peg round hole philosophy. you change O/D to fit your kids. dont force it, it wont work. maybe in spurts, but in the long term no.
So you change your offense (and-or defense) every year depending on your personnel?
What about your Sub-Varsity teams - do they run whatever fits them in a given season?
not necessarily. but to a degree yes. the sub varsity teams are different. the 9th grade team, run what works for you. this last fall they ran single wing. had some decent linemen, a rb that could go, a couple good blocking fb kids and a nice qb. we were not going to force spread run on them, it wouldnt have worked. now they could have ran the wing t or some pro I stuff. but the 9th grade coaches know single wing. on defense they ran a bastardized version of what we did, but in premise it was the same thing. to be perfectly honest, the HC took some single wing stuff and included it in our spread run game. was a nice package. a full scale change no, but additions/subtractions to your schemes based off of the kids. and there could be a full scale change with some transfers, upcomers, etc.... not going to hold down the 1800 yd rb that moved into my school by keeping the 5 wide package going. just like an in game adjustment you make, you make an offseason adjustment to scheme based off of who you have. last yr my qb graduated, we were 2x2 spread. 50 50 run pass. cant force a new qb in that spot, as the jv qb wasnt the same type of kid. the incoming 9th grader was though. so they were going to run my spread run/pass offense. varsity wise, we were going to pistol triple option with best 4 athletes in our ball carrier spots(qb, rb, wings/slots). i didnt have very good oline kids coming back, but I had 2 that were tough and smart. they were the strong side and would flip sides. this was a full scale change out of necessity. get the athletes ball in space. 9th grade team would not be doing this, until they moved up in a year or 2. never got to see it to fruition, thats another story.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 27, 2017 8:54:58 GMT -6
I'm talking about the generalization that a scheme cannot be run because of the types of players. It is referenced often and several times on this thread. For example, in terms of covering ground, a D1 defender needs to occupy an area quickly because the other guy is also a D1 athlete. Not so much at the HS level. i dont think this is a generalization, i think its fact. kids cant catch, why you throwing the ball? qb cant throw, same thing. you dont run read option with a frail qb, that wont make the read or cant run/take a hit. you dont run I formation pound the rock, with small OL kids, no fullback etc. so yes skill is relative to scheme. square peg round hole philosophy. you change O/D to fit your kids. dont force it, it wont work. maybe in spurts, but in the long term no. Most of your examples are to the extreme side.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Jan 27, 2017 9:25:08 GMT -6
I got my first coaching job at my alma mater with the man who came in as HC when I was a Senior.
He's a good man, was a good coach, but he changed offenses too much to my way of thinking.
At various times he ran Run 'n Shoot, Slot-I, two-TEs with Flanker and split backs, Power-I, T, Slot-T, and Veer.
Had two winning seasons in 11 years.
In the last "big school" league I coached in there was a school who changed offenses virtually every year - went from Wing-T to Spread to Pro-I to Veer.
And their Sub-Varsity teams ran something other than Varsity and different from each other.
They struggled to have success, in fact Varsity recently went through six losing seasons in a row.
Philosophically I believe you have got to have a system and Vertical Continuity in order to have a chance to be consistently successful.
Adjust, yes. Adapt, yes. Change, no.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Jan 27, 2017 9:27:36 GMT -6
i dont think this is a generalization, i think its fact. kids cant catch, why you throwing the ball? qb cant throw, same thing. you dont run read option with a frail qb, that wont make the read or cant run/take a hit. you dont run I formation pound the rock, with small OL kids, no fullback etc. so yes skill is relative to scheme. square peg round hole philosophy. you change O/D to fit your kids. dont force it, it wont work. maybe in spurts, but in the long term no. Most of your examples are to the extreme side. lol uh ok when i say cant catch, i should have said statistically he drops more than he catches. or cant throw should be, he misses a lot of wide open wr on short, medium and long routes. he does a great hand off, but cant throw bubble screen very accurately. his drop back footwork is decent, but to throw a slant is a struggle. those arent extreme, those are real examples. if kid cant throw well, you dont run a passing offense. but maybe he is a runner or can option pitch the ball. is that too extreme too? wr cant catch well, but man he can cover. he should be a DB. oline are small, maybe power isnt a good offense, but maybe angle blocks(wing t type down blocking) or option blocking (5 blocking 4 or 3) is more realistic. skill is or should be relative to scheme.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Jan 27, 2017 9:35:07 GMT -6
I got my first coaching job at my alma mater with the man who came in as HC when I was a Senior. He's a good man, was a good coach, but he changed offenses too much to my way of thinking. At various times he ran Run 'n Shoot, Slot-I, two-TEs with Flanker and split backs, Power-I, T, Slot-T, and Veer. Had two winning seasons in 11 years. In the last "big school" league I coached in there was a school who changed offenses virtually every year - went from Wing-T to Spread to Pro-I to Veer. And their Sub-Varsity teams ran something other than Varsity and different from each other. They struggled to have success, in fact Varsity recently went through six losing seasons in a row. Philosophically I believe you have got to have a system and Vertical Continuity in order to have a chance to be consistently successful. Adjust, yes. Adapt, yes. Change, no. i completely agree. we will run the football, pound teams into the dirt. now lets figure out how we are going to do it. do we have the tailback? do we have the oline? what other skill positions do we have that need to be apart of our philosophy? i coached 1 year at a school that was a various formation based offense for a couple years. they ran alot of i, and a little bit of spread. they ran power out of I formation alot. so as I came in to take the OC job, i explained to the HC that i run power too, out of the gun-1 back power- and its just as successfull as under center. with all the various motions and ways to block power, it worked very very well. coach asked me several times to line up in the I and run power. we did and was good, however he did tell me after the season that the way we ran the ball out of the spread and pounded people was much more impressive than the year before they ran I power as their base play. that is a philosophy thing, but you have to have the jimmies n joes to do it. we could have ran wing t or whatever the hell we wanted, that many good players. not all teams are created equally. adapt to who you have, adjust your schemes, and can be an overhual.
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 27, 2017 10:46:00 GMT -6
Most of your examples are to the extreme side. lol uh ok when i say cant catch, i should have said statistically he drops more than he catches. or cant throw should be, he misses a lot of wide open wr on short, medium and long routes. he does a great hand off, but cant throw bubble screen very accurately. his drop back footwork is decent, but to throw a slant is a struggle. those arent extreme, those are real examples. if kid cant throw well, you dont run a passing offense. but maybe he is a runner or can option pitch the ball. is that too extreme too? wr cant catch well, but man he can cover. he should be a DB. oline are small, maybe power isnt a good offense, but maybe angle blocks(wing t type down blocking) or option blocking (5 blocking 4 or 3) is more realistic. skill is or should be relative to scheme. Yes, and you are also describing kids that won't play period in most cases. I'm talking about the kids you have starting and playing in whatever system you employ. I also agree that you aren't going to take a 6'4" gunslinger and force him to play as an option QB in the flexbone. We are referencing 2 different concepts.
|
|
|
Post by mnike23 on Jan 27, 2017 11:02:03 GMT -6
lol uh ok when i say cant catch, i should have said statistically he drops more than he catches. or cant throw should be, he misses a lot of wide open wr on short, medium and long routes. he does a great hand off, but cant throw bubble screen very accurately. his drop back footwork is decent, but to throw a slant is a struggle. those arent extreme, those are real examples. if kid cant throw well, you dont run a passing offense. but maybe he is a runner or can option pitch the ball. is that too extreme too? wr cant catch well, but man he can cover. he should be a DB. oline are small, maybe power isnt a good offense, but maybe angle blocks(wing t type down blocking) or option blocking (5 blocking 4 or 3) is more realistic. skill is or should be relative to scheme. Yes, and you are also describing kids that won't play period in most cases. I'm talking about the kids you have starting and playing in whatever system you employ. I also agree that you aren't going to take a 6'4" gunslinger and force him to play as an option QB in the flexbone. We are referencing 2 different concepts. 18 hours ago option1 said: I'm talking about the generalization that a scheme cannot be run because of the types of players. It is referenced often and several times on this thread. For example, in terms of covering ground, a D1 defender needs to occupy an area quickly because the other guy is also a D1 athlete. Not so much at the HS level. this is what you said. scheme and generalization. now your back tracking on what you said. I am answering your question. if you said something different, please tell us. and those guys that wont play, you must work at a super star 22 D1 or D2 school kids, because we all have some kids that cant catch, cant block, not fast and they still see some time on the field. at least at my school now, and every school i have ever coached at, we have sat at the meeting room table and tried to figure out how to get billy off the field, but bobby and johnny behind him are worse. at least billy has heart....
|
|
|
Post by option1 on Jan 27, 2017 11:13:18 GMT -6
Yes, and you are also describing kids that won't play period in most cases. I'm talking about the kids you have starting and playing in whatever system you employ. I also agree that you aren't going to take a 6'4" gunslinger and force him to play as an option QB in the flexbone. We are referencing 2 different concepts. 18 hours ago option1 said: I'm talking about the generalization that a scheme cannot be run because of the types of players. It is referenced often and several times on this thread. For example, in terms of covering ground, a D1 defender needs to occupy an area quickly because the other guy is also a D1 athlete. Not so much at the HS level. this is what you said. scheme and generalization. now your back tracking on what you said. I am answering your question. if you said something different, please tell us. and those guys that wont play, you must work at a super star 22 D1 or D2 school kids, because we all have some kids that cant catch, cant block, not fast and they still see some time on the field. at least at my school now, and every school i have ever coached at, we have sat at the meeting room table and tried to figure out how to get billy off the field, but bobby and johnny behind him are worse. at least billy has heart.... Not back tracking, explaining as there seems to be a misunderstanding. Fantom and blb didn't seem to have an issue. Simply, I'm not going to discount something that might help our team because when Alabama does it their kid is moving at a faster rate than mine. This is all within reason of course and your points are valid. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by grouchy71 on Jan 27, 2017 12:11:17 GMT -6
Man, after reading the title of this thread, I was hoping it was going to be a post about a bar fight between an OC and DC in a "who has the chalk last" argument on a napkin. Agreed. Thread title>thread content. Sad.
|
|
fugulookinat
Junior Member
"Eye see DEAD people!"
Posts: 437
|
Post by fugulookinat on Jan 27, 2017 16:21:09 GMT -6
Here's what I've discovered over the years that will consistently give you the best information when it comes to clinics.
1. Go to the most popular clinics near your high school. 2. Go to the bar inside the hotel that is hosting the clinic. 3. Drink beer and talk ball with the hundreds of high school coaches that are attending the clinic.
By following these simple steps, you too can obtain information from quality coaches, who are working with similar athletes, and are seeing similar offenses and defenses. You don't even have to pay a registration fee to go.
Have a nice day!
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Jan 27, 2017 17:18:20 GMT -6
Here's what I've discovered over the years that will consistently give you the best information when it comes to clinics. 1. Go to the most popular clinics near your high school. 2. Go to the bar inside the hotel that is hosting the clinic. 3. Drink beer and talk ball with the hundreds of high school coaches that are attending the clinic. By following these simple steps, you too can obtain information from quality coaches, who are working with similar athletes, and are seeing similar offenses and defenses. You don't even have to pay a registration fee to go. Have a nice day! Sounds like a great plan...although if the school pays for your Glazier Season Clinic Pass, you might as well go to a few of those sessions as well.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jan 30, 2017 8:05:13 GMT -6
I have walked out of several over the years. It usually boils down to--someone else is talking that I would rather see or, what they are talking about isn't a fit for our program.
|
|
|
Post by CoachMikeJudy on Jan 30, 2017 13:42:58 GMT -6
I got my first coaching job at my alma mater with the man who came in as HC when I was a Senior. He's a good man, was a good coach, but he changed offenses too much to my way of thinking. At various times he ran Run 'n Shoot, Slot-I, two-TEs with Flanker and split backs, Power-I, T, Slot-T, and Veer. Had two winning seasons in 11 years. In the last "big school" league I coached in there was a school who changed offenses virtually every year - went from Wing-T to Spread to Pro-I to Veer. And their Sub-Varsity teams ran something other than Varsity and different from each other. They struggled to have success, in fact Varsity recently went through six losing seasons in a row. Philosophically I believe you have got to have a system and Vertical Continuity in order to have a chance to be consistently successful. Adjust, yes. Adapt, yes. Change, no. I 100% agree. I think many people look at offenses and categorize it based on the formation/plays being run. IMHO, this is just a small part of what "makes and offense." I truly believe that how your staff "problem solves" the offense is really what ties to the namesake. I'll give an example: I worked for a guy who was a wing-t guy. His philosophy was to run the 20 series (Buck/Trap/Waggle) and the 80 series (Belly/Belly Keep Pass/Tackle Trap) and really establish the primary run of each series by protecting it with the other plays in the series. This makes sense to me. Where we differ in philosophy was with situations: what do you do against Cov 0 blitz? how do you deal with defenses that play different fronts/structures? etc. His idea for attacking the blitz was to pin it and run outside or trap it and get north/south...not once did he consider attacking the 1v1 coverage on the outside. It worked for him (sometimes). Fast forward to where I have evolved- We run a few formations with no TEs. I feel as though the TE is becoming extinct in my area- I haven't seen a "real" TE in years here AND I hate how adding a player to my box allows the defense to do the same and "muddy" the waters/picture for blocking assignments (more on that in a minute). Everything...our entire offense is built around our IZ RPO. It's IZ with give/pull key, possible throw off the backside alley player, and open-access throws out the frontside pre-snap. That play is called 75% of the time (out of several formations of course and at different tempos). It is essentially triple (really quadruple) option football. Our formations and spacing is all about putting people on islands. Our WR are typical between Top of #s and sideline. This allows us to put our slots in 1v1 matchups a lot and affords us easy reads/throws against dudes that can't cover our best guys (slots). Keeping the box clean is a key to the offense. We teach IZ vs 3 front, 4 front, and Stack. If the box looks any different pre snap, then that means there is leverage/numbers/matchup issues for the defense on the edge and we go there...we don't give the ball on IZ and slam into a crowded box...non-negotiable. Vs blitz we attack it- screens, sprintout, quick game. We don't try to "split it" hoping their guy doesn't make the tackle...to me, that's a losing mentality when you put your success lying solely on your opposition making a physical/mental mistake. We attack the structure of the defense...attack areas they can't play or where they lack numbers/angles etc.
|
|