|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 3, 2017 8:08:55 GMT -6
While you can argue the (college) talent level is relative, meaning yes they have more talent but so do their opponents, what you cannot forget is that their talent level allows them to spend their time differently.
They have men that can physically execute whatever techniques they teach, and do so quickly and effectively. And they have a just as talented back up sitting behind him who can step up if not.
HS coaches have to play kids in positions they may be marginally suited for, use techniques that are appropriate for the physical skill sets they have in house because they can't go get another kid if this one can't get it done, and spend a LOT more time teaching fundamental movements to kids who may or may be able to physically execute such movement. For example, there isn't a D1 college player whose wrists/arms aren't strong enough to get hands on an opponent and lock out. Sure, they might not be able to control the other guy, or even catch the other guy, but when they get hands on, they can physically do certain things. Your sophomore player may not have strong enough hands/wrists to even hope to be able to do that.
You also have to take into account that the relative geometry is very different between HS and college. Their kids are faster than your kids, but the field is the same size. They can rely on speed to cover the field from different places than you can. That puts a premium on positioning/scheme for you to make sure the field is covered, while a D1 college coach doesn't need to worry as much about it. Yes, there are relative differences in speed between players in college, but the size of the field limits the effectiveness of that differential. Not to mention there is likely much less of a speed differential at the college level than HS. In HS you may have a 5.5 (40) DE trying to set the edge on a 4.5 kid, and that just isn't really going to happen in college - it would be a 4.5/4.6 DE up against a 4.3 kid.
|
|
|
Post by cwaltsmith on Feb 3, 2017 8:31:04 GMT -6
I agree that talent is relevant, however, There are some things that that big boys do that I cant do. For instance, Bama can sit there safety at 12 and buzz on the snap come down on the run bc he runs a 4.4 and can get to the LOS. My safety runs a 4.9 so I would have to play him at 8 and thus risk giving up deep pass. I listened to Mickey Andrews once on coverages. He talked about taking your best cover guy and letting him shut 1 side of field down and rolling coverage other way. I am not gonna have that guy most years. Thats why I like Glazier & this site. Several preakers that deal with stuff I do on daily basis.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Feb 3, 2017 8:55:47 GMT -6
The question that I find myself asking of coaches who say that they disregard ideas at a clinic because it doesn't fit their present situation is: Are you planning to retire after the 2017 season? There have been a lot of times when I've learned something that I knew we couldn't do this year but it turned out that we did use it down the road.
For example, there are routes that most HS QB's can't make but SOME of them can. Every QB in the NFL played in HS first. Maybe (Probably?) you'll never have a QB with that kind of arm but if you do don't you want to have weapons to maximize how you can use his talent?
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Feb 3, 2017 9:13:06 GMT -6
One of the big things college guys are doing that I haven't be able to is personnel groupings. I just haven't been at schools that have blessed with comparable backups that could situationally add an extra dimension to the scheme, especially offensively.
|
|
center
Junior Member
Posts: 490
|
Post by center on Feb 3, 2017 10:14:45 GMT -6
I will say that even though you cant apply a lot of the stuff the "big guys' talk about I am always amazed at the knowledge that they have. I have always left those sessions impressed with their knowledge and detail in teaching.
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Feb 3, 2017 10:24:06 GMT -6
I've shared this before but I'll share again since I think it pertains.
Had a guy (he was actually a HS guy) open his presentation with "Anybody who runs higher than a 4.5 40 can't lay corner for us".
I folded up my notebook & quietly listened but not very intently. I don't have 4.5 anybody. We work hard to get kids to 4.7/4.8.
So when I hear stuff like that I guess I become skeptical.
As for the higher level coaches, I think a lot of the DL, bench press a guy off of you type stuff works for 400 benchers but not necessarily as well in high school.
We work more old school pad level and rip & run stuff just b/c I think it suits kids who aren't as physically gifted.
JMO.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Feb 3, 2017 10:30:02 GMT -6
I listened to an SEC WR coach talk about cut blocking for 45 minutes once. He started the talk by saying "I know you guys can't do this, but here is how we do it". I didn't get up and leave because Chad Morris once told me that no matter who is talking and what they're talking about, you can usually pick up something that you can use. That wasn't the case here, but it is usually true. Was this at a high school clinic? Why would he talk about something he knew high school coaches LITERALLY can't do. (except Tx and Mass).
|
|
bdm
Sophomore Member
Posts: 104
|
Post by bdm on Feb 3, 2017 13:07:28 GMT -6
One of the things I tried but could not do what to flip a zone pressure based on the rb. good in theory and in practice but we F'ed it up in the games Yea we tried this, had it in real simple terms on what to do which guy should be going where, finally got to the point where I thought we could execute it in a game it went terribly wrong. I also like the guys in NCAA or NFL who run 1 LB in the box or slide both ILB to the edge of the box and be like from this formation or position we can play the run or the pass. My first thoughts are not the 3 wing-t teams we play and a conference that runs 70% of the time I gotta keep all kinds of people in box.
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Feb 4, 2017 19:00:22 GMT -6
I'm going to let you in on a little secret. If you want to find stuff that works, go to places that win consistently with lesser talent. If you are listening to the Alabama's and FSU's of the world, you aren't going to find much that can help you. I look to guys like Don Brown at Michigan, who's had a good defense pretty much everywhere he's been. Dave Aranda did a phenominal job at Wisconsin, as does Iowa and TCU used to but here lately has run afoul. Anyhow, visiting those guys is going to help you much more than going to see Saban, or Stoops. Wanna know where TGOG came from? It came from a Big 10 school that competes year in and year out for conference championships. They don't win many, but they are competitive, and that's all we're looking for when we don't have the Jimmy's and the Joe's! Duece You make a good point in that the top college programs can just out-athlete probably 60% of their schedule, and have depth that most of us can only dream of (even relative to competition). That's why I really enjoy listening to NFL coaches. They have more comparable problems to a HS coach in some ways. They are limited to a 53 man roster. The level of talent in the league is fairly even (I know that's arguable). They have similar issues with starters needing to be involved in special teams, having maybe 7 O-linemen who can really play, and a premium put on guys who can play multiple positions. IMO the coaching done at the NFL level is more nuanced and detail oriented than the college powerhouses because they kind of have to be. Very interesting comment ..never thought of it that way
|
|
|
Post by QBCoachDurham on Feb 6, 2017 10:48:03 GMT -6
I listened to an SEC WR coach talk about cut blocking for 45 minutes once. He started the talk by saying "I know you guys can't do this, but here is how we do it". I didn't get up and leave because Chad Morris once told me that no matter who is talking and what they're talking about, you can usually pick up something that you can use. That wasn't the case here, but it is usually true. Was this at a high school clinic? Why would he talk about something he knew high school coaches LITERALLY can't do. (except Tx and Mass). Yes, it was at a high school clinic. Made zero sense
|
|
|
Post by coachmonkey on Feb 6, 2017 12:49:20 GMT -6
Having DL cover a skill guy. I'm never going to have a guy that can drop from the line and cover a WR. Listened to Kevin Gilbride at a clinic and basically watched film of Eli Manning doing things I've never seen a HS kid do. Having a QB read more than 3 routes, or actually being able to protect that long. Running any kind of play that requires a "NFL throw" like a deep out from the opposite hash. A lot of times it's just the coach saying something along the lines of... "well the play is designed like this, but AJ Green actually did this and it worked" My kid is not 6'4", running a 4.5, with a 35+ vertical, 12" hands, and etc I don't think anybody at any level has a DL that can cover a skill guy. In the NFL they consider a LB on an RB a mismatch let alone a DL.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 6, 2017 12:54:58 GMT -6
Special Teams are the biggest one for me.
We struggled at kickoff for a few consecutive years. So our #1 point for the weekend (Glazier) was to make sure we learned something to help on kickoff.
I go and sit on on the special teams meeting from a BCS level special teams coordinator. Note pad is out. Ready to go. Starts off the talk with "We require our kickers to place the ball inside the 5 with at least a 6 second hangtime."
He then talked about the coverage team all having to be under a certain time (4.7 sounds about right). All 10 coverage guys.
Couldn't teach us to how help the kicker add hangtime either, I asked. (they recruit them that way)
I've tried a few more high-level special teams talks since then. Nope. Never going to help me. Even if we got the kicker, we wouldn't have the coverage team to do what they do.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 6, 2017 14:25:20 GMT -6
I saw a NAIA coach that has won multiple state titles speak a few years ago. He was talking about how they "had to switch over to the spread to "spread people out" and "use the whole field", because of lack of talent. I kept my trap shut but I thought this was a riot.
1. They had just gone to the semi-finals running their Pro-style offense and had been in the top 5 in offensive production that year.
2. They had (once again) had a top 10 recruiting class for NAIA...
3. The next year, the only change in their offensive scheme was the addition of Zone Read. Which wasn't terribly effective because they didn't have speed at QB. They hadn't been recruiting quick QBs.
4. Their passing attack didn't change much: they were running the same quick game and the same deep concepts.
5. They spent half of their games in 20 and 21 personnel.
6. They still ran IZ, OZ, Power and Counter but just did it out of the gun.
7. Their run/pass ratio didn't change. They had a dip in offensive production though because they ran Zone Read like crap for three games.
So many of the coaches bought into his spiel though...
|
|