"K.I.S.S." or "K.I.L.L."

Not to have a total cop-out, but here goes:

K.I.S.S. is a mindset/attitude, K.I.L.L. is (mostly) personality traits/soft skills.  Our defense is KISS, our offense is KILL.  Our offense is very learnable for most kids because we have great words and phrases that help our kids learn and retain the info well.  Our defense is quite simple, we try to do as little as possible so that we can get good at it (technical proficiency).

If I had to chose one, it'd be KILL, but I think it's important to have a degree of KISS to everything so that mastery is (theoretically) possible.

I think the best thing you can do is meet somewhere in the middle. You don’t want a playbook that is so confined you limit your ability to adapt to various factors. On the other hand you don’t want a playbook that your players don’t understand. I think if you can scaffold your teaching and create overlapping concepts and principles you’re on target.

If something is learnable and able to be executed, does it matter if it is considered "simple"?

As for KILL - I think being a teacher has helped me in this. Making it easy to learn definitely is key and using mnemonics and chunking/blocking techniques really helps imo.

In this context, yeah. I mean “simple” as less-detailed and more reliant on kids “getting it” with reps.

The way I see it, “KILL” would be moreso like installing TCU’s coverage system. Not necessarily a “now let’s line up and play football” thing, but covers all the bases and is easy to adjust after installing the bulk of it. You run the risk of miscommunication/confusion, but you’re usually in position to defend most of what HS offenses can throw at you.

“KISS” would be spot drop Cover 3. Nothing wrong with it, but a lot more is put on the kids in my opinion. I once read on here, “Cover 3 aligns to everything and defends nothing”. Not sure if I completely agree with that, but the sentiment is true. You never have to worry too much about checks and confusion, but your players better play fast and be in the right spots

I’m a Veer coach, label that how you want offensively.
Defense our players have rules that they follow.
Ex: OLB is force if play comes to them, look to cut #1 if pass. They may align in different positions so to speak, but they follow these rules regardless of our defensive adj with alignment.
I agree with what was said above. Simplicity is different coach to coach, it’s a matter of opinion for the most part.

In my mind "likeable and learnable" refers to how well players can retain the knowledge of what their tasks are and recite them in the classroom or walk thrus. I've worked with lots of coaches who used all kinds catchy acronyms, mnemonic devices, and other techniques to help the kids learn lots of different plays and responsibilities.

Unfortunately, games arent decided by how well players can recall their responsibilities before the play starts or draw it up on the whiteboard. Its often dependent on how fast they react and well they are able to execute a specific technique. Simply 'learning' a technique or responsibility is rarely the key, being able to repeatedly execute it under duress is.

I think the KISS perspective is that there are only so many techniques and responsibilities a kids can execute consistently well under the aforementioned circumstances. Sure they can learn a lot more, and know what to do, but its not just knowing its doing. Now, what that number is....well thats another debate.

I always like to look at how these coaches actually do with their teams. There's never a shortage of guys who become "famous" or "popular" because they know a few buzz words the profession is enamored with, but...

I think it was Lou Holtz who said every coach should have to coach on a bad team so they know what it's like to really coach. Terrible memory so that may only partially match up with what he said, but that was his basic point. 

Been there...

And been there too!

I think where I am at has turned me into a K.I.L.L guy? When I got here I thought offensively we did too much. We have way too many drop back passes, quick passes, and run "plays" (the run plays are really just variations on zone) to be successful. I was mostly concerned about having such a large dropback menu.

It works though. The WRs and QBs like slinging the ball around. We throw a lot at them, but they learn it and succeed because they enjoy doing it.

Defensively I thought we were a clusterf*ck. We're a multiple D, run every front known to man basically. The staff here has done a good job making sure rules cross over to all fronts and looks. Our defensive calls are also incredibly wordy. Basically we're telling players where they have to go.

I agree with this sentiment for the most part.  I do however want to see some film of the concept the coach is talking about especially if their record isn't the best.  If the concept has had success against comparable looking talent and comparably well coached kids the concept is definitely something I am more likely to consider using.

As far as what that looks like on film, I think "average" or better coaches know when something is successful because of quality coaching or if it is simply a case of superior talent.

Likeable is not always whats best for your team , i feel learnable would be what any coach or teacher would be able to start with given the IQ and talent of the class, so basically when teaching you usually assess your class and start out basic or simple and go from there trying to make the ideas likeable, so kiss is the process while trying to make the atmosphere kill, i guess you kill them with a kiss