|
|
Post by blb on Oct 29, 2020 10:36:21 GMT -6
If you were a head coach, which would you be more likely to change first and why - your offense, or your defense?
Please no senior citizen ("depends") replies.
|
|
|
|
Post by chi5hi on Oct 29, 2020 11:08:51 GMT -6
I changed from Depends to Fit Right briefs. They're less offensive and better defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Oct 29, 2020 11:14:31 GMT -6
I changed from Depends to Fit Right briefs. They're less offensive and better defense. Did coachpithy hack your account? |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Oct 29, 2020 11:16:20 GMT -6
I will say defense because it's reactive in nature
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Oct 29, 2020 11:40:39 GMT -6
I changed from Depends to Fit Right briefs. They're less offensive and better defense. Yeah, that's not what I meant. But you knew that. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Oct 29, 2020 21:08:06 GMT -6
If you were a head coach, which would you be more likely to change first and why - your offense, or your defense? Please no senior citizen ("depends") replies. I've never been a HC but what the hell. I'd say offense. The reason I'd say that is that defense is changing all the time anyway as new offensive trends emerge. You can have your defense evolve without making a wholesale change. |
|
|
|
Post by cfoott on Oct 29, 2020 21:11:35 GMT -6
Defense... Aaaaaand weight room.
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Oct 29, 2020 21:32:12 GMT -6
Defense, because I am a defensive guy foremost and thats what I hang my hat on.
But the depends answer is somewhat valid here; if the defense they had was solid and the offense a mess then that makes the decision for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Oct 29, 2020 21:35:50 GMT -6
Well we just changed our OFFENSE this year.
Defense should be very systematically flexible IMO. Only big issue is are you a 2-High team or 1-High team & even then, both should have an answer / systematic way to get into the other coverage structure.
Offensively we chose to be done with Triple Option / Flexbone because we felt like we would struggle too much if our 1st string QB went down...switched to a Power, Counter, Dive & Sweep based offense from a 2x1 / 22 personnel set so if our QB would go down we’d still have an effective way to move the ball. Meanwhile, we’ve kept our QB1 healthy & have an absolute STUD WR so our guys have set some single season passing records in just a 6 game schedule because our offensive focus has allowed more time devoted to the passing game!
|
|
|
|
Post by realdawg on Oct 30, 2020 5:52:35 GMT -6
I would say defense. I have experienced more problems getting personnel to fit certain defensive structures. For example, we switched from a 4-2-5 quarters concept to 3-3 cov 3 a couple years ago bc we didnt have enough depth on DL without having to play OL both ways, we didnt have enough safeties to play 2 high and have any depth, and we liked having 3 Lbs based on some problems we were having.
What we were doing on O we still have the kids to fit. So we didnt need to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Oct 30, 2020 7:08:19 GMT -6
I would be more inclined to change the offense than the defense for two reasons, number one I know offense much better than defense and I feel like I can adjust accordingly. Number two, it's very difficult (IMO) to go in and (potentially) change a kid's reads/reactions that he's repped for (potentially) multiple seasons.
Having said that, it also depends on the fundamentals that are in place defensively. I've been around d-line coaches before that didn't teach block reactions, their main emphasis was get off the ball, drive your man back, and go make a play. Needless to say, if this was how the defense was previously run, that would be #1 on the chopping block.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluedevil4 on Oct 30, 2020 7:22:48 GMT -6
If you were a head coach, which would you be more likely to change first and why - your offense, or your defense? Please no senior citizen ("depends") replies. Probably offense. The worst programs I've seen usually have an abysmal offensive system/coaching. For programs that have been losing a long time with the same OC/coach, a change in offensive style or system (even if it's not really a different system, just a better way of doing the old one) can seem like a huge breath of fresh air to a program. The worst team I played against in high school for years had the Supe's son as the head coach (with no prior coaching experience), and he lined up in 4-5 wide every play and threw the ball, with absolutely no structure or progression. They were awful. Their next head coach was a Wing-T veteran. They didn't become a winning program, but because they were consistent and simplified on offense, they became a team you actually had to prep for. They were no longer just throwing 30+ lob passes like it was a game of 500. I'm a Michigan State fan, and when JLS was the coach, fans were frustrated about the lack of a running game. When Dantonio took over, I remember how elated myself and fans were that we'd actually be trying to run the ball with physicality again. In the first play of the Dantonio era on offense, they lined up in an I-formation, and I remember the crowd going wild over it (a formation JLS never used). The formation signaled to the fan-base that it was time to move forward. Georgia Tech did a similar in their spring game when they moved on from Paul Johnson: The offense lined up in the flexbone, the motioned into a gun-empty set, and the crowd went absolutely rabid. Not saying changing defense first is the wrong idea, but in terms of sending a message to a program/community, a change in offense seems to be a lot easier to see and respond to. EDIT: I should add, while changing the offense is one thing I would do, on the coaching/management side of things, the first thing to change is the development system/program: Look at what is going on in the off-season, and how the staff previously facilitated player development and buy-in. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 30, 2020 7:34:54 GMT -6
blb In what setting are you asking the question? A new coach coming into a program? Or someone who has been at the helm for several years and is seeing things he/she doesn’t like.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Oct 30, 2020 7:46:10 GMT -6
blb In what setting are you asking the question? A new coach coming into a program? Or someone who has been at the helm for several years and is seeing things he/she doesn’t like. Anyone who has been a HC for awhile whether going into new situation or having been at current school. My question is not about a situation or conditions. It's as a coach, which would you personally be more likely to change. |
|
|
|
Post by Down 'n Out on Oct 30, 2020 7:52:19 GMT -6
Never been a HC but id say Offense.
Defensively it doesn't matter too much if youre a 3-4, 4-3, 4-4, 5-2, 5-3, etc. I would start with Cover 3 and try to keep everything in front of us, expand and grow from there.
Offensively I would want to run the ball from 31 personnel and would want to run the plays I believe in.
Maybe its just me but a 3-4 that likes to rotate a Safety down into the box is very similar to a 4-4, as where 11 personnel based in the Buck Sweep series is dramatically different that 31 personnel running Buck Sweep.
|
|
|
|
Post by center on Oct 30, 2020 12:36:36 GMT -6
Whichever side needed a change.
I wouldn't recommend a coach changing a side of the ball until it became evident that something wasn't working and you could see what was lacking. It should hit you in the face.
Other than that you are changing for the sake of change and might be veering (sorry for the wordplay BLB) further off direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by s73 on Oct 30, 2020 12:46:03 GMT -6
Defense definitely.
I have more of a philosophy on how i want to play offense.
Unfortunately, my "defensive philosophy" seems to be changing w/ all the RPO, spread to run stuff that has exploded in recent years.
We used to be so much about stopping the run back in the day & if you did see a spread team they were usually very pass oriented & you just gave up the short stuff KNOWIMG they would get bored eventually & start launching for what I used to call "glorious incompletions".
Now....they run the ball, screen like crazy & and are willing to take what you give them in the apss game which lends to trying to find ways to not give them much of anything which lends itself to change, etc.
Ironically, w/ spread being so prevalent, my run 1st style has even more appeal to me and I don't se that changing anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by planck on Oct 30, 2020 13:46:28 GMT -6
Offense, but only because I view our defense as a moving target anyway since it's necessarily reactive.
|
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Oct 31, 2020 16:15:14 GMT -6
And now they suck.
|
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Oct 31, 2020 17:12:10 GMT -6
Offense...
You don't have a kid who can throw worth a damn, you better get into something that doesn't require that.
You can play decent defense year-in and year-out by just knowing and reading fits and having kids who like football.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Oct 31, 2020 19:27:57 GMT -6
If you were a head coach, which would you be more likely to change first and why - your offense, or your defense? Please no senior citizen ("depends") replies. If I'm a sitting HC and I feel the need for a change, it's easy: defense. Defense isn't about scheme as much as it is about how you coach up the whiskey drinkers on your team. I'm all about 11 MASOB. If your best defenders have 5 DLs, 1 LB and 5 DBs, then you know what your defensive structure will look like. If your best are 3 DLs, 5 LBs, and 3 DBs then you might have the same structure but you'll call a very different game on each Friday night. I thought about this 25+ years ago and still think it's true; you could install a new defense in the first day of fall camp and by the time the games really count, you could be operating at 85%+ efficiency. Defense is about who wants to get to the football with a bad attitude as much as it's about who handles final 3 in a coverage scheme. Defense is about how nasty you can mess up the point of attack. It's whomever makes the tackle wins the battle. Offense is more about building relationships. Offense is working with Legos; you have to build it over and over with a plan. It's like a dance routine. Each participant has to know where all the other participants are going and when they should be there. Offense takes time and repetition. Offense is about getting the prima donna the ball in the right spot at the right time. Offense is a line dance at the wedding rehearsal. Defense is a bar room brawl on a random Tuesday night. |
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Nov 1, 2020 9:07:52 GMT -6
I've been in the same offensive system since 2003 and had the same philosophy since 1995.We evolve on offense. Defensively I have totally switched at least 3 times. Always looking to match my personnel or schedule and I don't have as set a system of beliefs on defense. Or at least I didn't. Now recently I have more things I believe in but they are not system specific.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Nov 1, 2020 12:44:56 GMT -6
It seems that most of the guys who say they'd change defenses consider themselves to be offensive guys. I think that most defensive guys believe, as I do, that meeting new challenges doesn't require a drastic change in defensive schemes. If you have a flexible system that you understand you can always find an adjustment or wrinkle. "Play defense not defenses".
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Nov 1, 2020 13:00:23 GMT -6
It seems that most of the guys who say they'd change defenses consider themselves to be offensive guys. I think that most defensive guys believe, as I do, that meeting new challenges doesn't require a drastic change in defensive schemes. If you have a flexible system that you understand you can always find an adjustment or wrinkle. "Play defense not defenses". This is an excellent post. |
|
|
|
Post by jg78 on Nov 1, 2020 15:33:36 GMT -6
they weren’t exactly winning titles. They went to a couple of Orange Bowls (winning one) and beat Georgia 2-3 times. Let me know when that happens again. |
|
|
|
Post by justafbcoach on Nov 2, 2020 12:05:59 GMT -6
In the most generic answer to the question, I'd say the offense (I'm a current OC).
|
|
ssm
Freshmen Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by ssm on Nov 2, 2020 12:07:09 GMT -6
I'd have to say offense. You can't come into a situation, say a new HC position & think that you know the personnel. You have to sit & evaluate what you have first before doing anything. Defense is a little easier fit because of the type of personnel that you will have. Offensively, if you're a spread guy & there's no speed, you can't run that type of offense unless you incorporate some RPO & WCO principles into it.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 5, 2020 15:42:08 GMT -6
Defense... I'd rather stop people, struggle on offense and win than light up the scoreboard and lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Nov 6, 2020 9:51:49 GMT -6
Honestly, there's going to be a lot of issues on both sides of the ball if you walk into a struggling program. IME, the worst issues are on the defensive side of the ball and not just from a schematic stand point. The defensive philosophy, fundamentals, practice structure (etc) are a dumpster fire. And, this is typically because they've spent season after season repping their offense while not practicing chit for defense (i.e. "WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE ATHLETES TO PLAY GOOD DEFENSE!!".
|
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Nov 6, 2020 13:42:33 GMT -6
Defense... I'd rather stop people, struggle on offense and win than light up the scoreboard and lose. If you only give up a score or two & hang around you always have a chance to pull off the win with just a big play or two! |
|
