|
|
Post by CS on Sept 19, 2021 6:18:18 GMT -6
Yes the final was 72-0. Not going to lie I love seeing Kelly brought down a peg but I still agree with some of his beliefs. Players win games is the #1 rule If players win games (which I believe as well) then why say that the most important things are playcalling, play design and "teaching" plays as opposed to saying the most important thing is developing players through fundamental skill work? I don't think any coach worth his/her salt doesn't think that having better players isn't the key to success. I am just confused as to why some seem to think that some of the things being discussed here aren't the factors that make better players. I never said that. My point this whole time is that some people do too much indo and not enough group and team. I never said play calling and eliminating indo all together was a smart move |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 6:33:57 GMT -6
If players win games (which I believe as well) then why say that the most important things are playcalling, play design and "teaching" plays as opposed to saying the most important thing is developing players through fundamental skill work? I don't think any coach worth his/her salt doesn't think that having better players isn't the key to success. I am just confused as to why some seem to think that some of the things being discussed here aren't the factors that make better players. I never said that. My point this whole time is that some people do too much indo and not enough group and team. I never said play calling and eliminating indo all together was a smart move Yes, I wasn’t directing those questions specifically at you. Those seem to be the philosophies Kelley believes in based on the interviews and discussion on this thread. I will say my personal philosophy is individual > team. The key is to not waste the individual time. From reading what I am sure is well over 100,000 posts on this board, I recognize there are many coaches out their who are quite likely to indeed waste it with meaningless work. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 7:36:13 GMT -6
Apparently against Campbell Kelley's team didn't need to worry about people questioning the no punt strategy, as his team turned the ball over 10 times (7 interceptions and 3 fumbles)
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Sept 19, 2021 7:43:24 GMT -6
Apparently against Campbell Kelley's team didn't need to worry about people questioning the no punt strategy, as his team turned the ball over 10 times (7 interceptions and 3 fumbles) Some of those may have occurred on 4th Downs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 7:54:00 GMT -6
ROMLAO! THAT IS FUNNY STUFF!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Sept 19, 2021 8:22:48 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Sept 19, 2021 10:51:42 GMT -6
I'm a firm believer that it is the following that matter... in order:
1) Player athletic ability - Recruiting is the most important skill for a college coach (a lot of HS programs too)
.....Alabama will beat ALL the bottom FBS and FCS teams 99.999999% of the time on athletic ability alone. Better dudes.
2) Skill development - Gotta take the 2* kid and develop him into a 3*, etc... (done in INDY)
.....Utah competes well (this year has been rough) even when they can't get any of those 4* or 5* guys. They develop the 1/2/3* guys they can get and make them better. They STRUGGGLE vs. teams with elite talent
3) Discipline - Penalties and decision-making. Some athletes can't learn how to not just "wing-it"
.....This is where my LSU Tigers struggle. They can get those 4* and 5* guys, but they can't seem to beat Alabama more than once every 5 years or so. Bama players seem to do the little things better than LSU does and it shows.
4) Playcalling - IF you have equivalent talent and IF you have developed that talent to the best of its ability and IF you have the discipline and execute according to the gameplan... THEN which plays get called can have an impact. I've seen spread teams go 0-10 running the exact same playcalls and scheme as the team down the street who goes 10-0 running the exact same thing... sometimes with a coach who was the OC at the 10-0 school the year before... he's a genius at one school, but goes 0-10 at the other. Same guy, same offense/defense, same philosophy, etc...
If my talent level is far superior to yours, I can make bad playcalls and run unsound schemes and get away with it. If your 3 LBs run 4.4 and my best RB runs 5.0 I can try to out-scheme you all I want, but odds are your 3 LBs can go the wrong way and still get to my RB before we can have a chance to win. Players win/lose games and I know that as a coach you have to take the blame for it politically, but when Helix high school had Reggie Bush at RB, Alex Smith at QB, and their 3 best players were lineman, they were gonna win regardless of what was called. They ran the Wing-T, and I know the run-heavy offenses get killed on this website a lot, but plenty of wingT teams go undefeated every year and plenty of spread teams go 0-10 every year.
Let it play out and what happens, will happen. I know what I believe will happen, but he has a philosophy, believes in it, and if it helps him get better players in recruiting... will lead to more wins eventually.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 17:38:08 GMT -6
Okay, so thinking along the lines of if someone was going to try this; HOW do you do it?
There was an established/connected coach that tried do this in SC a few years ago right after when Kelly 1st come to the spotlight in HS football. This coach got a job at a historically successful school, not always better than their competition, but a program that had been successful and was a team you needed to think about; it was one of those 'the last jobs you take' places.
He fell flat on his face. I wasn't close to the school but the "DA who would never punt on 4 & 25 at his own 10" was discussed in various formats. And a lot of it was just that 'who was discussing it'.
From what I gathered the 'old school' fans thought he was just being plain dumb by not following the traditional plan of football; play good defense, play field position, and be fundamental, etc.... (I don't personally agree with that line of thinking, though there is something to the phrase 'punt away and play another day"). I think this coach did get a bit stubborn on following this philosophy, but then again if you're going to piss into the wind then you've got to do it no matter how hard the wind blows.
So that brings me back to the HOW. How do you make this work? I know, I know,.... if you've go the Jimmys and Joes... But how do you structurally organize this approach? Do you throw all your best players on offense and gamble you're going to get that extra score, extra possession by the onside, the other team is going to blink? Do you even care about defense? How do you convince good defensive coaches to come work for you? How much time do you spend on special teams? Do you ever practice punt/develop a long snapper?
I faced a Double Wing coach that was similar in that he went on 4th a lot (not never punt though), would onside KO to steal a possession, etc.... but it was more of a measured approach to WHEN to do it, and he was usually working with lesser talent.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 17:45:52 GMT -6
Anyone that knows Kelley's history; does his defense send pressure and play C0 just about every play? I was watching highlight of this last game and at first glance that is all the defense seems to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Sept 19, 2021 17:50:53 GMT -6
I hated punting. Rarely did it. To the point that in a 12 game season one year we punted 7 times. 5 of those were during running clock victories that our JV was on the field and we didn't want to be super dicks. Even the years we punted, we usually did a 5 wide punt and would throw if you didn't cover our WRs.
Used to drive my DC crazy. Went for it once on 4th and 5 from our own 20. I heard him screaming from the press box. I ran wedge. Our FB went 80yds for a TD. I turned to the press box and took a bow.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 17:56:54 GMT -6
Okay, so thinking along the lines of if someone was going to try this; HOW do you do it? There was an established/connected coach that tried do this in SC a few years ago right after when Kelly 1st come to the spotlight in HS football. This coach got a job at a historically successful school, not always better than their competition, but a program that had been successful and was a team you needed to think about; it was one of those 'the last jobs you take' places. He fell flat on his face. I wasn't close to the school but the "DA who would never punt on 4 & 25 at his own 10" was discussed in various formats. And a lot of it was just that 'who was discussing it'. From what I gathered the 'old school' fans thought he was just being plain dumb by not following the traditional plan of football; play good defense, play field position, and be fundamental, etc.... (I don't personally agree with that line of thinking, though there is something to the phrase 'punt away and play another day"). I think this coach did get a bit stubborn on following this philosophy, but then again if you're going to piss into the wind then you've got to do it no matter how hard the wind blows. So that brings me back to the HOW. How do you make this work? I know, I know,.... if you've go the Jimmys and Joes... But how do you structurally organize this approach? Do you throw all your best players on offense and gamble you're going to get that extra score, extra possession by the onside, the other team is going to blink? Do you even care about defense? How do you convince good defensive coaches to come work for you? How much time do you spend on special teams? Do you ever practice punt/develop a long snapper? I faced a Double Wing coach that was similar in that he went on 4th a lot (not never punt though), would onside KO to steal a possession, etc.... but it was more of a measured approach to WHEN to do it, and he was usually working with lesser talent. I think there is a difference between being a dbl wing guy and saying "we will never punt" because of how the change in math matches up well with your offensive design and being a never punt guy throwing the ball all over the place. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 18:03:17 GMT -6
I hated punting. Rarely did it. To the point that in a 12 game season one year we punted 7 times. 5 of those were during running clock victories that our JV was on the field and we didn't want to be super dicks. Even the years we punted, we usually did a 5 wide punt and would throw if you didn't cover our WRs. Used to drive my DC crazy. Went for it once on 4th and 5 from our own 20. I heard him screaming from the press box. I ran wedge. Our FB went 80yds for a TD. I turned to the press box and took a bow. Quite right, like I mentioned, I get the DW/Power I/WingT teams that live the 'be tougher' gospel. I guess maybe I'm just not equating the two in the same line of thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Sept 19, 2021 18:11:26 GMT -6
I hated punting. Rarely did it. To the point that in a 12 game season one year we punted 7 times. 5 of those were during running clock victories that our JV was on the field and we didn't want to be super dicks. Even the years we punted, we usually did a 5 wide punt and would throw if you didn't cover our WRs. Used to drive my DC crazy. Went for it once on 4th and 5 from our own 20. I heard him screaming from the press box. I ran wedge. Our FB went 80yds for a TD. I turned to the press box and took a bow. Quite right, like I mentioned, I get the DW/Power I/WingT teams that live the 'be tougher' gospel. I guess maybe I'm just not equating the two in the same line of thinking. We weren't any of those offenses, although wedge was adapted from my days as a DW assistant. The biggest thing I notice is that soooo many teams don't stay on schedule offensively. By that I mean, they don't put themselves in a manageable 4th down situation. They do something stupid on 1st and 2nd down they randomly chose off their giant color coded lanyard menu that puts themselves in a really disastrous 3rd down. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 18:12:00 GMT -6
Okay, so thinking along the lines of if someone was going to try this; HOW do you do it? There was an established/connected coach that tried do this in SC a few years ago right after when Kelly 1st come to the spotlight in HS football. This coach got a job at a historically successful school, not always better than their competition, but a program that had been successful and was a team you needed to think about; it was one of those 'the last jobs you take' places. He fell flat on his face. I wasn't close to the school but the "DA who would never punt on 4 & 25 at his own 10" was discussed in various formats. And a lot of it was just that 'who was discussing it'. From what I gathered the 'old school' fans thought he was just being plain dumb by not following the traditional plan of football; play good defense, play field position, and be fundamental, etc.... (I don't personally agree with that line of thinking, though there is something to the phrase 'punt away and play another day"). I think this coach did get a bit stubborn on following this philosophy, but then again if you're going to piss into the wind then you've got to do it no matter how hard the wind blows. So that brings me back to the HOW. How do you make this work? I know, I know,.... if you've go the Jimmys and Joes... But how do you structurally organize this approach? Do you throw all your best players on offense and gamble you're going to get that extra score, extra possession by the onside, the other team is going to blink? Do you even care about defense? How do you convince good defensive coaches to come work for you? How much time do you spend on special teams? Do you ever practice punt/develop a long snapper? I faced a Double Wing coach that was similar in that he went on 4th a lot (not never punt though), would onside KO to steal a possession, etc.... but it was more of a measured approach to WHEN to do it, and he was usually working with lesser talent. I think there is a difference between being a dbl wing guy and saying "we will never punt" because of how the change in math matches up well with your offensive design and being a never punt guy throwing the ball all over the place. But WHAT is the math.... I know the math Kelley used to justify his never punt stuff..... but what is math used for this style of play? Is it -I'm coaching against 16/17 year olds and they're young, dumb, and full of c*m -I'm coaching against coaches that haven't discovered the 'math' yet -I'm creating pressure where there shouldn't be -I'm the greatest coach I know and I' going to prove it -  There has to be structure to the whole philosophy. Don't get me wrong, I've coached with/against the egotistical, arrogant HC that thinks he has the secret sauce. But what intrigues me is other than Kelley thinks he's got all the answers, HOW does he structure his program in order to try and achieve this product? |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 18:13:35 GMT -6
Quite right, like I mentioned, I get the DW/Power I/WingT teams that live the 'be tougher' gospel. I guess maybe I'm just not equating the two in the same line of thinking. We weren't any of those offenses, although wedge was adapted from my days as a DW assistant. The biggest thing I notice is that soooo many teams don't stay on schedule offensively. By that I mean, they don't put themselves in a manageable 4th down situation. They do something stupid on 1st and 2nd down they randomly chose off their giant color coded lanyard menu that puts themselves in a really disastrous 3rd down. Right and Kelley isn't in school of thought of 10 divided by 4 is 2.5. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 18:17:21 GMT -6
I think there is a difference between being a dbl wing guy and saying "we will never punt" because of how the change in math matches up well with your offensive design and being a never punt guy throwing the ball all over the place. But WHAT is the math.... I know the math Kelley used to justify his never punt stuff..... but what is math used for this style of play? Is it -I'm coaching against 16/17 year olds and they're young, dumb, and full of c*m -I'm coaching against coaches that haven't discovered the 'math' yet -I'm creating pressure where there shouldn't be -I'm the greatest coach I know and I' going to prove it - There has to be structure to the whole philosophy. Don't get me wrong, I've coached with/against the egotistical, arrogant HC that thinks he has the secret sauce. But what intrigues me is other than Kelley thinks he's got all the answers, HOW does he structure his program in order to try and achieve this product? What is his math? I was describing the 2.5 yards a play math. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 18:19:00 GMT -6
Apparently against Campbell Kelley's team didn't need to worry about people questioning the no punt strategy, as his team turned the ball over 10 times (7 interceptions and 3 fumbles) Here are some highlights. Note all the desperate-looking 4th down conversion attempts that end up as turnovers. I guess that’s part of Kelley’s strategy, too… an intentional INT may even truly be preferable lieu of a punt to Kelley. Presbyterian came in as 12.5 point underdogs, so while they were expected to be outmatched they weren’t expected to be humiliated 49-0 at halftime, either. The highlights truly do make them look like what happens when the worst team in your conference plays the best, though. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 18:30:13 GMT -6
Apparently against Campbell Kelley's team didn't need to worry about people questioning the no punt strategy, as his team turned the ball over 10 times (7 interceptions and 3 fumbles) Here are some highlights. Note all the desperate-looking 4th down conversion attempts that end up as turnovers. I guess that’s part of Kelley’s strategy, too… an intentional INT may even truly be preferable lieu of a punt to Kelley. Presbyterian came in as 12.5 point underdogs, so while they were expected to be outmatched they weren’t expected to be humiliated 49-0 at halftime, either. The highlights truly do make them look like what happens when the worst team in your conference plays the best, though. I was thinking that some of the INTs may have actually been defensive errors on 4th (intercepting and losing field position) after blb mentioned it, but couldnt find any evidence. Thank you for this. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Sept 19, 2021 18:44:10 GMT -6
We weren't any of those offenses, although wedge was adapted from my days as a DW assistant. The biggest thing I notice is that soooo many teams don't stay on schedule offensively. By that I mean, they don't put themselves in a manageable 4th down situation. They do something stupid on 1st and 2nd down they randomly chose off their giant color coded lanyard menu that puts themselves in a really disastrous 3rd down. Right and Kelley isn't in school of thought of 10 divided by 4 is 2.5. I don't think he has a math. He is probably of the mindset that every call he makes should go for 6 as long as his players don't {censored} it up. Which looks awesome when you have studs and can't out talent people. However, when you're not more talented, you get dick smacked 72-0. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 19:10:35 GMT -6
But WHAT is the math.... I know the math Kelley used to justify his never punt stuff..... but what is math used for this style of play? Is it -I'm coaching against 16/17 year olds and they're young, dumb, and full of c*m -I'm coaching against coaches that haven't discovered the 'math' yet -I'm creating pressure where there shouldn't be -I'm the greatest coach I know and I' going to prove it - There has to be structure to the whole philosophy. Don't get me wrong, I've coached with/against the egotistical, arrogant HC that thinks he has the secret sauce. But what intrigues me is other than Kelley thinks he's got all the answers, HOW does he structure his program in order to try and achieve this product? What is his math? I was describing the 2.5 yards a play math. I don't have the study at hand, but about 12-15ish years ago someone looked at the NFL's probability of TD scored if you tried to go for it, versus the probability how many point you give up if you punt or kicking a FG based on where you were on the field. If this was what Kelley was using ( and I'm not sure it was the basis for his thesis ) it was 1-based on a very predictable game 2-based on high level athletes 3-based on numbers that were very well recorded 4-base on a LONG line of historical reference and from what I gathered from the report was based on basically 1 thing; being able to effectively run the ball for a 1st down on 4th and .... From the data I saw and from what I could make sense of it, in any given game based on the statistics of what your offense could average each time it ran the ball; if you could expect to run for more than the 4th down to go distance, then you should go for it. So if you averaged 4 yard/rush, you should go for it on any 4th and >4. But the report also said you need to track how well you are rushing the ball as the game goes by to determine if that number is going to hold true. IE if we average 4 yards per rush going into the game - we start with that metric. But if in the course of our game this Friday we are only averaging 3 yards per rush, then we should use that as the metric. So you would need to track your in game average to decide if your are going to not punt. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 19:16:49 GMT -6
What is his math? I was describing the 2.5 yards a play math. I don't have the study at hand, but about 12-15ish years ago someone looked at the NFL's probability of TD scored if you tried to go for it, versus the probability how many point you give up if you punt or kicking a FG based on where you were on the field. If this was what Kelley was using ( and I'm not sure it was the basis for his thesis ) it was 1-based on a very predictable game 2-based on high level athletes 3-based on numbers that were very well recorded 4-base on a LONG line of historical reference and from what I gathered from the report was based on basically 1 thing; being able to effectively run the ball for a 1st down on 4th and .... From the data I saw and from what I could make sense of it, in any given game based on the statistics of what your offense could average each time it ran the ball; if you could expect to run for more than the 4th down to go distance, then you should go for it. So if you averaged 4 yard/rush, you should go for it on any 4th and >4. But the report also said you need to track how well you are rushing the ball as the game goes by to determine if that number is going to hold true. IE if we average 4 yards per rush going into the game - we start with that metric. But if in the course of our game this Friday we are only averaging 3 yards per rush, then we should use that as the metric. So you would need to track your in game average to decide if your are going to not punt. To which I think a lot of people are saying "None of that truly applies". If that is what Kelley based the direction of his coaching on, I think he may run into some issues when he isn't clearly the superior team. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 19:28:10 GMT -6
I don't have the study at hand, but about 12-15ish years ago someone looked at the NFL's probability of TD scored if you tried to go for it, versus the probability how many point you give up if you punt or kicking a FG based on where you were on the field. If this was what Kelley was using ( and I'm not sure it was the basis for his thesis ) it was 1-based on a very predictable game 2-based on high level athletes 3-based on numbers that were very well recorded 4-base on a LONG line of historical reference and from what I gathered from the report was based on basically 1 thing; being able to effectively run the ball for a 1st down on 4th and .... From the data I saw and from what I could make sense of it, in any given game based on the statistics of what your offense could average each time it ran the ball; if you could expect to run for more than the 4th down to go distance, then you should go for it. So if you averaged 4 yard/rush, you should go for it on any 4th and >4. But the report also said you need to track how well you are rushing the ball as the game goes by to determine if that number is going to hold true. IE if we average 4 yards per rush going into the game - we start with that metric. But if in the course of our game this Friday we are only averaging 3 yards per rush, then we should use that as the metric. So you would need to track your in game average to decide if your are going to not punt. To which I think a lot of people are saying "None of that truly applies". If that is what Kelley based the direction of his coaching on, I think he may run into some issues when he isn't clearly the superior team. right... but still what is the ______? and how do you 'sell' it? I can understand PC(U) giving him a shot; they are trying to remain solvent. So what is the 'math' or maybe rather the snake oil that makes the whole thing seem plausible. Again I've worked with/against these types and if you're close you can see the hoodoo if look. I'm no close to this, so I"m looking.... |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 19:30:53 GMT -6
I don't have the study at hand, but about 12-15ish years ago someone looked at the NFL's probability of TD scored if you tried to go for it, versus the probability how many point you give up if you punt or kicking a FG based on where you were on the field. If this was what Kelley was using ( and I'm not sure it was the basis for his thesis ) it was 1-based on a very predictable game 2-based on high level athletes 3-based on numbers that were very well recorded 4-base on a LONG line of historical reference and from what I gathered from the report was based on basically 1 thing; being able to effectively run the ball for a 1st down on 4th and .... From the data I saw and from what I could make sense of it, in any given game based on the statistics of what your offense could average each time it ran the ball; if you could expect to run for more than the 4th down to go distance, then you should go for it. So if you averaged 4 yard/rush, you should go for it on any 4th and >4. But the report also said you need to track how well you are rushing the ball as the game goes by to determine if that number is going to hold true. IE if we average 4 yards per rush going into the game - we start with that metric. But if in the course of our game this Friday we are only averaging 3 yards per rush, then we should use that as the metric. So you would need to track your in game average to decide if your are going to not punt. To which I think a lot of people are saying "None of that truly applies". If that is what Kelley based the direction of his coaching on, I think he may run into some issues when he isn't clearly the superior team. And from some on this thread apparently he wasn't necessarily the clearly superior team always.... You don't into that 'clearly superior' position without some leverage. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2021 19:40:46 GMT -6
To which I think a lot of people are saying "None of that truly applies". If that is what Kelley based the direction of his coaching on, I think he may run into some issues when he isn't clearly the superior team. right... but still what is the ______? and how do you 'sell' it? I can understand PC(U) giving him a shot; they are trying to remain solvent. So what is the 'math' or maybe rather the snake oil that makes the whole thing seem plausible. Again I've worked with/against these types and if you're close you can see the hoodoo if look. I'm no close to this, so I"m looking.... When you say "sell it" do you mean sell it to the potential employer? You don't need a ____ , or math or snake oil. He has lots of wins. So they are giving him a shot. If he wins great. If it is a disaster, they fire him (or he leaves) and it is just like any other coaching job. Mike Norvell is 0-3. Helton Just got axed at USC. I will be surprised if Orgeron coaches 20 more games for LSU. Scott Frost's coaching seat is melting. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 19:45:37 GMT -6
right... but still what is the ______? and how do you 'sell' it? I can understand PC(U) giving him a shot; they are trying to remain solvent. So what is the 'math' or maybe rather the snake oil that makes the whole thing seem plausible. Again I've worked with/against these types and if you're close you can see the hoodoo if look. I'm no close to this, so I"m looking.... When you say "sell it" do you mean sell it to the potential employer? You don't need a ____ , or math or snake oil. He has lots of wins. So they are giving him a shot. If he wins great. If it is a disaster, they fire him (or he leaves) and it is just like any other coaching job. Mike Norvell is 0-3. Helton Just got axed at USC. I will be surprised if Orgeron coaches 20 more games for LSU. Scott Frost's coaching seat is melting. How do you 'sell' it to the people that are inside the program? If you are the DC, OL coach, player, recruit, etc..? In the programs that I have been a part of that have been successful, there is a 'this is how we do _____' and if you can't fall in line with the _____ you will have to leave. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 19, 2021 19:47:45 GMT -6
Again, HOW do you do it? Is it the philosophy: never punt, onside, etc..... or is there something behind that? Maybe to better ask is what is the WHY?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2021 9:50:31 GMT -6
Again, HOW do you do it? Is it the philosophy: never punt, onside, etc..... or is there something behind that? Maybe to better ask is what is the WHY? When he started the never punt and always onside kick, Kelley justified it by citing what seemed like the study you referenced earlier. A couple of years ago he was getting some national attention for an idea he seems to have dropped: trying to run as many plays as possible with multiple people touching the ball. I’m not sure how that worked for him, but he cited some study he’d seen that claimed you have a higher probability of scoring on plays like hooks and laterals, reverse passes, etc. Part of me is wondering if that study actually existed or if part of the “hoodoo” is just claiming “studies show” justification for whatever the heck he feels is a brilliant new idea. After spending enough time in education, it’s easy to become cynical about that line. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 20, 2021 10:33:40 GMT -6
Again, HOW do you do it? Is it the philosophy: never punt, onside, etc..... or is there something behind that? Maybe to better ask is what is the WHY? When he started the never punt and always onside kick, Kelley justified it by citing what seemed like the study you referenced earlier. A couple of years ago he was getting some national attention for an idea he seems to have dropped: trying to run as many plays as possible with multiple people touching the ball. I’m not sure how that worked for him, but he cited some study he’d seen that claimed you have a higher probability of scoring on plays like hooks and laterals, reverse passes, etc. Part of me is wondering if that study actually existed or if part of the “hoodoo” is just claiming “studies show” justification for whatever the heck he feels is a brilliant new idea. After spending enough time in education, it’s easy to become cynical about that line. Studies in education show that most educational studies need to be restudied |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 20, 2021 11:38:26 GMT -6
When he started the never punt and always onside kick, Kelley justified it by citing what seemed like the study you referenced earlier. A couple of years ago he was getting some national attention for an idea he seems to have dropped: trying to run as many plays as possible with multiple people touching the ball. I’m not sure how that worked for him, but he cited some study he’d seen that claimed you have a higher probability of scoring on plays like hooks and laterals, reverse passes, etc. Part of me is wondering if that study actually existed or if part of the “hoodoo” is just claiming “studies show” justification for whatever the heck he feels is a brilliant new idea. After spending enough time in education, it’s easy to become cynical about that line. Studies in education show that most educational studies need to be restudied hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! now my students think I'm an even bigger idiot |
|
|
|
Post by newhope on Sept 20, 2021 13:35:32 GMT -6
He was pretty vocal about hating individual time when he coached here in high school. Some of it makes total sense to me though. Tackling and blocking are total “want to” things and if you don't want to then you will never be good at it no matter how many drills you run. And to his point about tackling Barry Sanders he's 100% right and it has been stated on here many times. If the opposing teams running back is physically superior to your guys how do you practice that? Yeah, but using Barry Sanders is not a good example. It's like talking about not defending jump shots because Michael Jordan, or working on rebounding because Wilt Chamberlain. |
|
