|
Post by 44special on Apr 7, 2024 16:01:51 GMT -6
things that might help (or not) -
1) run an offense, not a collection of plays
an oft-repeated phrase in the coaching world. i could be wrong, but "modular" to me sounds like being set up so you could run anything at any time. never known that to work.
2) john robinson, a highly successful COLLEGE coach a long time ago, said that his guys could only run about 12 plays total, run and pass combined, and EXECUTE them well. they could run more, but execution went to hell. don't know how many you want to run, but even nfl offenses usually only have 3-5 running plays.
as for formations, most of the teams i coached with (34 years as a hs coach) ran only a few formations. the wing-t teams i was with usually ran 2 - "right" and "left". not much motion, either. the bone and veer teams were similar. even the spread team i was with didn't run a lot of formations and plays. all of those teams were very successful.
EXECUTION is the part that counts, more than anything.
3). the worst fb player in the world is a confused fb player. makes them hesitant, which is a fatal characteristic on a fb field.
4). this has been mentioned - the stupidest, worst fb player you have on the field has to be able to understand and execute what you want to be successful. and in my experience, sometimes that kid is pretty stupid and bad.
none of this is real specific. just a different way of saying what many on here have been trying to tell you.
hopefully, you won't take any of this the wrong way. we're all just trying to help.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 7, 2024 16:18:17 GMT -6
Because my aim is to implement a modular play call system, and it's just a matter of advice as to what's the maximum number of tags that could be expected to put on a play, so I can determine just how long to attempt. I'm not scuttling the idea of a modular play call system, since others have done it, just determining its limit. I'm not taking "0" for an answer! This is ultimately the problem. Rather than your aim being to coach 10 year olds to a successful football season, your aim is as stated above. That is the source of the pushback from all the coaches. They are trying to steer you on the right path. Let them. Instead of pursuing the limit of the modular system, explore a different approach.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Apr 7, 2024 16:49:49 GMT -6
A simple, Declarative Sentence is typically four to six words.
That should be enough for 10-year old football players.
|
|
|
Post by 44special on Apr 7, 2024 16:56:35 GMT -6
in another post, you said all you wanted to discuss was the way it was called (paraphrasing somewhat).
unless i'm mistaken (which my ex used to tell me was always) - the way you call it has to be able to cover anything in your offense.
the play call you gave seems to indicate that there's a lot in that package. or at least that's the impression i got. and i think that's the impression everybody else gets, too.
maybe that's why most of the answers seem to center on cutting that package down and greatly simplifying your offense.
and- i think you said you wanted to impress the guy that runs the youth/club(?) program with your modular system.
i don't know anything about nj football, or club programs, or who might be running such a thing (i picture either an old ex fb coach or a fat bald-headed guy wearing a suit and smoking a cigar). just consider that it's possible that he might get the same impression we did.
or he may think it's the greatest thing since toilet paper (which is a pretty great thing).
anyway, hopefully you'll figure out what you need to. good luck.
|
|
|
Post by 44special on Apr 7, 2024 16:57:50 GMT -6
A simple, Declarative Sentence is typically four to six words. That should be enough for 10-year old football players. and hs kids.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 8, 2024 8:50:20 GMT -6
hard to answer that. first of all, i know nothing about youth football, and i never coached 10 year olds. second, i don't know your offense, formations, etc... figuring out good ways to simplify it would require some familiarity. what could work in one system might not help in another system. looks like you already figured out one way to shorten it. i would say, keep thinking of other possible ways. one of the problems i see might be eliminated simply because of my unfamiliarity with youth football. do you send the plays in? does the qb have to call it? or is the coach in the huddle at this level to call the play? having a qb that can handle repeating that call at that age, and kids that could take the play in to relay the play call without screwing it up would be pretty unusual, i would think. it needs to be something they can easily remember and repeat. our jh kids at any school i coached at could not have done that. not sure our hs kids could have. i would think - formation, (tag if needed), play (tag if needed), snap count. and the formation and play tags would not be all that frequent. so usually, the call would be formation, play, snap count. unless you just planned on using a particular formation or play tag a lot for that particular opponent that week, to take advantage of something they do. and that may be what you're doing. again, those are things i don't know. and, just my opinion - if you have all that in your offense, it sounds to me like way too much offense for that age. i would suggest throwing a lot of it out. again, that's just me. i operate on the kiss principle. also, keep this in mind- my earlier reply was mostly just me being a smartass and poking fun at myself, because i'm retired and bored. you may have a lot better suggestions in all the other replies, but i couldn't stay awake reading thru all of them. but you almost never go wrong going the simple route. regardless of the level you're coaching He’s just gonna argue with you and do it his way. Doesn’t really matter that your points are good. No, I'm looking for informed advice. I've never had a team where the play calls were done modular style -- except partly modular if you go by the digits of a 3-digit play call. But I've often thought they should have been modular, especially if we were flipping formation left and right. The pro is that modular allows the players to easily extract what they need for their assignment, and allows a complete range of the possible combinations. The con is that many of the possible combinations would never be used. But I'm thinking we'd want to use more combinations than you might think. For instance, I'd like to use motion away from the play as a diversion a lot. (For instance, rocket motion away from belly -- sacrifice the lead blocker for misdirection.) And since the default for most of the tags would be null, only a few possible play combinations would be lengthy.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 8, 2024 11:44:30 GMT -6
He’s just gonna argue with you and do it his way. Doesn’t really matter that your points are good. No, I'm looking for informed advice. I've never had a team where the play calls were done modular style -- except partly modular if you go by the digits of a 3-digit play call. But I've often thought they should have been modular, especially if we were flipping formation left and right. The pro is that modular allows the players to easily extract what they need for their assignment, and allows a complete range of the possible combinations. The con is that many of the possible combinations would never be used. But I'm thinking we'd want to use more combinations than you might think. For instance, I'd like to use motion away from the play as a diversion a lot. (For instance, rocket motion away from belly -- sacrifice the lead blocker for misdirection.) And since the default for most of the tags would be null, only a few possible play combinations would be lengthy. You want too many tools. Everyone keeps telling you this. pick a few tools and do it. And then see how it works. You can add more next year- But planning for all of this in year one of your first ever attempt at doing this is just stubborn to the detriment of the children Trust me, I think every coach here “gets it”. We would all love to be able to have vast tools to use. I am struggling with the same thing on my quest. SOOOO MANY fun possibilities. But I know if I try and execute- we will be less successful than if I keep it much smaller I have choices to make. One of the cruel irony of those that enjoy the schematics of football is that when you have the ability to be extremely multiple, most of the time your talent doesn’t require it and when your talent is such that you want to try to use many different tools, they usually are not good enough to execute.
|
|
|
Post by 44special on Apr 8, 2024 14:05:10 GMT -6
No, I'm looking for informed advice. I've never had a team where the play calls were done modular style -- except partly modular if you go by the digits of a 3-digit play call. But I've often thought they should have been modular, especially if we were flipping formation left and right. The pro is that modular allows the players to easily extract what they need for their assignment, and allows a complete range of the possible combinations. The con is that many of the possible combinations would never be used. But I'm thinking we'd want to use more combinations than you might think. For instance, I'd like to use motion away from the play as a diversion a lot. (For instance, rocket motion away from belly -- sacrifice the lead blocker for misdirection.) And since the default for most of the tags would be null, only a few possible play combinations would be lengthy. You want too many tools. Everyone keeps telling you this. pick a few tools and do it. And then see how it works. You can add more next year- But planning for all of this in year one of your first ever attempt at doing this is just stubborn to the detriment of the children Trust me, I think every coach here “gets it”. We would all love to be able to have vast tools to use. I am struggling with the same thing on my quest. SOOOO MANY fun possibilities. But I know if I try and execute- we will be less successful than if I keep it much smaller I have choices to make. One of the cruel irony of those that enjoy the schematics of football is that when you have the ability to be extremely multiple, most of the time your talent doesn’t require it and when your talent is such that you want to try to use many different tools, they usually are not good enough to execute. agreed. one of the hardest things in coaching is keeping all the things you want to do in check, and paring it down to a practical, usable package that kids can remember and execute. because we ALL want the capability to be extremely multiple and do lots and lots of things. making some of those choices are like pulling teeth.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 8, 2024 14:18:08 GMT -6
Doesn't seem like that many tools to me.
Formation with or without a split end -- depending on who's in, and mostly to adjust to who's on the roster. Line balanced or unbalanced; unbalanced is with the pulling guard over and the split end on the long side. And then these can be normal (strong right) or flipped (everyone mirrored left-right). So it's 6 formations, but most of the players just have to know who they're next to. Only one guard will be a puller -- the same one, wherever he's lined up.
3 motions -- 2 for the wingback, 1 for the halfback. Of course these are mirrored too, so you might count them as 6.
2 snaps -- handed or thrown (blind). Snap can be on "set", "go", or a number.
1 form of handoff. That's significant, because in a somewhat similar offense years ago I taught 3 different handoff forms.
4 pass routes, but no position will need to know more than 2.
Blocking is where I'll splurge, with several forms: hands, shoulder, and side of body for crab blocking. I might teach a cut below the waist too.
One form for overhand passes, and another for pitch and shovel.
And then blocking steps, for which I'll have a few forms, depending what they can handle.
Mixing and matching may make it seem like a lot of tools. Defense is where I expect to have more individual tools.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 8, 2024 14:40:21 GMT -6
You want too many tools. Everyone keeps telling you this. pick a few tools and do it. And then see how it works. You can add more next year- But planning for all of this in year one of your first ever attempt at doing this is just stubborn to the detriment of the children Trust me, I think every coach here “gets it”. We would all love to be able to have vast tools to use. I am struggling with the same thing on my quest. SOOOO MANY fun possibilities. But I know if I try and execute- we will be less successful than if I keep it much smaller I have choices to make. One of the cruel irony of those that enjoy the schematics of football is that when you have the ability to be extremely multiple, most of the time your talent doesn’t require it and when your talent is such that you want to try to use many different tools, they usually are not good enough to execute. agreed. one of the hardest things in coaching is keeping all the things you want to do in check, and paring it down to a practical, usable package that kids can remember and execute. because we ALL want the capability to be extremely multiple and do lots and lots of things. making some of those choices are like pulling teeth. Most of those choices will be a lot easier because they needn't be made all at once, but as the situation arises. Some choices will be dictated by others. So for instance if we find out neither the 1st nor 2nd string player at a position can throw the ball without hitting his own helmet, all the pass plays from that position are dropped. If a starter usually trips over himself on his first step to either the left or the right, then either the regular or the flipped version of that play is out the window. If players at a couple positions can't help but false start if the snap count goes past "go", then all the motions and motion-dependent plays are dropped. We'll start practicing the thrown snap along with the handed snap from the beginning, but the thrown snap plays don't go in until we're ready -- and if that's never, so be it. if the pulling guard is over the weight limit for ballcarriers, and doesn't look like he'll make that weight all season, all the plays for him to carry the ball are moot. And forget about putting something in because it looks good against a particular opponent -- our league bans scouting!
|
|
|
Post by 44special on Apr 8, 2024 14:50:59 GMT -6
had no idea there was a weight limit for ball carriers.
guess it makes sense with the little guys.
if you go to and watch somebody else's game, is that scouting? how would they enforce that?
|
|
|
Post by 44special on Apr 8, 2024 18:33:48 GMT -6
questions/suggestions - not meant as an insult, but i get the impression that philosophically we are different, so it may sound like it. and i have no idea what formations/offense you're running, so these are general thoughts that may be off base.
questions -
how do you call with or without a split end in your play call?
your normal formation - (strong right) - is your pulling guard on the right? is it with a split end or without?
what i'm getting at - could you have a base formation in which you don't even call the formation, and only need a formation call when you vary from that, split/tight(whichever isn't your base), flip or unbalanced (which i would call over - it's just easier)? that would simplify somewhat.
not big on motion myself, but that may be based on the fact that it changed very little for my defense. i looked at it as more of an extra opportunity to get an offensive penalty than anything else. and that i have no idea what formation you're basing out of, and what defenses you face, so no idea of how useful it might be.
the teams i was with had motions in the playbook, but even the offensive coaches who were all gung ho about having lots of neat stuff in the package and wanted to use all of it eventually ended up using it very little motion. including the spread team.
are the defenses you face balanced? do they flip sides? can they even recognize formations and adjust? that's something jh/hs kids have to work on. motion to pull someone on defense from the play is pointless if they don't move at all (i mention this because i have seen it on friday nights). if they're balanced, not sure moving from numerical superiority on one side to numerical superiority on the other side will make any difference. unless maybe you're trying to pick on one weak player.
again, a philosophical divide here - not crazy about the 2 snaps. just sounds like an opportunity for mistakes. yes we had gun and under center, but in those cases, the gun snap was the majority, so fairly consistent. the under center wasn't a hard thing for the center to learn, especially since they did it a lot in jh/fresh/jv.
when you go from majority under center to gun stuff, it can be quite an adventure, and not in a good way. and that's in hs.
one handoff form sounds good. had no idea there was more than one handoff form. having more also sounds like opportunity for mistakes.
i'll leave the different blocking forms for o-line people; i have thoughts, but it's not my wheelhouse.
if it sounds like a lot of my philosophy is eliminating possible mistakes, yes, it absolutely is. seen too many games where teams beat themselves with mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 9, 2024 4:55:53 GMT -6
if you go to and watch somebody else's game, is that scouting? how would they enforce that? Based on complaints. When I started with this league, it was that no electronics would be allowed to record other teams, so technically you couldn't exchange HUDL clips. Then they saw me with a clipboard taking notes on other teams' warmups, and they extended the ban to all scouting. I think the idea is that they want everyone's coaching staff to concentrate on teaching their own team, and not to sacrifice anyone to reporting on others.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Apr 9, 2024 5:41:20 GMT -6
how do you call with or without a split end in your play call? It's not in the play call, but is in the play book. Before they huddle, you'd already have the correct players on the field. The pulling guard would be on the left. The left end is split. Yes. As I wrote, the default "call" for everything would be a null tag, i.e. silence. So yes, there's a "normal" formation for which no words need be spoken. Wing T, slightly "flavored". Most of the teams in our program, and in our league, start using man in motion around 9U. I want to use rocket (with the HB) and jet (with the WB) with a motion start. Mostly our teams have used WB motion for belly sweep and counters. Some motion the WB to be like a HB for buck sweep series the opposite way. When we've had more passing -- and many teams in our league base out of shotgun or pistol at all ages -- motion can be to change receiver strength. I don't expect to use motion for all those purposes, but just to say it's feasible with kids that age. My experience in coaching some places has been that some defenses do, some don't. However, in this league they mostly do. There've been times where we've been unbalanced on offense by mistake, when the ends get the formation call wrong. (We've been using a 3 digit system, the first indicating the formation.) It usually wasn't a pass play, but if we wound up in "end over", there's no eligible receiver numbering, it's all by position, so tackle eligible plays are possible. With the number of officials we have, an ineligible receiver downfield call (because both nominal ends lined up on the same side) is almost impossible to draw. However, given our running success on many of those accidental unbalanced line plays, I've wanted to put in unbalanced on purpose -- but guard over, rather than end over, to take advantage of the positioning of the pulling specialist and have a possibly better blocker on the edge. Everything is an opportunity for mistakes. In sidesaddle T, the jet/fly is supposed to be a high speed reach-take exchange, where I coached the WB to "steal" the ball from the QB. I also coached belly to use a different, hip-to-hip handoff form from the dive handoff, which was more ball-extended.
|
|