2 platoon?

If you're going to platoon you have to have the numbers. Remember that there need to be subs for each platoon...D & D/score/time remaining etc.

Numbers are the trick. Most years we get close, but there are always some guys that go both ways.

Wel like to get as may kids on the field as we can, so platooning is a good way to try and go.

my first school did this. hs of about 600 kids.
new coach came in for my 2nd year, program that was never successful. implemented 2 platoon to get numbers up.

i don't remember how many we had to begin (i was a jh coach at the time), but i think it was around 40-50 (hs).
i later moved into the hs program and became the dc; i think we had about 80 kids playing in hs then.

when numbers were up, we used around 3-4 both ways? (i forget exactly how many).
made the playoffs 2 years in a row, when they had only made the playoffs once in the school history.

I do like limiting 2 way starters on special teams... Got this from a guy at glazier clinic one year. He assigned every position on every team a point. If you started on a team you got a point. Offense and defense starters got 2 points. The only way a guy was able to get more than 4 points was a unanimous vote by coaching staff. He said it helped keep kids fresh got more kids involved and helped develop kid by giving game reps to them

on cross-training -
all of our kids had an offensive and defensive position that they practiced at.   if you started on offense, you were probably the 2nd at a defensive position.

guys that should have started both ways, on the side of the ball they didn't start, ended up not being as good as the guy they should have been playing for, simply because of reps.
even though they were actually better athletes.
and maybe because they didn't really expect to play on that side of the ball.

Yeah this absolutely happens...for example we have a TE who could probably start at OLB or ILB over the current guys but we've had him specialize more on offense because the drop off between him and the backup there is a lot bigger than the dropoff from him to the guys that start at ILB/OLB.  He's still a quality backup but he's able to spend way more time getting better at what his primary focus is.  The economics teacher in me always comes back to marginal benefit vs. marginal loss.

In 2012 and 13 when we were really good and had 50-60 kids in the program, I should have platooned more during the regular season to keep guys fresher. I think that would have helped us develop kids better and kept us fresher for the playoffs.

Instead, I was obsessed with just abusing everyone on our schedule and I think it hurt us long term.

By the time I left in 16, there was no way we could as we had 30 kids, but they were virtually all freshmen and Srs.

never coached an nfl kid.

did have one ot who was at a d1 college, was 6'7, 330, good feet, very smart, who was probably gonna be.
but his dad died when he was in college and he went back home to run the family business.

Every situation is going to be different and unique, but what's your rough benchmark for numbers before you'd be comfortable 2-platooning?

Long time ago in galaxy far away, I worked at a rural school with no football tradition. An out of state HC came in with a history of 'rescuing' programs.

One of his things was that if we could get 15 players in each grade level 10-12 (HS had just varsity and JV) that makes 45. With 45 you can two platoon and everybody is on the 2 deep roster.

I never got to see it come to fruition, b/c he left before Christmas and I graduate college and moved on.  Interesting idea/rationale though.

The program that I played in and started coaching in my last two years at college two platooned. We were a small AAA school in SC, AAAA was largest classification. We were always smallest 1 or 2 in AAA, about 800 back then. We would have 45-50 on the team. Football was a big deal in the community. We won 4 state titles in the 90s and played for another one. Beat the 4A state champs one year and 6A defending champs out of AL.

Our coach was a big believer in it. Didn't notice when I played, but did when I coached there. Tons of games were close at half, but we would start pulling away in the third quarter. I think a big aspect of it, and an idea I have taken with me, is that if I really coach fundamentals, technique, understanding of the game and have a very good strength program I can make my lesser guys that start on one side of the ball as good as your two-way player, especially when he gets tired.

We would play an occasional guy both ways especially WR/DB. But we played offense first and were a physical option team. That way we could keep the ball and control the game. He told me that when we run 60 plays, it is usually a big offensive night because they are worn out at the end. We would spot play our good linemen on defense for short yardage or goal line. Everyone practiced on both sides of the ball, half and half. It worked for sure. At some other programs that were bigger, we would basically stay divided up but have a period once a week to cross-train guys and then play a little bit each day during team. This also helps you feel more comfortable putting your better players on special teams because they get some time to rest during the game.

One reason other teams played some many people both ways is that they weren't making the average kids good and so they found it necessary to play people both ways. That being said, I agree with when you have a stud, play them a few snaps on the other side.

That's about where we are. Those big guys are going to wear out faster. Ideally we'd get at least the front 7, but sometimes the dropoff is too steep somewhere.