|
Post by dubber on Jul 26, 2007 14:03:39 GMT -6
....BUT WE ARE GOING TO LIVE AND DIE WITH MAN TO MAN. die you shall
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Jul 26, 2007 14:04:27 GMT -6
thats bs, if I cant cover a kid what makes you think I can tackle him? thats just silly. if the kid is so talented that we cant jam and run with him for three seconds why should i expect that we can allow him space to run thru and still tackle him??? gimme a break. wow ... indeed
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 14:07:41 GMT -6
Hey I like my chances. It comes down to what the kids believe in . I know if I have 1000 reps at playing the bunch in man and they have 250 reps of playing their bunch against man that my chances of succeeding are good. We are pressing every day, every down...how much time of their practice is spent on beating the press? seriously? an hour a week?...maybe...
to think that you have to keep something "in front of you" to have a chance is faulty. If we know we are giving them "fade" and we work every day on defending fade...we have had 1000 reps a month vs fade and they have had maybe 250 reps at running fade vs man...again , I like my chances.
Its not like every olineman makes his block or every rec can get off the jam, every qb can feel the rush or every rec catches every pass. heck no.
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Jul 26, 2007 14:12:05 GMT -6
I think the biggest problem in this thread is a lack of perspective...
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 14:17:06 GMT -6
I think the biggest problem in this thread is a lack of perspective... or just an idea that ones opinion is better than anothers.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 26, 2007 14:17:47 GMT -6
I think the biggest problem in this thread is a lack of perspective... agreed. this makes a lot of sense running against 12 year olds. In this thread, folks are giving you a tempered perspective of what actually happens at the Varsity level. A counter point is vehemently aruged with the theoretical assumption that all things are equal between that would work with 12 year olds has got to work for 18 year olds....and that things will work out of sheer WILL....it will work because I WANT it to work.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 14:18:53 GMT -6
I think the biggest problem in this thread is a lack of perspective... agreed. this makes a lot of sense running against 12 year olds. right, because no one would dare run man to man at the pro level
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jul 26, 2007 14:35:44 GMT -6
it's not that man can't be run or shouldn't be run ... i think the whole thing started by someone saying "run man every snap" ... and a question was posed such as what adjustment would be made should the man coverage begin to be exploited through the course of the game .... the answer was still "man, man, man" ... then, it all went downhill.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 26, 2007 14:39:14 GMT -6
From a spread pass-offense perspective, you build your passing game to beat the heavy dropping zones, and then you work on the things you can do to their press-blitz-man defenses, every time. The goal is to set it up so that if a team wants to play press-man-blitz every play, or even a ton of Cover 1, I will hurt them so bad that it will not be viable. Then, all your pass packages actually are designed to decimate the zone defenses that you have actually FORCED them to play. This is not to say they can NEVER blitz, but what you have done is eliminated it as a constant or every down strategy. Then it does become a cat and mouse game where they try to slip in a well disguised blitz here and there when you aren't ready to make them pay for six. This is one reason why I don't like just relying on "hot reads." If the other team goes all out blitz against me, I really, really would like to score a touchdown and I don't just mean by throwing a 2 yard pass and expecting my guy to break 4 tackles. Anyway, this is the trick of the spread offense (and many others). You actually force the defense into things because the alternatives are so devastating to them. Then it becomes a kind of game-theoretic "one-off" kind of deal where both sides try to steal a play or two there, and the true chess match begins. What have I just described? I described the story of the run and shoot. They destroyed all teams that played the Calande blitz-press man for twenty years to the point where teams gave up. THEN the chess match actually began, and the shoot, the zone blitz, the spread, and the spread gun-run game, and all the other multiple-fanciness have been with us since. did anyone else READ this!?this isn't rocket science.....Is there anything fundamentally wrong in Chris' beautiful discourse here? He lays it all out there, by the numbers. THIS is what happens.
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Jul 26, 2007 15:15:25 GMT -6
Just my opinion, but if a defense stays in any one coverage the entire game, regardless if its zone or man, then they are rowing up stream. It might work in small rivers, but it gets tough when there are waterfalls... Don't get me wrong, I like pressure (we are a 335 and jump into a bear front vs 2/3 back teams) I like to blitz and pressure. I believe heavily in applying pressure from BOTH sides of the ball. I think our offense of no huddle, multiple formations, motion, shifts and a diversified attack pressure the heck out of defenses...... Defensively, I have no qualms about putting 11 guys within 5 yards of the LOS against teams that don't, won't or can't throw the ball.....its great against ONE dimensional teams when you KNOW what they are going to do. But I feel against multiple teams that you have to show multiple looks, maybe not 10 coverages but at least 2-4 coverages...0,1,2,3 works for me. I'd equate it to your offense, I'm sure you have more than one play, since at least 4 plays are needed to win a championship, right...LOL
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 26, 2007 15:32:00 GMT -6
I obviously can't state how effective calande will be with his man philosophy; but I can comment on my own experiences.
-Played an Air Raid team 2 years ago, DC decided to live in man and bring 6 all day. We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. 1 quarter and 3 touchdowns later, we came to the conclusion that living in man wasn't a good idea. We were the better team in affair; at least in terms of athletes.
- Four years ago, the HS my MS teams fed into decided to live in various man coverages all year. Cover 0 and Cover 8 were staples. Played the worst team in the state that year (4 wins in 5 years) and they switched over to the spread that year. They hung 45 points on the defense after averaging 14 a game in the 4 games prior to that. Good thing the offense put up record numbers and they managed to win.
- Watched an Air Raid team hang record breaking numbers (almost 600 yards passing) on a team that didn't move out of Cover 0, blitz heavy defenses all night. They bumped and jammed all night long; didn't do any good; someone was open eventually. And another note; they brought 6 50+ times, got 1 sack. This was a playoff game I might add.
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jul 26, 2007 15:39:51 GMT -6
Coachcolande - I think you've stated that you're now the OL coach at a high school after spending several years as the HC at the middle school level. I'm curious to know how your current HC and DC feel on this issue of Full time Man to Man. Not trying to be a jerk - we all have our own opinions based on our experiences - but is your new high school team using these defensive principles that you obviously believe in?
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 15:46:35 GMT -6
Coachcolande - I think you've stated that you're now the OL coach at a high school after spending several years as the HC at the middle school level. I'm curious to know how your current HC and DC feel on this issue of Full time Man to Man. Not trying to be a jerk - we all have our own opinions based on our experiences - but is your new high school team using these defensive principles that you obviously believe in? Doesnt matter what we do at the HS level right now, I have coached frosh ball and have assisted the varsity every friday night. Currently IM an Oline coach and Lbers coach, and while Im not the HC, I believe in everything our DC does and support his ideas. that said, when I have my own shot Ill do things my way just like anyone else would. To dismiss my theories as nothing more than "jr high mentality" is as cowardice as going to other forums under a phoney name to recruit others to harass me and members of my forum. Ask Brophy about that sometime and IM sure youll be enlightened as to why I have no respect to his opinion. Man to man defense, pure man to man, every down,every single snap has worked for plenty of coaches, I have already pointed out that Don Markham has over 300 wins playing man to man every down and has embarassed plenty of air raid and spread teams in the process, and hes also lost some that way too....everyone does zone or man. Again, to think that I dont know anything about football even though I started coaching in 1989 is just ignorant. To sit here and say why man to man will fail is just boring. I have watched enough games, coached enough games and participated in enough games on Friday nights to know that if you can cover, defend and rush then you have a chance. Offense is also part of the equation. Again, ask brophy, who has all of the sarcastic comments and answers just how successful the team he coaches for is?...
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 15:52:46 GMT -6
I obviously can't state how effective calande will be with his man philosophy; but I can comment on my own experiences. -Played an Air Raid team 2 years ago, DC decided to live in man and bring 6 all day. We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. 1 quarter and 3 touchdowns later, we came to the conclusion that living in man wasn't a good idea. We were the better team in affair; at least in terms of athletes. - Four years ago, the HS my MS teams fed into decided to live in various man coverages all year. Cover 0 and Cover 8 were staples. Played the worst team in the state that year (4 wins in 5 years) and they switched over to the spread that year. They hung 45 points on the defense after averaging 14 a game in the 4 games prior to that. Good thing the offense put up record numbers and they managed to win. - Watched an Air Raid team hang record breaking numbers (almost 600 yards passing) on a team that didn't move out of Cover 0, blitz heavy defenses all night. They bumped and jammed all night long; didn't do any good; someone was open eventually. And another note; they brought 6 50+ times, got 1 sack. This was a playoff game I might add. "We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. " one day of repping it? how can you expect to be good at it?. its a commitment and a mentality. btw, we gave up ZERO td passes and 15 total completions last year. It was at the 8th grade level...what would that compute to at the 11th and 12th grade level? I dont know....
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 15:53:48 GMT -6
it's not that man can't be run or shouldn't be run ... i think the whole thing started by someone saying "run man every snap" ... and a question was posed such as what adjustment would be made should the man coverage begin to be exploited through the course of the game .... the answer was still "man, man, man" ... then, it all went downhill. I dont think thats how it went.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 26, 2007 15:55:18 GMT -6
you're welcome.
you can take my comments for what they are. I am not trying to impress, justify, or sell anything.
what you see is what you get
If can learn from or help anyone on here.....great - thats what we are all here for.
If you don't believe something WILL work just because you don't like WHO said rather than WHAT was said, well thats just being bullheaded
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jul 26, 2007 15:56:11 GMT -6
Not trying to start another debate - I just thought it was a legitimate question. We use Man about 75% of the time for all of the reasons you have stated, and because I know it and I feel it gives our kids the best chance at being successful. We also use other coverages for the very same reasons some of the other posters have given, namely you can't do the same thing every play or you will get killed (unless you have superior talent to tilt the odds in your favor). Keep on posting - you've been a source of information as long as I've been on this board. Don't take it personally
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 15:59:07 GMT -6
I dont. Its no different than playing Monopoly or Chess. Some of us save our money for Board Walk and Park place while others buy up " Baltic and Mediterannian"...some like queen pawn openings, some like King pawn openings and some like hypermodern flank openings...all have merit even if some dont have the cerebral capacity to comprehend the validity in doing things a different way.
NO, never anything personal unless someone makes it personal. Its all good.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 26, 2007 15:59:35 GMT -6
I obviously can't state how effective calande will be with his man philosophy; but I can comment on my own experiences. -Played an Air Raid team 2 years ago, DC decided to live in man and bring 6 all day. We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. 1 quarter and 3 touchdowns later, we came to the conclusion that living in man wasn't a good idea. We were the better team in affair; at least in terms of athletes. - Four years ago, the HS my MS teams fed into decided to live in various man coverages all year. Cover 0 and Cover 8 were staples. Played the worst team in the state that year (4 wins in 5 years) and they switched over to the spread that year. They hung 45 points on the defense after averaging 14 a game in the 4 games prior to that. Good thing the offense put up record numbers and they managed to win. - Watched an Air Raid team hang record breaking numbers (almost 600 yards passing) on a team that didn't move out of Cover 0, blitz heavy defenses all night. They bumped and jammed all night long; didn't do any good; someone was open eventually. And another note; they brought 6 50+ times, got 1 sack. This was a playoff game I might add. "We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. " one day of repping it? how can you expect to be good at it?. its a commitment and a mentality. btw, we gave up ZERO td passes and 15 total completions last year. It was at the 8th grade level...what would that compute to at the 11th and 12th grade level? I dont know.... Did I say we repped it ONE DAY? No; we repped it every single day ALL DAY. Why in the hell would I even try to make a point by saying that we repped man coverage for A SINGLE DAY.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 16:02:11 GMT -6
I obviously can't state how effective calande will be with his man philosophy; but I can comment on my own experiences. -Played an Air Raid team 2 years ago, DC decided to live in man and bring 6 all day. We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. 1 quarter and 3 touchdowns later, we came to the conclusion that living in man wasn't a good idea. We were the better team in affair; at least in terms of athletes. - Four years ago, the HS my MS teams fed into decided to live in various man coverages all year. Cover 0 and Cover 8 were staples. Played the worst team in the state that year (4 wins in 5 years) and they switched over to the spread that year. They hung 45 points on the defense after averaging 14 a game in the 4 games prior to that. Good thing the offense put up record numbers and they managed to win. - Watched an Air Raid team hang record breaking numbers (almost 600 yards passing) on a team that didn't move out of Cover 0, blitz heavy defenses all night. They bumped and jammed all night long; didn't do any good; someone was open eventually. And another note; they brought 6 50+ times, got 1 sack. This was a playoff game I might add. did any zone team you are aware of give up big numbers to an "air raid" team? seems to me that some run and shoot teams beat the snot out of plenty of zone based teams. This really is stupid.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 16:04:56 GMT -6
"We were a big man coverage team; repped it all day. " one day of repping it? how can you expect to be good at it?. its a commitment and a mentality. btw, we gave up ZERO td passes and 15 total completions last year. It was at the 8th grade level...what would that compute to at the 11th and 12th grade level? I dont know.... Did I say we repped it ONE DAY? No; we repped it every single day ALL DAY. Why in the hell would I even try to make a point by saying that we repped man coverage for A SINGLE DAY. actually yes, you said you the Dc wanted to bring six and you repped it all day or something of that nature. doesnt matter, youd have been smoked in a zone as well from the sounds of things. panic and "lets change it up right now" gets you toasted just as well. Kids get confused and lose confidence in the coaches when you bail out on the things youve preached all week.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 16:07:19 GMT -6
you're welcome. you can take my comments for what they are. I am not trying to impress, justify, or sell anything. what you see is what you get If can learn from or help anyone on here.....great - thats what we are all here for. If you don't believe something WILL work just because you don't like WHO said rather than WHAT was said, well thats just being bullheaded NOT SELLING anyting doesnt mean your word is any better than anyone elses, your character and integrity is in question for sure though. Bullheaded coaches have won championships many times in history Im sure.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 26, 2007 16:23:48 GMT -6
google "strawman argument"
why? because Don Markham said so.
yes yes - you are right, Calande.
You have better morals than I do, you're better looking, you're smarter, you're a better lover than me....THEREFORE sitting in C0 all season is a great idea.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 16:30:49 GMT -6
If you went 10-0 for 30 years youd still fall short of Markhams career victory totals...double wing offense, (not balanced, which you swear you must be, and all man to man, which you swear will not work because a career jr high coach thinks it will)
think about it,....maybe YOU are wrong.
|
|
cls
Junior Member
Posts: 295
|
Post by cls on Jul 26, 2007 16:58:15 GMT -6
I honestly don't know how you could stay in man and play an option football team. When done right it's 10 on 11. I would think screens and play-action ( back out ) would kill you
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 17:13:12 GMT -6
Quick lets see how many other coaches can jump in and say "it cant be done"....if the fs is active against an option team its NOT ten vs eleven. Screens and playaction especially have no shot of fooling a press man team? why would you think a man team would be fooled by play action?
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Jul 26, 2007 17:30:10 GMT -6
On Markham's Double Wing website it shows that he's gone 303-105-1 over a 34 year span in high school coaching.....While noteworthy for longevity, its not astonishing by any means as a winning percentage, a 65% career winning percentage usually will get you fired in most places.... I'm sure he's a good coach and has turned around some programs, but it seems that he's lost his share of games for sure. If I was throwing out names and systems to support an argument, I guess for comparative purposes I'd have to go with a spread coach, Todd Dodge's 72-1 over the last 5 years at Southlake Carroll in TX, four of which were championship years, figured at 34 years would come out to 490-7 for a 98.7% winning percentage, so obviously the spread is unstoppable...LOL I'm just giving you a hard time CC..... "Correction"", 77-1 over the last 5 years, 96-11 as a HC at SLC...still not bad...LOL
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 17:39:46 GMT -6
No problem, how many losing seasons has Markham had? very few during that span. yes, he has won everywhere he has been. ...food for thought bro. I guess Dodge doesnt play man to man defense huh?
btw, Im thinking of making up tee shirts that say...
front " Amazing but True"
back " i did it my way and went against the advice on coachhuey.com and lived to tell about it"
think I can sell any?
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Jul 26, 2007 17:43:22 GMT -6
btw, do you really think a 65% win percentage is lousy? ...I read once that his teams avg a title game appearance once every three years. (that was a few years back before trying to turn around Bloomington this second time)
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Jul 26, 2007 18:27:50 GMT -6
He's won 5 CIF titles. 65% is obviously subject to situation, were they all turds before he arrived? Maybe so, like I said, I'm sure he's a good coach and has turned around teams. Believe it or not, there are GREAT coaches that have losing career records. My point of bringing up the comparisons wasn't to attack Markham or put Dodge in the spotlight, it was to point out that numbers, records, etc are all subjective and in reality have no meaning when discussing X's or O's or philosophies. Just because coach so and so did something doesn't mean its feasible for me to do it, their circumstances and talent structure might be completely different. So for you or I to refer to such and such coach's record or accomplishment to justify our position really doesn't do the discussion any justice, their situation and circumstances were and are different. I, as you, can only base my opinion on my personal experiences and observations. My opinion of press 46 is that its GREAT vs ONE dimensional run teams, particuliarly "I" formation teams. IMO, it loses its luster when the offensive formation widens, especially if the TE is split. I have seen first hand our defense in college (pure 46, almost total cov 0,1) get torched by one back spread teams. Our defense had 4 future NFL guys on it, so it wasn't a lack of talent, in fact they were loaded talent wise, however, the defense has structural weaknesses that are much more exposed against one back teams than two back teams. It is also, IMO, very suspect against the option.....
|
|