|
Post by brophy on Jan 1, 2015 16:17:31 GMT -6
Its easy to take for granted just how instrumental this site has been in all of our developments (personally, professionally, and academically).
What is interesting is how the site has withstood the pitfalls of the hundreds of other football sites out there to either sell out to sponsorship, turn into an echo chamber of 'veterans', become a sportsfan site, or just be a rinse and repeat 'send me that playbook, coach' threads...
I don't know how Huey and tog have been able to keep this site pure and fresh throughout the years to stay the course. That story would make a good 30 for 30 episode
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 31, 2014 23:11:22 GMT -6
It's 2015....... In June of this year, we'll celebrate a full decade of the most powerful tool known to humankind.
The landscape of football existing after the 2004 season (on the field, at the field house, in the job market) has changed by leaps and bounds. Truly it can all be attributed to this one site.
From A-11s, brain-numbing double wing, facemelting 42 Nickel, unstoppable Top Secret Air Raid, I know Joe Gibbs!, Thursday night Whiteboard Clinics, cover 0 vs everything, to HUDL I think we've all been changed by Coach Huey!!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 31, 2014 11:31:29 GMT -6
I'm very interested in the motivation here....
WHY would you want to teach football, when you can (still) PLAY football?
I'd really like to understand the rationale
You like the game, more power to ya and we'll all help.
If you want to be a leader in sports, calling the shots....there are some headaches ahead.
If you want to do play-calling....its not all its cracked up to be.
Football coaching is really about teaching technique and relating to others (staff and players) on a personal level. Then its about controlling the environment to ensure a consistent product (performance). Football *football* is kinda different than coaching (IMO)
If you like the game.....the true joy is PLAYING. Coaching is a distant second to the rewards of athletic performance and grinding with your teammates.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 16, 2014 11:16:47 GMT -6
1.Politics 2.Nepotism 3.Sycophantism 4.Hard work
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 12, 2014 6:37:20 GMT -6
thanks - but why would you want to keep a coaching staff that doesn't make the post-season content?
It sounds like your beef is that the rich get richer (and the under performing programs will not be rewarded). Tough - that's actually how life works.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 12, 2014 5:55:26 GMT -6
This is dumb on so many levels. you keep saying this, but I must be missing how you're actually supporting why its so dumb. You're against the overall intent of this, but you're not against stipend increases. Rage on, I guess
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 11, 2014 15:05:16 GMT -6
so you would be okay with a bonus, if * Program can divide the salaries among his staff * not taxed 40% I simply brought up the fact that you can have a great season, do a damn good job coaching, and not make a dime with this incentive system so what? How else should coaches receive an ADDITIONAL reward on top of their stipend?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 11, 2014 13:53:17 GMT -6
As far as #2 goes, you're not paying based on a "winning or losing record." You're treating the a possible 11-1 team that loses in the second round (a round before the quarterfinals) the same as an 0-10 team. With as jacked up as our playoff system is down here, you can be a damn good team but matchup with a beast in the 2nd round of the playoffs because of nothing more than geography. Then your issue is really with your playoff system, then, not the money. This is bonus money, not guaranteed, so any advancement in the playoffs is over-and-above what your base pay is. If your team is lucky enough to advance past the semis, then your coaching staff deserves a reward above regular season performance....whoopie! So you're against rewarding performing coaching staffs? or are you just upset with how the bracket is tiered? If the playoff brackets were bracket favorably, would you be for coaches receiving bonuses? The argument you've presented thus far has been difficult to follow
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 11, 2014 11:40:40 GMT -6
1) It treats all sports and coaching equally, which it clearly isn't valid point, considering the amount of hours worked. However, there is VALUE to schools to being playoff contenders (in any sport), so why not incentivize it. Its like asking if Nick Saban is worth $5M/ year. Well, if he can bring National Championships to Alabama, that exposure and prestige is invaluable. 2) Paying for wins and losses is a very shortsighted, particularly in the playoffs and in a sport where the ball bounces funny ways we do this in Louisiana. Coming from other states that do not do this....I found it a pleasant incentive. Why treat a winning record and a losing record the same, when they're not? As to your last point (shortage of money), this is all true IF IT CAN BE AFFORDED. If your point is simply to cut budgets for athletic salaries because we simply can't afford it. You have numbers to back that up, so there is really nothing to argue there. However, if the money IS there, then why not incentivize?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 11, 2014 9:54:20 GMT -6
you're upset over the incentive pay or you're upset that other sports are included in it?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 9, 2014 13:02:06 GMT -6
DOES THIS HELP THE TEAM?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 7, 2014 13:25:54 GMT -6
-- football as a war game is out of bounds? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargamingwar game in football is what, exactly, a scrimmage where assistants/coordinators go after each other to "win" (an exercise to galvanize strategy)? war game is assistants/coordinators calling sessions using the tactics of the opponent? war game is just thought exercises to create a new way to call a game?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 7, 2014 12:42:11 GMT -6
I propose to study deception's role in football by analogy with its role in military thought and water is wet this will only work if football is, in fact, a war game. war game in football is what, exactly, a scrimmage where assistants/coordinators go after each other to "win" (an exercise to galvanize strategy)? war game is assistants/coordinators calling sessions using the tactics of the opponent? war game is just thought exercises to create a new way to call a game? if i've been coaching at Big Blue High in South Carolina for the past 8 years, what does any of this study do for me and my program? What would it influence me to do differently (logistics)?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 7, 2014 11:53:43 GMT -6
makes me wonder why the push-back on this thread has been so vociferous. respectfully, I think it is largely because this subject isn't moving anywhere. It sputters, roars and hisses but the motor is not turning over and isn't turning the wheels. In plain concise English, what exactly are you driving with the anecdote in simple terms within two sentences? I've read it more than a dozen times and I cannot find a practical application to learn from as a (competent)football coach. This may be an academic discussion for the George Plimpton's of the board, but to everyone else it is coming off as
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 13, 2014 9:13:46 GMT -6
.....that one new unstoppable scheme
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 6, 2014 6:50:57 GMT -6
find another coach / football guy that will challenge you. We all want to be the best football coach out there and often times we think that the true metric is to come up with some great scheme, awesome brand, or be a renowned clinic speaker (because that is what is demonstrated as valued). The thing is, working towards that end will make for a single-mindedness of insular thinking , where we shut out critical voices. Coaches, particularly those that are starting out, need someone to call them on their {censored} and, even if you're right, get you to galvanize your position on what you're doing. Once you get through the core tenets of football, you'll see its just fundamental (technique/theory) and what is most important is teaching the game to your players and building those relationships.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 6, 2014 6:41:12 GMT -6
we're talking about 14 - 18 year old boys. I don't know about y'all, but for me it was finding my identity not because it was fun (practice has NEVER been fun) or because the game is enjoyable (particularly when you likely don't know what to do in a game).
1. hang out with your peers and prove yourself (affirmation from cohorts)
2. belong to something bigger than yourself (affirmation from females)
those, IMO, are the root of the issue. How we coaches leverage those desires/impulses and frame it into some larger purpose (self-efficacy) is the real trick.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 28, 2014 0:11:56 GMT -6
would this be info that only the DC would study to improve playcalling/counter predictable offenses, or would the players also have to know this info to adjust/get lined up quickly on the field? in short, no
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 27, 2014 21:20:11 GMT -6
Is it the concepts that opposing coaches have on tape that concern you the most, or is it the individual that nobody seems to be able to tackle? personnel situation (D&D)for conversion field position - vertical/horizontal formation/split available threats from the above criteria / manage the liability of the situation you've filtered
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 26, 2014 9:45:45 GMT -6
its just a game....it can wait a season or two
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 24, 2014 8:33:04 GMT -6
Then why do we praise pancakes? When are they ever neccesary? that's why it is important to completely articulate what you're after. We may say "throw harder" to a QB, but that isn't telling, teaching, instructing him on what, exactly, he is to do to achieve this. As football coaches, we are instructors of execution for the game, not cheerleaders. Pancakes happen because not only does a player get a good fit, effective hip explosion into the defender, but he has exceptional EFFORT to drive on an opponent. All that {censored} is teachable, enforceable and can be replicated without emotion or some personality quirk. You said you want kids to want to injure their opponent. How do you teach that?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 23, 2014 11:56:03 GMT -6
For me it's about that extra little push.
I want them to want to physically put their opponent in pain. I want attitude! nothing wrong with wanting something else...but you'd have to ask yourself WHY?What does it provide or give YOU? I may only need 2 aspirins for a migraine, but damn if I ain't taken 6 of those bad boys to AMP the effect up! Is there a medical need for it? No.....but it makes ME feel better knowing I'm throwing the book at this headache. Its important to understand this kind of stuff (what we're really after), because we'll waste A LOT of time trying to slap our kids around for them to "get a mean on", frustrating ourselves because they have a different personality, without really making progress to the meaningful result.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 23, 2014 9:47:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 22, 2014 20:07:26 GMT -6
I'd rather have a kid that gives you 100% effort on every play and does it right, than to have a Vontaze Burfict out there being a complete buffoon to show how 'aggressive' he is. Just do your job RIGHT, at 100%, and we'll call it a win....we don't need all that demonstrative nonsense.
You know how you get kids to care and refusing to quit?
You enable them to INVEST in the outcome. Give them the opportunity to spend the next 7 months training in a structured weight program, allowing them to gain as many competitive wins with the group. Most folks hear that and say, "yeah...I know...but give me another answer"
"Mean" (i.e. manifestations of frustrated, emotional outbursts) is the shortcut when hard work and process is too tough.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 22, 2014 15:37:17 GMT -6
why do they have to be mean?
why not just be competitive?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 21, 2014 11:49:51 GMT -6
Offense, offense, offense, offense
While offenses will "do what they do" each week without change, they face the dire need to convert downs and put up points against a tide of opposition looking to screw up all facets of their game. If your kids aren't solid in executing a play/series, it is a glaring liability causing inconsistent drives if you can convert.You aren't going to win many games without scoring on your possessions. Offense, IMO, is a little tougher than just handing the ball off to Johnny.
Defense is a reactive animal. Yes, you have to adjust to different offenses each week, but so long as you get your kids to hustle, fit, and tackle properly you will survive. Anyone can leave the lights on after that and walk away. All you have to do is limit your opponent to 1 less point than your offense puts up at the end of the day. To be a DOMINATING defense takes some work, but I feel we make defense way more complicated than it is; often times neglecting the real things that matter. Defense doesn't have to necessarily DO anything..they just have to ensure the other guys screw up.
Game prep, offense really just needs to know what flavor of defense the opponent plays and what type of pressures they use. By and large, though, the offense can do what they do and hope the defense doens't stop them (though, its not a given that the offense can 'do' anything even if there wasn't a defense out there). For defense, yes, you should be putting a ton of time breaking down the tendencies and personnel of your opponent. However, while this is laborious analytical work, once you know how to do it, it is second nature and will allow you to make adjustments smarter (not necessarily that you HAVE to make those adjustments)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 16, 2014 22:30:40 GMT -6
no question.....25 (or less) you can trust to compete with effort.
athletes are vital to winning games, no doubt, but if you're in it for the long-haul (2-3+ seasons) you've got to look at the dividend because if you cater to pampering those 3-4 special talents (without accountability) your control, and ultimately your program, will spin out of control and you'll be slave to that one turd (that you enabled) who'll break your heart
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 3, 2014 8:32:46 GMT -6
kids miss all the time and barely do anything when they are here.
refuse to do their running or whatever but still start and play. the advice of the replies here offer good suggestions on how to correct and raise performance expectations. Kids will push limits until they know the path down that road is a dead end. If there is no fear of a consequence they don't want (i.e. kicked off and mommy can't save them by complaining to the principal)... However, knowing the struggles bluedevil58 has had these past seasons would tell you that there is very little he, one coach, can correct. If turd behavior is accepted by the program, then kids will take the path of least resistance.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Oct 2, 2014 15:31:21 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 4, 2014 10:37:58 GMT -6
|
|