|
Post by brophy on Jan 31, 2013 15:22:03 GMT -6
Do you go get all your players checked everytime they happen to have a heart attack symptom? My guess is that heart attacks have killed a billion more people in the last 1000 years than concussions.
And by the way, our trainer does check our players everytime they have a concussion symptom. He even checks them when they don't have symptoms but were involved in a big hit.
wouldn't that just highlight the need to support more research, though? I don't know anyone that actually has an absolute answers or solutions to the issue. Anyone that does (positive or negative) would be speaking from ignorance. There are also various factors and motivations involved in the discussion, which is why its important to explicitly state what we're talking about with the issue rather than this thread being one big dogpile "ya know what grinds my gears!?" rant. Helmets protect the skull, not necessarily the contents inside the skull....so this isn't the beginning and end to the conversation. Probably the most troubling in all this is the focus on the NFL due to the money involved, but it would stand to reason that HS and NCAA players stand to benefit the most any protection, so where is their advocate? Brain injury isn't necessarily the result of a concussion, though concussions would be evidence of it. The focus is not relegated to just preventing knockouts. We cannot discount the opportunist nature of lawsuits that look to harvest a quick payday from the fat pockets of the NFL, so there may also be influence in the discussion from that angle. However, that in itself does not discount what can happen with the brain.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 30, 2013 13:54:34 GMT -6
I just think that it provides focus to the hysteria. maybe the bigger concern (IMO) is that people actually take any politician (or pundit) seriously... what is the point in trying to debate hoopleheads that get caught up in the frenzy of "anti-football" rhetoric? If people want to take his opinion and run away with it on some anti-sport spin, who cares? The more we play into it by moving away from an actual focus (and become purely emotional) the more momentum we fuel it [same could be said for the gun thing or abortion or whatever]. Who has time for that pointless nonsense? vanity of vanities...
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 30, 2013 13:09:31 GMT -6
I agree with Coach Slack's issue here and again why I strongly recommend your kids going to his camps. He drills home what participation (life) is about; serving the interests of the collective, to become something better than they already are. Unfortunately, I don't believe this virtue is intuitively born out of the game. Sure, you can grind with strength training, summer workouts, practice, etc....but injuries or not, the game, TODAY, is more about conditioning and incentivizing a selfish motive. The gripe and battle we should be fighting isn't about player safety, but re-enforcing the ideals of participation and effort in a world measured solely by output (individual stats, recruiting ranking/offers, conference recognition awards, W/L, etc). THAT, is our society where we measure everything as a commodity and if you aren't the best you aren't anything (there is no longer any value in the process or journey; just the end result). I don't know about y'all, but I KNOW the game doesn't care about your effort and yada yada....college coaches don't care about what you learned, they only care about what you can deliver RIGHT NOW for me.....and when you can't (deliver) you're chewed up and gone. The GAME is about fighting off the guy trying to get your spot on the roster, then that other guy (opponent) trying to outperform and dominate you on the field.....so there is little in the way of "The Game" that reinforces any altruistic character (kill or be killed). This is why Coach Slack's mantra of SERVING is so important to be delivered to our teams. Because whether or not your guys win State or get a scholly, the real reward will be in the strong relationships your kids forge with one another in the span of 8 or 10 months, and yes, the trials are where they prove their commitment to each other.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 30, 2013 11:01:38 GMT -6
nm
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 30, 2013 10:58:02 GMT -6
I would be interested in WHAT, specifically, we are opposed to with this talk? Are we opposed to research on the effects of head trauma? Are we opposed to players/families evaluating the long-term benefit of participation? We want kids who are willing to risk physical pain with the possibility of debilitating injuries? Okay, so what if there are other alternatives out there that most kids just don't feel its worth it (no longer relevant)? to my knowledge, there has been no legs to ANY of this talk (with the exception of the recommendations of Dr. Robert Cantu) that would affect Youth, HS, or College ball. No legislation, no rule changes, no new mandates....So what are you guys up in arms about? You don't want kids being monitored for concussions? I love that someone mentioned Obama. When Obama spoke out he was doing what people in the legal business refer to as"watering down the jury pool". He is a former lawyer himself and in the hip pocket of the Trial Lawyers Association. OP mentioned the President. Not sure what it has to do with the actual discussion other than it apparently has rustled the jimmies of people glued to the television set. I don't see any real relevance for football coaches, though. It sounds like you're saying, if you take a job you assume EVERY risk associated with the work place and should just shut their face and be happy they get a paycheck (" I'm sure that dust isn't going to be a problem - just be a MAN!")
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 30, 2013 9:12:45 GMT -6
utmost respect for Coach Slack and his crew. I understand what Coach is after here (the SACRIFICE is what football is about). Does SACRIFICE equate to (physical) RISK? The discussion of late hasn't been about the risk of being a Marcus Lattimore, its becoming a Junior Seau or Devon Walker I am a little removed from the latest hullabaloo (apparently the President said something?) but I'm unsure what this person said that is any different from what TROY AIKMAN has already said. Why aren't people {censored} their pants over that (or Bernard Pollard)? An interesting discussion was had on this very subject last night with Scott Fujita and NFLPA Rep George Atallah brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2013/01/future-of-football.html"It's entirely possible that this sport is unsafe at any speed"
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 29, 2013 23:01:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 28, 2013 16:04:13 GMT -6
SNOW day?!!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 25, 2013 18:14:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 24, 2013 16:16:36 GMT -6
the "related topics" is a MAJOR improvement (next level type {censored} there)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 24, 2013 8:53:29 GMT -6
anyone longing for the old white board (or Thursday night mini-clinics) may get their fix from webinars done by Joe Daniel at www.football-defense.com/They are free and really informative and have the feel of how the white board sessions went
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 23, 2013 17:03:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 23, 2013 9:07:33 GMT -6
Thanks for the upgrade. Growing pains its cool I would just like the ability to hide avatars and sigs The mobile version is a pain and even after selecting desktop version it still shows the mobile version
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 18, 2013 9:14:31 GMT -6
you're lucky if you're in an area that pays based on years of experience.....er....let me rephrase that.....YOU would be lucky, but some guys aren't WORTH the stipend they have to be paid (that is tiered based on how many years they've coached). I've been around a lot of {censored} coaches that didn't contribute but got the max pay simply because they were listed on the roster.
non faculty [when I DID get paid] Illinois - volunteer $1000 (cash) Iowa - coordinator $2500 Louisiana - assistant $6400 with post-season escalators
** and admittedly, I easily coached harder and more passionately when I wasn't getting paid
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 18, 2013 9:09:23 GMT -6
Another thing that sets them apart is their blue ribbon pure bread personnel.
this goddamnit this! I haven't been to Tuscaloosa practice (maybe I should?), but from what I could tell from the hours of All-Access was that they don't do much of anything different. Their IZ/OZ stuff is probably the simplest way to teach it. They aren't doing anything crazy to kill opponents. The way Saban packages the defense is worth checking out (IMO), but likely not entirely practical for HS ball unless you actually do much personnel groupings on defense.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 17, 2013 20:03:19 GMT -6
you've seen the 2010 All - Access series already, right?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 17, 2013 10:25:34 GMT -6
I don't think enough can be said about Chris Brown's work. Sure, we know the guy, because his subject matter appeals to us and we've all interacted with him on the forum here. That in itself has been enlightening and helpful. So, yeah, there is an immediacy of who he is.
I don't read much sports coverage (I try, but there isn't much out there) so this may be skewed, but I have not seen ANYTHING or any author that contributes as much to the game like Chris. Sports writers get so bogged down in jerking off tributes to themselves and their bs institution. True "coaches" write with such a narrow focus (how-to) that it can be uninteresting. Chris' analytic perspective provides a complete picture to help distill strategy, logistics, history and trends. You have a guy who can translate and introduce Andrew Coverdale to the masses in an interesting and digestible format
I could be wrong, but I feel his work has single-handedly raised the bar when it comes to football discourse globally. I would also venture to guess he has played a major role in many of the new coaches getting into the profession today.
so, yeah.....tl;dr - Chris kicks {censored}
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 16, 2013 9:01:25 GMT -6
time for the oddball answer Tom Osborne and Charlie McBride....1995
playing in HS and college, football was more of a social practice than a passion and I NEVER really understood it fully when playing (I just did what they told me without knowing why). Watching Osborne's Nebraska teams annihilate teams got me interested in what was actually taking place on the field. Tom Brandow's "Toby Zone" (featured a lot of Coach Huey's contributions) and Hugh Wyatt's blog are what got me amped up to learn about the game and quickly began coaching.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 15, 2013 9:38:36 GMT -6
no doubt depression is an issue. There are a lot of reasons for depression....not all are emotionally driven. Football is a really different sport that I'm not sure has many parallels outside of wrestling/mma (being so competitively driven, premised on physical pain). For what its worth, I'm sure the nature of football wires us all to be "not normal" (unless you're a QB or receiver). We don't operate at the same level as regular people. That in itself (IMO) predisposes us for abnormal, compulsive behavior. For the sake of the discussion, though, its important to remain focused on what is being discussed. The scientific research regarding head trauma is what is pointing to a precursor to these chemical changes in the body that lead to depression and psychological issues (and other degenerative conditions). Can we have a discussion on the impact of brain injuries and their impact on the body without getting defensive and dismissive? theconcussionblog.com/2013/01/15/concussion-symposium-march-2nd/Does the current meme of "head injuries" in football have any parallels that we faced 20 years ago with the death of Corey Stringer and the heat strokes and hydration issues that were foreign to the old school way of life back then? I remember playing and water wasn't really an issue, nor was body temperature......nowadays, we wouldn't even think about not considering these as major issues in planning practice. The point being, were we as sick of hearing about hydration issues 30 years ago and how the media is pissing their pants over this? Sure we can be frustrated with anything that is negatively reported about the sport (or incorrectly reported from 'analysts'), but it doesn't discount the facts surrounding human biology. Its rather enlightening to better understand the current studies with brain injuries and what can be done to minimize their occurrence (understanding the contributing factors). If you're sick of hearing it from the news (as am I), you can always choose to quit listening to it (it is the better option) because, lets face it, when was the last time you actually got something (other than simple entertainment fluff) out of the news / ESPN?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2013 14:13:52 GMT -6
This is what makes me angry about the media - Junior Seau, because of brain trama, because he was who he was ...he's 1 out of 38,000 = .000026316 = .0026% This is not cause for alarm. eh.....I could understand outrage over hyperpolied rhetoric saying "football killed Seau", but discounting brain trauma as NOT being a cause for his condition simply by the statistical category he happens to be in is looking at this from an emotionally embedded position (unwilling to just look at this soberly). You're also selectively ignoring the NFL retirees being 6 times more likely than the national average to commit suicide. This may or may not be linked directly to the head trauma thing, but ignoring or dismissing it doesn't hide its truth. If there is a marked increase in suicides from former military personnel (there is) should we not try to figure out why? Seau is a big name.....Barrett Robbins, Justin Strzelczyk, Terry Long , Dave Duerson, etc all dudes who's self-destructive (you could argue bi-polar) behavior lead to suicide. Its not like Seau is just some shot in the dark here There are so many positions and issues regarding player safety and football (easily a half dozen worthy of examination and discussion) that baby-with-the-bath water dismissals simply because we don't like where the conclusion leads isn't helping anyone (though it feels good). We're all football coaches here...we all have an interest to see the game continue as we "know it to be", we don't have to be PC or make apologies for the game. Does repeated brain trauma have degenerative effects? thats something to look at. That doesn't necessarily mean that football is bad or a dangerous sport. Does that mean I don't think the DPI / QB hit calls on any pass play aren't ridiculous? no (I honestly don't know how you're supposed to "coach" an NFL defense) I WILL say, though, I do appreciate the new NCAA rule regarding helmets that come off, if for no other reason than to make sure players keep their {censored} helmet on and fitted properly
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 10, 2013 11:24:44 GMT -6
i've mentioned it elsewhere, but you also run into the issue of
1. repeated exposure through media of the traumatizing physical injuries in NCAA/NFL. 2. hyperventilating mothers / players who do not understand pain/injury react to any discomfort by going to their doctor 3. "their doctor" = ER physician (not an orthopedist) who will automatically prescribe the "rest for 2 weeks" remedy to a bruise.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 10, 2013 11:15:46 GMT -6
its easy for any of us to get on a soapbox and let loose the frustration we all feel (because this isn't the game we played or the reason we got into coaching to a large degree); there is a lot of personal emotion involved with this issue. The other thing is there are SEVERAL different avenues to discuss this issue (protecting players, minimizing hits, enforcing fundamentals, diminishing physical aggression, legal ramifications, etc) I know the low-hanging fruit is attacking the KNOCKOUT shots, but from where I sit, by in large this comes at the expense of ignoring the more serious problem of the repeated smaller hits (experienced by linemen). How much contact are we still doing during the week of practice? Are there programs out there still doing full pad bring-em-to-the-ground banging during the week? The challenge is this issue isn't going away..... Junior Seau's degenerative brain condition...."The brain was independently evaluated by multiple experts, in a blind fashion," said Dr. Russell Lonser, who oversaw the study. "We had the opportunity to get multiple experts involved in a way they wouldn't be able to directly identify his tissue even if they knew he was one of the individuals studied."
The NIH, based in Bethesda, Md., conducted a study of three unidentified brains, one of which was Seau's. It said the findings on Seau were similar to autopsies of people "with exposure to repetitive head injuries."
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 7, 2013 13:33:32 GMT -6
respectfully, this award belongs to Coach Hoover , hands down Bend Over Backwards To Help a Coach Award = Deuce
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 5, 2013 13:39:01 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 4, 2013 13:18:54 GMT -6
To be effective, you don't have to do it a lot. You just have to be able to do it when you want or need to. that's perfect right there
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 4, 2013 8:38:41 GMT -6
But 4 or 5 state champions seems to agree with the phrase of playing great defense and running the football. Rummel Karr Parkview Baptist John Curtis Ouachita Christian win however you can, but these teams dominated through the season because of the manchilds they have on the roster. These statistics would simply be evidence not causational to their W/L. Karr over Neville Win by overcoming your opponent with efficiency...what is the easiest way for your team to remain consistent and not convert downs? More consistent performances are usually the product of execution, which is the product of drilling fundamentals and/or superior athleticism (athleticism can overcome technique). The end of the day is getting in the end zone more than your opponent. Running the ball won't inherently get you in the end zone any faster or better than throwing it. You're making this too simple of an assertion. There isn't any magic here. The challenge becomes, what if you are very conservative on offense and play to win the game on defense? What happens when that one time your opponent scores on your D, how does your defense manufacture a touchdown without a possession? You need an offense that is doing something too. The bottom line is advancing downs against your opponents defense and you can consistently do that running or passing.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 2, 2013 14:25:55 GMT -6
folded up practice plan. Surface? scribble as ya go (though current smartphone has stylus).
usually writing player names and depth the first week, then from there just various notes on what I need to do when practice is over (specific CPs for what kid - conversations w/ players that are worth remember that I know I'll forget). OR drawing up stuff for backups during TEAM
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 2, 2013 13:19:03 GMT -6
- T-shirt
- shorts (optional)
- FoxFire40 whistle w/ laynard with equipment room keys.....with pen attached
- practice plan in clear plastic sleeve
** I'll get blasted for this but...... smartphone. Use it a lot for timing, segment alarms, playbook (review concept with backups once the play is called in huddle) and recording indy drills (if needed).
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 2, 2013 10:36:07 GMT -6
I've seen this work with great success in other schools and it NEVER has to be vindictive or humiliating. Do it through a newsletter to parents
and stay positive
coachd5058's other, more pertinent question, though....I don't have an answer for. If your Sam Montgomery's don't show up for weights and are still your baddest war daddys, what are ya gonna do? Particularly if 1) there is no one that can even compete with him and 2) what does it really matter so long as this guy shows up on game night and contributes significantly to a win?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 13, 2012 15:35:43 GMT -6
^^once you realize this its easier to ignore because you understand it is willful nonsense
|
|