|
Post by brophy on Jun 13, 2011 7:29:59 GMT -6
.we don't go back to it cause it was unsuccessful but didn't know it was an easy fix and really was a great call . too late the next day to do anything about it. The guys in the booth do their best but at game speed tough to see everything. These guys aren't doing their jobs. period They need a systematic way of delivering the information you need during the game. Don't let them shoot from the hip - have them deliver specific data points. If they aren't calling the plays, the play call needs to be relayed to them so they know what to look for WHILE the play is taking place brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2010/01/game-communication.htmlThese are the same guys that BETTER HAVE SOMETHING to review when they come down for halftime.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 8, 2011 21:08:21 GMT -6
I wonder how many of these to notch college athletes were actually held to any standards in high school athletics. I imagine that some of these kids got away with murder within their high school programs; not showing up for practice, not being held to academic standards, etc.. ultimately thats what it boils down to. Whether you are Tressel or Pryor - it all comes down to what we incentivize. In my dealings with [bonafide] DI guys...its really all gonna come down to their parents. These guys are DI usually by the time they are 14-15. THEY KNOW. Their parents know. Honestly, they could sip gatorade their Senior season and show up on campus next Fall. The guys that can maintain perspective, that know they are going DI and not let it destroy their work ethic or personality are the ones with parents grounding them in character. These guys will have valid social skills (because of the former) - making it easy to establish a relationship with them. The guys who's parents don't know how to handle their son being blessed with freakish athleticism, see their son as a lottery ticket. You can develop a relationship with the kids and at the heart they are good guys.....but if your home life is messed up (and your lottery status is reinforced), WTF is coach really gonna do to you? You KNOW that no one is going to tell you "no". I'd like to say we have the ultimate say in the matter as coaches, but no matter how close you get to a kid, you can't eliminate the home life (and the 14 years prior) ** it isn't one or the other, either......there are more good kids, more good families than knuckleheads, but the homelives that enable (and have been enabling the exceptionalism) kids way before they get to HS, spoil the young men from maturing.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 8, 2011 14:58:48 GMT -6
I personally don't have a problem with an athlete taking anabolics. However, if we are all operating under a set of guidelines which dictates our playing field (anabolics are outlawed), then one of us is simply getting over on the other unfairly Its the same principle here. Should scholarship athletes be compensated / share a piece of what they are generating? I think so....but if Georgia operates outside the agreed upon guidelines and Georgia Tech doesn't, now we have a gross competitive advantage and not in the spirit of competition in which the game/experience is founded on. If we bring our teams together for a scrimmage and agree that we're not hitting the quarterback......but during the heat of competition, you decide "this isn't realistic - we're gonna blitz the pants off your thrower". That goes against the spirit of respect and maturity. It IS interesting, though (not necessarily about tOSU situation), but how a challenging sport / competition like football can develop and nurture the admirable qualities of character, the ultra-competitive environment also enables the corruption of those very same qualities. Fire is good; it can shape metal / provide heat......but too much will burn your whole freaking house down. Kantian ethics... just because a rule is a rule does not mean it valid or rational then you do what Bosworth did in the 80's and organize a union to have your position heard (not become an outlaw against everyone and everything propping up the very platform allowing you to enjoy success)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 7, 2011 18:04:24 GMT -6
great video!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 7, 2011 6:58:37 GMT -6
If he were a 'good coach' he would win anywhere, right? (thats what your hyperbole reference was pointing out) If you're into " where there's smoke, there's fire..." type logic, maybe we should ask why so many NCAA programs are having problems with ethics issues (OSU, rampant oversigning, USC, etc). What is the core issue with these programs? Its all about acquiring or further enticing TALENT.... Why would there be such a premium on 'ready-made' talent? I'm not trying to make this out to be a simplistic dichotomy (either its just coaching or just talent), just pointing out how, when you're judged solely on W-L, then the only thing that matters is winning.....and the only way to win consistently is TALENT. These guys are hired-fired ultimately on their recruiting classes.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 7, 2011 6:25:35 GMT -6
I apologize for continuing the exchange – I’m not arguing or even trying to advocate a position. This is entertaining and I'm just posing some questions Yes, the Head Coach is ultimately responsible for the performance of his football program. I agree that everyone involved in a program should never make excuses for performance and have to actively be part of the solution of excellence. However, I find labeling coaches “good” or “bad” to be a trap of vanity. Its usually done to stroke an ego (“hey, I’m better than X,Y, and Z coaches because….”) and becomes a very source for retarding personal growth (incentivizing complacency). there are more good coaches than there are good programs". I see that on here fairly often. Yet the coach is responsible for building the program. This argument suggests that there aren’t as many “good coaches” as we are led to believe. That there really can’t be “good coaches” associated with ‘bad programs’ because if they were any good….it wouldn’t be a bad program. Are there Head Coaches out there that get jobs merely because they’ve got tenure or know someone (but really have no business being a head coach)? I’m sure, but would that be the norm? There may be head coaches that are losing but could’ve/would’ve done things differently and got a different result on the field, but I doubt many “good coaches” are failing because of coaching, but simply misappropriated management skills. It goes back to the question of “do good coaches take bad jobs”? If you were a good coach wouldn’t you see the iceberg (of an infertile program environment) ahead and only cherry-pick the “right fit”? Or are we suggesting that Bill Belichick could go anywhere and make a winner out of Iowa State? I believe that in most cases schools are similar to the other teams in their league in terms of school size and talent base. This assertion is what supports the rest of the stated argument (in the perfect world, all things are equal – I’m going to judge other people on a standard of the perfect world). I would strongly disagree. In four different states I’ve been involved in, I’d say only one actually had consistent parity. I feel this is especially true at the high school level because parity within administrations isn’t standard and does change from state-to-state. If your state has perennial All-State contenders, it is usually because; 1) those are good programs and 2) there are a lot classes with not great parity. This is no different than suggesting every kid, across the nation, should be able to get the same scores on a competency test [ and if those kids don't pass....well, they must have 'bad teachers'] I think that the biggest problem in "doormat" programs is coaching. I’ve heard a ton of parents say the same thing (at every high school game I’ve visited) and is premised on the parity argument. RichRod 1. was not a good fit at Michigan 2. did not get the most out of his players. 3. did not connect with his players. 4. came in with a know it all attitude 5. failed to develop trust and respect with the players I’m no fan of teams or coaches (maybe Saban), but how do you know any of this? This sounds completely based on perception with no substance/quantifiables. This implies that if Rodriguez did something different, if he wasn’t a “know-it-all” (?) Michigan would’ve ended up with a different result in the Big 10? Would we have said this in 2005? Does this standard mean Bobby Johnson or Larry Smith were ‘bad’ coaches for their former programs? It’s a dangerous or naïve proposition that borders on the same critiques we would get from (what we perceive as ignorant) parents/fans.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 6, 2011 21:13:52 GMT -6
I don't really care about an 'answer' to this question, as all that really matters is that we all be the best "you" we can be (regardless of what anyone else thinks), so my question here isn't a challenge.
I don't know what the rationale is behind making judgments about other coaches being "good" or "bad", as I really believe it all is subjective (if it is ALL about W/L then 'coaching' may not be the most important thing going on, but something else).
This is all relative, take Rich Rodriguez. In 2005, this guy was untouchable and the "coach's coach" using scheme and such to gain an advantage over opponents and recruiting.
Rodriguez could write his own ticket at WVU. What if he never left WVU? At UM, he was humbled and ultimately a "failure" of a coach running that program.
What changed?
If Rodriguez never left WVU, would he still be a "bad coach"? Is there anything to be said of him taking the leap (out of the comfort zone of WVU) to a bigger pond?
NCAA ball aside, its all relative no matter where you are at - is being a "good coach" merely just being able to ride the momentum of good fortune or something else?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 4, 2011 19:10:10 GMT -6
I think we found a way to be successful within those circumstances because we focused on what we could control. How are you defining 'success', though? Is it W-L or just changing the culture?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 4, 2011 9:17:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 3, 2011 19:01:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jun 3, 2011 17:51:43 GMT -6
many good points - we can't look for ways out of the role of leadership. It ALL, ultimately, is on the head coach.
The question is rather misguided, though. It assumes every situation is the same and that Coach Wonderful will be successful (W-L) no matter where he goes. Good coaches can improve every situation they are in......however, I'm not sure its fair to expect success out of a 1-9 program when that team resides in a conference with top notch coaches and programs already established.
Maybe the question should be do "good coaches" make bad career choices?
boiling it all down to the Head Coach would be a true statement........but it really would depend on just how much control that guy has. All things aren't equal in many parts of the country and applying one standard to all situations is a naive proposition.
If your HC doesn't have control over the schedule, staff, teacher course work, budget, player discipline.....just how much are you going to weigh that guy for cooking a lousy meal (when he never had the time to prepare or even buy the groceries)?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on May 1, 2011 10:07:15 GMT -6
if it makes sense - it makes sense
from 2005
what the OP posted is one of the main reason this site was created
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2011 21:56:42 GMT -6
Keep on them and tbeir parents to get the ACT done (not much you can do about the GPA at this point) Visit a college campus in the spring to view their practices and drop off film of guys that can help them while you are there Expose your kid and his parents to plan the summer camps ahead of time entertain any and all offers great and small brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2010/02/notes-on-recruiting-process.html
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2011 18:30:17 GMT -6
First, what makes you think it's his last Super Bowl? math Unless the Packers repeat in 2011 (how many times does that happen?) and there is no labor lockout...you would have a 35+ year old cornerback in professional football. Where are the odds stacked against? Secondly, that stuff about guys who played with injuries is overdone. Oh I agree, which is why I wasn't making a solid assertion to begin with and prefaced my comments liberally Third, in Woodson wouldn't be able to blitz or force he wouldn't be much use. That's his game. I agree and the post about selflessly giving up his role to let another player go in made sense and also why I prefaced that comment with the "leverage receivers" remark because thats all he would be able to do. The point was 1) likely his last game of 2010 against a competent opponent in a game that player's work their entire career for (he may have been needed) and 2) the rosters on NFL squads aren't limitless - just to get an athlete to play man-to-man against the Steelers receivers would be tough and Woodson has always been reknowned as a man-to-man corner. All that post was, was thinking aloud
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2011 14:10:53 GMT -6
Well Peter King ( I'll take PeeWee Herman seriously before i give any credence to that self-serving hack Peter King) and "pain" notwithstanding.....given the temporary discomfort, is that something a player of that caliber work through (Ronnie Lott) for a once and a lifetime opportunity for 30 more snaps? Not suggesting a COACH tell him to get in the game, but that is something a player forces himself back in the game. No right or wrong.... and the swelling associated with that injury would no doubt be difficult (i've had it) just thinking aloud * unrelated but did anyone else catch the pre-game inside the locker room footage on FOX showing an equipment manager applying eye-black to a Steeler player? Seriously, you need help with that? * also unrelated (and unimportant), was the apparent use of PR/symbolism to open the ceremonies. I hate to be the cynic, but I can't help but think the wrapping the game in the flag and attempting to combine the 4th of July, Thanksgiving, and Veterans Day into one event with as/the Super Bowl is a smart (albeit obnoxious one) move by Goodell [especially heading into the threat of a labor stoppage to further villianize the player's union]. It has me quite confused though - I didn't really get the over-politicizing of the event (interview the prez / theatrical recitation of the DOI / unending scenes of patriotism) though.....its a freaking football game. Yes, it may as well be a holiday - but the images were a little much (IMO)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2011 13:21:53 GMT -6
I got a question (and blast me if you like).... Charles Woodson.
The only reason I bring this up (not that his injury wasn't legitimate or that he isn't a helluva player - and clearly Green Bay moved on without him in the lineup) , but being that this is / was this guy's last super bowl appearance, would a collar bone injury (likely a carotid process ligament tear) kept him out of the biggest game of his career?
I'm not questioning his toughness, and it was clear (with inside leverage at the snap) on his last snap that he couldn't press with the inside arm, but would this have prevented a player from really sitting out (not to be nostalgic but would this player have sat out 20-30 years ago in the super bowl)? Didn't Terrell Owens play a super bowl years ago with a broken leg?
He wouldn't be able to blitz or become force, but he would be able to leverage receivers downfield I would think.....
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2011 9:25:11 GMT -6
food for thought from a coaching perspective, i suppose would be
* Packers had 19 players (did I hear that correct?) players on IR? Plus losing 2 key defensive players in one half of the game....and still come up with a way to win?
* 11 handoffs total in the game for the Packers and still won? Doesn't that break some oldschool football gods mojo or something?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 31, 2011 16:36:42 GMT -6
BATON ROUGE – In response to Item Number 25 on the Louisiana High Athletic Association’s Annual General Business Meeting’s agenda regarding an officials’ pay increase, which was voted down Friday, January 28, 2011, Executive Director Kenny Henderson called an emergency conference call with the Executive Committee today at 1:00 PM.
The proposal, if it had passed, would have amended Section 9 of the LHSAA Handbook and would have given high school officials a pay increase in nine of its sanctioned sports. The proposal was declined by member school principals and troubleshooting for a possible boycott began immediately after the business meeting.
Over the weekend LHSAA staff members and Louisiana High School Officials Association board members met to discuss possible actions to resolve the issue, after rumors spread about officials’ associations across the state threatening to stop officiating basketball games.
The purpose of today’s conference call was to work out a solution or at a minimum, lay a foundation for a possible solution to the officials’ pay raise. The Executive Committee agreed to hold a meeting on Wednesday, February 2, 2011 at 1:00 PM at the LHSAA office in Baton Rouge with the fourteen basketball officials’ associations and the fourteen principals’ groups in each respective area. This meeting will be an opportunity for members of all organizations involved to have a chance to rectify the situation and take steps toward some sort of agreement to at least finish the current school year.
All official associations have signed contracts to provide officiating services for the 2010 – 2011 school year, and the LHSAA is strongly encouraging the Associations to honor those contracts. Currently, the Baton Rouge, Lafayette, Lake Charles, New Orleans, Opelousas, Ruston, Thibodeaux, Tri-Parish, West Central and Winnsboro associations have agreed to finish the remainder of the current basketball season. This does not mean that every official in these associations will officiate, but these associations intend to honor their commitments.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 29, 2011 20:52:03 GMT -6
anyone else having an issue with posting in threads / pms and a 'timeout' error occurs when submitting? Your request timed out. Please retry the request. I don't know that it might be a pro-board thing and out of our control, but I've tried it on several different browsers and get the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 26, 2011 6:56:38 GMT -6
anyone have any success downloading BCS games from itunes?
I'm trying to get last year's TCU-Boise Fiesta Bowl (I recorded it, but can't find it now), but I'm not an apple fan and itunes isn't playing nice with me
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 24, 2011 11:10:50 GMT -6
when you recruit, it has to be about selling the TEAM. "hey we're doing such-and-such this weekend (for off-season team building), why don'tcha come hang out with us?"
Kids are gonna play the same reasons WE played.....to join their peers in competition. Kids aren't as selfish as us adults can be. Give them an opportunity for peer-recognized affirmation and identity and they'll jump at it. If you get them out, they are going to hustle and compete not for coaches, but for their peers (respect).
Coaching and instruction is what we do FOR them, not TO them. The minute you tip-toe around a teenager's whims ('will I upset them?'), then the talent is what is running the program, not the coach. Once you enable those kids to make YOUR decisions, they will always end up screwing you no matter how talented they are
If you don't have (or are building) a positve peer culture of a program, then regardless if you get a stud, it will all be disolved at the first signs of pressure. Build and nuture off-season comradery and competition (not cut-throat, but rewarding effort) so that you have a foundation of committed players to sustain new blood in the Fall.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 24, 2011 8:31:01 GMT -6
am i the only one that finds the irony in these two threads (with these opening posts) juxtaposed in this forum? If you "beg" a kid out, then at what point do your terms and his terms mesh?
Maybe hes lazy... thus if we run too much he may quit..
Maybe years ago he was made to play Oline... thus if we put him there he may quit.. I've read several posts recently concerning players/ parents complaining about positions, or place on the depth chart because of the position that they chose. I've also read about players quitting if they didn't get the position they wanted.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 19, 2011 11:55:24 GMT -6
you'll want to talk to the coach that recruits your area if they have one. so save them some time and bring your roster and tapes of players that actually could play for their program (seriously...the ones that COULD contribute not your slappys)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 19, 2011 11:51:18 GMT -6
Yes. Why does your program wait so long afte season is over to have banquet? I can't wait to get ours out of the way (do it 10 days after end of regular season regardless if we're still playing or not). most seasons won't end until the 2nd week of december.....so putting together a banquet would have to take place after the Christmas break (we have ours at the end of Jan) I feel like calling our HC and telling him I want the job and I'll spend the next 6 months learning the position. Should I do it? are you going to be okay if he says "no"? Yes, you should go for it, but don't take it personal
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 18, 2011 3:01:57 GMT -6
Setting up? You just call and ask
The quality odf visit is usually directly proportional to how many legitimate recruits your school has
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 15, 2011 9:22:57 GMT -6
I reallly dont know how someone is supposed to "read all the threads". Yes - everything and every possible question has already been asked on this board, but that sounds like a Mr Miagi task.
When you're just starting out yeah its great to find a focus, but to gain a quicker understanding of scheme and the game, one really needs to take a step BACK
I think Chris Brown does this really well where he can give you a perspective without drowning you in details. How many guys do you know that coud tell you a dozen ways to block power but never understand how a formation affects front/coverage? How many guys do you know that have 100 LB drills in their arsenal but.have no idea of gap support?
Get a grasp WHY formations and coverages exist, thay will flesh out the concepts used with them. Once you can understand the difference between a 2 man surface and a 3 man surface against cover 3, then you can really have a foundation and security to technique and drills
Rely HEAVILY on the coaches on your staff and dont be in a hurry to start calling the shots
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 14, 2011 22:50:47 GMT -6
thats an odd request.
If the HC is telling you your weakness is Xs and Os, I would think he would take the time to build your knowledge starting with the rationale behind what YOUR PROGRAM does, rather than leave you to fend for yourself. Is he inviting you to go with THEM to clinics?
Thats kind of strange to say "you're sick" and order you to "get better".
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2011 10:31:23 GMT -6
the most impressive thing to me was the stamina of Fairley. He was the biggest guy on Auburn's DLine - got limited breaks in the 70+ snaps of Oregon and even after the openers of screens (numerous perimeter attacks), cuts, and misdirection....he still was explosive in the late 4th quarter. That was phenomenal conditioning let alone, unbelievable play-making ability.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2011 7:28:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2011 6:25:56 GMT -6
could anything have changed, and or what would have been the response had the AU runner actually broke the plane and scored on that last run (ala Broncos-Packers 1997)?
|
|