|
Post by 19delta on Jun 4, 2021 8:39:49 GMT -6
I found that one had a linked in profile saying he was a PE teacher at St. Thomas Aquinas through March of 2018 (while also stating he was coaching at Mckinley since 2017 and was OC/qb coach). Another has a zoom info page that says he is "Safety and Security". (Not director of, not head of...it states he is "safety and security". His twitter acct says he is the Director of Player Personnel and Linebacker coach. It's not a job. It's a lifestyle.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 4, 2021 5:00:44 GMT -6
So, taking the pork/religion out of it--should the staff have been fired just for berating and humiliating a student for missing a voluntary work out? I say yes. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 3, 2021 12:00:16 GMT -6
The school is apparently a historical power in Ohio high school football. Looking at Wattley's previous job experience, he has never held any kind of certified staff position in a public school. His degree is not really applicable to working in a public school. My guess is that he was hired essentially to be the head football coach and the "athletic academic liaison" position was a sweetener. So you are probably right. He's not just a study hall supervisor. Instead he's a GLORIFIED study hall supervisor.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 3, 2021 11:04:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 22:59:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 18:29:44 GMT -6
If you are able to make your program attractive to the best athletes in the school, things will get easier for you as a coach. For me, the question is,what happens to the average kids? Do those kids ever get a chance in a FTC program? If they're just coming out because it's easier, I don't want to deal with the extra baggage a kid like that's going to bring. Any ease to me by having "better" athletes is going to go away with the other crap they're going to bring. Just my .02. Plus, having been a HC track and football, they're WORLDS apart in discipline. Yes. I generally agree with this statement. I think there is a very fine line between a program that is "fun" and a program devoid of accountability. Takes a special coach to be able to tread that line.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 14:34:21 GMT -6
I don't think Holler's approach is inherently wrong. I don't personally agree with going out of our way to make everything easier. Both in sport and in general life. If you are able to make your program attractive to the best athletes in the school, things will get easier for you as a coach. For me, the question is,what happens to the average kids? Do those kids ever get a chance in a FTC program?
|
|
|
Coaching
Jun 2, 2021 12:57:26 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 12:57:26 GMT -6
Eh...I'm not so sure about that. The entire "Feed The Cats" approach is based on prioritizing recruitment over development. Exactly. If you read Hollers statement on why he started it was to keep kids in track over the "easier" baseball. From his statement- My teams would be under-trained, but we would win because of our superior talent and our love of the sport. I don't think Holler's approach is inherently wrong.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 9:13:28 GMT -6
I read a successful HS coach say that the real essence of coaching is finding talent and getting it on the field. Thoughts on that? "Developing" might be more appropriate word than "finding." Eh...I'm not so sure about that. The entire "Feed The Cats" approach is based on prioritizing recruitment over development.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 9:11:11 GMT -6
I heard a story from a guy who attended a clinic at Nebraska when Tom Osbourne was the head coach. The clinic was for high school option offenses. The coaches are all on the field learning drills and techniques from Nebraska assistant coaches, GAs, and players. Osbourne shows up and walks through the session, shaking hands and making small talk. He comes up to a group of high coaches and asks if they are learning anything good. One guy asks Osbourne some question about footwork...real minutiae stuff. Osbourne doesn't respond to the question. He simply says, "You guys want to know the secret to winning football games? Get better players than your opponents." He shakes a few more hands, signs some books, and then walks off to another group.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 7:04:54 GMT -6
Emails and texts are easy to ignore I do it every day. There are some emails and texts that I don't respond to. For example...I'm a social studies teacher. I frequently get emails, texts, or even voicemails from student travel companies. What I have learned is that the WORST thing to do, in those cases, is to engage. Because, when I have, I will be innudated with calls, texts, emails, and promotional materials. What I typically do in those cases is to respond to the initial email by saying, "Thanks for contacting me. We are not interested in traveling." Then, I will create a filter that will automatically delete an email that comes from that account. I will also delete text messages and block the number. Voicemails? Damn...I check my voicemail like 3x a year!
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 2, 2021 6:49:22 GMT -6
I disagree. It takes literally seconds to respond to an email or text. - "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. We aren't looking for anyone right now."
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. Can you send me a resume?"
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. Is there a good time/location we can meet?"
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. If you contact our HR Department, they can get you started on the application process."
It took me less than 10 seconds to type all of those responses. It SHOULD be considered common courtesy to respond to a text or an email. any scenario where you wouldn’t reply? Thanks No, at least not one that comes to mind. Here's another reply: "Thanks for reaching out, Coach. I don't know what our staffing needs are going to be right now. Can you check back in with me in (give some time frame)?"
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 1, 2021 7:15:26 GMT -6
It is in a way. I think texting is an auto no unless it's to set up a phone conversation. Emails are fine but as someone pointed out they can get overlooked easily. Never hurts to let them see you face or hear your voice On the flip side some people (like me) don't text or feel compelled to reply to emails from people they don't know or didn't request. I think it depends on the context of the text or email. If I'm a head coach and someone reaches out via text or email about a coaching position on my staff, that person is going to get a response from me. Again...I think that is just common courtesy.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 1, 2021 7:10:23 GMT -6
This is true but it is also rude and $hitty. It is in a way. I think texting is an auto no unless it's to set up a phone conversation. Emails are fine but as someone pointed out they can get overlooked easily. Never hurts to let them see you face or hear your voice I disagree. It takes literally seconds to respond to an email or text. - "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. We aren't looking for anyone right now."
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. Can you send me a resume?"
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. Is there a good time/location we can meet?"
- "Thanks for contacting me, Coach. If you contact our HR Department, they can get you started on the application process."
It took me less than 10 seconds to type all of those responses. It SHOULD be considered common courtesy to respond to a text or an email.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jun 1, 2021 5:21:30 GMT -6
Emails and texts are easy to ignore This is true but it is also rude and $hitty.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 26, 2021 16:28:26 GMT -6
It's like the guys who play a two-deep man under for every play of a 7 on 7 game. We do not run two deep man. We will play some man free because it’s what we actually run during the season. But also because I know me and the other defensive coaches can strategically stand in a spot where we can take away the same routes the extra safety would. That's some next-level stuff right there. Nice.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 26, 2021 10:47:04 GMT -6
I did not watch it but I was just going on this rant the other day. I was an offensive linemen and thought 1 v 1s with the Defensive Line were stupid most of the time. As a DB coach I feel the same exact way. I am not against one on ones in general. The problem is that too often coaches are running them trying to see who will “win” instead of using them as a way to get better. I like to run them situationally. Like we might go down to the goalline and tell our kids they like to run slants and fades on the goalline and then ask the offensive guys to run slants and fades. At a lot of places when you run 1 v 1s you are getting double moves and crossing routes at the LOS and all kinds of stuff from the offensive scoundrels. They take the snap, 9 seconds later they complete a 137 yard stop and go and stop and go again for a long TD and my DB looks at me like “sorry coach...” This is a problem I have with how a number coaches design their practices in general. It's like the guys who play a two-deep man under for every play of a 7 on 7 game.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 22, 2021 16:44:19 GMT -6
Didn't some goober in upstate New York get a kid killed doing that SEAL team log lift thing? The log slipped and crushed a kid?
Yeah...no thanks.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 20, 2021 5:22:47 GMT -6
Has conditioning been a problem in your games? I am currently researching it. We were constantly gassed at the end of games prior to doing 10 110's after practice. We got better quickly when we conditioned last year. Mostly 2 way players. What were you guys doing prior to the 10 110s? Were you prioritizing speed reserve? I just can't see running 10 110s, with a one-minute rest between each, as particularly effective for developing either speed reserve or conditioning. First, given that it's probably taking the kids 15-20 (or more) seconds for each 110, you really aren't training the primary primary energy system utilized in football and second, there is no way the kids have enough rest between each 110 to be able to sprint. Is it possible that the biggest reason your team was "in shape" was not the 110s but simply the fact that it was halfway through the season and the players had finally adapted to the stress of football?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 19, 2021 0:52:35 GMT -6
I agree with both coachklee and chi5hi . I was a (bad) defensive lineman in high school. Going into my senior year, I was determined to play so I worked my butt off in the weightroom. However, when practice started I was still pretty bad and wasn't going to start. Got beat out by a junior. Our OL was struggling at the time so our OL coach asked me after practice if I would consider giving the OL a shot. Knowing that I was not going to be playing much on the defense, I jumped at the chance and was able to nail down the starting left tackle spot on an eventual quarterfinal playoff team in the biggest high school division in Illinois. I also ended up attending an above-average D3 school and was a 3-year starter. So yeah...I don't think there is anything wrong with communiciating to kids that their best chance at getting on the field might be at a position other than the one they would like to play. I think there are some other things you can do, though. Here's some thoughts: - The OL does not have to carry bags or equipment out to practice or have to put that stuff away at the end of practice
- The OL gets unique helmet award stickers or special t-shirts. Basically, turn the OL into a secret society.
- On game day mornings, the OL goes to breakfast with their coach or they get together with their coach on the weekend for pizza. They get to nominate 1 non-OL player each week to join them. That guy gets to be an honorary "Hog of the Week" (or "Big Cat" of the Week if you are a Tony Holler guy).
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 8, 2021 10:08:32 GMT -6
We have Intek bumpers and they have held up very well, even the 10’s which I've seen bend and bow with other brands. Intek makes great products. I own a MF bar. It's awesome!
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 7, 2021 19:34:37 GMT -6
Has anyone found 100-lbs. bumper plates recently? They seem to be out of stock everywhere. As a guy who asked for 100lb metal plates for Christmas, what do you need 100lb bumpers for? Not trying to be snippy, genuinely curious. You have many kids cleaning 245 first set? I've never seen a 100lbs bumper weight. I always thought the heaviest bumper plate was 25kg/55lbs.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 6, 2021 16:27:29 GMT -6
Rogue HG 2.0 bumpers are the best I have ever used. Every other brand of bumpers I have used, the metal insert always comes loose. I've never had that happen with the HG 2.0s.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Apr 21, 2021 16:56:35 GMT -6
Education is important...but football is importanter. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Apr 21, 2021 16:54:51 GMT -6
Education is important...but football is importanter. 1hr in the weight room is worth a lifetime in the classroom Pro tip...if the football practice field isn't ready to go, you can always use the parking lot at Beef O'Brady's.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Apr 14, 2021 19:15:48 GMT -6
Love them all, even the one's who cannot help you. Yeah. That's a really good one. The way I heard this best explained was "there are a lot of kids who need football a lot more than football needs them".
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Apr 14, 2021 19:13:18 GMT -6
I was taught that in a pe major class. Best advice there is. Sadly, some coaches at all levels don't abide by the lesson... True. It seems that there are way too many teachers and coaches who have embarrassingly sloppy personal lives.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Apr 14, 2021 4:59:14 GMT -6
The best pieces of advice I ever got was, "if you aren't going to be any good, play a lot of kids".
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 15, 2021 19:28:41 GMT -6
But the allegations he made against Kirby Smart and Nick Saban are a pretty big deal. I thought he signed an affidavit basically saying that he made all that stuff up?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 14, 2021 21:03:52 GMT -6
In college, we had a "strong" side and a "quick" side. The ST and SG would always line up on the right side and the QT and QG would always line up on the left side unless the formation was called "left". In that case, ST and SG lined up on the left side and QT and QG lined up on the right side.
What was unique about the system is that the playcalling terminology followed the players. So, even-numbered holes were always to the strong side and odd numbered holes were always to the quick side, regardless of whether they lined up on the right or left side.
Example: our off-tackle play to the strong side was called "24". 2 back through the 4 hole. We usually ran it to the right. But if the formation was called "Left 24" in the huddle,ST and SG would line up on the left side and the play would be run to the left.
It was initially confusing because virtually all high school players equate odd numbered holes to the left and even numbered holes to the right, but eventually it made a lot of sense.
|
|