|
Post by 19delta on Mar 8, 2017 13:46:53 GMT -6
Whenever the track team is "lifting", it is a f*cking joke. Basically 40 minutes of unsupervised grabass.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 1, 2017 4:33:03 GMT -6
I think as coaches we really are missing the boat on the "low numbers" situation that is gaining traction at so many schools. This BS about kids not wanting to do things that are hard is crap in my opinion, the real issue is how is that you as a coach have not presented your program in such a light as to make the non-playing kid think "Man, I got to be a part of that". Yep! Frosty Westering: "Make the bigtime where you're at."
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 28, 2017 19:44:36 GMT -6
We just had a successful coach come onto our campus to talk with our staff about this very issue. We are restarting Frosh FB this year and that should help our numbers (Freshman year is when we were losing kids) His other advice 22 starters at every level JV and below clear down into the youth program. Make every kid feel like a big time part Special teams whatever. Sell the dream Tell kids that with them on your team you have a real chance to be a playoff team, state contender, state champion when they are seniors. I'm not saying beg but sell the program then if they chose not to play let them go and coach the daylights out of the ones who are there. Make them all feel special make it special to be a football player so that you keep them. This is great stuff, coach. I coached youth ball for 7 years (5th and 6th grade). Every year, the vast majority of the teams we played only played their "best 11". Only the top 11-13 or so kids would get the majority of snaps on both offense and defense. If the other kids were lucky, they would maybe get in the last 4-5 minutes of the game when the outcome was already decided. In many cases, those kids wouldn't get in the game at all. And, as the years went by, those programs had fewer and fewer kids go out for football to the point that a couple of those programs aren't even fielding teams any more. We NEVER had that problem. We always had around 25-30 kids every year. That's because our rule was that everyone starts somewhere and everyone plays quality reps. Parents knew that if they signed up their kids to play with us, their kids were going to play a lot of football.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 24, 2017 20:15:39 GMT -6
Ok if it is the majority Brady then... What do they do offensively that sets them apart... Throw small, run big. As a result of free agency, schemes in the NFL are pretty vanilla...everyone does the same stuff, more or less. The difference is that an elite QB is just better at doing that stuff than an average QB. And an elite QB is going to improve everyone else around him.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 24, 2017 19:31:09 GMT -6
Look, Belichick is a GREAT coach. Maybe the greatest the NFL has ever seen. Not going to argue that he isn't.
BUT...
Having the greatest QB who has ever played has made his job relatively "easy" in the sense that for his entire run in NE, he really hasn't had to worry about the most important position on an NFL team.
I look at the first 5 years he had in Cleveland. He wasn't terrible there...certainly, there have been NFL head coaches with a worse 5-year tenure than Belichick had in Cleveland. But, he only managed one winning season and one playoff win in his five years. I think there is enough of a body or work there to suggest that he was a pretty run-of-the-mill NFL coach with average talent.
Now, maybe the argument can be made that Belichick learned from the mistakes he made in Cleveland and improved his coaching ability. But I don't think it is surprising that Belichick's rise to the top of the NFL coincided with the emergence of Tom Brady.
I don't think it is ALL Tom Brady because the Pats have certainly performed well for Belichick without Brady at times over the past 16 years. But I think Brady is a huge part of it.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 22, 2017 17:35:23 GMT -6
Can you justify a nearly 100 percent mark up and lower performing product in the Virgina Tech Helmet Rating? www.beam.vt.edu/helmet/helmets_football.phpWill your company pick up the helmets every year, recondition, certify and paint them like our Riddell rep does? And a 2-year lifespan for a $400 helmet? I'll pass...
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 19, 2017 8:59:41 GMT -6
We have a proposal in our district to change junior high football from a tackle to weight training and 7 on 7.
If it passes at the BOE meeting next month, I will not be surprised if the other schools we play will go to a similar program within the next couple years.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 12, 2017 13:49:32 GMT -6
Another example lest say a school has the power I for their youth program, middle school and high school and its been that way for years. Now the HC leaves and they need a new HC but they want a HC that runs the Power I. If that is what they want then that is what they want. It is their choice and they are paying the person who takes the job. Now no one has to take the job.Congratulations. In the case of your community, mission accomplished.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2017 22:00:51 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 10, 2017 17:06:30 GMT -6
The Track team has had parents coaching it. I know that two of the last 4 Head Coaches we have had haven't ever coached High School Football before. I can't say for a fact about the other two. We can't get a teacher coach to come because there are no teacher spots open. So you can't draw in a coach that would need to move. The school has let the Head Coach do what he wants and guess what we have got. School lets out at 3pm football players are told they should left until the coaches show up at 5pm. Guess who watches over them NO one, so most go home, go hang out at a stores, or goof off till the coaches show up. We have one pep rally each year for home coming. Coaches don't recruit with in the school because they don't get there till 5pm. There isn't and hasn't been no real structure to the program for the past 8 years, because of the people who have taken the HC job. I'm not saying that the people who took the job didn't feel like they tried or did what they could. I'm saying they didn't do what a Head Coach should and needs to. It has came down to Aug with no coach so they just take anyone. That said what coach is going to move to a school and coach a team for only $5700 a year and no teaching job. Each time a coach quits they wait all the way till the last minute hoping a teaching job opens up. At that point they take who ever so that the boys still get to play football. After seeing this happen over and over again for the past 8 years, it has made me think that I may need to do something my self, because what has been going on isn't working. The people/coaches that have taken the job isn't taking care of the things that need to be taken care of and the school has just let them do what they want because that is all they can get for now. Yes it still has the old coaches name on the website because they are hoping a teaching spot opens up and if not come Aug they will take whoever will take the job. Apologies if I have missed this, but are you acting in an official capacity by posting the opening and the job description here? Or are you acting on your own? In other words, are you someone who is in a position to hire the next head coach? Or are you just taking it upon yourself as a community member to attract applicants?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 3, 2017 16:35:20 GMT -6
As a dude, I can't see why you would want to do this to someone else. I think a lot of guys who engage in this kind of stuff secretly get off on it. It's like when schools used to let boys dress up as girls during Homecoming Week festivities. There are always a couple guys who enjoy doing it a LITTLE too much...
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 1, 2017 17:27:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 23, 2017 16:41:40 GMT -6
Last year we had 3 coaches but I expect only 1 and hope for another Incidentally, when does your season start? Is this some kind of spring football league? Around here, we are closing in on the end of wrestling and basketball and getting ready for track and baseball.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 23, 2017 16:40:33 GMT -6
You can also use assistant coaches in some of the less important positions on a given play or to fill a need. For example if you only have six big kids you won't be able to run an ol/DL against each other so an asst coach can mine at guard or something, just make sure your player doesn't try to kill him. Dads can also make passable scout LBs and just tag the RB. Yeah. In addition, make sure you tell the dads that they are only they for perspective, not to re-live past glories. You shouldn't have to tell them that, but there always seems to be 1-2 meatheads who want to go full-speed against the kids. And get 55-gallon plastic garbage cans to work on timing and blocking assignments.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 22, 2017 11:35:50 GMT -6
I tell our players that they are representatives of our school and our program, what they do doesn't reflect solely on them. They will stand for the anthem or they will sit for the game. I noticed one of my JV players at the first game of the season put his hands in his pockets and sit down, draw attention to himself to show what he was doing. The kid wasn't making a political statement, he's just a jackass and was trying to be funny. I walked across the track, pointed and hollered at him to "get up and show respect". He got plenty of attention but not the kind he wanted. He sat the next game. Their freedom of expression happens on their own time. When they're representing the program they will behave as we instruct them or they will play somewhere else. So you basically chose to infringe on his constitutional rights. Secondly, that article is over a year old, and I'm not sure what the purpose of bringing it up now serves aceback76 , other than to fan the flames of political rhetoric, during an already divisive time in our country, on a football board. This problem occurs when football collides with politics, or anything else outside of the game. If the kid was a jackass, you should have seen it coming and addressed it prior to the game, instead of teaching a misplaced lesson on civil rights. Freedom of expression has no boundaries. As a former Marine, I shed blood, sweat, and tears for people to say, what they want to say, when they want to say it. That principle, alone, is the difference between us and our enemies. Democracy vs. everybody else. I personally stand for the pledge every morning. I stand at attention for the national anthem. I pay my taxes, and as an 0331 (Machine Gunner) I appreciate the right to bear arms (I can still shoot the wings off a gnat). If I stand alone on this, well it won't be the first time I stood alone. But I won't stand idle and make it seem like it is okay to suppress certain alienable rights, especially in young people who may not know the full weight of their actions regarding this matter. US Army cavalry scout right here (1996-1999). I agree with 100% of what you said.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 22, 2017 9:35:51 GMT -6
If a kid cries after a tough game, it doesn't mean he is an emotional wreck who won't be able to handle challenges in the future. That's just a stupid statement. There's plenty of guys who post on this very website who have cried and are successful adults. Not sure about "stupid statement". Again your kids want to cry wonderful. I think coaches need to explain to kids spill your guts, but if your kids are crying about losing a regular season game (I get last game of career stuff) there is something wrong there. We just explain there are other things a lot more important to be shedding tears about. I think most coaches will tell you a lot of the crying is fake emotional stuff from kids for attention or because they "are so dedicated". Sorry I offended your sensitivity delta but as a teacher and coach the last thing kids needs these days is to think becoming overly emotional after games is fine because football is the singular part of a kids life and being. Balance. I was at a wrestling tournament yesterday. There were some tears after matches. Not a lot. But it did happen. Kids who had worked hard gave it their best shot and came up short and it hurt. About 99% of the time I saw kids tear up, that kid still shook hands with the other wrestler and the other wrestler's coach. Then, he went over to his own coach to talk briefly about the match. And within a couple minutes, the kid had collected himself and was good to go the rest of the day. About 1% of the time, the kid was completely inconsolable after a loss. I'm talking foot-stomping meltdown. Throwing down the ankle strap, storming off the mat and in some cases, right out of the gym. No handshakes. No attention paid to the coach. One of those reactions to a tough loss is reasonable and even expected. The other reaction is clearly not. But there is a world of difference between the two. Kids should be discouraged from crying over stupid things. But not everything that makes kids cry is stupid. Good coaches know the difference.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 21, 2017 18:13:13 GMT -6
I understand what some of you are getting at about emotional investment and having tight relationships with kids, but Again as educators coaches should be teaching kids to prioritize things that cause them to be so emotionally attached that they cry over wins and losses or performance. Football is not on the top hierarchy of things kids should get emotional enough about that the bawl after a game. Going off many of your premises, kids are invested and emotionally attached to girlfriends...should they cry when that relationship ends. Teaching coping skills and how to create success blueprints after losses and/or poor performance should be what we aim for in the coaching profession. This is equitable to failure at work; don't dwell, get emotional, use the failure to fuel success. Emotional investment is understood, but please stop crying. If a kid cries after a tough game, it doesn't mean he is an emotional wreck who won't be able to handle challenges in the future. That's just a stupid statement. There's plenty of guys who post on this very website who have cried and are successful adults.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 18, 2017 21:42:23 GMT -6
could it be related to the bobby bowden article? hmmmmm. I have seen it as well. And ive had it from really legit D1 players to chicken eaters. I even went so far as to say if you can make a player cry and he comes back, then youve got a real dude. I dont know why that is but it seems to work out. I have made a few cry. I am kind of a jerk. I don't sugar coat things and I am completely honest. Sometimes they can't handle that. With all that said I got no problem crying. The assistants actually make fun of me for it. Ive cried at the banquet when talking about a player who was graduating. I almost always break down when I address my offensive line pregame for what could be the last time. This year I couldn't even get anything out. Im like the Dick Vermiel of high school football. Football is an emotional game and football players and coaches are usually emotional guys. I don't think that is really what is being discussed in this thread. It is totally reasonable for a coach who has built a strong relationship with a kid (and vice versa) to get a little emotional at the end of the road. Or for a kid who has played his heart out in a close game to let out some emotion at the end. That is totally understandable and, to a large extent, it is desirable to have kids who care that much. I don't think the OP is talking about those kids and those situations, though. I think he is talking about the kids (and there are a lot of them) who have been told all of their lives that they are special little snowflakes and have never been told "no" and have been sheltered from anything even vaguely resembling constructive criticism. I see it in my classroom all the time. I teach 6th and 7th grade social studies. Our 5th grade teachers are NOTORIOUS for handing out "A" like candy. When we do our quarterly awards ceremony, there will be more 5th graders on the honor roll than the rest of the middle school (6-8) combined. So, when I get these kids, it's often a HUGE culture shock. Because not everyone is going to get an A. It never fails...the week before grades are due, I will get 10-15 kids coming up to me in study hall, bottom lip a-quiverin', hands a-shakin' asking what they can do to get their grades up so they can be on the honor roll. And when I tell them that there isn't anything they can do...that the grade they have is pretty much it, there are almost always tears. And within a half hour of getting home, I will have more than a couple emails from parents telling me that their precious little unicorn is crushed because they didn't make the honor roll and they deserve it because they were on it last year and "they tried really hard" (even though they often didn't). So, I think there is a difference. Genuine emotion is OK. When you see it, embrace it. Those are special kids. Those kids are your winners. But you have to be able to spot the fakers, too. Unfortunately, there are a lot more of them.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jan 9, 2017 21:06:13 GMT -6
A couple Alabama players are wearing scrimmage vests on the sideline. I saw a couple yellow vests and one guy wearing a blue vest. Are those guys signaling in plays or are the scrimmage vests for something else?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 31, 2016 23:15:32 GMT -6
Never heard of it, but I can see why after watching one video. I believe you meant without pads. It looks like they are living the dream. Yes... Meant "without pads".
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 31, 2016 9:14:37 GMT -6
Do any of you guys know anything about this? www.a7fl.com/Basically, looks like full-contact, 7-man football played with pads.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 30, 2016 23:16:10 GMT -6
I think that there is just too much football and it drives kids away. Where I live, kids start playing football in 3rd grade. And it is competitive...coaches play to win, even at that level (which is, of course, ridiculous). IMO, what happens is that kids just get burned out. Heck, some of these kids have already played 6 years of football by the time they get to high school. There just isn't anything to look forward to (regarding high school football) anymore and for some kids, it has become drudgery.
When I first stated playing tackle football in junior high school (mid-1980s), football started in August and was done by November. Then, in the winter, you got to play a different sport and then maybe a 3rd sport in the spring. Once in high school, we did lift weights year round, but there wasn't 7-on-7s, team camps, contact days, and all of the other stuff during the summer that is more or less mandatory now. And for the kids who play basketball and baseball, just add in summer leagues and weekend tournaments on top of all the mandatory football stuff and it's not a shocker that it is hard to get kids to play.
I think less is more. I wish we could wind the clock back to when the only thing you could do in the summer was lift weights and football started two weeks before the first game. But that just isn't going to happen. The genie is WAY out of the bottle.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 23, 2016 22:20:27 GMT -6
Jadeveon Clowney received a lot of advice to sit out his Junior season at South Carolina to avoid getting injured-ruining his top draft pick status and potentially losing millions of dollars, especially in light of what happened to Marcus Lattimore. He played as a Junior, and there was a lot of criticism of his effort, that he was "saving" himself for the NFL. Should he have sat the season out? How is Clooney doing at the pros coach? I don't watch pro ball till late in the playoffs. Reminds me of Drunk Rick Sutcliifle:
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 22, 2016 12:08:42 GMT -6
In economic terms, spos21ram is exactly right. The "market" (in this case, the NFL Draft) will determine whether or not the value of McCaffrey or Fournette has been reduced by not playing in this game. Very simply, the market is simply the perceived value that consumers attach to some commodity. It is not a judgment on whether or not that value is a net positive or a net negative. It just simply "is". But there has never been any deep discussion about this affecting value. The vast majority of the discussion has been about the ethics or character of the decision. That's why I wanted to clarify what I understood spos21ram to be saying. I hope I did not put words in his mouth.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 22, 2016 11:51:06 GMT -6
I think there is a line. Stanford went through a rough patch in the middle of the season. McCaffery sat out at least 1 game with an injury. If he packed it in at that point of the season then I'd say there may be some character issues. The "market" will decide where the line is. When NFL teams pass on a player, that will be where the line is. Be wary of crediting the market for deciding an abstract concept such as this. The "market" values drug kingpins more than your grandmother. In economic terms, spos21ram is exactly right. The "market" (in this case, the NFL Draft) will determine whether or not the value of McCaffrey or Fournette has been reduced by not playing in this game. Very simply, the market is simply the perceived value that consumers attach to some commodity. It is not a judgment on whether or not that value is a net positive or a net negative. It just simply "is".
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 22, 2016 7:39:14 GMT -6
Saban has great points. How can the importance be "saved"? Pandora's Box...probably can't be.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 22, 2016 7:37:33 GMT -6
That's a good point. What have the coaching staffs at LSU and Stanford said about these two guys? Are they generally supportive of them not playing? Have the schools issued any public comments at all? I don't know about Stanford, but with LSU, the decision was actually one that Coach O and Leonard made together. So I would say that is supportive. I think Nick Saban's comments on this sum up things pretty well. Wow. Thanks for posting that. I think Saban hit it out of the park.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 22, 2016 7:34:13 GMT -6
If anything, the colleges owe them. Both of those guys have more than earned whatever value their education was worth. One could argue that the value of their "education" is about to be defined by their earning potential in the NFL, not what some college gave them in scholarships to play FOOTBALL (calling them a student is laughable). By that context I say they owe their college money for without the college opportunity they wouldn't be worth 1/16th of earning potential. Chicken or egg. The point is, both guys were (I'm assuming) viewed as valuable commodities coming out of high school. I would imagine that there was intense competition for their services. LSU and Stanford offered scholarships to them in the hope that both players would perform at a high level. Both players did just that. So, Stanford and LSU got their money's worth out of both players. Neither player owes the schools anything. That debt has been paid in spades.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 21, 2016 21:54:22 GMT -6
Well, I think you can make the argument that we are already there. Let's face it...once a team gets 1 loss, they are on the bubble. 2 losses? Forget it. Heck...a team can win their conference championship but if they have 2 losses, they aren't getting in to a 4-team playoff. So yes...I agree. I do think that there is a consensus that the 4-team NC playoff is really all that matters and that all the other bowl games aren't really important. That's probably why there will be a big push to expand the playoffs. If you are a Top 10 team that had a terrific season but got left out of the NC playoff, your season is going to be largely forgettable. I'm sure that teams like Michigan and Penn State, for example, would be big proponents of a 6-team or 8-team playoff. Actually, I remember hearing both Harbaugh and Franklin saying they would not want the CFP changed. I think the change has to be with the MINDSET. Competition is NEVER meaningless...it is a very deep rooted part of the animal condition. That's a good point. What have the coaching staffs at LSU and Stanford said about these two guys? Are they generally supportive of them not playing? Have the schools issued any public comments at all?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 21, 2016 21:19:23 GMT -6
The question is, would McCaffrey and Fournette feel the same? And this is why I think this is a very interesting discussion. Some may say I crying the sky is falling, but I think this may very well be the start of trend (see, taking a knee during anthem) where anything that is not "a championship" is now considered meaningless. Team won't make the playoffs..quit and start playing round ball. Team can't compete for a title, don't go out for it. An interesting side note, about 4 1/2 years ago (when the CFP was first announced) I wrote into Beano Cook and Ivan Maisel's College football show asking them if they thought that having an "official" playoff tied with the bowls would lead to a diminished interest in any bowl game not involved in the playoff that year because the had been "officially" labeled meaningless. I wonder if that time has come. Well, I think you can make the argument that we are already there. Let's face it...once a team gets 1 loss, they are on the bubble. 2 losses? Forget it. Heck...a team can win their conference championship but if they have 2 losses, they aren't getting in to a 4-team playoff. So yes...I agree. I do think that there is a consensus that the 4-team NC playoff is really all that matters and that all the other bowl games aren't really important. That's probably why there will be a big push to expand the playoffs. If you are a Top 10 team that had a terrific season but got left out of the NC playoff, your season is going to be largely forgettable. I'm sure that teams like Michigan and Penn State, for example, would be big proponents of a 6-team or 8-team playoff.
|
|