|
Post by coachks on Aug 9, 2021 10:55:00 GMT -6
To piggy back of the last thread what we are missing is quality backups. Those are the types of kids we are seeing not play. We got starters. And we got bench warmers. But that kid who couldn’t start but is a quality backup isn’t playing for us. Too much work and sweat to sit on the bench when he could have a job and make his truck payment. Just what we are seeing The big difference to me is that they have more opportunities in other sports than before. AAU basketball, Travel Soccer, Fall Ball and Lacrosse all provide fall options for kids. I teach in a big suburb with some money- the kids have choices besides backup and scout team. Can’t really say I blame them either. We ask more from them in the spring and summer - and if you are not going to get playing time, but you will in Lax or Fall Ball… it really ain’t a difficult choice. I graduated in 2005. We had three 7 on 7 dates - all on a Monday morning , a 3 day minicamp and then one week of conditioning. Weight room was open every morning and evening for an hour and they expected you to make 3 days a week. Right now we are Monday-Thursday for 3 hours in the evenings. Totally different commitment level. When I played, you weren’t really expected to be there in the summer before your varsity seasons. Now we want rising freshman involved. It’s a tough ask to give up 4 summers to maybe play some special teams as a senior.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jun 24, 2021 19:15:05 GMT -6
There is also a key difference in what the student did. She didn’t specifically mention individuals or the school by name. To the hypothetical above - she didnt cuss out the coach, teammates or the school. She vented frustration in a non-specific way. So the idea that a kid can blast a coaches play calls with no punishment is not an apples to apples. I think a more accurate hypothetical would be - you lose a game and you have a kid make a video that says “We need to run the f*cking ball”. And then you suspend the kid off the team for 365 days. Not sure that is right, or at least it is slicing it thin. She said "F--k school f--k softball f--k cheer f--k everything.” On the other hand, as one of the Justices said at argument, if using swear words off campus can be punished (including by suspending you from the team), then schools/teams would be doing nothing but punishing. You are more qualified then me, so I am not arguing - just sharing the interpretation I heard from other people more qualified then myself. It emphasized that she said “F school, cheer ect..” which is not the same as saying “F Valley HS, F Coach Johnson, F Lisa Smith” which is a distinction between what’s protected speech and/or disruptive. So in the hypothetical above, a player blasting his coach by name on social media is not a direct comparison to what this girl did. Or atleast that’s how other people involved in educational law interpreted this based on the details.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jun 24, 2021 14:37:03 GMT -6
There is also a key difference in what the student did. She didn’t specifically mention individuals or the school by name. To the hypothetical above - she didnt cuss out the coach, teammates or the school. She vented frustration in a non-specific way. So the idea that a kid can blast a coaches play calls with no punishment is not an apples to apples. I think a more accurate hypothetical would be - you lose a game and you have a kid make a video that says “We need to run the f*cking ball”. And then you suspend the kid off the team for 365 days.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 3, 2021 5:40:23 GMT -6
Nebraska ran a play against Michigan, this is probably 8 years ago now - I'm pretty sure Ahmeer Abudllah was the runningback, where they ran the Invert Veer, handed it on the outside sweep, and then the RB ran it like speed option and pitched. So it was triple option, but with 3 different ball carriers.
In a sense its cyclical - I mean it really isn't that different in concept to some very old single wing stuff with wide laterals and 3-4 ball handlers - in a sense it would be innovative... taking those principles and applying it to a "spread" offense with a lot more options.
In short, a lot more laterals / options by non-QB players. I don't know what the practical limit would be ... but running something like triple option with 2 pitches, hook and lateral as an option ect.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 29, 2021 11:36:10 GMT -6
Innovation tends to happen because of rule changes. Why didn't the RPO happen in the 1950s and 1960s? Different ball, different shape, different material. It was harder to throw and catch before. Before the 1980s you couldn't use hands in blocking. Those are some serious rule changes that created the conditions for the "West Coast Offense" to really evolve. There is no "air raid" if you have to use shoulders to block.
I would also make a strong argument that technological advancements (Hudl in particular) have made certain offenses possible at the lower levels. When I first started coaching, we would film 1 or 2 practices a season (usually intrasquad scrimmages). Now we film practice every day. It makes reading certain things a lot more plausible when you have HD film for every session.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 6, 2021 9:43:55 GMT -6
Day 1 - Base Day 2 - Base + Common Blitzes + Goalline Day 3 - Base + Pass Rush / Nickel
Eventually, Day 1 (Base) starts to include the most common blitzes. Day 2 becomes the variants of those blitzes. So from our 3-4 package, Day 1 is Base / Quarters. Day 2 is 1 man blitzes from quarters. Day 3 is the 2-4-5 package. After about a week, Day 1 includes the 1 man blitzes and Day 2 becomes the 5 man NCAA stuff. After about a week, Day 1 includes the NCAA stuff and Day becomes some specific gameplan stuff. By that point we are in-season.
In Season Day 1 - Monday Day 2 - Tuesday Day 3 - Wednesday
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 5, 2021 10:15:31 GMT -6
I think it's big plays. This study doesn't exist for high school - but I think the 3 biggest factors are:
1) Explosive Plays - For and Against. 2) "Havoc" Plays - Tackles for Loss, Sacks, Tipped Passes, Turnovers. --- --- --- --- --- 3) First Down Efficiency - For and Against (Efficiency as defined as gaining / not gaining 5 yards).
I think these are 3 very intuitive, and coachable, metrics. An offense that has explosive plays, avoids negative yardage and turnovers, and consistently gains yards on base plays will score a ton of points.
A defense that avoids big plays, can generate tackles for loss and consistently hold teams to 3-4 yard gains will not give up a lot of points.
How are they coachable: Offense: 1 --> Are you generating explosive play opportunities. Do you get open field 1 on 1s? Do you take enough "shots" (be it vertical passing or whatever). 2 --> What blocks are you missing that result in negative plays? What type of plays are leaving you vulnerable to "havoc." How do you adjust the technique or assignment to fix it. 3 --> Why are you getting stopped on 1st down? Incomplete passes? High variance plays? Predictable play calling? Running Back dancing in the backfield, quarterback who won't pull the trigger?
Defense: 1 --> Are you leaving a DB in a bad position, or with bad leverage? Poor Tackling / Pursuit? Blowing contain, or hitting the wrong gap on a blitz? 2 --> How can you attack the offense to create Havoc? If you aren't generating negative plays in base defense, what type of blitz or stunt will? Are the blitzes timing it poorly? DL not getting off the ball fast? Bad angles? Or is the QB getting the ball out to quick.... or are they simply going outside before you have time to get there. 3 --> What are your 1st down calls --> If they aren't working, then change them.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 17, 2020 13:10:32 GMT -6
If you can go 4-7 a couple times, you can put on some clinics and sell books about your culture.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 22, 2020 17:17:23 GMT -6
What size wheels do you guys suggest? 48 for HS Varsity. Can use a 42 for JV.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 22, 2020 15:10:02 GMT -6
They’re fantastic. You do need 2-3 of them for efficiency (same way you have a line of scout kids during a drill).
We don’t do a ton of rolling with them, but I like them for traditional form tackling. Roll it right at a guy and they tackle the front of the wheel and wrap through the inside and pick it up and run. This forces them to get into a hitting position, wrap and explode up with their hips to get it off the ground.
We will do the same with an angle tackle and have them pick up the wheel without rolling (basically punch and arm through the inside and then wrap the other arm.
They’ve been really nice to add on to other drills that we used to have to use a kid holding a bag - those reps were always sloppy because kids will brother-in-law the tackle and slow down.
We also use them for your kickout blocks, angle roll tackle and the stuff they put on the videos, but in general we don’t roll them a ton once we are in the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jan 14, 2020 10:11:13 GMT -6
I'll echo. The more specific the topic, the better. Part of that is so much overview is readily available online that a broad view and "camp rules" are just not useful. There are 15 different writeups on Rip/Liz match. What isn't readily available is how they drill the technique, in-game adjustments, how teams attack you ect.
Offensively, you drawing up some base rules against a 4-4 isn't going to help. How do you teach it against a defense people actually play in 2020?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Nov 27, 2019 20:10:20 GMT -6
Every year I spend a lot of time in the off season, camp and eventually find an excuse during the season to get into a 3-3 look - except I’ll never actually just put it in right because it’s only ever a package. There have been times that it has been effective. There’s been times it’s been a disaster. It always solves some problem we have, but it always creates a new one.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 2, 2019 22:15:24 GMT -6
Are there any studies yet on the impact of early enrollment for high school football players? Have the January enrollments led to less kids transferring and red shirting? Are a higher percentage graduating? Not sure of any formal study, but there are a LOT more grad-transfers then there used to be. There are especially a lot of kids grad-transferring with 2 years left. It has to be related to early enrollment getting those kids in January and then keeping them through the summer. Kids are completing 3 terms before they play in their first fall.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 1, 2019 19:22:28 GMT -6
... (other than retiring or getting fired), what likely would be the reason? Tired of parents? Higher paying job? Need more time with the family? I've been waiting to post in this thread to try and organize my thoughts as I've recently done just this after 21 years in coaching and education. I don't know if I've really been able to quantify it to just a couple reasons. I think a list would be sufficient. 1. I don't like the direction football has been going for a while. The emphasis on me, me getting a scholarship, me getting my stats, me getting my name in the paper, how does my jersey and helmet look, what are you doing for ME coach? 2. Parents are absolutely abysmal {censored}. 3. I really detest the social media dick sucking that goes on and is expected of you. 4. Kids are {censored}. Those of you that say kids haven't changed are delusional. (And no, I'm not trying to reignite that argument- it's definitely a reason I'm saying adios though) 5. I can not stand this #Grind {censored} everyone is expected to do by kids and their parents. This idea that taking a day off, or more, is weakness is insane and ruining the sport IMO. 6. I detest this notion that we are supposed to be fill in fathers. I did not sign up to teach kids morals and other stuff. If their parents don't do that, I don't agree with the notion that it's on me to do so- same for teaching. I'm just here to coach football. I'm sure some of you holy rollers or makers of men will scoff at this, but I would also be willing to wager you don't effect 90% of the kids you think you do with all your leadership classes and that stuff. 7. The lack of anonymity. I've greatly enjoyed being just larrymoe for the past 9 months instead of Coach larrymoe. 8. The idea that you're noble for sacrificing your kids and wife to "save" other kids. Want to save kids? Start with your own. 9. The emphasis on winning is horrific. Over the past two years I've seen such terrible behavior just overlooked so you could "compete" on Friday night I couldn't stomach it anymore. 10. I stopped caring if we won or lost. I just wanted it to be over. I'll stop at 10, but there's a lot more. I won't go into teaching. I never got off on teaching and when I decided I was good with walking away from coaching, it made no sense to stay in a job I despised to make less money than I can at a 40hr a week job that has incredible benefits for my whole family. I haven't been associated with coaching HS football since last October and I haven't missed it a second. This is a pretty good summary. My big ones are - 1) Getting kids to college. I can't make him taller, and since colleges don't even bother with film much anymore there isn't anything I can do. Heres a camp. They're going to measure him, run him and then put him in a group. It's not my DNA, sorry. 2) College football is not a good thing for most kids. I've seen a lot more kids blow money to play a year of D3 football and realize it sucks then loved playing for 4 years. Why should I promote that? So some parent can feel great that they produced a "college" football player? 3) "Trainers" / "Travel 7 on 7" and everything associated with that. None of that has anything to do with winning on fridays. None of it has anything to do with being a good teammate. It's garbage related to point #1. 4) "Branding" - Why does a high school need a brand? Why does a football team need a brand? Why do I have to tell my story so nobody else does. Its high school football. But if a few mommy and daddys don't think your twitter game is up to snuff, obviously you don't care enough. That's for sure the reason that the 6'1, 290 pound OT isn't good a scholarship atleast.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Aug 1, 2019 19:06:41 GMT -6
We have to take NFHS courses to coach in our state (NC), and one of those courses this year was the USA football contact system (Tip of the Spear / Bridge and Pillar). I like the Hawk tackle stuff (the original video that is) and thought that the Pillar stuff seemed interesting enough. Since the video advertises you get 3 free system if you go make an account, I went over and checked it out.
It says to start with the "Coil" video set since it's the foundation. Fair enough. I turn on the first video and it's a 2 minute video about the athletic stance. Ok. I skip ahead a couple of videos down to a drill video... and it's a minute and a half of how to run with a tennis ball between your hands + buy a piece of equipment to do it. Ok, not going to do it, but no biggie. It's for all levels, so I figure I'll move on to the next section which hopefully is a little more advanced. I move to the next section (Uncoil) and watch a little video about how to move your hips, again... ok sure pretty basic but again, it's for all levels. I go find something about the actual pillar technique, but that was it. That's the entire trial. What a waste of time. To subscribe to this would be $100.
If their mission was really "to make a better, safer game" shouldn't this stuff be free? What an absolute load of crap that my state makes me watch what amounted to a commercial for them under the guise of safety. I already was skeptical since they've tried to re-brand tackling at-least 3 times in the last few years (From Heads-Up, to Hawk Tackling to "5 Fights"). I thought it'd be worth spending 30 minutes learning a new technique. Nope. Another scam from an organization who is trying to promote safety.
/rant
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jul 15, 2019 8:41:03 GMT -6
So many different issues at play here. I followed the twitter thread and many of the subsequent spin offs (mostly an echo chamber)...
What I find very interesting is the seemingly large disconnect between the science and actual results as they play out. This is not meant as a my anecdote disproves science, but more to open up questions as to how well "exercise science" as really understands the toll football places on the body.
The idea here is that football is played in 4-5 second bursts of maximum energy (Anaerobic Alactic according to the twitter crew), but that just doesn't mesh with the reality of how people feel after a game (there is definitely lactic build up). So the real question is, is football actually an anaerobic sport played in 4-5 second bursts as the argument states. At what point does anaerobic convert to aerobic? Example:
Nose tackle play 1: Get in stance, play the snap. It's a bubble, so he is engaged for 2 seconds, sheds, and "sprints to the sideline" in pursuit. Play is tackled (5 yard gain), he gets there a few seconds later from his "sprint." Maybe 8 seconds of action by the time he gets slowed down. Offense is no huddle, so he is over the ball waiting for the center to place his hand on it - so he gets 5 or 6 seconds of rest here. Then he is down in his stance (He is fat, so this is a bit of work for him), it's Inside Zone so he takes on the double, it goes to the ground, but it was a 15 yard gain. Big boy gets off the ground, jogs 15 yards ahead and gets, catches his breath for 3 seconds, then is back in his stance. It's a drop back pass this time so he does the fat man dance and him and the center just hang out for 3 seconds. The ball gets thrown and caught for a 9 yard gain... he "sprints in pursuit" on the catch and gets there just a little after the tackle. Catch his breath for 4 seconds then back in his stance. IZ again, but his time he posts up the center, ball carrier bounces outside and he works down the line, ball carrier cuts it back and he gets in to help clean up the ball carrier. The crew goes down so they have to untangle, get up... get set. Defensive Call is for him to slant and penetrate on this 3rd and 2 so now he is going to go full speed. Ball is snapped, he penetrates his gap, QB scrambles on the pressure so he pursues to the sidline. QB reverses field on him and he turns back and chases the other way before eventually the QB whips it to the sideline over his receiver. That little scambled lasted 9 seconds.
That is a 5 play series. Probably 4 minutes real time. He was full speed for... 25 seconds? He was resting for... 25 seconds? He was jogging in pursuit/to get lined up, engaged, in his stance, in a pile for 2 minutes? Is that really anaerobic for a 275 pound 17 year old, or is he maxing out his aerobic system. What if this was a 8 play drive? What if the offenses fumbles the first snap and he is back on the field?
Lets look at a diffrent position, say corner. You are lined up on the left side, they run sweep right. You get in a pursuit lane for the last man tackle and go about 75% for 30 yards (You can't track the ball, so tough to sprint full speed). Whistle blows, jog back. Next play the receiver is running a decoy 9 route, so you run 25 yards with him, whistle blows, jog back. Now they run screen at you, sprint - shed - tackle. Next play is a screen to the other side, back on that last man angle with the long jog.
Is that aerobic or anaerobic. You went 100% once. You probably ran at 75% for 100ish yards. And jogged about 100ish yards. Which energy system are you taxing here?
So much of the "energy system" arguement assumes that 1) The play is the only movement, and 2) Kids actually go 100% every snap - which isn't true at any level of the game, it's not even practical (can you go 100% before you see the ball?)
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jul 2, 2019 9:42:26 GMT -6
Doesn't a lot of the lawnmower parents / video game culture really contradict itself? Both can't exist at the same time.
Online gaming is insanely difficult to be good. You are not competing against your peers, your not competing against your local kids. It's not at a state level. It's not even national. To be "good" at gaming, you have to be better then billions of people (especially Asian populations). There's no barrier for entry.
So for a parent to live vicariously through their child, it ain't gonna be through online gaming.
I played a ton of pickup sports growing up. Street hockey in particular. I think the implication that it is a "better" way to play then through organized leagues has no backing too it. Honestly, I would have killed to play travel ball and go to camps instead of playing made up rules.
It's also ironic that we have a post about how we can't coach kids hard (They don't get it, haven't experienced failure) the day after the commercial goes viral about the dad berating his kid on the car ride home. It's also in a post talking about online gaming - a platform renowned for how horrific everyone treats each other.
Here's how you coach Gen x, z millenials, alpha or whatever: - Be organized and have a progression. - Give constant feedback - positive when it's good, tell them how go fix it when bad. - Drills should be directly related to team. You should see the drill during a team period. - Praise publicly, admonish privately. - A picture is worth a thousand words, video is probably worth ten thousand. - Talk to them about their friends, family, Hobbies and school. Football is 10% of their day. - Before you jump their sh*t, make sure they understand their job. It's not their fault if you can't teach it. - Give the players ownership whenever possible. The more responsibility they have, the more invested they are. If you can't trust them, you didn't do a good job teaching them.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 26, 2019 13:36:22 GMT -6
Half line and Pod are on the list of drills banned in the NFL now. I don't know what Pod is, but it's implausible to me that a NFL team, with all their players and coaches, would ever want to do half-lines, so maybe they meant something else. I'm guessing here about "pods" but my assumption is that would be talking about perimeter fits (having TEs, WRs ect and throwing screens, sweeps ect), or having just OL/DL + LB and doing interior fits. Essentially, half-line but instead of right/left you are doing inside/outside and what not. As to half-line, I think it's a very valuable teaching tool because you can get so many more reps by cutting down the number of participants. Thats fewer guys getting untangled, walking back to the huddle ect ect. You can have a playside / backside setup at the same time, so when the left group is regrouping after a snap, the right group is going so you have less dead time. If you are only coaching up 3-5 guys at a time, you can focus on a lot more details. The NFL is also fairly limited as far as players as well. With Practice Squad they have 61??? guys I think. But you can go ahead and remove 3 QBs, a Kicker, Punter and Longsnapper since they'll never be a part of you defensive session (When you would be doing half-line). So, now you have 55. Offense is going to be practicing at the same time, so go ahead and take away at minimum 20 guys. So now the defense has, at best... 35 guys to use. Except, looking at any NFL injury report shows that on any given early week practice you are missing 7-8 guys as non-participants... so now we are down to about 28 guys to use for practice. I highly doubt anybody in the defensive 2-deep is playing scout team guard (You think Aaron Donald is running reps as the scout team FB for a drill?)... so you have 10 guys give or take that are going to scout during a defensive practice session (Not team, group sessions). Yea, half-line would make a lot of sense to me. I doubt it's a huge deal to them, but I can see where they would get value or want to do it if injuries start to pile up and you have a lot of guys who are not full go for practice.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 25, 2019 21:16:40 GMT -6
I think most people who are against this announcement don't care so much about the Oklahoma and Bull in the Ring drills, and a lot more about Half-line, Pod Work and the general movement towards demonizing contact. But is that what is being discussed? Are people floating the ideas of not using Half Line and Pod work? Half line and Pod are on the list of drills banned in the NFL now.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 25, 2019 11:33:51 GMT -6
Something that we need to understand is that these drills are going away as much because of time as for safety. NFL training camps used to last for eight weeks with two or three practices a day and six pre-season games. Colleges spent a month in spring ball and did two or three practices a day during pre-season. HS two-a-days lasted two or three weeks. Now, the CBA limits the amount of time and contact that NFL teams can have. NCAA and Federation restrictions do the same in college and HS. There just isn't enough time to spend (Waste, IMO) on drills that don't have a direct application toward preparing for the next opponent. Great points. Also, does anyone else find it a little odd that on a board filled with threads on RPOs, zone blocking rotations, count schemes, skip pulling technique, track/angle blocking, double team techniques, combo block techniques, reading defenders, defensive line slant technique, LB reading OL or Backs or a combination of both, BDSD DL technique... etc ...people are discussing a drill that puts an OL and a DL essentially nose to nose in a base block situation with a ball carrier following right behind in a 5-6 foot corridor that begins on a coaches command instead of a snap count? I think most people who are against this announcement don't care so much about the Oklahoma and Bull in the Ring drills, and a lot more about Half-line, Pod Work and the general movement towards demonizing contact.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 24, 2019 12:06:47 GMT -6
I like a lot of stuff that is "new" - the Hawk Tackling, USA football, Tackle Wheels. We use a thud tempo about 90% of the time (I've never coached for a team that went "to the ground" more then a handful of times during camp + maybe 1 goalline period a week). I think it's a net benefit, I think it's smart I am all for reducing collisions.
But, at some point, you are creating a bigger danger. Learning how to get hit is a skill. Learning how to go to the ground is a skill. Learning how to protect yourself in contact is a skill. "Contact Courage" is a skill (not dropping your head before a big hit, not turning away and making yourself vulnerable). Controlled drills on bags are great for teaching and drilling, but there is a level a point where we have to teach kids how to hit safely at full speed. Every season I have coached I have seniors who play football for the first time (or the first time since middle school or freshman year).
So the first time these kids get hit (or do the hitting) full speed should be in a game? The first time a kid gets into a gang tackle situation and feels the pile going down should be against the other team (who presumably have experienced players). So the kid is playing receiver, catches the slant and turns upfield and gets plowed because he's never actually had the safety drive into HIM instead of just tagging off. Or some 1st year corner steps up to force the run and the RB decides to get right though his chest with his pads down? Or they don't know how to roll during the fall to protect the shoulder joint, or to get the spikes out of the ground when the pile is rolling at him?
Because those are all skills that you get when you work small groups where you know the play + assignment, you are going against similarly skilled players and you might get 3-5 reps in a row where you know where the contact is going to occur (but it is still live). You can anticipate the pileup and roll over it. Or you know where the back is comign from and can anticiapte the hit.
Way, way, way safer then when the kid is lined up at corner, trying to read his keys... is nervous that his girlfriend is watching, is thinking about what that coverage call means.... and suddenly he has to make his 3rd or 4th live tackle of his life.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 24, 2019 9:15:19 GMT -6
If they want to ban the Oklahoma Drill in the NFL no problem to me. I can't imagine it is accomplishing very much for them to justify the risk to millionaires- most of them with lingering shoulder, knee and hip issues. The same reason I don't care that they limit how many days they can wear pads or have a scrimmage. It's like comparing grad students to 7th graders.
I can't imagine why they would ban pods or half line. Those are drills literally invented to increase safety and let you focus on teaching technique in a controlled environment.
For me, I do "Oklahoma" all the time - 1 OL vs 1 DL (or LB). But I use a tackle wheel for the runningback, because I don't want a RB trucking into my engaged defnder, or the tackle rolling up the back of the OL's leg. Is that banned too?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 7, 2019 6:09:26 GMT -6
Yea, not coaching for spring ball is probably BS. There could be a valid explanation (he has a ton of meetings with regard to these classes), but probably not. If you had met over winter, been discussing the season ect... and he had been a participant and knew he was part of the practice plan, that's unprofessional.
If your program puts out a calendar and everyone just rolls in for spring day 1 and decides its practice time.... that's on the HC.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on May 4, 2019 16:55:41 GMT -6
I've found that I use fewer drills the more years I coach.
As for getting bored.... how much detail are you getting into?
DL big picture... you have stance/start/block reaction (At, Away, tech for kickout), pass rush, slant/stunt.
That's 5 skills, 3 minutes for each skill each days fills 15 minutes. 4 minutes fills 20.
But really, there is a lot more detail... Stance & Start... base, goal line, pass rush. All 3 of those situations are different... making a pile on the goalline vs a straight pass rush stance and get off.
Block reaction - hand placement, escapes, double teams, wrong arm tech (or staying square). Playing QB. Chase and tackle. Taking on a downblock
Pass rush skills - Get off, angles, turning the corner, speed move/power move/counter move, QB contain, strip sack
Slants and games - footwork& aimpoint, twists, block reaction on slants, pass rush games, run stunt games.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Apr 30, 2019 20:43:14 GMT -6
A non highschool football related post: I was rewatching Superbowl 52 and it hit me. The guy who is notorious for breaking, bending, ... using loopholes within the rules to give his team an advantage is yet to run an RPO to my knowledge. Does anyone have any idea/insider info/opinion why Belichick of all coaches is yet to run RPO's? (even the basic run access throw stuff?) My guess is that Brady is so good at the check-with-me/ audibles that there is no need for them. I'd say a big part of why they don't do post-snap RPOs is that he doesn't want to risk Brady taking a shot from an unblocked rusher, which happens a lot in RPO schemes, especially when you start pulling OL. It's not like they've needed them to win Superbowls or maintain their dominance. As others have said, they've done the "Now" pass pre-snap RPO and a couple of similar things for a long, long time as a part of the offense early in Brady's career when Charlie Weiss was their OC. It was part of the "decided schematic advantage" he bragged about when he took over at Notre Dame. The part about the free shot on the QB is a huge part of it I think. That was always a big part of the "you can't run option in the NFL" (either zone read or triple) because your 20 million dollar QB is going to get have a 270pound freak of nature run through his chest. I know they don't run a ton of "true" RPO in the NFL (they usually lock the BS tackle in pass pro till... don't pull the guards as much), but our day 1 defense of the RPO is to have the OLB go straight at the QB.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Mar 15, 2019 17:55:45 GMT -6
I think a big part of the split here is that "culture" has become conflated with Tom Herman and PJ Fleck and that brand of showmanship. Thea idea that a catchy motto, insincere displays of affection and buzzwords are going to make you a winner. Like so many, they are marketing themselves at all times, under the guise of being a "players coach" whenever cameras are rolling. That's BS and fluff.
Culture that wins you games is Saban/Belichick/Chip(@oregon)/Urban/Harbaugh. They grind their guys to dust, burn bridges left and right and are generally a-holes with regards to the game and how things are done. Whether you call it "The Process" or whatever, the idea that the game is a meritocracy, they have exacting standards on exactly how it HAS to be done, and anybody not hitting those standards is gone.
And when I think about the HoF level coaches I've been around (not just football, all sports). They guys with multiple state championships ect, that is exactly how they are. It doesn't mean they treat everyone like garbage, and it doesn't mean you have to be a miserable dictator. But they have no problem processing people who don't meet the standard. Get better or get passed.
Now, the practicality of that in the high school setting is a real issue. Some programs with "tradition" have kids who are young and hungry and can pass a senior who wants to skip spring weights. Other programs have 35 kids, and no matter how hard #33, #34 # work, they aint getting into the top 22.
As far as building confidence - that comes through good teaching / coaching and the kids being prepared for a situation. Kids who know their job inside and out play with confidence. Kids who don't play slow and start to blame everyone else. It's not rah-rah stuff. Breaking it down to "family" doesn't create a brotherhood and having a locker in doesn't make you OLB sit on QB. Having a good staff that has been working their responsibilities and correcting every mistake in practice is what makes your OLB sit on the QB.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jan 29, 2019 14:24:03 GMT -6
Its another great example of history repeating itself.
Twitter was/is great because it makes things so easy. Easy to upload videos, easy to reply... it's right on your phone, you can keep up with anything. Football twitter was great, you get some cool cutups and share ideas. Impromptu conversations with multiple coaches.
But, like everything else, people figured out you can make money off of it and now it's gone to {censored}. No different then blogs or facebook or whatever other internet fad boomed and is now firmly on the decline. It used to be great content -> gain popularity -> gain money. People get a sniff of the money and the cycle becomes mass content = perfect monetization strategy -> repeat.
This is different then saying making money is bad. There are lots of good football books (including @jordon1 ). I have no problem with people making money off football (clinics, books, tapes ect). I have a much bigger issue with "branding" your garbage and then using a bunch of manipulative monetization tactics to gain a cult like following and essentially nuking the place with snake-oil bombs.
Especially when you aren't even a coach (LeCharles Bentley) and have never actually had to teach what you preach in an actual organized team structure.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Nov 15, 2018 8:52:30 GMT -6
I create little teaching tapes. I will circle things and write in the boxes. I feel 12 clips is probably enough for last week and 12 is enough for the next week. Anymore than that and you're losing people (coaches included). Work smart, not hard. Teach smart, not hard. This is basically what I do as well. 10 corrections from the game (practice or whatever) + 10 or so things about the next opponent (Typically formation checks, motions, tendency stuff... highlight the top 2 or 3 runs/passes... whatever is important for the week). As the season goes on, I eliminate the corrections (we do it as a group on Monday) and do more scouting stuff (at some point, you have seen yourself enough). Some opponents are pretty basic, and there are only 5-10 clips. Some opponents run 2 or 3 different offenses so they get more clips. It does help me limit what we do defensively... if I look at the film list and there are 30 some clips of checks and adjustments then we need to cut some of that out.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Oct 25, 2018 11:18:10 GMT -6
. If he was cleared now and shut down it would be a lot different from coming back in December. Why though? Doesn't cleared mean cleared? If he were cleared in December wouldn't he face the same potential risk to re-injure as he would if he were cleared now and played against Purdue tonight? To be clear, I am not saying people should throw stones at Bosa. I am simply saying this is just a complex situation, for me anyway. Now, maybe OSU loses to Michigan in a few weeks, and it doesn't matter because their December/January games become "meaningless" relative to how the sports society now few games. And I am surprised I have this type of opinion, because I am not really a fan of the CFP. But where it gets sticky for me is there are 100+other guys who have been working hard for years to be a part of a championship team, but now because I got potentially a 15- 18 million dollar signing bonus (not sure if that is generational wealth, but it is still a nice chunk of change) with a potential total contract around 20-25 million for 4 years ..well, bye guys. Because College Football itself is a closed system with ridiculous responsibilities and restrictions. By withdrawing at OSU, Bosa is now free to work with an Agent, work with private rehabilitation facilities, private doctors who specialize in his injury, work with private trainers, be paid for endorsement, accept money from an agent for future earnings. These are tangible differences. If you want a real comparison, how about we compare what he has done to the coaching carousel. How many universities quit on their teams by firing a coach DURING the season. How many coaches quit on their team by accepting a new position before the bowl game? Why don't we look at the recruiting process. How many commits are processed (they make a verbal commitment, a better recruit then commits, and the first one is no longer signable). How many players have their scholarships non-renewed? The bottom line is the player was seriously hurt. By most reports he is out for the entire regular season and MAY have been available for a bowl game [IE, a scrimmage] or the playoffs. What percentage would he be able to play at? Does he risk re-injury by coming back for a Bowl game? Would it be better if he waiting until OSU lost to Purdue and THEN gave up on the team and withdrew since they won't be going to the playoffs. That's worse, IMO. This isn't Leveon Bell who is throwing a temper tantrum about the rules and being dishonest with people. This isn't a healthy player who is foregoing a season to save himself. This is a serious injury, and the BEST route back for the player is to be able to rehab in private and comfort with 1 on 1, professional care. That is not going to happen at OSU (or any college). A bad combine performance following this injury is a multi-million dollar risk. And I hate Ohio State, but any criticism of this is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Oct 18, 2018 8:36:15 GMT -6
No. Not enough high school players go D1 to make any impact. Yea you might have a couple kids around the entire country who may not come back after an injury, but I don't see this impacting high school ball. We had this conversation a few years ago when McCaffery sat out the bowl game. I guess it's easy to say now, but those saying it would impact his draft status or NFL career and trickle down to high school were way off. I have to disagree with the last statement a bit. While maybe it hasn't trickled down to high school in a few short years, we have gone from a few guys sitting out of 2nd tier bowl games to a team captain deciding to shut it down while playing on the #2 team in the country and likely playoff team. He had surgery for (what I've seen reported as) a torn "core" muscle. I don't think that is apples to apples with what McCaffery or Fournette did (sit out while perfectly healthy). I think it is much closer to what Myles Jack did in 2015.
|
|