Posted by: @kfmagee

I recall seeing a list (USAFootball??) of drills no longer tolerated in the Youth PeeWee ranks... things like

--USAFootball doesn't run a youth org (that I'm aware of).  Their biggest contribution is just telling others that all things football should be done their way.  That being said, I don't know of any banned drills.

I have a coach in our league who still wants to use these drills on third graders, and he asked me "where does it say we shouldn't use these drills-- show me!"...

--His decision on whether to use these drills (or not) should be based on what he thinks he will gain by using them, and knowing how to keep the drill safe.  The majority of coaches out there simply use random drills as time fillers.  Many times, they aren't applicable to what their kids should do in a game situation; it's just a "generic" football drill.  I'd ask him what he gains from using the drill(?)  Even if the drill is applicable to his scheme, if he doesn't know the "why," then there's really no point in him using it.

Anyone got a source (blog, website, video) where it discusses the banning of these drills so I can share?  I'm not trying to eliminate hard contact, but I am trying to minimize tykes being used as crash test dummies.  

--As am I.

"The use of drills known by such common names as "The Gauntlet" or "Blood Alley" that send pairs of players thru a tight-quarters confined zone (alley, chute, lane) at distances of more than 3 yards separation between the two players, which results in a frontal tackle or collision of the players running at full speed is not allowed. 

--We've run a Gauntlet for years.  Never had  a "frontal tackle or collision" at the end of it, unless you count tackling a dummy at the end as a "frontal tackle or collision."

--Dave

Looking at the tags above, why is Oklahoma listed as a "bad" drill? 

I wouldn't try to mention anything about "common names". How one person runs a drill might be entirely different to how another runs a drill by the same name. I just googled "bull in the ring" and found a drill where a team makes a circle with a a "bull" (tackler in the middle"). Coach gives a football to someone that's part of the ring and he tries to make it across the circle. If the circle is small enough, and the coach isn't intentionally giving the ball to someone behind the tackler in order to set up a blind hit, I personally don't see a safety problem. I probably wouldn't run it because "other side of the circle" is too open to interpretation for a kid with a football in his hands who doesn't want to be tackled.

• Head on collisions with a distance of more than 3 yards? Yeah, I could probably be onboard with that.
• Repetitive blind-side collisions with a single player? I prefer zero blind-side collisions with a single player. I do not tolerate blind-side hits.

Define the types of contact that you want to eliminate and ban them. Then, let coaches run whatever they want and call it what they want as long as they do it within the rules. If they don't, fire them. I run Oklahoma. If Oklahoma (as I understand it) is too dangerous, then football is too dangerous. 

We used to run a drill called "meat grinder" every day. Then, our bigs started hitting head to head once or twice a week. We determined that this is too frequent, so we killed that drill. I was never a fan because it didn't teach anything that we want to see on a football field. 

My OC wanted to run "tackle baseball" last week. I absolutely HATED that drill based on past experience, but saw a presentation by Steve Parker and realized that the idiot that ran it on my team was running it ALL wrong. He had the runner run down the base line and the tackler run down the baseline in the opposite direction. Results: predictable. Then I saw Steve's way and thought "okay". Eventually, we decided not to run it because if the runners are always going counter clockwise (like in baseball), the tackles will always be to the same side. We thought about running it "regular" in one inning, then "backward" in the next, but my brain started to melt and we decided not to run it.

Posted by: @terrypjohnson

Looking at the tags above, why is Oklahoma listed as a "bad" drill? 

Probably because its a Red State. ? 

@terrypjohnson

simply because it was banned by NFL PA.  I run something I call Georgia  with 2 blockers a runner and 3 defenders that simulates one side of the LOS… seems like football to me.

Posted by: @kfmagee

I call Georgia  with 2 blockers a runner and 3 defenders that simulates one side of the LOS… seems like football to me.

We do the same, but call it 'Oklahoma'.   We use the hoses to define the area which is barely wider than the width of the 2 blockers, the ball carrier is right on their rumps.  2 DL and a LB.  The hoses are about 7 yrds long, the offense has 4 downs to 'score'.   It is high contact, but low impact - only momentum is one step.  More like a wedge play than anything else. Kids rotate in at RB, and move thru all 6 positions before they are back out.   Kids love the game and request it constantly.   This is my 7th season back in football, and we've never had a kid hurt in the game.  

@kfmagee - Like you and Coach @Coyote, I run that same drill. That's what my coaches called "Oklahoma" growing up, which is why I asked the question. 

Sounds like it might be time to rename it.

I think the thing that gets football drills banned is television. I remember seeing a graphic depiction of bull in the ring in some football movie. The kid was repeatedly blindsided. Coach didn't even give them a chance to get up, and since it's fiction, you got to see their face twist in pain.

Posted by: @coach-kyle

I think the thing that gets football drills banned is television. 

What gets drills banned is idiot coaches who have no idea how to teach drills safely.

--Dave

Posted by: @coachdp

Posted by: @coach-kyle

I think the thing that gets football drills banned is television. 

What gets drills banned is idiot coaches who have no idea how to teach drills safely.

--Dave

This!

I had an older book of football drills, the name and publication date escapes me but it was published before I was born which was 42 years ago.  In the book, it was stated that drills involving hitting at distances beyond 3 yards was detrimental.  I recall posting about this a number of years ago.  It's been known for a long time that two players running directly at each other from long distances and colliding wasn't a good thing -- plus it's not very realistic.  When have you ever, in all of your years of watching football has a ball carrier ran straight down a lane without moving and a defender ran straight at him down that same lane and they collided...never.

I suspect, I strongly suspect that the "battering ram" drill was adopted by some coaches was to demonstrate to the players that the equipment keeps you relatively safe.  I'm guessing that the logic was to create a radical situation to prove this point to the players...just a guess.

The problems are as such though:
+ straight ahead / long distance tackles are rare like, we never see them, so the usefulness of the drill is already in question.
+ the collision is violent to the point that it will likely not build confidence in the players but instead break confidence.