Beast playbook/help
 
Notifications
Clear all

Beast playbook/help

Page 5 / 6

gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4768
 
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @dimson

So we have averaged 9.43 pts/gm

--That's truly awful.

and the best team in the league has scored 19 per game.

--That's truly awful.

I am excited because I believe we can really do some things with beast combined with SAB blocking. We are small but we are fast. 

--Then you should be fine.

--Dave

 

In our 8 regular season games, we averaged just under 16ppg and allowed just under 20ppg. In the playoffs, we averaged just over 38ppg (with the brakes on) and allowed just under 7ppg, which includes 2 shutouts.

6 out of 8 games were against eventual D1 teams. We had 1 victory against D1 teams. We beat both D2 teams.

Out of 16 teams, there are 5 at the top. Their records:

7-1

6-2

6-2

6-2

5-3

All of their losses came to other top 5 teams.

 

There are then 5 teams in the middle (including us). Their records:

7-1 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 40-0) - seeded 5th in D1. Lost 1st round

5-3 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 26-12) - seeded 7th in D1. Lost 1st round

4-4 (tough schedule - no top 5 opponents) - seeded 3rd in D2. Lost to us in 2nd round

3-5 (tough schedule - 5 top 5 opponents - allowed 34ppg vs top 5, scored 8.2ppg vs D1) - seeded 8th in D1 playoffs. Lost 1st round.

3-5 (tough schedule - this is us - 4 top 5 opponents - allowed 36.75 vs top 5, scored 7.25ppg vs D1) - Seeded 2nd in D2. Won D2.

 

Then, there are 6 teams at the bottom.

5-3 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents, 1 close lost vs middle, 1 win vs middle, 1 blowout loss vs middle, 1 loss to bottom opponent) - Seeded 1st in D2. Blown out by us in the D2 championship.

2-6 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent, blowout loss. blowout losses to all 3 middle. Blowout losses to 2 bottom opponents) - seeded 5th in D2, lost in 2nd round.

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Reasonably competitive with both middle opponents - lost by 1TD, lost by 2 TDs)

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to both middle opponents. 2-1 vs bottom opponents)

1-7 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to 4 middle opponents. 1-3 vs bottom opponents with 2 blowout losses)

0-8 (soft schedule - 2 top 5 teams. Lost 25-12 against 1 bottom opponent. All other games blowouts)

So are we truly awful?  We're not where I want to be, but I wouldn't say we're even close to awful. IMHO, there are 3 coaches in our age group who are doing more with less. Troy is up front, followed by me, followed by our scrimmage partner.  I can't say much about the 7-1 team who lost in the 1st round to Troy. He lost 46-19 to Troy, which is better than we did. We lost to him about 40-13.  But I haven't seen any film on this team. So maybe 4 coaches out of 16 who are really coaching the hell out of their kids.

The other top 5 teams are simply culling their rosters to get better to the point that one of them had to forfeit a playoff win. You asked me earlier why I don't recruit to make my team better. The answer is that I can't do that without screwing over some of my kids, which I won't do. Troy couldn't stack his roster if he wanted to due to geography. My scrimmage partner wouldn't cull his roster either.

Hell, after my Round 2 playoff win, a fellow former Marine (served in the 50's) approached me to ask if his great grandson could play for us. He's best friends with one of my players. I didn't even hesitate. Then, I saw the kid. Small and looked uncoordinated with big feet and a big head, LOL. Don't care. I'll take him and hopefully give him the experience of a lifetime.

My mission statement for the last 6 years or so has been, "To create a football family that our members can't imagine not being a part of." Replacing lesser players with better players doesn't seem compatible with that.

 

 

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
DKTurtle
(@dkturtle)
Bronze
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 281
 
Posted by: @gumby_in_co
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @dimson

So we have averaged 9.43 pts/gm

--That's truly awful.

and the best team in the league has scored 19 per game.

--That's truly awful.

I am excited because I believe we can really do some things with beast combined with SAB blocking. We are small but we are fast. 

--Then you should be fine.

--Dave

 

In our 8 regular season games, we averaged just under 16ppg and allowed just under 20ppg. In the playoffs, we averaged just over 38ppg (with the brakes on) and allowed just under 7ppg, which includes 2 shutouts.

6 out of 8 games were against eventual D1 teams. We had 1 victory against D1 teams. We beat both D2 teams.

Out of 16 teams, there are 5 at the top. Their records:

7-1

6-2

6-2

6-2

5-3

All of their losses came to other top 5 teams.

 

There are then 5 teams in the middle (including us). Their records:

7-1 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 40-0) - seeded 5th in D1. Lost 1st round

5-3 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 26-12) - seeded 7th in D1. Lost 1st round

4-4 (tough schedule - no top 5 opponents) - seeded 3rd in D2. Lost to us in 2nd round

3-5 (tough schedule - 5 top 5 opponents - allowed 34ppg vs top 5, scored 8.2ppg vs D1) - seeded 8th in D1 playoffs. Lost 1st round.

3-5 (tough schedule - this is us - 4 top 5 opponents - allowed 36.75 vs top 5, scored 7.25ppg vs D1) - Seeded 2nd in D2. Won D2.

 

Then, there are 6 teams at the bottom.

5-3 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents, 1 close lost vs middle, 1 win vs middle, 1 blowout loss vs middle, 1 loss to bottom opponent) - Seeded 1st in D2. Blown out by us in the D2 championship.

2-6 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent, blowout loss. blowout losses to all 3 middle. Blowout losses to 2 bottom opponents) - seeded 5th in D2, lost in 2nd round.

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Reasonably competitive with both middle opponents - lost by 1TD, lost by 2 TDs)

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to both middle opponents. 2-1 vs bottom opponents)

1-7 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to 4 middle opponents. 1-3 vs bottom opponents with 2 blowout losses)

0-8 (soft schedule - 2 top 5 teams. Lost 25-12 against 1 bottom opponent. All other games blowouts)

So are we truly awful?  We're not where I want to be, but I wouldn't say we're even close to awful. IMHO, there are 3 coaches in our age group who are doing more with less. Troy is up front, followed by me, followed by our scrimmage partner.  I can't say much about the 7-1 team who lost in the 1st round to Troy. He lost 46-19 to Troy, which is better than we did. We lost to him about 40-13.  But I haven't seen any film on this team. So maybe 4 coaches out of 16 who are really coaching the hell out of their kids.

The other top 5 teams are simply culling their rosters to get better to the point that one of them had to forfeit a playoff win. You asked me earlier why I don't recruit to make my team better. The answer is that I can't do that without screwing over some of my kids, which I won't do. Troy couldn't stack his roster if he wanted to due to geography. My scrimmage partner wouldn't cull his roster either.

Hell, after my Round 2 playoff win, a fellow former Marine (served in the 50's) approached me to ask if his great grandson could play for us. He's best friends with one of my players. I didn't even hesitate. Then, I saw the kid. Small and looked uncoordinated with big feet and a big head, LOL. Don't care. I'll take him and hopefully give him the experience of a lifetime.

My mission statement for the last 6 years or so has been, "To create a football family that our members can't imagine not being a part of." Replacing lesser players with better players doesn't seem compatible with that.

 

 

Jimmys and Joes matter. To this day I believe the best season I had as a coach was leading team to a 1-6 regular season record. IMO we had the worst talent in the league but I felt that I got every last bit of football out of them. We had a brutal schedule, played everyone tough except for the #1 and #2 seeds and won the 'toilet bowl.' I've had undefeated championship teams where I felt we were no where near our potential compared to that 3-6 'toilet bowl champs' team. 

I always want to win. I feel if I am asking the kids to put in the hard work and sacrifice for the team, its only fair that I give them my best effort to win too. But at the end of the day, the wins and losses aren't what its all about, its the process. Sometimes the talent for winning just isn't in the cards, this team got more out of the process than any other team I've coached. 

Practice makes permanent. Perfect practice makes perfect.


ReplyQuote
Dimson
(@dimson)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 7500
Topic starter  
Posted by: @dkturtle
Posted by: @gumby_in_co
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @dimson

So we have averaged 9.43 pts/gm

--That's truly awful.

and the best team in the league has scored 19 per game.

--That's truly awful.

I am excited because I believe we can really do some things with beast combined with SAB blocking. We are small but we are fast. 

--Then you should be fine.

--Dave

 

In our 8 regular season games, we averaged just under 16ppg and allowed just under 20ppg. In the playoffs, we averaged just over 38ppg (with the brakes on) and allowed just under 7ppg, which includes 2 shutouts.

6 out of 8 games were against eventual D1 teams. We had 1 victory against D1 teams. We beat both D2 teams.

Out of 16 teams, there are 5 at the top. Their records:

7-1

6-2

6-2

6-2

5-3

All of their losses came to other top 5 teams.

 

There are then 5 teams in the middle (including us). Their records:

7-1 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 40-0) - seeded 5th in D1. Lost 1st round

5-3 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent - lost 26-12) - seeded 7th in D1. Lost 1st round

4-4 (tough schedule - no top 5 opponents) - seeded 3rd in D2. Lost to us in 2nd round

3-5 (tough schedule - 5 top 5 opponents - allowed 34ppg vs top 5, scored 8.2ppg vs D1) - seeded 8th in D1 playoffs. Lost 1st round.

3-5 (tough schedule - this is us - 4 top 5 opponents - allowed 36.75 vs top 5, scored 7.25ppg vs D1) - Seeded 2nd in D2. Won D2.

 

Then, there are 6 teams at the bottom.

5-3 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents, 1 close lost vs middle, 1 win vs middle, 1 blowout loss vs middle, 1 loss to bottom opponent) - Seeded 1st in D2. Blown out by us in the D2 championship.

2-6 (soft schedule - 1 top 5 opponent, blowout loss. blowout losses to all 3 middle. Blowout losses to 2 bottom opponents) - seeded 5th in D2, lost in 2nd round.

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Reasonably competitive with both middle opponents - lost by 1TD, lost by 2 TDs)

2-6 (moderate schedule - 3 top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to both middle opponents. 2-1 vs bottom opponents)

1-7 (soft schedule - no top 5 opponents. Blowout losses to 4 middle opponents. 1-3 vs bottom opponents with 2 blowout losses)

0-8 (soft schedule - 2 top 5 teams. Lost 25-12 against 1 bottom opponent. All other games blowouts)

So are we truly awful?  We're not where I want to be, but I wouldn't say we're even close to awful. IMHO, there are 3 coaches in our age group who are doing more with less. Troy is up front, followed by me, followed by our scrimmage partner.  I can't say much about the 7-1 team who lost in the 1st round to Troy. He lost 46-19 to Troy, which is better than we did. We lost to him about 40-13.  But I haven't seen any film on this team. So maybe 4 coaches out of 16 who are really coaching the hell out of their kids.

The other top 5 teams are simply culling their rosters to get better to the point that one of them had to forfeit a playoff win. You asked me earlier why I don't recruit to make my team better. The answer is that I can't do that without screwing over some of my kids, which I won't do. Troy couldn't stack his roster if he wanted to due to geography. My scrimmage partner wouldn't cull his roster either.

Hell, after my Round 2 playoff win, a fellow former Marine (served in the 50's) approached me to ask if his great grandson could play for us. He's best friends with one of my players. I didn't even hesitate. Then, I saw the kid. Small and looked uncoordinated with big feet and a big head, LOL. Don't care. I'll take him and hopefully give him the experience of a lifetime.

My mission statement for the last 6 years or so has been, "To create a football family that our members can't imagine not being a part of." Replacing lesser players with better players doesn't seem compatible with that.

 

 

Jimmys and Joes matter. To this day I believe the best season I had as a coach was leading team to a 1-6 regular season record. IMO we had the worst talent in the league but I felt that I got every last bit of football out of them. We had a brutal schedule, played everyone tough except for the #1 and #2 seeds and won the 'toilet bowl.' I've had undefeated championship teams where I felt we were no where near our potential compared to that 3-6 'toilet bowl champs' team. 

I always want to win. I feel if I am asking the kids to put in the hard work and sacrifice for the team, its only fair that I give them my best effort to win too. But at the end of the day, the wins and losses aren't what its all about, its the process. Sometimes the talent for winning just isn't in the cards, this team got more out of the process than any other team I've coached. 

I will say our team had som good talent but we wee really small and we had only 15 kids on the team. We beat the teams we should have beat, we lost to the ones we had no real shot at and we should have beat the one team we lost to by 1. In our last game we played a team we had already beaten twice. They just completely out coached us. Defensively they shut down our best play, QB bootleg and offensively they ran a lot of misdirection which took advantage of our over agressiveness and our inability of our corners to stay home consistently. Our offense was a hot mess as it pretty much has been all season and everything I said would eventually happen, happened. 


ReplyQuote
Bob Goodman
(@bob-goodman)
Diamond
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 9727
 
Posted by: @gumby_in_co
Posted by: @bob-goodman

If recessing the OL weren't advantageous, there wouldn't be a rule limiting the number of players you can have in the offense's backfield.

However, in analyzing what they were doing/trying to do, I came to the conclusion that having more in the backfield is only an advantage if you are passing.

No, if that were the case, they wouldn't've put a limit on it a few years before they legalized the forward pass.

It's like most things in football: Just because you're allowed to do something doesn't mean you should, because it's only an advantage under certain conditions.  Like when they liberalized the use of hands in blocking.  Of course hands are an advantage, otherwise they wouldn't've had it as illegal for such a long time.  But just because it's sometimes an advantage to block using hands doesn't mean it always is.

In the case of the numbers on the line vs. in the backfield, it was about the advantage you could get with more of a running start.  And it was restricted for both safety and competitive reasons.  However, long before there was a rule about it, 7 on the line out of 11 on the team was the customary number, and Walter Camp said that if they ever went back to 15 a side, teams would've put the additional players on the line.  So it wasn't like they were about to have a snapper and then everybody else in the backfield, it always made sense to have a lot of players up front.

There was a countervailing incentive in the early days: The neutral zone wasn't introduced until the same year as the forward pass.  Used to be the teams had to have their feet behind the ball before it was put in play, but that was all, so they'd get right up there and grapple for space before the ball was snapped.  It wasn't until around the turn of that century that they realized the advantages of laying back and firing out with a snap count.


ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4768
 
Posted by: @dkturtle

Jimmys and Joes matter. To this day I believe the best season I had as a coach was leading team to a 1-6 regular season record. IMO we had the worst talent in the league but I felt that I got every last bit of football out of them. We had a brutal schedule, played everyone tough except for the #1 and #2 seeds and won the 'toilet bowl.' I've had undefeated championship teams where I felt we were no where near our potential compared to that 3-6 'toilet bowl champs' team. 

I always want to win. I feel if I am asking the kids to put in the hard work and sacrifice for the team, its only fair that I give them my best effort to win too. But at the end of the day, the wins and losses aren't what its all about, its the process. Sometimes the talent for winning just isn't in the cards, this team got more out of the process than any other team I've coached. 

I'm onboard with everything you said there. Since 2nd grade, we have been lacking speed and athleticism and we weren't able to teach them to sustain drives.  We are in a "big play" league and we could only get big plays against very bad teams. Over the seasons, we managed to implement some skill. This year, we were able to pound out long drives, just not enough of them to overcome the top 5 teams. We were able to sustain drives against all 4 "top 5" opponents that we faced. Against 2 of them, we shot ourselves in the foot in the red zone and weren't able to score. That is a high water mark for us and something to build on going forward.  We made our greatest strides defensively. I feel like I gained a tremendous understanding of why good backs break big plays on us and how to mitigate that with OUR players.

I'm not a competitive person by nature. I'm not one of those guys who has to win at checkers. When I coach, I want it bad for my players. I want them to experience success. Winning is success, but success isn't always winning. I agree 100% with you about the process and this year, the process worked. Our guys got more our of our process than any other team I've coached. 

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4768
 
Posted by: @dimson

I will say our team had som good talent but we wee really small and we had only 15 kids on the team. We beat the teams we should have beat, we lost to the ones we had no real shot at and we should have beat the one team we lost to by 1. In our last game we played a team we had already beaten twice. They just completely out coached us. Defensively they shut down our best play, QB bootleg and offensively they ran a lot of misdirection which took advantage of our over agressiveness and our inability of our corners to stay home consistently. Our offense was a hot mess as it pretty much has been all season and everything I said would eventually happen, happened. 

I have mixed feelings on size. We have a lot of it and we put a ton of work into the bigs. For some, we can only hope that we can get them to "competent" before we get too far into the season. When a big is struggling due to effort/attitude, we replace him with a smaller player who often does just as well or better without too much work. That causes a rotation/MPP issue, so we work hard on that big to fix him. However, we have 2 bigs who are fast, strong, athletic, aggressive and mean. Those 2 guys cause nightmares for our opponents. 

Sucks about losing your last game to coaching. Are you running your bootleg out of I?  I really dug into the idea of "block the man closest to you" (BTMCTU) to see if I could make it work. I couldn't. However, it seems like Iso and Dive are 2 plays that might have a snowball's chance of succeeding with BTMCTU. What are your complimentary plays to set up the bootleg? I guess it doesn't really matter if your HC and OC are stuck in the mud.

As far as counters, I do not rely on corners to top counters/reverses. They are my last line of defense to the sideline and/or end zone. However, we made great strides this year with our corners not letting receivers behind them and holding down the fort to the sideline. It helped a lot that none of our 3 corners played a lot of offense. This means they got a lot of work at CB.

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @dimson

Well I learned a valuable lesson, never install anything, unless you are the one on the field running the offense. The work put in was all for naught. We couldn't even line up right. 

I think I posted this earlier:

"One practice?  Then don't waste your time on it.  I would never expect ANYTHING to work in a game with only one practice behind you.  That's a recipe for failure."

--Dave

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

I have mixed feelings on size.

That's because it's neither an advantage nor a disadvantage.  I've had (and seen) plenty of big players who weren't very good, and I've had (and seen) plenty of small players who were very good.

--Dave

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4768
 
Posted by: @coachdp
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

I have mixed feelings on size.

That's because it's neither an advantage nor a disadvantage.  I've had (and seen) plenty of big players who weren't very good, and I've had (and seen) plenty of small players who were very good.

--Dave

Agree 100%. You can either get the job done, or you can't. Many coaches fall into the trap of trying to scale youth players to the NFL. In my league, the patch rules dictate where bigs can play, so if you put a non patch kid on the line, your options are limited to where you can play the big kid. So we go to work on them not because we feel bigs should be on the line, but because the brain trust that writes the rules think they should be on the line. All that goes away next year. 100 yard fields, no weight limitations of any kind and going from a play count to a clock.

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

In our 8 regular season games, we averaged just under 16ppg and allowed just under 20ppg. In the playoffs, we averaged just over 38ppg (with the brakes on) and allowed just under 7ppg, which includes 2 shutouts.

So are we truly awful?

 

9.43 ppg is truly awful.  That's scoring barely more than 1 time per game.  19 ppg for the best(?) team is truly awful.  16 and 20 is poor because you're being outscored in most of your games.  If we were averaging 9 points per game, I would say our offense was truly awful.

--Dave

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @gumby_in_co

You asked me earlier why I don't recruit to make my team better. The answer is that I can't do that without screwing over some of my kids, which I won't do.

--Explain "screwing over your kids."  I'm not sure what you mean by "recruiting."  Whenever we held a football camp, part of it was to build our org's name recognition and "recruit" kids to sign up.  In the off-season, when I'd go to other youth events I would talk to parents and kids about playing football.  But as far as recruiting kids "in season" to replace the kids I already have?  No.  Have I had "late arrivals?"  Sure.  We all do.  And every kid deserves to have an opportunity to play, if this is what he wants to do.

When I was at EWHS, the Varsity header sent me a Varsity lineman (who was bigger and oider than my JV linemen).  But he hadn't been with our kids, hadn't played for our team and simply because he was a Varsity player didn't mean he was going to start over the kids who had been working their butt off for me.  (He started only one game with us due to an injury on our JV), but his dad was upset with me for not immediately starting his son on our JV team.  I explained to Dad that he wouldn't start with us simply because he hadn't worked with us and that I wasn't deferring to him simply because "he had been a varsity player."  At the same time, I told the Varsity kid that if he was going to start for us, he'd have to take someone else's job and that meant stealing reps and fighting for a spot, just like any other player on our team.  It took him a while to grasp that concept, because his assumption (like his dad's and our Varsity header's) was that he'd start with us because he'd been a Varsity player.

We've added a middle school kid to our team two practices ago.  We had low numbers (19) and you have to have at least 16 in Pop Warner.  He's a friend of one of our other players.  Seems to be a great kid.  But it a numbers thing, not a talent thing.  I have no idea how good he is.  He hasn't even tackled yet.  But he wants to be out there and work in the cold.  So he is.

Hell, after my Round 2 playoff win, a fellow former Marine (served in the 50's) approached me to ask if his great grandson could play for us. He's best friends with one of my players. I didn't even hesitate. Then, I saw the kid. Small and looked uncoordinated with big feet and a big head, LOL. Don't care. I'll take him and hopefully give him the experience of a lifetime.

--So you recruit, too.

My mission statement for the last 6 years or so has been, "To create a football family that our members can't imagine not being a part of." 

That's a mission statement that every coach should have.  Give the child the experience, opportunity and gift that this is.  If you believe that the experience you offer as a coach is worthwhile, then you should want every kid to experience it.

--Dave

 

 

 

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @dkturtle  Jimmys and Joes matter.  To this day I believe the best season I had as a coach was leading team to a 1-6 regular season record.
 

Of course they do.  But it's not the only thing that matters, nor even the most important thing.  Because coaching matters most.  And you may well have gotten the most that anyone could have gotten out of that 1-6 team.  And if that's the case, props to you. 

However, the youth ball that I typically see (not just in this area, but in the amount of video that I see from around the country), Jimmys and Joes ARE THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT in winning or losing a game.  Reason being, when two coaching staffs are equal (or, equally inept) it is Jimmy that has made the difference.  When Coach Bubba says, "We could have won that game if we'd had their #21 on our team," he speaks the truth because he doesn't know how to overcome the talent deficiency on his team.  Heck, he doesn't even know how to overcome his 7 bad snaps, his 4 turnovers and his blocked kick.  In his mind, that was just "bad luck."  In his mind, it was all about #21 on the other team.  And he'd be right.  Because #21's coach had 7 fumbles, 4 bad snaps and 6 off-side penalties on his team.  In the land of the blind, it's the one-eyed man who's king.

This year, we're that one-eyed man.  We've played teams that had real talent with no clue how to use it.  No clue how to teach a scheme.  No clue how to teach fundamentals.  No clue how to keep from kicking their own butt through turnovers, bad snaps and penalties.  I get angry watching our opponents struggle against us, because they're taught so poorly.  Their kids deserve better.  

Recently, I was watching a vid of a friend's team.  He won his championship game, 34-6.  But had his opponent not shot themselves in the foot so many times, his opponent would have had a legitimate opportunity to win the game.  But he thought he was dominant and that I was crazy, because he was looking at the result instead of the gifts his opponent gave him, leading to that result.  If his opponent had played well, and he'd won 34-6 then he could claim superiority.  But his team had nothing to do with the number of off-sides, blocks in the back, holding, illegal man downfield, bad snaps, etc.

--Dave

 

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
gumby_in_co
(@gumby_in_co)
Platinum
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4768
 

@coachdp

--Explain "screwing over your kids."  

I have plenty of players. I have 2, maybe 3 kids who would be coveted by the top 5 teams. The rest are simply not as good as the players on the top 5 teams, Troy's team being the exception. So, I can work my tail off to make those 18-19 players as good the top 5 teams' players in the next 3 seasons, or I can go looking for better players. Looking for better players to replace the ones I have or bump them down the depth chart is screwing them over. 

I'm not sure what you mean by "recruiting."  

It is against the rules in our league to ask player to join your team who is already on another team in our league. A kid has to miss 2 seasons before he is no longer considered to be on a team. Most coaches in our league seem to be ignoring that rule. To me, it's still a rule and I will follow it.

You are allowed to "recruit" players who have never played in our league, or who haven't played in 2 straight seasons. The kid who the grandpa approached me on has never played football. So yes, I am recruiting him legally. He needs a place to play, and his best friend is on our team, so of course, I am taking him. He could be Tom Brady or he could be Ryan Leaf. I have no idea.

What many of my opponents are doing is illegally recruiting the best players from other teams with impunity. They are also culling the worst kids on their team. Cutting, dismissing . . . whatever you want to call it. Used to be illegal, but I don't see it in the rules anymore. I won't do it. I'm about to get our team logo tattooed on my arm because my boys won a championship (that's the deal). Below it, I will have our motto: "Outlaws 4 Life!" Not "Outlaws until we find someone better!"

When in doot . . . glass and oot.


ReplyQuote
Dimson
(@dimson)
Diamond
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 7500
Topic starter  

@coachdp yes, 9 points a game is truly awful. And 19 ppg isn't that great either but for our league and our age group it isn't that bad. We only play 8 minute quarters and they go by quickly due to almost no passing. 

I wanted to do besst as we had to try something and we had already had some pistol/ gun plays in our play book and it would get our guys running down hill instead of waiting for the ball. It didn't fail due to lack of teaching the kids how to do it. It failed due to coaching on game day. I overestimated my HCs ability to run Beast and at least make sure the kids were lined up properly. 


ReplyQuote
CoachDP
(@coachdp)
Kryptonite
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 18111
 
Posted by: @dimson

@coachdp yes, 9 points a game is truly awful. And 19 ppg isn't that great either but for our league and our age group it isn't that bad. We only play 8 minute quarters and they go by quickly due to almost no passing. 

--I don't understand what "for our league and age group" means.  When I coached 7-8s, we averaged more than 30 and weren't able to be on offense after we hit Slaughter.  I understand about 8-minute quarters.  When I coached middle school, we played 8-minute quarters and lead the league in scoring (29+ ppg).  And we had little passing because we were running the Double Wing.  And I can tell you in the 44 points per game we're averaging this year, that if 2 minutes were removed from each of our quarters, it'd have made little difference to our points output, so I don't get your point.

I wanted to do besst as we had to try something and we had already had some pistol/ gun plays in our play book and it would get our guys running down hill instead of waiting for the ball.

--There is no offense where your runningbacks should be waiting for the ball.  Beast (or any other offense) won't cure that.  

It didn't fail due to lack of teaching the kids how to do it. It failed due to coaching on game day. I overestimated my HCs ability to run Beast and at least make sure the kids were lined up properly. 

--There is no offense on the planet that is simpler than Beast.  That your header can't run it speaks volumes.  That being said, there's no way to expect proficiency in any offense where you've had only one practice.  

--Dave

 

"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."

The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."

#BattleReady newhope


ReplyQuote
Page 5 / 6
Share: