Wedgebuster

I know this has been a long discussion topic before.  But what is the best end zone camera system around?  Which one is the best value? 

On 11/21/2021 at 11:45 AM, ASJCPUMA said:

My take from this post is this...Metro Indy area will dominate the top 2 classes much like the Chicago area dominates Illinois.  While there may be a team now and then that makes it and could win there just seems to be such a big difference in the football from northern Indiana to Indy.  All you heard about up here was Merrillville and look what happened.  Same with Mich City who won the regional in 5A up this way.

I figured whoever won the Brebeuf/West Laf game would get to Indy.  Marian played the Braves very tough but they prevailed.

What creates the big divide between the level of play in Northern vs Southern Indiana?  What are the Northern coaches to do about it? 

Would your interpretation be any different if that same basic footwork was used but the offensive player tried to stay on his feet and keep the contact at or above the waist?   O-Lineman canceling backside gaps is a major part of many gap-scheme offenses and I'm sure many coaches will be searching for an effective way to continue to run their scheme while not getting flagged for violating the rule adjustments. 

What will be interesting is how different officials make that call.  I think you're going to see a lot of coaching staffs in the Wing-T or Option communities continue to teach that technique and not get it called all year until they run into a certain crew.   Then its the classic conversation right?  "But Mr. Official, WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT CALLED ALL YEAR!" 

Sorry, wrong link

Try this one

I'm still confused.   A good O-Lineman is going to fun his feet thru the immediate cut any way.  So he is going to have 2-3 steps in the ground before he gets into the legs of the D-Lineman anyways.  The backside scoop block that I described is in my mind an "immediate action" and not nearly as dangerous as the fake pass set and then cut by an OT.  

How would you call the block demonstrated at the 12:00 minute mark of this clip?

15 hours ago, DE said:

Sounds correct, as long as I am interpreting your description correctly.  Immediate, initial action are major keys in the free blocking zone.

Illegal Blocking----9.3.2 situation (d)

That is a tough, yet "doable" block by the OT on the 3 tech.  We always made sure that if the OT was going to cut the 3, the OG next to that OT, does NOT even touch that 3 tech.  We didn't want to be called for a "high/low".

My question is could that tackle cut on his 3rd step?  Is that "immediate"?

If it's a LT he would step with his right foot turning his belly button to the sideline, crossover with his left foot, and then make contact with his left shoulder to that DT's far thigh on his 3rd step.  At least that's how a lot of Wing-T or Flexbone coaches would coach that kid prior to this rule change.  Will they be able to continue to teach that backside cutoff block in this manner? 

On 3/27/2021 at 10:33 AM, Bobref said:

The National Federation has changed the rule on low blocking in the free blocking zone. So, it may be useful to review that rule, just to get everyone current.

The free blocking zone (FBZ) is an area that extends laterally 4 yds. to either side of the snap, and 3 yds behind both the offensive and defensive lines of scrimmage. A player is considered to be in the FBZ if any part of his body is in the FBZ at the snap.

Blocking in the back is permitted in the FBZ when the following conditions are met:

1. The block is by an offensive player
2. The blocker is on the offensive line of scrimmage at the snap and within the FBZ
3. The defender being blocked is in the FBZ at the snap
4. The ball has not left the FBZ

Blocking below the waist is permitted in the FBZ when the following conditions are met:

1. Both the players are in the FBZ at the snap
2. Both the players are on their respective lines of scrimmage at the snap
3. The block occurs in the FBZ immediately at the snap.

Important points:

Only offensive players can block in the back.

Either offensive or defensive players can block low.

Although offensive players can block in the back, and either side can block below the waist, no one can clip.

If I have this right, no more offensive tackles showing pass with a high hat and then cutting the rusher on 3 step drops, but an OT could still cut the inside leg of a backside 3 technique on a play away correct? 

On 7/2/2021 at 6:08 PM, Bobref said:

I find it very interesting that the last 3 big school North coaches interviewed, when asked the standard question about the dominance of Indy schools, mentioned the huge disparity in strength & conditioning programs as a primary contributing factor.  It seems to me that is something readily fixable, if you’re willing to shift some priorities around.

How many Northern Indiana Athletic Directors are tuned into that fact?  How does a coach elicit that "shift of priorities"?  It seems that a lot of athletic directors, administrators, and superintendents like to use the following phrase when asked about facilities, coaches pay, weight program and room,....."well what we have is comparable to those in our conference"

You can make the argument, and I've heard Kevin Vanderbush (Ben Davis's Strength Coach) make it in articulate detail about how a Strength coach with a adequately sized room is financially responsible not just feasible.  1 person with a couple of athletic interns (older experienced students) can handle 70 students an hour.   That's 3 teachers with a salary and benefits and health care costs that the school doesn't need hire to house those students for 5 to 6 periods a day.  That's beyond the obvious benefits of students learning to be strong and healthy for the rest of their lives.   

So how does a coach get past " well what we have is very comparable to those in our conference"  when for many coaches in Northern Indiana, that is probably a true statement? 

17 hours ago, jets said:

So 8 total coaches at a HS practice. What are their positions/class loads within the school system?? Especially the "major" coaching roles (HC, OC, and DC?) 

 HC/OC is PE Teacher, DC is Special Education, One Business Teacher , One English Teacher, One Alternative School Teacher, One Police Officer, 2 local business owners. 

The issue will be that our staff is aging and finding replacements for some of these guys as they retire is going to be really difficult. Our MS staff is all Non-Teachers, where maybe 20 years ago those were young teachers waiting in the wings to move up to the HS level, that is no longer the case. 

I teach and coach of at a HS of 750.  4 JV/FR coaches (they handle both responsibilities) and 4 Varsity Coaches.  Staff has 4 "offensive coaches" and 4 "defensive coaches"  and the coaches travel between the levels at practice depending what side of the ball that level is currently on. 

To add to my list from earlier today....

#4.  Let respected head coaches and/or those in sports that NEED multiple quality coaches to function present quality candidates for hire.  (Administration is fearful to do this because they don't want to be accused of playing favorites, kids and programs suffer when lesser hires are made as a result). 

#5.  Superintendents need to craft a list of "district needs" to hand to their principals before hiring season begins. Coaching positions, club sponsors, band and choir directors, etc.   With instructions that you need to hire people that check off as many of these needs boxes as possible with each hire because they are all value adds to the school district. 

#6.  Make sure people follow through on what they say in their interview.  I've taught with to many people that got hired with the idea they would coach and either never followed through or did so for a year or two and then stepped aside but kept the teaching spot.  Not a lot of other professions would allow someone to misrepresent their intentions in an interview and not have any kind of penalty for that later on.   

4 hours ago, Goose Liver said:

I will propose this question: How do schools improve coach retention ?

#1 Hire people that will coach.   These teachers will have a better connection with the kids and get more accomplished in the classroom anyway.  Good coaches are typically good teachers as coaching is teaching. 

#2.  Give coaches a "manageable schedule".  They bring value to the building and community after school, so have them teach less different classes to prep for. Don't ask them to teach AP or classes that have heavy planning and grading loads, etc.  When other teachers complain, stand up for the fact that they coach and its valued. 

#3.  Pay stipends that allow folks to coach without feeling like they inflicting financial hardship on their family.  Lots of teachers have a "side hustle" and when those pay significantly better than coaching, it makes explaining the choice to coach to your family much more difficult. 

More thoughts to come later. 

1 hour ago, jets said:

Maybe I misread the title of this thread?? Are we talking "travel ball" or the shortage of coaches?? I'm not really seeing how the 2 are relevant?? 

What I have said, time and time again on this forum, is that the demands/expectations of a core classroom teacher are making it more and more difficult to have the time/energy to be the HEAD COACH of a program. 

When the MIC was hiring coaches, I asked time and time again what the actual "job titles" were for the HC's in the building. Very few answered, but almost all I believe were some sort of strength coach or some "administration" position. There are still some out there, but you'll find very few HC's that still have a core teaching schedule on their plate. 

Making it such that a classroom teacher NO LONGER wants to be a HC because it's not a realistic option to do both. In my opinion, that's a problem.

Like most problems, this one is multi-faceted.  In no particular order, here are some reasons I think coaching shortages are brewing in most places across the country......

#1 Less young males who played HS football entering the teaching ranks

#2 More requirements of classroom teachers that make it difficult to coach

#3 Coaches frustrated with travel sports based problems, and schools devaluing education based athletics because in part of travel sports leading to sport specialization and lower participation in traditional school based athletics. 

#4 Coaches feeling like their program needs so much year round attention that they no longer feel that they can coach multiple sports

27 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

We don't see that in Central Indiana.

Don't see strength and conditioning guys coach?  Or don't see under trained and overworked kids? Maybe Central Indiana people are as the kids would say "Just Built Different". 

On 3/25/2021 at 6:36 PM, gonzoron said:

Where do you 'run into' this?

I teach a Strength and Conditioning class and coach at a Michigan HS. 

1 hour ago, Goose Liver said:

There is that burn out factor!

What I run into is kids who are chronically over worked and under trained.  They walk into a Monday morning weights session in the summer and are so sore, tight, and tired they can't move.

BUT, that doesn't stop them from trying to go to 3 basketball open gyms, 3 weights sessions, a collegiate camp, and play 5-9 "travel" baseball or basketball games over the course of a week in the summer.   Then parents of the 5'9" 150 lb young lad can't understand why he doesn't get more playing time for his high school teams, after all, his travel coach says he is the BEST and he plays all the time! 

I hope at some point kids and parents start to realize that the pageantry, buzz, the big deal in town, etc.   All that stuff is synonymous with high school sports.  You'll never recreate that with travel athletics.  (Insert whiny voice): "Well I play travel....."    

Great kid, how did it feel to score the game winner in front of a parents only crowd of people you don't really know?  

5 minutes ago, SBFootball1 said:

I think you are correct, but this may also lead to an even bigger coaching shortage.  If you are asking a HC and one assistant to do the work of what was done by 4-5, burnout is going to get very real.  I think we are already seeing it and it does not look like a situation that will improve any time soon.

Will the pendulum ever swing back the other way?  What causes that shift?  

Does this significantly change how a coach builds his staff?  Is the age of teaching staff, # of coaches in the building, and willingness of the administration to hire coaches, now more important than ever for a coach to consider before taking a job?  

3 hours ago, vicvinegar said:

There obviously isn't just one answer, but I think for SOME of these school's Admin either doesn't care or have given up. 

First, make practice convenient for players. Have an athletic class. Students no longer have to find a way home after workouts, plus it allows them to work after school during the off-season.

Adding an activity bus would also increase participation. It would allow students a way home after practice in-season. This doesn't have to be difficult. Coaches can't drive players home after practice in their personal vehicles (at least aren't supposed to). So get them licensed to drive the activity bus and I'm sure a lot of coaches will be happy to take players home themselves. 

Secondly is coaching. I feel a lot of these schools fall in one of three categories. Either they hire a coach and fire them after 2-3 years if they haven't turned the program around. Coaches need more time than that to turn these perennial losers. OR hire a coach that averages 2-3 wins a year and the Admin allows them to stick around for 10-15 years. apparently they aren't a good fit. OR they hire a coach that has been to 2-3 schools and failed. It honestly puzzles me. I assume they feel that they are hiring someone that "knows" how to run knows how to run a program, keeping the Admin from having to deal with any day to day headaches.  

Admin should also take coaching into consideration when they are hiring teachers. It should factor in if a teacher is willing to coach one or multiple sports. Obviously not every teacher is going to be a coach, but I do feel like coaches are judged in a negative way by a lot of admin. They believe coaches just want to coach and don't care about teaching. Are there bad teachers that coach? Sure. Are there bad teachers that that don't coach? You bet! This would actually allow HC's to get talented assistants as opposed to having MAYBE a teacher or two, then hoping for lay coaches to fill out the rest of the staff. There are plenty of talented lay coaches, but work schedule keeps a lot of guys from coaching. 

Once again there are multiple reasons why some programs struggle year after year, but I feel Admin is one of the main factors. 

 

 

Lots of good stuff here, every situation is unique.  The key is getting decision makers in those districts to read their own situation, and then make the decisions that help engage students in those districts.   Getting kids to be active, take pride in their school and community, learn sacrifice and teamwork is only going to benefit these schools academically in the long run.  

Your 3rd point about Admin hiring coaches is a tough one.  I'm right with you, but teacher shortage is making that harder and harder.  Why can't every Administrator be given a list of district needs (teachers, coaches, directors, club sponsers, etc) and be given the marching orders by the Superintendent to cross off as many of those needs with each hire as possible?   Wouldn't that mentality bring the greatest value to the school with each open teaching position? 

It seems that sometimes very rural schools struggle at athletics because kids live so far apart and there is no park or centralized place of pick-up games.  

I've taught in a town with a park, and kids were always down there shooting hoops, throwing a football, playing soccer.  Kids there talked sports.  They came into your room in the morning saying things like "Did you watch that game last night?  Why the heck did they not take a timeout in that situation!?"

I've also taught in a very rural district.  Kids literally had trouble getting together to play with other kids because they were all 5+ miles apart from their buddies.  Kids there didn't talk sports.  It was exhaust systems on their truck, church youth group stuff, etc. 

On 2/15/2021 at 9:49 PM, Gipper said:

A huge enrollment of more than 2000, 2500, 3000...10,000 kids isn’t necessarily the answer.  Other factors need to be considered.   Take Linton as an example, or even Pioneer: both have very small enrollments, yet both are consistently good.  Props to them.

Both are consistently good due to extremely high participation rates, excellent coaching, and great program alignment grade school to high school.   I can see where if two smaller schools can't support those things individually, but by combining their resources could do so, that a bigger combined school might be an answer.

It does sadden me that some look at that as the first option, rather than putting things in place that might lead to better participation, better coaching, better program alignment at both smaller schools and therefore a higher number of kids overall benefiting from playing high school sports. 

Going to play a little Devil's advocate here........does anyone else worry about kids having less opportunities for involvement in this model?   44 starters in 2 football playing schools gets cut to 22.  10 basketball spots to 5, 28 wrestling slots to 14.  

What is the positive trade-off that comes with this move towards fewer teams?  Is the thought that Elkhart or other like schools couldn't successfully support 2 smaller programs in each sport but with their combined resources they could support 1 program at an accelerated level of competition?  

The football fans that don't understand how certain styles of play don't fit into certain scenarios/situations baffles me.   Throwing the football is one of the most difficult things in sports.  Many spend Monday's arguing how the QB of their favorite NFL team sucks but then then sit in the stands on a Friday night yelling "throw the ball!"  

High School football in most communities involves kids that play other sports, you get 6-9 hours of practice time with these kids a week (not 22 like the college game).  So unless your going to monopolize the time of a lot of kids outside of the fall (remember their is a lot of skill involved in pass protection too, think of what NFL tackles get paid) throwing the football consistently at the HS level becomes a tall task.  

A lot of the schools that are utilizing a run heavy offense are trying to narrow the talent gap between them and their opponent.  Army, Navy, and Air Force have long been competitive running the Triple Option with what amounts to D2 and D3 talent at the D1 level.  If those teams lined up in the spread it would get really ugly for them very quickly.  When they do what they do we've seen them win big games (Navy vs ND) and push other D1 schools to the brink (Army vs Oklahoma, Army vs Michigan).    Yet we often see the fan in the stands at schools that are trying to use the precision and aggression of their ground and pound offense to win a similar way that the academies do, yelling to throw the ball and then posting on sites like this about how "dumb" or "unimaginative" the offense is.   They have no idea how wide the gap would be in those games if that running team were to try to jump into a 4 or 5 wide shotgun formation. 

If you can get past all that, and you still want to throw the ball, have fun finding a coaching staff in 2021 to coach everything that you need to with the deep understanding that it takes to be elite in the spread.  You need a Qb Coach, a RB coach, OL Coach, TE Coach, Receivers Coach, and that is at minimum. AND they all need to have a deep understanding of how all the parts fit together (while working their 9-5 jobs or teaching their classes).  In the Straight T you can function with an OL coach (better with 2), TE Coach, and Backfield Coach.   Really limits the number of people you need to have that really know whats going on. 

Does throwing the football have a place in HS football?  Absolutely.  BUT the situation has to be right for it to go well. 

I suppose we will never open the eyes of some Monday morning Qbs, but all that know enough, know exactly what coaches like Coach Sharpe are attempting to accomplish offensively.