New blog series: football 101 by Ohio Vol

#26
#26
Ohio Vol,

That was a good read. You are very informational and I have enjoyed this post . I can't wait until you get to the 300 level courses.
 
#27
#27
Ohio vol:Just finished your article, reading it I find just How much was already know to be and how much wasn't.Its kind of like doing mathematics It left me feeling like that old punch drunk boxer who has been one round to many.That being said I will continue to read if you script any thing else.:clapping:
 
#30
#30
Most excellent sir! I have been looking for something like this since I have become so obsessed over football, but never played growing up.
 
#32
#32
I played football in High School and feel like I know the game fairly well, but definitely not from a coaching perspective. I look forward to reading more of your installments.

BTW, I was a center for 5 years. My QB thought it would be a good idea to rack me to be funny once...once.
 
#33
#33
vader said:
I played football in High School and feel like I know the game fairly well, but definitely not from a coaching perspective. I look forward to reading more of your installments.

BTW, I was a center for 5 years. My QB thought it would be a good idea to rack me to be funny once...once.
Click to expand...

lol reminds me of something I used to do to my center in middle school. I would pull my hands out a split second early and he would hit himself in the balls but I would still get the snap. Funny stuff.

He got me back though.
 
Last edited:
#34
#34
Nice blog. Even if you have a through knowledge of the game, it's still a good refresher course.

Ohio, you coach, am I correct?
 
Last edited:
#36
#36
O-V, I disagree so much with many traditional in-game coaching tactics. I'd love to get your view of some of them. MODs if you want me to take this Q&A offline let me know.

First one - Why do coaches change their kcikoff tactic at the end of a game when they are in the lead? The objective of every kickoff should be to stop the team as close to their goal line as possible. Coaches have determined the best way to do that is to kick it deep and aggressively pursue the ballcarrier. They have proven this is the best way by repeating it game after game for the last 100 years. But at the end of a game, suddenly the squib kick is a better tactic. I don't get it. Trying to reduce the probability of a touchdown return at the expense of a larger than normal return just isn't logical nor supported statistically.
 
#37
#37
vader said:
I played football in High School and feel like I know the game fairly well, but definitely not from a coaching perspective. I look forward to reading more of your installments.

BTW, I was a center for 5 years. My QB thought it would be a good idea to rack me to be funny once...once.
Click to expand...

Wearing a pair of practice pants with a hole in the crotch (and no underwear) will usually put a stop to that.

chavisut said:
lol reminds me of something I used to do to my center in middle school. I would pull my hands out a split second early and he would hit himself in the balls but I would still get the snap. Funny stuff.

He got me back though.
Click to expand...

I have to know how.

nickknx865 said:
Nice blog. Even if you have a through knowledge of the game, it's still a good refresher course.

Ohio, you coach, am I correct?
Click to expand...

This year I'm not, but normally I am. I've kept myself busy constructing a more perfect offensive playbook and using my own paranoia to ensure the defense could do nothing to stop it.

ZZ13 said:
O-V, I disagree so much with many traditional in-game coaching tactics. I'd love to get your view of some of them. MODs if you want me to take this Q&A offline let me know.

First one - Why do coaches change their kcikoff tactic at the end of a game when they are in the lead? The objective of every kickoff should be to stop the team as close to their goal line as possible. Coaches have determined the best way to do that is to kick it deep and aggressively pursue the ballcarrier. They have proven this is the best way by repeating it game after game for the last 100 years. But at the end of a game, suddenly the squib kick is a better tactic. I don't get it. Trying to reduce the probability of a touchdown return at the expense of a larger than normal return just isn't logical nor supported statistically.
Click to expand...

The idea with a squib kick is twofold.
1) It would force an upback (a much worse returner) to return the kick, and since the distance to him from the tee is a lot closer than to a deep returner, the theoretical field position advantage to the receiving team would be negated.
2) A ball that is squibbed downfield would be more likely to hit the ground and take a couple of weird bounces, thus increasing the chance of either a recovery or a returner simply having to fall on it
 
#38
#38
Ohio Vol said:
The idea with a squib kick is twofold.
1) It would force an upback (a much worse returner) to return the kick, and since the distance to him from the tee is a lot closer than to a deep returner, the theoretical field position advantage to the receiving team would be negated.
2) A ball that is squibbed downfield would be more likely to hit the ground and take a couple of weird bounces, thus increasing the chance of either a recovery or a returner simply having to fall on it
Click to expand...

Then why isn't it the primary tactic used on every kick of every game. The changing of the tactic in the middle of the game is my problem. But, more I think about it I guess its good to use it once in a while but if you used it all the time the opposition would develop a better response to it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top