WinOneThisCentury
Well-Known Member
Man, it is so uncanny, every time you hear Bo Jackson's mentioned, Chuck Hartlieb's name is sure to follow about their practice habits. Everytime. Weird huh.
I'm perplexed that Davis...
- Thread starter MadBomber3
- Start date
Man, it is so uncanny, every time you hear Bo Jackson's mentioned, Chuck Hartlieb's name is sure to follow about their practice habits. Everytime. Weird huh.
ThunderHawk
Well-Known Member
LOL WUT
Actually in Bo Jackson's case, he didn't lift weights and he dogged it in practice because he thought it was worthless. It's ironic because he's prolly the best athlete of the 20th century.
Hartlieb was a hard worker but unimpressive except on Saturdays.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Anyone who's played sports has seen guys who fit both sides. The guys who kill it in practice, but have uber-anxiety when the lights come. And the guys who are super-gifted that see practice as a waste of time or can't seem to concentrate enough to make plays because they know it's just practice, but when the lights come on they have the ability to focus and make plays when it matters.
Shump has always struck me as the guy with all the ability in the world who can't seem to calm his nerves and focus completely on the task during game days because he's so anxious.
Shump has always struck me as the guy with all the ability in the world who can't seem to calm his nerves and focus completely on the task during game days because he's so anxious.
HerkyDude
Well-Known Member
If I remember correctly, in the presser KF said Shumpert does really well in practice. He will probably keep getting action unless someone outplays him in practice. I doubt Ferentz gives a crap what anyone on a message board says. I don't get this constant Davis bashing. Okeefe, I understood it. Do you miss 3rd and 6 run to short side and 4th and 5 type crap? I was actually excited on offense the last 2 games instead of dreading the play call.
seepig
Well-Known Member
Doc - I'm not sure if you meant to do this or not, but your second post is very different from your first. The first one defies all logic unless we are sitting at 2-0 with comfortable victories in both games. Since we weren't, I see very little justification for not utilizing every tool in our bag to try to get to 2-0. I'm not even sure how that conversation would go..."No, let's not use that play/formation just yet. I'm saving it for the Big 10 season." ???
Having said that, I agree to some extent with your second post. I've done some coaching at the high school level, both offensively and defensively...I prefer offense. I don't know that coaches put in new plays to "keep players interested"...if anything they might add a play to attack a specific hole they saw on film. A lot of times though, we wouldn't necessarily add new plays as we would run our existing plays against the fronts we would see on film, and from there devise different ways with our existing playbook to attack those fronts. We might tag a run play to adjust a blocking scheme or to change some backfield action, but during the week you simply don't have the practice time to install several new plays. Reps on new plays take away reps (i.e are more "expensive" from a time perspective) from existing plays, so the timing of the game matters as well. For example, by the time we came down to the last game of the season, it's more feasible to add a wrinkle here and there because by that time we'd run our base stuff hundreds of times. Especially at a small school, where you have guys going both ways, you have to subscribe to the KISS principle; otherwise your kids can't play fast because they are too busy thinking.
Last time I checked we don't play 8 man football at Iowa U nor do our guys play both ways...so I'm not entirely sure what your point is here other than you don't think they install new wrinkles.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
Perhaps I didn't explain well enough because you missed the mark on the only point you thought I made. Not only was I not coaching 8 man, I was also not suggesting that no wrinkles are added in the course of the preparation for a game. Nor was I making a correlation between small school HS football and coaching at the D-1A level...Doc mentioned HS coaches in his original post, so I felt compelled to share my experience. Here's the points I was making:
1) The first post I quoted was silly. Unless you are blowing out your opponent, you (as a coach) need to do everything in your power to help your team come out with a victory. That post suggested that maybe we had plays we could have utilized to possible get us over the hump vs. NIU but chose not to use them in order to not "show our hand."
2) Of course new wrinkles are added each week (and if you read it again, you'll even see that early in my 2nd paragraph I mentioned that I agreed with him), but then again, that's what I said in my post. What I also said was that it wasn't always new "plays" that were added, but new ways of running our existing plays without compromising the integrity of the play. Learning new plays is more expensive because you have to spend time getting reps on them...but that's not to say it doesn't happen throughout the week. One area I didn't necessarily agree with is that coaches add new plays "to keep kids interested." Generally speaking you adding a play because you see an exposure in the defense that you want to exploit.
Last edited:
