Do you work on plays or players???

[MplsTom]

Well spoken Shaggy...I learned a lot from you in that weekend we spent at your EF Crib.

My observation is a general one...as long as I have strong "enough" bases and fast "enough" bases, I'll take consistency any day.

I love seeing new and innovative plays/formations/defenses, etc. I love seeing basic formations and plays executed to perfection.

My point here is just to challenge yourself...when you're about to spend time tweaking for that perfect base...take a step back and look at the bases you have. Can you come up with plays that will work 8 out of 10 times for 5+ yards against the formation your opponent usually uses? Can you set up your defense and then look at all the ways to attack it?

I just am saying that I see a trend toward "boom and zoom" and the past weekend in DC just helped to reaffirm my thoughts that it isn't usually the strongest or fastest that brings home the hardware.

Originally Posted by MplsTom

My observation is a general one...as long as I have strong "enough" bases and fast "enough" bases, I'll take consistency any day.

My point here is just to challenge yourself...when you're about to spend time tweaking for that perfect base...take a step back and look at the bases you have. Can you come up with plays that will work 8 out of 10 times for 5+ yards against the formation your opponent usually uses? Can you set up your defense and then look at all the ways to attack it?

I just am saying that I see a trend toward "boom and zoom" and the past weekend in DC just helped to reaffirm my thoughts that it isn't usually the strongest or fastest that brings home the hardware.

My apologies for editing your response in quote. I did it to emphasize the huge points that you made..... Mainly, the first line of your quote above. If I am watching a top notch coach develop a team and he says "that's good enough" I know to pack a lunch if I have to face him/her. For what it's worth, that's over 10 years of tourney trail experience, just in recent history alone, that I'm speaking from. That coach will not have the strongest or the fastest team in the mix. But I assure you they will often beat many teams who are obviously stronger and/or faster. Why? Because they have learned to make the most out of what some perceive as less. Learning to coach a team of consistent players who work well together is usually more rewarding (pays bigger dividends) than coaching a lot of very strong, fast players who do not work as well together. Learning how to overcome getting pushed around while still moving the chains on the ground will make you a better coach down the road. If you can learn to be successful with "less than" then being successful with personnel upgrades is going to be easy.... Almost like stealing.

Shabby J - I don't think anyone is or ever will belittle how important tweaking is. As The Tweak Freak I will defend you and it to the bitter end. But it is what it is. That being it is a very important PART of the puzzle to solve. Not the ONLY or most important part on its own. It's obvious that even the best coaches among us will have severe problems coaching a lot of crap players. What I am saying is, using that same crap team, those same coaches will be more successful than those who do not coach as well.

In short, two things.... You can't coach no talent very well. And tweaking is one of the legs that holds up the table. If it were the be all, end all for success... (1) The best tweakers among us would rarely ever lose when their fine china hit the field. (2) I've rarely witnessed the strongest or the fastest team win a championship in the bigger venues. And when they do it is almost always by a coach who coulda woulda done it with or without... they've won in the past when they were not the fastest, strongest team amongst the field.

Things to consider are, most of us already had a play book in mind somewhere along the line before we started utilizing the pliers. Most of us are already doing, to some degree or another, what I described.... Even if we don't realize it or perceive it that way. Lastly, and probably most important, learning to use "lesser talent" (not no talent) forces you to do things you would overlook if you just bullied or swept your way down the field. You are forced to be creative to overcome your team's "deficits." Short term, you WILL take some lumps. Long term, you WILL become a more well-rounded and knowledgeable coach. Later, when you add a few or more well fit superstars to that team, you will find it easier to execute what you have learned.

I have a million and one analogies that support and help explain this. But this post is beyond long enough already. So I'll spare y'all the additional eye strain for now.

-Mike Pratt

[WEIRDWOLF]

I don't have too much to add because I suck at coaching and tweaking but this is a GREAT thread! Very educational and one of the best ones to date! Keep the discussions going.

[andre kc]

I to do the play book first, that way I know what to look for or what to tweak for, for me the play book is like a goal to how I'm going to fill the positions on my team, but there are times I do add new plays when I find new talent

[MplsTom]

Anything taken to the extreme becomes a charicature (insert name of favorite political party here).

No one said that "no" tweaking had to be done or that guys will show up with unopened bases and can whip everyone.

My point here is just to challenge the mindset of how you spend your time preparing. Are you spending time on the thing that will get you the W?

In my experience, an observation I've made over the years is that a lot of guys in this hobby spend a lot of time and money looking for that base that will make it "easy" on them by being the strongest or fastest. I've certainly paid $ for bases over the years and some would say "too much". I've also been tweaking a great deal in the past 6 months as it is an area I'm working to improve.

When I get on the board, though, I seldom see coaches looking at "what is the defense giving them?" I seldom see coaches have play #3 or play #4 in their repitoire after you've shut down 1&2 (their bread and butter).

At the Beltsville Bash, I strongly doubt Adrian had the fastest team or strongest team. It was a new team to him and they didn't look to overpower anyone.

Having spend 1.5 hours on the board with him scrimmaging Friday night, though, it was fun because he was trying different plays and formations as was I. Adrian is one of the best passers in the game today and you sure don't need the strongest or fastest when you can get open like him.

This past year, I took inventory of my weaknesses in EF and worked like crazy on my passing. It paid off as the perfect score in the skills challenge showed and also helped bring me the Columbus Day title.

I'm not knocking tweaking or tweakers...just challenging guys to think of the proportion of time spent and will ask you if it is, "diminshing returns" when you have guys that are good enough. Should you be spending the time working on your passing, working on having a kicker that doesn't miss...working on having 10 plays in your playbook.

I think that moving some of the time toward those activities will make a huge difference to a lot of guys in this hobby.

[Coach K-LO]

you make some good points Tom, but if your WR could not get open or off the line....then you have to scramble for other plays (or play selection) to go to.

One other note - if you HAD to use a moblie QB that could not lead block - how do you 'buy time'??

The overall point you were making, to begin with, is THE point of consideration. Yes, we can tweak 'til our fingers bleed and the pliers break. But that alone doesn't guarantee you have worked enough to get a string of W's. We can contract and buy all the fast, and/or strong bases we can (or can not) afford but that still doesn't mean we have purchased a guaranteed string of W's. It may overwhelm your local league mates, or not. But when you enter someone else's Big House you NEED more than that.

One can buy the fastest racing car ever made. Surely that doesn't make one a race car driver. One can buy a bulldozer. But that doesn't qualify one as a heavy equipment operator. One needs to be able to coach. And that means being able to organize a game winning plan, with moderate but consistent talent, while having success. The best I have ever witnessed or know about can/could do it on the fly.

There is nothing wrong or foul about having a team of upper tier players. I have nothing against that at all. But I will say, from my own personal experiences, using them too often can contribute to "killing the skills." I have learned and relearned so much more by consistently using a team that is sub par or "good enough." Plus, as you mentioned, it gets obnoxiously boring to out push and out run your opponents play after play, day after day. Even worse when you know what is going to happen before you hit the switch. Worse still when you get so bored that you let it slip out to an opponent during a match. :::Yawn! Picks up down marker and moves it +15 yds before hitting the switch::::

-Mike Pratt

[detroitchild]

Originally Posted by TheTweakFreak

The overall point you were making, to begin with, is THE point of consideration. Yes, we can tweak 'til our fingers bleed and the pliers break. But that alone doesn't guarantee you have worked enough to get a string of W's. We can contract and buy all the fast, and/or strong bases we can (or can not) afford but that still doesn't mean we have purchased a guaranteed string of W's. It may overwhelm your local league mates, or not. But when you enter someone else's Big House you NEED more than that.

One can buy the fastest racing car ever made. Surely that doesn't make one a race car driver. One can buy a bulldozer. But that doesn't qualify one as a heavy equipment operator. One needs to be able to coach. And that means being able to organize a game winning plan, with moderate but consistent talent, while having success. The best I have ever witnessed or know about can/could do it on the fly.

There is nothing wrong or foul about having a team of upper tier players. I have nothing against that at all. But I will say, from my own personal experiences, using them too often can contribute to "killing the skills." I have learned and relearned so much more by consistently using a team that is sub par or "good enough." Plus, as you mentioned, it gets obnoxiously boring to out push and out run your opponents play after play, day after day. Even worse when you know what is going to happen before you hit the switch. Worse still when you get so bored that you let it slip out to an opponent during a match. :::Yawn! Picks up down marker and moves it +15 yds before hitting the switch::::

-Mike Pratt

Tell ya what Mike, just uuuhhhhh....send me your play book and I will decide what most important, tweaking or coaching.

[Kansas Bill]

Originally Posted by MplsTom

My observation is a general one...as long as I have strong "enough" bases and fast "enough" bases, I'll take consistency any day.

Amen to that..