|
Post by khalfie on Dec 12, 2006 18:08:56 GMT -6
I've been struggling with this age old delimma for the past 10 years...
1. If I go best 11... there's no sideline corrections, cardiovascular becomes a question, no specialization, and injury/substitution becomes monumentally important.
2. If Platoon... hoping a not so good kid, becomes a descent kid from the multiple reps, but great kids are on the sideline, multiple coaches needed and must be good at what they do...
Where do you stand, and why?
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Dec 12, 2006 18:17:28 GMT -6
We go into every season with the intention of platooning...With that being said, it's hard in 2A football when you only have 20-25 juniors and seniors. In small school ball, you aren't going to win many games by keeping your studs in the stable.
If you have the numbers to do it, I would say it is in your best interest to platoon. But, again, with only 20 or so juniors and seniors, we are only going to have a couple of studs. You need to have your best football players on the field.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 12, 2006 18:42:43 GMT -6
platoon.... If you have 11 all-stars every year, more power to you....but typically you may only have 2 or 3 at the most.....the rest, just coach 'em up. Platooning was probably one of the smartest things I've ever experienced. When you platoon, it's important to grade each Varsity kid out in January - determine their PRIMARY position (they HAVE to play / start here) and their secondary position (where else they could contribute). Then set your roster from there. You will do this kicking and screaming more or less....there were times when I felt hamstrung, where I thought there was NO WAY I could start _____ and ____ on "my" side of the ball. Give it time, coach those kids up, invest in their development. Looking back, I see where certain players I "didn't want" were some of the brightest spots and if I would've started the guy I thought should've played, we'd have been sunk. I feel the sideline adjustments and intensified specialized practices are immeasurable. coachhuey.proboards42.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1140414830
|
|
|
Post by djwesp on Dec 12, 2006 18:57:51 GMT -6
We like to put the best players on the field.
Platooning isn't the right word. Our players determine our strategy, not the other way round. This year (first half of the year) we played our FB both ways in our 50 front package. As the season progressed he wasn't the best fit in our 42 when we started playing teams that spreaded it out more.
He was a very talented athlete, but we didn't force him onto the field where he wouldn't have helped us much.
Some years we may have guys that can contribute both ways without sacrificing much, and we'll put them on the field. If two guys are similar in excellence we'll play them both instead of one both ways, but it is really hard to have your 4.39 (your only Div1 player--going to school for offense) guy sitting on the bench while you play a 4.6 guy at corner.
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Dec 12, 2006 19:26:43 GMT -6
At my former school, class 1A enrollment 135 (9-12) we could not platoon. The best we did was one year we had 50 guys out and we had our four DEs that were pretty even who also played TE so those guys rotated all game and stayed fresh. We had a bunch of linemen who were all pretty even and we rotated them (notice I said even...which does not neccesarily mean good) Our QB did not go both ways. In all we started 7 guys both ways but they could get rest as the game played on. Now I am at a 4A school and we plattoon most of our guys. But we always have 3-4 guys who have to be on the field for us to have a chance. It will be the same next year. Bottom line is if you can platoon it is going to help you. Personally I have a problem with my best player being on the sideline even if we are 2-platooning. If he is heads and shoulders above his teammates then he needs to be out on the field. Stop him time through the course of the game. But that is just my opinion and I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 12, 2006 20:02:30 GMT -6
At my former school, class 1A enrollment 135 (9-12) we could not platoon. The best we did was one year we had 50 guys out and we had our four DEs that were pretty even who also played TE so those guys rotated all game and stayed fresh. We had a bunch of linemen who were all pretty even and we rotated them (notice I said even...which does not neccesarily mean good) Our QB did not go both ways. In all we started 7 guys both ways but they could get rest as the game played on. Now I am at a 4A school and we plattoon most of our guys. But we always have 3-4 guys who have to be on the field for us to have a chance. It will be the same next year. Bottom line is if you can platoon it is going to help you. Personally I have a problem with my best player being on the sideline even if we are 2-platooning. If he is heads and shoulders above his teammates then he needs to be out on the field. Stop him time through the course of the game. But that is just my opinion and I could be wrong. what about just eliminating the 9th grade program and make 9th - 12th.......and a 5-6 game JV schedule (wouldn't that save money)? numbers will "never" be there to platoon (for any school) ....but platooning is what gets the numbers out.
|
|
|
Post by chiefscoach on Dec 12, 2006 20:20:35 GMT -6
I've seen it done both ways and I've seen both ways be successful, you have to get a feel for how you do it best. I personally like platooning better but thats just me. And I don't believe you decide this according to how good your kids are, I think that makes little difference.
|
|
|
Post by coachdawhip on Dec 12, 2006 20:55:56 GMT -6
Try to platton, but play the best 11... Build around the best 11, if you only have 30 kids total, you end up playing the best 16-17 anywayz, usally
|
|
|
Post by airman on Dec 12, 2006 21:24:01 GMT -6
I advertise 22 starting positions are open. I believe in platooning. you can do it at a small school if you have only one team, a varsity team.
if you are going to throw the ball as your base offense, you either have to platoon or you have to do what my friend at a small school does at that is he takes the top 6 wr and top 2 qb, they play only offense.
as for having the d 1 stud who is only going to be a wr or a db, I take them and put them on special teams as returners especially. they take less hits and they are fresher in the return game. they make a impact on o or d and then on special teams.
i find lineman are much better when they play only one way.
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Dec 12, 2006 21:48:20 GMT -6
At my former school, class 1A enrollment 135 (9-12) we could not platoon. The best we did was one year we had 50 guys out and we had our four DEs that were pretty even who also played TE so those guys rotated all game and stayed fresh. We had a bunch of linemen who were all pretty even and we rotated them (notice I said even...which does not neccesarily mean good) Our QB did not go both ways. In all we started 7 guys both ways but they could get rest as the game played on. Now I am at a 4A school and we plattoon most of our guys. But we always have 3-4 guys who have to be on the field for us to have a chance. It will be the same next year. Bottom line is if you can platoon it is going to help you. Personally I have a problem with my best player being on the sideline even if we are 2-platooning. If he is heads and shoulders above his teammates then he needs to be out on the field. Stop him time through the course of the game. But that is just my opinion and I could be wrong. what about just eliminating the 9th grade program and make 9th - 12th.......and a 5-6 game JV schedule (wouldn't that save money)? numbers will "never" be there to platoon (for any school) ....but platooning is what gets the numbers out. I think eliminating the 9th grade program would be a huge step backward...what are you going to do with the freshmen, most of whom won't play JV because they aren't good enough? In that scenario, you have a bunch of kids having to go to practice but don't get to ever play...how do kids get better if they don't get to compete against different kids? I would go as far to say that eliminating the freshmen program would result in more kids NOT coming out...a kid goes out for football as a freshmen, but never gets to play...that is going to cause a lot of kids to go out for golf next fall!
|
|
|
Post by airman on Dec 12, 2006 21:51:25 GMT -6
it would be like a college situation where freshman and sophs would wait their time to play. I know of a private school which only fields a varsity program and they do fine.
|
|
|
Post by jjkuenzel on Dec 12, 2006 21:54:37 GMT -6
As much as I would like to platoon, I just don't see us being able to make it work. I want the best 11 that we have on the field as much as possible. We had 44 kids 10-12 and ended up playing about 16 or 17 kids this past year. Luckily we were fortunate enough to not have to play any sophomores.
All of our skill guys on offense also started on defense and that was more or less out of necessity. The 4 dbacks were the only 4 that I trusted and that really deserved to play. Were there other dbacks that could have potentially started and played? Yes, but they were either sophs or juniors that were not quite ready yet. They will start or play significant time next year.
We certainly do make an effort to get as many guys as possible going one way. I think there is something to be said for having a kid fresh and only playing on one side of the ball. At the same time, I think there are certain guys who deserve to play both ways. There are certain kids who we are going to live and die with and the coaches know it, the players know it, and other teams know it.
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Dec 12, 2006 21:55:04 GMT -6
it would be like a college situation where freshman and sophs would wait their time to play. I know of a private school which only fields a varsity program and they do fine. But it's NOT a college situation...it's a high school situation. In college, you have players who are already skilled and have plenty of game experience. How are freshmen supposed to get game experience sitting on the bench for a year?
|
|
|
Post by airman on Dec 12, 2006 21:58:50 GMT -6
I think they will get better practicing with the varsity players vs playing freshman games. freshman games are brutal, we all know this. most fr cannot walk and chew gum. give them practice with the varsity for a year. the private school I know who only has varsity has good numbers each year. they know they are going to have to practice. now if a freshman or a soph is going to play, they are the best player.
we are talking a small school of 285 and they get 50 players out. most fr and sophs are 2nd and third string.
I am not saying it is the way to go, I am saying it has been done. now it might not work for you. however to just dismiss it is wrong as well.
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Dec 12, 2006 22:58:26 GMT -6
No way could we have dropped the 9th grade level games (which were actually 9th-10th grade games...which other teams usually brought thier juniors and seniors who did not play too but that is for another thread) ;D. It would have been a huge step in the wrong direction, we would have lost 9th graders which is usually where we had the best numbers anyway.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 12, 2006 23:42:15 GMT -6
I say..................drop ALL athletics..........volleyball, basketball, baseball.
Just have 9th - 12th football, those other sports are ridiculous anyway.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Dec 13, 2006 5:43:31 GMT -6
I'm going to be the blacksheep here- I doubt I'll ever platoon, even if I have the studs to do it. I like the concept of doubling practice time, but I hate that the kids only learn one side of the ball. The problem isn't necessarily your starters, but the depth behind them; its gets real shallow real quick.Injuries are still a concern when platooning; you lose a stud to injury and the what do you do? You play a kid that would normally be 3rd or 4th on the depth chart or you have a stud from the other side of the ball take over hoping he'll be able to learn a whole new set of skills.
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Dec 13, 2006 5:54:32 GMT -6
Brophy and airman do make good points and I agree with them that if you can platoon, it is in your best interest. It just doesn't happen in small school ball.
|
|
|
Post by coachcalande on Dec 13, 2006 6:50:06 GMT -6
I've been struggling with this age old delimma for the past 10 years... 1. If I go best 11... there's no sideline corrections, cardiovascular becomes a question, no specialization, and injury/substitution becomes monumentally important. 2. If Platoon... hoping a not so good kid, becomes a descent kid from the multiple reps, but great kids are on the sideline, multiple coaches needed and must be good at what they do... Where do you stand, and why? playmakers are on the field. when rest is a concern, give them a breather.
|
|
|
Post by sls on Dec 13, 2006 8:14:02 GMT -6
I committed to platooning this year and came pretty close.
I had 1 slot/CB who plyaed the entire game and my 2 OLB's rotated at FB.
It was great, played the better kids on defense and we were much fresher, great recruiting tool. More kids will know they are going to play.
We are a smaller school around 650 kids and it helped give us the best season since 1989.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Dec 13, 2006 8:31:34 GMT -6
Weird,
Only 1 school in our entire state platoons that I know of. The two-time defending state champion has an enrollment of 2700+, and even they do not fully platoon.
We try to get there every year, but we always have 3-5 guys that have to play both ways because they are just too good not to, and our league is way too competitive to not have guys like that in the game. We typically do everything in our power to have linemen not going both ways, buth after that, we play our best, and that's it.
|
|
|
Post by fbcoach33 on Dec 13, 2006 8:36:25 GMT -6
we have platooned for years and it has worked well for us, however we are not true two platoon for two reasons, one we dont have enough kids for backups so our starters on one side are our backups on the other if someone gets hurt, otherwise we would have to put kids on the field that are really bad. Also we tend to have maybe 2-3 kids that we play both ways, these are mainly skill kids and are so much better than the other kids that we feel we have to play them because they will be the difference between winning and losing. We do find ways in the game itself to get them off the field for a series or so a half to get them a bit of a rest. If we are playing a team that we feel we can handle we try to sit them even more. I think a huge advantage of platooning is the injury factor, the less kids are on the feild the fewer hits they take and they seem to last longer into the season than the two way kids. I think for smaller schools, a little of both if you can.
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Dec 13, 2006 8:39:09 GMT -6
Coach Mark Bliss won five state championships at Conway Springs, KS, (a small school) and I once asked him his philosophy in this area. What he told me is something that I now work for on my teams. His idea was to build around a "franchise" of 15 players. These kids have to be on the field and must be in the most important positions. During the off-season the coaching staff identifies the "franchise" and determines how to use them to the best advantage of the team. Then the coaches identify role-players who can get a job done if they only have one job (either offense, defense, or special teams) and determine where they can best make contributions.
We did this going into this year, my first at my current position. As a result, we ended up with a large number of one-way players for a small school (270 students in grades 9-12) and we had MORE KIDS PLAYING AND CONTRIBUTING than if we had a bunch of two-way athletes. Our one-way kids on offense included center, both guards, both tackles, and quarterback. Some of these kids did get a few reps on defense, but we really felt that we had an advantage by having a fresh offensive line all the time. On defense, our one-way players were a tackle, a defensive end, both corners, and one inside backer.
I also believe this makes us better in practice as we have several "ones" on our scout teams, so our first team offense and defense are not just beating up on the younger kids and are getting a better look.
By the way, we had 27 combined juniors and seniors. We have to replace several starters on both sides of the ball next fall, and as much as possible we are going to do so with one-way players.
One of the biggest advantages that I see in this approach is that we have more kids buying in and contributing, which means we have more happy parents!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 13, 2006 8:51:29 GMT -6
I'm going to be the blacksheep here- I doubt I'll ever platoon, even if I have the studs to do it. I like the concept of doubling practice time, but I hate that the kids only learn one side of the ball. The problem isn't necessarily your starters, but the depth behind them; its gets real shallow real quick.Injuries are still a concern when platooning; you lose a stud to injury and the what do you do? You play a kid that would normally be 3rd or 4th on the depth chart or you have a stud from the other side of the ball take over hoping he'll be able to learn a whole new set of skills. that's what coaching is all about, ain't it? In all platoon systems I've seen......kids learn both sides of the ball, then commit exclusively to offense or defense for Varsity only. That way, the kids know your system pretty thoroughly. I know what the thought process is like though, "Hey, I've only got ___ Varsity players". Well, if kids know they are going to play, you'll end up with enough numbers to field two 9th grade teams, and those kids will keep coming out because they know they'll get a shot to play / have a role on the team. What is the point of playing football if you know you're the 3rd LB or the 4th running back?. If you have 40 kids, 10 of which, play both ways........there are about 28 other kids, who know they aren't going to play so they don't pay attention in practice (or off season) and consequently never develop to their true player potential.
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Dec 13, 2006 8:55:35 GMT -6
I'm going to be the blacksheep here- I doubt I'll ever platoon, even if I have the studs to do it. I like the concept of doubling practice time, but I hate that the kids only learn one side of the ball. The problem isn't necessarily your starters, but the depth behind them; its gets real shallow real quick.Injuries are still a concern when platooning; you lose a stud to injury and the what do you do? You play a kid that would normally be 3rd or 4th on the depth chart or you have a stud from the other side of the ball take over hoping he'll be able to learn a whole new set of skills. that's what coaching is all about, ain't it? In all platoon systems I've seen......kids learn both sides of the ball, then commit exclusively to offense or defense for Varsity only. That way, the kids know your system pretty thoroughly. I know what the thought process is like though, "Hey, I've only got ___ Varsity players". Well, if kids know they are going to play, you'll end up with enough numbers to field two 9th grade teams, and those kids will keep coming out because they know they'll get a shot to play / have a role on the team. What is the point of playing football if you know you're the 3rd LB or the 4th running back?. I totally agree with Brophy here. It is hard enough to get kids out for football in today's world; I don't want kids thinking they have no chance to play because only 11-12 kids will be on the field getting all the reps. We want competition for spots on our team, and I want to reward kids who are improving. Practice is obviously very important, but the kids want game time.
|
|
|
Post by pantherpride91 on Dec 13, 2006 9:06:47 GMT -6
I played at a high school that was a Division 4 school in Ohio. There are 6 divisions in Ohio, with 6 being the smallest.
We were a strictly platoon team and had great success with it. 3 state titles and year after year trips to playoffs is hard to argue against. I agree 100% with the fact that platooning is something that is going to get your numbers up. If a kid knows he is fighting for 22 positions instead of 11 than he is more likely to come out. We had many guys on our team that would have never seen the field had they gone to a different school. They werent the greatest athletes in the world, but they knew their positions better than any guy going both ways ever could. They knew every move they could make and how it would work by heart. When a guy came in he was to pick his position and was what he would work on for the next 4 years. Our coach had mande a decision 20 years ago taht he was going to platoon and after a couple rocky seasons the undefeated teams starting churing out. One of the major advantages we had was the fact that when the 4th quarter came around we still had our legs. i can think of numberous times when we would be in a close game during the first half but as the second half came we would wear down a team. Like many people have said on here you might have 2 or 3 studs on your team in a year. We have only had 4 guys go to a D 1 school ever. My senior year we had no one go any higher than D 3 off a team that made the state semi finals. But with the right coaches and getting numbers out you can platoon and have emense success. One final advantage comes down to coaching. There is so much more you can do with a platoon system that you can not do with a "best 11" system. We were able to have a defense for every team we played. So many schools, including the one I am at now, can not do that. We have a 50 and a 40 front and simply do not have the time to put anything more in. While in school we had a 10-12 different defenses. We would game plan our defense to fit the offense we were going against. Sometimes i felt like we knew the offense we were playing against better than they did. Our offense could be much more elaborate and spend way more time ensuring the fundamentals and perfection of plays than any other school could. We ran the Run and Shoot with the triple being our staple play. One last thing that platooning does is it allows you to have a solid inseason lifting schedule. With being able to do Team O and Team D at the same time, we were able to get done with practice 45 minutes sooner and still get more accomplished than most teams did in the entire time. That left us with more than enough time to get a solid lift in 2 or 3 days a week. I know that alot of people have made playing with your best 11 work for them. Alot of great programs, including those that we would get beat by in the state playoffs, do not play more than 15 or 16 guys. However, I hope this helps dispell any ideas that even at a small school you can not do a platoon system.
|
|
juice10
Sophomore Member
Posts: 200
|
Post by juice10 on Dec 13, 2006 9:17:05 GMT -6
I was just curious, for those of you who platoon, Do you play sophomores? How many 10-12 graders do you have out for football? What is a good number to start with when your are considering a 2 platoon system?
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Dec 13, 2006 9:17:49 GMT -6
However, I hope this helps dispell any ideas that even at a small school you can not do a platoon system. No one is saying it CAN'T be done...the thing is, it just doesn't happen...In Illinois small-school ball (enrollments under about 550), the VAST majority of teams that play for state championships have their best athletes on the field. This past season, we had 18 juniors and seniors (and brought up about 4-5 tough sophomores). ALL of our juniors and seniors started somewhere, but, we started about 7 kids both ways because: 1) They were better than the backup and 2) You don't win small-school ball in Illinois by having your studs on the sidelines. In 6 years of coaching small school ball and watching state championship games, I can only remember one 2A team that only had 2 kids going both ways. And this was a Catholic school that had 40 juniors and seniors (completely UNHEARD of in 2A football to have that many juniors and seniors).
|
|
|
Post by pantherpride91 on Dec 13, 2006 9:23:13 GMT -6
However, I hope this helps dispell any ideas that even at a small school you can not do a platoon system. No one is saying it CAN'T be done...the thing is, it just doesn't happen...In Illinois small-school ball (enrollments under about 550), the VAST majority of teams that play for state championships have their best athletes on the field. This past season, we had 18 juniors and seniors (and brought up about 4-5 tough sophomores). ALL of our juniors and seniors started somewhere, but, we started about 7 kids both ways because: 1) They were better than the backup and 2) You don't win small-school ball in Illinois by having your studs on the sidelines. In 6 years of coaching small school ball and watching state championship games, I can only remember one 2A team that only had 2 kids going both ways. And this was a Catholic school that had 40 juniors and seniors (completely UNHEARD of in 2A football to have that many juniors and seniors). What are you total team numbers?
|
|
|
Post by superpower on Dec 13, 2006 9:26:47 GMT -6
I was just curious, for those of you who platoon, Do you play sophomores? How many 10-12 graders do you have out for football? What is a good number to start with when your are considering a 2 platoon system? We had 40 10-12 graders this season, but we only started on sophomore (at cornerback). We got huge contributions from almost every junior and senior on the roster. One other aspect of this discussion is special teams. That is another place that we use to get kids on the field and give them a job where they can make an important contribution. One of our juniors didn't play a single snap of offense or defense but lettered because he was great on special teams. That success may lead him to making an offensive or defensive contribution next season.
|
|