Originally posted by navyrules:
Originally posted by cidhawkeye:
I apologize if that statement came off as arrogant, definitely wasn't intended to be. To clarify some and I hope I don't say it wrong is by the time kids get to JV there is a pretty decent idea of who can do what at what positions and what plays they can execute. What they do is move kids to a different position during a game to see how they respond to a new position, maybe playing a freshman earlier and more often to see how they respond to a higher level of competition. It may make winning more difficult but they feel in the long run it is beneficial. Similar theory goes into play calling, they can get into games where they know based on personnel they can run a base set of plays well and they may not run them very often, instead working on some plays they may need next week or plays that tests some of those younger players in new positions. I am sure all schools do this to some degree, they just seem to do quite a bit of it. In the NFV game last year they figured out the 4 plays they could run at will and that's what they did and they physically dominated Regina with those plays and piled up a big victory. Would that have been a good time to work on some other things? That's a coaches decision. I didn't mean to sound arrogant and hope this helps. If not ask away and hopefully I can give better answers.
Fair enough... however, I would say that nearly all schools do a variation of what you said at the 9th/JV level. I'm not from NFV, but your comment about '4 plays' is an ill-disguised shot on what you think of the NFV coaching staff. What's to say that NFV didn't use different personnel, schemes of blocking, that made it appear to only be four plays? Just because it's a running attack, that doesn't mean there is not a lot of technique, strategy, thinking, or on the fly adjustments involved. Working on 'other things' doesn't have to be throwing it when you have had success running it or vice versa. It can also be experimenting with what call works best depending on Regina's defensive scheme, personnel, or situation presented by down distance or many other factors. Correct?
Let me be clear, I think that Regina is extremely well coached, has players that work hard, and plays the right way. I respect them for that. I have enjoyed watching them in the dome over the years and their results have been tremendous. Their players and staff deserve all the accolades they receive. That being said, and forgive me if I come off as being obstinate. But it would seem like you are implying that Regina has the market cornered on the correct way of how to improve JV players, and get them ready for the varsity level which smacks of conceit.