Venting on injuries

smalltown":2r9g8s4s said:
The truly great teams seem to have depth every year. I think sometimes coaches lack talent but I also think sometimes coaches pick their 3- 4 players when they are young and only teach them the game.

That is about the most ridiculous statement that I have heard. You actually think that if a coach has no talent that he will only coach 3 or 4 of his kids? and expect to win?

And, if you were to do a little research (or pay attention to what is going on) some of the truly great teams only had or have 12 to 15 kids.
 
It isn't how many kids you have it is how you work with them and teach them the proper fundamentals. When a coach has been at the same school for many years there is no excuse. Coaches have every opportunity to encourage the kids when they are young
In a small school most of the time the coaches know the kids from kindergarten up. I may not be saying it how I mean it but I believe that every kid doesn't have the same opportunity. When kids have a parent on the school board or the right last name they will have a better opportunity than most kids even if someone has more talent but that is how the world works nowadays.
 
Only concern I have- and do have sympathy for Aggieland...is that their was the decision to play inside of TAIAO and a choice made to be part of Division 1 (big school division) even when going into the season, you know you only have a roster of 9 and the league determines that the low end requirement is 15 athletes for D-1...

May be that while you are playing the "bigger team schedule" your boys get beat up more often by teams that don't have to go ironman all game long...Unfortunately, the result of playing "Up" is that you will have to face that more than otherwise.
 
If you have enough kids to have a jv team in sixman then you should be in 11 man. Then sixman could have only one division and more teams per district. Then your chances of loosing to many kids but playing teams with jv teams would narrow. For instance what if your school just barely went into division one at the minimum I think it was around 57 kids or so but playing teams with 100 kids that's a big gap. I could see maybe having a exception rule if only 13 kids signup. If they have anymore kids than that it's no different than 6 man teams playing with 6 or 7 players.
 
tobyvann":30dy73yi said:
If you have enough kids to have a jv team in sixman then you should be in 11 man. Then sixman could have only one division and more teams per district. Then your chances of loosing to many kids but playing teams with jv teams would narrow. For instance what if your school just barely went into division one at the minimum I think it was around 57 kids or so but playing teams with 100 kids that's a big gap. I could see maybe having a exception rule if only 13 kids signup. If they have anymore kids than that it's no different than 6 man teams playing with 6 or 7 players.
Here's an example: Throckmorton 2012, had to play Division I with 52 kids. (The cut off was 51.5). How horrible. They barely did squeeze past Abbott (enrollment 97) in the state championship. By 45.

Obviously the sarcasm was thick there. Richland Springs is one of the smaller DII schools, and yet they have finished DII state champion and had the number 1 ranking overall...... more than once. Oh, and Throckmorton had a JV in 2012, so they should have had to play 11 man, even though they only had an enrollment of 52? The reason that the schools have JV is because they are successful and therefore more kids come out for the football team because they want to be a part of that success. It has nothing to do with enrollment.

Example 2: Gorman, enrollment 72, six man numbers but play 11 man. Won 3 games in 4 years. They only have 13 on their football team this year, but they do have 19 on their basketball teams (Varsity and JV). Gordon, enrollment 72, six man team. Usually wins more than loses and goes to the playoffs most years. 10 to 12 on Varsity, 7-9 on JV every week. So is it an enrollment thing? I don't think so.
 
granger":3swlnz8o said:
If I go down, this site might have to forfeit the rest of the season.

Well here's hoping that doesn't mean your sick or hurt (not just for the sake of the site).
You know Guru's don't get sick days, they play hurt....
Besides, I thought you had Lifegate as your Brandon Weeden, I mean backup.
Your not having back problems are you....
 
Although this thread has taken a slight turn, can someone enlighten me as to the logic of having two divisions in six-man anyway? We are one of the small districts having only 3 teams (should have been 4 but one didn't field team). So we have two district games. I believe it would be beneficial to have round robin in those circumstances, but as I look at the teams in our vicinity, we wouldn't have a small district if we didn't have two divisions. We are one of the smallest schools (by student enrollment) playing but play Div 1. Then you have folks like Oakwood and HIgh Island that are D2, which could easily be in our district giving us 6 teams if everyone fielded a team. But we are split. Our HS school enrollment averages low to mid 50's every year. This year we were blessed to have 22 kids play football. Four years ago we struggled to start with 9. But our school average remained consistent.

Truthfully I'm not a fan of divisions in the upper classes either. If it were over today who do you think is top dog...Crowell or Throckmorton?

What are the benefits?

Sure hope Granger stays healthy...I hate a forfeit.
 
Oglesby feel victim to the injury bug and it cost them a win against Walnut Springs. I also can't stand the divisions in any of the classifications and wish there was one outright state champion for each.
 
It is tough, Cherokee at one point had one starter left on the field. We have recovered a couple, but from game 2 on we have been short handed and it will cost us a playoff trip. Sad thing is with our full team we would have been extremely competitive and now it's tough to compete. The good thing is numerous young players are getting experience that should help us in the future. Injuries are out of anybody's control!
 
DEVERETT":11fpawin said:
Injuries are out of anybody's control!
From what I've been taught, most injuries are at our weakest links in our bodies. So in theory, if we spent Jan. to Aug getting into the best shape of our lives, by working out like a monster and eating right, we might be less likely to have weak links during FB season. Isn't getting into and staying in shape 100% in our control? ALL of the football programs I've seen basically take boys off the couch and beat them till they break. Again...100% in our control.
 
ol' gus":2ln51vj7 said:
DEVERETT":2ln51vj7 said:
Injuries are out of anybody's control!
From what I've been taught, most injuries are at our weakest links in our bodies. So in theory, if we spent Jan. to Aug getting into the best shape of our lives, by working out like a monster and eating right, we might be less likely to have weak links during FB season. Isn't getting into and staying in shape 100% in our control? ALL of the football programs I've seen basically take boys off the couch and beat them till they break. Again...100% in our control.

Good point Gus, however we have suffered the unfortunate 3-man tackle ankle sprains, head-banging concussions as well as things such my man-child's dive for a fumble with a perfect shoulder to his helmet, sling his body around, haul off in an ambulance neck injury (which by the grace of God had no permanent injuries, thank you Jesus), the worst night of my life kinda stuff. Other than those kinds I do think you are spot-on about being in shape and strengthening the weak links. There is no excuse to not have a strengthening program if you have a football program. The two go hand-in-hand. And the eating right?? Boy, I could vent on that all day.
 
barny75070":8w2k68ln said:
Only concern I have- and do have sympathy for Aggieland...is that their was the decision to play inside of TAIAO and a choice made to be part of Division 1 (big school division) even when going into the season, you know you only have a roster of 9 and the league determines that the low end requirement is 15 athletes for D-1...

May be that while you are playing the "bigger team schedule" your boys get beat up more often by teams that don't have to go ironman all game long...Unfortunately, the result of playing "Up" is that you will have to face that more than otherwise.

This is true that we had the decision; but it would not have been fair to our boys to play D2 and walk over every team in the district!! Because that is exactly what would have happened. These boys healthy can play with any team in D1.....just ask Temple Centex and Capital Christian(who we had 2 injuries against). But we will be healthy by the time playoffs rolls around and these boys will show why they belong in D1!!
 
Well Shelton I am glad to hear it that your boys are back to healthy. I think this years D1 in TAIAO is really strong maybe not Top 40 strong but respectable. I guess the only way our teams will meet is if we both make it to state as we are in different brackets. And your's is the roughest with Feast, Thesa and Capital good luck with that. Go Heat
 
dalelee":10a4pmmu said:
Well Shelton I am glad to hear it that your boys are back to healthy. I think this years D1 in TAIAO is really strong maybe not Top 40 strong but respectable. I guess the only way our teams will meet is if we both make it to state as we are in different brackets. And your's is the roughest with Feast, Thesa and Capital good luck with that. Go Heat

I've heard great things about your team and would be honored to play. Hope to see you there!!
 
I understand what your saying about success and that determines the numbers that play. On the the other hand you do have a girl/boy ratio to think about. For instance our senior class has 1 boy he plays jrs have 4 and 3 play sophomores 4? And 2 play freshman big class 6? And 4 play. No big deal but it would be great to not drive 3 hrs to play when there are 3 D1 schools within 30 miles but we are d2. Those same schools are in our basketball district and girls volleyball. Tell me why is this.
 
Just some thoughts. I did some driving to watch the Robert Lee game where they suffered so many injuries. During this game on side kicks were very physical. First onside kick by Robert Lee they head down and make serious contact all around the ball. I dont recall if it was before the ball went 15 but that doesnt matter only 1 in 10 official crews will call that anyway. The next onside kick by Robert Lee and Sterling City is heading at Robert Lee just as hard and there are huge collisions, complete with kids literally staggering back to both sidelines and helmet to helmet contact during subsequent kicks. At least one of RL concussion prolly happened during kick offs.

Thoughts to make this safer and this is discussed in another thread where an official said you can "assume" 90% of the contact is two kids going for the ball. Lets spend a year reteaching officials that contact cant be initiated by kicking team until the ball has gone 15. Now for the change. Give the receiving kid kick catch interference protection even if the ball has bounced more than once. This allows the receiving team to step up and catch the ball without assumption and the kicking team the ability to still go aggressively after a muffed or 15 yard kicked ball.

Just thinking for a solution that requires less venting, less injury, and more playing.
 
So, are you going to allow a kicking team player to defend himself when a receiving team player crosses into the neutral zone with every intention of taking him out of the play and out of the game. This is before the ball has traveled the 15 yards. Sounds like you want the kicking team player flagged for any contact before the ball travels the mandatory 15 yards. That is one-sided in the extreme!
 
Back
Top