[Oakflat]

I don't agree with the whole junior high, learning the system arguement. In junior high they need to learn, and most of the time all they emphasis is the fundamentals. To me, you are wasting time if you try to get into the intricacies of the offense and defense. Most kids that age aren't ready to learn multiple schemes. You maybe able to teach a kid cover 3, but how successful are you going to be able to teach them how to disguise coverages, disguise blitzes, how to stunt, play cover 2 or man to man. You only have so much time with them and most of them can't grasp but the basic fundamentals. Thats what the feeder systems are for.

Show me a high school staff that can't prepare, and coach "up" kids in 4 years, and I'll show you a staff that can't coach. How many years does a good staff need to teach them the game and get them to learn the system? I would guess most good staffs do that in the 4 years they are on a high school campus. They need to learn basic fundamentals in junior high (ball security, how to take handoffs, tackling, playing with pad level, pursuit angles, and so on). High school is the time to get into the details of the x's and o's.

Skyline's failure in the playoffs has little to nothing to do with the junior high feeder systems or lack thereof.

[steeler 01]

~RockinL~, on 04 November 2009 - 02:36 PM, said:

I guess my point was....with all that talent, they, like my Longview Lobos, seem to somewhat underachieve come playoff time. Thats a long way from saying they dont have a very good team.....which they do.

If Samples is as good as you say (and Im not doubting you), they should win it all.

Also depends on how good their O-line is.

[jbell73986]

Oakflat, on 04 November 2009 - 08:56 PM, said:

I don't agree with the whole junior high, learning the system arguement. In junior high they need to learn, and most of the time all they emphasis is the fundamentals. To me, you are wasting time if you try to get into the intricacies of the offense and defense. Most kids that age aren't ready to learn multiple schemes. You maybe able to teach a kid cover 3, but how successful are you going to be able to teach them how to disguise coverages, disguise blitzes, how to stunt, play cover 2 or man to man. You only have so much time with them and most of them can't grasp but the basic fundamentals. Thats what the feeder systems are for.

Show me a high school staff that can't prepare, and coach "up" kids in 4 years, and I'll show you a staff that can't coach. How many years does a good staff need to teach them the game and get them to learn the system? I would guess most good staffs do that in the 4 years they are on a high school campus. They need to learn basic fundamentals in junior high (ball security, how to take handoffs, tackling, playing with pad level, pursuit angles, and so on). High school is the time to get into the details of the x's and o's.

Skyline's failure in the playoffs has little to nothing to do with the junior high feeder systems or lack thereof.

I totally agree with your points on what the feeder schools should be focusing in on. One of the other advantages with a feeder system though is teammate familiarity. I live in the Wichita Falls ISD, which is open, and one of the struggles I've heard from coaches is that by the time players get to HS they are playing with some kids they had never been on a team with before; whereas, a feeder program, especially in a one HS town player familiarity is a premium... Teams are able to jell a little quicker.

[bodyguard]

jbell73986, on 03 November 2009 - 04:12 PM, said:

True, but you have to consider since Skyline is a magnet school, they don't have control over the feeder programs since the kids come from all over the Dallas area...that's a huge disadvantage in this state! By the time coach Samples gets these kids as freshmen, other top programs already had their kids getting acclimated to their system for 2 years. Texas is too competitve to assume good coaching and great athletes equal state championship. Too many other variables to factor in.

Acclimation or not, being able to draw from a much bigger pool of talent has always been a huge advantage in high school sports, not a disadvantage. If it's such a disadvantage why doesn't he just play kids who are less talented but are from the district? Gimme a break!

This post has been edited by bodyguard: 07 November 2009 - 09:10 PM

[jbell73986]

bodyguard, on 08 November 2009 - 03:10 AM, said:

Acclimation or not, being able to draw from a much bigger pool of talent has always been a huge advantage in high school sports, not a disadvantage. If it's such a disadvantage why doesn't he just play kids who are less talented but are from the district? Gimme a break!

I wasn't referring to drawing from a larger pool as a disadvantage but that they don't have a feeder program like some of the state powers...that's the disadvantage. Obviously they're an inner city school so there are other disadvantages as well, facilities being one of them. The bottomline is power programs like Cedar Hill, Trinity and SLC (who also have their fare share of talent BTW) have an advantage b/c they are able to work with the kids earlier.

Don't confuse it though, I still think they will win state b/c I think they are hungry for it, they have bought into the coaches system and they are loaded, but it doesn't take away the fact there are disadvantages in being a magnet school.