I have a hypothetical question to high school football fans...If a player went through the summer practice and earned the starting position of whatever position that might be, and their game performance has been lack luster and the backup comes in and totally looks like the best player of the 2, would you bench the starter in lieu of the backup? Is it about wins and loses and who can get you there? What are your thoughts?
Thoughts on starting players
- Thread starter mvwarrior
- Start date
I think the coach has to put the other 10 players in the best position to be successful. I think you give that hardworking kid the chance to keep that spot, but if someone else is better, then the best man plays. I know that the coach is pulling for the hard working kid who embraced the grind all summer and was constantly in the weight room. But if the kid who just showed up the first day of practice is better, then the coach owes it to the other 10 kids, who might have busted their tail all summer, to put the best player on the field. But it is not an easy spot for the head coach, but that responsibility comes with the title. But every situation is different and rarely is it simple. Just my two cents.
I agree with you two, but with a caveat. And like you said, Bulldog, you as the coach have a responsibility to give the team the best chance to win. But you have to be aware of the team dynamics, and proceed with measured caution.
Here is the point I'm trying to make. You have a group of young men that have been in the weight room, and practicing skills, etc., together, since last December. You have to be careful when you sit one of those players and start playing a kid that didn't make the same sacrifices. You need to manage the situation so that everyone becomes convinced that it's the best move for the team. Before somebody screams at me, please remember these are not NFL of NCAA players, these are teenagers!
Here is the point I'm trying to make. You have a group of young men that have been in the weight room, and practicing skills, etc., together, since last December. You have to be careful when you sit one of those players and start playing a kid that didn't make the same sacrifices. You need to manage the situation so that everyone becomes convinced that it's the best move for the team. Before somebody screams at me, please remember these are not NFL of NCAA players, these are teenagers!
I agree with the answers above for the most part. The thing is the ultimate job of the coach is to put the aces in their places. A long established chemistry is important but success with a new teammate garners confidence and chemistry. Think of an out of state player coming in and having to sit behind someone that they are clearly better than. Plus the coach will "lose" his team if he doesn't address performance issues by making a change when it is clear to everyone. In my humble opinion, a good coach can make that switch with little to no push back. Parents on the other hand have a hard time seeing little Johnny benched when he is being out played. That's where the support of the AD and the buy in from the whole staff come in to play. Also if the player was an important piece of the puzzle leading into the season, I am sure there are other roles that he could fill. The hard work that the kid put in has to count for something but not at the sacrifice of the overall team.
I asked an asst. coach recently about a player that seemed to be playing very well in a limited role. The coach said, "He is better than the starter, but he is only a junior and the starter is a senior." I don't fully understand/agree with that philosophy, but if they are consistent then everyone knows going in what is going to happen. I agree with @RedPrideNation_RollPride that there are about 77 positions to be filled and a good coaching staff will find a spot to have kids play.
I think it comes down to this. Being a head coach is a tough thankless job. They probably average about 37 cents an hour if you divide by the hours dedicated. Thank God there are good people out there willing to do the job.
I'm surprised this has come up and I would like to provide an answer with an explanation but not much.
The other players know who the best ones are. They don't need the Coachs to tell them. That's who they expect to play with. That's who they want to play with. If you don't play your best, the others think "why bother"? The team fails.
There are circumstances which change things and the players will understand that but if you don't play the best available, you lose the team.
The other players know who the best ones are. They don't need the Coachs to tell them. That's who they expect to play with. That's who they want to play with. If you don't play your best, the others think "why bother"? The team fails.
There are circumstances which change things and the players will understand that but if you don't play the best available, you lose the team.
There are so many things to take into account, which most have been mentioned here. One thing that has not been mentioned, at least not directly, is the history of the school's program. I have seen coaches win 1-3 games total over a 3-4 year time period and keep their jobs because the program has never been that good and the school did not seem to care. I have also seen coaches loose their jobs because after 3-4 straight years of making the playoffs they never got beyond the 2nd round and the school wanted better. If your in a program that expect not only wins, but playoff wins you better put the best team on the field.
I personally think it is sad that somebody who is basically volunteering gets fired for lack of performance, but that is life sometimes.
I personally think it is sad that somebody who is basically volunteering gets fired for lack of performance, but that is life sometimes.
Especially when the coach has to deal with the hand that he is dealt. Meaning sometimes you have talent sometimes you don't!
Agree the short answer is you play the best. The trick, and the circumstances you speak of, comes in defining what constitutes the best and setting expectations within the team concept. Coaches may have a definition, players may have a different definition. Both undoubtedly have a differing perspective, with a coach taking a longer term view of building a program while the kid has a four year window at most. The key to not "losing the team" and building a program is communication of expectations and clarifying what constitutes the best. Probably everybody that has ever played high school sports has a story of the kid deemed "one of the best athletes in the school" not playing because they were unwilling to meet some expectation be it on the field, in the classroom or in the community. I would contend while kids may like to play with the best, in the long run they really want to play with the teammates they can depend on every time they step on the field.
This is why I coach tennis. Where it should be simple enough. You think you deserve their spot, beat them in a challenge match. But even then, there are still parents who want to play the "But Suzie came to all the practices and Mary didn't, why isn't my Suzie playing?"
Very well thought out answer (again). It's refreshing. But I think your last line provides it all because the good programs give you the best, the dependable and a team of confidence each time they take the field. Even with lesser players, they will provide school pride and positive results.
This is why there are so many problems with kids in high school sports. Everyone wants to preach about the good old days when kids were held accountable but as soon as we start talking about wins and losses that gets thrown out and we play "the best player". The kid who came to conditioning every day, never misses practice, and gives it his all is cast aside for the guy who shows up the first day but has more talent. I understand the pressure to win, but what do you tell that kid and everyone else when we sacrifice accountability for wins. Kids don't respect that even when you do put the best player out there. I have spent plenty of time coaching and have made some unpopular decisions because I refuse to sacrifice my integrity and a players dignity for someone who is not all in. As Herm Edwards said it "Some players are interested and some players are committed- I want the ones who are committed "
Great line from Coach Edwards. When asked to expand on that approach he used a very funny analogy. Paraphrasing he said it was a lot like breakfast, the chicken was interested but, the pig was committed.
Herm also said, "you play the game to win". Your program creates the commitment level. There are times you must set an example in your program but if you're not getting commitment, you're not Coaching well.
Exactly. This is one of the many reasons I'm proud of Coach Mills and our program. Several kids, (actually seven I'm told), that were starters and/or significant players on the JV team last year thought they were going to skip all of the off-season conditioning and waltz back in the first day of practice. Guess how that worked out?
And that's how it should be. Good for Dinwiddie. Must be why they have a winning program. Any coach who wants to esablish his program needs that accountability. Set that tone early and the players will follow. Break one time and it will take years to fix it. When it's all said and done football does teach life and accountability is a huge factor in that.
So let me get this straight as it applies to life after football. As long as I show up all the time and try real hard I can keep my job and maybe even advance. What about the new guy that comes in on fire and is just a better all around employee? Oh, he hasn't been there that long so he has to wait his turn. I cal BS, I agree with rooting for, supporting and even hoping a player succeeds but to not acknowledge talent is foolish in any avenue of life.
Look, I am not all about the wins but if you just reward effort then you can end up with mediocrity just for efforts sake. There are countless programs that work very well by playing upper classmen over more talented under classmen or established players over newbies, I am not even arguing that. But to put your head in the sand and say that because a kid lifted everyday with his team he starts is the same thing as promoting a long time employee over a newer more talented employee. Wonder how our society has gotten so screwed up? Just give them all a C on their jersey so everyone feels like the captain. Life is hard enough without us setting another generation up to expect things without results. Any of you that work for someone want to just mail it in for a few months and see what happens? It's not just about results/winning but you can bet your *** if all these young men understand that at this level, they will be more productive in society as an adult.
Look, I am not all about the wins but if you just reward effort then you can end up with mediocrity just for efforts sake. There are countless programs that work very well by playing upper classmen over more talented under classmen or established players over newbies, I am not even arguing that. But to put your head in the sand and say that because a kid lifted everyday with his team he starts is the same thing as promoting a long time employee over a newer more talented employee. Wonder how our society has gotten so screwed up? Just give them all a C on their jersey so everyone feels like the captain. Life is hard enough without us setting another generation up to expect things without results. Any of you that work for someone want to just mail it in for a few months and see what happens? It's not just about results/winning but you can bet your *** if all these young men understand that at this level, they will be more productive in society as an adult.
I don't believe the point is rewarding effort merely for effort's sake and everybody recognizes that results are the final measuring stick. That being said, whether it be a team or an organization it is about setting expectations and managing chemistry to get the highest functioning group as a whole. Coaches/Managers rarely treat everybody the same but, the successful ones treat everybody fairly based on the merits of their own individual skills in the context of their contribution to the team/organization as a whole. To use the example above of kids skipping offseason conditioning provides some food for thought. If as a coach, a kid who is good directly flaunts my expectations by skipping workouts and I can play a kid who may not be as dynamic and still win, I haven't lost anything, I am setting expectations of behavior and building the program rather than celebrating mediocrity. If I lose an early game I might be willing to accept a short term setback for long term gain, again not accepting mediocrity. Over the course of a season, the better player has the chance to win the job back through performance and demonstration of work ethic and commitment. The rules do not necessarily have to be applied universally across all kids they just have to be applied fairly and communicated clearly. A kid who misses offseason workouts because they play other sports out of season or they must hold a job to help their family is evaluated on a different scale than a kid who just says I do not want to participate in workouts. In the end, the methods and goals are that the sum of the whole exceeds the individual parts.
cutnjump, you make good points but no one statement covers it all. Of course you want a hard working, committed kid to get opportunities. You just can't reward effort in that area and ignore talent. I almost argue with my self in the sense that I also think you can't reward talent with no commitment. But are we really saying that running drills in May equates to committment? I can't wrap my head around that logic. There are multiple factors as to why the kid doesn't do off season stuff and frankly unless it's mandatory what does that matter. I won't argue anymore as everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion. I will say we are all blessed to watch these young men on Friday nights and I hope all of them are able to live out their dreams doing it.
The player that worked in the off-season should start the season at the top of the depth chart, as he put in the work, but it's also his responsibility to keep the starting position as the practices and games go along. As the practices and scrimmages (and sometimes even games through the regular season) go along, the cream starts rising to the top, and you have to get your best players in the game. Sometimes depending on the match-up you may start different players in different spots anyway to put your team in the best position to win.
You are right that one statement cannot cover it all anymore than there is a single way that is absolutely the right way. You are also right that you cannot just reward effort and ignore talent, however, I believe the converse to also be true, that being you cannot reward talent and ignore effort or lack thereof. Running drills in the off-season is a sign of commitment and, more importantly, an opportunity to build teamwork, comraderie, and familiarity, all traits that at one time or another have played integral parts to wins during a season. Mandatory or not as well as reasonable/allowable exceptions is another part of the discussion. I didn't feel like we were arguing as much as offerring different perspectives/opinions to which we are both entitled. We are fortunate to watch the product on the field on Friday nights. We are even more fortunate that our kids can learn life lessons in the context of a game as opposed to the life and death reality of the real world.
Cretainly I don't think that all players don't deserve a shot at PT or being a starter. But that guy who been there should ALWAYS be at the top of the depth charts at the beginning of the season and the next guy should be head and shoulders above him before he loses his job.
And as for the new guy in the work force in life heus also show that he can show up when he is supposed to and must be accountable. Most of us who have a job work on someone else's schedule and not what we choose.
Many good points have been made here and it boils down to how the team feels about it. If it's good with th, who are we to argue. It all starts with the tone and relationship building employed by the head coach. Some are better than others.
And as for the new guy in the work force in life heus also show that he can show up when he is supposed to and must be accountable. Most of us who have a job work on someone else's schedule and not what we choose.
Many good points have been made here and it boils down to how the team feels about it. If it's good with th, who are we to argue. It all starts with the tone and relationship building employed by the head coach. Some are better than others.
The best coaches have the ability to match the right job to the right players at the right time. The best coaches also find ways to involve everyone during the season. I can spot a bad coach a mile away just watching the top 22 practice and the rest of the team standing around. The best teams backup players are contributors even on the sidelines. They keep the regulars pumped up. Those who have been dedicated in the weight room are much better than they would have been otherwise. Those that didn't come out are not nearly as good as they could have been so there is built in reward and penalty intrinsically. Everyone has varying talent that can be utilized in special situations. pass rush on 3rd and long versus run defense on 3rd and short for example. There are injuries, suspensions, etc. and good coaches have everyone prepared for "next guy up". That is what a team concept is all about.
Well, of course Mills made that decision. He had no choice. Already in the program but don't follow the program?
I believe in best player plays but there is not a Coach out there that wouldn't do the same thing. I give Mills lots of credit on the program. I expect Dinwiddie to be the 4A State Champion. Playing against their defense is like trying to carry water with a colander. But this is no more than SOP for any Coach.
Put best team on field. never play a senior just because he's a senior. If a freshman is better, play the freshman. I have seen people totally hung up on seniors. I have never seen a football team with player's class sewn on uniform.
I recall a volleyball coach back in the 90s who started 5 freshmen and put the seniors on JV team.
I recall a volleyball coach back in the 90s who started 5 freshmen and put the seniors on JV team.
Seniors on a JV team? Really? I suppose the name of that team was the flying pigs and you found a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
It actually happened. Team wasn't very good, and the 5 freshmen and were actually better than the seniors.