Guest nostradamus Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 You show me a kid that gets stronger putting 1.5 hours a week into weight lifting and I'll show you a kid that at one point was pathetically weak. So now you assume you know how strong the kids are before they started the weight program?? I was a certified personal trainer for 3 years. If someone lifts for 45 minutes twice a week (especially if they are participating in multiple sports throughout the year) it is more than enough. That is the problem with so many people who believe they are "experts" in weight lifting......they have the quantity over quality attitude.....and that is about as wrong as you can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 any coach or parent that tells their athletes/child to specialize is nuts. playing multiple sports just makes you a better athlete. true some skills do not transfer, but you cannot argue with the fact that just the mere competition makes you better. hard to get the competition edge shooting in the gym or pitching in the bullpen. furthermore, any coach that is out there telling kids that if they specialize they have a better chance of getting a scholarship is just a flat out liar and he should be fired for detrimental behavior to the program. kids need to play and parents and coaches need to encourage them to play everything. so you're saying concentrating on basketball year round will not help you get a basketball scholarship as much as playing football for half the year will? that doesn't make sense. concentrating on a sport will help them get a scholarship, if they're good enough. granted, your third string point guard isn't going to make it, but to say that concentrating all of your energy into the sport of your choice is going to make you less of a player in that sport is silly. what's detrimental to a team is a universal offseason that caters to only one sport. also, children should be encouraged to play sports that they want to play, rather than forced to play the sports that "dad wants them to". school pride is great, but kids actually enjoying the sports they play is much more important. i played with guys in HS who hated football, and were basically playing because it was what their dad wanted. They were miserable. now that being said, coaches should certainly work around practice and workout schedules to help out athletes who want to play multiple sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigNutBuck Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 You were a personal trainer for 3 yrs., now a all star basketball coach that shares his workouts with the 5a powerhouses across the state. OK! Like I stated before, if those kids gained strength lifting 1.5 hours per week they didn't start off with much did they. Its not hard to improve when you start at the bottom. Point is, if you have never lifted weights and you start with the bare minimum you will improve. No where to go but up. Like I said you show me a football team that only spends 1.5 hours a week lifting weights and I'll show you a loser. They may only spend 1.5 hours during the school day because of short periods, but I guarentee you they have a weight room full of kids getting extra work in after school and in the summer to improve. The last time I noticed football takes much more strength and work in the weight room than basketball does. Unless you are playing two-below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigNutBuck Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Agreed Bullets! Kids should play what they want to play, but they should be encouraged to play them all, especially at a smaller school where numbers are scarce. One-sport specialization kills a small school athletic program. If a kid and his parents want to throw all their eggs in one basket, let em, more than not they will be extremely disappointed. My only problem is when you have baseball or basketball encouraging kids to go "solo", then you have a problem. I also don't want to hear the people in the community bad mouthing the coaches when they are not as successful as they want them to be when their best athletes are giving up football. It starts at home, and like I have stated before, and will continue to, sometimes the kids look for the easy way out, football is too tough and too hot, before they even try it. The parents ought to encourage them more and baby them less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2MADRE Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Forty five minutes, 2 days a week will get it done. I have seen it work, and it is working in our program also. All our starting lineman bench 300 or more and are squating in the mid to high 400's. This has all been done by hitting the kids muscles hard and then giving them plenty of time to recoup. JMO! but the #'s are there to support nostadomus. Having said that, more time in the weight room is need to gain the strength needed for football and you just can't get all the lifts that you need for a FULL BODY work out in the 1.5 hours in a week. More isn't always better, but the correct implementation of "MORE" shows bigger #'s than the 1.5 hours a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggen Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 What happened to Coldspring's DC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playdefense Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 biggen - nice job of getting the thread back on topic. you other guys all have your opinions about workouts - 10,000 ways to skin a cat. just encourage kids to play all sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcatter Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 As usual Bignut you are talking about things that you have no clue. My point to all of this has been that it is efficiency and motivating kids in the time that you have them. I think you have family that play multiple sports, is he living in the weight room? It is up to the kid to decide what he likes and doesnt, not bignutbuck. Make better use of the time that you have and challenge the kids in workouts, don't waste their time. In the army we had a complete workout in 45 minutes 3 times per week, not a second was wasted. When we get the football kids into basketball it takes about a month for them to get into basketball shape because they are not used to running. Our basketball kids run cross country to stay in shape and nos I think yours do as well. Great for the kids and great for the program, when was the last time you went out and ran 6 miles bignut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nostradamus Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 You were a personal trainer for 3 yrs., now a all star basketball coach that shares his workouts with the 5a powerhouses across the state. OK! Like I stated before, if those kids gained strength lifting 1.5 hours per week they didn't start off with much did they. Its not hard to improve when you start at the bottom. Point is, if you have never lifted weights and you start with the bare minimum you will improve. No where to go but up. Like I said you show me a football team that only spends 1.5 hours a week lifting weights and I'll show you a loser. They may only spend 1.5 hours during the school day because of short periods, but I guarentee you they have a weight room full of kids getting extra work in after school and in the summer to improve. The last time I noticed football takes much more strength and work in the weight room than basketball does. Unless you are playing two-below. First, I never said I was an all-star coach. I have had my fair share of success....and yes I was a personal trainer for three years BUT never stopped coaching. I did it during the spring and summer months to help our family survive as my wife had to stay at home with our son who was diagnosed with a kidney disease at the age of 22 months. Hope that explanation helps you out a little. Again....you assume you KNOW these kids started at the bottom and are using that to make your point. All of these kids have been in our off-season program for multiple years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nostradamus Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 My only problem is when you have baseball or basketball encouraging kids to go "solo", then you have a problem. I also don't want to hear the people in the community bad mouthing the coaches when they are not as successful as they want them to be when their best athletes are giving up football. It starts at home, and like I have stated before, and will continue to, sometimes the kids look for the easy way out, football is too tough and too hot, before they even try it. The parents ought to encourage them more and baby them less. So only baseball and basketball "encourage kids to go solo"??? You don't have a problem if football encourages them to go "solo"?? Basketball and baseball are "the easy way out"?? You are saying that if a parent encourages their child to play football then they are being tough on them but, if the parent only encourages the child to play baseball and basketball they are "taking the easy way out"?? I had a brother who never played a down of football in his life (though the football coaches drooled over him as a prospective middle linebacker). However, he CHOSE to play basketball, tennis, and golf. He went to the playoffs in basketball, state in tennis (twice), and state in golf (twice). Was he taking the easy way out?? Because he didn't play football?? He was a three sport athlete in a 3A high school.........but his parents never encouraged him to play football.........were they too soft on him?? Coincidentally, as a senior, he made it to the state tournament in golf and tennis and had to participate at the state level in both sports on the same day. He was far and away the athlete of the year at our high schoool. Oddly enough, the football coaches decided to do away with the award that year (out of the clear blue. They had no case for any of their football players to win the award so they decided to cancel it instead of giving it to a no-footballer. I am starting to see the same mentality in your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigNutBuck Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Wow! I guess its the concensus that if you implement a basketball workout into your football offseason you will be bigger, faster, and stronger. PLEASE! Try to convince that to a football coach that wins and wins big. You can not and will not win football games spending 1.5 hours a week in the weight room. You will be pushed around and ran around for 4 quarters and the only consistency to it is losing seasons. I'm talking about small school athletics. And if you believe that one-sport athletes and coaches that convince kids to go "solo" don't kill a program you must be off in your own little dream world. Schools like Orangefield has to have their best athletes in the program or they will continually lose. Bottom line. They don't have the numbers to choose from to have their best athletes not playing football, going "solo" to earn a schlorship. If you are good enough you are good enough. Until they get that point across every coach that comes in will struggle and the community will continue to complain about the lack of success. Yeah, an air conditioned gym is much easier than the weight room and track. Wildcatter before you continue to mumble on you have no idea who I am. I have no kids old enough to play sports yet. One will be starting school this year and the other is in diapers. I don't even have any cousins in this district, I just happen to live here and love sports. By the way, my cousin's kids play multiple sports, but in the Splendora district, just to clarify. They do love football and in Splendora football is still king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nostradamus Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 I'll be sure and pass along your sentiments to the Lufkin football staff.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat22 Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 They do love football and in Splendora football is still king. Splendora's record the last five years. 2008 4-4 2007 7-4 2006 5-6 2005 3-7 2004 2-8 21-29 over the last 5 years and football is king!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcatter Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 Well then it must be working Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AggiesAreWe Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 My whole argument to this thread was that schools like Orangefield and Hardin-Jefferson will not see success on the football field unless their best athletes play football. If a student chooses to play one sport over the other, so be it. But the fact remains, if Orangefield wants success on the football field, theu either have to get their best athletes on the field, or drop down in classification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFDM COOP Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 I agree!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOSgrad Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 I don't know that a drop into 23-2A (which it looks where they would be) would benefit them all that much with the likes of EC and Buna. Look at the last three years and OF is 1-5 against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AggiesAreWe Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 I don't know that a drop into 23-2A (which it looks where they would be) would benefit them all that much with the likes of EC and Buna. Look at the last three years and OF is 1-5 against them. That's true, but I believe they would have a better chance there than the district they are in based on the numbers and the "type" athlete they are getting to participate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catfever Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 You keep talking about all the kids that are not playing football for OF. In reality, there was just one kid who did not play this last year that everyone is referring to. To say that he would have turned around a 1-8 season is crazy. There were no other kids that chose not to play football this past year that would have made a difference. Is it important that all the kids participate at schools the size of OF. Yes. They should only play if they want to though. They should not be coerced to play or not to play. The kids should play what they want to. If you want to get on here and bash kids for making the decision not to. You live with that. I hope someone doesn't do the same to your kids when they get older. Lord help them if they choose not to play the almighty football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleed orange Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 It was a lot easier in my day, late seventies. Most kids worked and earned money. We know the value of a dollar and we know work ethic in the real world. But now they work out and get prepared for sports and most of them do not know the value of a dollar. Some kids had jobs that were a lot harder than any workout for 2 hours in the weight room. Don't get me wrong athletics played a key role in my success as an adult. But having a job and earning money also did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playdefense Posted June 1, 2009 Report Share Posted June 1, 2009 I have worked for and been a part of some very successful teams and I have to say I have never heard an AD/Hd FB coach tell an athlete to go straight football, but I have heard both basketball and baseball coaches tell a kid they should go straight basketball or baseball. Unfortunately the comment made is you are more likely to get injured in football and then you will be out for the year. So, if basketball or baseball was the first sport of the year it would be ok. Just let the kids play - injuries happen just like bad things happen in life - what are you going to do sit around and not compete in life either b/c something bad might happen. As for working out - there is no way you can get stronger working two days a week as opposed to three. Just will not happen. Now true enough you do need to give the body a certain amount of time to rejuvenate itself from time to time, change the percentages and lifts, work all the bodies muscles not just the core lifts - use explosive lifts, olympic lifts, free weights, machines, etc. but there is just no way you can honestly say you get stronger lifting only two days a week. Do you have improvement - sure you do. You could get improvement by only lifting one day if done properly, but you do not gain as much strength. With all that said, bottom line you have to believe in your method and get after it full bore. Now, can we go back to the original topic - who is going to get this job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggen Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 What happened to the Coldspring DC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catfever Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 So you have never heard a football coach say it would be more benficial for you to lift weights instead of playing basketball or baseball. You are crazy. It happens all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brubaker Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 Yes, most good high school football coaches / AD's will encourage their football players to contribute in ALL sports for the good of his athletic program. He also would hope to reap athletes from basketball and baseball to the cornerstone in Texas, the football program. So no, he's not crazy, many will absolutely encourage participation in ALL sports where an athlete can contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wildcat 08 Posted June 2, 2009 Report Share Posted June 2, 2009 What about Troy Bolton? I hear he may be interested! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts