One of the hot topics in the blogosphere during fall camp was the issue of practicing 1's vs. 1's; the idea that pitting your first-string offense against your first-string defense created better competition and preparedness for both.
It's a simple enough concept to grasp. After all, it makes sense that if you're a receiver going up against a top cornerback, you're going to better know where you stand, and what your strengths and weakness might be.
So, when Richt clarified the Bulldogs will typically go 1's vs. 2's on both offense and defense, many, particularly those that love to question the coaching staff's methods, got a little antsy. After all, how could we possibly be prepared for Boise St. and South Carolina 1st stringers if we're not practicing against our own?
What those people may fail to grasp is that both offense and defense are predominately working on technique, communication, execution, and specific plays. In order to that, the coaches need to set up various scenarios. Hence, you're not getting the most out of each practice because either the offense or defense is constantly running "bogus" plays. Or, you're not getting the most out of practice because you're not concentrating on specific goals and improving where you're weakest. Either way, going 1's vs. 2's is a necessity.
But, fear not, armchair QBs and coaches. The Dawgs held what Richt deemed a "competition day" on Friday, in which several scenarios (down and distance) were set up, and the #1 offense and the #1 defense went at it (The offense won the day 3-2). The coaching staff, much more often than not, knows what you know (and plenty more). They do see the value in each side of the ball getting the others' best shot, at least every once in a while.
The point is, the ol' coach sees a far greater value in getting down plays, signals, techniques, reps, and every other what-have-you more. Besides, it's not as if the second team is composed of the little angels in Sister Mary Catherine's Little Fireflies Dance Troupe.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
For the most part, our 2nd teamers are either inexperienced, not very good or both. They could probably give Coastal Carolina a run for their money.
ReplyDeleteI actually like the 1s v. 2s this year. It seems that the starters are pretty much set. What we need is a solid set of backups, and they can only get better by playing against our best.
ReplyDeleteugh... everyone does 1 v 2. its not designed to prepare you to take on the 1 team of the opposing squad but rather to be able to identify what is going on in pre snap read, snap and play development. Yes, you have to beat the man in front of you.... but if you are guessing, you are going to struggle. The key is for the 1st units to understand what is going on and mentally prepare for what might happen next.
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to acknowledge questions, why all these losses ?
ReplyDeleteWere we not the more talented team, in every case ?
@ Anonymous 12:59 - The answers to that question are far too reaching in scope and various magnitudes to answer in a little blog like mine. But, as it pertains to this particular entry, I am about as certain as I can be without knowing for sure that going 1's vs. 2's is not the culprit. I think you'd find that if you looked at the fall practices of the vast majority of recent top 10 teams, they have gone 1's vs. 2's as well.
ReplyDelete