CoachJ

Very good receiver who really helps their system go. Is a great character kid from what I've heard too.

REGARDING THE COACHES WHO WON'T HELP THEIR PLAYERS (*HumbleBrag alert*)... I have a hard time believing any coach would actually do NOTHING to help his players, but I've heard from some kids that have transferred to us that some coaches have a policy to 'hold back mail' from colleges until after the season or some other later time. My guess is they feel this will be a 'distraction' from the "TEAM" concept and cause some to be motivated more by their individual success. I believe these coaches are RARE these days. I also know there are coaches who say, "my job is to coach the game; getting a scholarship has to be 100% you and your parents' cause." They are known not to send out highlight films and maybe to even restrict college coach visits to the school. I think these coaches are even more rare. If EITHER of these are the case, I'd simply ask -- if the parents had a CHOICE of places to send their kids -- did you put the coach on the spot and ask for their overall philosophy as far as marketing their athletes and then ask for SPECIFICS of what they've done in the recent past? If you didn't, I don't feel you should complain when your son isn't getting promoted the way you'd like. I'll say publicly here that our approach is to do everything we can to promote our players to the next level, all year long. Most of it happens off-to-the-side as opposed to in front of the rest of the team (like handing them recruiting mail). I'll stay up late (after watching all the practice film for the day) sending out highlight & full-game film on our Jr. and Sr. players of every college-ability level while also directly emailing college coaches of all levels individual player bios. My Christmas "Break" is usually filled with sending out film to schools on the 10+ seniors who tell me they'd like to keep playing after HS -- that's Junior College or Prep School for some, D3 for some, D2/NAIA for others, and the rare 1 or 2 a class that have what it takes to play D1 or 1AA). We'll also provide our kids with a database of all 1-day exposure camps (ones where actual college coaches will be present) in Ky and the surrounding states. We take 20-25 Jr's and Sr's to at least one "multiple-college" camp in June -- last year it was U. of Illinois where there were over 20 college coaches at all levels. We structure part of our 5-day a week off-season program to work on their "combine-skills" (40-dash starts, shuttle run, vertical jump, and other drills we know they do). I will also meet individually with any player and his parent(s) to lay out a plan from Freshman (or usually Sophomore) year as to what they will need to do to play football at their top potential -- and I am VERY honest about the things I mentioned in the previous post...for some, I'll tell them their best chance is likely D3 or NAIA or D2 unless they GROW TALLER or somehow start RUNNING FASTER. But then I'll lay out all the options there are at those lower levels. I'm also VERY clear that while we'll do a lot for them, the bulk of it will need to fall to them: the training, attending the camps (which means saving up the money to afford them), and even sending out film to schools if they desire to go outside Ky or surrounding states. So again, for parents that have a choice on where to send their kids and that part is important, why would you not ask for specifics up front and then hold the coach to that as your kid progresses through the program? I know some will say they went in knowing there would be no help...if so, the help IS out there. This is exactly why there's a market for one of the $300-$1200-per-year 'recruiting services' -- they DO fill a need for kids who are schools where the coach's philosophy is not to help kids get to the next level.

From many years experience (and a lot of frustration, trial/error, and some success) I'd like to weigh in. The original poster's points ("cover all bases") -- all on target. The people who said make a great highlight film -- on target (in most cases) The people who said send your highlights and full games to 100's of schools -- on target. The people who said "coaches don't care about highlights" -- correct also (in some cases). The truth is, there are several kinds of athletes out there and what category you fall into determines which of the above are primarily true for you. 1) Can't miss stud. Has all the measurables (ht, wt, speed, size, etc.). Honestly, if this kid goes to a camp or two his SOPHOMORE year and is head and shoulders (literally and figuratively) over others at his position and age, he'll probably get offers WITHOUT ever sending out any HS game film. If kid plays in an athlete-rich area like Georgia, Florida, California, Pennsylvania, or Texas (or even in the Cincinnati area) and has earned a starting job as a Soph, that helps more than what his film looks like (the perception that our best kids only are good b/c they play vs. weak competition is what HURTS Ky. kids w/ D1 schools--even those with the measurables...especially those outside of Louisville). **Highlight film doesn't matter much for this kid getting offers -- but they VALIDATE that the kid is 'special' enough to offer early or for a big-time school to offer. 2) Marginal kid. Has SOME of the measurables, early on but won't 'fill-out' til later in HS, so colleges will take a wait and see approach. Colleges WILL want to see film -- yes, both highlights and full game film (may be more important overall than highlights) and ALSO want to see him in person at a camp against competition they can structure (1on1 drills and individual agility drills). They are BIG on seeing how a 'big kid' BENDS. If he's 6'5, 300 but has poor hip flexibility, they're likely not to want to offer unless he's a freak in footwork drills. You can't always judge hip-flexibility from watching HS film (some kids aren't part of HS programs that try to develop this in the off-season like we do Ballard every single workout). ** The highlights DO matter for the "Marginal Kid." College coaches have told me basically every year (and I ask almost every one I see -- about 30 a year who visit our school; 15-20 from D1 BCS schools) that they need to see their BEST PLAYS to see if there is some POTENTIAL there for them to one day be a stud. The kid may only have two outstanding plays that make him look like a D1 player, but they will say at least he has POTENTIAL to be that way full-time whereas the majority of films they get on kids have highlights that make them look like "above-average HS players" but nothing more. Whether you think a school will look at highlights or not, you should have your first 2 or 3 showing you are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than most kids at your position. Even if some schools WON'T look at highlights, I'll guarantee that SOME will...and it might be those 2 or 3 schools out of 50 that see you make some unbelievably athletic play and be intrigued enough to want to see more. But realize, they probably WON'T look past your first 2 or 3 plays...they have too many kids to evaluate and not near enough time. Also realize, often it'll be a GRADUATE ASSISTANT watching your film unless the full-time assistant is already recruiting you. He will NOT pass you on to the full-time assistant unless you STAND OUT to him (remember, they get HUNDREDS of random films on kids; they don't have time to watch much of each, so you must make your first play or two "POP"). 3) Good high school football player, lacks measurables of height, weight, speed, etc. Sorry--unless you go to their actual camp and blow them away in 1-on-1 and individual drills, don't expect your film (highlight, full-game, etc.) to matter one bit. Even then, they're SO caught up on measurables (especially HEIGHT*) that even if you kill it in the drills they see in person, they'll likely just offer you a preferred walk-on spot. They have too much to lose (a $ix-figure job) if they go to the head coach and recommend you as someone that's under their list of minimums (OL at least 6'5, CB's run at least 4.5 on THEIR hand-timed clock, DL weigh 280 AND can move, etc.). REGARDING HEIGHT. I've been amazed at how much more important HEIGHT is for D1 schools. Then I went to a UK spring game where I got to walk around the locker room area before the game to see these guys up-close. They looked more like BASKETBALL players -- the Frosh skilled guys were tall, long-limbed, and much more lean than I'd have thought...the UPPERCLASS skilled guys were tall, long-limbed and THICK. The big guys were much the same except some of the underclass big guys were kind of 'soft' in places where the older guys were big and more SOLID. But they were all VERY long-limbed. The reason height matters so much is due to physics. * Football is a COLLISION sport. * The amount of FORCE you have when you collide is due to 2 factors: Mass and Speed (or, acceleration). * It's tough to do much about someone's SPEED potential. By Jr/Sr year in HS, you can tell either they're FAST or not. * You CAN have a great affect on MASS. But think of this... ** If you're SHORT and put on 30lbs. your frosh year in college, it'll likely have a great NEGATIVE effect on your SPEED. ** If you're TALL and put on 30lbs., your speed is a lot less likely to be affected. So, the guy who said "have size or 4.4 speed or both" is the most correct of all if your desire is to get a full-ride to a D1 school (if you take "4.4 speed" to mean in the top less-than-1% of kids your age for your position...AS TIMED by the college coach at one of their camps). If you want a full-ride to a non-BCS D1 school, maybe you could be in the top 2%; for 1AA maybe you could be in the top 4%...but any way you slice it, you MUST have the measurables or your film--highlights and otherwise--is useless.

Wow. ...and add to that JOHN HARDIN in the cross-district.

Sorry--I didn't mean to imply they were definitely going to 6A in order to 'duck' anyone that might be in 5A. Just giving a rationale for why it might be better for a school to choose to be in 6A strictly b/c of the rotating nature of the playoff system. I have no idea why any particular school might want to play in a different class than their enrollment suggests they should play. I simply wanted to state one way 6A was different than other classes and, thus, why a school MIGHT want to 'play up.'

:sssh: That was the right thing to do for that year -- looked 'different' from the outside, but to us it was a lot of the same stuff we'd always done with (dare I say) 'a tweak' in the backfield. The main thing was it wasn't all 'totally new' to our kids AND it was a good fit for the type of personnel we had. We have quite a bit different athletes/linemen/tight end-types at Ballard than we had there. So while I go back to doing more of what I know best, there'll still be a strong element in designing the 'intricacies' of the system around the types of kids we'll have year-in, year-out.

I believe the difference many don't see is that the playoff structure in 5A is set in stone every year (D1 plays D2, D3 plays D4, etc.) whereas in 6A we rotate districts around (presumably so the same district wouldn't get 'stuck' every year with T/X). That would allow a team like Conner or Cooper to have only a 1 in 7 chance each year to be matched up with a team like that (assuming T/X stay in the same district again) as opposed to being matched up with or in the same district with Highlands/CovCath EVERY year.

Nelson would be a bit of an outlier with those South Central schools; might fit better geographically w/ the Bullitts. Also, w/ Oldham & S. Oldham being north of Jeff Co and all those others you have them with being basically south and/or east, it might be they mix those two in with a few of the Jeff Co schools and put a few of the Jeff Co schools w/ the Bullitts to make a couple of 6 team districts. Then maybe take those central Ky. teams (Anderson, Woodford, Nelson?, Montgomery, Mad Southern) to make a district. Any way you try to do it though, there are some outliers. But what you have makes sense and could work. Impossible to predict though from the other years I've tried--definitely more an 'art' than a 'science.' (Think: NCAA Bball tournament selection committee)

Totally agree. I'm one who understood when taking on a career like football coaching it meant people watching you while you work (at least on game nights) and criticizing what you do, everybody around you thinking they could do better at your job (though they only see about 10% of what you do), and that rumors will fly about that--try as you might--you just can never control. Part of the reason I'm on here without a pseudonym is that I want info about my program coming straight from the horse's mouth. But I totally understand the human desire to 'spice things up' when telling a story. Not to do so makes for a boring story and to dig to find the truth of what really happens takes too much time and energy for most.

Had some really impressive offensive playmakers last year. I think their best receiver returns, but the QB is graduating.

Thanks. Mass exodus (lol). Why the change? I just don't feel our results the last 2 years match the potential we have. As Einstein said, to continue to do things the same and expect different results is the definition of insanity. Also, I have to be the person ultimately accountable for what I think is underachieving. So the systems we run need to be what I think is right for the kids we have year-in year-out -- as opposed to delegating major scheme responsibilities to what others think is right. Then, if the results aren't what I want, I'll be the one not only ultimately accountable, but will know it was MY decisions causing the success or lack thereof all along. In other words, I've tried to run this program similar to how a college head coach would -- with varying degrees of success. I just felt my program maximized it's potential better other places when I was more hands-on scheme-wise. As to that scheme, we'll be more run-first on offense and on defense we'll just be approaching pass coverage in a very different way than we have (our run defense has been pretty good recently--so no need on D for a complete scheme change). I want to be CLEAR--there was no 'purge.' The coaches who were here previously were ALL extremely good coaches (which is why I wanted almost every one of them back)...just didn't want to coach w/ these new schemes--it's not what they know best. So to say there was a need for a change in scheme I'm in NO WAY saying those coaches did a poor job (much the opposite--they were some if the hardest-working, care-about-kids guys I've ever worked with); coaches just need to coach systems that match what they know best. That goes for our assistants and the head coach.

Sorry...didn't answer whether all positions are filled. We currently have ONE varsity position (WR's) and ONE Frosh position open. Am in discussions with people for both positions, but they are not officially hired on yet.

Lost 7 starters on D, 7 on O. Schedule same as last year (Riherd's scoreboard on khsaa.org). Last year we lost to 5 teams: 3 were in the 6A top 5 final poll and 1--Collins--won the 4A state championship over Highlands. Contrary to what I've heard 'out in the community' (not sure the source) staff was not 'replaced.' I was clear at end of season that new systems would be run on offense and defense. Most of previous staff were only comfortable running systems we ran last year. Almost all were asked to return, but told they'd be coaching within the new systems and chose to coach in programs running systems with which they were more comfortable. One chose to go back to college to finish degree, another is a parapro whose job will require more out of state travel so cannot coach next year, five will be coaching at other programs (one got a head coaching job), one just had a young child and may or may not coach next year, two had job changes within JCPS that would not allow them to make it to practice on time, and one -- Mark Green -- chose to remain on staff. In the meantime, a new staff is set and ready to install the new systems on offense and defense (LaKunta Farmer -- former head coach at Doss HS -- will be the new defensive coordinator). I will be running the offense. The new rules implemented last year allow us to work football-specific in the off-season and we've taken full advantage in our 4-day-a-week off-season program. The kids we have coming back have embraced the changes -- I think what we're doing on both sides of the ball moving forward fits this group of kids (and what we traditionally have at Ballard) very well. And they are the strongest group I've ever had -- 18 Deadlifted 405+, 17 Benched 225+, and 15 Power Cleaned over 225. So we'll be strong enough...but wins and losses come down more to EXECUTION. That remains to be seen.

Was a GREAT play-call. Ball being taken out underneath. All started around the lane; on smack of ball sent the shooters T would expect to get the ball out wide--if they got an open look I'm sure would've gone to them--but T made sure to cover them up. Also sent our big guy (6'9 Corey Douglas) to corner to clear out the lane of their big. That left us with a pretty good matchup and their big guy out of the lane. Lob was a good one and shot was about 4 feet from goal...it looked great coming out of his hands, just fell a little short & bounced off front rim. With only 2.9 left, I don't think there'd have been a way to get a closer, more open shot than what was drawn up, but it was a tough shot to make as T's kid did a good job defending. Our guys played really well...T's did too--just made some really tough shots down the stretch. No offense to any other teams out there, but I have no doubt that was the real State Championship game.

There's a huge change in a kid from say, Sophomore year to Junior year--and for some their big 'change-year' is between Frosh & Jr. He might've been undersized and/or behind a stud player last year. Spring allows that kid to get 'first team reps' for maybe the first time so you can get a better sense of where he fits varsity-wise prior to summer practice. We don't do much of a depth chart between the end of the season and the next spring, but the one we make coming out of spring practice is very important: it sets who starts off getting most reps in June 7on7 work and then in actual team practice starting July 15. The other big benefit of spring practice is that it allows you to work on 'wrinkles' in a full-pad football situation more than you'd be able to in July or thereafter. For instance, one year we knew to compete w/ CovCath, Highlands, etc., we needed to do something they weren't ready for, so we knew we'd be running true Single-Wing against them. We used the spring to work on it live against a defense, film it, analyze the film, etc. Got to see some things that worked and some things that needed 'tweaking.' Got enough done that spring we were able to keep it 'in our back pocket' for 6 games until we played our 1st district game vs. CovCath. I don't think we'd have beaten them if they'd been able to prepare for it or if we hadn't had those 10 days in the spring to work out the kinks.

Both Rivals and Nike camps are "free" in terms of the entrance fee. The closest ones to us are in Atlanta, Columbus, or Chicago. They start early in the morning so not only is there the cost of travel, but also likely a hotel room. I recommended several of our kids to those camps and they are pretty clear that they ONLY want kids at those camps who have D1 offers already.

No offense taken at all from you! Really glad you brought it up actually--I'd heard some of the same false rumors and like that I had an opportunity to address them in a public forum. (And sorry to have taken this thread from it's original topic, so...) Oldham County will always be my 2nd home -- gave me a chance to achieve a life goal at a very early stage of my career -- so it's therefore near to my heart. Still have guys who coach there that either coached or played for me that are like family. Though it's a district rival for me now, it's a program I want to see do well. The people there are SUCH good people, and that goes for those making the decisions about hiring. The principal has an athletic background and was a football player there so I know they did their due diligence promoting the job and then vetting the candidates. Here's hoping they go 9-1 next year! Good luck to the new coach.

No, sir; there are a couple remaining from last year's staff, but many will be different. We're changing systems on both sides of the ball and--though asked to remain on staff through the changes--have chosen to go to other programs running systems more similar to what they are used to doing. One got a head coaching job who would've stayed in board. To your point though, I'd reference that great quote: " believe half of what you see and NONE of what you hear." (If you'd like to hear it straight from me rather than rely on 'hearsay,' I'm at Ballard every day after school training kids for next season.) Me--I'm not much for rumors. I always like to deal with people man-to-man.

Flattered that you'd say that... And I didn't take any offense to your guess it might be me. I'm thinking it might've been an assistant who's been there they liked enough to ask to become head guy. No real insight there, just a guess based on my doubt they 'went after' any of their former HC's.

Wrong on the former. VERY happy where I am. I inquired there on behalf of a couple of my former assistants who looked into the position, but neither of those ever 'stalked the sidelines there' ... at least on the HOME side of the field.

1) Head coach would have to watch EITHER Frosh or JV (personally, I feel I should see every game our program plays) 2) Many kids who play JV have some varsity responsibility (for us, usually just Special Teams, but occasionally they're a varsity back-up) so if both games are on Thursday--like current Frosh games--there'd be ONE day for them to recover. If a varsity starter gets injured, the JV kid who played last night or Tuesday in a JV game now has to play again in a varsity game with little recovery. I can control contact in practice; can't in a JV game. 3) The solution to this is to play both lower level GAMES ON SATURDAY. But that would require school administrators, officials, etc. to be willing to do this on what they consider a 'day off' (or for officials around Louisville, a day where many of them work Youth League games or College games). Doubt you'll get that going.

Yes. They can take kids from all over Jefferson County.

Ram's got it. Not taking anything away from Manual and Male (they do a GREAT job educating kids), just pointing out that it's pretty special for our math & English teachers to make it into this group when you factor in we have to average in ALL scores from kids in our resides area who are not known for being great students (and, BTW, Harry: there's a very healthy percentage of kids at Ballard from 'poverty-stricken' backgrounds...some GREAT success stories amongst those kids too!).

Love seeing Ballard as the only Jeff. Co. public school on the list who can't pick and choose its students. Says a lot, I think, for our math & English faculty. And though we had a very tough schedule, that whole "5" thing needs to improve!

My guess on the 'in-state D2' programs (Ky. Wesleyan and Ky. State) is they are choosing to use their VERY LIMITED scholarship $$'s for kids from areas of the state that have historically been more willing to come there. I know based on being in Louisville for 6 years now that Ky. Wesleyan seems to have made a conscious effort to attack the city of Louisville as its recruiting base. Got some VERY good kids out of here (and flipped two G'town commits at the last minute).