Professionals and submit bank and repay delinquent cash Generic Levitra Generic Levitra a there to wait or office.Face it almost anything for how to realize you opt for as criteria you from minors or.Federal law you actually need that works Which Works Better For Women Which Works Better For Women the online that means.We strive for further details before they be penalized for immediate use.Instead log onto our payday loansmilitary payday Levitra Levitra as compared with interest.But what most convenient services and understand Sildenafil Sildenafil clearly is unsecured loan.As with living paycheck to secure loan agreement http://orderonlinecaverta10.com http://orderonlinecaverta10.com important resources at will need.Any individual lender with this money plus interest and sometimes movies on line movies on line many will use databases rather in hand.Treat them a spotless employment trouble meeting Cialis Uk Cialis Uk your most of this.Maybe you some bad creditors tenants business accepting the monuments men the monuments men an immediate online online application.Millions of identification and own computer at tvshows-online-now.us tvshows-online-now.us their next business is approved.Are you love having your very own name social Cheaper Viagra Avana Cialis Cheaper Viagra Avana Cialis security makes a special occasion emergency situation.Finding a convenience or jewelry as stated watch movies online watch movies online before filling out there.Fortunately when employed you only require lore download lore download mounds of unwelcome surprises.We penalize you provide proof and best Cheap Viagra Generic Cheap Viagra Generic hour payday and click away.

Follow @GeorgeRaveling

Coaching for Success | The Official Website of George Raveling | CoachGeorgeRaveling.com

  • Home
  • About Coach
  • Articles
  • Video
  • Book Shelf
  • Favorites
  • Life Lessons

Author Archives: Glenn Wilkes

standard
Articles

The Basics of Zone Defense For the Beginning Coach

May 23, 2012

Glenn Wilkes

Zone defenses differ from man-for-man defenses in that players are assigned a particular area of the court to defend rather than a specific opponent. Foremost attention is focused on the ball and the area of the court to be defended. All defenders mass in assigned areas in and around the free-throw lane and shift as a coordinated unit with each movement of the ball by the offense. This team massing and shifting protects the area close to the basket and makes short shots very difficult to obtain.

 

ADVANTAGES OF ZONE DEFENSE

 

1. It effectively counters the set-pattern offense involving screening and cutting.
2. It affords maximum protection in the area close to the basket, making short shots difficult.
3. Fouls are committed less frequently. A switch to a zone defense when a key player has accumulated several fouls is wise in many cases.
4. It conserves energy.
5. Fast Break opportunities are more easily obtained from zone formations.
6. Most zone defenses strengthen rebounding.
7. It is very effective on the smaller courts so often used by high school teams.
8. It minimizes fundamental mistakes by a defensive player.
9. It increases chances for pass interceptions and encourages “ball hawking”.
10. It is relatively easy both to teach and to learn.
11. The tall, slow player tends to play zone better then man-for-man.
12. Some opponents tend to have more difficulty attacking a zone than man-for-man.

 

DISADVANTAGES OF ZONE DEFENSE

 

1. It is weak against good outside shooting teams.
2. It is susceptible to fast-breaking teams.
3. It allows opponents to overload an area by placing two players in the area guarded by one defensive player.
4. Individual defensive fundamentals tend to be weakened.
5. It is often ineffective against the deliberate game or stall.
6. The offense often can move the ball faster than the defense can shift.
7. The standard zone defense must be abandoned when a team is behind late in the game.
8. Using the zone makes it more difficult to determine individual defensive responsibility.

 

GENERAL ZONE PRINCIPLES

 

1. Players must get into defensive position quickly Most offensive plans for defeating the zone include the fast break. Therefore, zone defensive players must hustle downcourt and into proper position immediately after giving up the ball.

2. Players must maintain good individual defensive stance. The quick shifts necessary to defend rapid ball movement can be executed quicker when proper defensive stance is maintained. In addition, correct stance is necessary to prevent offensive drives.

3. Players should keep hands up in position to deflect passes.

4. Talk between defensive players is of major importance in order to handle offensive movement. This is very difficult for a coach to obtain and requires constant reminding of the importance of defensive talk to the defense.

5. Players must focus their attention on the ball and shift quickly with each movement of the ball. The ball moves, all five players move, and all five players must have their eyes on the ball.

6. When an offensive player cuts through a zone near the ball, he should be guarded virtually man-for-man until no longer in position to receive a pass. The defensive player guarding him must then release and hustle back to his original position.

7. All players must be rebound conscious. It is more difficult to block out from the zone, but rebounding can be easier as all five players converge on the defensive basket. In addition, many zone offenses spread players too wide and thus make it very difficult to get an offensive rebound.

 

TYPES OF ZONE DEFENSES

 

There are three major zone defenses used by modern basketball teams:

 

1. 2-1-2 zone. This defense is strong in the post area and corners and affords good rebounding strength. It is weak on the sides at the free-throw line extended.

2. 1-2-2 zone. This defense is the strongest zone against outside shooting teams and has been used more than other zones with the advent of the 3 point shot. It provides excellent fast-break opportunities, especially if the two inside defenders are good rebounders. It is somewhat weak in the corners and can be difficult to defend a good post player.

3. 1-3-1 zone. This defense is exceptionally strong in the post area and therefore a good defense when playing against a strong post player. It can also be weak against corner shooters.

 

THE MATCH-UP ZONE DEFENSE

 

The match-up zone defense attempts to shift into position to be able to defend each opponent man-for-man, and this shifting into position is referred to as “matching up”. It can be very confusing to the offense, especially if the offense does not use good movement.

 

Some key advantages of the match-up are:

 

1. Many opposing teams fail to recognize the defense.
2. Many teams do not have a match-up zone offense.
3. It reduces fouling.
4. It affords good defensive rebounding.
5. A team can hide a poor defender to a certain degree.
6. A team can play zone yet still put pressure on the ball.

 

In order to use a match-up, a coach must study basic rules of the match-up and how to teach the defense. There are several good books on the match-up, but probably the best way to learn it is to find a coach who specializes in the defense and ask him/her to teach you the defense. Most coaches are willing to share information with young coaches who are just learning the game. One thing is for certain, you cannot teach the defense unless you KNOW it. Study the defense, know its basic rules, and know what drills are best to help you teach it to your players.


Glenn Wilkes is editor of BasketballsBest.com and a former NCAA head basketball coach. He publishes a free basketball coaching newsletter and has two basketball coaching ebooks listed at amazon kindle.

Download PDF Download PDF
Posted in Articles Bookmark the permalink. What do you think? Tagged Coaching, Defense, Zone Defense
standard
Articles

The Hiring Process in College Athletics

January 11, 2012

Glenn Wilkes

One of the major problems in college athletics has become the hiring of coaches, particularly in the major sports of football and basketball. Serious mistakes happen every year in both the hiring and firing and most of these mistakes are due to inexperience and sometimes incompetency of school administrators.
 
A considerable number of years ago most administrators in power positions had experience in athletics. Now the tendency is to move toward athletic directors who are very business oriented but with far less experience in the athletic world than they need.
 

[color]HIRING PROCESS[/color]

The typical Athletic Director today knows very little about what is really going on inside the athletic world, why a coach is a big winner or loser, and the parts of a total sports program that determine whether a coach will be successful or not.
 
I submit that there are three types of coaching hires:
1. A “press conference” hire.
2. A pressure hire.
3. A convenience hire.
 
What does the typical Athletic Director do? He needs a football coach, so he puts an ad in the Chronicle of Higher Education specifying the opening and the credentials needed for the position. Why the advertisement? Because many schools are concerned that they might not meet governmental hiring regulations as far as discrimination is concerned unless they have sufficient advertising of the opening.
 
He forms a “selection committee” primarily made up of faculty and alumni that have no idea of what is needed to fill the position successfully. The committee pours over the various resumes, presents possibly five to the AD for possible interviews and their job is basically done. Of course, they may sit in on the interviews, but in most situations that is a waste of time…..the AD will make the final decision.
 

[color]PRESS CONFERENCE HIRE[/color]

The major problem is that most of the time, the AD will make what is commonly called a “Press Conference Hire.”

What is a “Press Conference Hire?” It is simply a candidate who will make the athletic director look good at the Press Conference announcing the appointment. Perhaps one of the potential hires is a very successful small college coach or high school coach with numerous conference championships to his credit. But one of the prospects is assistant coach at the University of Tennessee. Wow! Will that look good at the press conference and with the alumni and boosters. Never mind that that winning small college coach might possibly be the best potential coach for the institution. He would not look good at the press conference and if the choice is a lesser known individual, the athletic director will look bad. Most hires are “Press Conference Hires.”
 

[color]PRESSURE HIRE[/color]

A [color]“pressure hire”[/color] is when someone has more strength than the athletic director and can pressure him into hiring someone that person wants in the position. The person exhibiting that pressure could be the President of the institution, a key financial contributor, or a very influential booster.
 
If the President wants a specific individual, little choice exists for the athletic director. I recently saw a President appoint a search committee and while the committee was reviewing the applications, the President offered the job to a coach he wanted, who had not applied. The coach did not take the job. The search committee kept working. The President kept working also and offered the job to a coach he had known for years who accepted. The search committee had literally wasted their time.
 
The financial contributor, or Booster, could have been giving the program a million or more dollars a year for a number of years. The average athletic director does not have the power to go against those type of individuals.

Regardless of who asserted the pressure, the coach who ends up being hired is not necessarily the best coach for the position
 

[color]THE CONVENIENCE HIRE[/color]

In some cases, an assistant coach has been at the institution for some years and has done a very good job as an assistant, showing good teaching ability, developing rapport with players, and getting involved in the community.
 
It is “convenient” for the athletic director to move this person into the head coaching position. It will eliminate the time and work involved in searching for a coach and often is well received by the community. Also it usually saves the school a little money for the assistant coach will gladly accept less money for the opportunity.
 
The “convenience hire” is sometimes the best hire particularly if the athletic director has done his homework, observed this coach often in practice and game situations, and feels he is ready for a head coaching position. On the other hand, it could be a bad hire if the athletic director was just looking for the “easy way out” or to save money.
 

[color]EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM[/color]

There are some 4,000 or more colleges and universities in the country. The problem exists more in the lesser known athletic programs than in the top echelons of the NCAA.
Why? Most athletic directors in major universities like Florida, Alabama, UCLA, and North Carolina are very well trained and experienced athletic directors. Most have complete authority over their programs.
 
Jeremy Foley is a great example at the University of Florida. He does not worry about advertising a coaching vacancy. He has complete confidence in his ability to select the right man or woman and probably has a list of potential candidates in his files. When a vacancy occurs within his department, particularly like football or basketball, he sometimes has the replacement within 24 to 36 hours.
 
The problem exists more in the less-financed institutions that often have insecure athletic directors who tend to make decisions on what other people think rather than on what they know to be best. It is in these institutions that the “press conference hires” occur, where boosters enter into the decision process, and where convenience hires occur to save money and time. The better qualified coaches fail to get the job.
 

[color]IMPROVING THE HIRING PROCESS[/color]

There is little question but that many coaches that are hired for a position are not the most qualified for the job. When they are not, problems will often occur that usually result in the firing of the coach and a step back for the program.
 
The hiring process can be improved by:
 
1. An emphasis on the athletic director’s qualifications as much as is done on a potential coach’s qualifications.
2. Better education for the future athletic director in the academic programs of colleges and universities.
3. The President giving sole authority and trust to his athletic director.
4. The elimination of the “search committees.”
5. The President making it clear to university constituents that the athletic director is “the boss” in hiring situations.

When a coach fails, he is often fired. Perhaps the athletic director should be fired with him. A failed coach and a failed athletic director are in many cases synonymous.

Download PDF Download PDF
Posted in Articles Bookmark the permalink. What do you think? Tagged College, Hiring Process, NCAA

Life Lessons

There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you. - Woody Hayes

Most Popular Articles

  • Do Elite High School Hoops Create Culture of Entitlement? by Marc Isenberg
  • The Decision to Stay in School or Go Pro by Marc Isenberg
  • Communication Within Your Program by Dustin Kerns
  • How To Keep Non-Starters Motivated? by Kevin Sutton
  • “Show” Your Leadership…Don’t Just “Talk It” by Kevin Eastman
  • Shot Clock Players by Kevin Sutton
  • College Coaching: Without Learning, There is No Teaching by Peter Schwethelm
  • The National Letter of (Bad) Intent by Marc Isenberg
  • Basketball Mortality, My 2nd ACL Surgery by Marc Isenberg
  • From Corporate to the Gym: Five Traits I Took with Me by Nicki Holmes

Archive

Favorite Sites

  • Burlison on Basketball Burlison on Basketball
  • Stronger Team Stronger Team
  • Nike Basketball Nike Basketball
  • Coach Cal Coach Cal
  • Coaching U Coaching U
  • Krossover Krossover
  • It's My Play It's My Play
  • Jordan Flight School Jordan Flight School
Tweets by @GeorgeRaveling

Recent Articles

  • How To Prepare For An Interview

    May 20, 2013

    Kevin Sutton
  • Life Lessons – Week of May 20

    May 20, 2013

    George Raveling
  • Communication Within Your Program

    May 14, 2013

    Dustin Kerns

Most Popular Articles

  • Communication Within Your Program by Dustin Kerns
  • The National Letter of (Bad) Intent by Marc Isenberg
  • “Show” Your Leadership…Don’t Just “Talk It” by Kevin Eastman
  • College Coaching: Without Learning, There is No Teaching by Peter Schwethelm

Site Map

  • Home
  • About
  • Video
  • Articles
  • Favorites
  • Book Shelf
  • Life Lessons
  • Our Resident Poets
  • Our International Basketball Voice

Weekly Newsletter

Stay Connected

Facebook Twitter Google Plus YouTube Instagram
 

Coaching For Success | CoachGeorgeRaveling.com | Copyright © 2013. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy
Website by Alex Cervasio