Putting Saturday's Loss in Perspective

The Outlaws are part of the Women's Football Alliance.  The alliance includes something like fifty-eight teams from all across the country and from big cities like Boston, Chicago, Dallas.  (I'm fudging on the number of teams because the WFA websites says forty-five but I count fifty-eight team logos in the website banner, and fifty teams in the standings list.)

A lot of teams.  Drawing from some serious population centers with large talent pools from which to recruit. 

The Dallas Diamonds finished the 2012 season as one of the top four teams in the league.  They were one game away from the national championship, losing in the semi-finals to the San Diego Surge. 

Look at the protection the O-line provides for the Dallas
quarterback throwing a pass.  They are good.

In 2012 the Dallas Diamonds scored an average of 74 points per game while allowing an average of only 4. 

And they completed a lot of their
passes. 

They were also pretty good at the run game.

They started the 2013 season with a 41-6 victory at the Houston Power. 

And we all know what happened in Austin Saturday:  Diamonds 49, Outlaws zip.

Don't let that loss get you down.  We lost to a great football team.  Lots of talented athletes.  Lots of experience.  A large Dallas/Fort Worth community from which to recruit athletes.  A top-four team in the league.  A lot of teams will lose to the Diamonds this year.

We should be proud of the Outlaws holding Dallas to under 50 points.  The Outlaws are a better team this season than last. The Outlaws will be a match for every team we face.  Maybe even a match for the Diamonds when we visit them on May 4.  But don't start looking ahead to that game. 

On April 27 we'll travel to Houston where we'll meet a strong team.  A team we can beat.  Winning in Houston won't be easy.  Like Dallas, they have a large community from which to recruit talent and they have had a great history, marred with some ups and downs.  But they are a team we can realistically expect to defeat. 

Forget about Dallas.  Get ready for Houston. 

Roster Reading

I didn’t visit a single tryout, a single practice, a single team meeting.  I missed the season opener, a 50-10 victory over Tulsa. 

But I did read the roster.

And the roster says 2013 could be a very good year for the Austin Outlaws.

This is an older photo of Shadan Hurd, wearing her original jersey
number.  Now she's #24.  She is one of my all-time favorite
Outlaws.  One of these days we'll feature her in a player profile.

 The roster says Shadana Hurd is back.  Shadana is good!  Great!  She is both quick and fast.  She was the nicknamed BoPeep because she didn’t want to get her uniform dirty.  Everyone gets tackled but Shadana ended a lot of her runs in the end zone, standing on both feet, uniform untarnished.  She’ll be wearing #24.  Watch her.  Watch fast.  She moves so fast she sometimes looks like a blur on the field.

Bridgette Brown is back.  Unlike Shadana, Bridgette wants her uniform dirty, as long as she brings an opposing runner to the ground with her.  I first noticed Bridgette a few years ago when I saw runners go from up to down so fast I almost missed it.  Bridgette is an amazing tackler.  She is listed on the roster as on the defensive line.  I like her better at linebacker but wherever she plays on defense, she will be a force for opponents to reckon with.  She’ll be wearing #42. Watch her when the Outlaws are on defense.  She’ll be around the ball.

Bridgette covers a lot of the field.  If you've played football you
know the open field tackles are difficult.  Bridgette brings runners
down wherever they are, open field or in a crowd. 

 

I don't have many clear shots of Patricia
because she's always in the middle of
a bunch of players.  I like this shot because
it shows the kind of determination I like,
making the tackle even from the ground.

Patricia Kincheon is back.  She joins the Capers-Christobal sisters to make three three-hundred pound players in the line.  I’m pretty sure this is a first for the Outlaws.  And a welcome first.  Football loves big.  She’ll be wearing #54.

 

My friend Tiffany “Crash” James is gone.  She was one of the early Outlaws who retired for a couple years and returned in 2012 for one more season.  I’ll miss her reckless-abandon style of play, that earned her the “Crash” nickname.  More, I’ll miss her positive personality and ever-present smile.

Tiffany James inspired a blog posting titled "Socks."  It was so much
fun I did several other posts along the same line.  She is one of the
first Outlaws I profiled on the Outlaw website and she will always
be one of my favorite people.

 

Tara Andrickson, #33 and the 2012 defensive
player of the year, chasing down an
opposing ball carrier.  She did a lot of that.

Tara Andrickson is gone.  She was the 2012 defensive player of the year and she will be missed.

I don't think Ski likes this shot as much as I do.  I like it
because it shows her determination to make the play.  In this play the
runner was going  up a lane not Ski's responsibility but Ski responded,
dove to the ground, grabbed what she could, a foot, and hung on while
teammates joined her to finish the tackle. 
Great down and dirty football!

Amazingly, Grandma Ski Tejeda, #8,  returns for her thirteenth season, a women’s pro football record.  I absolutely love her style of play ranging far and wide on the field in pursuit of the ball carrier, hitting with power, getting her uniform dirty. 

Scanning the roster gives Outlaw fans reason to be optimistic about this season.  Lots of last year’s rookies are this year’s veterans.  The year of experience will make them more competitive this season.  Want proof?  Look at the first game win, 50-10 over Tulsa. 

The roster lists eight coaches!  Including the return of Frank Brown.  I recognize some of the names but three are new to me.  Football is a complicated sport.  Many Outlaws hadn’t played the game before joining the team.  Football is a sport traditionally reserved for men (and boys).  The Outlaws ladies are eager to learn more.  They’ll take all the coaching they can get. 

I want to compliment whoever is doing the Outlaws website this season.  I especially appreciate  the roster providing more player information.  It is giving me subject material for this blog.  Expect at least one more posting inspired by what I noticed “roster reading.” 

Personal Note:  This blog has been idle for about four months as I’ve been involved in some family projects.  The blog has been fun and I hope to keep it going.  There are some obstacles.  More on this later.

Getting Low; Tackling Dummies; Learning from the guys

Imagine how you'd position yourself if you were asked to push a car or pickup truck.  Something like the ladies in the photos, right?  You wouldn't stand up tall.  You'd bend at the waist. 

 

 

 

 

Lily came up with a cool drill for her line.  It is the kind of thing you do when your budget won't buy a blocking sled.  Push a truck.  It builds strength and makes a point.  The point is you have more power with a low profile.  You want head and shoulders higher than hips, back fairly straight.  But this posture produces power. 

 

 

I've been screaming (softly) at television images of the pros and college players missing tackles.  Seems at that level of play they should rarely miss.  But even at that level they seem to go high, grab for the runner's shoulders and try to wrestle him to the ground. 

 

No no no no no no no!  Get low.  Shoulder into belt buckle.  And wrap the runner up, shoulder in middle and arms wrapping around the legs.

 

Go low.  Grab the legs.  Runners can run fast with dragging
a two-hundred pound tackler.

The photo here isn't a perfect illustration but the tackler is low and is wrapping arms around runner legs.  Low.

  

 Tackling dummies have been around forever to help football players practice tackling without having to hit teammates. Tackling dummies are about four feet high, while people are closer to six feet. What does that tell you? It tells you designers of tackling dummies expect tacklers to hit the lower part of the runner's body.

The Outlaws share their practice field with a men's team, the Austin Wolfpack.  At one of the Wolfpack practices, I did some photos of the guys practicing tackling on the tackling dummy.  The photos are kind of fun.  I'd like it better if they got even lower but you can see there is a tremendous amount of power in these hits. 

The ball you see in this picture had been placed on top
of the dummy.  I think coach set it there to make the point
you hit the runner below the ball.  In his middle.

Big guy.  You wanna bet whether he'd bring the runner down.  He is hitting low because
the tackling dummy is only four feet high.  A whole lot of power in that hit.

 

Tackler isn't so big but he's driving through the dummy.

 

 

See the tears (rips) in the tackling dummy?  It is taking a serious beating as the guys practice getting low and powering their bodies through it.  The coach to the left is bent over a bit.  You can still see
that the power is aimed at the midsection of a typical opponent.

Now I'm going to get in a little trouble.  After shooting the Wolfpack abusing the tackling dummy, I thought I'd like to get some photos of Outlaws doing likewise.  And I didn't do so well.  I did get them working the dummies but somehow this lacks some of the energy I saw in the guy's practice.

Low, engaging the dummy, but I don't think there is much power in these hits.

 

Remember I'm not a coach.  Also remember that some photos distort whatever is happening on the field.  I suspect there's a really good reason for this drill.  Certainly the Outlaws are getting low as they engage the four-foot dummy.  But beyond that, I'm not sure what is going on.  I liked it better the way the Wolfpack did it.

Football Rues - A Little Fun; Personal Note

Personal Note First -
It has been nearly two weeks since my last post to this blog. Where have I been?  Dealing with elder care.  My mother-in-law is 98 years old and doing pretty well except she needs 24/7 care.  In the past few weeks we've had problems with caregivers - had to release two.  So we've been interviewing replacements.  In the process we've found a personal care home which was suggested to us as an alternate to our keeping mom in her own home and also an alternate to a nursing home.  We've been doing lots of interviewing and evaluating and considering and money-counting.  And not much blogging.  The care home is really nice with very fine owner and caregivers; we'll be moving mom there around the first of December.  Maybe after that I'll get back to frequent posting.

Football Rules
I've disliked field goals ever since November 8, 1970, when I watched in horror as field goal kicker New Orleans Saints Tom Dempsey beat my Detroit Lions with two seconds left in the game by kicking a 63-yard field goal for a final score of 19-17. I believe 63-yards remains the record now over forty years later.

Which football rules would you change if you were in charge? 

In his autobiographical book Terry Bradshaw suggested some rules changes.  One of Terry Bradshaw's ideas was to increase points for long field goals.  I don't remember the details - maybe award 4 or 5 points for an over-fifty yard field goal. 

Dumb!  And I'm a Terry Bradshaw fan.  But that struck me as a terrible idea. 

A field goal attempt is an admission of failure.  Failure to get ten yards for a first down.  Failure to move the ball into the end zone for six points.  A long field goals is evidence of a bigger failure.  Not only didn't you get the ball into the end zone, you didn't even get it close.  Why would we want to reward failure?  Long field goals should get fewer points than short ones.  Over fifty yards maybe one point.  Over forty, two points.  Over thirty, three.  Closer than thirty, four?  Nah, never more than three points.

If I were making the rules, I'd fiddle with field goals. 

I'd also get rid of the false-start penalty.  I don't know the statistics but it feels as though this penalty is called a dozen times in a typical game.  False "start" isn't quite accurate.  If a lineman moves after being set, it is a penalty.  "Move" means leaning a little tiny bit, shifting his down hand, raising his head.  The rule was instituted because the O-line used to try to draw the defense off sides by appearing to start a play before the snap of the ball.  Okay, if a lineman does a serious move in an obvious intent to fool the defense, maybe a penalty.  But if he just blinks an eye, no penalty.

How about the illegal block in the back on kick-offs and punt-returns?  It seems as though three out of four returns draw this kind of penalty.  A kick receiver runs eighty yards and the play is called back because a blocker touched a defender's back.  There has to be a better way.  Maybe take the penalty from the end of the run, not the point of the foul.  On kicks, you have twenty-two players racing toward each other at top speed, trying to get a bead on the guy with the ball.  A blocker may aim at the front of a defender and miss because the defender turns to expose his back.  That shouldn't be a penalty should it?

Another idea - at the end of the game when one team has the ball and the lead and the other is out of timeouts, why waste time taking a snap and a knee to kill the remaining 80 seconds?  Why not just call it a game and everybody go home?

Couple more silly ideas and then I have to get back to my elder-care duties:  On the opening kickoff, kickers are routinely kicking the ball all the way through the end zone.  A couple years ago the league moved the kickoff line closer to mid-field with the intent of reducing run-backs because those special teams situations invite injuries.  This has inspired  a couple ideas.

One is to have the kickers trying to split the uprights.  If he succeeds, award the kicking team a point.  Effectively kicking a field goal.  And applying my graduated field-goal point system noted above.

The second idea is why kick off at all?  Why not just give the receiving team the ball at the twenty yard line?  That would avoid the injuries and blocks in the back and all the other troubles with kickoff returns. 

Of course it would also eliminate those thrilling 99-yard kickoff returns.

Actually, football rules are pretty good overall.  I probably wouldn't really make changes.  Would you?

The Second Half - Available Darkness

Available light.  That photographer-speak for shooting in low light without a flash. 

Notice the sky.  The sun is setting. 
The second half, I'm shooting in available
darkness.  That's Lily Messina in the
foreground.

Way back when I first thought of being a photojournalist, I did some photography for the Battle Creek (Michigan) Enquirer.  The photo editor was Corky Wherret (spelling?).  He was shocked when I resigned my day job to do full time photography.  And his shock validated when a few months later I returned to my day job because photography wasn't paying the bills.  He called photos "pieces of art" rather than photos.  I asked myself but not Corky why he'd call a news photo "art".  (The question calls for a separate posting about what is art and what isn't and how you can tell.)  I didn't care what they called it as long my photos got published and paid. 

Corky hated low light photography.  He called it shooting in "available darkness."

His solution was a good strong flash, one that would light up an area of 75 to 100 feet.  His flash was plugged into a battery pack that was about half the size of a car battery and hung over his shoulder by a big strap.  My own flash wasn't nearly as effective as Corky's.  It operated on four AA batteries and had a reach of maybe 30 feet.  These days no serious sports photographer uses a flash.  Instead they have $10,000 lenses with huge glass that can inhale lots of available light.  My lens cost $500 and just inhales darkness. 

I suspect  you visit my blog out of an interest in football, not photography.  I won't bore you further with technical issues involved in shooting under low-light conditions.   Rather, I thought you might enjoy the artistic work of a not-very-artistic photographer dealing with available darkness.  The photos that follow were shot in the second half of the Houston game.  By the second half the sun is setting.  The stadium lights come on.  My camera with my lame little $500 lens becomes useless at shooting action on the field.  So I start looking for any subject, any image, that will capture some of the fun of football. 

And the result?  Pieces of art?

This is Bobby James.  The photo is shot about halfway through
the third quarter.  I think I was shooting the sky and Bobby
just got in my way.  You can see I'm not an artist.  The
composition isn't quite right.  But I still like the shot.

 

Players returning to the field after the half-time break.  There's still some light but not enough.  Sometimes the background is interesting.  Like the scoreboard showing 469?  I think that means the second half kickoff is 4 minutes and 69 seconds away.  Wait  a minute?  69 seconds?

 

Another sky photo in the third quarter.
Bobby getting in the way again.  And a
lot of other people in the way, too. 

 

 

Notice the sky is totally dark now.  This is a fourth quarter photo.  Players are taking a knee, which
suggests there is an injury on the field. 

 

I don't know if this is connected to the photo above.  This
is Rubi Reyna telling the team trainer her elbow is fine, just a
little tender, and she's ready for play.  Trainer says "No." 
Later x-rays reveal a fracture.  Rubi is tough. 

Okay, enough of the sky photos.  I like candids and when the light is low I start looking for interesting shots of the people associated with the Outlaws and I try to capture some of the feeling of the game by capturing the people watching it.

 

Stephanie Marshall, normally a defensive back
but now carrying a clip board as she recovers
from a knee injury.

Does this one qualify as art?

Expressions of players behind in the score and
running out of time.

The Outlaws lost this game.  Can you tell from sideline expressions that things aren't going well on the field?

Coach and player talking strategy.  I always wonder just
what he is telling her.  Or is she telling him?

 

His name is Julio. His daughters, Maile and Malia, play in the line for the Outlaw and he
helps out with the chains and down maker.  And he also helps keep Jackson cool with
a refreshing spray of water.  My intent with candid photos is that the subject doesn't
know I'm shooting.  I think Julio knew.  My clue?  He asked "Did you get that?"

Cookie Rivas visiting with Vero Narvaez during a break late in the game.  My candid shots sometimes catch hidden stories.  Note Vero is holding a candy bar.  Note Cookie is licking her lips.  Vero's expression is saying Nope, you aren't getting my candy bar.

 

Blocking

Just browsing photos from the Houston game.  Offense on the field.  I'm looking for fun photos, photos you might enjoy.  After selecting a few to post, I wonder if there is a pattern.  And a pattern emerged. 

To spoil the suspense, I'll tell you up front that
Cookie got the pass away.  She did have a collision
with this tackler but didn't get knocked down.  This
is an example of what happens when the blockers
don't sustain the block.

Quarterbacks and running backs are smaller than defensive guards and tackles.  So football custom inserts offensive guards and tackles between the offensive backs and defensive line.  The job of the offensive line is to keep the defensive line from crushing the quarterback and running backs. 

Sometimes it works.

 

Tara Andrickson playing offense and doing a good job
of containing the Houston defender.

A couple previous posts featured Tara Andrickson as the Outlaws defensive player of the year.  I studied her play and suggested she might do well on offense.  When she saw the post she told me that in fact she did play a little offense.  Effectively, I might add.  She is featured in two of my blocking photos. 









The running back normally starts with a plan.  In the huddle the tell her where to run.  Hopefully the blockers will be successful clearing a path for her.  Things rarely go perfectly so the runner needs to identify where the path is.  And then blast through it fast!

In the foreground left, number 33, Tara Andrickson, is holding off
a larger defensive linewoman.  Deidra Hollad has the ball and
is checking the path Tara has opened for her.  Her job is to
blast through there in a second or two, quick enough to capitalize
 on Tara's block.  And she hopes Houston number 74 doesn't
notice what's happening. 

Number 14 is Deidra Holland, taking the hand off from
quarterback Cookie Rivas and hoping number 50 Malia
Capers-Cristobal will be able to sustain her block for
just a couple more seconds.

Normally you have large offensive linewomen blocking large defensive linewomen.  But everyone has to block.  If you're a back who isn't carrying the ball, you're expected to participate in the blocking.  Ideally, the line takes care of the bigger defenders and the backs either pick off a blitzing defensive back or linebacker, or run ahead of the running back clearing away any stray tacklers. 

 

 

 

This looks like a passing play.  Whether a pass or a run, backs are expected to block, to protect
the quarterback or ball carrier.  Cookie, the quarterback, looks pretty safe, doesn't she?
I don't know the outcome of this play.  I just liked the photo.

 

 

  Sometimes, though, you have a small back going against a large defensive                   linewoman.  In most cases that can be a problem.  However, if the smaller black is Charmeine Jackson I'm ready to bet the defender won't be making a tackle.  Even giving away a hundred pounds, Jackson is super strong and likely to win any one-on-one contest. 

Number 22 is Charmeine Jackson.  She works out a lot and
is extremely strong, extremely tough.  Even against a
large defender, my money is on Jackson.

 

 

 In a previous post I noticed how fast things happen in football.  The quarterback has about three seconds to do something with the ball.  Likewise the runners have about three seconds to get the ball and blast through the path opened by her blockers.  And Griff, the punter, has about three seconds to get her kick in the air.  That means the blockers need to contain the defense for three seconds. 

 

Griff punting.  Blockers successful in keeping the defender
at bay.  Barely.  But barely is okay.

 

Sounds easy, doesn't it.  Only three seconds.  But three seconds is a long time.  If you're trying to control a two hundred pound athlete who is quick and strong, three seconds is forever.  And what happens if the blocker maintains the block for two seconds?

 

This is Griff the punter again.  This time the blocking didn't hold long enough.  I think this
is a case where the snap from center wasn't true and Griff used up her three seconds
retrieving the ball.  If the blocking doesn't work, things can go hard on the punter.

If the blocking doesn't work, things can go hard on the runner.  Deidra Hollad getting caught
in the middle of two Houston defenders.  I selected this photo because it is a great
action shot.  These ladies play some serious football.

What happens when blockers can't sustain their blocks?  Runners and punters find themselves being handled roughly by unfriendlies. 

Disgusting

No photos with today's post.  You'll thank me.  I don't have photos that support my message.  Even if I did, I think you would prefer I not post them.

I'm older than you.  Grew up in the 40s and 50s.  I was there when television was invented.  Black and white only (well, as a photographer I know we're really talking shades of gray).  Small screens.  Three channels available. 

My folks weren't rich.  I went to a friend's home to see his television.  The show was "The Lone Ranger" and it was so cool. 

Televisions had antennas.  Either a V-Shaped contraptions called rabbit ears because they looked like rabbit ears.  You'd set then on top of the television and connect to the tv by a flat plastic cable carrying two wires.  If you wanted better picture quality you'd have  a more complex thing mounted outside on your roof with a wire running down and through the window to connect with the television.  Some were really fancy, lots of aluminum arms running in all directions.  From above, neighborhoods looked like little forests with all the antennas sticking up into the air from the rooftops.  If you Google TV Antenna's, you'll find lots of photos. 

TV images were small.  Often there was lots of "snow" in the picture, white dots on the black background.  If snow was a big problem you'd get a fancier antenna.  Or a "tena-roter" you could use to turn the roof antenna around to get a better signal.  Sometimes the the snow was caused by birds landing on the arms of the antenna.  You'd need a beebee gun to shoo them away.

Sports on TV were great.  Pictures weren't crystal clear but clear enough.  You could definitely see the action.  You could read the numbers on the jerseys.  I especially loved watching hockey. The white ice provided a great contrasting background so the players were clearly visible.  The puck was a problem, too small to see clearly. 

Football was great on tv.  Much better than just listening to a radio announcer try to describe what was happening.

I wonder if TV created the need for teams to have different uniforms for home and away games.  Before tv, people attending games could see the games in color.  It was easy to distinguish between the guys in blue uniforms and the ones in red.  On tv, all colors  presented in shades of gray and you might have trouble figuring out who was who.  So they had one team wear white, the other team use team colors.

Baseball... this is where disgusting comes in.

Not disgusting back in the day with the little shades-of-gray images on the little screen.  Actually it was fun watching baseball in those days.  Not a lot of detail, though. Even if you had a huge antenna on your roof.  The cameras were good but you didn't get super close-ups.  You couldn't see the seams of the ball and pitcher's hand griping it. There were no close-up of player's faces except in after game interviews. 

That was then.  This is now. 

I've been watching a lot of baseball lately. I'm a big Tigers fan and just delighted they'll play in the world series.  I've been watching playoff games on a 42" high definition television.  The close-ups are spectacular. 

And disgusting. 

Baseball players spit.  All the time, all the players.  Spit spit spit spit.  Why?  Where do they get enough hydration to spit so much?  In one of the games (Giants vs Cardinals) I noticed the field seemed wet.  I wondered if it was wet from rain or spit. 

Do players in other sports spit?  Do the Outlaws spit?  I haven't seen any spitting at Outlaws games.  I don't recall spitting at football games in general.  Maybe because the face masks are in the way?  I don't spit.  In the old days it was a guy thing to chew tobacco and that generated a lot of spitting.  Bars had spittoons to so tobacco users didn't have to mess up the floor, provided their aim was good. I think some modern baseball players chew tobacco.  That would explain some spitting. 

Some chew gum. I chew gum.  That never makes me want to spit.

Most baseball players just spit.  That's what baseball players do.

Isn't spitting unsanitary? Watching a baseball game, I wonder if there is a square inch of the field not wet from spit.  Spit contaminating the turf with whatever germs players may be carrying around.

When I see players sliding into a base I'm distracted from the action by wondering if they're getting spit all over their uniforms. 

I'm going to watch the world series.  Hopefully the Tigers will win in four so I'll only have to endure about twelve hours  of spitting. 

Spitting.

Disgusting.