There sure is a lot of noise in this thread... And, it has devolved into a discussion on metering instead of addressing the OP's original question.
So, in an effort to simplify, here's my two cents' worth:
First, if the OP is worried that they will run out of shutter speeds or have to stop down too far in overly bright conditions, then they should know that even with faster film, this is rarely the case. If this is indeed the case, then, by all means, use a ND filter (or whatever) to get the aperture/shutter-speed combination that you need.
Note: using a neutral-density filter does not affect the contrast of the scene. If the OP thinks that a ND filter will somehow keep the highlights from getting "blown out," then they are wrong. Dealing with contrast is separate from exposure.
If you think the scene is too contrasty, you have to deal with it when 1) developing the film (esp. for B&W film) or 2) printing the negative (paper contrast etc.). With color film there are fewer options, so control the lighting or wait till the lighting is better. Of course, exposing correctly is very important (more later).
A polarizing filter can be used as a ND filter. You can adjust the amount of polarization so you don't even have to eliminate reflections. It's a good choice since it serves more than one purpose. IM-HO, everyone should have a polarizer.
A word about metering: Metering style depends on the kind of photography being done. All this stuff about whether to meter the sky or not is meaningless without describing the entire approach (not to mention the film being used).
The OP seems to want to do more action-related, "decisive-moment" type of work. In such a case, metering shadows, highlights, fiddling with placements, etc. for each shot is just too time-consuming. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Zone System user and spot meter most everything carefully. That said, when doing "action" photography, I'll be using an averaging meter of some sort and arriving at a general setting that I can use for everything under those lighting conditions, regardless of the type of film I use.
So, at the risk of adding to the noise, here's my advise for using an average meter reading in for "action" photography:
Point the meter at the subject. Be careful that nothing overly bright or dark can affect your meter reading too much. Take the reading, set aperture and shutter speed and shoot away.
If the scene is predominantly brighter than average (i.e., "high key" as opposed to brightly-lit), compensate by overexposing a stop from the meter reading.
If the scene predominantly darker than average ("low key" as opposed to dimly-lit), compensate by underexposing a stop from the meter reading.
If the scene is very contrasty, compensate by overexposing a stop from the meter reading; two if the scene is very, very contrasty (this ensures adequate shadow exposure in contrasty situations).
That metering approach will give you a 90+% success rate, even with transparency film, as long as you've done the initial testing to find what E.I. you need to set your meter at for what film.
So, if I were photographing kids playing in the park under static lighting conditions (e..g., sunny day) and using a meterless TLR and a hand-held averaging meter, I'd take a reading from something with an even distribution of tones from high to low that's in the lighting I'm going to be working in, apply that to my camera (compensating as described above if needed) and then click away. Only one initial meter reading is needed until the lighting changes.
Best,
Doremus