There is no such thing as a perfect football coach, or any coach for that matter. For our purposes here, we will focus just on football. Vince Lombardi wasn't a perfect coach, in fact, he was utterly useless during an actual game. Lombardi was great at preparation during the week, and back when coaches were only moderate control freaks, he let his quarterback call all of his own plays. Lombardi also gave up creativity for precision with a 12 play playbook that was rarely entirely used. You take the good with the bad. The Packers ran the sweep better than any team in NFL history, if you stopped the sweep, the Packers had little else to beat you with.
With that in mind, I shift my gaze at Pete Carroll. I wasn't a fan of the fact the Seahawks hired him. All I could think of was the fact that he'd been fired twice in the NFL and his USC teams played with an astounding degree of sloppiness against teams they didn't respect and the fact that USC had awful clock management in Carroll's time there. As a Seahawks fan, I'd already seen a successful college coach(Dennis Erickson), flounder in mediocrity upon arriving to the NFL. Erickson ran a program at Miami very similar to USC's, and was about to be hit with sanctions right before he left, much like USC was.(The sanctions USC suffered will get their due diligence in another blog).
Then I read Pete Carroll's book. You may scoff at the notion that a book can completely change a perception of someone. But it added illumination and reasoning to what people saw of Pete Carroll, the hyper-kinetic "raw raw" coach. Carroll stresses the desire to do things better than you've ever done them before. A mantra of constant improvement. He formed this philosophy after the New England Patriots fired him and he's been ridiculously successful ever since. Has he become the perfect coach? No, does he still have clock management issues? Yes. Do the Seahawks commit a lot of penalties? Yes, but they are improving in that regard. Do I like what he's doing? Yes.
In the two years he's been the Seahawks coach, he has completely rebuilt the team while still remaining competitive. That is something the Rams have been trying and failing to do since 2007. He's laid a significant foundation for what I think will become one of the best defenses in the league. He's rebuilt the offensive line into a powerful, nasty, physical unit if it can stay healthy, and he has added depth. The Seahawks are bigger,stronger, faster, younger and better than they were when he and John Schneider took over.
So why is everyone still skeptical? Why do I turn on the sports radio stations in Seattle during football seasons and constantly here digs at Pete Carroll and tons of negativity? Why, after two games of the season last season did Hugh Millen suggest Seahawks fans march to Renton at the Seahawks headquarters and demand an explanation for the max protection schemes the Seahawks used against the 49ers and Steelers elite defenses with two rookie offensive linemen who had no OTA's and virtually no training camp reps? Why did Ian Furness unceasingly bitch and moan about the lack of "leadership" the Seahawks didn't have and would never have again because they cut his beloved Lofa Tatupu?
Key questions, and a long answer. Pete Carroll isn't a "traditional" football coach. He isn't a large, intimidating presence. He doesn't scream at players on the sideline. He's not Mike Holmgren. For the record, everyone loved Mike Holmgren. He was successful, and good with the media. As in, he tricked the media into thinking he was actually telling them something insightful because he used his grandfatherly tone and smiled a lot. Pete Carroll says nothing by saying a lot of nothing. The opposite of Bill Belichick. Belichick got fired from Cleveland because he made enemies with the media, and they turned the public against him. Same thing has been attempted by some of the Seattle media because he's late for press conferences and doesn't butter them up like Holmgren did. And he replaced one of the local good old boys Jim Mora.
Furthermore, Pete Carroll coached at USC. The rest of the old Pac-10 conference hates USC because USC has dominated from when it was the Pac-8, to 2008, with the 90's being the only time that wasn't the case. Pete Carroll murdered the Cougars and Huskies every year, only losing to the Washington schools three times, and once after he really got going in 2003. It smacks of bitterness about getting slaughtered every year by the renegade program down south. I know for a fact that it kills some old Husky alums that they have a USC guy coaching UW as well. To me, its ridiculous, but its there.
In sum, people still have it in their mind that Pete Carroll is a flake, that he's a coward because he fled a sinking ship at USC(BS, but whatever). People hate on him because his approach is non traditional. People doubt him because they still are licking their wounds from years of USC beating UW and WSU by 30-50 points yearly. I don't doubt, he isn't perfect, he has his flaws, just like any successful coach. But I am fairly confident that this guy is going to win the Seahawks the Super Bowl. And I intend to enjoy the ride.
Friday, April 13, 2012
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
My N.B.A. Conundrum
So naturally, the Sonics leaving was an upsetting, infuriating, and sad time period, and it still pisses me off just as much as it did when the whole farce actually happened. I've never respected David Stern or the NBA, whether it's their marketing approach and idiotic business model, or their extremely suspect egotistical officials. But I love the sport played at its highest level. I'm not one of the people that scorn the N.B.A. and call the players "spoiled millionaires". I don't rant about the selfishness of the players, or the lack of defense. I have always enjoyed watching, reading, listening and discussing professional basketball and can with ease bring a counterargument to anyone criticizing the actual product on the floor.
However, the crooked way the Sonics were ripped out of this city has left a bad taste in my mouth that I don't know will ever go away. If the Mariners lose out on their ridiculous attempt to block the arena being built in SoDo, and the Sonics actually returned, I don't know how much I can support that team. Would it be great to have professional basketball back? Yes. Would it be great to heckle Lebron James in person? Absolutely. But will it ever be the same? I honestly don't think so. When I'm sitting in the new arena, I will feel a little dirty. The money I spent on tickets is going to the very people that ripped the team out of Seattle in the first place. We aren't getting a new team, we're getting a team from a city that went through the same thing the Seattle did. Will I be able to chalk that up as a "nature of the business" and move on? Probably not.
Of course, I could say all this and it would last until I walk into the arena, sit down, and am watching professional basketball in person again. That's what the NBA is counting on at least.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Seahawks draft thoughts; LB and DT
With the inevitable departure of David Hawthorne and who really knows what's happening with Leroy Hill, the Seahawks are going to revamp the linebacking corps. K.J. Wright had a solid rookie season and may move into the middle to replace Hawthorne. And, as always, the Seahawks are most likely looking to add depth on the defensive line.
A linebackers success is directly related to the success of the defensive line in front of him. A porous defensive line can make even the greatest of linebacking corps look ordinary. Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs look positively pedestrian when the Bears front four is banged up or lacking in depth any given year. The defensive line doesn't eat up blockers, and offensive linemen are given a free path to the linebackers.
First guy I've looked at is Mychal Kendricks, a inside linebacker from Cal. Cal had probably the best back seven on defense in the Pac 12, but a defensive front that was too small and not stout enough to run a 3-4 hurt them against power running teams. You could argue that Kendricks wasn't the best linebacker on the team, that being D.J. Holt, but Holt will be playing his entire NFL career in a 3-4, Kendricks will be in the 4-3. Kendricks is fast, smart, plays extremely hard and is an incredible tackler. On the downside, he's very small and can get blown clear out of plays. Pete Carroll has put an emphasis on size when he rebuilt the Seahawks laughably small defense, which makes me think that Kendricks is not the fit the Seahawks are looking for. Regardless, I loved watching his tape, because he is a 240 pound guy who plays like he's 260 and hits like his 280. Stanford, which has one of the biggest, strongest and best offensive lines in football, blew him up, a lot, in the run game though.
A couple defensive linemen to think about because YouTube just took a crap on me. Michael Brockers from LSU and Devin Still from Penn State. Devin Still is a monster. He's big and strong and really took a leap forward his senior year. He's still a little raw and needs to work on all the little things guys like him need to work on. Here's a good breakdown on Still: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/devon-still-dt-penn-state-tape-review
In regards, to Brockers, who looks like a mid first rounder. I wasn't nearly as impressed. He is your standard LSU defensive linemen, great effort, big, fast, but benefits from a defense that resembles a tornado. I watched him against Ole Miss, not a great team by any stretch, and nearly every time he was double teamed he was either blown off the ball, or pancaked. He resembled Colin Cole in 2009, rather than hold his own, he elected to sink and try and slide away from the blockers, and every time he tried to stick in his gap, he'd get crushed. And this was Ole Miss. Yikes.
More prospects tomorrow, maybe offensive linemen and my longstanding love affair with David Decastro.
A linebackers success is directly related to the success of the defensive line in front of him. A porous defensive line can make even the greatest of linebacking corps look ordinary. Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs look positively pedestrian when the Bears front four is banged up or lacking in depth any given year. The defensive line doesn't eat up blockers, and offensive linemen are given a free path to the linebackers.
First guy I've looked at is Mychal Kendricks, a inside linebacker from Cal. Cal had probably the best back seven on defense in the Pac 12, but a defensive front that was too small and not stout enough to run a 3-4 hurt them against power running teams. You could argue that Kendricks wasn't the best linebacker on the team, that being D.J. Holt, but Holt will be playing his entire NFL career in a 3-4, Kendricks will be in the 4-3. Kendricks is fast, smart, plays extremely hard and is an incredible tackler. On the downside, he's very small and can get blown clear out of plays. Pete Carroll has put an emphasis on size when he rebuilt the Seahawks laughably small defense, which makes me think that Kendricks is not the fit the Seahawks are looking for. Regardless, I loved watching his tape, because he is a 240 pound guy who plays like he's 260 and hits like his 280. Stanford, which has one of the biggest, strongest and best offensive lines in football, blew him up, a lot, in the run game though.
A couple defensive linemen to think about because YouTube just took a crap on me. Michael Brockers from LSU and Devin Still from Penn State. Devin Still is a monster. He's big and strong and really took a leap forward his senior year. He's still a little raw and needs to work on all the little things guys like him need to work on. Here's a good breakdown on Still: http://seahawksdraftblog.com/devon-still-dt-penn-state-tape-review
In regards, to Brockers, who looks like a mid first rounder. I wasn't nearly as impressed. He is your standard LSU defensive linemen, great effort, big, fast, but benefits from a defense that resembles a tornado. I watched him against Ole Miss, not a great team by any stretch, and nearly every time he was double teamed he was either blown off the ball, or pancaked. He resembled Colin Cole in 2009, rather than hold his own, he elected to sink and try and slide away from the blockers, and every time he tried to stick in his gap, he'd get crushed. And this was Ole Miss. Yikes.
More prospects tomorrow, maybe offensive linemen and my longstanding love affair with David Decastro.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Seahawks draft thoughts
Every year in the draft, I fall in love with a few players. Some years the players actually work out, some years, they really, hideously do not, (Aaron Curry, Fred Smoot, JaMarcus...oh nevermind that).
This year everyone is in infatuated with the two quarterbacks who will get picked 1-2. Luck is regarded as a can't miss, once in a generation quarterback. He will struggle his first year, that doesn't mean he'll bust, but Peyton Manning is still the best qb I've ever seen entering the NFL Draft. Griffin III is a wild card, but the Redskins are a good fit scheme wise, too bad the team completely sucks.
A couple things, I will never advocate drafting a defensive player from North Carolina. Who is it this year the Kipers and Mcshay's of the world are getting their jollies to? Quintin Coples? Poor effort, undisciplined, cut and paste to any of Butch Davis's crew from UNC.
Me, my attention is focused on the Seahawks, and Courtney Upshaw. Chris Clemons is like any veteran that you acquire through FA or a trade, you get two, maybe three years out of him tops. This would be year three of Chris Clemons and last year he was already showing signs of slowing down. Is Upshaw the ideal size? No. He's a little short, but so is James Harrison. He can float between a 3-4 OLB and a 4-3 DE, which is exactly the role Pete Carrol has designated for the LEO position. While Clemons is tall, lean, and long, the Seahawks have been gashed many times on cutback runs because he gets sealed off. Upshaw holds his own a little bit better against the run Most of all, he's smart. He rarely is out of position, his fundamentals are excellent and he doesn't get out of his gaps. He doesn't have a wide array of pass rush moves, but he's quick enough to get around the edge, and strong enough to get leverage and get good push. And he's relentless.
The Seahawks are building a great defense. I think Upshaw would be another nice piece.
Next, I'll find a few linebackers I'm drooling over and share my infatuation.
This year everyone is in infatuated with the two quarterbacks who will get picked 1-2. Luck is regarded as a can't miss, once in a generation quarterback. He will struggle his first year, that doesn't mean he'll bust, but Peyton Manning is still the best qb I've ever seen entering the NFL Draft. Griffin III is a wild card, but the Redskins are a good fit scheme wise, too bad the team completely sucks.
A couple things, I will never advocate drafting a defensive player from North Carolina. Who is it this year the Kipers and Mcshay's of the world are getting their jollies to? Quintin Coples? Poor effort, undisciplined, cut and paste to any of Butch Davis's crew from UNC.
Me, my attention is focused on the Seahawks, and Courtney Upshaw. Chris Clemons is like any veteran that you acquire through FA or a trade, you get two, maybe three years out of him tops. This would be year three of Chris Clemons and last year he was already showing signs of slowing down. Is Upshaw the ideal size? No. He's a little short, but so is James Harrison. He can float between a 3-4 OLB and a 4-3 DE, which is exactly the role Pete Carrol has designated for the LEO position. While Clemons is tall, lean, and long, the Seahawks have been gashed many times on cutback runs because he gets sealed off. Upshaw holds his own a little bit better against the run Most of all, he's smart. He rarely is out of position, his fundamentals are excellent and he doesn't get out of his gaps. He doesn't have a wide array of pass rush moves, but he's quick enough to get around the edge, and strong enough to get leverage and get good push. And he's relentless.
The Seahawks are building a great defense. I think Upshaw would be another nice piece.
Next, I'll find a few linebackers I'm drooling over and share my infatuation.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Kentucky vs Lousville Running Diary
Here we are running diary, I'm picking Kentucky by double digits in this one.
3:17: Missed the first two minutes, Kentucky up 8-2, doing what Kentucky does best, blocking shots, snatching rebounds and running the floor. Pitino steps away from the spaghetti buffet to call timeout.
3:21: The court looks terrible, like its a St. Patty's day special. Let's count how many times Clark Kellogg says "High Octane".
3:22: Siva's a local boy, but I think this is a mismatch for him.
3:23: Kentucky getting sloppy, Louisville taking advantage. Cue the endless T.V. Timeout.
3:27: Silky smooth jump hook from Davis. 14-6 UK.
3:29: Shaky charge call against Gilchrist, the flopping epidemic continues. Terrence Jones with a transition dunk after Lousville blows their second dunk of the half.
3:31: UK foul on a three point shot. Terrence Jones needs to learn the art of the closeout.
3:33: UK is dominating inside, but the guards are jacking up jumpers. Youth.
3:37: 18-10 UK, as is the norm in these domed stadiums, the three point shots are clanging horrificly off the rim.
3:42: 22-12, sloppy game, the fighting Pitino's are fighting, but are going to have to get hot and UK is going to have to wear down for this to be a game in the second half.
3:46: Can Clark Kellogg stop calling a DQ a "Dairy Queen", it's not clever. He's obviously spending too much time with Jim Nance.
3:48: As Al Mcguire would say, "Too much french pastry for Kentucky!" Then they hit Davis on a ridiculous alley oop. Good with the bad.
3:51: Louisville starting to figure out Kentucky defensively. 26-20, time out.
3:56: You have to stop the ball, easiest layup I've seen by Kentucky.
3:59: Louisville getting all the calls right now, scrappy effort right now and with these calls, it's 31-27 UK.
4:00: Token white guy for Kentucky stymies a run with a cold blooded three and leads a fast break leading to a foul. Kentucky was losing their head a little bit. Let's see if they settle down a little now.
4:03: 35-28 Kentucky at halftime. Louisville grinded their way back into it. Should be an interesting second half.
4:26: This is not a well played game as far as fundamentals go.
4:32: It's "unsung" not "undersung" Clark. 41-32 UK. Steal, dunk. 43-32: UK.
4:41: Louisville staggering around the ring, waiting to get knocked out, and Kentucky is letting them hang around. Now they've got it down to single digits. 46-38
4:46: Terrence Jones has a little Chris Webber to him, that's not a compliment.
4:47: Louisville with a couple tip jam dunks, Kentucky can't grab a rebound, turning over the ball, down to 46-42, timeout Kentucky. Louisville has been killing Kentucky on the boards, they aren't trying to out jump Davis and Jones for rebounds, they are tipping it out and getting it to their guards. Definitely the smarter team today. Kentucky isn't anticipating the attempted shot blocks and failing to rotate to the weak side.
4:54: Kentucky is getting tired, if Louisville keeps at them, Kentucky might break around the five minute mark. 49-46. 9 min left.
4:57: Siva ties it with a three, Kentucky assaults the offensive boards, takes the lead. This is turning into one hell of a game. Kidd-Gilchrist with a spin and a dunk. 53-49. Timeout Pitino. Three times today either Calipari or Pitino have called a timeout right before the T.V. timeout.
5:04: Louisville laying some stiff picks right now. Did Kellogg just call Louisville Syracuse??
5:06: Kentucky hits a dagger from three point land. Louisville had just missed a couple layups. Bam, 58-51. Terrence Jones just realized that he was playing a game in that last sequence. Flying around and being a million times more aggressive than he was the rest of the game.
5:09: 60-51, Louisville ice cold.
5:17: 63-57, 1:29 left, another turnover by Kentucky, Louisville climbs out of the grave again! Kentucky missing free throws and Louisville is relentless.
5:18: Anthony Davis, a ridiclous one handed dunk. 65-58, Siva comes back with an airballed three. Less than a minute left. Louisville burns their last timeout.
5:21: Louisville doesn't foul, Kentucky gets a couple of easy dunks. That's the ball game, Anthony Davis, wait, Kentucky beats Louisville 69-61. Great effort by Louisville, just didn't have the firepower to beat Kentucky. Pitino coached a hell of a game.
3:17: Missed the first two minutes, Kentucky up 8-2, doing what Kentucky does best, blocking shots, snatching rebounds and running the floor. Pitino steps away from the spaghetti buffet to call timeout.
3:21: The court looks terrible, like its a St. Patty's day special. Let's count how many times Clark Kellogg says "High Octane".
3:22: Siva's a local boy, but I think this is a mismatch for him.
3:23: Kentucky getting sloppy, Louisville taking advantage. Cue the endless T.V. Timeout.
3:27: Silky smooth jump hook from Davis. 14-6 UK.
3:29: Shaky charge call against Gilchrist, the flopping epidemic continues. Terrence Jones with a transition dunk after Lousville blows their second dunk of the half.
3:31: UK foul on a three point shot. Terrence Jones needs to learn the art of the closeout.
3:33: UK is dominating inside, but the guards are jacking up jumpers. Youth.
3:37: 18-10 UK, as is the norm in these domed stadiums, the three point shots are clanging horrificly off the rim.
3:42: 22-12, sloppy game, the fighting Pitino's are fighting, but are going to have to get hot and UK is going to have to wear down for this to be a game in the second half.
3:46: Can Clark Kellogg stop calling a DQ a "Dairy Queen", it's not clever. He's obviously spending too much time with Jim Nance.
3:48: As Al Mcguire would say, "Too much french pastry for Kentucky!" Then they hit Davis on a ridiculous alley oop. Good with the bad.
3:51: Louisville starting to figure out Kentucky defensively. 26-20, time out.
3:56: You have to stop the ball, easiest layup I've seen by Kentucky.
3:59: Louisville getting all the calls right now, scrappy effort right now and with these calls, it's 31-27 UK.
4:00: Token white guy for Kentucky stymies a run with a cold blooded three and leads a fast break leading to a foul. Kentucky was losing their head a little bit. Let's see if they settle down a little now.
4:03: 35-28 Kentucky at halftime. Louisville grinded their way back into it. Should be an interesting second half.
4:26: This is not a well played game as far as fundamentals go.
4:32: It's "unsung" not "undersung" Clark. 41-32 UK. Steal, dunk. 43-32: UK.
4:41: Louisville staggering around the ring, waiting to get knocked out, and Kentucky is letting them hang around. Now they've got it down to single digits. 46-38
4:46: Terrence Jones has a little Chris Webber to him, that's not a compliment.
4:47: Louisville with a couple tip jam dunks, Kentucky can't grab a rebound, turning over the ball, down to 46-42, timeout Kentucky. Louisville has been killing Kentucky on the boards, they aren't trying to out jump Davis and Jones for rebounds, they are tipping it out and getting it to their guards. Definitely the smarter team today. Kentucky isn't anticipating the attempted shot blocks and failing to rotate to the weak side.
4:54: Kentucky is getting tired, if Louisville keeps at them, Kentucky might break around the five minute mark. 49-46. 9 min left.
4:57: Siva ties it with a three, Kentucky assaults the offensive boards, takes the lead. This is turning into one hell of a game. Kidd-Gilchrist with a spin and a dunk. 53-49. Timeout Pitino. Three times today either Calipari or Pitino have called a timeout right before the T.V. timeout.
5:04: Louisville laying some stiff picks right now. Did Kellogg just call Louisville Syracuse??
5:06: Kentucky hits a dagger from three point land. Louisville had just missed a couple layups. Bam, 58-51. Terrence Jones just realized that he was playing a game in that last sequence. Flying around and being a million times more aggressive than he was the rest of the game.
5:09: 60-51, Louisville ice cold.
5:17: 63-57, 1:29 left, another turnover by Kentucky, Louisville climbs out of the grave again! Kentucky missing free throws and Louisville is relentless.
5:18: Anthony Davis, a ridiclous one handed dunk. 65-58, Siva comes back with an airballed three. Less than a minute left. Louisville burns their last timeout.
5:21: Louisville doesn't foul, Kentucky gets a couple of easy dunks. That's the ball game, Anthony Davis, wait, Kentucky beats Louisville 69-61. Great effort by Louisville, just didn't have the firepower to beat Kentucky. Pitino coached a hell of a game.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
The Want To Know Why
First of all, as a Seahawks fan, I live at Seahawksdraftblog.com. If you feel likewise about the Seahawks, I recommend you visit there as well. But, to a rant, granted, I'm taking a lot of this from something I wrote a while ago, but I think it still serves its point.
The more I read about the draft or peoples views on football in general, the more I realize that the vast majority of football fans, don't actually understand the game that they love so dearly. Do I look down upon them for this? Only if they propogate these ideas as the truth, rather than a fairly uneducated opinion. I am by no means a football expert, so hopefully you don't dub my opinion as arrogance, when its merely a call to not be ignorant.
Just like in baseball, there has been a flailing attempt at a statistical revolution in football. These statisticians use their "advanced metrics" to compare players across decades as well as current players, eschewing the changes in the game and its philosophy in the sake of "comparison". These analysts, I believe, use numbers in place of football understanding. I am not saying that fans should know the wide varieties of play calls coverages and scheme, but they should understand, if nothing else, technique.
Technique, in order to understand technique, you must first understand correct technique and the fact that certain physical attributes enable better technique than others. You want a stout center with quick hands and tremendous natural strength. You want a defensive end with strong hands. You want a tackle with long arms, thin ankles, big hands and a fat ass. Why? Because he needs to be light on his feet, good balance, have long arms to hold at bay pass rushers and strong hands to control their opponent in run blocking.
40 times are irrelevant. Acceleration is far more important. How often during the course of the game does a player run forty yards unimpeded in a straight line?
If your watching game tape on a potential prospect, ask yourself questions, "How well does the tackle move his feet?" "How often does a defensive linemen drop his arms?" On the flip side, "How well does he use his hands?" "What angles does a linebacker take to the ball? "How is his gap containment?"
Look at a quarterback, look at his release, how does it vary depending on the throw. Watch his feet. Where does he release the ball? How tight is the throwing motion?
It is one thing to know that something happened, it is an entirely different thing to know why it happened? Why are most of Drew Brees interceptions off deflections? Why is Marshawn Lynch such a stud? What makes James Harrison such a great pass rusher? (great balance, acceleration and hand technique) Why does Matt Hasslebeck struggle throwing the deep ball(It goes beyond arm strength). Figure out the answer to these questions, and talent assessment is much easier.
If you don't honestly care about why Tavaris Jackson sails seam routes, I don't blame you. But whatever your passion may be, look closer.
The more I read about the draft or peoples views on football in general, the more I realize that the vast majority of football fans, don't actually understand the game that they love so dearly. Do I look down upon them for this? Only if they propogate these ideas as the truth, rather than a fairly uneducated opinion. I am by no means a football expert, so hopefully you don't dub my opinion as arrogance, when its merely a call to not be ignorant.
Just like in baseball, there has been a flailing attempt at a statistical revolution in football. These statisticians use their "advanced metrics" to compare players across decades as well as current players, eschewing the changes in the game and its philosophy in the sake of "comparison". These analysts, I believe, use numbers in place of football understanding. I am not saying that fans should know the wide varieties of play calls coverages and scheme, but they should understand, if nothing else, technique.
Technique, in order to understand technique, you must first understand correct technique and the fact that certain physical attributes enable better technique than others. You want a stout center with quick hands and tremendous natural strength. You want a defensive end with strong hands. You want a tackle with long arms, thin ankles, big hands and a fat ass. Why? Because he needs to be light on his feet, good balance, have long arms to hold at bay pass rushers and strong hands to control their opponent in run blocking.
40 times are irrelevant. Acceleration is far more important. How often during the course of the game does a player run forty yards unimpeded in a straight line?
If your watching game tape on a potential prospect, ask yourself questions, "How well does the tackle move his feet?" "How often does a defensive linemen drop his arms?" On the flip side, "How well does he use his hands?" "What angles does a linebacker take to the ball? "How is his gap containment?"
Look at a quarterback, look at his release, how does it vary depending on the throw. Watch his feet. Where does he release the ball? How tight is the throwing motion?
It is one thing to know that something happened, it is an entirely different thing to know why it happened? Why are most of Drew Brees interceptions off deflections? Why is Marshawn Lynch such a stud? What makes James Harrison such a great pass rusher? (great balance, acceleration and hand technique) Why does Matt Hasslebeck struggle throwing the deep ball(It goes beyond arm strength). Figure out the answer to these questions, and talent assessment is much easier.
If you don't honestly care about why Tavaris Jackson sails seam routes, I don't blame you. But whatever your passion may be, look closer.
Monday, March 19, 2012
The Case For Matt Flynn
It's fairly obvious that people are infatuated by the sexy idea. In football, teams without a star quarterback talk endlessly about getting a "franchise" quarterback. You ask them how, and they will say, "draft one in the first round." Easier said than done.
This offseason the Seahawks found themselves in a bit of a quandry. They weren't bad enough to have a high draft pick, one that would net a top qb prospect, and they weren't good enough to feel that they could stand pat with Tavares Jackson. I will stand by my idea that even with Jackson starting, the Seahawks are a playoff team this year. But, to reach the next level, the Seahawks need more from that position.
You don't need an elite quarterback to win in the NFL, Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson are two great examples, Joe Flacco is another. The counter argument is that the previous mentioned quarterbacks were buoyed by great defenses. I'd argue that the Seahawks defense is one year from very good, and two years from great. What you DO need however, is a quarterback who doesn't make huge mistakes, no pick sixes, no turnovers on big drives, no heniously missed throws in crucial situations, and you need a quarterback that can drive you down the field in the fourth quarter of a big game and score a touchdown. In order to win a Super Bowl, this will have to happen at some point during the season.
So where does Matt Flynn fit into all of this? Quite well. We don't have a large sample size to work with, so, let's look at what we know. He's made a couple starts for the Packers over the last couple years and performed very well. His performance in the regular season finale against the Lions was ridiculous. Before the Lions game, the Packers offense had started to sputter, or, in their case, not ring up 40 points a game. Flynn comes in and has a record day against a below average Lions team. There was no pressure, but Tavares Jackson has never done that, against anybody, even with Adrian Peterson, Sydney Rice and the best offensive line in football at the time with the Vikings.
But, that's just one day, Rob Johnson was a stud with the Jaguars in mop up duty when the Jags were winning 12-14 games a year. So was Jay Fielder when he was in the same situation.
Flynn, at LSU, was asked to do exactly what he'll be asked to do with the Seahawks. Don't make mistakes, and get the ball to the playmakers. He did this perfectly at LSU, he was a leader on a poorly coached offense, and made some huge throws when he had to(see LSU/Auburn 2007). It's not like the Hawks are going to be asking a guy who is used to chucking it 40 times a game to change his style. Flynn's style is the Hawks style, and vice versa.
I would feel differently about this move if the Hawks had overpaid, if they got suckered into a long contract, or the teams scouting department didn't draft the guy in Green Bay. But, I trust Green Bay's scouting, and I trust the Hawks scouting. Jackson was a placeholder in a year where the Hawks were trying to cut down on the learning curve of the offense and he played, dare I say, above expectations. He's a solid backup, but he's not going to win you the Super Bowl. I think there's a much better chance that Flynn is.
This offseason the Seahawks found themselves in a bit of a quandry. They weren't bad enough to have a high draft pick, one that would net a top qb prospect, and they weren't good enough to feel that they could stand pat with Tavares Jackson. I will stand by my idea that even with Jackson starting, the Seahawks are a playoff team this year. But, to reach the next level, the Seahawks need more from that position.
You don't need an elite quarterback to win in the NFL, Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson are two great examples, Joe Flacco is another. The counter argument is that the previous mentioned quarterbacks were buoyed by great defenses. I'd argue that the Seahawks defense is one year from very good, and two years from great. What you DO need however, is a quarterback who doesn't make huge mistakes, no pick sixes, no turnovers on big drives, no heniously missed throws in crucial situations, and you need a quarterback that can drive you down the field in the fourth quarter of a big game and score a touchdown. In order to win a Super Bowl, this will have to happen at some point during the season.
So where does Matt Flynn fit into all of this? Quite well. We don't have a large sample size to work with, so, let's look at what we know. He's made a couple starts for the Packers over the last couple years and performed very well. His performance in the regular season finale against the Lions was ridiculous. Before the Lions game, the Packers offense had started to sputter, or, in their case, not ring up 40 points a game. Flynn comes in and has a record day against a below average Lions team. There was no pressure, but Tavares Jackson has never done that, against anybody, even with Adrian Peterson, Sydney Rice and the best offensive line in football at the time with the Vikings.
But, that's just one day, Rob Johnson was a stud with the Jaguars in mop up duty when the Jags were winning 12-14 games a year. So was Jay Fielder when he was in the same situation.
Flynn, at LSU, was asked to do exactly what he'll be asked to do with the Seahawks. Don't make mistakes, and get the ball to the playmakers. He did this perfectly at LSU, he was a leader on a poorly coached offense, and made some huge throws when he had to(see LSU/Auburn 2007). It's not like the Hawks are going to be asking a guy who is used to chucking it 40 times a game to change his style. Flynn's style is the Hawks style, and vice versa.
I would feel differently about this move if the Hawks had overpaid, if they got suckered into a long contract, or the teams scouting department didn't draft the guy in Green Bay. But, I trust Green Bay's scouting, and I trust the Hawks scouting. Jackson was a placeholder in a year where the Hawks were trying to cut down on the learning curve of the offense and he played, dare I say, above expectations. He's a solid backup, but he's not going to win you the Super Bowl. I think there's a much better chance that Flynn is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)