|
Post by brophy on Sept 26, 2007 20:39:01 GMT -6
that reminds me of the epistles of Paul. GOSPEL, baby!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 26, 2007 20:58:04 GMT -6
Coach I understand what YOU ARE saying. But who you are throwing and your protection have to b taken into account. for all the perfection of romo, only one of them has been to a superbowl. a whole factor when evaluating qbs. again, no one in this entire thread is saying Romo is 'great' quarterback. It was illustrating the dicotomy of fundamental footwork using a prime time televised game. Whether you are throwing to Jerry Rice or David Terrell, it doesn't change your footwork. The illustrations were based not on "perfect" throws, but when "it hits the fan", (protection breaks down....does the quarterback, with his feet, put himself in a position to throw the football correctly). Again, if you can get your players to a Slack Camp, DO IT.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 26, 2007 21:08:39 GMT -6
coachjerk, You are so right! No disagreement. We are just trying to look at the 2 QBs reactions individually, and against each other, in their own situations. It is hard to do it, but the debate is helpful, because we might learn some things. The variables in a QBs success are too numerous to count. No doubt. I happen to like Rex Grossman, I know his Dad, and he has been very encouraging over the years. I couldn't possibly hope to exhaust all those variables(and in Rex's case, he had a great deal of help from the Bears defense and special teams that put them in the dance), I just do what I can for THE MAN. After that, all I can do is hope he gets some help. In Tim Couch's case, he didn't get much help around him, and what little mechanics he had deteriorated into major shoulder injuries that needed a new approach, not the same one. That is what I did for him to get him back to Jax. I DON'T BELIEVE everyone needs that, but I just know from watching the development of my position over the years, that I can work on THE QB POSITION, for the rest of my life, and not scratch the surface of the need I am seeing for genuine input and help. It isn't that coaches don't want to coach, they just aren't always sure what to say, or do, to make happen what they want. They can get as frustrated as the kids. It is something to see and hear on the road like I do. While this debate about the "footwork" can go in circles for sure, the point I am making, and have been making, is that the things a A QB DOES under pressure, can be improved, can be adjusted as necessary, can be changed for the better, and that includes Rex and Romo individually. Not taking anything away from their need to have better help, or receivers. Those factors just make it easier, or harder. Just because a team makes a QB look good, doesn't mean he hasn't got issues, and that is the debate as I saw it. Thanks for chiming in. GOOD STUFF> Sounds like things are fixing to get rough for REX this week with Griese taking over this Sunday. Just my opinion, but the awesome expectation on the QB position, just isn't being matched by any comprehensive, meaningful, consistent investment beyond endless drills, Scheme, and Reads. As a side note, to your post, about the "WHO YOU ARE THROWING TO," and "WHO IS PROTECTING YOU," as well as every other position, is up next for my venture. There are some exciting things in the works, that I hope to announce soon, that will allow me to hopefully reach deeper into programs to help, giving more quality coaches a chance to make an impact, like I hope to. Soon. In the For What its Worth department: Here is a video link to Tim's progress with these things, prior to the ridiculous YAHOO article that broadsided his return, it shows the possibilities: www.quarterbackacademy.com/Tim_Couch.html
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 27, 2007 12:02:15 GMT -6
Why? Don't mean to be dense, just trying to understand.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 27, 2007 12:24:04 GMT -6
but everything I have mentioned plays into your foot work. One qb is clearly better protected than the other, One clearly has better receivers. all of it plays into your mechanics. which was why this thread was premised on THEIR FEET when protection breaks down[/color] - Not their reads
- Not their throws
- Not their decision making
- Not if the throw was complete / incomplete / or intercepted
when both quarterbacks drops were disrupted.....were they able to 'recover' to a throwing position? The video included showed examples of how each QB responded. A theory was presented that the footwork was the reason Grossman would never recover to a throwing position. ......consequently, that forces throws, which are ineffectively delivered. Part of the problem in discussing pro athletes is the rivalries and sports writer 'wives tales' that we have to overcome to actually get down to the truth of an issue[/font][/size]
|
|
|
Post by coachm on Sept 27, 2007 12:35:08 GMT -6
Coach slack Their is a reason they dont know and you do. Probably because Coach Slack's passionate nature on the subject of QB-ing has lead him to search below the superficiality of drills and dogma to learn the details of what is necessary to effectively play the position. Of course, I'm just guessing!
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Sept 27, 2007 13:34:09 GMT -6
Coach Slack, Just reading your posts I can sense the agony in you of watching QBs with so much potential who don't work on those little things. And I agree the NFL is infamously bad at staying with fundamentals. Without having coached with or for the man, it always seemed like Bill Walsh was one of the few who continued the focus. I remember reading where Joe Montana said he and Walsh would take several hours a week, throughout the season, away from everyone else, to do nothing but work on fundamentals, drops, throws, and technique. Imagine if only they'd been using Coach Slack's methods! I hope Vince Young doesn't think he's so amazing that they do not develop. I would not think Chow would be so lax, though I know he believes in giving QBs more freedom (again, enter Coach Slack's method).
|
|
|
Post by coachm on Sept 27, 2007 13:52:22 GMT -6
the answer I like is that he has just worked harder than most others that work at his craft. Of course if you are passionate about anything, it really it really isnt work, now is it? BTW if the drills are superficial? Then either they are useless and why are they being taught, or The coach is running the drill without fully understanding why he is doing it. coachjerk - didn't mean to imply that all drills are superficial. Just some that don't go to the root of a problem whatever that may be.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 27, 2007 20:13:08 GMT -6
talk about Drew bledsoe in his last two years in dallas and new england and grossman. Compare favre with holmgren till they fired Sherman. WHY!? What would you be comparing? Stats? Completion percentage?
what do you think we are comparing in THIS THREAD?
|
|
|
Post by tog on Sept 27, 2007 20:51:21 GMT -6
dogma
good word
but it is like the word stereotype
stereotypes are based on something
dogma s based on something
i am the biggest outside the box thinker around and i will sometimes just go
'you know what, let's run iso here"
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 28, 2007 7:06:38 GMT -6
Okay, lots to respond to here...
Thanks coachjerk for taking time to explain. I believe drills are only superficial when their is no clear understanding of why they are being done, and they serve no larger purpose in the improvement of the athlete under fire.
Drills are tools in a coach's hand, they are not the coaching. I think some do QB drills, hoping they will coach the kid for them. Like a hammer, a drill will drive the nail home, but it takes coaching to know which tool is needed when. You can't hammer a screw.
COACHJERK and COACHM,
If you will indulge me for a moment, you hit on some good stuff...
I didn't really start passionate, for about the first 4 years, I was more interested in demonstrating and being impressive, not coaching. I thought that was how it was done. Man, was I wrong! I was ambitiously upwardly mobile, and just got jazzed by the idea of "being in charge" of kids and they would "listen." BUT when I realized that nothing was really getting better in the camps and workouts, that is when the onion layers had to be peeled back, and my "coaching" had to be retooled. It humbled me, and I am not a humble man.
You know what it was...
I would try to work 3 step drop, 5 step drop, Sprint out...FEET, FEET, FEET, JUST LIKE I WAS TAUGHT... and while they could get from point A to point B, but most of them couldn't consistently throw it in the ocean, if I put their feet in the damp sand on the beach! AND THEY HAD NO EARTHLY IDEA WHY!
Some were baseball players who made 2 great throws and then 2 bad ones, etc. It was simply that I didn't get talented kids. I had to teach them how to throw a ball, and they just didn't know how. Period.
I simply asked the question, "How much do you go out and play in the yard, street, etc. with the football?" What I have found is that kids don't go outside and play in the yard anymore. They specialize way early in baseball, but the ability to throw a football, jump a rope, run a ladder, etc. just isn't there.
So, I HAD to go back to their level, and start over, and I have found a whole new world of ignorance that I did not know existed in the QB culture, until I started doing it!
I assumed most people knew how to throw, just not these kids I had...WRONG AGAIN! I travel the country, over 1,000 kids this year, and you can ask my coaches, and they will attest...The kids are just standing there, no footwork, no drops, just playing catch...
Ask any kid, 15 yards away who misses a target, WHY he missed and what he needs to do next time to fix his miss, and they HAVE NO IDEA! And many had been to 5 or more QB camps. They will guess, say something like, "I came around, and need to get HIGHER," and when they miss again, Their heart deflates. Do that 5 times as pressure increases, and you see why QBs are train wrecks on Friday!
I hear coaches say, Well, they were just thinking too much about the next throw. If they just threw it, they would hit it. They might - a few times, but they are still uninformed. IGNORANT. What if they knew it, cold?
Is that how a SNIPER SCHOOL coach would teach. Oh, hey, don't take into account all these factors, don't think when you shoot. Just shoot from the hip! Now, in battle, under pressure, with all that training they can do it by feel. BUT, it started with good information, thought, and practice.
I know we aren't talking about Snipers, but what if a kid could PROCESS some of those factors, what if they COULD "feel" and understand immediate change...How good could they be! What if you could inform their "feel," so that the thoughts BETWEEN, not during, the throws actually served to control flight and feel, and their misses were small, and they couldn't wait to get the ball back to try again.
The worst part for me in this process, was finding out, that I didn't know how to throw either! I wasn't even doing what I was trying to get them to do... I was icing my arm after camps, and my demos were marginal.
I just did it like the other talented ones, grip it and rip it, and hope for the best. However, if I was going to coach it, I had to reteach myself (Probably shouldn't try to teach, what you cannot do, or do not believe yourself), and what it feels like.
This is where the AGONY comes in, Chris, because I know what even a little input can do now. FOOTWORK IS MISSION CRITICAL, I AM COMMITTED TO FOOTWORK...but when you add the ability to "feel" control and Process flight feedback with it...WOW!
I got a lot of kids who couldn't throw it out of their shadow, and I had to grind it out and learn other ways to achieve what I wanted from them. That is where this passion was forged. Thousands of "wannabes," not "already weres."
I think that working with the more talented can be great, but truly developing players hones your edge as a coach. It takes longer and it isn't flashy, but the reward is greater, because you know you made a difference to the kid.
Now that I am getting more chances to see better players try some things, I am seeing how quickly the talented player improves with even just a little input. That's all. It just gets me pumped at the possibilities.
I want to be clear, I am not suggesting some fountain of youth in the things we are talking about, nor the answer to everything, but I think it would help some of these very frustrated guys I observe, catch up to the ever increasing speed of the game.
CHRIS,
You are so right! I watched Bill Walsh's video with Joe Montana, and it was refreshing to watch the common sense approach to footwork in the West Coast scheme, the commitment to mechanics as a means of success in the offense. He got technical where it mattered, and not where it didn't. No wonder so many coaches are where they are because of him. That is making a difference. GREAT EXAMPLE!
Chow is the SCHEME MEISTER! He is working with Vince for sure, but within the framework of feet as it relates to the scheme. Chow is a feet, feet, feet, guy, and that is great for Vince. Vince is learning to discipline those speedy legs in the pocket, and then use them to get away. Great combo.
TO THE THREAD....
For what it's worth, when you apply a standard, you can compare any two guys to that standard. The other variables while different in look, scheme, and personnel, etc. They are probably constant enough between the Bears and Cowboys, on a level that is stable enough to break REX and ROMO down.
Coachjerk is right though, eventually, like any analogy, the comparison is overcome by these things and breaks down, but I think the exercise BROPHY started, of identifying a "standard" of footwork, isolating the QB's responses to pressure, and delivery time and location with the mechanics, independent of the catch, gives us a chance to have great discussion about two guys' ability to play. I think that would be how we typically decide which QB in our offense plays?
Either way, I know Rex won't be playing this weekend, because he hasn't gotten it done according to Lovie's standard.
And when it all goes the heck...tog is right...RUN THE ISO!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 28, 2007 22:11:10 GMT -6
With pressure Comes break down of mechanics. Any QB under duress and constantly getting hit? His mechanics go south almost immediately. IF you swap Romo and GRossman? Romos mechanic go to sh!t too. Duress is when mechanics / fundamentals are exposed (no matter what position you play). And THAT was what the thread was about. I hate to sound like a turd here, because I feel like I am saying the same things over and over. In a vacuum, in skelly, sure QBs can look great. THIS thread was about....when the QB gets hurried out of his drop.............does he regain his feet (THIS is the proper fundamentals we are discussing)? Maybe I should just shut up....because I cannot communicate this well.
|
|
|
Post by dsqa on Sept 29, 2007 5:49:25 GMT -6
While I agree in principle with the idea the EVENTUALLY all mechanics succumb to duress in some way. Hence the reason for the blitzes the QB's see. I don't necessarily agree that mechanics go to pot under pressure EQUALLY in players. I think that is kind of the point in comparing them. I do think Romo may be better than Rex, but not as good as others for sure. The pressure reveals whose mechanics weaknesses tend to show worse when the heat is on...Footwork, arm mechanics, timing, anticipation, etc.
I think with just those two guys, Romo has made some better decisions and kept his composure a little better under pressure, and delivered better throws. Rex had throws where he didn't have pressure, and just mechanically broke down and missed people.
He was way late on a out route, the DB had clearly broken on - pick.
He missed a deep cross too far inside, due to slashing. His stride got too wide, weight didn't transfer, elbow was unable to elevate properly, forced an early release, ball hung high and right - pick. No pressure, just mechanics.
Maybe I missed the point as well, but I am just taking what I observed in this game.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 29, 2007 7:58:51 GMT -6
- mechanics don't go to pot under pressure EQUALLY in players. I think that is kind of the point in comparing them.
- The pressure reveals whose mechanics weaknesses tend to show worse when the heat is on...Footwork, arm mechanics, timing, anticipation, etc.
- His stride got too wide, weight didn't transfer, elbow was unable to elevate properly, forced an early release, ball hung high
- No pressure, just mechanics.
thanks - that was a great summation of what this thread is about.
Anyone can look good when they drop....1--2--3--,4,5 THROW! But when you have to go 1--2--3---OHSNAP!GETOUT!.... does the player have a foundation of mechanicss that muscle-memory train him to side step (avoid) then return to a balanced stance (feet) to deliver an efficient throw?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Sept 29, 2007 8:55:43 GMT -6
That is what seperate Manning, brady, and maybe palmer... from the rest. but it is fundamental skills that jr high / high school kids could be equipped with. Since this is a coaching site, that is why we bring it up. Kids don't become 'natural' QBs anymore than they become 'natural' LBs overnight....it is a foundation of skills and techniques that enable a player to be successful.
|
|