CoachSP
Sophomore Member
Posts: 212
|
Post by CoachSP on Dec 15, 2017 11:16:56 GMT -6
Coaches feel they can "coach em up"
You can't teach measurables, but you can teach football.
Just my two cents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 11:25:40 GMT -6
Not knowing kid/school/situation, who's to say that 25% of those incompletions weren't drops? Or that most of the passing game was vertical as opposed to majority bubble/now/tunnel screens? Or that his team was down majorly in many games and it was all on him to do the deed without much of a surrounding cast? There are many different things that go into completion percentage, not just QB ability. I am saying that its a major red flag. I have started a side project, using the data off maxpreps in my state. Cross referencing the more successful QBs in college as a base line. No one and I mean no one has been that off. We all think we are qb whisperers. Including me. But this is off. Major Program in Florida. Largest Classification. No excuses. (I am not trying to knock this kid specifically, or his program. Just using this as example of my point) MaxPreps isn't the most reliable source for stats, though, especially since so many schools don't bother and the ones who do tend to half-ass or even let a parent do the uploading. A few years ago I was at a small school where our little freshman FB was "the number 4 FB in the nation!" according to MaxPreps because he had like 400 yards rushing in an option offense at midseason. Other kids were flipping out about how they were #12 in tackles in the state" or whatever and were sure that would get them a ride to a Power 5 school. Big time QBs completing less than 50% of their passes in HS didn't used to be that unusual. I remember when I was growing up and Tennessee recruited Tee Martin. He was a 4* or 5* recruit and wanted by everybody, but he only completed like 44% in HS and people saw that as a red flag. He still won a NC, set the NCAA single game record for completion percentage, and got drafted into the NFL. Matt Ryan, I believe, never threw for more than 1200 yards in his HS career running a Wing-T offense. The reason that measurables are so important to college coaches (and NFL GMs) isn't because they're necessarily great predictors of performance, but because those guys know that stats can be misleading and don't translate even more poorly to the next level. Is an average, slow HS QB with great accuracy who plays in an Air Raid offense and completes 70% throwing mostly screens and shallows going to be the better college player than the stud athlete who's got a cannon but only completes 50% throwing downfield or running option? Probably not. There are throws that guys need to be able to make routinely at that level that only a few humans on the planet can make. Then there's the whole difference issue with the level of competition those stats were racked up against (which is actually extremely hard to judge because it can vary so much from conference to conference and state to state within a classification). Besides, if a kid's 6'4" and runs 4.5, even if he can't hit water from a boat they can probably move him somewhere else and get production in college. If a kid's 5'10 and runs 5.4, even if he's got pinpoint accuracy and a great head on his shoulders (which is almost impossible to really measure) there's probably not much else he can do. At that level, it's all about having dudes who are bigger, faster, and stronger than the other guys' dudes.
|
|
|
Post by 53 on Dec 15, 2017 11:29:28 GMT -6
My high school coach played for an SEC team and had a huge issue on just playing players that looked the part.
We had a tall skinny kicker that was lucky if he could make a PAT. One of our linemen could constantly hit from 40 in, and just because he was a fat ass, our coach wouldn't let him kick in games because he didn't look like a kicker.
|
|
|
Post by **** on Dec 15, 2017 11:31:33 GMT -6
You can’t coach/teach a kid to be 6’5”, 260# and run a 4.4.
Bigger/Faster/Stronger beats Smaller/Slower/Weaker.
|
|
|
Post by gators41 on Dec 15, 2017 11:34:36 GMT -6
I am saying that its a major red flag. I have started a side project, using the data off maxpreps in my state. Cross referencing the more successful QBs in college as a base line. No one and I mean no one has been that off. We all think we are qb whisperers. Including me. But this is off. Major Program in Florida. Largest Classification. No excuses. (I am not trying to knock this kid specifically, or his program. Just using this as example of my point) MaxPreps isn't the most reliable source for stats, though, especially since so many schools don't bother and the ones who do tend to half-ass or even let a parent do the uploading. A few years ago I was at a small school where our little freshman FB was "the number 4 FB in the nation!" according to MaxPreps because he had like 400 yards rushing in an option offense at midseason. Other kids were flipping out about how they were #12 in tackles in the state" or whatever and were sure that would get them a ride to a Power 5 school. Big time QBs completing less than 50% of their passes in HS didn't used to be that unusual. I remember when I was growing up and Tennessee recruited Tee Martin. He was a 4* or 5* recruit and wanted by everybody, but he only completed like 44% in HS and people saw that as a red flag. He still won a NC, set the NCAA single game record for completion percentage, and got drafted into the NFL. Matt Ryan, I believe, never threw for more than 1200 yards in his HS career running a Wing-T offense. The reason that measurables are so important to college coaches (and NFL GMs) isn't because they're necessarily great predictors of performance, but because those guys know that stats can be misleading and don't translate even more poorly to the next level. Is an average, slow HS QB with great accuracy who plays in an Air Raid offense and completes 70% throwing mostly screens and shallows going to be the better college player than the stud athlete who's got a cannon but only completes 50% throwing downfield or running option? Probably not. There are throws that guys need to be able to make routinely at that level that only a few humans on the planet can make. Then there's the whole difference issue with the level of competition those stats were racked up against (which is actually extremely hard to judge because it can vary so much from conference to conference and state to state within a classification). Besides, if a kid's 6'4" and runs 4.5, even if he can't hit water from a boat they can probably move him somewhere else and get production in college. If a kid's 5'10 and runs 5.4, even if he's got pinpoint accuracy and a great head on his shoulders (which is almost impossible to really measure) there's probably not much else he can do. At that level, it's all about having dudes who are bigger, faster, and stronger than the other guys' dudes. A lot of Great Points Here 1. You can lie on Maxpreps. I have seen it before 2. If there is an obvious red flag physically the kid should be done. 5'7 or 6'4 but runs a 5.3 40. I get that 3. It is tough, but not impossible to look at their "Head on their Shoulder" and their decision making skills. Completion percentage is one of them. Also something like the Wonderlic can help with that 4. The outlier games vs bad teams should be thrown out of their stats. Agreed 5. Still HS stats could help in the process of recruiting and I feel they are being underutilized. Esp if a kid is 6.2 200 Runs well. Wins. Can make the neccessary throws, maybe not the 20 yard comeback to the field, but the ones you have to make, has good HS stats, Is a winner, multisport athlete and no mechanical problems? Why is he getting the shaft because some website gives stars to the pretty kid that can run fast jump high and throw it a mile. The system is flawed.
|
|
|
Post by gators41 on Dec 15, 2017 11:36:47 GMT -6
You can’t coach/teach a kid to be 6’5”, 260# and run a 4.4. Bigger/Faster/Stronger beats Smaller/Slower/Weaker. The other 10 spots on Offense, I am not arguing with you. QB is different. Dont have to be elite physically, really just cant have glaring weaknesses. Top 2 QBs of all time are Joe Montana and Tom Brady. No one wanted Tom, and if Joe came along today he would be hammered. That argument holds up for a Linebacker, it doesnt for a QB
|
|
|
Post by **** on Dec 15, 2017 11:39:45 GMT -6
You can’t coach/teach a kid to be 6’5”, 260# and run a 4.4. Bigger/Faster/Stronger beats Smaller/Slower/Weaker. The other 10 spots on Offense, I am not arguing with you. QB is different. Dont have to be elite physically, really just cant have glaring weaknesses. Top 2 QBs of all time are Joe Montana and Tom Brady. No one wanted Tom, and if Joe came along today he would be hammered. That argument holds up for a Linebacker, it doesnt for a QB Decision making should be #1 for QB. Measurable follow in behind.
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Dec 15, 2017 11:41:50 GMT -6
You can’t coach/teach a kid to be 6’5”, 260# and run a 4.4. Bigger/Faster/Stronger beats Smaller/Slower/Weaker. The other 10 spots on Offense, I am not arguing with you. QB is different. Dont have to be elite physically, really just cant have glaring weaknesses. Top 2 QBs of all time are Joe Montana and Tom Brady. No one wanted Tom, and if Joe came along today he would be hammered. That argument holds up for a Linebacker, it doesnt for a QB You didn't answer yet. Do middle school stats matter to you?
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Dec 15, 2017 11:45:59 GMT -6
To play devil's advocate, measurables are easier to contextualize than stats are, "In the 2012-2013 school year, 14,048 U.S. high schools fielded teams to play 11-man per side American tackle football. " www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/football-top-sport-us-1088158-high-school-playersThere is a lot of variety through those 14,000 school, some of those schools have vastly different levels of competition than other schools, some players play in vastly different systems, they have vastly different levels of teammates, etc etc if you look go through some of the statistical leaders on maxpreps, this becomes apparent pretty quickly, many of the leaders play in system specifically designed to inflate that particular stat, most of them play at a pretty low level of competition in contrast, a guy who's 6'4 is 6'4, no contextualization needed, a guy who can run 4.4 can run 4.4, again, no contextualization needed its actually pretty similar to what value Harvard gets out of using the SAT instead of just using GPA, school vary so much, that comparing GPAs across schools doesn't actually tell you that much, (unless you really have the ability to contextualize each school you're comparing), whereas everyone is taking (essentially) the same SAT -------------- -------------- End devils advocate - I actually agree with what I think is your general thesis, just comparing across measureables is too easy (or just adding in a highlight tape), is too easy I talked a little bit about it in this thread a while back coachhuey.com/post/755729it doesn't take enough work, if you're competing against all the other schools, especially if you're competing against any schools with more resources than you have, you need to run up hill a little bit, and get in the weeds, and figure out how to contextually more information than, "big and fast, good highlight reel" (I also agree that not being able to complete 50% should be a big red flag that a QB isn't processing information well, probably regardless of the system or talent level)
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Dec 15, 2017 11:48:15 GMT -6
Bill Polian, perhaps the best GM in history said "we don't take exceptions, pretty soon your whole roster will be filled with exceptions and you will be in the stands"
|
|
|
Post by coachbdud on Dec 15, 2017 11:48:50 GMT -6
if a college is gonna "miss' on a recruit... they cant miss small... that gets them fired I wonder how long until people start to follow the Patriots model in college and have success...realizing that (holy crap!) you can build a good team around a great quarterback and then a whole lot of role players who are willing to work hard running backs don't matter, go cheap....lots of guys out there who can run fast with the football WR's don't have to be unbelievable - get a bunch of good route runners with good hands, great QB will throw them open get the best interior defensive lineman you can find ....win a lot this wont happen because there isn't a salary cap in NCAA the patriots have to do that because you can't pay everyone in the NFL... you have to pick and choose WHERE to invest in college there are the MAJOR programs, and every one else... Alabama, Ohio State, etc. are gonna get the best player's in the country PERIOD the top teams dont need to just get by they take all the 4 and 5 star kids why "go cheap" at RB when you dont have to
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Dec 15, 2017 11:52:16 GMT -6
Full disclosure. I'm a guy who had a cup of coffee on a college staff. I'm also one of those guys who thinks I can coach a qb pretty well. Last but not least I agree the 1 place you can make hay over the masses is by getting production out of an undervalued qb. It is #1 most mis-evaluated position by college and NFL scouts.
|
|
|
Post by fshamrock on Dec 15, 2017 11:55:58 GMT -6
I wonder how long until people start to follow the Patriots model in college and have success...realizing that (holy crap!) you can build a good team around a great quarterback and then a whole lot of role players who are willing to work hard running backs don't matter, go cheap....lots of guys out there who can run fast with the football WR's don't have to be unbelievable - get a bunch of good route runners with good hands, great QB will throw them open get the best interior defensive lineman you can find ....win a lot this wont happen because there isn't a salary cap in NCAA the patriots have to do that because you can't pay everyone in the NFL... you have to pick and choose WHERE to invest in college there are the MAJOR programs, and every one else... Alabama, Ohio State, etc. are gonna get the best player's in the country PERIOD the top teams dont need to just get by they take all the 4 and 5 star kids why "go cheap" at RB when you dont have to From a coaches perspective I'm with you but maybe you float it to your bag men that they need to pool up for the can't miss QB and not worry so much about the other guys. I'm sure there is something of a "salary cap", it's just not one that we get to be privy to. Maybe you start giving the Runningbacks moms regular jobs and save the really cool no-show jobs for the parents of QB's and d-lineman
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Dec 15, 2017 12:00:21 GMT -6
I wonder how long until people start to follow the Patriots model in college and have success...realizing that (holy crap!) you can build a good team around a great quarterback and then a whole lot of role players who are willing to work hard running backs don't matter, go cheap....lots of guys out there who can run fast with the football WR's don't have to be unbelievable - get a bunch of good route runners with good hands, great QB will throw them open get the best interior defensive lineman you can find ....win a lot this wont happen because there isn't a salary cap in NCAA the patriots have to do that because you can't pay everyone in the NFL... you have to pick and choose WHERE to invest in college there are the MAJOR programs, and every one else... Alabama, Ohio State, etc. are gonna get the best player's in the country PERIOD the top teams dont need to just get by they take all the 4 and 5 star kids why "go cheap" at RB when you dont have to The salary cap is your recruiting man hours, its large, but it is finite
|
|
|
Post by scottbailey on Dec 15, 2017 12:02:04 GMT -6
I would recommend the book, "Fourth and Goal Every Day" by Phil Savage. It is an insiders view of the Alabama football program with a lot of information on the recruiting process.
Scott Bailey Lamar HS Lamar, Mo.
|
|
|
Post by IronmanFootball on Dec 15, 2017 12:39:04 GMT -6
Every college coach I talk to says they look at: In person eval Full game tape Measurables Success as a team
They can't teach size. They can make you faster, quicker, more powerful, and better at football though.
Kid "only" completed 50%... maybe they had him throw fades every play? Maybe there's drops? Maybe guys suck at running routes? No O-Line?
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Dec 15, 2017 12:43:25 GMT -6
Honestly, recruiting is all about what the kid COULD be at the college level, not necessarily what he has accomplished in high school.
If I'm a college level recruiter, and I see a tall, fast, athletic QB with a cannon for an arm, my first thought is "Where can this kid end up with some D1 level coaching and some D1 level receiving threats?" I am going to be a bit spooked by his low completion percentage but I am willing to gamble and hope that being coached and playing at a higher level will boost that percentage.
Every year, we have some stud All-State players in this state that everyone complains about "not going D1". Well, that 5'11'' QB may have set all kinds of passing and rushing records and won state titles but a college recruiter sees a plethora of QBs from all over the country that are taller, bigger, stronger and have had the same success.
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Dec 15, 2017 13:46:43 GMT -6
The other 10 spots on Offense, I am not arguing with you. QB is different. Dont have to be elite physically, really just cant have glaring weaknesses. Top 2 QBs of all time are Joe Montana and Tom Brady. No one wanted Tom, and if Joe came along today he would be hammered. That argument holds up for a Linebacker, it doesnt for a QB You didn't answer yet. Do middle school stats matter to you?
I'm curious, do they not to you?
if you get a player in the 9th grade, who physically seems average to you, but then you hear they're middle school coach tell you that actually, they were a great player for them
wouldn't that be useful information to update your opinion of the kid, (its not the end all be all, maybe in the end, its not all the great a nugget of information, but its a nugget of information that you're better off knowing than not knowing)
might you not be more inclined to see what they can do in different situations? maybe it gives you additional ideas for ways to usefully use a kid.
Am I wrong?
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Dec 15, 2017 13:55:34 GMT -6
You can’t coach/teach a kid to be 6’5”, 260# and run a 4.4. Bigger/Faster/Stronger beats Smaller/Slower/Weaker. The other 10 spots on Offense, I am not arguing with you. QB is different. Dont have to be elite physically, really just cant have glaring weaknesses. Top 2 QBs of all time are Joe Montana and Tom Brady. No one wanted Tom, and if Joe came along today he would be hammered. That argument holds up for a Linebacker, it doesnt for a QB it probably doesn't hold for linebacker either
a useful thing put some thought into, which positions are information processing positions and which ones aren't
its probably a mistake to think that information processing deficits can just be coached away, certain guys are probably inherently good or bad at it
if you're not recruiting it, you'll probably wind up with a team full of guys who are bad at it
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Dec 15, 2017 14:10:57 GMT -6
I coached against Jake Browning. He threw 220+ TDs passes in HS. He never went to any "Elite" anything...ON PURPOSE. I don't think he was a "star" guy.
What he ended up being was great in college...and I predict...he will be better than Darhnold, Rosen, etc. in the NFL. Why? Because he's never cared about fluff...and just produced. The good coaches liked him. The wise coaches...love him.
I might be stupid...but I think he ends up like a Joe Montana. Not on people's radar...and then just becomes a freak show in the NFL.
PS - I met Browning face to face the summer before his senior season. My wife was with me. We talked for a few minutes. He walks away and my wife says..."he's the QB that has torched everyone the last two years?" Doesn't look like much. Produced like no one ever has. Maybe he's an anomaly.
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Dec 15, 2017 15:05:19 GMT -6
You didn't answer yet. Do middle school stats matter to you?
I'm curious, do they not to you?
if you get a player in the 9th grade, who physically seems average to you, but then you hear they're middle school coach tell you that actually, they were a great player for them
wouldn't that be useful information to update your opinion of the kid, (its not the end all be all, maybe in the end, its not all the great a nugget of information, but its a nugget of information that you're better off knowing than not knowing)
might you not be more inclined to see what they can do in different situations? maybe it gives you additional ideas for ways to usefully use a kid.
Am I wrong?
But do you ask what his completion percentage was? Perhaps how many sacks he had? Or how many yards he rushed for? The answer is probably no.
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on Dec 15, 2017 15:17:18 GMT -6
I'm curious, do they not to you?
if you get a player in the 9th grade, who physically seems average to you, but then you hear they're middle school coach tell you that actually, they were a great player for them
wouldn't that be useful information to update your opinion of the kid, (its not the end all be all, maybe in the end, its not all the great a nugget of information, but its a nugget of information that you're better off knowing than not knowing)
might you not be more inclined to see what they can do in different situations? maybe it gives you additional ideas for ways to usefully use a kid.
Am I wrong?
But do you ask what his completion percentage was? Perhaps how many sacks he had? Or how many yards he rushed for? The answer is probably no.
Probably not, but if one of my guys was notably productive at the middle school level, especially out of relation to that guy's measurables,
That's good information to know
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Dec 15, 2017 16:22:32 GMT -6
For the record Tom Brady was 6'4" and could sling it from sideline to sideline... even in high school. He couldn't run a 4.4 or do a shuttle, but he was still top 5% of ALL high school players to get scholarships at Michigan (at the time was a top-10 program EVERY YEAR) and the other places he could have went.
Montana went to Notre Dame... when they were NOTRE DAME... at a time that a 6'2" 200 lb QB was BIG. In the 1st round of that same NFL draft, what was considered a HUGE rb for the time was Charles Alexander from LSU... 6'3" 225. Now 6'3" 225 is about the average for a non-spread RB.
Coaches need to recruit minimums for the "uncoachable" things and then they try to teach the ones that are "coachable" You can't teach a QB to be as fast as Michael Vick... you can coach a QB to complete more passes. We run a run and Play-action pass type offense. Our QBs never have the 70% completion percentages that all these guys running bubble screen 15 times a game have. Who is a better pocket-style QB? My kid who completed 59% of his passes but all of them were 10+ yards downfield or a kid with a 70% completion percentage with half of those receptions behind the LOS?
Each coach is looking for something to fit their system. The physical tools to not get killed are #1. LeBron James could have played professional ANYTHING if he wanted to. All a football coach would need to do is point him in the right direction and let him handle.
|
|
|
Post by joelee on Dec 15, 2017 18:10:24 GMT -6
You didn't answer yet. Do middle school stats matter to you?
I'm curious, do they not to you?
if you get a player in the 9th grade, who physically seems average to you, but then you hear they're middle school coach tell you that actually, they were a great player for them
wouldn't that be useful information to update your opinion of the kid, (its not the end all be all, maybe in the end, its not all the great a nugget of information, but its a nugget of information that you're better off knowing than not knowing)
might you not be more inclined to see what they can do in different situations? maybe it gives you additional ideas for ways to usefully use a kid.
Am I wrong?
They do not matter to me at all. I watched 1 jr high game this year. I have seen 0 stats. I have had 1 conversation with the coach and he said "its a good crop of linemen this year". We are a program that worries about development and what can they do as they grow and mature in our program.
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Dec 16, 2017 6:15:48 GMT -6
Might be a little astray of the OP but at my small school I'm constantly trying to recruit players. I usually have no production stats. When I see kids in the weight room I find some good to great physical ability that could translate to helping our team IF the kid can give and take hitting/contact and can commit to strength training. Before my first season here this fall (in the off season) I found a kid that played but people thought he could never be much of a player. He was decent size (for us) and Standing Long Jumped 9' 6" the first time he did it. He committed to weights and ended up being a top player playing both sides of the line. So SOMETIMES you need to take a chance on the "measurables". The big colleges are able to get both measurables and production.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 16, 2017 7:55:53 GMT -6
Statistically every national championship FBS team has had at least 50% of their roster made up of 4 or 5 star players. The star system is far from perfect but its better than most people realize. The one way for a program to punch above their recruiting weight is with an underrated qb and a system for him to produce big. It is somewhat of a chicken and egg situation though. Often, "2 star" (whatever the hell that means) athletes magically become 4/5 stars when Bama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, show interest. Best recruiting story ever is Ivan Renko. Indiana Basketball. Look it up. I wish that got promoted a lot more.
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Dec 16, 2017 8:17:18 GMT -6
Statistically every national championship FBS team has had at least 50% of their roster made up of 4 or 5 star players. The star system is far from perfect but its better than most people realize. The one way for a program to punch above their recruiting weight is with an underrated qb and a system for him to produce big. It is somewhat of a chicken and egg situation though. Often, "2 star" (whatever the hell that means) athletes magically become 4/5 stars when Bama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, show interest. Best recruiting story ever is Ivan Renko. Indiana Basketball. Look it up. I wish that got promoted a lot more. As a Hoosier, I almost posted this same story. Great stuff...Bob Knight is a crazy dude!
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Dec 16, 2017 8:19:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Dec 16, 2017 13:31:40 GMT -6
Why doesnt Production in HS count for more? I feel like debating this. Especially with QBs "In the village of the blind the one eyed man is king." HS football is so heterogeneous in its talent that raw numbers (production) is often skewed based on the opposition. A few years ago I coached a kid who was 5th in the nation (first in the whole state of California) in tackles. Amazing kid, hard worker, solid grades, very good football player; not a single D1 offer. Why didn't his production count for more? Because we were a small private school mostly playing against other small schools; moreover his teammates, as good as we were, were still that of a small private school. You put that same great kid on one of the dominant teams out here in So Cal then he is sharing or losing many of the tackles to teammates. Additionally, he would have been struggling to make some of those tackles against a higher level of competition. As you move up in levels, the overall talent within that level becomes more homogenous, and thus production comparisons become more valid. As it is looking at just raw production without context is not always accurate. FWIW that kid is getting a quality education at a top D3 school and putting up huge numbers still.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 16, 2017 16:51:22 GMT -6
Agreed. And stats don’t really matter. Recruiters are looking and measurables and tools. But still, a major college prospect should compelete more than 50% of his passes. Why should stats not matter, especially for a QB? In one of the Top HS football States, In the Largest Classification and they run the spread? All situations are different. But this seems clear cut. Stats should matter Why? What stats should matter? Comp percentage? Already discussed here in this thread (Bubbles/hitches vs comeback routes and other 5 step routes). TD to Int? When is the team passing? How many Int's were caused by bad decisions, how many by poor throws (mechanical errors), how many due to pressure, how many due to game conditions (be it weather, or having to force situations due to score time)? Yards? Obviously not for the reasons brought up here. I really don't think there is any debate to your question. Now, the question "Why do measurable qualities after a certain minimum, particularly height, matter so much. What is the difference between 6'1 1/2 and say 6'4 for many positions"
|
|