|
Post by spreadattack on Apr 24, 2024 16:25:06 GMT -6
thank you for the eulogies! But not to put a damper but there are some known issues and I am working with a developer (who has been slow) to fix it up and modernize it, and also hopefully be there for more posts. I was hoping it would have been done earlier in 2024 but hope is it will be updated in the coming weeks/months, and then would work long term. But the old site was so old and barely worked with browsers and had some hacker issues.
(I may even write a bit -- and recruit some other writers -- so fingers crossed!)
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 14, 2024 9:59:17 GMT -6
This incident doesn't really "bother" me -- and given it is between two very highly paid, very successful professionals who are not me, why would it? I don't think it's a great look, and I saw Kelce "apologized" in the sense that he said he didn't mean to bump Reid. I guess at bottom my view is I don't really think it's an appropriate way to act, but it's also the NFL and these folks have thick skin and a lot of money, consequences, etc. are on the line (and, at least as I understand it, Kelce's point is he wanted to be in the game).
But who knows. This kind of stuff happens.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 17, 2024 13:18:56 GMT -6
Best advice is:
1) Think about what *you* would want to hear if you were in the audience, and then make your slides/outline based on that
2) Do at least two practice run throughs of your whole presentation with a timer/iphone stopwatch, speaking to yourself. You can pick a quiet room (your office or even the bathroom) and run through the whole thing, and the timer will show you that almost certainly it will go slower or (less likely) faster than you think.
Ultimately speaking at a clinic is like anything else: if you want it to be good, you have to plan ahead of time and practice.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 12, 2024 10:50:32 GMT -6
He said he couldn’t figure out how to play cover 2 Do you have the article or video where he talked about this, I did a deep search and couldn't find anything on it...I hate it when this happens lmao. I could have swore he said 2-high (or now I'm thinking maybe he said split-safety? Because he likes to use that term a lot), I definitely don't remember him saying Cover 2 specifically, it was just 2-high (or split-safety) defense in general... I think he meant traditional Cover 2, but he was also making a joke (and the hosts kind of stepped on his punchline).
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 11, 2024 9:20:43 GMT -6
With Saban retiring, I am curious what are one or two football/coaching things -- could be scheme, technique, development, etc -- that you have taken from Saban and used successfully. Could be something big (a whole defensive package, or coverage) or something small (small technique coaching point, or method of communication) or something else. For me personally, I am not a specific Saban-ite running Cover 7 with all of the specific tags/checks/variations, but I'd say I have learned more about coverages and pass technique from studying Saban than anyone else, and while I don't use it specifically (please don't quiz me on whether something is "Clamp," "Cut" or "Cougar" ) it's definitely seeped into my thinking. Further, I don't try to overdo coach-isms as life advice (a lot of "daily grind!" type stuff), but I always thought Saban's bit about the "Illusion of Choice" was accurate, and even a bit sobering. If you want to be successful, well, "it takes what it takes".
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Sept 18, 2023 14:37:57 GMT -6
Plus keep in mind that he's not a young man. He's 56 years old. For the NFL, that's young. There's at least 3 NFL HCs in their 70s. There are 9 NFL coaches who are 40 or younger
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 27, 2023 11:26:36 GMT -6
There's a broader trend in the world at large about worker mobility, and in a way the transfer stuff is part of it. If you're the best software engineer at Joe Schmo Technologies, and Google comes and offers you a big pile of money to go there, you take the money and go. In the past at times there may have been non-competes and things like that, but those seem to be on the way out (with some exceptions).
In the example of an FCS kid who turns out to be a stud and promptly goes to a P5 school, and it being "unfair". In a way it is unfair I suppose - the coach discovered the kid, recruited them, gave them a chance, and then loses them 1-2 years in... but for the kid if he has the opportunity to go play P5 and he wants to, wouldn't it be unfair to him to not give him that opportunity? Certainly compared to other kids who were recruited out of high school who maybe turn out to not be as good, hard working, or motivated.
As someone said above, if these were just club teams and sports was just fun recreation, then sure I guess - impose more rules to limit transfers (in part to protect kids so they don't mess up their academic careers by transferring around), and the option is always just don't play. But in a world where there is that much money, it seem hard to effectively limit opportunities. Keep in mind too that much of what we call "recruiting" is there because you can't (directly) recruit the way every other job in the country does: by offering more money and benefits. So it's all this other stuff. Don't have to like it, but it's kind of hard to argue against it.
On the NIL stuff, I think some of it just needs time -- in 10 years we'll know a lot more about it and it will mature. I do think some kind of truly fair minded NCAA or similar board that actually was set up to help student athletes would be great, but not a bunch of narrow federal rules designed to limit things (and which probably would have the effect of just entrenching the top dogs). I worry less about a kid making money from NIL deals than kids getting scammed for fake ones, or that promise a little bit up front and then don't materialize or have unfortunate terms on the back end. We're in this very funny place because the NCAA - at the direction of schools - wanted it all or nothing, and now we have still nothing direct with the schools but a shadow NIL operating in some instances as the wild west.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 12, 2023 18:03:36 GMT -6
What does he gain by lining up one day against a defensive end deciding between offers between Alabama and Georgia, and being humiliated? He's 10. I was reacting to the "will only play 7 on 7 football" part, and extrapolating to 5-7 years from now.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 12, 2023 10:52:12 GMT -6
I tried a little googling, I may he missing something but I think they just cleaned up the language of an illegal forward hand off to mimick that of an illegal forward pass. Right - it's supposed to be situations when a forward pass would be illegal (i.e., a forward handoff downfield, or a QB getting sacked who hands it to an ineligible player, like an offensive lineman). Of course, we'll see how it is actually interpreted in games!
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 12, 2023 10:35:11 GMT -6
The real funny part is that the kid only plays 7 on 7 football and probably will only play 7 on 7 football. That might be smart, actually. Keep it to a forum for social media and Tiktok. What does he gain by lining up one day against a defensive end deciding between offers between Alabama and Georgia, and being humiliated? My question is whether the real Gronk has a trademark on "Gronk." Not sure I let some kid trade off my name/brand.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on May 30, 2023 9:32:18 GMT -6
This is going on in my state right now. What do you think about it. 7A Bryant (largest classification) just completed their 5th state championship in a row. Players that did not go through spring football in 2023 are being denied their 2022 state championship rings. This included the state finals MVP who made a choice to finish his career focusing on baseball (He is a University of Arkansas commit) The Coach, who is the best in the business in Arkansas, laid out the rules in the parent meeting pre-season and has followed the ruled for five years. This is the first time it's been an issue. Where do you land on this? www.mysaline.com/hornet-rings/Maybe just me, but seems petty to do this about *rings*. Who cares? I have been around teams that were pretty open handed about rings. The value of the championship is the effort, accomplishment and respect among peers and coaches. Are we really doing this so that Johnny gets a ring but Joey doesn't? (And guess what, if you ask Johnny if Joey, who was MVP of the game, deserves a ring, do you think he will say "no, he wasn't at spring practice," even if he was at fall camp and played the whole season?). If this rule was so important then why didn't it affect the MVP's playing time?
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 27, 2023 12:49:36 GMT -6
Winning helps and makes things easier, but at this level it really should be about improving, opportunities, doing something athletic and, yes, being around their friends. Look for the small victories, the improvement, praise constantly (especially things like effort), etc. Frankly, at that age I wouldn't be above some good ol' fashion candy or gatorade types of rewards at the end of practice, etc.
The other thing is trying to get buy in from parents on process and improvement over wins/losses. All your hardwork on confidence, etc., can be undone in the car ride home. (And seriously, wins/losses at that age don't actually matter - it really is improvement and enthusiasm that does. And the best way to get them better at football is to have them like playing football.)
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 22, 2023 8:43:04 GMT -6
I was coaching in a rural area and had 2 guys tell me a few years apart that they would need to miss practice and when I asked why, they said they had to leave right after school to get to the city several miles away for high-profile concerts. And, when I was a head baseball coach at one high school, my starting catcher (w/ JUCO and/or college playing potential) told me after practice that he would "need to miss the game tomorrow (against a BIG rival) to take his GF to the AC/DC Concert about 40 miles away from our small town. I told him that would not be a wise choice. When he failed to jog through the gate for pregame on game-day he cut himself from the team. Sad thing is, several 2- and 4-year coaches contacted me about him and I would not give him a glowing recommendation. I simply mentioned that he had a problem with choosing priorities and that sport was not high on his list, and that his work-ethic was marginal. He received no offers. Great story, though a small part of me wishes you'd run into him and he'd say, "I hear you and maybe I could've played in college, but that AC/DC concert was AMAZING, and I regret nothing"
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 17, 2023 8:46:50 GMT -6
spreadattack For us, 'indy' is for specific skills. What you are describing is 'group' work. I pretty much NEVER do a full 7on7. It turns into a $h!t-show. We will do 2 offensive players running routes vs. the 3 defensive players an do our group-work with just the 5 of them and the QB. Closer to game-situation, but still not live. Indy periods are more for: QB - stances, starts, footwork, throwing mechanics, handoff mechanics, ball security RB - stances, starts, footwork, ball skills, handoff mechanics, ball security, pass pro, run blocking WR - stances, getoffs, footwork, route running, ball skills, perimeter blocking OL - stances, steps, types of blocks, doubleteams, combos, etc... etc... etc... LOTS to do for these guys Defense - pretty much the same, but for defense. Lots of leverage, lots of tackle-technique, etc... Group periods are more for specific situations you would apply what you just did in indy Team is more game-situation, where you don't know when you are gonna need the skills, but hopefully apply them when they arise. That's how we handle it, but there are a lot of ways to do it. Some guys do nothing but team, some don't do team, and everything in-between. Good stuff, and basically agree. Football is such a technique driven sport, and also the nature of it (play stops every 3-6 seconds) it's different than some other more "free flowing" sports. That said, I have been trying to think about how (if possible) to spend as much time working on skills/techniques by "playing" but in controlled environments in football. The below is an example of some of the thinking for basketball; there's lots of stuff out there. The analogy is trying to get away from spending a bunch of time working on stationary right hand pound dribble, left hand pound dribble, etc., when (especially for high school and below) kids need to learn by "doing." But again, football is not basketball or other sports - so (good offseason project) trying to think of drills that (a) get a lot of reps, (b) simulate but break down a game like situation, maybe with constraints, (c) gets a lot of good technique/skill work in and (d) frankly keeps the kids engaged. coachingtoolbox.net/practice/games-based-approach-coaching-basketball.html
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 16, 2023 13:23:43 GMT -6
Here's a related question: What percentage of your time (whether in Indy or otherwise) are you spending doing true fundamental/individual work (i.e., stuff on air, vs. no defense, steps, etc) versus small drills/groups/etc?
One thing I have been both evolving to and thinking about - particularly informed by how basketball coaching has evolved -- is to figure out as many opportunities for "live" reaction/decisions/technique, but in controlled "small sided game" environments. One-on-one routes vs. DBs compared to just routes on air, or half line drills, etc. Doesn't mean they have to be "live," but curious how folks think about their practice time with that. Particularly because football is particularly challenging to break up into "small sided games".
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 14, 2023 14:18:03 GMT -6
Po tay to, po tah to, at least in this context. Probably right that it was based on the Packer sweep, which the west coast guys ran for years (and Reid is from that tree). How they run it looks almost verbatim like the "buck sweep" that a lot of spread teams run, especially since they ran it weak.
Either way, really fun play.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 13, 2023 18:57:48 GMT -6
Buck sweep from a pro set
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 5, 2023 14:42:50 GMT -6
I always liked this answer by Belichick about this topic. There are various ways to do it. www.patriots.com/news/bill-belichick-press-conference-transcript-183406Q: You've talked about you guys being a game plan offense. Where was the idea of being a game plan offense born from for you? In terms of it being the right way to do it, compared to a team like the Steelers when Bill Cowher was there, that this what they do and you have to stop it? BB: I don't know, I guess I've always had that philosophy. You try to do what you think works best against that particular opponent certainly within the framework of what you're comfortable doing, whether that's offense, defense or special teams, it's all the same. [Former Head Coach] Wayne Hardin at Navy maybe, if you want to go back a ways; Detroit, the Giants. I don't know. Q: Would you agree with the thought that it's an ambitious thing to try to do because you have to be able to execute in all areas, as opposed to majoring in one thing? BB: I'll just give you this example. When I was in high school at Annapolis, I played for Al Laramore, who was Maryland Coach of the Year, a Hall of Fame high school coach in Delaware and all that. So, he's a pretty good coach. We won a lot of games, we won a ton of games and we ran four plays. We ran four plays: 22 Power, 24 Quick Trap, 28 Counter and Sprint Right and that was it. When we ran them to the other side, we just flipped formation. The whole line flipped and the play went the other way: 22 Power, 24 Quick Trap, 28 Counter and Sprint Left. That was the offense, that was the entire offense and we won a lot of games. Then the next year when I went to Andover and played for Coach [Steve] Sorota there, who again was a great player, great coach, played with [Vince] Lombardi at Fordham and was one of the most renowned coaches I'd say ever in New England prep school football or maybe high school football period for that matter. The quarterback called his own plays. They didn't send them in; they didn't tell him what to call. They got in the huddle and he may have asked for a suggestion from me or Ernie [Adams] or somebody, but he called whatever he wanted to call and that was the offense. So, that was about as opposite as you could get it from one year to the next year. We won just as many games. It was totally different, but both were very successful. So what's the right way to do it? What's the wrong way to do it? I don't know. Whatever works, whatever you believe in. But then it all has to line up that way. I got to Baltimore with Coach [Ted] Marchibroda, Bert Jones. Bert called all the plays. I want to say it was his second year in the league. He called all the plays. Call timeout, come over to the sideline, fourth-and-one, Burt would say, 'What do you want me to call?' Ted would say, 'We have 24 Hunch, we have 36 Bob, we have Play Pass 37 Y Flag, whatever you feel good about.' 'Alright.' Other players and coaches would come up and say, 'What are we going to run?' 'I don't know, it depends what Burt calls.' There are other teams, Coach [Ray] Perkins, Coach [Bill] Parcells, those guys, called every play. Not that we wouldn't audible to a play or something but he called every play. So, what's right and what's wrong? I don't know. It can all work. If you do it right and you have the other things – if you do it one way, you have to have other things that are in place to do that. There's a reason for doing it. There are also some drawbacks to doing it that way. When that happens, you have to have some way to counter it. That's the same way on defense. When I was with the Broncos and Joe Collier, there were game plans where we had 60 different fronts – fronts. It's hard to imagine 60 different fronts in a 3-4 defense really, but that what it was. It was 60 different alignments, which would include a linebacker that was blitzing so any one of the four linebackers were blitzing so that was part of it.
I got to the Giants when Bill [Parcells] came in, we put in a 3-4 there. We played one front with one adjustment. We reduced the end on the weak side from a four-technique to a three-technique and that's it. Then I'd say 95 percent of the snaps that we played from '81 to '90 that weren't nickel snaps; over 90 percent of them had to be either base or reduced front, maybe 95 percent. It might have been higher than that. Two good defenses: the Orange Crush, the Broncos defense, that was a great defense. The Giants defense, that was a great defense. The same 3-4, two totally different philosophies. So what's the right way to do it? Both work.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 22, 2022 8:53:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Oct 28, 2022 14:53:54 GMT -6
I'm failing to see what's so egregious here. The ball is spotted. Chains are brought out and set. Ball is short of line to gain. White Hat moves the ball up from where it was spotted, and signals 1st Down. It also looks like he actually pulls the first down marker in when the other ref is putting it down...
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Oct 28, 2022 13:38:12 GMT -6
If I saw this happen in a game, I might lose my mind. Anyone experienced anything like this?
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Aug 3, 2022 14:16:47 GMT -6
Is there any chance that at least part of the answer is that playing football really well, and really fundamentally sound... is hard? It's hard to coach, hard to execute, even for major college/heavily recruited studs and for professionals? (Also, it's a sport where physical traits can sometimes compensate for poor/mediocre fundamentals, unlike, say, throwing darts or maybe even golf?)
I tend to think the fundamentals in the NFL are on the whole quite good -- though there can be clear markers between well coached teams/long term veterans, versus rookies and less well coached teams -- and similarly to college, though the different in fundamentals and technique between college and the pros is pretty stark, for very logical reasons (mostly experience/seasoning and time on task).
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jun 14, 2022 9:12:10 GMT -6
Some years ago I got ahold of a formula for computing QB rating. Thumbing through some old notebooks I found it. Here it is. Does anyone concur? Not? 1). Divide completions by attempts. 2). Subtract 0.3. 3). Divide that by 0.2 and record the total.* ....* the total cannot be greater than 2.375 or less than 0. 4). Divide passing yards by pass attempts. 5). Subtract 3. 6). Divide by 4 and record the total. 7). Divide the number of TD passes by pass attempts. 8). Divide that by 0.05 and record the total. 9). Divide the number of interceptions by pass attempts. 10). Subtract that number from 0.095. 11). Divide that product by 0.04 and record the total.* ....* the total cannot be greater than 2.375 or less than 0. 12). Add together the 4 totals. 13). Multiply that by 100. 14). Divide by 6. 15) The final number is the QB rating. In all seriousness, it's not perfect but "adjusted yards per attempt" is pretty good to me. It's just basically yards per attempt with adjustments for sacks, touchdowns and interceptions. Formula is: - (Passing yards, minus sack yards, plus (20, multiplied by passing TDs), minus (45, multiplied by interceptions)), divided by (total pass attempts plus sacks taken) In other words, it's all passing yards (minus sack yards), with 20 "yards" for every TD and 45 "yards" removed for every interception, divided by all dropbacks. Not perfect but is probably more informative than a lot of these "passer ratings" re: efficiency, etc.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Apr 7, 2022 17:24:58 GMT -6
Does anyone have a list of meaningful stats - stats that correspond with winning ? Something along the lines of, "turnover ratio: the team that has the fewest turnovers wins ?? % of the time". Also, explosive plays comes to mind. One of the issues is that there are descriptive stats and predictive stats, and also stats that are more or less within a team's control. (There is another issue that most of the studies get done with NFL/college teams, so query how applicable it is to a high school team.) But turnovers is a big one. At least at the NFL level (see above), turnover margin is both extremely important for deciding individual games - no kidding -- but there's also not much data that turnover margin is sustainable long term and it tends to mean revert for teams over the course of seasons and from season-to-season. This isn't to say that some teams aren't better or worse at giveaways/takeaways, but there is a lot of "noise" in the data -- the errant pass that is dropped, the unfortunate fumble luck or bounce of the ball, etc -- so for all of the turnover circuits and ball security drills, there's a lot of randomness in the data. So while your turnover margin might decide whether you win or lose a game, it's very difficult to predict or control over time. Of course it's also common sense that some teams are better at taking care of or taking away the football, but just know that from game to game there's a lot of randomness. Then there are other stats which are both controllable and predictive, though there are causation/correlation issues like rushing attempts or even pass defense, which can be highly situation specific. So I'm not at all saying that stats don't matter or aren't useful, but using them correctly or helpfully is a bit tricky. The ones that jump out to me beyond the obvious like turnovers (or score) are explosive plays, offensive/defensive yards per play on first down, negative plays on defense and success rate/lack of negatives on offense, starting field position/hidden yardage. Really the big "insights" (whoopdie doo) being that the more yards you gain on early downs the easier it is to keep drives alive (that's just arithmetic), and it's hard to drive the field so explosives and field position matter a lot, and negative plays are drive killers. So the stats say be good and don't harm yourself.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Mar 31, 2022 8:50:46 GMT -6
Anyone have or seen good experiences with any particular camps, purely from a player development point of view?
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 13, 2022 9:13:02 GMT -6
My only comment is that all types of personalities and backgrounds can succeed as football coaches, so long as they can do the one thing that is a requirement: coach. Of course, players make you a better coach, so there can be a lot of luck (in the NFL, how lucky you are at drafting, how good your GM is, does your owner pay) and in college recruiting is the name of the game so the guys you see in those roles are going to have to walk into homes and get players to come.
In the NFL, at core what most good players want is someone who can help them be personally successful at their job (make them better), win, and get paid -- and usually the getting paid comes with being good and winning. I really don't know anything about Mike McDaniel but he's had success and he seems to have at least some degree of player loyalty; the SF tight-end Kittle had it basically written into his contract that McDaniel would be involved with coaching him.
And yes, anytime you coach pros you deal with the fact that there are guys that make more money than you, have more experience than you, and have had plenty of success before they ever met you -- one approach is to treat them like they are still 21 years old and you are their God, and another may be to make it more of a professional, two-way relationship. We saw how the first approach worked for Urban Meyer this year (among other issues) and it's been an issue for other college goes who have gone to the pros; seems like McDaniel and some of his similar coaches take more of the second.
All of which is to say, it's no surprise to me to see different kinds of coaches hired and to be successful, both at specific levels like the NFL, college, HS, or across football. Pete Carroll, Mike Leach and Bill Belichick are successful (on a relative basis, not comparing Leach to guys who won Super Bowls and National Titles, and in the case of Belichick maybe the best coach ever), but think about how different they are as people and their styles, and Leach didn't even play football and Carroll was a safety at the University of Pacific and cut from the Hawaii World Football League team, and Belichick was a backup/sometimes player at Wesleyan.
I have no idea if McDaniel will be successful, but I am convinced there are lots of ways to get the job done and we'll continue to see a wide array of coaches and coaching styles.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Feb 1, 2022 19:53:05 GMT -6
Well, the Flores lawsuit looks like it is about to drag a lot to the surface. This is going to make the league’s management look like the fraternity of spoiled @$$holes that everyone already assumed them to be. One of the stats that’s being pointed out is that all the owners are “white” but 70% of the players are black. I do feel that the ownership makeup and culture within that group is one of the main reasons this has been such a frustrating conversation for years. I expect the NFL to launch a big initiative soon to lure some black billionaires to buy franchises or even expand the league so they can get at least one token black owner, if for no other reasons than PR. I wonder if Jay Z or Magic Johnson wants to own the WFT… Ownership of teams in other sports leagues -- MLB, NBA, international soccer, etc -- has changed a lot, and tend to be investment groups with majority/minority owners, often led by wealthy tech people, hedge fund managers, etc. (For some reason I keep getting emails asking me if I want to be an investor in MLB teams. No thanks.) The NFL has -- by all accounts intentionally - tried to keep individual or family ownership of teams, and also boasts that many teams have stayed within the same families for many generations. They say it promotes stability and a feeling of "owners" and "ownership," but the downside is that you have franchises now worth billions of dollars which were bought for tens of millions (or less?) by the deceased grandpa of junior who now "owns" the team, and whose entire wealth and identity is tied up in being the "owner" of an NFL team which in turn is often the dominant/most recognizable enterprise of many cities or even states. In other words, the NFL has treated the good ol' boy network of franchise ownership as a feature, not a bug. I would expect to see a lot of turnover of ownership of teams over the next 5 to 10 years. The below link is kind of wild, when you think about how the Broncos are projected to sell to an investment group (TBD which one) at a value of over $4 billion. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_franchise_ownersAs examples, the Bidwill family bough the Cardinals for $50k in 1932, and the Mara family founded the Giants in 1925 and the current main owner, is the grandson of the founder and son of the guy who owned/operated the Giants for 68 straight years, before he inherited his role. Imagine Steve Jobs passing away and bequeathing ownership and operation of Apple to his eldest child.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 31, 2022 16:09:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 3, 2022 8:14:16 GMT -6
Re: ESPNization of football, it's at least to a degree the price for football being far and away the most popular sport in America, by a large stretch. That popularity directly correlates to more kids growing up playing it, more peewee and high school players, more college players of all levels and stripes.
It's definitely true that if I go to Buffalo Wild Wings on Sunday and listen to the football takes at the bar it's pretty brutal, and I bet if you go to the international curling convention those dudes are purists and can tell you every subtlety of the game, and probably bemoan the know-nothing fans that show up every 4 years when the winter olympics are on and they suddenly become curling fans -- but how many kids grow up playing curling, and even the folks that get into it, how many watched one of those winter olympic curling broadcasts and decided "maybe I'll try that"?
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Dec 29, 2021 14:12:41 GMT -6
Setting aside the stupid season on twitter, Madden was really an amazing figure - totally authentic, a legit winner and coach, excellent teacher (first to his teams, then to the whole football community). He even spent a lot of time with the video game developers in the early years talking football and helping them figure out how to make the game feel like football, especially in those early 1990s years when the technology wasn't there.
(The original story is that the developers told him that game systems could only handle 7 on 7 at the time, and he said that wasn't football and it needed to be 11 on 11. They told him that would "take years to make," and he said, "Well, then it will take years to make." Two years later they released the first Madden football game -- 11 on 11.)
He was just spooky good at explaining stuff without making you think he was trying to act smarter than you, which was especially valuable when you're young and learning the game. Plus he understood line play, and helped a lot of casual fans appreciate it and those players -- which is hard for many to do.
There's been some fun clips posted recently. I enjoyed this one, which I'd never seen before. (Think about his audience here -- the entire world watching the Super Bowl in the 80s, and he's going to explain the Bear 46 defense.)
|
|