|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Sept 10, 2021 9:06:24 GMT -6
They do not work on technique. There are no blocking, tackling or turnover drills and receivers are not asked to work with cones. “Everybody in football is working on blocking and tackling and I don’t think anybody is gonna be a lot better than the other team unless you have dominant, physical guys,” Kelley said. “Tackling depends on who’s running the ball. I mean, if Barry Sanders is running the ball, nobody is a good tackler.” FOOTBALL SCOOP
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Sept 10, 2021 9:14:14 GMT -6
I need to share this with our opponents this season; some might buy into it and we'll win pretty big.
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 10, 2021 9:21:09 GMT -6
He was pretty vocal about hating individual time when he coached here in high school. Some of it makes total sense to me though. Tackling and blocking are total “want to” things and if you don't want to then you will never be good at it no matter how many drills you run.
And to his point about tackling Barry Sanders he's 100% right and it has been stated on here many times. If the opposing teams running back is physically superior to your guys how do you practice that?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 10, 2021 9:37:35 GMT -6
Anytime someone attributes great success to playcaling, I laugh.
I am a bit confused though- he says that “teaching” is one of the big 3 (playcalling, play design, and teaching).
If they aren’t practicing individual skills, what is he teaching?
|
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Sept 10, 2021 9:57:47 GMT -6
Reminds me of the decided schematic advantage Notre Dame enjoyed for so long.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 10:10:21 GMT -6
Kelly is a guy who has never had to teach blocking and tackling much because he’s had the luxury of building his reputations on kids who come to him with at least reasonably solid technique already,
Pulaski was a powerhouse full of D1 athletes long before Kelly was HC there (wasn’t he Gus Malzahn’s successor at Pulaski?) and continued to be one with him calling the shots. They also had huge numbers and kids transferring in to play there, so what he was doing was more analogous to an NFL coach who simply finds the best “finished” products to plug in. You’re even seeing that in his first year at a college, who blew out the same team by nearly as big a margin last year.
His comments reflect that he’s not had to teach the fundamentals of the game like your typical HS coach. His comments on taking PATs for granted because “you make 90% of those whether you practice them or not” reflect a reality that I have never seen at any of the multiple HS I’ve coached at. At most of them, we were lucky to make 50%.
While I like his willingness to experiment, Kelly’s ego and hunger for self promotion really comes across in this article. The three keys to winning as plsycalling, play design, and “teaching” seems like his way of saying “the only real key to winning is ME!”
If your typical HS coach tried things Kelly’s way at an ordinary public school with average talent, he’d be lucky to last a season.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 10, 2021 11:11:23 GMT -6
He was pretty vocal about hating individual time when he coached here in high school. Some of it makes total sense to me though. Tackling and blocking are total “want to” things and if you don't want to then you will never be good at it no matter how many drills you run. And to his point about tackling Barry Sanders he's 100% right and it has been stated on here many times. If the opposing teams running back is physically superior to your guys how do you practice that? Well, who has a better chance at tackling Barry Sanders? The guy who isn't very talented but practices consistently on body control, pad level, coming to balance, etc. or the guy who isn't very talented and doesn't practice all of that stuff? And couldn't one say that blocking and tackling are not natural actions, and that no matter how much you want to do them, if you don't practice then you will not be very good at them (when faced with similarly gifted opponents) ? |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 10, 2021 11:33:51 GMT -6
He was pretty vocal about hating individual time when he coached here in high school. Some of it makes total sense to me though. Tackling and blocking are total “want to” things and if you don't want to then you will never be good at it no matter how many drills you run. And to his point about tackling Barry Sanders he's 100% right and it has been stated on here many times. If the opposing teams running back is physically superior to your guys how do you practice that? Well, who has a better chance at tackling Barry Sanders? The guy who isn't very talented but practices consistently on body control, pad level, coming to balance, etc. or the guy who isn't very talented and doesn't practice all of that stuff? And couldn't one say that blocking and tackling are not natural actions, and that no matter how much you want to do them, if you don't practice then you will not be very good at them (when faced with similarly gifted opponents) ? I would ask which of the 2 shy's from contact because the guy willing to put his body on the line is the one with the better chance to tackle anyone regardless of coaching. I'm not saying I don't think you should practice those things and I'm not even so sure that's what he is even saying. I think that he is saying people spend a ton of time on drills and indo that they don't need to and I agree with that. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 10, 2021 11:37:25 GMT -6
Kelly is a guy who has never had to teach blocking and tackling much because he’s had the luxury of building his reputations on kids who come to him with at least reasonably solid technique already, Pulaski was a powerhouse full of D1 athletes long before Kelly was HC there (wasn’t he Gus Malzahn’s successor at Pulaski?) and continued to be one with him calling the shots. They also had huge numbers and kids transferring in to play there, so what he was doing was more analogous to an NFL coach who simply finds the best “finished” products to plug in. You’re even seeing that in his first year at a college, who blew out the same team by nearly as big a margin last year. His comments reflect that he’s not had to teach the fundamentals of the game like your typical HS coach. His comments on taking PATs for granted because “you make 90% of those whether you practice them or not” reflect a reality that I have never seen at any of the multiple HS I’ve coached at. At most of them, we were lucky to make 50%. While I like his willingness to experiment, Kelly’s ego and hunger for self promotion really comes across in this article. The three keys to winning as plsycalling, play design, and “teaching” seems like his way of saying “the only real key to winning is ME!” If your typical HS coach tried things Kelly’s way at an ordinary public school with average talent, he’d be lucky to last a season. 100% on the ego part. He is a huge self promoter. But he created that powerhouse. Malzahn was at Shiloah Christian not PA. PA had never won a state title until he became the HC. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 10, 2021 11:46:05 GMT -6
Well, who has a better chance at tackling Barry Sanders? The guy who isn't very talented but practices consistently on body control, pad level, coming to balance, etc. or the guy who isn't very talented and doesn't practice all of that stuff? And couldn't one say that blocking and tackling are not natural actions, and that no matter how much you want to do them, if you don't practice then you will not be very good at them (when faced with similarly gifted opponents) ? I would ask which of the 2 shy's from contact because the guy willing to put his body on the line is the one with the better chance to tackle anyone regardless of coaching. I'm not saying I don't think you should practice those things and I'm not even so sure that's what he is even saying. I think that he is saying people spend a ton of time on drills and indo that they don't need to and I agree with that. Why are you including an assumption that one of the 2 hypothetical players avoids contact? I may agree with the statement "people spend a ton of tim eon drills and individual work that they don't need" , but with the caveat that they are doing so and wasting time while NOT DOING drills and individual work that they do need. For example the DB coach who seems to think it is important to run 8 different backpedal and plant drills, or the DL coach who thinks monkey rolls daily to teach getting off the ground is important, or an OL guy spending half of his period doing King of the Board drills and never works on other aspects of OL play etc. I don't think that is this coach's belief. He seems to think that drill/individual time should be cut in favor of running plays as a team. I just disagree with that. My philosophy is that you teach the skills of football on an individual level / small group level and then put it all together with others to play the game of football. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 10, 2021 12:17:08 GMT -6
I would ask which of the 2 shy's from contact because the guy willing to put his body on the line is the one with the better chance to tackle anyone regardless of coaching. I'm not saying I don't think you should practice those things and I'm not even so sure that's what he is even saying. I think that he is saying people spend a ton of time on drills and indo that they don't need to and I agree with that. Why are you including an assumption that one of the 2 hypothetical players avoids contact? I may agree with the statement "people spend a ton of tim eon drills and individual work that they don't need" , but with the caveat that they are doing so and wasting time while NOT DOING drills and individual work that they do need. For example the DB coach who seems to think it is important to run 8 different backpedal and plant drills, or the DL coach who thinks monkey rolls daily to teach getting off the ground is important, or an OL guy spending half of his period doing King of the Board drills and never works on other aspects of OL play etc. I don't think that is this coach's belief. He seems to think that drill/individual time should be cut in favor of running plays as a team. I just disagree with that. My philosophy is that you teach the skills of football on an individual level / small group level and then put it all together with others to play the game of football. Because if they're contact shy they ain't making the tackle no matter how much you coach them. So that particular piece of info is important in my decision. I can't speak on what he does at Presbyterian but I have seen him speak on this several times and at PA he would do like 10 min of indo a day but the rest was group or team and they coached them up in that setting. So that's why I don't believe that he doesn't believe coaching it is important just not spending a ton of time in indo teaching it. I will also point out that I am no KK fan but I do respect the way his teams play and how well they are coached. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2021 12:17:47 GMT -6
Kelly is a guy who has never had to teach blocking and tackling much because he’s had the luxury of building his reputations on kids who come to him with at least reasonably solid technique already, Pulaski was a powerhouse full of D1 athletes long before Kelly was HC there (wasn’t he Gus Malzahn’s successor at Pulaski?) and continued to be one with him calling the shots. They also had huge numbers and kids transferring in to play there, so what he was doing was more analogous to an NFL coach who simply finds the best “finished” products to plug in. You’re even seeing that in his first year at a college, who blew out the same team by nearly as big a margin last year. His comments reflect that he’s not had to teach the fundamentals of the game like your typical HS coach. His comments on taking PATs for granted because “you make 90% of those whether you practice them or not” reflect a reality that I have never seen at any of the multiple HS I’ve coached at. At most of them, we were lucky to make 50%. While I like his willingness to experiment, Kelly’s ego and hunger for self promotion really comes across in this article. The three keys to winning as plsycalling, play design, and “teaching” seems like his way of saying “the only real key to winning is ME!” If your typical HS coach tried things Kelly’s way at an ordinary public school with average talent, he’d be lucky to last a season. 100% on the ego part. He is a huge self promoter. But he created that powerhouse. Malzahn was at Shiloah Christian not PA. PA had never won a state title until he became the HC. Thanks for the correction. I knew Malzahn had coached at Shiloh Christian, so I looked it up and the program I was confusing with Pulaski was Springdale. Springdale HS is where Malzahn was when he had Mitch Mustain and some other big time recruits, which is why Houston Nutt made him the Arkansas OC back in the day. Kelley was an assistant at Pulaski since 1997 and took over as HC in 2003. My mistake. In looking it up, Pulaski is still an independent private school, though, that has emphasized athletics heavily with championships in many programs since 2000, so Kelley was hardly having to go to war with average HS players he “developed” from square one. At least four of his players went on to play in the NFL, which is pretty much unheard of in Arkansas AFAIK. I like the guy. I hope this doesn’t come off as ripping him. I just think he gets to live in a world that’s different from the realities the rest of us are dealing with and his philosophies and attitudes are products of that. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 10, 2021 12:29:26 GMT -6
100% on the ego part. He is a huge self promoter. But he created that powerhouse. Malzahn was at Shiloah Christian not PA. PA had never won a state title until he became the HC. Thanks for the correction. I knew Malzahn had coached at Shiloh Christian, so I looked it up and the program I was confusing with Pulaski was Springdale. Springdale HS is where Malzahn was when he had Mitch Mustain and some other big time recruits, which is why Houston Nutt made him the Arkansas OC back in the day. Kelley was an assistant at Pulaski since 1997 and took over as HC in 2003. My mistake. In looking it up, Pulaski is still an independent private school, though, that has emphasized athletics heavily with championships in many programs since 2000, so Kelley was hardly having to go to war with average HS players he “developed” from square one. At least four of his players went on to play in the NFL, which is pretty much unheard of in Arkansas AFAIK. I like the guy. I hope this doesn’t come off as ripping him. I just think he gets to live in a world that’s different from the realities the rest of us are dealing with and his philosophies and attitudes are products of that. He benefited from being able to get kids who wanted to escape inner city schools. He would always down play his talent but they were freaking good. They also have a youth program complex that would make your jaw drop and they ran his system from the time they could walk. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 10, 2021 16:32:48 GMT -6
Why are you including an assumption that one of the 2 hypothetical players avoids contact? I may agree with the statement "people spend a ton of tim eon drills and individual work that they don't need" , but with the caveat that they are doing so and wasting time while NOT DOING drills and individual work that they do need. For example the DB coach who seems to think it is important to run 8 different backpedal and plant drills, or the DL coach who thinks monkey rolls daily to teach getting off the ground is important, or an OL guy spending half of his period doing King of the Board drills and never works on other aspects of OL play etc. I don't think that is this coach's belief. He seems to think that drill/individual time should be cut in favor of running plays as a team. I just disagree with that. My philosophy is that you teach the skills of football on an individual level / small group level and then put it all together with others to play the game of football. Because if they're contact shy they ain't making the tackle no matter how much you coach them. So that particular piece of info is important in my decision. What piece? You keep putting in an assumption that of the two hypothetical players (both not terribly talented, one practicing tackling one not) one is afraid of contact. Lets say that is not the case. So I ask again, who has the better chance of tackling Barry Sanders...the one practicing tackling or the one that isn't? My point being I don't understand the alternative. "We aren't very good compared to our opponents so we are not going to practice skills to get better at them?" I don't see how that works. |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Sept 10, 2021 17:26:54 GMT -6
Didn't John Gagliardi do this like 40 years ago?
I get so tired of all this "we do X,Y and Z differently" just so they can build their "brand".
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Sept 10, 2021 18:59:50 GMT -6
sounds like an arrogant asssholle to me
chad morris txhsfb move up the ranks sounds familiar
we used to call backstabbing your head coach to get the job (when that happened at other places)
being chadded
this guy seems similar
|
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Sept 10, 2021 21:12:01 GMT -6
Tackling and blocking are total “want to” things and if you don't want to then you will never be good at it no matter how many drills you run. True. But most do want to, and then what? This is one of those things where once you scrape off the "bottom", improving that factor produces minimal improvement in outcome. I've unfortunately coached kids who didn't want to, but as to the rest of them, "wanting to" more made no favorable difference, and sometimes was even unfavorable. There are a lot of things like that in football, where you can blow it by being bad in a certain way, but where being the world's best would make hardly any competitive difference over being merely mediocre. Meanwhile there are things in football where not only getting off the bottom but improving thru mediocre into the high end results in a monotonic improvement in competitive outcome. Many of those things are in the area of technique, and practiced skill in tackling and blocking are among them. |
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Sept 11, 2021 2:26:32 GMT -6
I'd like to see him take my 28 kids I dress varsity and show me how it's done vs. the teams we play. All we do is preach leverage, alignment, assignment... and we blow all 3 weekly. Meanwhile a team 5 miles south of us is top 20 in the country and dress over 100 each week. Run the same offense and base defense, but somehow we come up short every week and they don't.
There is a coach here trying to do the never punt thing... they are 1-4 I believe... maybe 2-3.
I wanna see long term how it goes. How long are the boosters gonna like going on 4th and 8 on your own 20 against a team that has similar talent
|
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Sept 11, 2021 16:34:49 GMT -6
I don’t know or care about the guys resume, personality of experience.
When talent is equal or close, you need to practice tackling and blocking.
If one wants to argue coaches waste time in Indy I will bite, but to completely abolish teaching blocking and tackling is asinine in most situations.
The Barry Sanders comment is just silly. Almost none of us are playing Barry Sanders.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 11, 2021 17:00:39 GMT -6
I don’t know or care about the guys resume, personality of experience. When talent is equal or close, you need to practice tackling and blocking. If one wants to argue coaches waste time in Indy I will bite, but to completely abolish teaching blocking and tackling is asinine in most situations. The Barry Sanders comment is just silly. Almost none of us are playing Barry Sanders. Or even if you DO play against Barry Sanders, how does not practicing tackling fundamentals make it better? What other uses of that 5-8 minute daily period are you going to do to increase your chances of winning against his team? What about next week, when you aren't playing against Barry Sanders? Saying that coaches should evaluate their practice time and in particular the individual drills being performed is a good idea. But that isn't what I believe this guy is trying to say. |
|
|
|
Post by coachscdub on Sept 12, 2021 0:20:37 GMT -6
Anytime someone attributes great success to playcaling, I laugh. I am a bit confused though- he says that “teaching” is one of the big 3 (playcalling, play design, and teaching). If they aren’t practicing individual skills, what is he teaching? They are teaching the plays. They run almost everything as 11 on 11 and work each play "get better at the game by playing the game" |
|
|
|
Post by coachscdub on Sept 12, 2021 0:24:37 GMT -6
Kelly is a guy who has never had to teach blocking and tackling much because he’s had the luxury of building his reputations on kids who come to him with at least reasonably solid technique already, Pulaski was a powerhouse full of D1 athletes long before Kelly was HC there (wasn’t he Gus Malzahn’s successor at Pulaski?) and continued to be one with him calling the shots. They also had huge numbers and kids transferring in to play there, so what he was doing was more analogous to an NFL coach who simply finds the best “finished” products to plug in. You’re even seeing that in his first year at a college, who blew out the same team by nearly as big a margin last year. His comments reflect that he’s not had to teach the fundamentals of the game like your typical HS coach. His comments on taking PATs for granted because “you make 90% of those whether you practice them or not” reflect a reality that I have never seen at any of the multiple HS I’ve coached at. At most of them, we were lucky to make 50%. While I like his willingness to experiment, Kelly’s ego and hunger for self promotion really comes across in this article. The three keys to winning as plsycalling, play design, and “teaching” seems like his way of saying “the only real key to winning is ME!” If your typical HS coach tried things Kelly’s way at an ordinary public school with average talent, he’d be lucky to last a season. He did not take over Malzahn, they did play against each other tho. Also they dont have a constant supply of D1 Guys, look at the last few years, maybe, maybe 1 kid is ranked in the state. Do kids go D1 a few yea, alot of have been walk on (Hatcher, Bratcher, Hefley, etc). Does he have an ego absolutely but he wins, which is what matters when it comes to job security. Also just to point out they never seem to have superior talent to who they play, some of their rivals have just as many if not more ranked/D1 Kids. |
|
|
|
Post by coachlit on Sept 12, 2021 4:22:24 GMT -6
I’d like to see what his practice plan looks like. If he truly just does a lot of 11 on 11 I assume it’s almost a small controlled scrimmage everyday and watch film afterwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 12, 2021 6:25:56 GMT -6
Kelly is a guy who has never had to teach blocking and tackling much because he’s had the luxury of building his reputations on kids who come to him with at least reasonably solid technique already, Pulaski was a powerhouse full of D1 athletes long before Kelly was HC there (wasn’t he Gus Malzahn’s successor at Pulaski?) and continued to be one with him calling the shots. They also had huge numbers and kids transferring in to play there, so what he was doing was more analogous to an NFL coach who simply finds the best “finished” products to plug in. You’re even seeing that in his first year at a college, who blew out the same team by nearly as big a margin last year. His comments reflect that he’s not had to teach the fundamentals of the game like your typical HS coach. His comments on taking PATs for granted because “you make 90% of those whether you practice them or not” reflect a reality that I have never seen at any of the multiple HS I’ve coached at. At most of them, we were lucky to make 50%. While I like his willingness to experiment, Kelly’s ego and hunger for self promotion really comes across in this article. The three keys to winning as plsycalling, play design, and “teaching” seems like his way of saying “the only real key to winning is ME!” If your typical HS coach tried things Kelly’s way at an ordinary public school with average talent, he’d be lucky to last a season. He did not take over Malzahn, they did play against each other tho. Also they dont have a constant supply of D1 Guys, look at the last few years, maybe, maybe 1 kid is ranked in the state. Do kids go D1 a few yea, alot of have been walk on (Hatcher, Bratcher, Hefley, etc). Does he have an ego absolutely but he wins, which is what matters when it comes to job security. Also just to point out they never seem to have superior talent to who they play, some of their rivals have just as many if not more ranked/D1 Kids. They absolutely have superior talent to most of the teams they play. It's not IMG or anything but to say they don't have superior talent than most of the teams they play is to say that you haven't seen the teams they play. |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Sept 12, 2021 8:05:40 GMT -6
I wonder in todays day and age coming out and saying we don't work on any technique or tackling sets you up for massive liability if a kid gets hurt bad. I could see especially in HS people running with that if something ever happened and you are on record saying we don't teach kids how to do that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2021 8:08:50 GMT -6
I wonder in todays day and age coming out and saying we don't work on any technique or tackling sets you up for massive liability if a kid gets hurt bad. I could see especially in HS people running with that if something ever happened and you are on record saying we don't teach kids how to do that. You dont have to IF you have athletes. 5 minutes, muscle memory kicks in and off and running they go. Let vanderbilt hire him…and see how it works out. Or better yet, let him be saban’s replacement. Anybody can do what saban does, especially if it is all game planning, play calling and whatever other idiotic thing he said. |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Sept 12, 2021 8:10:18 GMT -6
I wonder in todays day and age coming out and saying we don't work on any technique or tackling sets you up for massive liability if a kid gets hurt bad. I could see especially in HS people running with that if something ever happened and you are on record saying we don't teach kids how to do that. But what if, at (or before) trial, you bring out evidence that you have a lower rate of injuries (or of that particular kind of injury) than at places where they do practice that technique? Then who's in trouble? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2021 8:11:40 GMT -6
I wonder in todays day and age coming out and saying we don't work on any technique or tackling sets you up for massive liability if a kid gets hurt bad. I could see especially in HS people running with that if something ever happened and you are on record saying we don't teach kids how to do that. But what if, at (or before) trial, you bring out evidence that you have a lower rate of injuries (or of that particular kind of injury) than at places where they do practice that technique? Then who's in trouble? the problem is not everybody else has a kid with a broken neck and shoots his mouth off. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 12, 2021 8:24:06 GMT -6
Anytime someone attributes great success to playcaling, I laugh. I am a bit confused though- he says that “teaching” is one of the big 3 (playcalling, play design, and teaching). If they aren’t practicing individual skills, what is he teaching? They are teaching the plays. They run almost everything as 11 on 11 and work each play "get better at the game by playing the game" The game is played by the interaction of various positions executing their (very different) fundamental skills though-- not by having 11 x's run around with a corresponding 11 o's . Maybe the comments are taken a bit out of context, and he is talking about practice in November. I would still disagree particularly because the accumulation of that individual skill development time over years is what develops "program strength" as I like to call it, but at least it makes a bit more sense. I also think peoples personal philosophies will impact how they interpret and receive his style. Coach, if I remember correctly a about a year or so ago you had made posts in a thread where you stated that calling plays is what you love about coaching. So that influences your ideas. A coach like Ted Seay seems to enjoy play design the most. A guy like dcohio seemed to enjoy building a defensive structure based on what offenses were doing that was capable to handling everything and yet being simple to install and teach. Me, I like the idea of building players in the weight room and by teaching them how to execute the fundamentals of the sport (Hence "play defense, not defenses") . |
|
|
|
Post by coachscdub on Sept 12, 2021 13:29:24 GMT -6
They are teaching the plays. They run almost everything as 11 on 11 and work each play "get better at the game by playing the game" The game is played by the interaction of various positions executing their (very different) fundamental skills though-- not by having 11 x's run around with a corresponding 11 o's . Maybe the comments are taken a bit out of context, and he is talking about practice in November. I would still disagree particularly because the accumulation of that individual skill development time over years is what develops "program strength" as I like to call it, but at least it makes a bit more sense. I also think peoples personal philosophies will impact how they interpret and receive his style. Coach, if I remember correctly a about a year or so ago you had made posts in a thread where you stated that calling plays is what you love about coaching. So that influences your ideas. A coach like Ted Seay seems to enjoy play design the most. A guy like dcohio seemed to enjoy building a defensive structure based on what offenses were doing that was capable to handling everything and yet being simple to install and teach. Me, I like the idea of building players in the weight room and by teaching them how to execute the fundamentals of the sport (Hence "play defense, not defenses") . I understand what you're saying and i'm not saying you're wrong. The great thing about football is there are so many ways to skin the cat that it's impossible to say one is better than another. I like and understand the notion of playing the game in practice like it will be played come game day. I like coach kelley and his contrarian views because they are contrarian, and contrarian thinking always makes things more interesting, as opposed to everyone sipping the same koolaid. |
|
