Coaching wizardry is closely linked to player talent. Or as the old saying goes, you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
The number of college coaches who have found success in the NFL is extremely thin. Dick Vermeil, Jimmy Johnson and Jim Harbaugh are among the very few. I judge success in the NFL as taking over a middle of the road or bottom feeder team and building it into a playoff contender. Most college coach coaches with no NFL back ground simply can not adapt to the level of competition and general parity that exists at the professional level.
I will always remember when Vermeil was in his second season with the Eagles and he was asked in a press conference about the difference between coaching the Eagles verses his time at UCLA. His answer was that at UCLA there were only two or three teams they played in a typical season that they actually had to prepare for. Everyone else on their schedule they could beat with their base offensive and defensive schemes. In the NFL he said you never have a week off. No matter who you were playing that week if you didn't take them seriously and thoroughly prepare they could beat you. That really says it all.
I would add that when you agree to follow your employers rules those rules can't be illegal and if they are they are they not enforceable within the legal framework of the United States. Now if you work for the Mafia that is a different story.
The law does not say schools have to pay players a salary. It says schools can't prevent athletes from going over to Dick's and signing jersey's for $5 a pop and getting to pocket the money themselves.
I could be wrong, but I believe the law states schools cannot prevent athletes a from profiting from their name and/or image and that schools can not revoke their scholarship for doing so. NCAA rules are not laws and the NCAA can not ignore state laws. If California is the only state to enact this then the NCAA could ban California schools from membership, but they can't make the players involved ineligible. That would be illegal and not enforceable within California or any state with similar laws.
The problem is that billions of dollars began flowing into college sports with everyone from the Universities to the guy charging people to park in his front yard on game day getting a piece. All the while the NCAA pretended it was amateur athletics with regard to the players but not for anyone else. There needs to be a solution and I don't know what that is, but it can't be the status quo.
But that is little different than if those linemen end up playing in the NFL and are blocking for a QB making five times what they are paid who is also getting endorsement they are not sharing in. In they end all these guys are playing for their scholarships and their roster spots. Now will it be good for college football? Probably not, but so what. Allowing an abuse to persist simply because those perpetrating that abuse benefit from it is not justification. The NCAA needs to address they fact that member schools have been abusing some very basic rights in a way that would never be tolerated in any other area of the economy. There is no better example of how ridiculous the whole situation has become than when Chris Spielman had to sue OSU to stop them from selling jersey's with his name on them decades after he played for the Buckeye's. If schools want their athletes to be amateurs then they should behave as if they are running amateur sports programs and not professional leagues. Otherwise they should accept that whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
It is the Universities selling jersey's, posters and bobbleheads with players names and images on them without compensating those players and at the same time telling kids they are prohibited from doing something comparable on their own, like getting paid for signing autographs at a sporting goods store, or risk being banned that is the root of this legislation. And yes a local car dealership giving a player money to put his name/image in their in their advertising is a good example of what the NCAA would be unable to prevent in California and possibly more states to come.
I don't think White is over rated, I just think there is one heck of as lot of talent out there competing for playing time. While I am not making any predictions I would not be surprised if White doesn't end up as a safety on an NFL roster eventually.
The NCAA brought this on themselves. If schools had been barred from using college athletes' names and images for profit then rules barring the players themselves from doing so would most likely never have been an issue. But the NCAA for years has treated college football and basketball like professional sports for the benefit of member schools while holding the athletes to highly restrictive amateur rules which until recently they attempted to extent even beyond the athletes college playing career. I expect California will not be the last state to pass this type of legislation unless the NCAA moves to address the issue with rules changes.
Archie had the advantage of playing four seasons, staying healthy and winning the starting tailback spot early in his freshman season. However the seasons are longer now than in Archie’s time so while it would take an unlikely set of events his records are at least potentially reachable. Archie probably played around 42 college games. The right guy on the right team could start 45 games in three seasons today. I think his records will stand for a while.
Have to start wondering if NPF is a five star either. Not sure what is keeping this kid off the field, but I don’t think it is a bunch future NFL starters playing ahead of him. I guess time will tell.
I suspect there will be some who will question his level of competition. However level of competition only impacts experience and while that might determine how long it takes for some guys to adjust to upper level Division I play it doesn't determine attributes such as size, athletic ability, intelligence or attitude which in the end will define his football career. He appears to be a great prospect and I look forward to seeing him in Columbus.
Not sure why any short coming by any player is always blamed on coaching. Why isn't it simply that he isn't talented enough to overcome the very high level of competition that exists for playing time on a roster like the one at OSU. If so many of OSU's recruits are the victims of poor coaching than do all of those who make it to the NFL, often as high draft picks, succeed in spite of poor coaching? Are recruits foolishly coming to Columbus only to be subjected to poor coaching that will place roadblocks in their path to success?
Personally I believe that coaching has very little to do with the success or failure of any player in a program like OSU and talent is 90% of the determining factor. That is not to say that some very talented players don't end up never contributing to the program only that in many cases they are sidelined by teammates who have even more talent and not that they fall victim to poor coaching. Joe Burrow would most likely have spent his entire career at OSU on the bench and in so doing would likely had no chance to play professionally. Had that happened I don't think it would have been due to poor coaching but rather lack of playing time. Very few players make to the NFL sitting on the bench in any program.
The game went into overtime. You don’t play your backups when your fighting for your life.
It is excellent for a college quarterback, but Fields has aspirations of playing in the NFL. I have no doubt he recognizes that putting up impressive stats against FAU, UC and IU is not the same as doing it in the NFL. I see his comments as an acknowledgement on his part that more than a few of his incompletions were his fault rather than poor play on the part of his receivers or great play by the defense. With that approach his ceiling will by as high as his talent will allow.
Chris Gamble comes to mind as well. IIRC he was a 2 star recruit.
Really liked what I saw from Fields today. They highlights may not have been as flashy as last week but last week his receivers beat the defense. Today he made more plays where he beat the defense.
Well for one thing I had the impression that after the initial scoring flurry Fields started holding the ball longer and in some cases pulled it down and scrambled, usually without much success. If the QB becomes tentative the pressure on the OL goes up significantly. Fields did a great job of finishing plays in which his receivers had clearly beaten their coverage. Now I want to see him make plays where he beats the coverage with his accuracy, velocity and timing. OL play looks so much better when the ball gets out quick.
Was he ever actually on the OSU football roster? I thought he played rugby or some thing other than football in college. Maybe he was on the football roster but impressed people with his rugby play.
I will never understand this line of thought. Day wasn’t playing. How does “Day taking his foot off the gas” explain the offensive players on the field basically being unable to effectively execute plays for the last three quarters of the game. Play calling and executing plays are two different things.
Well Fields may be a better runner than Haskins and a better passer than JT, but he did didn’t look as good overall as either one today, at least not after FAU got past the shock and awe of playing in front of 100,000 and their coaches made some adjustments. He did show that with no pressure and a wide open target he could make a highlight play. What he needs to show is he can consistently hit receivers who aren’t wide open throwing from a collapsing pocket.
However, he was starting his first college game ever today and he is very likely going to get better with each game. I seem to recall watching Lawrence in a couple of his early starts last year and he struggled as well.
Heard rumors during last season that the coaching staff was concerned that Price was not going to be as good at center as they had hoped. Not all that detail, but that there was concern. Not surprised at MJ starting well. Any offensive lineman who can win a starting spot at a college program with talent like OSU has is the real deal.
When different coaches come to same conclusion with regard to who the starting linebackers should be maybe it’s time for people to accept that those guys are in fact the best players on the team at the present time.
Great HS players often fail to become great college players just as great college players often fail to become great (or even passable) NFL players. At each level of competition the need to supplement athleticism with technique, awareness and knowledge becomes increasingly important for success. Fans always assume that every athletically gifted HS recruit will be equality capable of making that mental transition to faster and more competitive college ball. That is simply not true and the evidence supporting that fact is overwhelming.
I would not for a second claim that coaches never get it wrong or that some players don’t show their ability under fire better than in practice, but I have never understood the pervasive belief of some fans that many of the teams best players never see the field due to coaching bias or incompetence.
Am I remembering incorrectly or wasn't this kid the top rated dual threat QB in the country his senior year in HS? If so are we looking at one of the top ranked QB prospects in recent years facing the possibility of, in the absence of major injury, playing his college career without managing to win a starting job? Don't tell me ratings of HS players aren't a crap shoot. Talent is as talent does or as they used to say the proof is in the pudding.