Coach em Up Myth

Submitted by Ziff72 on

As I was scrolling thru the chat I noticed Brian say something that I think most people like to believe, but I think rarely comes true.  They were comparing Beaver to Forcier and they keep talking about Forcier at this ceiling because he is already coached up, but Beaver has the arm and if you give him some time and coach him up he will be great.  This is more true from college to pro, but in my experience this never works.  Arm strength and athleticism are hugely overrated.  Accuracy and decision making make a QB.  Examples of QB's that need some time to be coached up that turned into anything.  When I say that I mean as a passer.  Obviously V. Young was a great college QB, but that was his feet.  Look at P. White and his "dramatic improvement" this year.  Once they got in the shit storm he started running...why...because he blows as a passer.  Guys obviously improve as they mature, but more often than not your strengths remian your strengths.  Bill Parcells was famous for saying "we are what we are".  So I guess in closing I just want to say that don't expect Beaver to come in here study some film and work on his mechanics and he is gonna look like J. Elway and Forcier is gonna be stuck looking like J. Garcia.  Forcier will always be the better passer, wether he will be the better QB for Rich we'll have to wait and see.  Will he be Steve Young or

If anyone has an example of a QB that got coached up and really changed his game from being inaccurate to a stud I would be curious.

Vick-garbage

V. Young-being revealed as garbage

Akili Smith-garbage

Stanton-this is a good test case, he's not horrible with accuracy but he's not good they tried to break down his mechanics.  I see him being wht he is a guy that can make stuff happen and then throw a 10yd slant 5yds behind and inthe turf.

 These guys had access to all the coaching in the world and they still couldn't hit a barn or read a coverage.  Every once in a while you get the total package in Mcnabb, Steve Young or Elway but it's rare. 

 

MGoBoard

ShockFX

September 12th, 2008 at 10:37 AM ^

"Forcier will always be the better passer"

 

If you're actually prescient, can I have the winning lotto numbers for tomorrow?

Joined: 07/16/2008

MGoPoints: 4073

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 10:47 AM ^

It has little to do with your argument, but lummping Drew Stanton in with Vick, Young, and Akili Smith - three heisman finalists - is HIlarious.

And regardless - your argument is that guys like Steve Young, McNabb, and Elway are exceptions - but you name just as many "exceptions" to your rule as you do QB's that support your argument.

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

Eric

September 12th, 2008 at 10:59 AM ^

You're nuts if you think that coaching at the collegiate level can't change the way a kid plays. Beaver and Forcier will both evolve as players largely because of the coaching staff at Michigan. Also, accuracy doesn't mean shit if you let the ball float in the air too long. A precision pass that is lofted will get knocked down and picked almost every time. If athleticism is way overrated then we could use a 300 lb lineman with an accurate arm and good decision making ability to play QB, right? Athleticism is everything at skilled positions. You also said "In my experience, this never works" then you proceed to give 3 examples of when it actually did work... What is your experience?

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 2632

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 11:09 AM ^

You guys can make fun of me, but I'm still waiting on an example.  Troy Smith isn't a bad example but he lit up Michigan in his Sophmore year with his arm and feet, he improved as most players do, but he didn't transform from Stanley Jackson into Joe Germaine.  I'm just trying to say that Beaver's throwing motion and pocket presence looked pretty poor and people are hanging onto hope that we'll coach him up and he'll be completing 65% of his passes.  It doesn'thappen.  My eamples of Elway and etc.  were to show that in college theywere accurate as well as athletic not athletic then they got coached up in the NFL and became hall of famers.  Please see P. White this week he will run about 25 times as they get back to their bread and butter.  The reason Richdidn't let him pass Stewart you dumb fuck is because he sucks at it unless there are 10 guys in the box.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

baorao

September 12th, 2008 at 11:48 AM ^

too look beyond what Troy Smith did in games against Michigan to see the greater transformation. But even if you don't you can easily see he completed 56% of his passes his sophomore year while running for 145 yds against us, compared with completing 70% of his passes and rushing for just 12 yards in his senior season.

I would say both of those stats directly contradict your assertion that pocket presence won't improve.

Joined: 08/08/2008

MGoPoints: 1075

dex

September 12th, 2008 at 11:11 AM ^

Could this "lack" of improvement really be due to a tremendous lack of data on the part of the observer?

Could it be you never saw Akili Smith in HS and have no idea how much better he got in college?

Could it be that John Navarre and Chad Henne both got much better at UM and were ignored?

Could it be that Tom Brady is a far better professional QB than he was a college QB?

Could it be that you simply don't know what to look for in terms of improvement, as in the difference between average, good, and great may not be readily noticeable to a person who isn't a QB coach?

Could it be that there are over 200 guys playing QB in D1 college football, and you have no idea if even 1/8th of them improved over their time?

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1934

Magnus

September 12th, 2008 at 11:30 AM ^

I was about to make this point, but dex obviously beat me to it.  If you watch high school games of elite quarterbacks, they're often better overall athletes than the players around them.  You probably could have plugged Steven Threet in at running back or receiver in high school and he would have been All League.  Ryan Mallett had something like 7 rushing TD's as a senior.

A lot of these "run first" quarterbacks become legitimate dual threat quarterbacks in college.

If you need another example of a guy who improved, try Dennis Dixon.  He's on an NFL roster (Steelers), and it's certainly not based on his performance in his first couple years of college.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 166007

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 11:18 AM ^

Also, to argue that Vince Young's game didn't radically change and improve from his Freshman year to his Junior year is to stick your head in the sand.

Freshman: 54.9% completion percentage, 13.75 yard per completion. 0.85:1 TD:INT ration.

Sophomore: 59.2%, 12.5 yards per. 1.09:1 TD:INT ratio.

Junior: 65.2%, 14.3 yards per, 2.6 TD:INT ratio.

You're right, though. No coaching did that.

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 11:23 AM ^

From Freshman to Junior year, he threw 182 more passes, completed 10% more, and had each completion go for more yards (I include the yards per completion to show that his competion percentage didn't climb just by throwing simpler, shorter routes). And his TD:INT ratio tripled. Further, his INT per pass attempt (how often he got picked) went:

Freshman: 5% of passes were intercepted.

Sophomore: 4.4% of passes were picked.

Junior: 3.1% of passes were intercepted.

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 11:29 AM ^

To pick someone else (it's hard, because in order to show someone "grow" from freshman to senior, they had to play as a Freshman), Jay Cutler:

Freshman: 48.6%, 1.1:1 TD:INT

Senior: 59.1%, 2.3:1 TD:INT

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 11:40 AM ^

I never said that a person could not improve, I never said Vince Young was not good.  I am saying that when they talk about "raw" talents and try to plug them into QB I have not found that they become great passers. Most players improve and depending on their work ethic and coaching some make great strides.  V. Young improved and M. Brown's staff learned how to use him, but is he a good passer???  No.  Tell me if you could drop him into Mich's offense and he was not allowed to scramble how he would do if he had to sit in the pocket and read D's.  Henne's performance the last few years would blow him out the water. Slow guys don't get fast they get faster, horrible passers don't become super accurate they become more accurate.   Beaver looks very athletic can he come in here and be an improved version of Pat White hopefully, will he be D. Mcnabb??  maybe but if he looks terrible from the outset probably not.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 11:45 AM ^

I feel a little like Rome in that the lcones have taken me off topic.  In case my original point was not clear.  I know nothing of Forcier and Beaver's talents other than video and I'm not a QB coach, but based onthe experts they say Forcier is the better passer but Beaver is raw because he got less coaching and when he gets that coaching he will zoom past the more polished guy.  I don't see that happen very much in college.  Hello DJ Shockley

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

dex

September 12th, 2008 at 12:54 PM ^

Don't flatter yourself. Rome, while terrible, is far better than you.

Reading comprehension? People read your article, noticed blatant inconsistencies in it, and pointed them out.

From what I can tell you are arguing that people can improve, but not all of them do, so therefore coaching makes no difference. You use Young as a specific example. Someone points out Young improved, but that isn't a good enough answer. I laid out multiple issues I had with your statement, and you didn't answer a single. fucking. one. of them. 

Nobody is saying Beaver is going to be better than Forcier, guaranteed. But if you have Forcier, who is maybe already at his ceiling, and Beaver, who has a lot of room to improve, there is a chance coaching might make him pass Forcier. It's not guaranteed, but to dismiss the notion that coaches can make a player better is fucking absurd. 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1934

Eric

September 12th, 2008 at 2:12 PM ^

So let me get this straight...You believe the experts when they say that Forcier is a better passer, but not when they say that Beaver will pass him up after he gets proper coaching? Also, what was so bad about Beavers passing last night? On the one pass over the middle, if that receiver doesn't break stride and come to a complete stop and turn around to jump and catch the ball, it's a touchdown. That was a great ball. He threw 2 INT's. One that was a great play by the defensive guy and the other was a 4th down hail mary. How about the TD pass while he was falling. He made that play look easy, trust me, it wasn't...I thought he played pretty well, maybe I'm just an optimist...

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 2632

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 2:48 PM ^

I was actually amazed at his accuarcy given that throwing motiom.  He obviously can run like a deer.  I just fail to get enamored with the measureables on qb's.  We'll see how Mallett turns out but he appears to be a knucklehead with a rocket for an arm with questionable accuary.  I'll take the smart guys with the accuarcy Brady vs Henson as an example.  Obviously with the spread we need a little bit of wheels, but I still think accuarcy is the key and it will be difficult for Beaver to pass Forcier if we strictly believe the pundits.

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

ShockFX

September 12th, 2008 at 3:39 PM ^

"I'll take the smart guys with the accuarcy Brady vs Henson as an example. "

 

You do realize that Henson had quite possibly the best season a QB has ever had at Michigan right?  Then he went to play baseball for 5 years for $17M?

Joined: 07/16/2008

MGoPoints: 4073

UofM Snowboarder

September 16th, 2008 at 12:27 AM ^

Not having a private coach, Beaver's mechanics are poorer than Forcier's. With coaching, Beaver could improve in all aspects of play, including mechanics, leading to crisper more accurate throws. Forcier will probably be ready sooner than Beaver, but if Beaver can reach his full potential (hell, they might not reach of tenth of it, see Courtney Sims) the SPECULATION is that he'd have a higher ceiling. I don't know about that, mainly because I'm not a QB expert, nor are many of us. Secondly, because I have seen little of Beaver and less of Forcier.

I'm waiting until the Spring Game to see who to get more excited for. 

Joined: 08/22/2008

MGoPoints: 957

Jay

September 12th, 2008 at 11:45 AM ^

I'd like to see Dennis Dixon's numbers from freshman to senior year, too. I might be mistaken, but, I believe he improved dramatically as well. For the 5 minutes that I actually watched Shavodrick Beaver last night, I noticed that, when he was pressured, he kept his eyes locked down field looking for an open receiver. That's a pretty good sign that he can develop as a passer if you ask me. 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 578

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 12:58 PM ^

So, when Young complete 53% of his passes, he wasn't "raw". To argue that he didn't become a better passer is moronic. It's in the numbers.

When Cutler, as an 18 year-old, completed 49% of his paaes, you would argue...what? That he had more "inherent passing goodness", not that he was "coached up"? How do you explain their development, or the development of virtually every QB?

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 1:20 PM ^

PLAYERS IMPROVE DUE TO COACHING AND WORK ETHIC(COACHING DOES MATTER, NEVER SAID IT DIDN'T) THE DANGER I THINK A LOT OF FANS HAVE IS THAT A POOR PASSER WILL BECOME A GREAT PLAYER.  PEOPLE THINK FORCIER HAS A CEILING BECAUSE HE HAS ALREADY BEEN COACHED I WILL TELL YOU I DON'T NOTICE MANY GUYS THAT ARE POOR PASSERS BECOMING "ELITE" PASSERS.  ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS??  ANSWER MINE!  YOU TAKE YOUNG BEHIND CENTER OVER HENNE MINUS SCRAMBLING??  D .DIXON IMPROVED YES HE WAS GREAT LAST YEAR BUT HE WAS STILL A RUNNER OR DID I MISS THE NFL TEAMS LINING UP FOR HIS SERVICES. BEAVER MAY BE A GREAT QB AND HE MAY BE SO GOOD A RUNNER, BUT IF YOU GUYS ARE WAITING FOR HIM TO BE COACHED UP AND A BETTER PASSER THAN FORCIER I THINK IT IS INCORRECT.  DO I KNOW EVERY INSTANCE?? NO... THAT IS WHY I ASKED, BUT APPARENTLY EVERYONE ELSE IS AN EXPERT AND KNOWS FOR SURE THAT BEAVER WILL BE THE NEXT TROY SMITH BECASUE WE'LL COACH HIM UP.  JUST LIKE MIKE MCMAHON FOR THE LIONS HE HAD 3 YEARS TO PAN OUT THOSE MECHANICS....STILL COULDN'T COMPLETE PASSES CONSISTENTLY.  OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN BE A GREAT COLLEGE QB WITHOUT BEING A GREAT PASSER.  I JUST FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THERE ARE ZERO QB'S THAT WERE ATHLETES IN COLLEGE THAT BECAME WINNERS INTHE PROS.  MCNABB HAS BEEN THE MOST SUCCESSFUL BUT HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GOOD PASSER.  SO BASED ON EVERYONES REPONSE I WILL LOOK FOR J FEAGIN TO START THE NEXT 4 YEARS SINCE HE WILL GET COACHED UP ON HIS MECHANICS A YEAR AHEAD OF BEAVER.   

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

Magnus

September 12th, 2008 at 1:32 PM ^

Ziff, you're ignoring the most important part of the argument against you:

How do YOU know that a running quarterback has not improved dramatically from high school to college to the pros?  Have you followed every single quarterback's transcendence from their teen years to their professional careers?  Who are you, Tom Lemming?

You said, "In my experience, [coaching them up] never works."

"Never" is a very strong word.  It was probably a mistake to use it.  If you would admit that, you would seem a little more credible.

By the way, Feagin was a 3-star ATHLETE.  Beaver is a 4-star QUARTERBACK.  There's a huge difference.  I've never heard anyone say that Feagin would be our savior at quarterback, so even using that example sarcastically is a huge stretch.  Many of us thought he'd be given a shot at QB but he'd probably end up at wide receiver or safety.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 166007

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 1:33 PM ^

I WILL CAPITALIZE BOLD UNDERLINE NOT USE PUNCTUATION AND ITALICIZE TO OUT EMPHASIZE YOU

No I won't.

No one is saying Beaver will be awesome. A direct quote from Dex: "Nobody is saying Beaver is going to be better than Forcier, guaranteed."

And you point "I WILL TELL YOU I DON'T NOTICE MANY GUYS THAT ARE POOR PASSERS BECOMING "ELITE" PASSERS", is, again contradicted by the fact that, Jay Cutler, as a freshman, was a poor passer. Vince Young, as a freshman was a poor passer, and, statistically, a very effective passer as a senior.

 

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

Ziff72

September 12th, 2008 at 2:08 PM ^

My 1st sentence inmy original post was "rarely" not never I apologize if I used that word in subsequent posts as that is obviously incorrect.  I never claimed to know for sure I was posting a discussion post a little out of the box to see what other people thought as in my experience when you listen to the preseason or recruiting or predraft fluff whenever someones accuracy or mechanics come into question they usually disappoint.  I can't seem to get this point across, but I will try once again.  Vince Young improved as a passer.  He is not an "accurate passer" this is more of an eye test and not an indication of his completion % which is inflated due to the threat of his legs.  The case I was inquiring about and not trying to make is and it is alittle more difficult as we  have the College to NFL jump which is pretty clear and the HS to College which is less clear.  A clear example of my debate was the P. Manning vs R. Leaf debate coming out of college.  Leaf(bigger arm leass accurate more upside) Manning(accurate avg arm coached up already maxed potential)  QB's are not lineman who need room to grow or lb's or who need to get stronger.  Accuaracy is king with a QB and if you have it you have it no need to look further.  As with the debate with Newsome over Forcier it comes down to what you want.  All I ask is watch these guys as they evolve and see how it plays out.  Beaver completed some nice passes yesterday and looked fine.  He may be a better passer with just an unorthodox delivery(Phillip Rivers has been successful with a horrible motion, but he has always been accurate) Don't know.  Just next time you see that leading into the draft or on the recruiting board see how it turns out.  Personally I would like to see a more balanced O with more passing as it is harder to stop than the pure runner like Pat White.  Newsome appeared to be the super stud athlete who may or not be able to pass.  I think the ideal would be more the Junior version of Troy Smith who had some designed runs, some scrambles but also a diverse passing game not just streaks and bubble screens.   According to the recruit dicks it appears to be Forcier, Rod may not want  and want the superior runner that may be Beaver. 

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 9823

baleedat

September 12th, 2008 at 3:01 PM ^

theory as to why everyone gets so angry and nasty over one guy's opinion: it's because you're all a bunch of nerds, picked-on your whole life, and you've never once been able to tell someone off in person.  i bet if we were all sitting at a bar and Ziff said what he posted above none of you would actually say to his face the things you've posted. am i right?

Joined: 07/10/2008

MGoPoints: 272

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 3:03 PM ^

I am 100% positive that I'd disagree with him to his face. Seeing as I didn't attack him personally (something you seem to continually do, Baleedat), didn't call him stupid, or anything - just disagreed, I'm roughly 100% positive I'd say what I wrote to his face.

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

baleedat

September 12th, 2008 at 3:26 PM ^

when have i ever "attacked" anyone personally, or intellectually for that matter? if you're referring to the "you're all a bunch of nerds" comment, it was just a theory. i like reading all the posts, even the angry, nasty ones. i just think you're all a bunch of internet tough guys, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Joined: 07/10/2008

MGoPoints: 272

Eric

September 12th, 2008 at 3:40 PM ^

The things that I said to Ziff were not meant to be insulting. I would say them to my close friends. Ziff I apologize if I came off that way. I just don't agree with his assumption. As far as your theory, Baleedat. You can't physically kick someones ass over the internet so if you do it intellectually then yes I guess we're all "internet tough guys". I don't call people who want to fight because someone disagrees with them a "tough guy". I call them morons... Besides, being located within 60 miles of eeeee Barwis makes you invincible....

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 2632

dex

September 12th, 2008 at 3:50 PM ^

Internet Tough Guys run around telling people on the Net how hard they would kick their ass. I've never said that. While I'm sure I could take some people here, there's plenty that would bodyslam me through a table and leave me crying like Brady Quinn after Shawn Crable hits him.

As for disagreeing - well, we have different opinions there. This is supposed to be a place for discussion. I don't see the problem in pointing out the flaws I see in this guys post. 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1934

chitownblue (not verified)

September 12th, 2008 at 4:06 PM ^

baleedat:

"when have i ever "attacked" anyone personally"?

"you're all a bunch of nerds, picked-on your whole life, and you've never once been able to tell someone off in person."

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0

ShockFX

September 12th, 2008 at 4:28 PM ^

"you're all a bunch of nerds, picked-on your whole life, and you've never once been able to tell someone off in person."

 

Clearly a person that has never met any of us.

Joined: 07/16/2008

MGoPoints: 4073

Other Chris

September 12th, 2008 at 4:32 PM ^

And they didn't seem very nerdy to me.

What people don't understand is that spewing opinions without facts to back them up might be effective in personality-driven, ideologically-based media (think Rush Limbaugh), not everyone goes for that.  Just because we are all M fans doesn't mean we'll all agree, and if you can't give us any reason to agree, some of us will quibble. 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1219

Eric

September 12th, 2008 at 4:42 PM ^

I've been called a lot of things, but a nerd is not one of them...I have been called a gentle giant though, because I fit the mold of a guy who would be in a bar talking shit to everyone because he's bigger than most and, in reality, I want no part of it..I just like to talk football with my fellow Wolverine fans, and sometimes we don't agree.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 2632

Nate-Dawg

September 12th, 2008 at 5:39 PM ^

FYI--I laughed throughout this whole thread. I did. Dex adn ChiTown and ShockFx's responses are awesome. Dex and Chitown and ShockFX---can I join the revolution? I promise I won't personally internet-attack you.

Joined: 07/01/2008

MGoPoints: 73

chitownblue (not verified)

September 16th, 2008 at 8:43 AM ^

I am 95% pure that by next spring game, Forcier will be the better QB. I am 50% sure that he will be by the time they are seniors.

 

Regardless, if Threet continues his improvement (which has been significant in three games) I don't think we can readily dismiss the possibility of Threet playing next year.

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 0