OT: Chan Gailey down on Devin Smith (indirectly takes shot at OSU)
http://nypost.com/2015/10/30/why-chan-gailey-is-lukewarm-on-jets-wr-dev…
I'm always surprised at how little current coaches complain about this. It's got to be frustrating for them to be teaching things they should have spent the last four years learning.
“He’s struggled integrating into the whole system,” Gailey said. “He did certain things in college that were in their system, and getting involved in the whole system [with the Jets] — it’s been a longer process than any of us thought it would be.
“He’s just got a lot to learn and a lot to work on to this point,” Gailey added. “He’s got talent. We obviously all see that. If he’ll just keep working, things will happen good for him in the future. But he’s just got to keep working.”
Two other problems for Smith are that Ohio State’s system didn’t call for him to learn defenses or concern himself with the entire offense, in stark contrast to the Jets.
“He’s got a lot of work to do about reading coverages and reading [the details] of man coverage,” Gailey said. “All those things are important, and he’s just never had to do that.”
October 30th, 2015 at 10:28 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
They simplify things for their receivers, limit their routes, limit their reads, and just try to play fast. Works great in college football, but in the NFL where all the athletes are better and defenses more complex, it's a ton to learn for many of the guys coming from those offenses.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:25 PM ^
Sounds like a good thing to point out (though I usually hate negative recruiting, it does make sense to tell a kid he has a better shot at the NFL in a non-spread offense, and you don't have to name names)
"Oh yeah, sure, go to a championship contender that runs the spread. But you'll play a simplified offense and flame out in the NFL. Hey, you can pawn that championship ring though? What's more important: being on a championship-caliber team that prepares you for the NFL or a team that has won championships recently that will make your job harder to impress NFL coaches?"
October 30th, 2015 at 2:17 PM ^
it's just the reality of which coaches (Harbaugh) best prepare you for the next level. But as an employer, head coaches and management staff appreciate that. They'll know that someone like an Amara Darboh or Jehu Chesson will have been taught these things as opposed to the hot shot Oregon Duck wide receiver. It definitely gives a leg up.
October 30th, 2015 at 2:31 PM ^
No problem: "Come to Michigan, where we're going to prepare you to play in an adaptive, modern NFL style offense, win big games AND get an elite education or go to Ohio State, win some games but flame out on Sundays and have fewer options outside of football.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:45 PM ^
but as a devil's advocate... is the Jet's system just too needlessly complicated? If a system "makes football too easy" and the players don't learn anything, why not just run that easy system?
Is it, as you say, that NFL defenses have higher talent levels than college? Rule differences?
Does Chip Kelly's lack-of-success answer this?
October 31st, 2015 at 12:33 AM ^
A few differences versus college:
-
The NFL is a full time job with immediate competition for roster spots and playing time.
If it takes 80-100 hrs/week including
meetings & home study to learn
the NFL scheme, the player has
the available time and incentive to do it. -
There are far fewer NFL roster spots to fill than college roster spots.
Only the best play in the NFL.
At the NFL level, if the best means
ability to execute complex schemes
in addition to physical talent,
then that's what will give coaches
the best shot to win. The "best"
(physical ability plus playbook competence)
will rise to take the spots. -
The fluidity of NFL rosters is far greater than that of college rosters.
In the NFL, there are 32 practice squads
filled with at least good athletes, and some
will be able to become
(your own) playbook competent quickly.
If you need alternate help,
you can go get it immediately.
In college, by contrast, you're stuck
with the players you have on the roster
for the current year.
October 30th, 2015 at 1:38 PM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:41 AM ^
Yes, it is a common theme - with quarterbacks and wide receivers, especially. I think at the college level, you can still get away with having really talented players trump schemes/knowledge a lot of the time. But that advantage gets more and more diminished the older you get. You have to be smart and athletic in the NFL, which is I think why the Patriots have been able to be so successful, even though they don't always have the most talented OL, WR, etc. NFL offenses and defenses are a lot more complicated.
Sometimes NFL wide receivers will have three routes they can run, based on what the defense is doing. In an offense like Ohio State's, Smith was basically lining up and running a go route or a post route. I think that was always a concern with Smith. He caught a lot of deep balls at Ohio State because he was their deep threat while teams had to respect the run, but he was never really asked to run short routes, intermediate routes, sight adjustments, etc.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
How does Michigan's wide receivers compare? I know we are less athletic as of right now, but as in terms of the offense. Are Michigan's receivers learning more complicated routes, etc?
October 30th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
Michigan is a very pro-style offense. The routes are more complicated, although I'm not sure how often they have sight adjustments built in based on coverages. In fact, it seems like Harbaugh is being pretty vanilla in that aspect, perhaps because Rudock just joined the program in August.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:25 AM ^
It's something my local Chicago radio guys have been on this week and Clayton supported them this week - that the NFL product might not be that good this year and it's likely because of how college teams opperate these days. They were particuarly hard on OL and the problems that they can create for QBs and RBs by not being fully developed or experienced enough in protection schemes.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:31 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 11:36 AM ^
Borges had a very NFL route tree that stems from the same WCO route tree that Harbaugh utilizes. I think Harbaugh's is generally simpler, and the offense is likely a bit more simplified this year than it eventually will be, but yes, Harbaugh's system relies a bit more on route execution than many spread offenses tend to.
For the record, no college offense is going to be an NFL offense. There isn't the time to teach it all or execute it at a high enough level for college teams. The difference is learning the fundamentals and the foundations of what you will eventually have to do in the NFL (someone like Amari Cooper) compared to a section of a foundation of what you'll need to learn.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2015 at 10:30 AM ^
if you look at his routes at OSU, it was basically a game of 500. I doubt he learned what a route tree is, just go deep and I'll get it to you.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:30 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:30 AM ^
But they need to win. So if that means playing a college system where you don't need to understand the nuances of the game, so be it.
But I don't know why the Jets are acting so surprised. OSU does not run a pro-style offense. And Smith seemed like a had a specific role on the offense at OSU. Unless he develops his knowledge of the game, he'll be another Percy Harvin.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:39 AM ^
OSU is going to do what OSU does, it's their system and it's very successful in college. The fact that Jets coaches/scouts are blaiming OSU instead of themselves, their scouting, and their homework, is just as much of an issue.
Players will keep getting drafted high because they put up numbers and are good athletes, and the NFL drafting process is being lazy and just blaiming the college. But it doesn't really hurt OSU unless/until NFL scouts start actively taking these guys lower because they are less prepared and have to invest more time to get a return on the player (typically about the time they become a free agent).
It's bad scouting by the Jets, plain and simple.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
"It's bad scouting by the Jets, plain and simple."
I agree somewhat, but I think it's always tempting to try to "teach an old dog new tricks." Some guys can change systems and be successful. Some guys can't. David Terrell was in a pro-style offense at Michigan, but he obviously didn't do a ton in the NFL outside of a couple plays here or there. Demaryius Thomas was in a triple-option offense and has done just fine in the NFL.
You have to make projections based on athleticism, work ethic, etc. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but that's the case for someone coming out of virtually any system.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:26 AM ^
You have to make projections. Dez Bryant was in a simplified pass offense at Oklahoma St. But both guys really took about 3 years to even be close to completely NFL ready, and both are extremely hard workers.
So yes, you have to make projections, and players can learn and improve, but it's going to be an investment more often than not to teach spread receivers to be NFL receivers, and if it isn't a high-worth-ethic guy, that's on your scouting.
But they shouldn't be upset when they aren't putting up numbers like they expected. The risk/reward of taking these guys should be adjusted more than it currently is. But scouts see numbers and go off that.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:52 AM ^
On Smith's side of the argument though is that he missed training camp time for family reasons and has had broken ribs, a punctured lung, and an ankle injury. Sounds like Urbz is to blame.
October 30th, 2015 at 1:23 PM ^
*blaming
October 30th, 2015 at 10:44 AM ^
It is not the job of college coaches to prepare their players for the NFL, it is to win games for the employer. If Gailey wants to complain about the skills Smith brought to the NFL he should direct his comments to his GM
October 30th, 2015 at 10:32 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^
What rookie doesn't have a lot to absorb?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
#RecruitingFodder
October 30th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:45 AM ^
that we were both excited and cautious when the spread came to AA.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:42 AM ^
but this has been the case forever. It's not the OSU system that didn't teach Devin Smith, it's Devin Smith that didn't want to learn about reading coverages and learning what the entire O does.
I'm sure the OSU coaches would have helped him, had he asked.
October 30th, 2015 at 10:51 AM ^
As a coach...you teach the kids how to play within your offense, and a lot of it is predicated on simplifying things, so you can play faster. If he has too much information, or is busy reading through defenses at the college level (that are set up to p[lay mostly spread teams) then he might not be as successul. On top of that, if he is only running a couple different routes, he has no use to read defenses.
The question arises, does a coach owe it to his school to get the most out of an athlete or does a coach owe it to the athlete to make sure he has the longest career? A college coaches job isn't really based on how successful his guys are in the NFL, only how many wins he has in college right?
October 30th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
Had Smith been asked to do many of the pro-style things people would ask of him, he may not have produced, he may have filtered himself out of being drafted entirely, he may never been in a position to be looked at the way he was out of OSU.
On the flip side, he may have been better prepared to produce once he got to the NFL.
For some, a pro-style system in college will help them get a paycheck from football some day; for others, a different system will help them get a paycheck from football some day.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
It's an interesting thought.
In most college classes, it would be frowned upon to say, "In this class you will learn the skills necessary to pass my class." After all, the point of college is to learn skills to take with you beyond college. So in theory, it doesn't make a lot of sense for coaches to teach players the skills to only succeed in their system.
However, it's a business and everyone has his own system to run. I think it's totally fine that different coaches have different systems. It's a unique situation, and not totally like classes. However, I can see why it would be frustrating for the player and the NFL team if drafted players are not prepared for success at the pro level. It's just a necessary obstacle.
October 30th, 2015 at 1:25 PM ^
In most college classes, it would be frowned upon to say, "In this class you will learn the skills necessary to pass my class." After all, the point of college is to learn skills to take with you beyond college. So in theory, it doesn't make a lot of sense for coaches to teach players the skills to only succeed in their system.
...but college (at least liberal arts) is not trade school or a professional school. It is intended to teach people how to learn, not train them for an occupation.
October 30th, 2015 at 2:18 PM ^
A logical comment, but not often how the world works.
For example, I went to law school. Instead of teaching much of anything about how to be be a lawyer, you read appellate court decisions for the most part and dissect them so you can regurgitate the the legal principles back on the final exam in the form of an analytical essay.
That gave you the privilege of taking the bar exam, where you did pretty much the same thing. There is really very little lawyer training going on in law school except learning how to analyze with learned legal principles while dealing with pressure. Those skills are necessary to actually function as a lawyer. There is an old Estonian proverb "the work will teach you how to do it."
NFLing perhaps might be a lot of the same stuff. Those that can adjust to the speed of the game and the relatively equal level of competition thrive. Those who cannot fall by the wayside.
October 30th, 2015 at 2:43 PM ^
Eh, it gives people practice in learning things. I don't think college is really intended to teach people HOW to learn. There is very little direction on HOW to think, HOW to respond, HOW to solve a problem, etc. College is basically, "Here's a bunch of information, and hopefully you figure out how to synthesize it all before the exam."
October 30th, 2015 at 4:33 PM ^
That definitely was not my experience at Michigan in the College of Engineering - and engineering is a program that is much more intended as on the job training than most university programs.
...and yes, a liberal arts education is specifically designed to teach people how to learn and think.
http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/liberal-arts/
"More than anything, the purpose of a college education is to learn how to think critically and what questions to ask."
http://www.wheaton.edu/Student-Life/My-Wheaton/2013/10/6-Benefits-of-Li…
"1. Liberal education teaches students how to think
2. Liberal education teaches students how to learn"
October 30th, 2015 at 10:44 AM ^
smith saying before the combine that he wanted to show all of the NFL teams that he wasn't just a WR that ran go routes in college... i guess thats not working so well...
October 30th, 2015 at 10:45 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 11:12 AM ^
And the reason this is true is that the athletic margins are much smaller as you climb the competitive scale, whether it be football, or any other sport.
Collegiate athletes can, and often do, dominate their competition through the force of sheer talent, whereas that is much, much tougher to do on any professional level.
Smith was a talented player on a talented team that could often exert its own will on other teams. Professional athletes are facing much more equal competition on a consistent basis, and it many times is the mental side of the game that separates the wheat from the chaffe.
If that was not required for him to excel at OSU, it is now Gailey's job the teach him how to do it. Too easy to blame it on other factors. They either took the wrong guy, or cannot show him how to be the guy they thought he would be.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:52 AM ^
I have actually found WRs and RBs to be the most likely to have an impact in their first year. Last year alone you had OBJ, Mike Evans, Kelvin Benjamin, Allen Robinson, Jordan Matthews, and Jarvis Landry have solid debuts.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:07 PM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 12:13 PM ^
Everyone leaves out Martavis Bryant! And I can't figure out why for the life of me. Even the NFl draft experts were nowhere near as high on him as they should have been, I couldn't believe it.
Had all the measureables of any other 1st or 2nd round wide receiver, only he was overshadowed by Sammy Watkins. Yet was taken in the 4th.
But a lot of people analysts were also saying that the 2014 was a) an exceptionally strong draft in recent years, and b) had a treasure trove of wide receivers who were game-ready.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:32 PM ^
Are you Martavis Bryant's mom or dad?
Bryant had an injury issue in 2014, was inactive for a while, and has only played 2 games this year after being suspended. Maybe he was downgraded in the draft because of off-the-field concerns.
October 30th, 2015 at 12:52 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2015 at 10:46 AM ^
He's not going to outrun anyone in the NFL. Everyone in the secondary is just as fast as him, if not faster. He can't just "out-talent" anyone anymore.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2015 at 10:46 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:47 AM ^
The guy averaged about two catches a game and 25+ yards per catch. I'm sure Chan Gailey and the Jets knew exactly what they were getting when they drafted him. I don't think Gailey's complaining or being overly critical. He's just saying it is what it is.
October 30th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ^
October 30th, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^