"The product of a system is really stupid." --Mike Leach
by Seth C on Oct 8, 2008 6:49 AM CDT
in Texas Tech Football
Email
PrintThis is good times this morning. In KAMC's Open Mike Night feature from Monday, there was the following quote from our captain:
"The product of a system is really stupid. To say somebody is a product of a system is like saying, alright, they don't need their coaches, cause they can just go out and just run whatever. Who do you think decides for a guy to throw it, or how do they decide who to throw it to, or how do they decide whether or not they're going to hand it off? I mean the product of a system suggests that you don't need coaches and just for a job security thing, if nothing else, I think you do need coaches, so I'm going to continue to coach, call plays and run drills. But all of these people that aren't a products of a system don't need to practice, they don't need to worry about that, they don't need to worry about watching film, and they don't need to worry about what they're coaches say, because if there's no system if they're not doing things in a specified choreographed way, then why do they need to aggravate themselves with all that, they just need to show up for games and go do it." --Mike Leach
I don't know what to say after that.
Yes, I did spend 15 minutes transcribing this morning, but the video and the transcript are priceless.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
System
Beergut had a good explanation of the issues surrounding the “system” argument in a post over on Corn Nation (sorry, don’t have time to find the link right now).
Now that I’ve seen Jacob Karam play, my thinking has changed somewhat on the system argument. Is it possible that Mike Leach is a superb evaluator of quarterback talent, and he always gets the guy he wants? Karam is prolific, and he’s exactly the type of player who will be a good quarterback at Tech. Chase Daniel is a great QB at Mizzou, but he’d be average in K-State or Colorado’s system (and not just because of the talent gap). Ell Roberson was a phenomenal QB at K-State, but he wouldn’t have seen the field at Tech (or he would have been converted to wide receiver).
What it all comes down to is this. Yes, Mike Leach has a system. So does every other coach in America. And just like every other coach in America, Leach faces a defense and its coaches who are hell-bent on stopping him every week. And yet, he and his quarterback still enjoy impressive success year in and year out. Most other schools have some up years and down years, or at least some variation in production. Tech has been shockingly consistent in its offensive output. Could this not be a result of Leach’s prowess in recruiting the guys who fit his system? I wonder.
We'll carry the banner high!
I'm confused
Either I am totally missing Leach’s point or he is reading more into “product of the system” than the girl who stalked me my sophmore year read into “we should just be friends.”
Certainly a QB who throws 50 times a game is going to rack up more passing yards than one that throws 35. Is that the system? Yes. Can every QB in the nation handle throwing 50 passes a game and develop the ability to make the reads to do so effectively? No.
Every QB is a “product of the system.” Tim Tebow won the Heisman because of Urban Myer’s spread system at Florida. Vince Young was a product of the zone read at Texas. TB makes an excellent point that coaches recruit players who fit the scheme they are running. If they don’t, they end up like Franchioni at A&M.
While how a player performs in college will certainly garner attention, pro scouts look at how players perform in the combines and camps. They are looking for a very elite set of physical attributes and skills that most past Tech players (not just QBs) have not possessed (there are some exceptions, but you get the point). Players that fit the mold get drafted. The rest show up at camps and work their butts off and try to make the team. Some of them (Welker) make it. Most others don’t.
You don’t have to be able to throw the ball 70 yards on a rope, bench press 225 lbs 50 times and run a 4.4 40 to be a successful college QB. And if you can it doesn’t mean that you will be a successful college QB But you’ll probably get a contract.
after reading the quote again and watching the clip a couple of times, I think he meant to say, “To say somebody is NOT a product of a system…” That would make the whole rant make more sense. And I agree. Though he is still pretty close to the same level of crazy as when I told that same girl that just being friends was a euphemism.
Leach is pretty touchy when it comes to this subject (among several). Really, both sides are right.
I think the criticism our players receive (namely WRs and QBs) is that the numbers are so huge not because of outstanding ability or skill, but because the ‘system’ is designed for them to get huge numbers. If you throw it enough, the skill players will have video game stats, which is only okay if you’re winning. Which we are.
Sure, there is skill and ability involved in the defensive reads and you still have to throw it and catch it in order to get the numbers. Would Harrell be a possible Heisman candidate somewhere else? Who knows and who cares? He’s here and I’m happy about that.
But there’s also a very good reason most of our huge-stat QBs and WRs are never heard from again once they leave Tech. They aren’t overly gifted or talented (I think Crabtree will be the exception in the talent/gift category). The system allowed them to be successful and utilize whatever skills they DID have while in college. That’s fine by me, since I am only worried about NFL success for players as a tertiary benefit to Tech.
The fact is that at QB and WR, our offensive system does appear to be plug-and-play. Every single guy who’s played QB at Tech since 1999 has had ridiculous stats every year. Since none of them had any success at all in the NFL, the thinking is likely that the system made the numbers – not the player. It’s a fair argument and to an outsider who doesn’t follow the team on a regular basis it makes perfectly logical sense. Shoot, I follow Tech like the rest of you and the system label seems pretty fitting to me. The same can be said for the procession of hugely successful college QBs at Hawaii under June Jones. Or the WRs who light up the night at the Univ of Florida, only to flame out once they leave.
I fully expect the next few Tech QBs to put up massive numbers as well. Why? It’s our system. (Sorry, Leach, but it is.)
That perception doesn’t bother me in the least because the system works and we’ve had an unprecedented run of success the last 8 seasons using this system.
- For some reason, this same logic never applies to RBs from run-only schools (though there aren’t many of those left).
Actually, what I thought
Leach meant was that every player and team are a product of a system, but some systems take advantage of a teams’ size, speed, strength, etc. Texas Tech takes advantage of space.
Go Raiders . . .
Perfect explanation
I have heard Leach rant on this before and this recent rant puts it best.
These media pundits that want to claim ‘product of systems’ need to really analye what they are saying when tey claim this.
Tim f*ckin Tebow ran an offense with a great passing game and mediocre run game. He would assume the role of RB whenever them team got within 5 yards of the goal line. He accumulated a ridiculous amounts of stats because of this and he is not a product of a system? Is it because he plays for a media darling school in ESPN’s favorite conference?
Before I make this statement I must preface that Texas Tech football is by far my #1 favorite team, pro or college, and that I am a proud alum and season ticket holder, but Texas Tech will never win a Heisman with Tech running Leachs offense. It is sad to say that Andre Ware has scrwed over Tech. The fact of the matter he translated to very little after-college success has scared the crap out of Heisman voters. The fact that this trend has continued in the likes of Eric Crouch, Jason White, and (dare I say) Troy Smith, thee has been more pressure to make the Heisman an award that echoes about a person’s football ability. So if there is any sort of novelty-type feel to a player’s offense of if they are not on a historically dominant team, their chances to win are reduced exponentially. Previous examples: Chase Daniel in 07, Larry Fitzgerald in 03 (?), Vince Young in 05, and Darren McFadden in 06.
How this ties back is that the Heisman voters feel like they got burned with a guy that played in both a trendy team and a novelty offense. Unfortunantely, Tech falls into both of those categories.
Sory Tech fans but the Heisman will not come to Tech until a) Tech wins the Big 12, b) we run a more balanced offense and c) Tech actually recieves the coverage of a national darling (i.e. USC, LSU, OU, Texas, etc.)
The funniest thing to me is that the media has accepted and expoilted the fact that the spread offense is the future of college footbal (remember the coverage in SI) and yet the person that runs this offense the best gets no love?
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
