Why It's Not the System
by Seth C on Dec 16, 2009 7:00 AM CST
in Texas Tech Football
Email
PrintI'm not sure why this hasn't been written or maybe it has and I just haven't read it: It's not the system.
While eating dinner with my wife last night I realized or figured out or finally put two and two together that it's not the system. I'm guessing that my brain was subconsciously mulling this concept over while I was ignoring the Heisman Ceremony last week. In any event, I thought back to last year's supposed Heisman snub as both Graham Harrell and Michael Crabtree couldn't even get as much as an invite despite having incredible careers that may not have been deserving of a Heisman Trophy, but at the very least a Heisman invite. I've moved passed any resentment that I might have had and the truth of the matter is that it's really the uninformed Heisman voters, some of whom admitted that they didn't even watch some of the Heisman candidates. As a personal aside, this is the same moral dilemma that I have when voting in the BlogPoll, which I started to do at the beginning of the season, but I quickly realized that I wasn't watching enough games to truly be informed. I could watch some scores and see some highlights, but I could never vote with a good conscious if I knew that I had watched one game that weekend, that game being the Red Raiders.
In any event, I started thinking about Harrell and Crabtree's careers and how truly spectacular each of their individual and team accomplishments last year actually were. When the question of whether or not Harrell or Crabtree were even worthy of Heisman consideration last year, there were many that thought that they weren't worthy because they were merely products of the system. I wish I could go back and find those thoughts (I believe there is sufficient interwebs evidence that would point to this general perception) and it's easy to say that Harrell and Crabtree's success was not a matter of their mental or physical talents, but rather some goofy little system that that lovable and quotable Mike Leach scratched out on some notebook paper and told both of them to just go out and play.
If there was ever a year that Texas Tech fans all need to ingrain in your memories, it is the year of 2009, where the Red Raiders did still have offensive success (the second best passing offense in the country and the seventh best offense in the country), but to those that watched the games closely, it just wasn't the same.
About a year and a half ago, I had just finished up reading Malcolm Gladwell's Blink and I was truly inspired. Inspired so much as to write up what I thought was a fantastic post about Blink, and in particular, rapid cognition, i.e. the ability to make correct decisions in a very short period of time and how this related to quarterback play (I apologize for the video no longer working, it's not my fault). For those of you too lazy to click on over (you should, because I spent a lot of time writing that post and I think it's good) there are three main tenants that I took from the book:
- When talking about rapid cognition, experience may be the biggest reason for success, however, like anything else in life, that experience can fail you.
- Sometimes experiences and circumstances can keep you from making what are typically good decisions.
- Sometimes you can succeed more because you know less about your opponent, i.e. knowing too much information can impair understanding.
I could write and talk for hours about how I thought, and still think for the most part, that Gladwell thoughts regarding success of a player is highly dependent upon the repetition and physical ability that any certain player has. In fact, I think if you were to corner Leach prior to the season about his decision regarding Potts, I think he'd tell you that Sheffield, despite being a huge part of the program, that he didn't have the repetitions in the offense in order to be successful. It was no secret that Leach had been grooming Potts for the past three years to be Harrell's eventual successor and despite the fact that Sheffield having somewhat limited repetitions in practices, due to the fact that he was a walk-on, that he was playing better than Potts, which was on full display during the spring game. And this may be something to write about in another post, but Sheffield's ability to essentially take Leach's formula, repetition, repetition, repetition and more repetition (if you haven't read Hal Mumme's practice plan, then you need to do so to realize how true the fact that repetition is important to Leach and the Air Raid offense) and perform at a very high level is something that Leach hasn't experienced thus far in his coaching career. To say that Sheffield was an anomaly is an understatement. If Sheffield is given the reins next year, you might say that Sheffield's ability to recognize defenses without the hundred and hundreds of repetitions would make Sheffield a Leach-offense prodigy (again, this is probably a great off-season post).
This is the delicate balance in those three items listed above and to get back to the original point of this post, it's that 2008 was a culmination of those three factors from Blink coming together for Harrell and Crabtree (I do think it's humorous to look back what I wrote about Harrell in reviewing those Rice highlights, "In the Rice video, Harrell cannot throw off of his back foot. It's a disaster waiting to happen for any quarterback." Sound familiar?). As stated above, despite still being successful in 2009, it wasn't the same.
Perhaps Texas Tech fans are a bit spoiled, especially after what Harrell and Crabtree did in 2008, but maybe more than that I hope that writers, bloggers, and television commentators realize that the "system" is more than the system. Harrell wasn't blessed with a wicked arm or the ability to make every throw, but what he did have and what I think he perfected, was the ability to make very quick decisions and those decisions were right, especially in 2008, at an incredibly high rate. And for those that discount what Crabtree did on an almost every game basis for two years straight is undermining what an absolutely exceptional player and maybe even once in a generation type of player he actually was. Both gentlemen had physical gifts, but it was Harrell's ability to make accurate throws, but even more than that make very quick decisions that made him successful, and as much as Crabtree was a physically dominant receiver, Leach has always maintained that Crabtree's recognition of space on the field was unmatched by any player he's ever coached.
Texas Tech fans can sometimes get caught in their own webs of whether to credit or blame the system. Was Crabtree a product of the system? Sure, he was, but being the product of a system and being a productive NFL player (at least thus far) are two completely separate questions. Was Harrell a product of the system? Again, yes, but it was probably those physical limitations that made it difficult for him to spend any real time in the NFL. Were Crabtree and Harrell in the same system? Again yes, each did things the other could not do and made the whole thing work and sometimes, credit needs to go to the incredible athletic and mental abilities of both.
Now we bring ourselves full-circle and we ask ourselves, where is Potts in this equation. I know that some Texas Tech fans will not go to games or support the team or support the player if Potts continues to start. Fine, whatever, you're entitled to your opinion and the right to support or not support the team, but I think the tough part, the part that none of us get to see is that Leach has probably always, and I mean always based his decision on those hundreds and hundreds of repetitions that a player takes during practice on who he thinks should start. Despite what we're seeing this year, Potts' performance during those three years he practiced the system, he was probably outstanding and the repetitions warranted him being the starter in 2009.
But things changed when the lights went on and the opponents were live.
If it was the system, then Potts would have been an All-American with 5,000 yards passing, 50 touchdowns and 10 interceptions because Mike Leach's system would have dictated that every quarterback be as successful as the last quarterback.
Again, this is something that Leach was truly unfamiliar with from the standpoint that his quarterbacks had almost always overcome those mistakes with stellar performances because of Leach's reliance on repetition in practice. Potts may be the exception to the rule and that's your problem with the quarterback position. Leach's system is nothing more than Leach trusting his eyes, and he did trust his eyes leading up to 2009, but the problem was that Potts' performance didn't match the repetitions he had in 3 years of practice. Meanwhile, Sheffield's lack of repetition in practice didn't match what Leach could have dreamed about in terms of production on the field.
And Texas Tech's 2008 and 2009 seasons are why either giving credit to or discrediting the "system" is not fair, either for writers, bloggers or fans . . . because it's just not true. Sometimes it's the player and sometimes it's good and sometimes it's not as good as other years.
As I read this past, I realize that it's a rambling mess. For those of you who were able to stick through this entire post, thanks a ton.
44 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good Thoughts
Excellent thoughts Seth. I think the message is we wanted them to pay Leach so he could do the coaching and make the decisions on who starts, not us. I think either Potts or Sheffield will be great quarterbacks next year and the future is bright with Leach at the helm. Wreck Em !!!!!!
Great post Seth. I am sure it’s been said before but IMO a lot of Potts’ problems come from throwing to open receivers rather than spots. An experienced safety can turn a play where a receiver is open into an interception simply by making the correct read and taking the proper angle towards the play. Potts is trying to hard to do the right thing and as Leach says he needs to figure out how “easy” the position really is. Sticks came in relaxed with nothing to lose and threw the ball to where the receivers were supposed to be. I played some QB in junior high and learned how to throw to spots because I couldn’t see over the offensive line. Granted, we ran the ball almost every play and I only completed one pass but let me tell you, it was highlight reel material.
Viva San Antonio!
"Life's a garden, dig it."
Agreed
Leach is in a tight spot. Not only does he have 1 exception to his rule of repetition on his hands… he has both extremes vying for the job in the same season. The thought process that has never failed him until this year has revealed its flaw in the worst way (though no fault of Leach’s, 90% of the time it works every time!).
I forget what the QB situation was with Harrell in 2006. I know he beat out Todd for the job so Todd ran off… but I wonder if Leached sensed a little bit of that physical/mental exception in him so he gave him the nod.
Leach pulled Harrell once during a game.
I forgot which game though.
I think one problem with Harrell is that, because he ended so well, we really inflated our expectation as to what Tech quarterbacks are supposed to do/be. I really don’t remember having this much anxiety about a in 2006 when Harrell was putting up at least comparable performances to Potts. I was at the TCU game where we didn’t score a touchdown and I was completely distraught, but I don’t remember ever thinking that Leach had screwed something up… maybe because I didn’t yet have such unwavering confidence in Leach’s ability to coach anyone up into a stud CFB QB.
by Skin Patrol on Dec 16, 2009 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
It was the Mizzu game that year. Todd sparked the team but then threw a int his next series out.
In my opinion there were alot of things wrong with that 06 team. From what I heard the locker room was filled with conflict between the offense and the defense, and the receivers were bitching about the qb. Also every time we played someone that got physical with us we layed down.
I know this, Mizzou flat out punched us in the mouth that year. Wow
That was simply an ass kicking. Two years in a row if I remember right.
by imisswesttexas on Dec 16, 2009 1:50 PM CST up reply actions
Interesting perspective
Here is what I know for sure. Maybe not the ‘06 season, but in the 2007 & 2008 season, there was no time where we were behind in a game that I wasn’t completely confident we would come back to win. Obviously we didn’t win them all in ‘07 and I’m excluding the OU game last year. My point is, this year there were few games that I was overly confident when we had the LEAD much less that we would come back from being down. And that is directly attributed to the play of the QB.
by imisswesttexas on Dec 16, 2009 1:53 PM CST up reply actions
Good stuff Seth...
There’s not many things that piss me off, but I can’t stand to hear the “product of a system” argument. I think that the struggles Potts has endured this season shows that being a QB in Leach’s offense is every bit as difficult as any other offense in the nation, if not more so. Every football player in the nation, to some extent, is a product of some type of system.
by Wreck Em on Dec 16, 2009 8:57 AM CST via mobile reply actions
Great Stuff....
Seth you have done it again….great! I also like thoughts from “Tipping Point” and even it didn’t turn out as quick as we all hoped it is still very evident to me there is a real difference in TTech team and fan expectations. I also think that TTech nation is primed to really support this team even more as evidenced by the Baylor and Alamo ticket sales. I agree with Wreck Em and Harrell had the ability even from ’06 to put the ball where YAC could occur for all his receivers. If Crabtree had to caught some of Potts balls then he too would not have had all the extra yards. Anyway, TTech is “movin on up” and I think the next few years will be very interesting and productive from a overall win/support point of view! Wreck"Em Tech!
EVERY PLAYER is a product of a "system"
Seth – Really good post and insight. Some thoughts I had while reading:
- “Product of the System” has gotten to the point of being laughable and simply lazy from the media. Every damn player in the country is a product of their system! Why is that a crime or so hard to figure out???
Colt McCoy = product of a system; Mark Ingram = product off a system; Gehrhardt = absolutely product of a system.
My point is any coach who is worth a crap is going to recruit kids who fit his offensive or defensive system and then coach them up to preform within that system. You simply align your gameplan to execute to your teams strengths! It’s not that freaking complicated.
- Interesting point watching “The U” on Saturday. Count me in the crowd that is facinated with the 90’s and early 2000’s Hurricane’s but would never want that to be my team! At one point, Testiverde was talking about the Orange Bowl against Nebraska. He said “Nebraska was running this really basic, simple defensive scheme and simply had no chance. They had never seen a ‘Pro-style’ offense like Miami’s and had no chance at defending against their talent”. Think about this for a minute. His point was Miami’s offense was revolutionary and no one had seen anything like it at the time in college. Sound familiar???
- Heisman bias toward ‘traditional’ programs and ESPN. Frankly, I was laughing my ass off in Austin over the past few weeks listening to the hypocritical media. Lot’s of complaints about how 1 game should not cost someone the Heisman trophy. Short memories. But a lot the uninformed voters seem to be overly influence by who ESPN thinks is “leading” the Heisman polls.
- Coach Leach confirms your views. First time he has ever had to have so many QB’s in one season. Leach’s MO is to settle on one guy and whoever that is receives most of the reps in practice each week. Confirms how important he views repetition.
Sorry for the long reply. I also have a lot of opinions on this subject.
You are exactly right about the system label. Every coach has a “system” and brings in players who can perform best in their system. That is why players choose different schools, because they too want to go where they will fit best into a system. This works both offensively and defensively. Any coach that didn’t have a system of sorts would be insane, a horrible coach, and a loser.
Also, you never hear of a “System Runninback”, but if a RB at Stanford gets the ball three times as many times as a RB at Texas Tech, it’s safe to say that their “system” is run-based. So why can a RB with gaudy numbers be considered for the ESPN-H(yp)eisman award, but a QB or Receiver with gaudy numbers get discounted due to their “system”? That RB is (rightfully so) considered a workhorse.
Then there are other QB’s with more mediocre-big numbers who get hype because they are the product of a “system” that surrounds them with 100% 4* and 5* athletes. They get excuses about having “intangibles”, great leadership, and the “wow factor”(dammit I hate you Musberger). It is absurd.
So the question is…after seeing what Potts can do on the field after the benefit of those hundreds and hundreds of reps, does Leach chalk it up as a learning experience and continue to throw him out there (and just HOPE that he performs better on the big stage next year?) Potts may be spectacular in practice, but after seeing him this year, how sure are we that he will improve? Possibly he still lets the pressure get to him and just cannot perform when it counts…
Or does he divert those reps to somebody else and HOPE that the practice experience can translate to someone else better? Somebody that has already proven they can relax a little more and be a more effective leader during game time, like Sheffield…
It sounds like Leach’s “system” is the product of a huge gamble early in the spring when Leach likes to choose a starter (whether he publicly announces it or not) and stick with them, giving them rep after rep after rep. Even if he realizes a few games into the season that he may have chosen wrong, he will still stick with his original starter
Great Thoughts
I heard that Potts is unbelievable in practice. That he makes the right checks, right reads and the right decisions. Sheffield has been as consistent. I can’t blame Leach for going with who he believes is the best prepared from what he is seeing in the week of practice. It’s just weird to me that a player can execute in practice and can’t translate this consistency to play on game day.
Sounds like a great thesis for a sports psychology graduate student.
Go Tech!
The only thing about 'product of the system'
is that it is offered by someone as either an excuse for not understanding or as an insult…and that ‘we’ take exception to it and react. As indicated above, and anyone can see it, if you are watching a football game that is being played without at system, you are watching a pickup game…
I cannot get so embroiled in which qb is better because I do not think it matters based on the data available. To analyze the two qb’s in light of qb’s of the past does not work for me. There has never been a season in which TTU has started 3 qb’s, that is a major anomaly…and maybe the most controlling…we will never know one way or the other.
To compare anyone to Harrell and Crabtree is not reasonable either, they had a special relationship built on trust, all those reps, and their special athletic gifts as football players. The major asset that Harrell possessed was his accuracy…it took him three years to develop the consistency that he displayed in 2009. Crabtree is a very gifted guy whose ability to use space is a characteristic that is so abstract for most of use that it is almost surreal. And for the reality of the situation of 2009, it was as much as the great—absolutely Air Raid System GREAT offensive line that made it all happen. Couple that with a number of very good second choice receivers—Harrell more often than not looked at Crabtree first as a read—at rb, y, and h…and the dynamic duo are no longer dynamic…again we will never know because the other players were there. (When are we going to stop talking about 2009…it was a great year, even a milestone, but it is over and there are few people in the universe who do not know that this is the past—it is an insult, IMHO, to constantly talk about this year’s team in light of last year’s…do they not achieve in their own right ???) The major point that I am trying to make is that they will never be replicated…the wonderful think about college sports is that we get to see these great moments and then they go away…but other, new, different great ones come along and we get to see them also…those are the ones I am looking forward to seeing.
The more I step back from this season’s qb situation, the more I think that the decisions are as much a result of circumstances, that is injuries, as anything. Again we will never know what might have been. In the past the HC has always made a choice of qb and stuck with it through thick and thin, and in the few occasions in which he did put in another, he questioned himself for doing so immediately after. Something from the past behaviours that I have noticed from Coach Leach tells me to expect to see Taylor Potts starting again in the Fall.
Seth, you have presented some really great thoughts. They cover a huge range of thought, we could discuss the cognition concepts by themselves for days. Then coming back to try to relate to this season’s qb circumstances and decisions would be another thing altogether.
blink & Potts
The overarching premise of blink is that the person is capable of rapid cognition. When they are, experience, etc., help the person to make better decisions. I think the biggest problem that Potts had this year was the concussion. Just take a look at the list of symptoms.
Moreover, the guidance is that althetes shouldn’t return to play until all of the symptoms are gone, and they may persist for weeks.
Confusion, sluggishness, difficulty concentrating – all symptoms of the concussion. The word that gets the most air time in sports is hesitation. When your brain is scrambled, you can’t make the types of rapid decisions required by the position at game speed.
Sheffield quite possibly has a better rapid cognition ability; though it is difficult to compare since Potts had is left cerebral cortex tied behind his back for half of the season. Sheffield certainly benefitted from the extra repitions during the time Potts was out.
I agree with TallMike that the decision process for Leach regarding the QB was more a product of the circumstance. He had 2+ QBs that were playing equally well at different points of the season, for sundry reasons, and making the decison “is injured player A better than healthy player B” is not one that I envy.
Having said all of this, the QB race in the spring/fall is wide open from my perspective. Potts, Sheffield, Karam, Doege each will be likely be given a shot. Repitions will be important to whoever gets the nod, so I anticipate Leach will try to reach a decision sooner rather than hold out for his favorite game time decision.
Potts got the concussion late in the 1st half against New Mexico
And the offense was moribund the entire half after the quick 1st touchdown. I don’t think it was due to concussion. I think it’s an innate inability to react in real time at game speed.
I think Potts
was diagnosed with a concussion against NM, but I agree with NM99 that Potts probably suffered a concussion against UT. Just speculation on everyone’s part since there’s no concrete information out there.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Hard to think he had concussion after the Kindle hit
I say this for two reasons. First, he came back after that and lead the Offense down the field on a long drive for a TD and seemed to handle himselft well. Second, I didn’t really notice a significant drop off in timing/decision making during the Houston game. Maybe there was and I just didn’t notice, but seemed like the same guy from the UT game IMO.
by imisswesttexas on Dec 17, 2009 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
He was probably running on adrenaline at that point.
Concussion’s can take a while to show their faces. Odds are, the NM game with a couple of sacks really brought it out of the bag….
" Answers -- Become Resources."
Without Questions; There are limited Resources...
System...what ever
I think if we all learned anything this season it’s that the “system” needs great athletes for it to work. It’s not a plug and play offense as most analysts or so called experts claim. Maybe in the long run it was good thing for Tech to struggle offensively this season proving that the offense demands skilled position players. The QB competition should be interesting moving forward and I’ll just trust in Leach to make the best call for 2010.
"You've got to find your inner pirate" - Mike Leach
Just the opposite
can be argued though. We started 3 different QBs and according to our fan base we had offensive struggles (I agree with this). The problem is we were still the 2nd most potent passing attack and 5th total offense team in the nation. And we still won 8 games in the regular season. There are a number of teams that are 500 and under this year obviously.
So while we(TTU fans) agree that we struggled because we had a weak QB/offense, someone looking at the stat lines would say that 2009 only reinforces the idea of a ‘system’ that produces gaudy numbers even when being run by a player or players that their own fans readily admit are not high quality talent.
I don’t think anyone looking at Pott’s stats would claim that he is a sub-par athlete that put up amazing numbers. He was 18th in passing yards even sitting out several games, but his QB rating and TD to INT ratio column are telling.
As much as it bugs me when people say it, I don’t have a great argument for our offense being a system that can produce a winning season with mediocre talent. I guess it is a compliment if you think about it – Leach and his staff are smart enough to beat your coach even with less talented players… jealous much?
Just a thought
JDee – I hear you about what to say to people and I get this alot from the UT fans in Central Texas. Typically my response is if this system was so easy, produces one of the top rated offense year-in/year-out and is simply plug and play, why the hell isn’t everyone running it??? More to the point, why doesn’t UT hire someone to come in and install this offense with all of their great talented players? Surely that would equate to 4 or 5 BCS Championships in a row, right?
Answer = It’s not that easy and it takes a lot of hard work to execute it to the level that we Tech fans get to sit back and enjoy. That’s pretty much my standard answer…
by imisswesttexas on Dec 16, 2009 1:48 PM CST up reply actions
Also
There is only one Mike Leach, the Captain and Pirate, who has a most unique way of looking at offenses and defenses (yes, defenses, because his offenses have to face them). He figures out how a defense reacts to any particular offensive set and designs his play accordingly, to take advantage of any shortcomings. Many times, the same adjustments will work against sevral teams. Those others take a bit of a different approach. That is where Leach’s mind comes forward and designs plays other coaches may not think of, or selects a play he already has to exploit the defense. No other coach can equal Leach in this regard…at least, not now. That is why few others attempt to run a similar offense. It just will not work as well without Leach’s input. Period!
TTpilk
I tend to think that
Leach’s offense is predicated on having success without having to have the elite athletes, however, I think what we saw in 2008, which may be the exception to prior years, is that Leach had built a very successful system based on players who weren’t elite athletes. For the longest time (and I think that Leach’s interview with the NYT even goes into this) is that Leach has done more with less talent for years and years, however, the fact that better athletes are coming to Texas Tech, I think that the expectation that the offense will return and hopefully surpass 2008 is a very real possibility.
In general, it’s not that the system needs great athletes to work. I don’t think that’s the case at all, but I would say that in order to be an elite system (and this would be true of any system) the more elite athletes you have, the better the system.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Well said Seth .. that escalated quickly . .. I mean got out hand fast..
it sort of opened up a flood gate of comments. Great write up Seth and an excellent series of comments. I mean .. Good read folks.
When we step back and look at the requirements to coach, play and participate at this level of competition what you find is that the skill sets of all the other teams are very close together. Coach Leach, Coach Nutt, Coach Dantonio and Coach Mangino all have the same organizational, leadership and management skills. They all manage systems. All have the same "general" mental acuity , agility and cognitive skill meaning they all recognize a blue chip defensive linemen or a savvy defensive back or a stud peripheral vision equipped "instinctive" runner like Adrian Petersen. Then they must mold the tools, the skill sets the abilities into a programmatic attack on three side of the ball. All the while managing the expectation of the administration (follow the rules) fans, parents and players or employees and the supporting staff. Then they must deliver this package to a location where violent collision will result in a successful outcome. At the end state the human missiles will walk away to the next career without permanent injury or disability. So every pewee league to NFL team is a system (program) designed to deliver the win – while teaching an organizational skill. It’s what makes us so indignant when we hear the system sound bite. What you really are hearing is "it’s not what I grew up with it’s a change … so I hate it.." As many of you have better illustrated than I can.. The style of play – demonstrated by the Raiders – is focused on getting down the field within the rules of play. Not remembering plays just remembering where to stand when you execute your technique dictated for your position. Every teams success is dictated by the level of talent, amount of distractions and physical skill sets brought to the point of attack in that precise moment. So the perceived snub of the up and coming talent- show cased in a "revolutionary" – read different style of play – i.e. Harrell and Crabtree don’t get invites to New York – is a product of fallible humans trying to rationalize who is worthy to attend a celebration of excellence displayed in a game surrounding. “If it’s different from what Coach xyz told me back in 19xx .. I am suspicious ..so I discount it.” It’s not evenly remotely trying to be "fair". Which is a reason why we love the college game. The game is a struggle, it’s not fair, it is even arguably designed not to be fair. Hell it has referees to make everyone play out your talent against another talent which is not the same. It’s funny but that organized chaos determined on field of endeavor is the thing that either lifts up or brings down your fan morale with regard to how our Raider team achieves its goals. All participants – fans, parents, players, coaches, administration and support staff want to be perceived as winners. So we Red Raider fans are going to ride the Leach system to that goal.
"do routine things routinely"
"Where is Potts in this equation?"
Good analysis. The theme appears to be that in this offense, skills will get you so far, at which point something subjective, “rapid cognition” kicks in and helps get you the rest of the way. I call it “instinct”. So where is Potts in this equation?
Potts = Aikman. Tremendous physical skills (though Aikman could also scramble in his younger days, which Potts can’t do). Tendency to throw to a person as opposed to a spot. (See Remington 870 post). As a pro, Aikman developed the ability to compensate for a linear approach and enjoyed a great career. He had great physical skills, but had to develop the cognition to get from being an Oklahoma wishbone QB to Hall of Famer.
I think the jury is out on whether Mr. Potts will be able to develop this cognition. He’s not there, yet. Sheffield has this cogntion and instinct in abundance; however, he lacks the arm which Potts possesses.
What distinguished Harrell, to me, was his ability to easily get into a “rhythm”. This rhythm made the offense’s performance appear effortless. Always making the right read. Taking what the defense gives you. It allowed Tech to get up in some games in a way where they could actually throttle back, offensively. It made Tech appear as the agressor, especially at the Jones.
This year’s team, though statistics are somewhat misleading, has had a hard time finding that “rhythm”, with the exception of New Mexico – 2nd half, Kansas State, and Nebraska. The common thread. Sticks. Stats don’t always tell the story, as strategy, ball possession, and clock management change when you are the aggressor and are playing with a lead.
Bottom line: I wish Potts had Sheffield’s instincts…
by Oklahoma Red Raider on Dec 16, 2009 1:59 PM CST reply actions
Harrell
One thing that gave him a big advantage was being a coach’s kid. We all remember the stories of the coaches basically having to kick him out of the film room. He learned that from being the son of a coach. By the time he saw the field, Harrell had more virtual repititions than just about any QB in the country reading defenses. By the time he was starting for the 3rd year, he had seen just about everything. This enabled him to step up to the line, read the defense extreemly quickly, and call for the ball. I haven’t compared the numbers, but I am sure that the pace of our offense with Harrell at QB was significantly higher (more plays per game) than under either Potts or Sheffield. This helped to keep defenses on their heals, as they had to make equally quick reads of our offense.
excellent post Seth.
I think you are spot on. While we had success this year, we also had our share of dissappointments. Nevertheless, I feel Leach has learned and will be more in tune with those who are vying to be the next great Texas Tech quarterback.
From the outside looking in Potts looked to be the Qb we always wanted, proto-typical Alpha quarteback. Good size, and a cannon for an arm, tough… add that to the “system” and you have defensive coordinators nightmare.
Something hard to evalute and measure is the “it” factor. This attribute can only be detected as circumstance presents itself. I refer to it as “it” for a lack of better words… some call it heart. I’d rather not go that far because I think potts has heart. So I’ll refer to it as the kavorka. Symmons had the Kavorka, Harrell had the kavorka, Welker had the karvorka.
I dont want to write Potts off just yet.. I will say I hope coming into the spring, there is a die hard competition for the starting position… All attributes of a college quarterback to be measured : strength, size, accuracy,leadership, heart, intelligence and last but not least the kavorka!
I don’t think repetition is going to make any difference if the player doesn’t have the temprement to play Divison 1 College Football. What a painful season this was watching our Masarati offense sputter & die failed drive after failed drive. We finally have a defense under Leach that can keep us in any game & the football Gods hand us a starting QB who is afraid of playing a contact sport. If we wanted a tap dancer behind center we would have brought in Gregory Hines. Does Potts have restless leg syndrome? He hasn’t planted his feet since August. God help us January 2nd. “No More Potts!!” indeed. The students knew what was up early in the season. Why can’t the coaches see it?
I would disagree
with your statement about repetition not making a difference. Leach firmly believes in repetition = good quarterback play and that was the point of the entire post. If repetition didn’t make a difference then you would have seen Leach plug in any freshman quarterback with zero experience, but he has almost always relied on the guys who have had the most repetitions in games and in practice. You may not like how he handles his QB’s but that’s been Leach’s pattern from day 1 at Texas Tech.
I would also disagree with your statement that Potts is afraid of contact. I still have respect for Potts and he literally took one for the team when Marlon Winn failed to lay a hand on Sergio Kindle. Potts may be a lot of things, but I would guess that being afraid of contact isn’t one of them.
Go Raiders . . .
Double-T Nation
Respectfully disagree with you here.
I think if Potts were afraid of contact, he wouldn’t have had the long drive vs UT AFTER the big hit from Kindle. He makes bad decisions at times and poor throws as well, but he’s got the balls to keep getting up after getting blasted.
I veiw this a little differently. IMO, I believe his biggest problem has been trying to do TOO MUCH and make the spectacular play. When he has had success is when he simply plays within the system and doesn’t force things. That includes checking to run plays when that is the best option. He can be successful if he just does his job and doesn’t try too hard.
Regarding the “No more Potts” crap, I strongly hope that doesn’t ever happen again for any player. It’s short-sighted, disrespectful bullshit that has no place in college sports in my opinion. As I’ve said before, if they think they can do better, bring their butt out to practice and suit up.
by imisswesttexas on Dec 17, 2009 10:21 AM CST up reply actions
What exactly is bs?
Not wanting Potts back and expressing it here or something else?
If you mean chanting it at a game, I’m with you. If you mean that it makes me nauseous to think of Potts as our starting QB after this year and detailing that on dtn…..0 apologies.
by oldschoolraider on Dec 17, 2009 3:27 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Fair point, I should have been more clear
I was specifically referring to the chanting at the game by some of the students. IMO, that was wrong. The reason I think it is short-sighted is b/c the fact is the kid wants to win as much as anyone (players, fans, coaches, etc).
That said, I’ve really got no issue with being critical of his play or prefering Sticks to be starting QB. That is certainly my preference given their play on the field. Also, I’ve got no issue with debating all things Tech on DTN. I’m not holding back on my opinions and wouldn’t expect anyone else to hold back either.
by imisswesttexas on Dec 18, 2009 10:05 AM CST up reply actions
Re-cognition
You’re pretty much on-target in your analysis, Seth.
When I watched Sheffield come into the New Mexico game, the first thing I noticed was how quickly he made his decision on where to throw the ball. (My wife can confirm this observation, having been in the room while I was screaming.) I still think this is the Sheffield advantage. And it’s the Harrell advantage, too. Much has already been conceded on this site and elsewhere concerning Harrell’s so-called physical limitations, but he knew what he was doing, what he was seeing, and could deliver the ball accurately. I’m pretty sure that reading/recognition and accurate throws are the qualities at the top of Coach Leach’s list for quarterbacks, as I believe he has said in the past. Arm strength and mobility are further down the list.
I previously posted a somewhat whimsical offering on this subject in which I was trying to make a similar point. The “tragedy” of Potts (and this is a much exaggerated turn of a phrase) is that, with his physical tools, if he ever does figure out the “re-cognition” thing, he’ll rip the opposition to shreds; but as yet, he hasn’t shown an ability to do that. I am still pulling for him, however, maybe because…
of the “system” epithet. I detest pop psychology, but I can’t avoid speculating on the thought process here. I wonder if Coach Leach hasn’t favored Potts because he might be the one quarterback we’ve had who could make it in the NFL, and thus, validate Coach’s methods. (Yeah, it’s probably a bunch of pseudo-psychological B.S.)
This is so obvious
Simmons, Cumbie, and Hodges were all fifth year seniors and had more reps in practice than anyone below them. Thats why they were named the starter. Also, notice how Kingsbury had his best year his senior year in in terms of stats (more reps). Harrell is the exception. Baron Batch and a great o-line were a big factor why Harrell’s numbers (yards and td’s) weren’t better in 08 compared to 07’. But he made better decisions (only 5 int’s) with the ball last year. He rarely had the “wtf was that Harrell” pass in 08.
Potts has not seen the amount of reps any of these guys above have, nor has Sticks. But Sticks does have the ability to run, and run well. Instead of making bad decisions like a young Harrell, Potts, or Dodge, he runs away from it instead. The exception is the Okie Light game when it looked like Sticks had a Shaq cleat on with 4 lbs of tape. What happened when he could not run away? He made bad decisions and was pulled because it. His reps in practice probably also include a healthy Sticks who can run when needed. When injured his routine is off. Bad decisions were made.
Its all about routine. 15 formations with a gigillion different ways to perfect it. The more you are introduced to situations, the better you are at predicting an outcome. This leads to better decisions, in any sport or field you practice.
One more thing. Harrell had the intangible of being a winner and a leader. He carried the team on his shoulders when no one else would and we all knew, no matter how little time or the situation, Harrell would find a way. Something this 09 team desperately needs from a qb. I think Sticks has this natural quality. The team responds to him. Texas Tech responds to him. With more reps and practice this offseason, I hope to see him lead this team next year.
Is it because the Blink article
was in June of 08 or is there just this many more posters on this site now?
Great write up Seth!
I am still a space flow kind of guy.
VIVA LA FIGA!
The concept is interesting
But hard to quantify. I am sure repitition helps muscle memory and enables better gametime performance. I am sure Mike is a big believer, I just hope he trusts his eyes.
The very first time I saw Potts, I was freaking out how he throws off his back foot but still has power to spare. That was in trash time last year and this year he was in the Baylor game throwing the same way, and his few lengthy completions probably should have been picked off. I wish him well, but I ( the unapolagetic Leach apologist) will wonder what’s up if Potts isn’t our Senior backup QB.
by oldschoolraider on Dec 16, 2009 9:32 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Fantastic Write Up Seth!!
This is what happens when I don’t logon for a few days.
" Answers -- Become Resources."
Without Questions; There are limited Resources...
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.
