I tried responding earlier this morning but was in work and lately I've actually been working and haven't had my phone with me.
I think this is as good time as any to say "thank you" to Bacon for all I've done if you live in Boston. Or even if you're just passing through. Guys like me, tough guys like me. Build this city for you to drive around in. Live in. Visit. Roads, hotels, condos, malls, schools, you name it. Bacon builds it and makes it happen. Someone has to get their hands dirty and it sure as shiit won't be most of you. You couldn't do it.
So its only nice to say "thank you" for make your life easier, more efficient and effective.
Talking out of my ass here, but I'm taking a sh*t so it fits -
Hopefully it fit or you're probably still on the pot with no feeling in your legs.
Two things to keep I often think of and ask myself, but my lack of both knowledge and subsequent effort to research prevent me from finding any answer:
1 - How different is the college -> pro transition in terms of gameplay and scheme? Is it the worst in
the NFL?
can you expand on this "is it worse in the NFL" ?
I personally wondered if this is why we see a shift towards RPO/drifting away from pocket passers with an intense knowledge of the game and timing. Since then, we've seen a proliferation of offense. Of course, this comes with rule changes as well, and that's where the analysis gets sticky.
College & NFL are the same but very different in some regards. I've talked about this a few times but the size of the field is the same, 53 1/3 but the hashes are much different. NFL is a little under 20 feet, I forget exactly but roughly like 18.5 - 19 feet. Whereas in college it's double that, like 40 feet.
That makes a big impact on where the ball is spotted. How you might line up. What you might call. Easier to run spread.
I've talked to enough players and read enough about it to know it affects certain players at least in the short term. Mostly WR/TE who work in the middle of the field. Spacing is a huge part of football so you can imagine it might mess with someone a little initially. The lines are a little blurred today with the rule changes, more teams running college stuff. Its still a man vs man equation in the NFL. Man vs space in college.
It matters a lot. It's something rarely brought up if at all that's a big difference.
As far as RPO. The NFL is still adapting and getting used used the RPO. Make no mistake there are some wonderful coaches in the league but it's a thick shell that's tough to penetrate in terms of change, new ideas, new coaches. We see a ton retreads with little change when you think about how vaste football is.
So basically in college you can take a few steps (3) while in the league it's one. You really have to be creative with design and on point with timing. Like we know why we wouldn't run any with Harry. So teams might be afraid of penalties but there's no evidence to suggest refs are looking for this. And even if the throw a flag make them throw it every time. We've seen DB's and DL take advantage of physical play outside and other things. you have something that works why not take advantage? It's not against the rules.
I have no stats on this but I would have to believe you have a higher % of a positive play with RPO vs a regular run, especially one between the tackles. There's just so much built in that helps you succeed vs a normal run. I mean how often do we see an "illegal man" downfield on regular runs not called.
Teams should run more rpo with slants bc of how easy it is to complete and the yac opportunity. Tua built a career around that play.
There's plenty of room for growth there and NFL teams should be pushing the envelope not dusting off the
old playbook.
A friend and I considered writing a book that examined the evolution of offense by looking at the evolution of the fullback position, from start to finish. Half the reason I wanted to do that is so I really understand how we've ended up where we are today, and I bet that'd provide some insight into why drafting is difficult.
2. Is it simply the wildly complex nature of football (relative to other pro sports) is what makes it so complicated to draft? A few points to examine what I mean:
There's a lot of room for research in the draft space. You can use the AV score from pro football reference. The 33rd team just published something that shows only 31% of players sign a second contract with the team that drafted them.
I always welcome that stuff bc again there's a lot of room for insight, improvement in that space.
It's tough bc Bill has supreme job security. The NFL is a turnover machine. It's a little tough to compare and contrast between someone rebuilding from scratch vs Bill but definitely useful.
Again there should be a lot more talk, accountability and transparency in the draft space. Comparing GM's, media, draft geeks. I welcome an unearthing here.
- Environment: Football is by far the most contact intensive mainstream team sport in the USA. This makes coaching stupidly crucial. While some here like to dismiss the heavily emotional aspect of football, I will hold thoroughly that coaching style matters the _most_ in the NFL. Constantly we read stories of players who do incredibly weird **** in the locker room (Hernandez being a big example, but every team of every year has someone who is just... Off. Very weird. Masturbates in locker room. Says wildly racist ****. The list goes on.) Say what you want about Mike Tomlin, but not only did he manage AB the best, he also kept all of the rest of his team okay with how batshit insane AB was. That's crucial. So, draft picks don't have much say in their landing. If they land in the wrong environment, they gotta go. And there's a world of difference between Parcells and Walsh. I would ****ing suck under Parcells. I'd thrive under Walsh.
There's so many layers here.
Coaching matters. A lot. Especially when the margins are super thin.
First off let me say how wrong I was about Tomlin. I admitted this last year when AB was going nuclear and that only grows stronger. AB, Ben, Harrison, Bell and on and on and he just kept winning. Hats off.
I'm still very much player > coach. You wont see a good or even great coach move the needle on a bad team but we've seen good-great QB's or teams drag guys like McCarthy, Pete, Rex and others to the playoffs. But yea they matter. Back in the day players were soldiers in some cases. Literally responded to orders. Today players would go into trigger tweeting crying from their mansion. The chemistry has to be there today.
Landing spot is also enormous. Especially for QB'S it's so crucial. This is such a big part of process though. Where you go matters a ton.
2. Team Size: It's a whole-ass 11 players on the field at any given time. With incredibly different assignments. With different coordinators and position coaches. System is absolutely crucial. Things can look so different from one team to another. It can also take a lot of time for you, the lower pick, to get a good look before the higher pick. This is why I appreciate Bill's propensity to hold on to some players longer than fans would like. He understands that, just as he'd assert you need years for a new HC to really judge them, players are the same sometimes.
I remember Jared Goff talking about roster sizes in college. In the pros you get to know everyone. Everyone has a specialty and role. In college you have 7 of everything. You could be dealing with double the size. See someone a few times and never see them again.
One reason why the NFL is chess and college is more checkers.
Welp, there's more but I'm also done on the toilet. So I'll end it there.
ok so you did make it, nice.
But I do think those questions can provide insight to the draft puzzle - I'm definitely more of a circumstancial/context-based analysis type, hence the nature of my questions.
Look into who's good drafting between RDS 4-7. Who's good in the media? Does any team draft one position better than everyone else (like Pitt and WR)
Almost anything would be useful bc there's still so much to learn in that space.
