'13 FL RB Derrick Henry (Bama commit)

#1,452
#1,452
jave36 said:
UK scored 10 points...and im pretty sure he coached WRs. He has not proven to be a great coach yet, but he is a great recruiter.
Click to expand...

When asked a technical question about his receivers last year he said: "I don't know. I never played the position." Says it all IMO.
 
#1,453
#1,453
UTCVol said:
When asked a technical question about his receivers last year he said: "I don't know. I never played the position." Says it all IMO.
Click to expand...

Yep. Kiffin wanted him for recruiting. Not saying he will never be a great coach of WRs, but I dont think he's proven hes there yet.
 
#1,454
#1,454
jave36 said:
Yep. Kiffin wanted him for recruiting. Not saying he will never be a great coach of WRs, but I dont think he's proven hes there yet.
Click to expand...

But in reality, aren't all of your position coaches recruiters first and coaches second?

I feel like for a team to succeed, the position coaches need to be totally in sync with the coordinators. That means taking alot of direction from the coordinators on how they want the position coached. Not all that complicated, I wouldn't think.
 
#1,455
#1,455
shelbyvillevol said:
But in reality, aren't all of your position coaches recruiters first and coaches second?

I feel like for a team to succeed, the position coaches need to be totally in sync with the coordinators. That means taking alot of direction from the coordinators on how they want the position coached. Not all that complicated, I wouldn't think.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Look at all the teams like Texas who waste talent. Development and coaching is very important. The coordinator can't do everything himself.
 
#1,457
#1,457
jave36 said:
I disagree. Look at all the teams like Texas who waste talent. Development and coaching is very important. The coordinator can't do everything himself.
Click to expand...

I'm by no means saying if a guy can't coach a lick, that it doesn't matter. But the fact is you see coaches all the time who switch which positions they coach at a school. That tells me that the coaching aspect is secondary. If a coach is a good recruiter, the HC usually tries everything they can to keep them on staff.

Look at what Dooley did a couple years ago. He knew Sirmon was going to be a stud recruiter, so he moved Thompson to the DLine, just so he could keep Sirmon on the staff.

Another good example is Rodney Garner. No chance in hell is he a good enough coach to be considered for a DC position, but any school would love to have him as a postion coach.
 
#1,458
#1,458
shelbyvillevol said:
I'm by no means saying if a guy can't coach a lick, that it doesn't matter. But the fact is you see coaches all the time who switch which positions they coach at a school. That tells me that the coaching aspect is secondary. If a coach is a good recruiter, the HC usually tries everything they can to keep them on staff.

Look at what Dooley did a couple years ago. He knew Sirmon was going to be a stud recruiter, so he moved Thompson to the DLine, just so he could keep Sirmon on the staff.

Another good example is Rodney Garner. No chance in hell is he a good enough coach to be considered for a DC position, but any school would love to have him as a postion coach.
Click to expand...

There is merit to that to a point, but I think LT couldn't just switch to RB. Working in football long enough will make you a good position coach at several related positions. That doesn't mean its not super important, it just means its not unheard of for someone to be really good at coaching several positions.

Hopefully our online will be a great example of that next year. Having talent is only half the battle, you've got to have coaches who can develop them technically.
 
#1,459
#1,459
jave36 said:
There is merit to that to a point, but I think LT couldn't just switch to RB. Working in football long enough will make you a good position coach at several related positions. That doesn't mean its not super important, it just means its not unheard of for someone to be really good at coaching several positions.

Hopefully our online will be a great example of that next year. Having talent is only half the battle, you've got to have coaches who can develop them technically.
Click to expand...

I think the O Line could be the one exception to my theory. I honestly think for O Linemen, it's less about "talent" and more about technique, strength, and aggressiveness. More so than any other position on the football field, at least.
 
#1,466
#1,466
VOLS_FAN15 said:
The great Dupree? Wasn't there an ESPN 30 for 30 on him called the best that never was?
Click to expand...

It will replay tonight on ESPN U after The Opening, I believe. I have watched it plenty of times and it never gets old for me. That is one of my favorite ones from the 30 for 30, the guy was amazing in HS.
 
#1,467
#1,467
UGA insider said:
It will replay tonight on ESPN U after The Opening, I believe. I have watched it plenty of times and it never gets old for me. That is one of my favorite ones from the 30 for 30, the guy was amazing in HS.
Click to expand...

Would've been awesome to see him play out to his potential in college and then on in the league
 
#1,468
#1,468
VOLS_FAN15 said:
Would've been awesome to see him play out to his potential in college and then on in the league
Click to expand...

HS players that are that talented always seem to have the wrong people (handlers) around them that are always giving them the wrong advice. You see it so many times (Bryce Brown recently).
 
#1,470
#1,470
rivals vid from Opening.

saying 85% for Bama being out in front.

*Moving along from this thread*
 
#1,471
#1,471
UGA insider said:
It will replay tonight on ESPN U after The Opening, I believe. I have watched it plenty of times and it never gets old for me. That is one of my favorite ones from the 30 for 30, the guy was amazing in HS.
Click to expand...

Highly recommend this to anyone that hasn't seen it. All of them are so well done, but this one in particular was really good.

Available on amazon.com I believe.
 
#1,473
#1,473
UTMVol76 said:
It was a better historical documentary than the History Channel has had for years. Tragic, but all engrossing.
Click to expand...

That's a good point! The History Channel has become nothing but a bunch of "What If?" type shows, antique shows, and reality shows. Don't get me wrong, I like some of those programs a lot, but what happened to the History Channel I remember as a child back in the 90s? You know, the one that talked about Hitler and WWII all day long. haha!

But, yes, every 30 for 30 I've seen has been fairly well made at the very least. Some are more engaging than others depending on interests, but all have been fairly well-made.
 
#1,474
#1,474
UTMVol76 said:
It was a better historical documentary than the History Channel has had for years. Tragic, but all engrossing.
Click to expand...

It was an excellent documentary. They just did not really show how much the Colombian people loved Escobar, some consider him a saint 'til this day.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top