As I was watching the game last night, something stood out to me as the biggest difference between our teams of the last several years and the two teams on the field last night. Aside from the obvious talent and execution disparity that jumps off the screen when you watched the game, what I noticed was two teams that were lead by a group of PLAYERS (and not necessarily upper clansmen in all cases) that fully bought into what the coaches were telling them and were able to execute on the field.
There has been a lot of debate of late on here about why we have not made it over the hump and are mired in mediocrity. I think a lot of it is fair:
- are we putting our players in the best possible position to succeed? (scheme/coaching)
- do we have the talent to compete with the elite teams in college football?
But I would propose that we need leaders on the field before we can make it back. We need our team to be lead by a group of PLAYERS that buys into the system and guides the younger/less talented players around them to victory. We need guys on the field who the team can rally around and be lead to victory. What is concerning to me is that I think we have the players on the team that fit the profile (Perryman, Duke, Dorsett, Chick, Morris, even Green), but they don't seem to have the ability to inspire those around them and lead us to where we need to be.
I have a theory as to why this may be happening. I think it might be unpopular, but after giving it some thought, seems to make some sense. We have a reputation of being a pipeline to the NFL. I think it is one of the few remaining attributes of the program that still attracts talent. However, I think this has come at a price. I think the players on our team are more concerned that they are not looking as good, on the field, and it might hurt their draft prospects, and therefore are not fully committing to the scheme. Now, I don't know if they are right or wrong. I don't know enough about X's and O's to tell you, however, before we can be great again, I think we need to have a more unselfish group of leaders on the team that does all the little things right schematically, to allow us to succeed on the field.
I think this is a problem for the coaches and the players. First the coaches need to communicate the bigger picture to the players more clearly, in a way that they understand how doing things they may not understand will translate to success on the field. And second, there needs to be a group of players who takes a leap of faith, and become an extension of the coaches on the field and lead those around them to victory.
Maybe I'm wrong, and we do have those guys, and the scheme is just that flawed, or we don't have those guys and the talent just isn't there. But I think if we had guys truly buying in, and had more leaders on our team, that we would have beat Duke and VTech. That we would have been better prepared for Louisville. We need guys to go all in. To live for the TEAM, not just to improve thier draft stock and we need coaches who can communicate what we want to do effectively that inspires that group of players to do it.
I think this is Golden's challenge going forward and Duke/Chick/Howard/Perryman/Dorsett responsibility to their teammates.
There has been a lot of debate of late on here about why we have not made it over the hump and are mired in mediocrity. I think a lot of it is fair:
- are we putting our players in the best possible position to succeed? (scheme/coaching)
- do we have the talent to compete with the elite teams in college football?
But I would propose that we need leaders on the field before we can make it back. We need our team to be lead by a group of PLAYERS that buys into the system and guides the younger/less talented players around them to victory. We need guys on the field who the team can rally around and be lead to victory. What is concerning to me is that I think we have the players on the team that fit the profile (Perryman, Duke, Dorsett, Chick, Morris, even Green), but they don't seem to have the ability to inspire those around them and lead us to where we need to be.
I have a theory as to why this may be happening. I think it might be unpopular, but after giving it some thought, seems to make some sense. We have a reputation of being a pipeline to the NFL. I think it is one of the few remaining attributes of the program that still attracts talent. However, I think this has come at a price. I think the players on our team are more concerned that they are not looking as good, on the field, and it might hurt their draft prospects, and therefore are not fully committing to the scheme. Now, I don't know if they are right or wrong. I don't know enough about X's and O's to tell you, however, before we can be great again, I think we need to have a more unselfish group of leaders on the team that does all the little things right schematically, to allow us to succeed on the field.
I think this is a problem for the coaches and the players. First the coaches need to communicate the bigger picture to the players more clearly, in a way that they understand how doing things they may not understand will translate to success on the field. And second, there needs to be a group of players who takes a leap of faith, and become an extension of the coaches on the field and lead those around them to victory.
Maybe I'm wrong, and we do have those guys, and the scheme is just that flawed, or we don't have those guys and the talent just isn't there. But I think if we had guys truly buying in, and had more leaders on our team, that we would have beat Duke and VTech. That we would have been better prepared for Louisville. We need guys to go all in. To live for the TEAM, not just to improve thier draft stock and we need coaches who can communicate what we want to do effectively that inspires that group of players to do it.
I think this is Golden's challenge going forward and Duke/Chick/Howard/Perryman/Dorsett responsibility to their teammates.
