Let’s talk about recruiting from a staff perspective (not about recruits)

[Ethnicsands]

I’m with Phillip Buchanan. I’m sick and tired of Lazy hires. When you look at it, the players wanted Coker and he turned out to be the worst thing that could have happened to the program. He took what was the top program to a state where it never recovered from. This next hire is key.
With respect to Evals. This is why i couldn’t care less about stars. I should have added how important player development is. You know this. Everyone does. And it’s not even about Saban. He selects the best of the best. Although i agree with what you said completely The next coach needs to find the 3 star kids that have potential. Realize Jaden Davis and Nick Bonitto should be here. Adjust your approach to what you have on the roster. etc

Development is thrown around too often and few can define it. It's not that it doesn't happen. IMO it's more that it's a consequence of other inputs not an independent variable.

If you evaluate well, have competition, depth, culture, balance and S&C, you'll have the ingredients for development. Have good coaches with effective schemes who game plan and play call well, and you'll have the ingredients for development. When players go through this dynamic, some will be really good and go on to bigger things. Those are the ones we say we 'developed.' Did we teach them some technique? Sure. But that ain't magic. Other kids went through the same program and weren't good. When we're winning, nobody much notices. When we lose, people gawk. People talk about Nick Saban's recruiting rankings but it matters a lot that those guys go against future pros every day in practice, just like our '01 team did.

 

[CT Cane 44]

Development is thrown around too often and few can define it. It's not that it doesn't happen. IMO it's more that it's a consequence of other inputs not an independent variable.

If you evaluate well, have competition, depth, culture, balance and S&C, you'll have the ingredients for development. Have good coaches with effective schemes who game plan and play call well, and you'll have the ingredients for development. When players go through this dynamic, some will be really good and go on to bigger things. Those are the ones we say we 'developed.' Did we teach them some technique? Sure. But that ain't magic. Other kids went through the same program and weren't good. When we're winning, nobody much notices. When we lose, people gawk. People talk about Nick Saban's recruiting rankings but it matters a lot that those guys go against future pros every day in practice, just like our '01 team did.

Well yes but guys can absolutely be developed physically mentally and from a strategic point. We see teams like Iowa St who are strong. Iowa develops players and coaches them up. It’s not all about talent. It’s also, as you pointed out, a character thing. Bryant McKinnie and Russell Maryland needed to WANT to change their bodies and become the stars they became.

 

[Rellyrell]

Development is thrown around too often and few can define it. It's not that it doesn't happen. IMO it's more that it's a consequence of other inputs not an independent variable.

If you evaluate well, have competition, depth, culture, balance and S&C, you'll have the ingredients for development. Have good coaches with effective schemes who game plan and play call well, and you'll have the ingredients for development. When players go through this dynamic, some will be really good and go on to bigger things. Those are the ones we say we 'developed.' Did we teach them some technique? Sure. But that ain't magic. Other kids went through the same program and weren't good. When we're winning, nobody much notices. When we lose, people gawk. People talk about Nick Saban's recruiting rankings but it matters a lot that those guys go against future pros every day in practice, just like our '01 team did.

I agree w/ what ur saying, but development is encompassing all of that.

The term or phrase is literally called coaching & development. What does that mean? It means knowing ur players strengths & weaknesses. What do the excel in, and what area do they fall short? Can strength be developed? What type of strength is being developed? Can u teach w/ footwork, tackling, cadence drills to help minimize false start penalties. Plays that accentuate a players strengths while minimizing their weakness.

Lemme give u a real life example of Lamar Jackson & John Harbaugh. They literally overhauled their playbook which was once upon a time centered around Joe Flacco’s abilities, to cater to Jackson. The playbook was created to his strengths, while minimizing weaknesses. Every off season, they would work & work on those weaknesses, but still call plays to his strengths to help minimize.

I’ve said this for a while, I’ve seen from the last 3 regimes in particular this propensity of trying to fit square pegs into round holes. That’s apart of development, or a lack thereof.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Well yes but guys can absolutely be developed physically mentally and from a strategic point. We see teams like Iowa St who are strong. Iowa develops players and coaches them up. It’s not all about talent. It’s also, as you pointed out, a character thing. Bryant McKinnie and Russell Maryland needed to WANT to change their bodies and become the stars they became.

Sure, but UM still sends more players to the pros than Iowa, despite our 'crappy development' and their 'good development'.

Hence my point on development being a murky concept.

 

[Ethnicsands]

I’m with Phillip Buchanan. I’m sick and tired of Lazy hires. When you look at it, the players wanted Coker and he turned out to be the worst thing that could have happened to the program. He took what was the top program to a state where it never recovered from. This next hire is key.
With respect to Evals. This is why i couldn’t care less about stars. I should have added how important player development is. You know this. Everyone does. And it’s not even about Saban. He selects the best of the best. Although i agree with what you said completely The next coach needs to find the 3 star kids that have potential. Realize Jaden Davis and Nick Bonitto should be here. Adjust your approach to what you have on the roster. etc

I've been critical of the lazy hires over and over around here. And vocal on evals. But it's easy to talk about evals. What does it mean, what are you looking for, for evals to be good, you need to be really detailed and analytically deep.

 

[Ethnicsands]

I agree w/ what ur saying, but development is encompassing all of that.

The term or phrase is literally called coaching & development. What does that mean? It means knowing ur players strengths & weaknesses. What do the excel in, and what area do they fall short? Can strength be developed? What type of strength is being developed? Can u teach w/ footwork, tackling, cadence drills to help minimize false start penalties. Plays that accentuate a players strengths while minimizing their weakness.

Lemme give u a real life example of Lamar Jackson & John Harbaugh. They literally overhauled their playbook which was once upon a time centered around Joe Flacco’s abilities, to cater to Jackson. The playbook was created to his strengths, while minimizing weaknesses. Every off season, they would work & work on those weaknesses, but still call plays to his strengths to help minimize.

I’ve said this for a while, I’ve seen from the last 3 regimes in particular this propensity of trying to fit square pegs into round holes. That’s apart of development, or a lack thereof.

It's not that development doesn't happen. It's that people aren't remotely clear about what they mean when they say it. It becomes some catch-all for 'coaches suck'. You yourself describe some things that aren't development but rather putting players in a position to win. Training on weaknesses is development. Calling better plays or changing scheme, that's play calling and scheme.

People say we recruit but then don't develop. 99% of the time, they have no idea what they're talking about because they judge our recruiting by stars and don't understand that we're evaluating poorly. So the starting point isn't what they assume.

At the same time, some of our kids get to the pros. Maybe they developed. Maybe they were just better athletes. Who knows.

We have a lot of problems as a program. Development is a piece of it, but a small piece, IMO, relative to all the others. If we evaluate better, fix the culture, improve S&C, create depth, improve schemes, game planning, play calling and motivation, then all the sudden people will think development improved. And it would, no doubt, not the least because competition drives development. But the things that are needed to be done can be described with a lot more specificity than a catch-all term like development.

 

[BoxingRobes]

So who had the bad takes in this thread...it surely wasn't me, but I'm curious.

 

[CT Cane 44]

Sure, but UM still sends more players to the pros than Iowa, despite our 'crappy development' and their 'good development'.

Hence my point on development being a murky concept.

Fair point but they as in Iowa are putting out George Kittle TJ Hockerson Brandon Scherff etc. Kirk Ferentz doesn’t recruit in the most talented area in the nation in his back yard. It’s Iowa

 

[CT Cane 44]

It's not that development doesn't happen. It's that people aren't remotely clear about what they mean when they say it. It becomes some catch-all for 'coaches suck'. You yourself describe some things that aren't development but rather putting players in a position to win. Training on weaknesses is development. Calling better plays or changing scheme, that's play calling and scheme.

People say we recruit but then don't develop. 99% of the time, they have no idea what they're talking about because they judge our recruiting by stars and don't understand that we're evaluating poorly. So the starting point isn't what they assume.

At the same time, some of our kids get to the pros. Maybe they developed. Maybe they were just better athletes. Who knows.

We have a lot of problems as a program. Development is a piece of it, but a small piece, IMO, relative to all the others. If we evaluate better, fix the culture, improve S&C, create depth, improve schemes, game planning, play calling and motivation, then all the sudden people will think development improved. And it would, no doubt, not the least because competition drives development. But the things that are needed to be done can be described with a lot more specificity than a catch-all term like development.

Good post

 

[Ethnicsands]

Fair point but they as in Iowa are putting out George Kittle TJ Hockerson Brandon Scherff etc. Kirk Ferentz doesn’t recruit in the most talented area in the nation in his back yard. It’s Iowa

Eh. There's arguments every which way but the argument that so and so develops and others don't, strikes me as not grounded in logic anyone can consistently defend. We've developed NFL players despite sucking. Or they developed themselves. But most of our problems are in areas you can actually explain -- evals, recruiting, culture, roster management, S&C, coaching, scheme, game plan, play calling, motivation, etc.

 

[CT Cane 44]

Eh. There's arguments every which way but the argument that so and so develops and others don't, strikes me as not grounded in logic anyone can consistently defend. We've developed NFL players despite sucking. Or they developed themselves. But most of our problems are in areas you can actually explain -- evals, recruiting, culture, roster management, S&C, coaching, scheme, game plan, play calling, motivation, etc.

Fair points. Whatever the case may be, it’s been done at this program before. It will be done again. I remember back to the last time Miami was elite. You would hear people say “ It’s Miami it sells itself” when we lose it’s “ no fans no stadium”. The same stuff was said when Butch was losing. At some point you have to start getting the dudes. Could 01 Miami play a 4-2-5 and be elite? yup! Larry Coker won a national title as the guy who collected the permission slips on road games. The problem is we don’t get enough dudes. The debate continues “ win and they will come “ or “ how do we win when players XY and Z don’t stay home” One way or another we need to get better players. No matter what scheme, it won’t change the fact 53 gets swallowed up by tackles, or 17 can’t take an angle or 26 would rather run away from the ball and not tackle the ball carrier. You can’t win that way.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Fair points. Whatever the case may be, it’s been done at this program before. It will be done again. I remember back to the last time Miami was elite. You would hear people say “ It’s Miami it sells itself” when we lose it’s “ no fans no stadium”. The same stuff was said when Butch was losing. At some point you have to start getting the dudes. Could 01 Miami play a 4-2-5 and be elite? yup! Larry Coker won a national title as the guy who collected the permission slips on road games. The problem is we don’t get enough dudes. The debate continues “ win and they will come “ or “ how do we win when players XY and Z don’t stay home” One way or another we need to get better players. No matter what scheme, it won’t change the fact 53 gets swallowed up by tackles, or 17 can’t take an angle or 26 would rather run away from the ball and not tackle the ball carrier. You can’t win that way.

It may not be done again here. It's not luck and it won't happen by itself. It's hard and takes coordinated effort, commitment and resources.

We do need better players but that doesn't just happen. It's not just recruiting either. That's selling. But who are you targeting? How do they fit your needs and culture. Oh, and by the by, what are your needs and culture anyhow?

It requires leadership and evaluations and coaching, S&C, development etc. All of it. But for that, we need infrastructure and a legit program builder as HC.

 

[CT Cane 44]

It may not be done again here. It's not luck and it won't happen by itself. It's hard and takes coordinated effort, commitment and resources.

We do need better players but that doesn't just happen. It's not just recruiting either. That's selling. But who are you targeting? How do they fit your needs and culture. Oh, and by the by, what are your needs and culture anyhow?

It requires leadership and evaluations and coaching, S&C, development etc. All of it. But for that, we need infrastructure and a legit program builder as HC.

Couldn’t agree more with everything you said. I just think Miami can win. I really do.

 

[TruCane81]

@Ethnicsands

What is your definition of development?

I ask because development IS a catch all term. Speaking for myself and I am sure others may agree, development is simply an easy way to say that players:1. Get consistently better and play well in your program. 2. Players consistently reach near their peak potential in your program.

Development DOES encompass EVERYTHING. Psychological growth. Emotional growth. Physical growth. Discipline. Technique. Scheme. Play calling.
Wins and losses are the main we judge development, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. How do your players look in comparison to their recruiting rankings? In comparison to their competition? What do the analytics say about their performance?

There is a difference between college and NFL development. Talent is a big deal with outcomes and players do develop themselves. Better programs consistently make players better so that they live up to or exceed projections. Mediocre and bad programs do the opposite. There is no secret sauce and there are too many variables that make it difficult to ACTUALLY predict what MOST players will become. Still a strong process produces much better percentages as a whole even though there is a ton of unpredictability in individual outcomes.

Saying that Miami has recruited well but does not develop does not mean that we don’t have bad evaluations. It means we are capable of competing for players that many other programs want as well. A 4 star prospect is a hot commodity and signing one is nothing to sneeze at. We do it better than 90% of fbs football programs. The problem is there were other 4 and 3 star players right in front of our noses we could have had but we **** the bed in the evaluation process too often to just be bad luck.

Development is all of the aspects that go into growing a prospect to their full potential. It breaks down into many categories though.

 

[Ethnicsands]

@Ethnicsands

What is your definition of development?

I ask because development IS a catch all term. Speaking for myself and I am sure others may agree, development is simply an easy way to say that players:1. Get consistently better and play well in your program. 2. Players consistently reach near their peak potential in your program.

Development DOES encompass EVERYTHING. Psychological growth. Emotional growth. Physical growth. Discipline. Technique. Scheme. Play calling.
Wins and losses are the main we judge development, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. How do your players look in comparison to their recruiting rankings? In comparison to their competition? What do the analytics say about their performance?

There is a difference between college and NFL development. Talent is a big deal with outcomes and players do develop themselves. Better programs consistently make players better so that they live up to or exceed projections. Mediocre and bad programs do the opposite. There is no secret sauce and there are too many variables that make it difficult to ACTUALLY predict what MOST players will become. Still a strong process produces much better percentages as a whole even though there is a ton of unpredictability in individual outcomes.

Saying that Miami has recruited well but does not develop does not mean that we don’t have bad evaluations. It means we are capable of competing for players that many other programs want as well. A 4 star prospect is a hot commodity and signing one is nothing to sneeze at. We do it better than 90% of fbs football programs. The problem is there were other 4 and 3 star players right in front of our noses we could have had but we **** the bed in the evaluation process too often to just be bad luck.

Development is all of the aspects that go into growing a prospect to their full potential. It breaks down into many categories though.

Development is one of those words people use but resist any clear explanation of what they really mean when they use it, so I don't trust it as used even if it has some merit in theory. More specifically, I think it's usually tossed around to describe an outcome (they got better!) rather than an input (how they got better).

It's not a very useful term. If a school takes more kids with athletic upside, some will turn out to be good and they'll be said to have 'developed.' If I bet on 38 at the roulette table, eventually I'll hit it and can then say I developed as a gambler. But then what do you do about a situation where Clemson takes LB prospects with less upside, but they play well at Clemson? Some will start threads saying our guys are better because they got drafted in the 6th round of the nfl draft. Maybe better. Did they 'develop' more? How do you show that? You'd need to compare more aspects of what you started with than we have access to and same for what happened.

I think most people mean 'development' to mean 'they got better' -- like you say. Some of that is S&C, some maturity, some training and skill development, and a LOT the result of coaches putting kids in a position to play. I'd say the biggest aspects of 'controllables' for coaches are culture and competition -- when they're right, you'll tend to get the most out of kids. When your culture and competition are weak, more kids won't develop fully.

Not disagreeing there's stuff that happens along the way that fits that label. Think it's used indiscriminately too often.

Also, our fans way too often imagine that our scrubs would be stars at Clemson, and the only logic was that we were so enamored of them when they got to UM, and Clemson's so good at this, that of course they would be. It's never a compelling argument, IMO.

Evaluate well, good S&C, good culture, good competition, a bit of technical training, a lot of scheme, game plan, play calling. That will allow kids to shine and the best ones to shine more, and everyone will be sure development is the explanation.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

It seems to me development is just the catch-all term people use to track a player's change in performance over time. If the change over time is positive, the player improved and was developed well. If not, he wasn't.

In reality, there are so many variables that contribute to player performance...