Prototypes

[puertorricane]

One thing I heard several times by coaches about recruiting, is one of the criterias they look for is if the love football.
We should go after football players, if they are physical freaks the better.

 

[Ethnicsands]

I don’t think that there’s really any evidence that “lore” or some type of osmotic absorption occurs with coaches that have had nothing to do with Miami or very little to do with Miami.

A new head coach is always going to trust himself and the people he employs, with those evaluations. Other than using whatever infrastructure exist, they make their own evaluation decisions. This is what you would expect.

We have had overall less than high-standard coaching, and therefore substandard, or less than ideal standard, evaluations. It only follows.

Or in other words we’ve had the type of coaching, recruiting and evaluations that lead to an average of 8 to 9 win game seasons, at best.

I have seen too many people get captured by their own bureaucracies in all walks of life from govt to business to church and charities, to believe that every new coach is unaffected by UM’s history. These guys all came here because of our past. They all have our past stars come back to talk to players, talk to campers, talk to coaches. They know what we had. I’m not trying to have a theoretical debate or win an argument. I can’t prove this. Just think especoally at LB and WR we’re chasing the wrong spec, not just evaluating badly against spec. And hence wondering why.

Obviously your last comment os correct, but within that, there are a host of reasons why. That’s where my question goes towards.

 

[Ethnicsands]

One thing I heard several times by coaches about recruiting, is one of the criterias they look for is if the love football.
We should go after football players, if they are physical freaks the better.

Good comment. Don’t think we’ve done that well enough.

But is love of football the same as love of competition? Or drive? Do tjey love the grind? Working out? Playing hoops, or poker? Some guys will compete at anything. Jordan, e.g. Pete Rose. Other guys, may love the game but aren’t hyper competitive. Would expect that competition is a bigger personality driver than love of game. I’d err that way anyhow.

 

[Swampcity]

Reading another thread got me thinking to whether we've had some guys over the years who distorted the prototype our staff recruited for at their position.

Examples:

- Vince Wilfork - not the typical UM 3 tech. Was so good. Coker then tried to recruit more big NG types. Abdullah and Dixon come to mind. Except there isn't another Big Vince and our recruiting base is more DT than NT. Meanwhile, DT-U had a brutal time recruiting dominating DTs for a long while. We had Lewis and Joseph go 1st round in '01, '03, then Big Vince in '04. Since then we've had 2 4th round DTs, both Coker era (Harris, K. Brown), then only RJ in 5th round. Since '04. Lesson: stick to the proven UM mold at DT unless you have a once in a generation guy like Wilfork.

- Andre Johnson - combined fast and quick with big and tough and hands. Before Dre our bigger WRs were more ball guys. The staff started looking for measurables IMO trying to replicate AJ. Leggett comes to mind. Jolla. It's not that we went away from fast smaller guys (Parrish, e.g.). But our mold for bigger guys was changed a bit. Since the Coker era, we had Dorsett go 1st as IIRC the fastest guy in that draft, Benjamin went 4th (fast as heck), and Osborn 5th. Plenty of problems with our evals at WR but IMO chasing measurables over playmaking is part of it. Lesson? Worry less about how you get to the ball and more about what you do when you get there.

- DJ Williams - our LBs were traditionally instinctive guys, IMO. We shifted to more of an athlete / projection approach. Gooden, Adkins, Sharpton. We had some of that previously (T. Russell comes to mind) but more of the UM LBs from the pre-'01 era were really LBs, not athletes first. The only LBs we've had drafted 4th and above since the Coker era recruits are Spence, McCarthy, Perryman and Shaq. McCarthy, I don't recall his recruitment and he was a lot better athlete than folks realize so not sure how he first the list but the other guys were good, solid LB instinct guys coming in, in my recollect. Lesson? Recruit LBs for LB. Athletes for DE.

Just another way to wonder about our evals. But like I always say, step 1 is knowing what you're looking for. Yes, recognizing fit to spec is core to evaluations. But you gotta start with your spec.

I agree ... let's just keep it simple ... Is the recruit a Balla? That should always be the first evaluation.

 

[grover]

One thing I heard several times by coaches about recruiting, is one of the criterias they look for is if the love football.
We should go after football players, if they are physical freaks the better.

Supposedly the 2021 class is full of those kids. I've drunk the Kool Aid and been poisoned enough times to wait and see. But you got to love the pedigrees many of them bring to the team.

 

[grover]

Only the blue bloods get those guys now. We are like UCF to those fan bases

You're really only talking about Bama and Clemson, and maybe Ohio State, though. We've won recruiting battles versus pretty much every else. We've lost them too. But after the big 2-3, we're competitive.

Gotta show we deserve to be in the conversation by winning 10+ every year and getting to a BCS playoff. Then we can go after their recruits, too.

 

[mirvin88]

Lesson? Recruit LBs for LB. Athletes for DE.

Flagg

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

I have seen too many people get captured by their own bureaucracies in all walks of life from govt to business to church and charities, to believe that every new coach is unaffected by UM’s history. These guys all came here because of our past. They all have our past stars come back to talk to players, talk to campers, talk to coaches. They know what we had. I’m not trying to have a theoretical debate or win an argument. I can’t prove this. Just think especoally at LB and WR we’re chasing the wrong spec, not just evaluating badly against spec. And hence wondering why.

Obviously your last comment os correct, but within that, there are a host of reasons why. That’s where my question goes towards.

Being affected by UM’s history, whatever that may mean, I don’t think has any realistic impact on how coaches recruit or who they recruit.

They recruit/evaluate based on their own experiences and what they’ve learned in the past which is how most people try to do things successfully. Whether do they are successful or not is a different matter.

I am not trying to win a debate, or score style points either, I just looked at your statement, evaluated it, and came to the conclusion that from my perspective it’s illogical for people that really don’t have much history with Miami to somehow use the past history of the type of players we had as some sort of template for recruiting now.

Just using what I consider logic and common sense to evaluate your theory. Nothing personal.

 

[Dwinstitles]

You're really only talking about Bama and Clemson, and maybe Ohio State, though. We've won recruiting battles versus pretty much every else. We've lost them too. But after the big 2-3, we're competitive.

Gotta show we deserve to be in the conversation by winning 10+ every year and getting to a BCS playoff. Then we can go after their recruits, too.

The think is the drop off between those elite athletes is too much to overcome. There isn't alot each cycle and if we are missing those the drop off is why u lose to bum *** UNC. If u get those freaks u smack those team easily yearly

 

[Ethnicsands]

Being affected by UM’s history, whatever that may mean, I don’t think has any realistic impact on how coaches recruit or who they recruit.

They recruit/evaluate based on their own experiences and what they’ve learned in the past which is how most people try to do things successfully. Whether do they are successful or not is a different matter.

I am not trying to win a debate, or score style points either, I just looked at your statement, evaluated it, and came to the conclusion that from my perspective it’s illogical for people that really don’t have much history with Miami to somehow use the past history of the type of players we had as some sort of template for recruiting now.

Just using what I consider logic and common sense to evaluate your theory. Nothing personal.

No offense taken, just a discussion.

My first example was how Wilfork biased our DT recruiting under Coker. That's the same HC so obviously different from your response.

W/re AJ, I mentioned Leggett and Jolla as follow-ups, both Coker also. Same point.

Re DJ, it's a more long-term issue in our LB recruiting, excepting Dorito, who was a former LB and had his own view.

So I haven't quite said what you're disagreeing with, though I ask about it, because I notice that especially at WR and LB, we've continued for a long time to recruit to a prototype that is a bad approach to the position. Who knows why. I'm suggesting one reason.

I do know that plenty of leaders go into organizations and end up going native, so to speak. There's nothing unusual about people adopting some of the beliefs (lore) of organizations they lead. That is time tested organizational behavior. It actually takes a strong leader to avoid this and change the organization's belief on some topics. And we certainly haven't had strong leaders. Just listen to Hurlie Brown in the recruiting video from the Golden years. He's giving you the 'UM' legacy view. He happened to be right in that discussion, but the point is, there are lots of ways that tribal beliefs get spread and reinforced. Not just here. Everywhere. But maybe it's all just bad luck.

Whatever the explanation, we're aiming at the wrong models at WR and LB. So a secondary point here is evaluation in my mind is really fitting a kid to the model you're seeking. How you define the spec is a separate aspect of evals. They converge, no doubt, on can the kid do the job in college. But when a HC says get me LBs like this, the staff can find the best ones out there, and it still may be the wrong spec they're targeting.

 

[305to954]

Great topic. And you see this happen around sports. And imo it comes from having analytical guys making personnel decisions. For instance in basketball the emergence of what GSW backcourt started had franchise after franchise tricked into thinking shooting more 3 would equal success. No. It works for GSW because u have the greatest shooter of all time and the greatest catch n shoot player beside him then they added the most efficient outside threat in KD.

in pro football you saw ppl try to duplicate the Tampa 2. Not understanding if you don’t have a rhonde at CB1, Derrick brooks at Mike and 3 tech like sapp, and rice off the that scheme probably won’t work.

As for us I see what you mean. I guy like big Vince was a future HOF in any scheme as he proved in NE the when he held down the NT. We used him as a 3tech. Ppl that big should not have quick first step like Vince did. You can’t just go looking for that. Same with Sean. Not only his explosiveness/fluidity at 6”3 225 but his instincts to play both safety positions at in any scheme. Rather single high, Filling the alley at SS or C2 hash to boundary a dude like that shouldn’t be compared with any Hs prospects (lavon ponder, Ray Ray come to mind)

I think it’s more important to evaluate talent that fits what you want to do rather than find the next super star based on measurables you think made that star special

 

[Bender]

Our own Clinton Portis was being recruited as a DB by hometown UF. A tape he sent to Miami got the Canes to recruit him as RB. Or so goes the story....

That same Clinton Portis didnt get why Sean Taylor wanted to play S at Miami instead of playing RB when he watched his HS tape.

 

[Arehel]

No offense taken, just a discussion.

My first example was how Wilfork biased our DT recruiting under Coker. That's the same HC so obviously different from your response.

W/re AJ, I mentioned Leggett and Jolla as follow-ups, both Coker also. Same point.

Re DJ, it's a more long-term issue in our LB recruiting, excepting Dorito, who was a former LB and had his own view.

So I haven't quite said what you're disagreeing with, though I ask about it, because I notice that especially at WR and LB, we've continued for a long time to recruit to a prototype that is a bad approach to the position. Who knows why. I'm suggesting one reason.

I do know that plenty of leaders go into organizations and end up going native, so to speak. There's nothing unusual about people adopting some of the beliefs (lore) of organizations they lead. That is time tested organizational behavior. It actually takes a strong leader to avoid this and change the organization's belief on some topics. And we certainly haven't had strong leaders. Just listen to Hurlie Brown in the recruiting video from the Golden years. He's giving you the 'UM' legacy view. He happened to be right in that discussion, but the point is, there are lots of ways that tribal beliefs get spread and reinforced. Not just here. Everywhere. But maybe it's all just bad luck.

Whatever the explanation, we're aiming at the wrong models at WR and LB. So a secondary point here is evaluation in my mind is really fitting a kid to the model you're seeking. How you define the spec is a separate aspect of evals. They converge, no doubt, on can the kid do the job in college. But when a HC says get me LBs like this, the staff can find the best ones out there, and it still may be the wrong spec they're targeting.

Just to go back on the Golden years, I don’t think they’re group we’re terrible recruiters, they excelled in certain position groups like OL DL TE and LB weren’t that bad at RB either, they were just awful schemers and coaches.

Now they didn’t get the best of, although, they had some studs in hindsight in, I don’t think they went after the Miami prototypes, they were just in love with measureables, in some places like DB and WR where in college it matter way less then in the pros.
Not saying the Golden years were good or he was just saying, he did find some good players, but his depth and reaches... woof. Maybe it’s a case of even a broken watch gets the time right twice a day, was such a strange era.

 

[Astcloud11]

Couldn't agree more on linebacker evals. I probably sound like a broken record but we need to stop recruiting tweener pass rushers with the intent of making them off the ball linebackers. Good size and athleticism doesn’t mean you can just make the transition from rushing into the backfield on every play to diagnosing plays and being in the right position every time. Smarts and instincts are more important. The best guys obviously have both and there’s certainly a floor for athleticism at the position but I’d take a stiff and slow Shaq Quarterman everyday over the athletically superior Zach McCloud. Corey Flag is probably going to be our starting MLB and he might have been our lowest rated linebacker recruit.

As for our quarterback issues, there’s two factors to blame. First, we’ve had four different OC/QB coaches in the last ten years. They all had different priorities it seems. Secondly, and more importantly, we haven’t been playing the numbers game until very recently. I used to be against recruiting QBs every year because I didn’t want to lose roster spots to guys who weren’t going to play or guys who would likely transfer if they didn’t win the job. Now, you HAVE to take a QB every year. You can’t hitch your wagon to one guy and hope and pray he works out or never gets hurt. You need to try to bring in a blue chip QB every year. We lucked out that Stephen Morris turned out to be a solid QB because he was just slated to be Teddy Bridgewater’s backup. Then we had to trot out Malik Rosier for two years because frankly, our staff never planned for Kaaya to leave and we had nobody besides a baseball player to play the position. The more recent seasons have been hit and miss but that’s why you sign guys every year. Imagine Payton Matocha taking all the snaps this spring because they didn’t recruit anyone else and were caught off guard by King’s injury. That’s exactly how Miami handled the QB position until recently.

This is false bro. We pulled Rosier and Kaaya at the same time. That's a good haul. The following class we got a project QB because hardly any QB wanted to sit behind Kaaya who had just started as a Frosh. Going into Kaaya's 2nd year, we had 4 other scholarship QBs. Only 1 was a JR/SR (Gray Crow). The following 3 years our QB evaluation is ultimately a failure, but all Blue chippers. Jack Allison, N'kosi Perry, and Jarren Williams. All 3 of those guys were top 10 of their position and consensus 4* QBs. We also got Cade Weldon as a project QB in the same class as Perry. The 2 classes after Stephen Morris were horrendous yeah, but as far as potential coming out of high school, we've had solid QB talent come in and either get injured or just simply didnt work out.

 

[DTP]

This is false bro. We pulled Rosier and Kaaya at the same time. That's a good haul. The following class we got a project QB because hardly any QB wanted to sit behind Kaaya who had just started as a Frosh. Going into Kaaya's 2nd year, we had 4 other scholarship QBs. Only 1 was a JR/SR (Gray Crow). The following 3 years our QB evaluation is ultimately a failure, but all Blue chippers. Jack Allison, N'kosi Perry, and Jarren Williams. All 3 of those guys were top 10 of their position and consensus 4* QBs. We also got Cade Weldon as a project QB in the same class as Perry. The 2 classes after Stephen Morris were horrendous yeah, but as far as potential coming out of high school, we've had solid QB talent come in and either get injured or just simply didnt work out.

There’s two types of QB recruits. Blue chip guys and depth guys. Blue chippers are the guys you bring in to be your starting quarterback or at least compete for the job. Depth guys are exactly that. Low ceiling guys. Guys who can be an emergency quarterback and run the scout team offense. Every QB Miami signed between Jacory Harris and Jack Allison was a depth guy besides Kaaya. We lucked into mild success with Stephen Morris and Malik Rosier but those guys got starting jobs simply because we had nobody else. Allison, Perry and Williams were all busts to an extent but at least the staff kept trying to bring guys in during those years. That’s why the key to finding good quarterbacks is quantity. It’s incredibly hard to project high school quarterbacks. Even the highest rated guys bust sometimes. That’s why you need to recruit one every year. There’s no reason for Miami to not sign a 4 star QB every year. The QB situation is probably better now than it’s been at any time since Gino Toretta was backing up Craig Erickson. We have an entrenched senior starter, two blue chip guys fighting to be his replacement next year, a depth guy who is at least capable of coming into a garbage time game and not crapping his pants and we’ve got another blue chip recruit who’s going to commit any day now. That’s what a real QB room should look like.

 

[schucane1]

Vilma came in weighing 185 lbs soaking wet. DJ came in weighing 220 lbs of chiseled muscle. To project Vilma would be a Hall of Famer and DJ a really good player in the NFL in their high school/college days would have been outlandish. We would be playing basketball at the Wellness Center on campus, and Shockey would be running stairs literally for hours by himself. These guys lived at Hecht and the 7th Floor. They guys had some dog in them.

I read yesterday Manny has a point system for extra work the kids put in. The old guys didn't have a point system. Either you complied and worked your *** off, or you didn't and you didn't play. Regardless of the lack of "drive" and "commitment" of the new kids, even when provided an opportunity, they **** the bed (Pope cannot catch still, Wiggins cannot catch still, the line is soft, etc). I do not recall Gore ****ting the bed, Portis, Moss, etc etc.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Just to go back on the Golden years, I don’t think they’re group we’re terrible recruiters, they excelled in certain position groups like OL DL TE and LB weren’t that bad at RB either, they were just awful schemers and coaches.

Now they didn’t get the best of, although, they had some studs in hindsight in, I don’t think they went after the Miami prototypes, they were just in love with measureables, in some places like DB and WR where in college it matter way less then in the pros.
Not saying the Golden years were good or he was just saying, he did find some good players, but his depth and reaches... woof. Maybe it’s a case of even a broken watch gets the time right twice a day, was such a strange era.

Golden was somewhat different. I agree and already mentioned that dorito’s LB evals were better and different from what we’ve seen from manny.

Golden’s wr evals were pretty bad and somewhat similarly flawed in that toughness and ball skills weren’t prioritized as much as some other traits. He did chase tall guys who weren’t good (d. Jones, j. Carter, e.g.).

Golden’s bigger recruiting issue was 3 things. 1, taking kids who had no chance to play here. He was okay at the prototype for top recruits but had no clue how to pick 3*s, and so we had guys like Larry Hope, Vernon Davis, Dortch, Gayot, Mayes, Henley, Dillard. Add to them guys who were never even coming here - Who he took a commit from just to bolster paper rankings. Bond, Griffin, Lockley, AJL. Then 2, DT, just flail after flail. At the end he left us Willis, RJ, Norton, so kudos, but we went through a lot of guys to find them. Hamilton, R. Fines, Briscoe, Ivery, Moore, J. Brown. Then 3, too many wasted spots at QB and OL. Crow, Dewey, Thompson, Shirreffs, Loftus, Mahoney, Milo.

But I do agree that Golden was at least recruiting to a different prototype than Manny and Coker.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Great topic. And you see this happen around sports. And imo it comes from having analytical guys making personnel decisions. For instance in basketball the emergence of what GSW backcourt started had franchise after franchise tricked into thinking shooting more 3 would equal success. No. It works for GSW because u have the greatest shooter of all time and the greatest catch n shoot player beside him then they added the most efficient outside threat in KD.

in pro football you saw ppl try to duplicate the Tampa 2. Not understanding if you don’t have a rhonde at CB1, Derrick brooks at Mike and 3 tech like sapp, and rice off the that scheme probably won’t work.

As for us I see what you mean. I guy like big Vince was a future HOF in any scheme as he proved in NE the when he held down the NT. We used him as a 3tech. Ppl that big should not have quick first step like Vince did. You can’t just go looking for that. Same with Sean. Not only his explosiveness/fluidity at 6”3 225 but his instincts to play both safety positions at in any scheme. Rather single high, Filling the alley at SS or C2 hash to boundary a dude like that shouldn’t be compared with any Hs prospects (lavon ponder, Ray Ray come to mind)

I think it’s more important to evaluate talent that fits what you want to do rather than find the next super star based on measurables you think made that star special

Great response. Agree with all of this. I focused on a few positions where we seem to have ‘systematic error,’ not just bad evals. I didn’t mention ST for two reasons. First, because we’ve evaluated well enough and had a history of good safeties before and after him, and second because ST despite his athleticism was a safety by instinct also.

LB and WR stand out most to me. OL we’ve just evaluated poorly but I don’t see a pattern behind the bad evals. We’ve taken big guys, thin guys, etc. not enough athletes and not enough toughness, imo. Same with QB. Terrible evals.

DE and RB we’ve done okay. CB has been mostly about recruiting misses more than evals, though we’ve passed on smaller qbs we should have taken for way too lomg. Could have mentioned that. Maybe the Rumph/Rolle effect.

Elsewhere I’ve mentioned the intangibles and screening for them. This discussion is more about the measurables we over-fpcus on at some positions.

 

[305to954]

There’s two types of QB recruits. Blue chip guys and depth guys. Blue chippers are the guys you bring in to be your starting quarterback or at least compete for the job. Depth guys are exactly that. Low ceiling guys. Guys who can be an emergency quarterback and run the scout team offense. Every QB Miami signed between Jacory Harris and Jack Allison was a depth guy besides Kaaya. We lucked into mild success with Stephen Morris and Malik Rosier but those guys got starting jobs simply because we had nobody else. Allison, Perry and Williams were all busts to an extent but at least the staff kept trying to bring guys in during those years. That’s why the key to finding good quarterbacks is quantity. It’s incredibly hard to project high school quarterbacks. Even the highest rated guys bust sometimes. That’s why you need to recruit one every year. There’s no reason for Miami to not sign a 4 star QB every year. The QB situation is probably better now than it’s been at any time since Gino Toretta was backing up Craig Erickson. We have an entrenched senior starter, two blue chip guys fighting to be his replacement next year, a depth guy who is at least capable of coming into a garbage time game and not crapping his pants and we’ve got another blue chip recruit who’s going to commit any day now. That’s what a real QB room should look like.

Correct. Every cycle you need to bring in 1 QB who can project as a future starter. You can’t have a class like we did with gray crow and Preston dewy. One of those types are fine but no matter who QB1 is every cycle you need a Starter level guy..Coker didn’t understand that. Shannon didn’t understand that. Golden didn’t understand it. MR got it and manny seems to get that. Our QB room looks like a quality level room with King, Tyler and jake. Then you have Payton and we see to be bringing in jaccuri

 

[305to954]

Great response. Agree with all of this. I focused on a few positions where we seem to have ‘systematic error,’ not just bad evals. I didn’t mention ST for two reasons. First, because we’ve evaluated well enough and had a history of good safeties before and after him, and second because ST despite his athleticism was a safety by instinct also.

LB and WR stand out most to me. OL we’ve just evaluated poorly but I don’t see a pattern behind the bad evals. We’ve taken big guys, thin guys, etc. not enough athletes and not enough toughness, imo. Same with QB. Terrible evals.

DE and RB we’ve done okay. CB has been mostly about recruiting misses more than evals, though we’ve passed on smaller qbs we should have taken for way too lomg. Could have mentioned that. Maybe the Rumph/Rolle effect.

Elsewhere I’ve mentioned the intangibles and screening for them. This discussion is more about the measurables we over-fpcus on at some positions.

The CB position is very interesting too me because that’s the 1 position I believe that in today’s game you need a good combo of length and speed on the outside if you want to play heavy Cat cover. Which is the defense most teams use to combat today’s schemes. You look at the next level and most the top guys aside from Jair, Harris JR and Casey Hayward, all of have length and and run. And the smaller guys usually are more zone type guys who are cat Quick and react

Every team (aside from Miami) seems to have big body guys on the outside at WR. You look at the Bamas, Clemson and recent DBU OSU and they seem to set a high premium for speed and length on the outside. **** Bama don’t seem to recruit u as a outside corner unless your 6”0 or better now.

Now there’s always a place for a kid like Bandy and Couch in the slot in today’s game but a guy that size has to have that pitt bull mentality and be ready to hit. Which both do.

outside corner or the only position that you need prototypical size and speed if you want to compete at a elite level in CFB Imo..every other position especially on defense you can get ballers that come in different shapes n sizes