We all process the world differently. For instance my girl and I could be watching the Titanic on television. We all know that the ship is about to go under. They hit the iceberg and the ship was sinking and I automatically think, "ain't no way in hell I wouldn't find a way to get off that boat". I eat my popcorn and just miffed at what I see. Many people just accepting their fate. The movie ends and for me it's off to yard work or an errand; the movie doesn't rent space in my head. I look over and I see the tears building up in my old ladies eyes. Then she poses a question that I am sure many of you got, "would you do that for me"? WTF, I disconnected from that reality a long time ago. I say, "yeah", it's a little one word response that makes my day to day living a lot more enjoyable. See we both saw the same movie but in damn near 3 hours we processed what we saw completely differently. It's an extreme example but still an example on how two people can see the same thing but process it completely differently.
In sports these interpretations differ from man to man as they do with my old lady. I grew up with a kid named Orlandis Williams that ended up playing football at La Tech and in the Semi-Pros. The kid was a natural, put him on the court and he would get 15ppg, on the football field he could play QB, RB, WR, CB, S, LB with equal success. It's what many call a "gamer". He was 6ft and 180 pounds with what I would guess the speed at a low 4.6. Myself on the other hand was 6'2" 200lbs and ran a low 4.5. Unlike Orlandis sports didn't come naturally. In life like in sports I have to overanalyze any and everything, which in turn puts a lot of doubt in me. In some aspects in life it's a gift, in sports it has been a hinderance.
When I played football in order for me to be comfortable with any decision I made on the field I had to put enough time overanalyzing the opponent. I would study film as far as 3 years back on a team to be sure that I knew the coaches plays. I had to know what they did on 1st down, on 2nd and 8, 2nd and 4. I had to know what they did out of each formation. I had to know what they did on the right hash mark, on the left hash mark, and in the middle of the field. I had to know the stances of the lineman and any variances in their stance if it was giving me a tip. I had to know the spacing of the wide receivers and determine what routes they ran based on the space. I had to know if there were any variances in their body language pre snap as a tip on wether they were getting the ball. I had to know variances in their feet to determine what direction they were going initially. I was able to process most if not all of this information pre snap based on the information I gathered in the week. That's a process many football players use but it's specific to a person's personality. Wether you are in IT, or a custodian. For some people let alone athletes you got people where they have the "feel", where they just have a natural ability to do a task. For others they have to have all the information in order to make a decision.
This is something that is overlooked in sports. Sure they have the wonderlick test to measure intelligence, but rarely do teams, or the general public look at the ways that athletes and people in general process information. For example Peyton Manning is going to process information throughout the week similar to the example I gave of myself above. 80% of the time I knew the play in college before the ball was snapped. On the surface it looked like I played reckless, but I processed enough information to the point where I knew the play. That's Peyton Manning, he knows where the ball is going a majority of the time before the ball is snapped. Brett Favre is the opposite. Brett Favre plays based on the premise of what he feels, terms attached to him are "gunslinger", and "gamer". Peyton never had those labels attached to him. Generally because of those labels we have a sense to what those QB's thought process was, but we don't look at it specifically. Both throw touchdowns and both throw interceptions. The difference is Mannings success and failures are rooted in what he thinks is going to happen, Farve success and failures are based on what he feels is happening, subtle yet important differences.
Physical ability is important. I may have a similar mental process to Manning but I can barely throw a ball 40 yards. You have to have talent to play in the NFL. But the mental game is never considered. Put Manning in an offense like the West Coast where plays are scripted and he has to depend on his instincts/feel to make it work, and you don't have the same QB. Develop Manning with a coach that doesn't have the same mental makeup like Dungy/Moore and you have a different QB. That's what most people miss that cover sports. Kiper can rave about an arm. Leaf's and Jamarcus Russel's talent was undeniable but I bet nobody analyzed what their mental process was in order to determine their decisions.
As a Kansas City Chiefs fan we see both Matt Cassel and Ricky Stanzi. Matt Cassel's physical ability is not that of Manning's, but his mental approach is similar. Coaches rave about his work ethic. But he constantly has someone making decisions for him. Which in term makes him rely on his "feel" and not his brain. He is not allowed to go to the line and make adjustments, not allowed to call his own plays. Not saying this turns him into a Pro Bowler but that approach matches his mental makeup. Stanzi on the other hand is what you call a "gamer". He doesn't make decisions that he thinks is right but that he feels is right. That's the guy who you call a plays for, and will thrive in that setting. Unlike Cassel his mind doesn't limit him. He can scan no matter what the play is and make the right decision. That screen pass against the Chargers, Stanzi because he is dependent on feel would have seen that the play wasn't there. Cassel because of his mental approach needs time at the line to be comfortable. If rushed he will make the play based on what he has determined is right based on his mind. Against San Diego that screen was called pre snap and he made the throw. He made it because it was decided prior to the play, he didn't process what was there on feel, he decided based on what was supposed to be there. That's why this style of play calling doesn't suit his mind. It relies on someone with feel for what is happening. That's why he is so good in the two minute, he has the time to scan pre snap and eliminate reads.
Obviously the mind is measured through GPA, wonderlick, ACT, etc. But the process of how one makes decisions is never evaluated, and that process is the biggest culprit outside of raw talent for success and failure. Some teams get lucky. They draft a player that mentally fits the profile of the staff and gameplan. I provide no answers to remedying teams from making bad choices. I just present to you another angle in which to evaluate the game that isn't being considered.
No comments:
Post a Comment