(I wrote this in 15 minutes...I do it for free...sorry in advance for the grammar...not that serious for me)
Who is Alex Smith?
Since 2005 up until a week ago I could care less to answer that question. He was a QB that San Francisco allowed to be pursued by the Dolphins...who ended up taking Tannehill instead. He was a QB that took his team to the front door of the Super Bowl, and a back-up to a QB that kicked the door in the next season.
Did you ever really want Alex Smith last year...did Miami...did San Fran? The answer is no...two teams passed...not for Manning, not for RG3, not for Luck...two teams passed for Tannehill and Kaepernick. Up until a week ago...how badly did you want Alex Smith?
San Fran and Miami worked Smith out, was up close and personal...the Chiefs made this choice at a time when they could have no contact. Smith was never an Eagle...he was never a Packer...if this choice is that important...get him in a room.
Sure Reid has contacts...but why choose a QB...a QB two teams passed on...without checking it out for yourself?
The stats lie...sure Smith's %'s and rating increased under Harbaugh...but his usage decreased. The two years under Harbaugh...San Fran ranked 31st in the NFL in pass attempts. San Fran was defined by defense and the power game.
The thing that bothers me about this situation. Reid's offense is dependent on the Quarterback to make plays. Even under Harbaugh...while Smith's rating increased...the TD's, the yardage really didn't. All indications do not point to an improved QB...points to an improved scheme to mask the QB.
The biggest issue with Smith is the lack of understanding where the numbers come from. The INT's decreased...the rating rose...but the sacks he took nearly doubled. This particular change is reflected in the rating...he didn't improve as a passer...he simply stopped making mistakes.
Make no mistake...we didn't get a good QB...we got the same QB by and large that was on the open market that few were clamoring for. We got a QB that has learned how to not make mistakes, in an offense that didn't ask him to throw much. That situation has changed...and it's important.
This isn't a brilliant move by Dorsey and Reid...it's a safe one. The film has been out for years...there is no re-writing Alex Smith's history. He's marginally better than we've had, and he's a vet with success...but he's not special.
People act like I'm not supposed to question...but in my heart...this move isn't one I can grip. I hope it works out, but I think it's a safe move...not the best move for the Kansas City Chiefs.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Thoughts on the 40
As a free safety I think I ran full speed on average twice a game. I was a 6'2" 210 pound kid with a 4.5 playing small college football...so naturally there was little need to ever run at full speed. The irony as a safety...the slower you play the better off you are.
It sounds blasphemes when any football player says they don't go full speed...but it's not. When playing with 10 other guys...you have to understand fits. You have to understand space in coverage, when to pass off routes. None of those situations call for full speed.
I learned that the hard way...over pursuing, vacating zones too quickly, taking shortcuts with footwork (rounding). In time the slower I played the better football player I became. Taking time in my read steps, keeping my balance, cleaning up my footwork for breaks.
The majority of runs are going to end after 5 yards...majority of passes will end in 10...the game isn't played 40 yards at a time. That's my contention with 40 yard times...it's a track and field measurement...it rarely serves as an adequate football measurement.
For the wide receivers on a 9 and the corners that defend them...it has a place along with other examples. But generally the game is played low...for the corners to the line...the gains are made before the ball is in the air or the QB hands off the ball. Those gains are made when you are playing low.
A 40 has two key phases...an acceleration phase (drive phase), and a deceleration phase. When a player gets crouched it mirrors the crouches taken in football. That crouch lengthens the quad, giving it a full range of motion (quad is dominant muscle in football)...it's important for explosion (squat, jump). So that part of the 40 can be applied to the game.
The other phase (majority of 40) isn't a football measurement...it isn't even a speed measurement. In a sprint after the first phase at the start that is largely quad dominant...deceleration happens. An athlete's ability to decrease the degree of acceleration is paramount.
Athletes do this by turning their hips, streamlining their motion, and making their stride more efficient. This particular motion...that happens with all runners in the 40...is largely non-existent in the game of football for most positions.
Most of football is played in that drive phase...the hips are rarely turned and typically players are taught to turn hips on contact. That's my fundamental problem with the 40 being an adequate football measurement...because it measures a motion that few football players will ever use.
It sounds blasphemes when any football player says they don't go full speed...but it's not. When playing with 10 other guys...you have to understand fits. You have to understand space in coverage, when to pass off routes. None of those situations call for full speed.
I learned that the hard way...over pursuing, vacating zones too quickly, taking shortcuts with footwork (rounding). In time the slower I played the better football player I became. Taking time in my read steps, keeping my balance, cleaning up my footwork for breaks.
The majority of runs are going to end after 5 yards...majority of passes will end in 10...the game isn't played 40 yards at a time. That's my contention with 40 yard times...it's a track and field measurement...it rarely serves as an adequate football measurement.
For the wide receivers on a 9 and the corners that defend them...it has a place along with other examples. But generally the game is played low...for the corners to the line...the gains are made before the ball is in the air or the QB hands off the ball. Those gains are made when you are playing low.
A 40 has two key phases...an acceleration phase (drive phase), and a deceleration phase. When a player gets crouched it mirrors the crouches taken in football. That crouch lengthens the quad, giving it a full range of motion (quad is dominant muscle in football)...it's important for explosion (squat, jump). So that part of the 40 can be applied to the game.
The other phase (majority of 40) isn't a football measurement...it isn't even a speed measurement. In a sprint after the first phase at the start that is largely quad dominant...deceleration happens. An athlete's ability to decrease the degree of acceleration is paramount.
Athletes do this by turning their hips, streamlining their motion, and making their stride more efficient. This particular motion...that happens with all runners in the 40...is largely non-existent in the game of football for most positions.
Most of football is played in that drive phase...the hips are rarely turned and typically players are taught to turn hips on contact. That's my fundamental problem with the 40 being an adequate football measurement...because it measures a motion that few football players will ever use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)