I liked Kirby's post too. We know each other well from the Kool Aid/Sunshine program.:lol:. (He's my sponsor)
It's not you. I gotta dig, but I'll see if I can find it. I think they just had too high hopes for the O-line, but I doubt any coach would say. "Well our O-line is.... eh. So anyway...."
Here's what I've got: I realize it's close enough, but I read it more as a wish or hypthetical. It's all good, though. Because clearly this line wasn't the best - and it showed early on. 2theadvocate.com | Sports | Not as advertised — Baton Rouge, LA
That's cool...I just had to bust your nads. I share a lot of your frustrations and embrace your concepts of constructive criticism and skepticism as well. I can't help but think that lack of playing time for people like Sheppard are in part due to an embarrassment of recruiting riches over the last few years. Sheppard is not a "pure QB" and I don't think he was recruited to be one. If he's intended to be a WR, there are several players on the team who had paid their dues in terms of doing everything that was asked of them for the years before Sheppard arrived. I would think it would be unfair of guys that were here for a couple of years working their tails off to suddenly be "further back in line" on the depth chart simply because a stud recruit comes in. I'm speculating here, but one of Miles' job is to keep the locker room happy and I think he makes playing time decisions - in part - with those considerations in mind. The depth chart is probably not a pure meritocracy for that reason. It would be different in other programs where you might have one excellent football player at a given position and the rest were mediocre. In that case, your stud recruits move toward the front of the playing time line. In terms of player development, I tend to hold the players as responsible as the coaches in that department. The players need to have a level of gifted talent and the coaches have to have a level of competence; but if the players simply "show up" at practices and film sessions and do not put the required work and focus into their game, then they will probably not rise to their potential. The academic equivalent is the student who shows up to class but does not put much effort into studying and mastering the knowledge presented for the course. They may pass the exams, but they probably will never make the Dean's list.
Thanks man. You are right though its like playing phone; after so long one thing that has been quoted so man times often gets distorted to something that it wasn't. Thanks for the clarification.
I completely see where you're coming from here. I just keep saying at the start of practice for the year make it very clear that every week you can loose you starting position. I know that might be kind of harsh but this way all the kids that have it will bust their a$$ to keep it and the kids that want the starting position will push the others and then the whole team gets better. I really just dont like the entitlement idea. It sucks but that's the game I mean if there is some one better than you and they are younger they should still get the start I dont care how long you rode the bench. If the older guy in this situation wants to start well he should put the time in and earn it. Just my thinking; hell that's why I never played football I wouldn't be able to cut it either. I agree with you 1000000% here. You can have all the raw talent in the world but if a guy doesn't try to develop his talent then it is a waste. On the flip side you can have a smart guy who is coached up and then suddenly some one who may not have won a national championship or made it to the NFL is getting drafted (ie. Matt Flynn).
