forums

Joe Brady Interview

Some ppl just get it...and some ppl don’t.

As someone else said it’s depressing how bad Blake James has been at identifying the traits that successful coaches have in common.
 
Advertisement
Square peg round hole philosophy has been quite remarkable with the coaching staffs we’ve had last 15 years. I see a common denominator with that mentality (Losses).
 
MichiCANE said:
"it’s not about running a system and just plugging it in and saying, ‘this is what we’re doing.’ It’s about finding out what they do well and running those plays and putting them in the position to have success."

Why is this so hard to understand for play callers at Miami? For ***** sake
Click to expand...
There may be a guy in New England who has won a few super bowls and he might have something to say about this.
 
Advertisement
MichiCANE said:
"it’s not about running a system and just plugging it in and saying, ‘this is what we’re doing.’ It’s about finding out what they do well and running those plays and putting them in the position to have success."

Why is this so hard to understand for play callers at Miami? For ***** sake
Click to expand...

This flies in the face of 100 years of football. Football is the closest thing to war without being in battle. It was fashioned that way in the inception days. Football has always been: devise a strategy, prepare your troops/condition them for war, drill your troops for battle, ensure execution at the highest level, go win the war.

The thought process of listening to your troops' input, devising your battle plans based on the specific skills of the collection of individuals you have, detailing the WHY to your subordinates is not something that generals ever did and its not something that coaches have taken with alacrity en masse.

I'm not surprised we haven't had that here because there aren't many coaches that TRULY believe in this approach.
 
Advertisement
sitzee said:
Just announced new HC at UNLV Oregon OC Marcus Arroyo
Click to expand...
Whats funny is since UO has such a high standard of offensive output and standard from their success with lighting up scoreboards earlier this decade, that they werent really fond of their OC and felt like he wasted the talent of their qb.. They are happy someone came and "stole" Arroyo..
 
mikedeep97 said:
This flies in the face of 100 years of football. Football is the closest thing to war without being in battle. It was fashioned that way in the inception days. Football has always been: devise a strategy, prepare your troops/condition them for war, drill your troops for battle, ensure execution at the highest level, go win the war.

The thought process of listening to your troops' input, devising your battle plans based on the specific skills of the collection of individuals you have, detailing the WHY to your subordinates is not something that generals ever did and its not something that coaches have taken with alacrity en masse.

I'm not surprised we haven't had that here because there aren't many coaches that TRULY believe in this approach.
Click to expand...
Didnt take what he said that way.. I think what he said to use your analogy is that he looks at his troops and the resources they have at disposal and says hey we dont have 100 tanks to just run over opponents, but we got these planes and we got these guys with these skills. I feel like to put them in best position to succeed we should attack in this way which works better than what we have done in last war..

What our guys have basically said last 10 years is, this is who we are, and who we are has worked for last 25 years of battle, we will continue to do this because this is who we are.. Regardless of new ways, technology and resources, we will stick to this way because it has always worked and only reason it doesnt work is because the soldiers we have are not able to execute the orders given to them,
 
I wonder how many Joe Bradys exists around the NFL(maybe even CFB) tucked away as analysts on good teams, while the same idiots like Enos and Matt Canada keep getting passed around like a blunt as OCs
 
Advertisement
skyman said:
Didnt take what he said that way.. I think what he said to use your analogy is that he looks at his troops and the resources they have at disposal and says hey we dont have 100 tanks to just run over opponents, but we got these planes and we got these guys with these skills. I feel like to put them in best position to succeed we should attack in this way which works better than what we have done in last war..

What our guys have basically said last 10 years is, this is who we are, and who we are has worked for last 25 years of battle, we will continue to do this because this is who we are.. Regardless of new ways, technology and resources, we will stick to this way because it has always worked and only reason it doesnt work is because the soldiers we have are not able to execute the orders given to them,
Click to expand...

My response was an answer to the inferred question: "Why can't we have this here?" or "Why were Richt and Enos so stubborn when this guy clearly gets it?"

I agree with your take. I was just explaining why they said, "[...] this is who we are, and who we are has worked for last 25 years of battle, we will continue to do this because this is who we are.."
 
Canes Device said:
I wonder how many Joe Bradys exists around the NFL(maybe even CFB) tucked away as analysts on good teams, while the same idiots like Enos and Matt Canada keep getting passed around like a blunt as OCs
Click to expand...

While your general point is true of recycled OCs (which happens in college and the NFL), Canada is different from Enos in that he actually does vary the pace of his offense and the huddle and he somewhat adapts to personnel strength.
 
Canes Device said:
I wonder how many Joe Bradys exists around the NFL(maybe even CFB) tucked away as analysts on good teams, while the same idiots like Enos and Matt Canada keep getting passed around like a blunt as OCs
Click to expand...
I lol'ed....they would be considered bobby brown...not loud
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top