Ursa Major said:
BWahlberg said:
Grizfan-24 said:
My experience with college position coaches, is that some of them who have been around for 1.2 million years aren't worth a crap. Yet they get hired because of the programs they have been with.
In most cases I will take a grad assistant who works hard and is willing to adapt and get better over someone who has coached at half of the SEC/Pac 12 schools. This kid sounds like the type of coach I would want on the staff.
1. He is a analyst. Which means he watched a ton of football and that allows him to use that knowledge to communicate to his players.
2. He was a defensive guy, which means he understands coverages and how to beat them.
If I were to hire a wide receivers coach in a spread offense, this is the type of guy I would look for. Perfect fit and comes here with a desire to move up, which is good. I think a really good hire. But I guess if you can find fault in things, you'll find it here.
Great post
+2
For GF24, posting on e-griz has to be the equivalent of teaching at the Montana School for the Deaf and the Blind.
Ha ha. Thanks. :thumb:
Both guys that Mick Delaney has hired are detail oriented football coaches. I have been a big proponent of learning the game of coaching through film work. It is one thing to have played the game at a high level and learn it through years of experience, but for most of us in the profession we weren't blessed with the athletic ability to play the game for 20 years. I had to learn the game by spending hours upon hours of watching film. I owe my first head coach I worked for a huge debt of gratitude for putting me in charge of scouting and game film before I did any actual coaching.
I know both of these guys don't have the resume, but to me it is the substance of what they have done rather than where they have been at. Just my two cents.
