Posts tagged Matt Waldman

Grinding Tape: NIU RB Chad Spann Part II

0 Comments read Players, Running Back

In Part I of the Grinding Tape Series, Mid American Conference MVP Chad Spann explained the concepts behind plays that require a running back to understand blocking schemes, defensive tendencies, and reading keys. This week, he reveals how quickly a runner needs to be able to process information to choose a hole, ball security protocol, and the importance of minimizing surface area to become a strong, after-contact runner.

2nd and 7 12:43 1st Quarter

Waldman: Describe the next play for us.

Spann: This is “11” personnel [1 back and 1 tight end]. We’ve got two receivers out to the left, we have a tight end to the left, and we’ve got another receiver on the bottom. We’re in the Pistol.

Basically this is our Power. We generally run Power out of our 21 personnel.

However, our slot receivers have beaten a lot of guys deep and we’ve decided as an adjustment to line up with three receivers, hopefully pulling the linebacker out of the box with that third receiver and still run a power.

Now the guy that is being pulled out of the box is the SAM linebacker and [if we were running the play from 21 personnel rather than 11 personnel] he would be the fullback’s guy.

Since the fullback’s not in we’re hoping that the SAM has the slot receiver in man coverage so we can use our same blocking scheme up front to take on the two linebackers that are still in the box.

Power play from "11 personnel"

Waldman: So what actually happens here?

Spann: On this particular play the safety gets down into the box and we don’t have anyone to block him. Our guy who usually goes to block the safety is that slot receiver, but now he’s man-up on the linebacker (Above).

Post Snap

Blocking Scheme for 11 Personnel Power
Waldman: At the snap, the slot receiver veers to the left as if he’s running a swing screen behind the outside receiver and the linebacker initially follows him. But that leaves the safety…

Spann: …who sets the edge (below) and the linebacker cuts the pulling guard, which jumbles up the whole play.

Safety setting the edge and linebacker cutting pulling guard at line of scrimmage.

Waldman: Otherwise, the tight end and left tackle do a nice job of sealing the defensive end inside and you were decisive. You didn’t try to bounce the play outside; you lowered your pads into the crease and drove forward for a yard rather than risk a loss.

How tempting is it for a running back to want to bounce a run outside? You have to have a good feeling here that you’re not going to get much taking it through a small crease that’s well defended. But if you just could beat that one guy to the edge it’s a big gain. I see college runners try to do this all the time and when they get to the pros they struggle.

Finishing downhill.

Spann: One thing we’re always taught as runners is that the easiest way to be brought down is by running sideways (east west). That’s the easiest tackle for a defender. You won’t see me, or any running back on this team, running east west a lot and making cutbacks that way because we know we would be making things a lot easier for a defender to tackle us. And there’s always a chance somebody misses a tackle when you’re heading north south and because you’re heading downhill you’re in good shape to make a positive play.

3rd and 6, 12:06 1st Quarter

Waldman: You gain 12 yards on this play on a very decisive run, bouncing it to left end from a three-receiver set.

Spann: This is our zone read play. I essentially have the same rules on this play as I would for our inside zone play. I’m going to take my steps while looking at the A-gap player who is going to be double-teamed back to the MIKE linebacker [by the right guard and right tackle]. As I’m getting the handoff and running through the play I’m watching where the A-gap player goes. That player is going to set the hole for me.

What kills zone plays is penetration and that’s what they get on this play. I have a hole when the A-gap player goes to the right; it is between the center and the tackle blocking down.

Intended hole with double team of A-gap defender on front side.

Spann: We’re going to work a lot of double teams on this. We’re running to the left and [as I mentioned above ] the center and guard on the front side are going to double team the A-gap player – the one-technique player –to the linebacker (No. 45).

Now the backside guard and tackle are going to double team that three-technique up to the other linebacker (No.32) who is in the box (below).

Both double teams of one-technique (left side) and three-technique (right side).

Spann: So the play side tackle (the left tackle) is going to block the defensive end. The tight end on the backside is going to go to the next linebacker (who is outside the box and listed as “OLB” to the right of the TE). The tight end is going to seal the linebacker off.

The holes that I usually see are off of that center-guard double team (above). If the one-technique tries to go outside the guard then the center is going to come off the block and get to the linebacker. If the one-technique goes the other way or stays where he is then usually the guard will come off the block and get to the linebacker.

Waldman: In essence, you’re explaining the blocks that should open lanes for you to get to the second level if they are successful. With the zone-read play, there is a key player, correct?

Spann: We’re reading the backside tackle on this play. The quarterback is reading to see if the backside tackle comes straight up the field. If so, he’s giving me the ball. If the backside tackle is keying me then the quarterback is going to keep it.

Waldman: Let’s now see how the play actually develops after the snap and not just in theory.

Zone-read post-snap movement.

Waldman: There are a lot of  things happening here on the line. Let’s start with the one-technique/A-gap player you’re watching.

Spann: In this case the one-technique tries to go across the guard’s face because the line is executing a stunt [the left defensive end is looping inside of the one-technique/A-gap defensive tackle].

It wasn’t that [well executed because] where they stunted with the defensive end, it opened up the left side of the line.

When the defensive end came around the offensive line stayed on the same course. The stunt caused the left tackle to pick up the linebacker (No.45). And where the play was designed for the center to take No.45, now he’s picking up the defensive end.

Waldman: When I first watched the play it appeared as if it was originally designed for you to run off left tackle. So its pretty eye-opening to see that the play design was an inside run. When did you know you were taking this play outside?

Spann: When I see our left tackle take the linebacker (N0.45) and our backside (right) tackle getting pushed back into the hole due to penetration, which kills all zone plays.

The LDE stunts inside the one-technique and the LT takes LB (No.45).

Waldman: So you take the run further outside…

Spann: I take it a little bit further to one more hole. When I do,  the tackle knows where I’m at and I cut inside of him as he pushes the linebacker outside.

Waldman: And this is where you press the hole. Can you explain that concept?

Spann:  I set the block up by sticking my foot into the ground outside of the tackle to make that linebacker come up and put the tackle in a better position to make this block as I cut inside of him. As I do that it makes the hole bigger.

Pressing the hole created by the left tackle.

Waldman: When you spot your left tackle coming outside to seal the edge you take it to that one hole over and  make a decisive cut inside the tackle.  That press and cut also ruins the corner’s angle on you. You then  burst through the hole and up the line of scrimmage for a 12-yard gain.

End of run.

Waldman: Let’s talk a little bit about ball security. I always hear that the basic rule is to carry the ball under the outside arm. On this play you run the ball up the left hash and have the ball under your right arm for most of the play.  Can you clarify the protocol for ball security on a play like this one?

Spann: You always want the ball in your outside hand but as you look at this play, you’re going to naturally have the ball in your inside hand because you are coming across the quarterback during the exchange. If you want to have a proper hand off on this play, it’s going to end up in your right arm.

Now if I hit this play normally where I would have hit it, I would hit right inside the backside (right) tackle. This would have kept me on the right side of the play and I would have the ball in my right hand.

But because the defender got penetration and I had to bounce the play out to the next hole.  I had already made the decision to keep it in my right hand and I hadn’t changed hands yet because I don’t know exactly where I’m going and I’m still in a crowd of people.

You’ll never want to change hands in a crowd of people, but if you watch at the very last second before I get tackled, I’m switching hands and trying to use my inside hand to stiff arm this guy but I couldn’t get it off in time. My first available time to switch the ball was when I cleared that tackle’s block and that’s when the defender came up.

3rd and 1 10:24 1st Quarter

Waldman: This formation looks a lot like the zone-read we just watched.

Spann:It looks a lot like the play we looked at a second ago – a zone-read – but it’s a completely different play. This play is 11 personnel with two receivers to the right side and another receiver to the left and I’m in the shotgun to the right.

The subtle difference is that if you look at my stance in this play (below) and you look at it on the other play, I’m a lot tighter to the quarterback on this play. I was a yard deeper than the quarterback who was five yards deep on the last play. On this play, I’m right on his toes. I also lined up in the B-gap on the previous play, but now I’m over the tackle.

Pre-snap of what appears to be a zone-read, but is a full zone with line slanting left.

Spann: The reason why we do this is because the last play was like an inside zone play where we use double teams to get up to the linebackers. This play is a full zone and while I’m going to read it the exact same way as the other play, the blocking up front is going to be different. Everyone is going to be moving on their path to the left and get up to the second level.

Line slants zone left, LDE stunts inside and one-technique (RDT) loops behind RDE outside.

Waldman: Once again, we see the defensive end on the play side (left) stunt to the inside. You head to the left, dip outside of No.32 in the hole and pick up the first down. After what you explained to me with the last play, I’m left wondering if this was the intended direction of the play or another read and react situation.

Spann: There really is no place where this is supposed to hit. It hits outside a lot if that three-technique  to the play side (the LDT) comes downhill. If everyone on the defensive line is fanning to the left it’s going to cut back and be more of a downhill play. So there’s many places where this play can hit unlike the last one and I’m just supposed to find a hole and get into it.

Waldman: So what do you remember thinking or reacting to on this play?

Hole opening as Spann enters the mesh.

Spann: So you see me coming through the mesh. It’s not a read any more; the quarterback is going to give it me and I’m looking the whole time where I’m going, which was actually the same for the last zone read play.

But as soon as that hole presents itself I have to get through it as fast as I can. It’s third and one and we have to get the first down so I’m not trying to pick up a whole lot of yards. I see this hole where I can get one yard and I’m going to get it right now – that’s my mindset on this play.

That’s how we approach this play. We started running this play against Western Michigan this year and we actually ran it a lot my sophomore year, but we got away from it. It hits well. It hits play side a lot more than the [zone-read] play might. The zone read play might hit backside more where the quarterback keeps it.

Waldman: It’s interesting to see that when you get close to the first down marker on this play you make a move away from No.32 who jumps into your path. One thing I often see good short yardage runners do is when they are about to face contact head-on they are able to turn away or get sideways and pull that player down hill – almost backing their way down field. Is that more of an instinctive move or is it something you’ve watched other backs do?

Spann in the hole and dipping away from two linebackers for extra yardage.
Spann dips away from LB No.32 and gets skinny to turn away from OLB to get extra yardage.

Spann: It is kind of instinctive, but it is also something that can be worked on as well. We’ll go through bag drills before practice starts and we’ll run over the bags forward with our coach standing at the goal line and he’ll be a yard between the goal line and the boundary and we have to duck our shoulder to get into the end zone.

One thing that they stress is to take your numbers away from the defender so they can’t hit me square. So being able to keep them from hitting me square gives me an advantage.

Think about when a linebacker blitzes and a running back has to pick him up. A linebacker is going to lower his shoulder where the running back has to stay square to take it on. It’s exactly like that.

But this time the linebacker is going to try to tackle me square and I’m going to lower my shoulder so I have the advantage because he has less [surface] area to hit so I can run through it or I can deflect it or drag him forward because my momentum is going one direction at a sharper angle than his.

Waldman: When I watch runners who are good “after-contact” ball carriers, it seems like they are trying to give a defender as little surface area as possible to tackle.

And when they attack a defender, they do so with the idea of forcing the defender to grab one point with a lot of force behind it. When a back is moving like this,  it must be like trying to tackle the front of a spear or a club for the defender. It’s harder to tackle one point than several points of contact.

Spann: Exactly. When I can lower my shoulder and put it into your chest, I’m going to hit you first. As I mentioned in the Q&A we did, you either hit or be hit.

So when I turn my shoulders and dip my shoulder into somebody, I plan on hitting him first. He’s not going to be able to react fast enough because he’s thinking he’s about to lay out and hit me.

But while he’s laying out, I’ve already decided that I’m going to hit him while he’s suspended in the air. It becomes hard from them to react after that and still remember to wrap up because I made contact with them before they were ready.

Waldman: In addition to the pad level,  it’s also the hips that factor into getting your pads under a defender’s pads. A player I saw do this for years and years and loved watching was Edgerrin James. It seemed he always got lower than the guy he was taking on. You thought he was going to get taken down or stopped at the point of a collision, but he’d always find a way to get another yard, two, or three yards on the play.

Spann: Absolutely. I’m from Indianapolis, and I grew up watching Edgerrin James. I love Edgerrin James. He’s one of the backs that I grew to admire. I even wore No.32 for a year during my career.

He’s one of the guys that I emulated as well as Emmitt Smith. I watched a lot of Emmitt Smith and he used his off-arm very well. It’s weird because he carried the ball religiously in his left hand, but he was still able to use that right hand so well. It was those little things that I picked up on.

In the third part of this Grinding Tape Series with Chad Spann, we’ll learn what a runner is watching to determine his path between the tackles and the differences with a runners pre snap location in zone and zone-read shotgun plays.

Grinding Tape: NIU RB Chad Spann Part I

0 Comments read Players, Running Back
Chad Spann began his career as a walk-on and ended it the MAC MVP.

This is the first in a series of posts will feature a film study session I had with former NIU RB Chad Spann, 2010’s Division-I leader in rushing TDs and the Mid-American Conference’s Most Valuable Player.

If you don’t know about Chad Spann, you’re probably not alone. He wasn’t drafted in April. However, that doesn’t make him an unworthy pro prospect. He’s a smart and tough runner who began his career practically begging for a shot from any Division-I team. He began the summer of his freshman year as the ninth RB on the NIU depth chart, but by the end of August he was the No.2 RB. After a strong college career, he’s once again in a similar situation as the underdog. If there is a player who is could follow a career trajectory similar to Priest Holmes, Spann has the skills to potentially do it.

I had the opportunity to interview Spann for the New York Times Fifth Down Blog last spring. In addition to the interview, Spann generously agreed to spend a couple of hours with me over the phone to break down one of his games. He chose  his three-touchdown performance against Toledo – a game where he played a significant part of the contest with a hip pointer – as the one for us to review. A few days before our meeting I emailed Spann a list of plays from the game that I wanted to discuss and when the time came, we sat in our respect homes and queued play after play.

If Spann shows the same kind of patience on the field in a training camp that he showed with me during our call, he’s going to be a find for an NFL team with enough foresight to give him a camp invite. Most impressive was the way in which Spann communicated his role, the responsibilities of his teammates, and the actions and reactions of the defense both pre- and post-snap. Spann was instructive, insightful, and his knowledge demonstrated a good counterpoint to the overstated generalization that the running back position is mostly instinctive. There are enough analytical requirements of a good runner that it is a fallacy to imply that the position doesn’t require thought or preparation.

The initial post is a Q&A discussion of two plays from the first series of the contest. Note Spann’s ability to describe his teammate’s assignments, what he’s trying to read from specific defenders, and what he’s doing very early in the run to set up his teammates so they can return the favor and set him up for a nice gain. This is something that will become more evident with future posts.

What this session reinforced for me is that few running plays ever work exactly as designed.

1st and 10 14:55 1st quarter – One-yard gain

Pre-snap look 14:55 1st quarter

Spann: This is our first play from offense. We have a two-receiver set with both receivers to the left in “21” personnel [2 backs, 1 tight end].

The fullback lines up on the wing almost as if he was an H-back. We’re running a zone play to the weak side (away from the tight end). This is actually a variation of our inside zone play. Instead of our fullback blocking back side he’s going to stay front side and he’s going to lead up on the ‘backer…

Waldman: This play didn’t work out as drawn up. Will you explain what was supposed to happen?

Spann: What is supposed to happen ideally is that we’re working a lot of double teams.  My pre-snap read is to look at what the A-gap defender is doing in terms of his technique. On this play he is play side. That is the first thing that I look at. Now I look at that because we’re going to double team him with the play side guard and center. We’re always going to double team the A-gap player. They are going to double team him to the middle linebacker (No.32) (below).

Now in this front where we have both receivers to our left the defense adjusted what they were doing and bumped the receivers over. Instead of going corners over they brought the corner down into the box as if he was a linebacker. What should happen is that our line should adjust and make the cornerback the backside linebacker (the FS drops before the snap), No.42 the MIKE linebacker and No.32 the play side backer – or the WILL.

That’s how it should happen, but we had a miscommunication upfront where No.42 – now the MIKE linebacker -was unblocked. That’s why the play wasn’t that big of a gain. The front side guard should have been double-teaming up to No.42…

[Author’s Note Instead, the guard stumbled out of his double-team and this freed the linebacker (No.42) to make the play on Spann who tried to hit the hole between center and right guard.]

Waldman: So at what point do you see that you’re going to have to make an adjustment? Is it at the point of the exchange or even before that with the cornerback moving into the box?

Spann:  What we’re taught is that we have an initial read and a primary read as we’re running zone. My initial read on this play is the front side defensive tackle, which in this case is the A-gap player – the one-technique. My primary read on inside zone plays is also the one-technique/A-gap player. So in this case, he’s both my initial and primary read and he’s going to tell me which way the play is going to go. If [this defensive tackle] tries to cross the guard’s face then the play is going to hit up the middle where the center is going to come off the tackle and get the MIKE linebacker (as diagrammed above).

If the defensive tackle says where he’s at the double team should push him back the other direction and I should be able to hit it play side B-gap where it is supposed to hit (below).

If one-technique (DT) doesn't cross the guard's face...

So that’s what I know going into the play and when I see [the defensive tackle/one-technique] at the beginning of the play. So when the ball is snapped, I’m reacting to either the one-technique going outside the B-Gap or staying where he’s at…that’s the first thing I’m looking at.

I already know what could happen so that gives me the ability to look at the next level a little bit earlier. Now I know exactly what is going to happen to that A-gap player so I keep the ball play side. But he drives back into the hole and I have to make the cut back.  Since we didn’t block it correctly…

Waldman: …The result is a short gain.

1st and 10 13:14 1st Quarter

Waldman: This is a run to right end from a two-TE Pistol formation where you follow your pulling guard to the flat.

12 personnel from the pistol - NIU's Bounce Play

Spann: This is “12” personnel (1 back, 2 tight ends). We’re in the pistol with two receivers to the right. This is our bounce play. It’s set up to look a lot like our power play. We run it mostly out of “12” or “21” personnel.

It’s supposed to look identical to Power except we’re either pulling a guard and a center or a tackle and the center. My steps on this play are identical to Power if we were just running Power Right, except I’m going to take two steps in and then I’m going to start rolling with the pulling tackle and center on this play (below).

Initial post-snap look with RB taking two steps towards line to bait LBs.

Waldman: Tell me about the importance of these first two steps to begin the play. I’d imagine it helps you set up a good distance to follow your pulling linemen, but does it also help set up the defense?

Spann: Absolutely. If you watch Nos. 32 and 42 – the two ‘backers on this play – the whole point of me taking those two steps is to bring them into the line of scrimmage as close as possible. So now when I make this cut – the cut outside on No.32 – he’s out of position to make that play (below).

After two steps towards line, Spann cuts outside and forces No.32 to chase.

Now he’s chasing me rather than being there to make the play. It’s supposed to suck them inside so they get caught up in line and they have to weave through the center and the guard to get to me. I’m going to follow this center’s block. Usually the tackle who is pulling is going to kick out and I’m supposed to follow the center who is pulling up field and usually that cut will be between the two. Sometimes the tackle will get up field and cut somebody inside and I can get to the outside. Normally both linemen split and I make that cut in between them.

Power as blocks develop outside.

Waldman: When the center makes a diving cut to the linebacker’s feet, you accelerate, charge forward to the line of scrimmage, and then leap over the linebacker’s diving attempt to hit you. For the defender it’s either dive at you or fall from the cut block. You land two yards ahead of the line of scrimmage with a backside defender wrapping your waist while quickly lowering your pads and ducking under the oncoming safety for one more yard (a gain of three).

Spann: We’ve run it better – watch the Minnesota highlights and we were hitting this play very well.

In Part II we study a zone read and a shotgun play that appears very similar presnap but for a small difference in the RB’s stance. We’ll also talk more about pressing the hole, the thought process behind ball security, and concepts behind gaining yards after contact – plus some love for RB Edgerrin James. 

Losing Your Football Innocence

0 Comments read Matt Waldman
Photo by Jill Greenspeth.

Readers often ask me for advice on how to watch football with a more critical eye. My answers are below, but if you take my advice you’ll lose your football innocence.

Let’s dispense with the obvious:

You love football.

I love football.

We wouldn’t be interacting on this blog if we didn’t.

I’m stating these facts because, in lieu of what I’m about to share, you may forget that I love football. And that’s a shame.

You’ll probably never know how much I love football. It was as regular a part of my day as brushing my teeth during my youth in Cleveland, Ohio and Atlanta, Georgia. Backyards. Playgrounds. Practice fields.  Summer camps. Streets. Even hallways of apartment complexes.

As a latch-key kid, I loved football so much that I used to prepare for my truancy from elementary school with “pre-skip” visits to the library. There I would check out books featuring the likes of Red Grange, George Halas, the T-formation, Gale Sayers, Deacon Jones,  Sam Huff, Jim Brown, and Bronko Nagurski.  I’d then spend my “day off” reading out loud to the bewildered family parakeet.

Yes, I had my own special bus…

I think you need to know this about me in light of the fact that for the person interested in film study my advice seems dour. The first thought that comes to mind: Say goodbye to a normal life.

There is a reason football people call film study grinding tape. When done well, it’s a methodical, unrelenting process that ultimately turns into a job. Granted, it’s often a fun job, but it’s still work.

I have frequently spent as many as eight hours studying a single player in one game – and that includes fast forwarding through plays where he’s not on the field. I realize most of you aren’t that serious about studying film and you don’t need to make that kind of commitment to developing a more critical eye. However, you do have to be willing to give up some of your football innocence.

At first, you might not enjoy taking a sober look at the game. However, the deeper appreciation gained is worth the effort. I make my share of mistakes and I’m sure there are experienced scouts or draft analysts who would disagree with some of the points I’m about to share. But I’m sharing part of my path and what has been valuable to me.

10 things you can do to become a more critical viewer:

1. Watch football alone: Football is a great outlet to let off some steam and bond with friends and family. However, what you’ll be doing requires more focus than what the average fan is going to enjoy. Trust me.

If you want to develop a more critical eye you need to be willing to set aside a game to watch by yourself on a regular basis. While watching games with an experienced tape grinder can be helpful, there is no substitute for logging those hours on your own road to self-discovery.

2. Become a student, not a fan: You have to temporarily put aside your game day habits as a fan. I’m not telling you to abandon watching football for the sheer enjoyment of it. However, you have to have the mindset that this is homework.

Set aside time where you’ll have minimal interruptions. Although most don’t have  an eight-hour block to watch an entire game in one sitting, making the commitment to take as much time as needed to break down and understand what you’re seeing is vital.  If it takes you two weeks to finish studying a facet of a game (be it a player or a unit of a team) that’s okay. It’s the journey that’s important.

3. Pick a player, any player: In the beginning, focus your attention on one player. Pick a position that you really enjoy watching. I suggest the first group of players you study are NFL veterans renown for their technique because they are the standard setters for developing a more critical eye (see point No. 8).

Since the “tape” you’ll be using is a televised game and not coaches tape, it will be more difficult to examine certain aspects of wide receiver, safety, and quarterback play on a consistent basis. Although I believe there are times where the televised games actually offer better details of specific techniques that you need to see from these positions, the coaches tape’s end zone view provides a better macro view of the X’s and O’s.

That said, nearly all of my evaluations are based on recordings of televised games and me and many of my peers have delivered solid analysis.  What you’re going to discover is that although your primary focus is on one player you’re going to develop a greater awareness of what several other players on the field are doing. Over time you’re going to develop an enhanced understanding of the game.

4. Wear out these three remote buttons:  l l,  <<, & >> : Pause, rewind, and better yet, the combo of pausing and using frame-by-frame fast forward in slow motion will be your best friends.  These symbols on my six-year-old remote are worn off the buttons.

I suggest you begin studying by watching every play at least three times:

  • In real time.
  • In slow motion. Use frame-by-frame rewind and fast forward as often as needed to see everything that the player you’re studying is doing, what his teammates are doing in support, and how his opponents are acting or reacting to the player you’re studying.
  • Watch the play again in real time.

Take your time with the slow-motion viewing. Don’t regard it as some form of training wheels to help you eventually notice more in real time. It might be an indirect benefit, but it isn’t the goal.

The slow-motion viewing helps you see keys to a player’s motivation: where is he looking, what are his teammates doing to set him up for success or failure, and how that player and his opponents act or react to each others’ decisions.

5. Sometimes you’re going to discover more questions than answers: It’s okay if you finish watching a series of plays or a performance of a player and you feel like you have more questions than when you began. That’s a good sign.  It means you’re figuring out what you specifically need to learn.

NFL Films Producer and avid film watcher, Greg Cosell has the luxury of calling NFL coaches to ask questions about plays, and he does so regularly. If a guy who has watched the film for 30-plus years, 5 days a week has moments with more questions than answers after watching the film, then you’re in good company.

6. Take notes: Whether it’s a laptop,  an iPad, a spiral bound notebook, or to-go napkins from the barbeque joint down the street, take notes. Organize those notes into sections for questions, a place to diagram plays, and an area to describe examples of good technique. You can always use the glossary from the Rookie Scouting Portfolios.  I break down in detail what I’m using to evaluate skill position prospects.

In lieu of the RSP, here are some very basic, common sense things that you should be watching to learn more about technique:

  • How a player uses his hands.
  • How a player uses his feet.
  • How a player uses his shoulders and upper body.
  • How a player uses his knees.
  • The angle a player bends when engaging an opponent.

As for getting your questions answered, additional film study, reading, and listening to experienced NFL players (see below) talk about technique or strategy are good options.

7. Listen to ex-players: There is a great deal you can learn about the game from ex-players analyzing tape or discussing techniques and concepts of their position. I have learned a ton just from watching pregame shows. Who better to learn from than former NFL starters – many with Pro Bowls on their resume?

The way Steve Young once described how footwork bridges the mental and physical sides of football was one of the more insightful pointers I’ve seen. Cris Carter made a great presentation on the way receivers should use their hands. Merrill Hoge’s film break downs of blocking schemes on running plays are frequently excellent.

If you’re here I probably don’t have to mention this, but I will just in case someone referred you here: Don’t fall into the trap of letting an ex-player’s personality, speech, or other on-air tendencies annoy you. There are definitely personalities I enjoy watching more than others, but what I’m seeking is information. Why should I discard gems from knowledgeable players because they have difficulty enunciating a word correctly or they have incorrect grammar?

Remember, most politicians have great enunciation and grammar and we’re still buying what they’re selling even when we know we shouldn’t.

8. The NFL is the standard you use to study college players: This is perhaps the most important of concepts you need to remember. If you want to really become more observant of what separates a good college player from a good NFL prospect, you need to study NFL players and use their techniques as the standard to evaluate college players. You’re going to discover that the better NFL veterans are far more consistent executing techniques on plays with smaller margins for error than their college counterparts.

Top NFL quarterbacks operate more consistently and productively from a tighter pocket. Top NFL running backs display better judgment with when to bounce a play outside and when to get the pads down and grind out the play inside as designed. And top NFL receivers are far more precise with their footwork and more skilled at turning and cutting at top speed without tipping off a change of direction.

Listen to who the ex-players-turned-analysts say are the best NFL players in the game and why. Then take those reasons and study those players until you can apply that standard to another player. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have great footwork and presence in the pocket. That’s the standard you should be using to judge the development of other college quarterbacks.

I have had the pleasure to speak with Greg Cosell a couple of times at length and each time we’ve talked (with years going by in between), he remains astonished that evaluators of college players aren’t required to study NFL players. One would think this is how scouts should calibrate their observation techniques. If I ran a scouting department, I would require each scout to have a laptop or iPad with film highlights of specific players who our organization believes set the standard at every position when it comes to proper technique.

9. Ignore most statistics:  If you’re studying a player’s technique, execution of the game plan, decision-making, and athleticism, most stats are not only useless but misleading—at least until you’ve taken the time to study the player’s film. Once you have, data can help clarify what you’ve seen—especially a player speed, acceleration, quickness, and strength.

The only stats I seek from a box score before I sit down to study a player’s performance are those that show enough opportunities to get a strong sample size (attempts and targets/catches).  There are many stats linked to players that are more indicative of how well the team executed, rather than the player.

A perfect example is a running back I once saw who averaged less than two yards per carry. If gave any real weight to his stats, this player sucked. However,  I looked solely at technique and because I did,  I graded him as a future NFL starter.

One of his games that I studied was against a national championship-caliber defense.  His opponents were far more athletic than his offensive line. In fact, all but seven players on the entire roster of the opposition could bench press as much,  if not more,  than all but the strongest offensive lineman on this runner’s team.

Although this runner had as poor of a statistical game as one can imagine, his technique attempts to execute the game plan, decision-making, and athleticism was strong. In three NFL seasons, that player has started all 48 regular season games; averaged four yards per carry behind a mediocre offensive line; and has at least 50 catches and 1400 yards from scrimmage each year. That player is Matt Forte.

In contrast, I’ve seen players compile great stats, yet lack the skills to even come close to approaching the standards we see in the pros. While I will display game stats for each player’s game that I study, it’s just to provide the reader with another layer of context. A player with great stats but sub-par skills could indicate he’s a great fit for his college team due to the system or his athleticism. A player with sub-par stats but great skills could be a fine performer surrounded by lesser talent.

10. Have a slice of humble pie: It’s easy to tell the difference between the average football fan and the guy who grinds tape. The average fan behaves as if he’s a football genius. The average tape grinder knows he’s a football idiot. He also can explain why in great detail.

Part of adopting a student mindset is having the willingness to accept that you’ll be wrong a lot. Learning requires the ability to accept your errors.

I recently wrote an article about this topic. The subject was an accounting professor whose award-winning research was recently cited in Forbes. Her study dealt with the concept of cognitive dissonance in investing.

What she discovered is that people tend to make emotional choices once they commit to a decision. Moreover, it doesn’t matter if they are an expert in their field. If they’ve taken a stance, they defend that stance even if presented with evidence to the contrary.

In fact, they will seek analysis from sources that aren’t even as credible as the information presented to them in order to get validation that they made a good choice,  even if the result eventually says otherwise.

In essence, we stand by our decisions to placate our egos because it’s often more important for us to be perceived as experts than behave like them. The sad, but comical thing about this is that we all do it if we make a decision before we fully weigh the evidence. I have no problem admitting I do it. The only real cure for this problem is having insight – and that’s a topic for another time…

Hopefully, this will help you shed your football-genius innocence and become a student of the game.

Speed In Context

0 Comments read Matt Waldman

Jerry Rice is a perfect example of speed in the proper context. 

Speed (noun, verb, sped or speed·ed, speed·ing. –noun)

1. rapidity in moving, going, traveling, proceeding, or performing; swiftness; celerity: the speed of light;the speed of sound…

6. Slang . a stimulating drug, as caffeine, ephedrine, or especially methamphetamine or amphetamine.

Legendary NFL owner Al Davis coined the phrase Speed Kills. Because the long-term demise of the Oakland Raiders can be attributed in part of Davis’ addiction to speed over anything else, there’s no shortage of irony in his statement. However, Davis is just one of many in the NFL whose beliefs and actions indicate that they are intoxicated by speed. It has become the football equivalent of beer goggles.

I have been studying college and NFL games 60 hours a week, 8 months a year since 2005 and one of the things I have learned is that speed should not be regarded solely as a physical attribute. The NFL may be one of the most physical games in the world, but the strategic side of the game beyond the quarterback position is overlooked more often than it should.

NFL players have to be strong at processing information quickly. They have to understand the roles of their teammates, the tendencies of their opponents, and how to anticipate what is going to happen before the play even begins. They also have to have strong technique that they can execute without thinking about it. There is still a far greater variation physical talent in college football than in the NFL and this is why college teams can dominate with far simpler schemes. Pro football has very little variation in physical talent, which is why a back like Reggie Bush cannot make the same kinds of reversal of field runs with success with the Saints that he did at Southern Cal.

Because the strength, speed, and agility gap is so much narrower in the NFL, anticipation, precision, and consistency of technique becomes vital. Take an RB with 4.4 speed in a workout and put him in a situation where he doesn’t have the blocking scheme, offensive verbiage, audibles, or defensive tendencies under his fingers, and he’s going to hesitate because he’s thinking rather than reacting. You can reasonably add between 0.2-1 seconds of hesitation time to that 4.4 workout speed and what you get is a fast player who plays slow. The less knowledgeable and confident a player is with his role the more likely this hesitation time has a compounding effect on his quickness and accuracy of execution and the overall effectiveness of his teammates relying on him.

In contrast, a player with strong technique, knowledge of his role, and knowledge of his opponent has little to no hesitation in his execution. This is why there are numerous examples of RBs or WRs with 4.6 speed who can make big plays. NFL Quarterbacks talk about the game “slowing down” after they accumulate a better understanding of the demands of the position in the pros. However, the game doesn’t really slow down, their reaction time speeds up because the confusion with the playbook, technique, and defensive schemes are no longer creating hesitation. This is no different with any other position.

Speed is not just a number on a stopwatch. Imbibe those times with moderation.

Evaluating the Evaluator

0 Comments read Matt Waldman

With its vast knowledge of strategy and technique and a wealth of  financial resources at their disposal, NFL organizations not only have the potential to discover if that linebacker prospect fits their scheme, but they can also find out what he did with that blue pencil sharpener in Mrs. Beam’s second grade social studies class. So why do they still have a huge opportunity to improve as evaluators of talent? The answer is in the process.

During his 2011 NFL Draft Confidential special that aired on ESPN,  Bill Parcells describes football as a “talent-acquisition” industry.  And during the show’s next 90 minutes, Parcells provides great insights into the scouting process, how it generates a draft board, and its economic impact on the game.

But what got my attention as a former operations manager and director of a service sector business is the issues that NFL teams face to do consistent, accurate, and quality work.

One of the things I took away from the show is that the NFL has a lot in common with other businesses – especially those in the service and manufacturing sectors.

As with other industries, the word tenure isn’t a common way to describe jobs in the NFL. General managers, coaches, and personnel feel tremendous pressure to win now, which can lead to a results-driven mentality.

This is perfectly natural. However during those long hours of work in an urgent quest to attain these results, it’s difficult for an organization to feel the same urgency to scrutinize its processes that are in use to reach its goals.

The Inexact Science of Evaluation

During the ESPN special, Parcells repeatedly described talent evaluation as an “inexact science.” Once again, this is no different than the service and manufacturing industries where statistics are essential to measure productivity.

But what makes talent evaluation an inexact science is the fact that statistics cannot provide a full or accurate measure of an individual’s performance. Nor can statistics alone gauge talent or project future performance.

Because measuring and projecting individual performance deals with both objective and subjective criteria, it is vitally important that there is a strong methodology in place to ensure that evaluators are consistent with their approach to the work. Many service and manufacturing businesses have figured this out by embracing an approach that I call “quality-driven processes.”

These processes not only generate results that are more accurate and productive, but the structure of the process itself also helps these businesses get better at what they do with each passing year while saving money.

Don’t Blame The Evaluators, Focus on The Process

Based on the processes Parcells explained in this show, as well as conversations I have had with former scouts, I believe that as knowledgeable as teams are about the game, they lack of a high-quality, well-defined evaluation process. The current process isn’t designed to help them continuously improve and I think it is a reason why NFL teams frequently contribute to their own scouting mistakes.

Exhibit one is the NFL’s grading system. Most teams use a grading system that inherently create a high level of variability. And when individual evaluators have a different understanding of how a system is supposed to work because the system isn’t well-defined, differences of opinion among evaluators can be avoided.

Here is the basic system that most NFL teams use. There will be differences in the range of numbers, but this is essentially it.

Typical NFL Prospect Grading Scale

  • 9.00 –  A player for the ages (Jim Brown).
  • 8.00-8.99 – A perennial All-Pro.
  • 7.50 – 7.99 – Future All-Pro.
  • 7.00-7.49 – Pro-Bowl-caliber potential.
  • 6.50-6.99 – First-round-caliber player with Pro Bowl potential.  
  • 6.00-6.49 – Potential to become a quality NFL starter.
  •  5.50-5.99 – Potential starter and likely first-day pick.
  • 5.10-5.49 – Potential to make an NFL roster and contribute.
  • 5.01-5.09 – Has a better than 50/50 chance to make a roster.
  • 5.00 – Has an even chance to make a roster.
  • 4.75–4.99 – Training camp player.
  • 4.50-4.74 – Potential invitee to an NFL training camp.
  • 4.00-4.49 – Needs developmental time in another league.

On the surface this might seem like a very clear scoring system, but it’s not clear at all.

After talking with former scouts with recent stints in the NFL within the past 10 years, all of them explained to me that the score is a “hard grade.” This means the scout watches the player, writes some notes, and then assigns an overall grade according to these type of general definitions.

The potential problem is that it appears that none of these grades explicitly define what NFL scouts should be considering when evaluating a player:

  • Athletic skills (speed, flexibility, strength, agility, etc.)
  • Position-specific techniques (pad level, routes, blocking, etc.)
  • Conceptual knowledge of the game (vision, pocket presence, etc.)

You might argue, of course scouts understand what to look for when evaluating a player – that’s their job!

However, look at any industry that hasn’t really examined its processes and there are frequent errors that occur among employees with regards to how they define the criteria they use to evaluate performance. This is especially the case in the NFL.

According to ex-scouts there is an unwritten truism called the 25/25 Rule, which describes the tendency for NFL organizations to fire veteran scouts and replace them with new scouts in their mid-twenties (25) at an annual salary of 25K. This practice often occurs when teams change leadership. It also keeps scout salaries low – a nice side benefit.

However, the 25/25 Rule also creates an environment where scouts are more reticent to stand up for their takes on players. Working for the NFL is a dream job for many and job security is already a tenuous thing.

Training for scouts also appears to be lacking with some teams. One former scout for a team in the AFC North explained to me that his team never had a defined training for the position. New scouts were put to work and given the option to attend position meetings at the team complex when not engaged in 90-hour work weeks.

He explained that the skills portion of his job interview was to watch film and write notes about what he saw, but he never knew exactly what he specifically did that separated him from the other candidates for the job. Obviously, he was doing something right, but imagine what kind of things he was doing wrong that were tacitly reinforced because he didn’t get any formalized training.

The dynamic this creates within a team’s scouting department is similar to any business where there is a group of individuals made up of  different ages, different levels of job experience, and different levels of knowledge about the job.

Think I’m wrong? Next time you’re at work, gather a group of your peers and ask them all to define in writing how a simple task: how the receptionist should answer the telephone.

Then pretend you’re the receptionist answering the phone while they grade your performance using this 1-5 scale:

  1. Poor
  2. Fair
  3. Meets Expectations
  4. Good
  5. Excellent

Unless your company has very clear guidelines for every process, you’ll not only find that each of your peers has a different answer how the receptionist should answer the phone, but they also will have a very different idea of how well/poorly the job was done. To compound the problem, ask them after the fact how they define each of these grades and you’ll likely get a different answer from each person.

The problem this example underscores is that a lack of clearly defined criteria increases variation among those assigned to judge performance.

Where one scout might define a player’s performance as Good, another may define it as Meets Expectations. The difference between these two scores in the NFL might be the difference between a player projected to become a starter and one projected only to make a roster.

Undefined Processes + Process Variation = Poor Results

Former 49ers, Rams, and Cardinals scout Dave Razzano’s account [as told to Yahoo! writer Michael Silver] of a much-publicized run-in with Rams GM Charlie Armey over his scouting report of Utah QB Alex Smith is a glaring example.

Razzano’s refusal to fall in line with the widespread belief that Smith was a big-time quarterback prospect led to a heated confrontation with Armey in a meeting at Rams headquarters a couple of weeks before the ’05 draft. Razzano’s report on the former Utah quarterback opined that Smith was “not as good as our backup, Jeff Smoker. Backup only for the Rams.”

Armey, who declined to discuss the incident after it was initially reported by Santa Rosa Press Democrat’s Matt Maiocco, solicited the input of other scouts and coaches who’d studied far less tape (if any) of Smith, who ended up being picked No. 1 overall by the 49ers.

“There were 12 guys around the table, and Charley had them rate him on every attribute – arm strength; accuracy short; accuracy long; judgment; game management; ad-lib ability under pressure. And he put a highlight tape on the projector. I mean, obviously, he’s gonna be 30 out of 30, and every throw’s a great pass … it’s a highlight tape!

“He said, ‘Are you gonna sit there and be stubborn? Why can’t you see what we see?’ I got heated. I said, ‘I’ve watched seven tapes, and I’m not changing my grade.’ He told one of our assistants, ‘Go get all seven tapes.’ I started screaming, ‘You’re gonna look at highlight tapes? That’s how Akili Smith got drafted!’ [Scout] Tom Marino had me in a bear hug. I just lost my mind.”

Not only did they differ on how to score the player’s overall performance, but also what type of criteria (highlights of preselected plays or actual game conditions) to use to arrive at that grade.

Another former scout of an AFC East team said he saw his peers paraphrase material from print and Internet publications to complete his scouting reports.

These examples aren’t meant to cast NFL teams in a bad light. These are common issues in any industry where its processes aren’t given the scrutiny they deserve.  These are symptoms of poor processes management and poor processes create variation that can have a negative impact on the team on the field as well as economically.

Overestimate a player’s skill level and a team could wind up overpaying a player who cannot start for them. Underestimate a player’s skill level and a team can miss on the opportunity to acquire him.

This is the kind of variation that can be corrected with a good process, which:

  1. Defines specifically in writing what the team values in players.
  2. Defines which settings scouts can use to grade players.
  3. Clearly defines a grading system.
  4. Uses a system that incorporates all skills and techniques that a team wants to see from its prospects into the grading system.
  5. Prioritizes the importance of those skills and techniques with a weighted score the contributes to the overall evaluation.
  6. Scores players as only meeting or not meeting expectations of those scoring criteria rather than using a highly subjective number system.

No evaluation process is perfect, but I believe NFL teams will see great improvement to its talent evaluation process – and bottom line – once it decides to explore best practices in process management.

Doing so will help them create an evaluation process that will help their scouts and management stay on the same page and prevent issues that they have control over. In addition, when they do have a vast difference in opinion the process should be structured so it will help address the larger problem and continuously refine what they are doing as the game evolves.

The Rookie Scouting Portfolio already does this because it adopts and customizes best-practice methodologies for its performance monitoring that Fortune 500 companies use in the service and manufacturing sectors. I believe if an NFL team, and its wealth of resources and vast knowledge about the game, applied similar best practices in process management they would produce an incredibly strong scouting department that could give them a huge edge over their competition and ultimately save their team money.

Although I came to the Rookie Scouting Portfolio lacking NFL-caliber knowledge or football experience, I possessed the knowledge to build a process that would help me use others’ knowledge of the game to successfully evaluate the skills of NFL prospects. Moreover, my process continues to help me refine my knowledge and end product.

I don’t think it will be long before teams explore this avenue to improve their scouting process. The Saints recently purchased a system to refine their tracking and management of data. This is a step in the right direction. However, the same could be said about the use of video tape to record games for scouting.

What NFL teams need to consider is that a system only works well if you have a strong process to incorporate that system to fulfill an overall objective.

Otherwise, it’s just expensive technology.