Eight
Member
I agree with 99.9% of your thoughts, but not sure I follow this line of thinking.
Pulling back an offense to fit a QB due to lack of arm strength or speed or whatever the reason would be, is a smart coaching move. 100%.
But I’m not sure that falls under developing a kid.
If SR stays here and in year 2(technically 3 as he got garbage time as a freshman, and assuming he puts the work in) he cuts his turnovers by 60-70% by teaching him how to better read defenses, but not adjusting game plan, then I’d say he helped develop the player.
If he decides to run the ball 75/25 to keep the decision making out of SR hands, I don’t think that’s developing him.
so how much is a staff developing players, how much is from mom and dad, and how much are the decisions of the kid?
i have always felt some programs get way too much credit for "developing" quarterbacks, running backs, etc... when you look at the talent they bring into the position.
how much can you improve the speed of quarterback processes the information they take in before the snap and immediately after the snap? how much can you truly improve hand and eye co-ordination? making decisions under pressure?
obviously the answer is some on all of these, but how much of the performance on the field a byproduct of putting a player in a position to succeed?
tying this back into the recruiting thread i have always felt a strength of patterson was he needed the basic skills, ability, and aptitude needed by players to be successful in his defense.
i would think the same would be for any quarterback sonny were to recruit and i do believe boykin and hill both improved under sonny.