JohnnyBall
Ball, oskie, cover, block
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 3,324
- Likes
- 603
I have long thought that due to the importance of recruiting, and the predictive ability of talent, that recruiting as a singular skill is far under valued. In other words if simple talent averages alone can explain about 70% of wins and losses, recruiting should maybe be given much more credence. Thinking outside the box, a guy like O, could be brought on a staff and given a title but only focuses on recruiting. This position would have a huge salary but no real coaching responsibility. I'm not suggesting we hire that mumbling fool, but I do think that the system could be tweaked to hyper utilize great recruiters without devaluing a whole staff with limited positions.
[QUOTEdaj2576;9588888]I have long thought that due to the importance of recruiting, and the predictive ability of talent, that recruiting as a singular skill is far under valued. In other words if simple talent averages alone can explain about 70% of wins and losses, recruiting should maybe be given much more credence. Thinking outside the box, a guy like O, could be brought on a staff and given a title but only focuses on recruiting. This position would have a huge salary but no real coaching responsibility. I'm not suggesting we hire that mumbling fool, but I do think that the system could be tweaked to hyper utilize great recruiters without devaluing a whole staff with limited positions.
So what position group do you want to leave mostly uncoached? Defensive line? Receivers? How about the secondary?
Do we make a run at him?
Do we make a run at him?