It is harsh and unrealistic to define any person's legacy by one moment or one game. A legacy is, by definition, an accumulation of moments and games. Bill Belichick can add to his legacy if his New England Patriots win Super Bowl XLIX but, considering his long track record of success, his legacy cannot possibly be defined solely or primarily just by this game. The reality is that Belichick's legacy has already been largely defined by a series of great moments and games, dating all the way back to his time as an assistant coach. Belichick's defensive game plan from Super Bowl XXV resides in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Belichick, then the defensive coordinator for Bill Parcells' New York Giants, came up with a brilliant strategical approach to slow down the seemingly unstoppable Buffalo Bills' offensive machine headlined by quarterback Jim Kelly. Parcells never made it to a Super Bowl without Belichick by his side.
Belichick has won five Super Bowls--two as an assistant coach with the Giants, three more as the head coach of the New England Patriots--and today he will be making his ninth appearance (three as Parcells' assistant, six as New England's head coach) in arguably the biggest, most prestigious game in all of sports as his New England Patriots face the defending champion Seattle Seahawks. This is expected to be one of the most competitive Super Bowls ever (I'll go on record picking the Patriots to win 24-21 in a contest decided in the waning moments of the fourth quarter) and many people perceive this to be a legacy-defining moment for Belichick. If the Patriots lose, Belichick's critics will crow that Belichick still has yet to win a Super Bowl since the so-called "Spygate" scandal, when the Patriots had an employee in full team regalia openly and publicly shoot real-time video of football games. If the Patriots win, Belichick's critics will whine about The Most Overinflated "Scandal" Ever and confidently declare that the victory is somehow tainted. In other words, no matter what happens in Super Bowl XLIX, Belichick's legacy will supposedly be tarnished.
This narrative--that Belichick loses no matter what--is ridiculous. I much prefer Kevin Clark's take in The Dueling Legacies of Bill Belichick. Clark writes that Belichick's defining legacy is "bringing value investing to football." Belichick had great success with a 3-4 defense when few NFL teams used that alignment. Belichick was a master at finding players who other teams overlooked who could fit perfectly in that scheme. Belichick did so well with the 3-4 that most of the league's teams copied him and started looking for the same kinds of players. Belichick used to have his pick of the litter among nose tackles because few other teams were looking for nose tackles, but when many other teams started running the 3-4, the Patriots--who always fell to the bottom of the draft because they were at the top of the standings--could not so easily draft the players who they needed. This is when Belichick's genius became fully apparent. Clark explains, "Free agency became even harder. It was no longer cheap or easy for
Belichick to get the players he needed. So he did something insane. He
completely changed the system." Belichick switched back to the 4-3 defense.
Clark describes what happened next:
He found the cheap and great players there. New England kept winning
and he's swung back and forth a handful of times in the remaining
decade. Whenever one system gets too costly, he jumps to the other.
This
sort of value-searching is common with anything Belichick, who operates
as the Patriots' general manager and has full control of the roster.
While the NFL waits around for its "moneyball" revolution, the search
for inefficiencies is actually long over. Belichick found them all.
A
handful of teams have tried to imitate this but have failed. That is
because adopting the Belichick model is akin to trying to adopt the
Usain Bolt model for running. It takes talent that is really, really
hard to acquire.
People who are jealous of Belichick's success and/or spend their lives looking for snipers in grassy knolls fail to appreciate the hard work and intelligence that is the foundation for New England's success during the Belichick era.
Showing posts with label Seattle Seahawks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Seattle Seahawks. Show all posts
Sunday, February 1, 2015
Monday, February 3, 2014
If Peyton Manning is Football's Roger Federer, Then the Postseason is Manning's Rafael Nadal
Roger Federer is often praised as the greatest tennis player of all-time; his game is aesthetically pleasing and technically precise and he has claimed a large portion of the sport's all-time record book--but Rafael Nadal, whose record-setting career is even more impressive than Federer's was at the same stage, has defeated Federer 23-10 in their head to head meetings. When Federer faces Nadal he does not look like the greatest player of his own era, much less the greatest player of all-time.
Peyton Manning is often praised as the greatest quarterback of all-time; his game is aesthetically pleasing and technically precise and he has claimed a large portion of the sport's all-time record book--but Manning has just an 11-12 record in playoff games, including 1-2 in Super Bowls after his Denver Broncos lost 43-8 to the Seattle Seahawks in Super Bowl XLVIII.
A tennis player battles one on one against his opponent in singles matches, while a quarterback is just one of 11 offensive players--but quarterback is the most important position in football, if not all of team sports, and a great quarterback can have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of a game. Manning has no problem making his presence felt during regular season play but his playoff record does not measure up to the postseason success enjoyed by Otto Graham (10 championship game appearances and seven championships in a 10 season career), Johnny Unitas (2-1 in NFL championship games, 1-1 in Super Bowls, 6-3 overall playoff record), Joe Montana (four Super Bowl wins in four appearances, 16-7 overall playoff record) and Tom Brady (three Super Bowl wins in five appearances, 18-8 overall playoff record). Terry Bradshaw was not as efficient statistically as Manning--though Bradshaw played in an era during which the rules heavily favored the defense, while the opposite is the case now--but Bradshaw went 4-0 in the Super Bowl and posted a 14-5 overall playoff record. Steve Young began his career in the USFL, played two seasons for a terrible Tampa Bay team and then spent several of his prime years backing up Montana in San Francisco but Young still assembled a 12-8 overall playoff record, including 1-0 in the Super Bowl. Kurt Warner has the same 1-2 Super Bowl record as Manning but Warner went 9-4 overall in the playoffs and he performed better in his three Super Bowls than Manning has.
Manning receives a lot of credit for "making his teammates better"--an ambiguous phrase at best in terms of defining an athlete's greatness--but even if we accept the very debatable premise that Manning has elevated mediocre teammates and/or teams to greatness during the regular season and thus deserves praise for doing so then don't we also have to assign some of the blame to Manning if those same teammates are nervous and/or tentative at the biggest moments? More to the point, Manning himself seemed nervous and tentative during Super Bowl XLVIII; although Manning set the Super Bowl single game record for completions (34) and threw for 280 yards, Troy Aikman commented during the telecast that it was difficult to remember when Manning accumulated all of those completions and all of that yardage: Manning's performance did not pass the eye test and anyone who watched the game analytically could see that Manning did not play at a high level, regardless of how one spins the numbers.
Furthermore, the idea that Manning has thrived despite being surrounded by lesser talent does not withstand close scrutiny. Manning's teams do not generally sneak into the playoffs only to lose to clearly superior squads; his teams race to tremendous regular season records only to stumble against lesser teams: Manning has lost his first playoff game (either in the Wild Card round or after enjoying a bye week) a record eight times. Just as it would be wrong to deny that Manning's gaudy regular season numbers have earned him a prominent place in the all-time quarterback pantheon, it would be wrong to deny that Manning's relative lack of postseason success (compared to several other members of that pantheon) strongly argues against placing Manning at the very top of the all-time quarterback list.
The title "greatest of all-time" may be largely mythical, something that is impossible to determine by purely objective means--but it is difficult to believe that someone with a glaring hole in his resume should be ranked ahead of great players who do not have a similarly glaring hole in their resumes. Is Federer one of the greatest tennis players of all-time? Of course. Is Manning one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time? Of course. Federer never mastered his main rival Nadal--or even figured out how to play against him on close to even terms--so it makes no sense to label Federer as the greatest of all-time; Manning never dominated NFL postseason play--or even came close to matching the championship success of quarterbacks like Graham, Unitas, Montana and Brady--so it makes no sense to label Manning as the greatest of all-time. Super Bowl XLVIII did not hurt Manning's legacy, because objective observers already understood where Manning should be placed in the quarterback pantheon--but Manning's mediocre performance during Denver's loss represented a missed opportunity for Manning to add to his legacy. If Manning had been sharp while leading Denver to victory then he would have written another chapter in his story, much like Federer could have done if he had ever figured out how to deal with Nadal's relentless groundstrokes.
Peyton Manning is often praised as the greatest quarterback of all-time; his game is aesthetically pleasing and technically precise and he has claimed a large portion of the sport's all-time record book--but Manning has just an 11-12 record in playoff games, including 1-2 in Super Bowls after his Denver Broncos lost 43-8 to the Seattle Seahawks in Super Bowl XLVIII.
A tennis player battles one on one against his opponent in singles matches, while a quarterback is just one of 11 offensive players--but quarterback is the most important position in football, if not all of team sports, and a great quarterback can have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of a game. Manning has no problem making his presence felt during regular season play but his playoff record does not measure up to the postseason success enjoyed by Otto Graham (10 championship game appearances and seven championships in a 10 season career), Johnny Unitas (2-1 in NFL championship games, 1-1 in Super Bowls, 6-3 overall playoff record), Joe Montana (four Super Bowl wins in four appearances, 16-7 overall playoff record) and Tom Brady (three Super Bowl wins in five appearances, 18-8 overall playoff record). Terry Bradshaw was not as efficient statistically as Manning--though Bradshaw played in an era during which the rules heavily favored the defense, while the opposite is the case now--but Bradshaw went 4-0 in the Super Bowl and posted a 14-5 overall playoff record. Steve Young began his career in the USFL, played two seasons for a terrible Tampa Bay team and then spent several of his prime years backing up Montana in San Francisco but Young still assembled a 12-8 overall playoff record, including 1-0 in the Super Bowl. Kurt Warner has the same 1-2 Super Bowl record as Manning but Warner went 9-4 overall in the playoffs and he performed better in his three Super Bowls than Manning has.
Manning receives a lot of credit for "making his teammates better"--an ambiguous phrase at best in terms of defining an athlete's greatness--but even if we accept the very debatable premise that Manning has elevated mediocre teammates and/or teams to greatness during the regular season and thus deserves praise for doing so then don't we also have to assign some of the blame to Manning if those same teammates are nervous and/or tentative at the biggest moments? More to the point, Manning himself seemed nervous and tentative during Super Bowl XLVIII; although Manning set the Super Bowl single game record for completions (34) and threw for 280 yards, Troy Aikman commented during the telecast that it was difficult to remember when Manning accumulated all of those completions and all of that yardage: Manning's performance did not pass the eye test and anyone who watched the game analytically could see that Manning did not play at a high level, regardless of how one spins the numbers.
Furthermore, the idea that Manning has thrived despite being surrounded by lesser talent does not withstand close scrutiny. Manning's teams do not generally sneak into the playoffs only to lose to clearly superior squads; his teams race to tremendous regular season records only to stumble against lesser teams: Manning has lost his first playoff game (either in the Wild Card round or after enjoying a bye week) a record eight times. Just as it would be wrong to deny that Manning's gaudy regular season numbers have earned him a prominent place in the all-time quarterback pantheon, it would be wrong to deny that Manning's relative lack of postseason success (compared to several other members of that pantheon) strongly argues against placing Manning at the very top of the all-time quarterback list.
The title "greatest of all-time" may be largely mythical, something that is impossible to determine by purely objective means--but it is difficult to believe that someone with a glaring hole in his resume should be ranked ahead of great players who do not have a similarly glaring hole in their resumes. Is Federer one of the greatest tennis players of all-time? Of course. Is Manning one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time? Of course. Federer never mastered his main rival Nadal--or even figured out how to play against him on close to even terms--so it makes no sense to label Federer as the greatest of all-time; Manning never dominated NFL postseason play--or even came close to matching the championship success of quarterbacks like Graham, Unitas, Montana and Brady--so it makes no sense to label Manning as the greatest of all-time. Super Bowl XLVIII did not hurt Manning's legacy, because objective observers already understood where Manning should be placed in the quarterback pantheon--but Manning's mediocre performance during Denver's loss represented a missed opportunity for Manning to add to his legacy. If Manning had been sharp while leading Denver to victory then he would have written another chapter in his story, much like Federer could have done if he had ever figured out how to deal with Nadal's relentless groundstrokes.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Monday Night Football Quick Hits
Darren Sproles did his best LaDainian Tomlinson imitation, rushing 13 times for 102 yards and one touchdown as San Diego edged Seattle 18-17 in the Monday Night Football preseason finale. Here are some quick hits about the game/telecast:
1) Before he became a TV celebrity, Tony Kornheiser was one of my favorite sportswriters. He used to craft in depth, insightful articles for a variety of publications, including Inside Sports, a now-defunct magazine that at one time featured a lot of very high quality writing. Kornheiser was not in the MNF booth this week due to his recent hernia surgery and, while I wish him a speedy and full recovery, it must be said that I did not miss him during this telecast. Kornheiser's MNF role--whether by his own choosing or the decisions of the director and producer--consists of making pop culture references and allegedly supplying historical context but in reality simply narrating over a montage of pop culture images at the beginning of the telecast. I much prefer to hear Ron Jaworski explaining exactly what is happening during the game; Jaworski is a true student--and teacher--of the game. If I wanted pop culture references or one liners then I would tune in to Comedy Central. Kornheiser is smart, funny and talented, just like Dennis Miller--but I don't want to see or hear either of them in the MNF announcers' booth.
2) Stat of the night: Most yards from scrimmage per game, NFL history (min. 100 games played): LaDainian Tomlinson, 126.4 ypg; Jim Brown, 125.5 ypg; Barry Sanders, 118.9 ypg.
3) When Michele Tafoya asked San Diego defensive end Luis Castillo about the possibility that Pro Bowl linebacker Shawne Merriman might miss the entire season, Castillo's response hit the perfect note: Castillo clearly stated that Merriman is a great player who will be sorely missed but Castillo also expressed confidence that Merriman's substitute, Jyles Tucker, will perform well. I immediately thought back to the 2004 season when then-Eagles wide receiver Terrell Owens suffered a devastating injury--a sprained ankle combined with a broken fibula--less than two months before the Super Bowl. When Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb was asked how the Eagles would do without Owens, he blithely replied that the Eagles had already made it to three straight NFC Championship Games without Owens. Even though that was an accurate statement, it was the wrong thing to say and the wrong way to say it; unlike Castillo, McNabb failed to find the delicate balance between praising the injured star's importance while also displaying confidence in the abilities of his backup. McNabb's flub understandably rubbed the sensitive Owens the wrong way and set the stage for the deterioration of the McNabb-Owens relationship.
4) Jaworski noted several times that Seattle quarterback Charlie Frye (19-29, 219 yards, two touchdowns, no interceptions) made "stick" (i.e., accurate delivery into a tight space) throws and manipulated the defensive coverage with his eyes. Last season in Cleveland, Frye became the first NFL quarterback since the NFL-AFL merger to start week one and then get traded prior to week two. Seattle Coach Mike Holmgren is a noted quarterback guru, so it will be interesting to see how Frye develops in Seattle. Maybe this was just a one game, preseason fluke, but Frye was not converting lucky plays: the abilities to read coverages and make "stick" throws are things that should stand him in good stead for the rest of his career. I wonder how much of Frye's growth is just a result of a natural maturation process and how much of it has been accelerated by the coaching that he is receiving. Granted, Derek Anderson became a Pro Bowl quarterback in Cleveland after Frye's departure, but Anderson's success was based more on arm strength and derring-do than "stick" throws or manipulating coverages; in fact, touch and reading defenses seem to be Anderson's weaknesses, as evidenced by his completion percentage and interception rate. Did Frye fail in Cleveland because he was simply thrown into the fire too soon or because he never received the proper coaching to develop his talent?
1) Before he became a TV celebrity, Tony Kornheiser was one of my favorite sportswriters. He used to craft in depth, insightful articles for a variety of publications, including Inside Sports, a now-defunct magazine that at one time featured a lot of very high quality writing. Kornheiser was not in the MNF booth this week due to his recent hernia surgery and, while I wish him a speedy and full recovery, it must be said that I did not miss him during this telecast. Kornheiser's MNF role--whether by his own choosing or the decisions of the director and producer--consists of making pop culture references and allegedly supplying historical context but in reality simply narrating over a montage of pop culture images at the beginning of the telecast. I much prefer to hear Ron Jaworski explaining exactly what is happening during the game; Jaworski is a true student--and teacher--of the game. If I wanted pop culture references or one liners then I would tune in to Comedy Central. Kornheiser is smart, funny and talented, just like Dennis Miller--but I don't want to see or hear either of them in the MNF announcers' booth.
2) Stat of the night: Most yards from scrimmage per game, NFL history (min. 100 games played): LaDainian Tomlinson, 126.4 ypg; Jim Brown, 125.5 ypg; Barry Sanders, 118.9 ypg.
3) When Michele Tafoya asked San Diego defensive end Luis Castillo about the possibility that Pro Bowl linebacker Shawne Merriman might miss the entire season, Castillo's response hit the perfect note: Castillo clearly stated that Merriman is a great player who will be sorely missed but Castillo also expressed confidence that Merriman's substitute, Jyles Tucker, will perform well. I immediately thought back to the 2004 season when then-Eagles wide receiver Terrell Owens suffered a devastating injury--a sprained ankle combined with a broken fibula--less than two months before the Super Bowl. When Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb was asked how the Eagles would do without Owens, he blithely replied that the Eagles had already made it to three straight NFC Championship Games without Owens. Even though that was an accurate statement, it was the wrong thing to say and the wrong way to say it; unlike Castillo, McNabb failed to find the delicate balance between praising the injured star's importance while also displaying confidence in the abilities of his backup. McNabb's flub understandably rubbed the sensitive Owens the wrong way and set the stage for the deterioration of the McNabb-Owens relationship.
4) Jaworski noted several times that Seattle quarterback Charlie Frye (19-29, 219 yards, two touchdowns, no interceptions) made "stick" (i.e., accurate delivery into a tight space) throws and manipulated the defensive coverage with his eyes. Last season in Cleveland, Frye became the first NFL quarterback since the NFL-AFL merger to start week one and then get traded prior to week two. Seattle Coach Mike Holmgren is a noted quarterback guru, so it will be interesting to see how Frye develops in Seattle. Maybe this was just a one game, preseason fluke, but Frye was not converting lucky plays: the abilities to read coverages and make "stick" throws are things that should stand him in good stead for the rest of his career. I wonder how much of Frye's growth is just a result of a natural maturation process and how much of it has been accelerated by the coaching that he is receiving. Granted, Derek Anderson became a Pro Bowl quarterback in Cleveland after Frye's departure, but Anderson's success was based more on arm strength and derring-do than "stick" throws or manipulating coverages; in fact, touch and reading defenses seem to be Anderson's weaknesses, as evidenced by his completion percentage and interception rate. Did Frye fail in Cleveland because he was simply thrown into the fire too soon or because he never received the proper coaching to develop his talent?
Monday, December 31, 2007
Ed Hochuli is the Greatest NFL Referee Ever
Ed Hochuli is one of the few NFL referees who even casual fans know by name--and if you don't know him by name, you almost certainly would recognize him: he's the referee with the legendary "guns" for arms who is able to give the most precise and accurate explanations for even the strangest plays; the "guns" can perhaps be explained by the fact that the 6-1, 215-pound Hochuli played linebacker at UTEP, while his way with words probably stems from his training as a lawyer.
Hochuli reached a new level during Sunday's Atlanta-Seattle game. Seattle quarterback Matt Hasselbeck fumbled and then general chaos ensued, leaving everyone in the stadium wondering who should get the ball and where it should be spotted. If Bud Selig had been the referee, he would have shrugged and declared the game a tie. Fortunately, Hochuli stepped to the mike and restored order with this explanation:
"The ball was initially recovered by Atlanta and it was fumbled again. It was never regained by anyone. Therefore, it's Atlanta's ball--however, it was a fumble forwards that went out of bounds; therefore by rule it returns to the spot of Atlanta's fumble. It's Atlanta's ball there, first down." Of course, Hochuli punctuated this statement by signaling first down with one of his massive "guns." If there has been a better NFL refereeing moment--other than Ben Dreith's legendary "giving him the business down there" call--I haven't seen it.
Hochuli reached a new level during Sunday's Atlanta-Seattle game. Seattle quarterback Matt Hasselbeck fumbled and then general chaos ensued, leaving everyone in the stadium wondering who should get the ball and where it should be spotted. If Bud Selig had been the referee, he would have shrugged and declared the game a tie. Fortunately, Hochuli stepped to the mike and restored order with this explanation:
"The ball was initially recovered by Atlanta and it was fumbled again. It was never regained by anyone. Therefore, it's Atlanta's ball--however, it was a fumble forwards that went out of bounds; therefore by rule it returns to the spot of Atlanta's fumble. It's Atlanta's ball there, first down." Of course, Hochuli punctuated this statement by signaling first down with one of his massive "guns." If there has been a better NFL refereeing moment--other than Ben Dreith's legendary "giving him the business down there" call--I haven't seen it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
