I think, in some instances, Sparano puts too much emphasis on practice.

There have been several instances where players have not seen the field because they haven't shown it in practice.

SOME GUYS ARE GAMERS!!!!! There is NO way that a coach can duplicate a game situation in practice, and although some players practice like they play.....some guys find some extra gear or mojo on game days.

I think Turner needs to see the field. I think Clemons needed to be played sooner, Merling is a gamer.

he needs to give Turner a shot in a game and see what happens.

I can sympathize with Sparano. If he gives guys playing time who slack off in practice, this gives a bad message to the team that slacking off is ok. Sparano (and Parcells) prefer guys who are dedicated to football 100% of the time...not just one-day-a-week.

If we were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, I'm pretty sure Sparano would be playing all those guys more. Problem is, it's risky to take that chance in a real game.

I know Shula had a handful of players whom he let slack off (Csonka, for example), but that came with experience. Fact is, I'd rather have Sparano than Wanny. Wanny didn't really care about practice, and it showed on the field.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/04/2009 06:31AM by montequi.

"We talkin about practice. Not a game. Not a game. Practice."

At this point I could care less who Sparano lets play. Apparently he knows what he is doing he got us 11 wins last year and three division wins so far this year. We have a much better team now than in years past and we can compete with any team out there.

My only question is that if a guy doesn't show something in practice, how is Sparano to know that he will play well in a game or is a "gamer"?

You can't simulate a game situation because game situations are much more physical, mental and faster, which would make practice situations easier. So if a player can't do something in practice why would you believe that they would be able to do those things in a game.

IMO it seems, that if a player really wanted to get on the field the player would step it up in practice and not slack, especially young players like Turner.

Reports that I have read say that Turner isn't slacking off in practice but was dropping balls and running sloppy routes...those reports also said that he is getting better at both so we will see him get his chance sooner reather than later if he keeps it up IMHO.

I have to agree with Realist.

Sometimes, it's not a case of slacking off in practice but that the coaches play that guy who GOES NUTS in practice.

However, he is more calm and confident in practice but freezes up when he gets on the field.

So what Realist is saying is simply double-check your impression that you got from practice and see which person performs better on the field.

The adrenalin of a REAL GAME may make that guy who does not do well in practice become a real freak in the game.

On the other hand, a REAL GAME may turn that Lion in practice with his fellow teammates into a LAMB on the field against the guys from the other team.

I've always believed in verifying abilities in practice by trying out both the good practicers and the bad practicers in a game situation.

I'm not sure I agree. Soliai is a perfect example. Sparano has been on him to improve in practice, and now he's showing tremendous ability in games. It all started with practice.

its a matter of trust. You cant put a guy on the field during a game when he hasnt proved himself in practice just to see if hes a "gamer" as u call them. Imagine he throws turner out there without seeing much in practice and he bobbles the ball up in the air and gets it picked. It could cost us a game and as a head coach its his job to give us the best chance of winning not gambling our chances away on a hunch. If turner was any good hed show it in practice by making plays.

GA FinFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> You can't simulate a game situation because game
> situations are much more physical, mental and
> faster, which would make practice situations
> easier. So if a player can't do something in
> practice why would you believe that they would be
> able to do those things in a game.

You answered your own question... you can't simulate game day situations in practice. So, therefore, how can you expect to make realistic translations of how successful a player will be in those games?? Granted there is a lot of carryover...

But, we all know nobody gives 100% in practice. But, where a player's "pace" in practice can be drastically different. Let's say the two players are Randy Moss and Ted Ginn. Randy Moss is conditioned to practice at 50% and no matter what you do, you can't get him moving above that in a practice situation regularly. Ted Ginn however practices at 90%... and with everyone else practicing at a reduced speed makes ALL the catches and is getting open regularly. But, we know at 100% with everyone else moving at 100% Ginn can't catch a thing... and Randy Moss is nearly unstoppable. Do you keep Moss on the bench because he isn't practicing well??

Luis75 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> its a matter of trust. You cant put a guy on the
> field during a game when he hasnt proved himself
> in practice just to see if hes a "gamer" as u call
> them. Imagine he throws turner out there without
> seeing much in practice and he bobbles the ball up
> in the air and gets it picked. It could cost us a
> game and as a head coach its his job to give us
> the best chance of winning not gambling our
> chances away on a hunch. If turner was any good
> hed show it in practice by making plays.

You can, and should, when your "performers" in practice are looking like they should have been cut in training camp. Look, how many times have we seen a guy FINALLY get a chance due to injury (or another player's continued lack of performance) and he goes nuts??

Tom Brady?? or a more recent example that is similar: Miles Austin. There had to be a reason the coaching staff had him on the bench behind Crayton. You think that is gonna change anytime soon now that we've seen what he can do in a game as a starter?? Probably not, and probably regardless of how either of them perform in practice.

Grooves, I guess my question is what "performers" are looking like they should have been cut in training camp? We see backups come up playing well all the time. Cobbs is a great example, but should he have been starting?

We saw Hartline come up big in one game then do nothing in the next.

A player makes the starting line up in one of two ways. Necessity, or beating out the starter in practice. You don't just through a guy in and say "let's see what he can do". Not unless the game is well in hand.

Grooves12:

Randy Moss has proven himself over several years and I doubt he practiced at 50% during his first couple of years. I don't think its relevant to compare a veteran to young rookies. My question is other than practice how is the coach supposed to decide whether or not to play unproven rookies. So to your question, you do keep Moss on the bench if they are both young players. If you rememeber it wasn't that long that Moss' 50% practice effort was translating to a 10% effort on gameday.

Do you really believe that no player practices at 100%??? I Find that hard to believe. Practice habits and work ethic are a big reason Ricky is still on the team. Also see Peyton Manning.

Grooves and Realist, I don't think you can change the mind of the "practice" people.

I think practice is often a good indicator of how a person will play but, as Grooves pointed out with respect to Randy Moss, it is not the only indicator.

And to answer the question, Yes, Randy Moss often goofs off on plays he is not involved in so and would have no trouble believing that he goofs off at practice.

The practice people simply believe that games and practices are the same thing and that neither has any dynamic not present in the other.

It therefore follows from that philosophy that the practice people don't believe that there is such a thing as a "practice player" and a "game player." They believe the practice player is the same as the game player and each person is good or bad at either at the same rate. It's a simplistic view, but I'm afraid they won't be shaken from it.

I agree that you can't reward 'slackers', but there is some middle ground between 'slacking' and playing like its a game.

I doubt Turner is slacking. I don't think Merling was slacking. I am sure Clemons was going hard. Sometimes you need a game to show what you can do.

Well....if the starter is doing his job...who cares if the guy gets into a game? I don't.

But if our WR's are not playing like they need to...and there is this 6'5" rookie who is faster than them...but he doesn't practice at a hard enough level....maybe he needs to get a taste of the field and the game to see what he can do?

Why was Kurt Warner bagging groceries? Why was he the back-up? Because he didn't show in practice what he ultimately can do in a game.

good points.

Practice work ethic is important, as a coach I believe that and enforce that; however, if you have an area of need. And the guys who practice the best are not getting it done in games....??? Why not try the others? The raw, unpolished guy.

GA FinFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you really believe that no player practices at
> 100%??? I Find that hard to believe. Practice
> habits and work ethic are a big reason Ricky is
> still on the team. Also see Peyton Manning.

Yes, I TRULY believe that... how often do you think linebackers light up receivers going across the middle in practice the way they would in a game??

How often do you think an offensive-lineman absolutely mauls his defender into the ground and refuses to let him up??

It DOESN'T happen. Practice is more for the mental aspects of the game and most players are somewhere between 80-90%. But, a lot of things can change when that last 10% of intensity is fired up. Players who are focused and determined in practice might not be able to compete against other guys with more physical gifts... or can not keep that same focus while going all out physically... while there are other guys who may not have the same mental focus, can dominate games on their physical traits alone.

What if the starters are bobbling balls and not getting it done? Isn't it worth trying the young guy who has the size and speed but no polish?

realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if the starters are bobbling balls and not
> getting it done? Isn't it worth trying the young
> guy who has the size and speed but no polish?


Agreed, but who's slot would he take? Because of his size and lack of speed he'd most likely replace Camarillo. Problem is, Cam may still be our most sure-handed receiver. So, what are we gaining with Turner?

Sparano has stated publicly that he doesn't believe that some players are gamers only. His intent is to make Practices harder than the actual game so that he can trust the players to perform for the real thing.

The flaw is that Football is also a game of momentum and emotional swings. As we saw, big plays on special teams can squash the opposing crowd and crush an opponent emotionally.

Now the thing that Sparano does well is rotate players. This gets some youngsters in the game...but, it also can have a negative effect. Certain players have a greater effect w/ more reps. Ronnie Brown needs the ball a certainl amount...and some receivers and QB's need a few plays to get in rhythm.

Football is also a game of rhythm. And I believe that has been our greatest problem in the passing game. Changing QB's had to have some effect...as does pass protection, arm strength, and procession the progressions to have the ball arrive on time.

The great thing about the wildcat is that it messes w/ the rhythm of the defense. It brings hesitation.

The unnecessary hesitation on offense can be a self inflicted wound. Sparano needs to show confindence in every player that he puts on the field. Some of our guys get so few opportunities that they are pressing to make big plays.