Yeah I'll take the cush was job vs the stress of coaching. Can imagine going back to that workload after being retired for 10 years
Not to mention, you keep your job indefinitely instead of being subject to being fired over wins and losses
I’m right there with you. I’d think so too. I’d quit for $500k a year. But I guess retirement life at whatever age he’s at must be boring?
I can’t imagine making as much as he does for an easy job and not being able to have fun with that money and my family
Man quotes like this make me wonder how long it is until the eventual NFL collapse. Pretty shocking to think the NFL might actually be less progressive than MLB at this point.
"These findings intersect with other research identifying conservatism as a type of social cognition that emphasizes fear, authority, social dominance behavior and hyper-vigilance to perceived threats and negative stimuli."
plenty of teams in the NFL are progressive though. why would you judge the whole league on this quote?
Because guys who say things like this keep getting hired and praised by others in the league rather than laughed at.
why would you point out that your competition is doing something wrong when you can just laugh at them behind closed doors and allow them to fail?
also, MLB is crazy progressive too in the way of analytics. I'm just all around confused by your comment.
That's part and parcel of what I'm saying. MLB, which has historically been the most opposed to change, has embraced analytics more than the NFL has to the point that basically every team has to use them in order to compete. I don't think what I'm saying - that the NFL is the least progressive major sports league right now - is all that controversial so I'm still not sure what you're getting hung up on.
I'm not saying they don't use analytics. I'm saying analytics are less in favor in the NFL than they are in MLB or the NBA (I know almost nothing about the NHL). It's been the slowest league for advanced analytics to catch on as the norm. I'm not speaking in absolutes, only comparatively to the other major sports leagues.
http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12331388/the-great-analytics-rankings The top 10 contains zero NFL teams. The bottom 10 contains four NFL teams. Zero NFL teams were rated as "all-in", compared to 1 NHL team, 4 NBA teams and 9 MLB teams. Half of NFL teams were rated "skeptics" or "non-believers". Compared to 4/30 NHL teams 9/30 NBA teams and 8/30 MLB teams. I'm not saying every NFL team is full of meathead idiots who hate spreadsheets. But the average NFL coach or GM is much more skeptical of them than in any other sports league. Yes, this article is two years old, but its the most applicable information I could find. My guess is that the results wouldn't be all that different, again, comparatively, today.
missed that. whether I agree with your point about the NFL's comparative use of analytics or not, I'm still not sure I understand why it would lead to some sort of collapse. or why baseball is on the verge of collapse as well due to their anti-analytical ways.
It doesn't help that football analytics aren't nearly as effective and never will be compared to baseball and basketball because they have much easier results to quantify (made or missed basket, on-base v out) That's why football analytics aren't nearly as widely adopted as baseball/basketball, not due to a cultural issue.
The nfl is sharing the player tracking information with all 32 teams. They can tell you exactly how many steps every player is taking and at what speed they're doing it
I'm using adoption of analytics as an example of a symptom, not a cause. The cause is a certain level of hubris and stubbornness (generally starting at the ownership level) in a number of NFL franchises who seem confident that they can win by going back to the past instead of embracing the future. Obviously there is an ebb and flow with popularity of all the major sports leagues but the fact that NFL teams are still hiring coaches who say shit like what Gruden said isn't a good sign for the game. The only reason I even mentioned the MLB is because they've always been the paragon of a league resistance to change over the last couple decades (though probably less so in the past decade) and have declined in popularity as a result. Would not surprise me to see the same happen to the NFL not because of resistance to analytics but because of an unwillingness to adapt and embrace new ideas.
You seem to be working on some sort of assumption that football analytics and baseball analytics are similar. I don't think even the staunchest proponents of football analytics would suggest that analytics in football are even close to being as applicable to baseball from the perspective of an executive in either sport.
If nothing else, I wish the anti-analytics people would find some other joke than the one where they intentionally misuse some acronym to indicate they think it's useless nerd stuff
I just searched a couple minutes and can't remember how to find the thread but there was a video of some "football guy" melting down and going hard in the paint against analytics and I'm pretty sure you posted in it
Lol I think maybe the best way to piss someone off is to repeat what they say back to them, only in a nasally or lispy way that makes them sound stupid
Stop trying to create some narrative that somebody knows how to piss someone off better than somebody else
This is the point I was trying to make. It definitely has nothing to do with a cultural issue among owners. It's just the fact that in baseball there are binary results with a much larger sample size that make their metrics much easier to understand and trust. Similarly, in basketball, there is a binary result used to measure all of the variables in the game (did the shot go in or not). That's not the case at all in football. A five yard gain can mean a million different thing depending on situations and there are too many variables to make metrics like this easy to quantify and understand and trust.