Talent, well not according to these players

[Donno]

friend and I were talking about this and he sent this to me.  I don't know what this guy does, but his blog is great, he has excellent access and therefore insight.  I am guessing it is Leavitt (k-state) way.

I guess it would be better if I was a UM fan, but his insight is awesome.

According to players it is not talent but experience/intelligence keeping players off the field.

Hmmm, underclassman making mistakes and limiting what the coaches can do, sounds familiar.

"The transition from high school to college is all mental," Chavez Grant said when I asked him why some of the young players aren't ready to contribute yet.

"You're going to get faster, you're going to get stronger, but this game is played between your ears. You have to understand where you are and where you need to be, what plays are called, what those plays are designed for. And what those guys are struggling with is that. You can't just learn two coverages if you're going into a game with six coverages. Then, the coaches would have to pick and choose based on what you can do. That's the biggest problem. They have to learn the plays. Physically, Brandon [McGee] can play football. Arthur Brown, he can play with the best of them. Arthur Brown will be the first one to find the ball in practice. But when it comes to schemes, blitz coverages and blitz pacakges, dropping into coverages those are not those guys' strong points. And it's not the coaching. We're all in the same meetings. We're all getting taught the same way. If those guys really want to learn, they have to put in the extra time."

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/umiami/2009/11/is-um-headed-for-another-lateseason-collapse.html

I know this is about UM, but I am employing it as an example for USF, feel free to move in desired.

[Who'sYourData?]

friend and I were talking about this and he sent this to me.  I don't know what this guy does, but his blog is great, he has excellent access and therefore insight.  I am guessing it is Leavitt (k-state) way.

I guess it would be better if I was a UM fan, but his insight is awesome.

According to players it is not talent but experience/intelligence keeping players off the field.

Hmmm, underclassman making mistakes and limiting what the coaches can do, sounds familiar.

"The transition from high school to college is all mental," Chavez Grant said when I asked him why some of the young players aren't ready to contribute yet.

"You're going to get faster, you're going to get stronger, but this game is played between your ears. You have to understand where you are and where you need to be, what plays are called, what those plays are designed for. And what those guys are struggling with is that. You can't just learn two coverages if you're going into a game with six coverages. Then, the coaches would have to pick and choose based on what you can do. That's the biggest problem. They have to learn the plays. Physically, Brandon [McGee] can play football. Arthur Brown, he can play with the best of them. Arthur Brown will be the first one to find the ball in practice. But when it comes to schemes, blitz coverages and blitz pacakges, dropping into coverages those are not those guys' strong points. And it's not the coaching. We're all in the same meetings. We're all getting taught the same way. If those guys really want to learn, they have to put in the extra time."

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/umiami/2009/11/is-um-headed-for-another-lateseason-collapse.html

I know this is about UM, but I am employing it as an example for USF, feel free to move in desired.

This is true of every sport and every level.  Happens at the high school level, which is why upperclassmen generally get much more playing time than underclassmen.  Happens at the pro level where rookies need to earn their time.  There are always a few exceptions where a player is so talented it makes up for mistakes, or a player is so smart they don't make them when they are younger.  But by and large this holds true.

[smazza]

kids are so much more sophisticated and smarter today

the coach needs to recruit smart  football players

leavitt clearly doesnt do that and it is evidenced by undisciplined play year after year

usf tends to recruit athletes and not football players

[redfisher78]

kids are so much more sophisticated and smarter today

the coach needs to recruit smart  football players

leavitt clearly doesnt do that and it is evidenced by undisciplined play year after year

usf tends to recruit athletes and not football players

If you look at our commits for next year we are getting some real quality academics out of them

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

i have a problem with this part of the article:

.

i think a  lot of that IS coaching.  the coaches recruit kids knowing full well what their attitude, academic aptitutde and overall composition is.  if you're recruiting kids that only care to be the fastest or hardest hitting guy on the field but demonstrate no interest in the mental calculus and technical nuances of the game of, you are going to get talented but ignorant players.

furthermore, it is up to coaches AT EACH LEVEL [as well as other players and assistants] to instill in their young players an appreciation for the mental aspects of the game. an okay coach simply hammers X's and O's into a player's head for the sake of memorization.  a great coach instills in his young players an appreciation for the intricacies of the game and shows them how God-given athletic ability is only improved with intense study and appreciation of the non-physical parts of the game.

that has always been an issue with USF. we have had some fantastic athletes on this team, but only a few of them have been [from an outside observer's perspective] true students of the game. this is why USF can sleepwalk to wins over Cuse or FAU or WKU simply on sheer athletic ability alone, despite completely uninspired play, but why we have been incapable of winning the grind-out, smash-mouth war of attrition that is Big East Conference play.

there is no substitute for athletic ability ["can't coach speed," etc.], but lesser athletes can outplay more athletic opponents with SMART play.

Larry Bird is the perfect example of a mediocre athlete with genius acumen in the mental study of his game, who outplayed better athletes simply on knowledge and instinct of his sport.

[Who'sYourData?]

i have a problem with this part of the article:

.

i think a  lot of that IS coaching.  the coaches recruit kids knowing full well what their attitude, academic aptitutde and overall composition is.  if you're recruiting kids that only care to be the fastest or hardest hitting guy on the field but demonstrate no interest in the mental calculus and technical nuances of the game of, you are going to get talented but ignorant players.

furthermore, it is up to coaches AT EACH LEVEL [as well as other players and assistants] to instill in their young players an appreciation for the mental aspects of the game. an okay coach simply hammers X's and O's into a player's head for the sake of memorization.  a great coach instills in his young players an appreciation for the intricacies of the game and shows them how God-given athletic ability is only improved with intense study and appreciation of the non-physical parts of the game.

that has always been an issue with USF. we have had some fantastic athletes on this team, but only a few of them have been [from an outside observer's perspective] true students of the game. this is why USF can sleepwalk to wins over Cuse or FAU or WKU simply on sheer athletic ability alone, despite completely uninspired play, but why we have been incapable of winning the grind-out, smash-mouth war of attrition that is Big East Conference play.

there is no substitute for athletic ability ["can't coach speed," etc.], but lesser athletes can outplay more athletic opponents with SMART play.

Larry Bird is the perfect example of a mediocre athlete with genius acumen in the mental study of his game, who outplayed better athletes simply on knowledge and instinct of his sport.

Have you met many high school students?  They are young.  Very few high school kids have the focus you want in all of your athletes.  If USF only recruited football players that were intelligent and wanted to study football all day long, there would be a half dozen players on the team. 

Oh, by the way, they are also taking a full time college courseload.  That eats into the time they have to eat, drink, and sleep football.  Your expectations are unreasonably high.  Even the vast majority of players at Florida have the kind of dedication you would like.  They are simply better athletes.

Actually, I can make the argument that we probably have more than our share of dedicated football players.  A couple of years ago we were beating BCS teams with CUSA talent.  We have not had Top 25 classes, but we've been close to the Top 25 at the end of the year.  To think we have more talent than the teams we've been beating the last three years is silly.

[Brad]

usf tends to recruit athletes and not football players

Funny you should say that...

W. Virginia coach: 'We got outathleted' by USF