hawksincebirth
Active member
I think he did again today .. he’s doing pete no favorsadeltaY":29fpzo6k said:
Stephen. A on Seahawks loss to Bears
- Thread starter Mistashoesta
- Start date
hawkfannj
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,771
- Reaction score
- 160
I believe that put a spear into the belief and trust system implemented here . Just awful
hawksincebirth
Active member
NJlargent":2hn80bgb said:
That was the most damning to me aswell .... if any doubts remain about the play .. Avril sums it up perfectly
I don't follow Cowherd at all and that's actually the first clip I've seen of him in ages and ages but...he's right to a large extent.
Feel free to not read the following if you don't dig nerdy stuff and/or think principles and experiences in other games have no cross over to football:
I play a game online competitively called Blood Bowl. It's a cross between rugby, football and fantasy backstory with elves, dwarves, orcs etc. Super fun game to me because the entire game is risk management and making the right moves at the right time and honing your intuition. That's not where I'm going with this though - the intricacies of good Blood Bowl play are not translatable to coaching a football team. You don't have known probabilities of success or failure in football that are determined on a D6 or 2D6 and everything is simply more fuzzy in football from a risk perspective. But the thing that is similar is the difference between good and great coaches.
I fancy myself a good coach. I have won tourneys, I have won a league, I can rise to the occasion and fell a superior coach with a superior team, sometimes I get my ass handed to me by a better coach playing a worse team. But my fault as a game player are not being super detail oriented. I also play based on emotion a ton more than great coaches do. When I am down in the dumps with life (which I am at times, sometimes Blood Bowl itself) I struggle to do the small things well which translates into not doing the big things well. A guy moved to the wrong place, a risk taken that was avoidable, feeling the need to create something with my own initiative instead of picking apart what the other guy is doing.
Coaches better than I though...they are academics of the game. They can see almost everything possible and the tradeoffs and do so whether they're feeling spry or feeling down. They don't lock on to a specific move and try to make it work if it imperils them down the future. They don't grip and feel the need to create things because the game could slip away, they have answers already devised. When I'm playing my best game and am my most focused I can give the best a run for their money because my confidence is translated into trying to play my best game and thinking about things on another level that my low morale ass can't access because I fatalistically believe it won't work. I am in that mode, in that flow.
But like Cowherd said, that doesn't last. I have only ever become better over the past 5 years by using my low periods of morale to fix the small things, to dig deeper into what I'm doing wrong with the help of other, better coaches. I haven't given up because the prospect of figuring it out and rising into the pantheon of great BB coaches is a challenge I welcome and want to conquer. But you can't ride positive energy indefinitely to get there. You have to stumble, pick yourself up, ask questions, change aspects of what you do, and just accept you can always learn more and actually make changes to your game to improve. You also have to adjust to changes to the game itself like things being added or removed in the rules or people playing you a specific way based on reputation.
The translation of my experience to football and what Cowherd is talking about is this:
Morale matters but being able to play with morale on the back burner and just hit the details of what you're doing correctly and in consistent ways matters more.
For what it's worth, I'm one of the odd ones in the BB world where I have a much better attitude about dice and luck than other coaches in my spot. Most coaches who struggled like I did for a couple of years give up completely blaming it on the dice while the best in the game stay and stay and stay because they are consistently rewarded with wins for playing a detail oriented game better than their opponents.
And that's part of the dichotomy I see in aggregate within the football coaching world - you have game players and football guys. Game players understand the meta of the game, the constraints of the game, what other people do in reaction to the meta and constraints, don't bind themselves with dogmatic tactical approaches in the face of struggle, are willing to look stupid and learn from it, try to gain every single small edge at every point of preparation and execution. Football guys believe in willpower and simply playing their style of game better than the other guy plays their style of game.
And both can work, but to me the longevity is on the game player not the football guy.
End of nerd rant.
Feel free to not read the following if you don't dig nerdy stuff and/or think principles and experiences in other games have no cross over to football:
I play a game online competitively called Blood Bowl. It's a cross between rugby, football and fantasy backstory with elves, dwarves, orcs etc. Super fun game to me because the entire game is risk management and making the right moves at the right time and honing your intuition. That's not where I'm going with this though - the intricacies of good Blood Bowl play are not translatable to coaching a football team. You don't have known probabilities of success or failure in football that are determined on a D6 or 2D6 and everything is simply more fuzzy in football from a risk perspective. But the thing that is similar is the difference between good and great coaches.
I fancy myself a good coach. I have won tourneys, I have won a league, I can rise to the occasion and fell a superior coach with a superior team, sometimes I get my ass handed to me by a better coach playing a worse team. But my fault as a game player are not being super detail oriented. I also play based on emotion a ton more than great coaches do. When I am down in the dumps with life (which I am at times, sometimes Blood Bowl itself) I struggle to do the small things well which translates into not doing the big things well. A guy moved to the wrong place, a risk taken that was avoidable, feeling the need to create something with my own initiative instead of picking apart what the other guy is doing.
Coaches better than I though...they are academics of the game. They can see almost everything possible and the tradeoffs and do so whether they're feeling spry or feeling down. They don't lock on to a specific move and try to make it work if it imperils them down the future. They don't grip and feel the need to create things because the game could slip away, they have answers already devised. When I'm playing my best game and am my most focused I can give the best a run for their money because my confidence is translated into trying to play my best game and thinking about things on another level that my low morale ass can't access because I fatalistically believe it won't work. I am in that mode, in that flow.
But like Cowherd said, that doesn't last. I have only ever become better over the past 5 years by using my low periods of morale to fix the small things, to dig deeper into what I'm doing wrong with the help of other, better coaches. I haven't given up because the prospect of figuring it out and rising into the pantheon of great BB coaches is a challenge I welcome and want to conquer. But you can't ride positive energy indefinitely to get there. You have to stumble, pick yourself up, ask questions, change aspects of what you do, and just accept you can always learn more and actually make changes to your game to improve. You also have to adjust to changes to the game itself like things being added or removed in the rules or people playing you a specific way based on reputation.
The translation of my experience to football and what Cowherd is talking about is this:
Morale matters but being able to play with morale on the back burner and just hit the details of what you're doing correctly and in consistent ways matters more.
For what it's worth, I'm one of the odd ones in the BB world where I have a much better attitude about dice and luck than other coaches in my spot. Most coaches who struggled like I did for a couple of years give up completely blaming it on the dice while the best in the game stay and stay and stay because they are consistently rewarded with wins for playing a detail oriented game better than their opponents.
And that's part of the dichotomy I see in aggregate within the football coaching world - you have game players and football guys. Game players understand the meta of the game, the constraints of the game, what other people do in reaction to the meta and constraints, don't bind themselves with dogmatic tactical approaches in the face of struggle, are willing to look stupid and learn from it, try to gain every single small edge at every point of preparation and execution. Football guys believe in willpower and simply playing their style of game better than the other guy plays their style of game.
And both can work, but to me the longevity is on the game player not the football guy.
End of nerd rant.
Maciasstrong
New member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2018
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Cowherd is the MAN !!! speak the truth brotha !!
