Great read!!! Bill Walsh's NFL draft philosophies: Six lessons from the master By Michael Lombardi NFL Network http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...es-six-lessons-from-the-master?module=HP11_cp One of my greatest memories (and learning experiences) from my days as an NFL executive was being around Bill Walsh during draft preparation. The legendary San Francisco 49ers head coach had a unique perspective on the NFL draft -- one rooted in time spent with another coaching icon, Paul Brown, while Walsh worked for as an assistant for the Cincinnati Bengals. Walsh always thought differently in so many areas of the game, on and off the field. Many of Walsh's disciples have been able to take his West Coast offense and duplicate his success. However, few were able to leave the 49ers with his skills as an executive. Walsh knew exactly what his team needed before each draft to challenge every season for a Super Bowl. Since we are just 10 days from the 2012 NFL Draft, I thought it'd be fun to go over six of Walsh's biggest hot-button issues with the drafting process. Some come in the form of the statements you might hear or read and others highlight Walsh's unique view on scouting. 1) Describing the player by the round he should be taken. Walsh hated hearing a scout tell him a player was, for example, not a good second-rounder, but a great third-rounder. He always said the only time people talk about rounds is in draft preparation and on draft day. Never during any player's career, Walsh would vent, does anyone say a player was picked in the right round. The day after the draft, every player is graded on his playing performance, not his selection round. Walsh only cared about what a player would be able to do for his team. He thought "round talk" was the wrong way for a scout to measure his own abilities. It was not talent evaluation, but rather round prediction. When I was in Cleveland, we had a scout who would rarely say much before the draft. When asked a question before draft day, he was vague, unwilling to commit to an opinion, almost sheepish. He refused to extend himself, always playing it safe. However, once the draft was over, he instantly become a new man. He'd sit in the draft room, review every team's pick and grade his work based on his round predictions, as if that was the true litmus test. I can still see him sitting there, looking like he just aced the exam. Walsh always told everyone: It never matters where we pick them, it only matters how they play. If Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill goes eighth overall to the Dolphins and plays great, no one is going to remember where he was taken, just that he produces on the field. If he stinks, it will be a blown pick, regardless of where it occurred. 2) "This is a bad draft." This statement drove Walsh nuts, as he felt it was a huge copout by scouts. I talk to certain people every year before the draft, and every year they lament the weakness of that year's draft class, as if I don't remember those exact words the year before. Walsh would remind everyone in the room that the draft only needed enough depth for his team to acquire 12 good players. Satisfying every team was not his concern. All he cared about was finding talent for his own team. Therefore, the depth of talent in each draft was not irrelevant. 3) "We should trade down -- there is no one worth picking at our spot." Even though Walsh loved to move up or down, he felt that scouts always wanted to trade down to avoid putting their reputations on the line. He didn't like scouts shying away from making the tough call when he had to make tough calls all the time. He would ask scouts/personnel directors: "What do you want us to do: Pass on the pick?" When the cost of draft picks soared in prior years, moving down was a great option. But with the new collective bargaining agreement's reduced rookie pay scale, it is not as financially dangerous to just make the pick. Walsh believed there was always someone worth picking, because three years from any draft, people will look back at the great players in the league who were passed over by a number of teams. Once again, Walsh was all about the talent, not the spot. 4) Watch out for players from downtrodden programs -- particularly programs that have just fired a coach -- being unfairly downgraded. In Walsh's mind, players from a program that has just fired its coach pay a price in draft evaluation. Coaches rarely admit the real reason for their termination -- bad coaching -- instead placing the blame on bad players. These side effects of a losing culture can taint a scout's visit to a particular school. Walsh insisted that all the college prospects in this situation had to be examined closely. 5) "Never take the one-year wonder and look forward; take the one-year wonder and look back." After Walsh was burned by a one-year wonder in the 1987 draft -- Clemson running back Terrence Flagler -- he became skeptical of limited track records. If a good coach was unable to get a player to produce before his final season with the program, how could he expect to get consistent effort at the NFL level? In a similar vein, former Georgetown coach John Thompson has explained a scenario on the recruiting trail that I love to reference. When the parents of a prospective recruit would ask Thompson to make sure their son attended classes, despite his spotty attendance in high school, Thompson always responded with a simple question: "If you can't get him to go, what makes you think I can?" 6) "The first year we will teach the players the system, the second year we will develop their skills within the system." Walsh thought overloading a rookie with the entire playbook was a bad mistake. He wanted to have a defined role for each first-year player, and then expand that role in Year 2. His biggest concern was making sure his guys played fast, which required them to react, not think first. With the lockout eliminating minicamps and OTAs this past offseason, teams were forced to cut down on overloading rookies with too much information. And many rookies went on to make significant contributions to their teams in the 2011-12 campaign, further proving Walsh's theory. In the next 10 days, as you're bombarded with pre-draft analysis, try and think like Coach Walsh. As he would often remind me, "If we are all thinking alike, then no one is thinking."
Must say I especially agree with the quote "It doesn't matter where we pick them, it only matters how they play". Who cares if we draft someone at #16 when all the draft predictions say he should be a bottom 1st rd pick? All that will matter for the next 10 years is how he'll play. For example many though the Patriots over-drafted Mayo because of the position he plays but I don't think many would question the pick now...
Hey, I wouldn't be against it especially if the thought is he can play some OLB too (I think he can).
Great read Mambo, thanks for the article... I like the part about the one year wonder and how to look back instead of forward. Like Walsh said, we have to find 10 good players at our picks (or whatever the number is assuming we move around) despite depth at a certain positions.
The biggest thing I get out of this is that Bill Walsh wanted 12 good players out of a 12 round draft. Smart guy.
I bought Bill Walsh book that outlined everything from A-Z about running a football organization. Walsh was brilliant on so many levels and when you have a system that a majority of the NFL run you're a visionary. I always believe if you like a player take him no one will care which round he was grabbed if he is successful. Its only these so called mock geniuses like McShay, Kiper amd Mayock who will never coach a player or win a Super Bowl. By the way Walsh's book is so expensive now it can cost upwards of 400 dollars.
I think the most important thing to think about is that round no longer matters once April 29th hits. They're all rookies, and they all need to be developed. Clean slate across the board.
I love #6.....allowing players to grow within the system, now and days we expect so much out of rookies that if they aren't dominate out the gate we bash them and label them busts. Say if we reach on Chandler Jones, on draft day we will boo the hell out of him BUT come week 1, if he gets 2 sacks we'll praise the hell out of the pick and label him the next Aldon Smith
Yeah. I didn't find anything particularly ground breaking. If you hit gold drafting a franchise Future HoF QB, you are going to win some games.
I agree with that whole thing - I get so tired of hearing about where a player was drafted. All that matters is whether he can play.
Its weird isnt it how nearly every coach that is considered "great" had during their careers a true franchise/elite QB - its not too hard to look like a great coach when you have a Montana/Young/Elway/Brady/Manning in your back field What impresses me (in soccer as well as the NFL) are the coaches that can make something more out of what they have available to them.
You can't ignore the system. It's no accident they get Joe Cool and when he got a little older they call in Steve Young from the bullpen to take the reins. Call it talent evaluation. Call it efficient management of resources. Call it whatever you want. But don't call it a fluke. It might not all have been on purpose, but there have to be a lot of good things to let a player like that develop.
I am not suggesting that without Montana Walsh would be a terrible coach, or similarly Belli without Brady, but it is also true that pretty much every great coach had a great QB and its a lot easier to look good with a top class QB playing for you than you can manage without one. Obviously its a team game and its always hard to judge players or coaches individually (how good would Montana or Young have been without Rice to throw to for example) and so whilst you can certainly say "XXX was a great team", its not so easy to say YYY was a great player or a great coach (though if they have managed to translate that success with another organisation then that tends to suggest that they have something special).
Not taking anything away from Bill, I absolutely recognize the man had a brilliant football and business savvy mind. But, just based on what was posted initially, I didn't see anything prophetic If anything, I think Mambo posted this because he's comparing Rex's drafting strategies with Walsh's. The Jets have had no problem reaching nor do they care about what others thing about their "bad" picks, they take guys they believe can help them regardless of their Draft grade. Do I agree with this? Nope. I really wish they didn't reach for certain players, I believe this directly set the team back with depth and if they'd taken just about any other player within the general "grading scale" they'd have contributing starters. But essentially, that goes against this article, because "the general grading scale" doesn't exist to the gurus. This article is trying to make Walsh out to be like Bill James, trying to show his contrary to popular thinking in relation to the draft, but it really doesn't succeed.
