There appears to be a major hole in what I'm saying: If Tim Tebow is a great college player, wouldn't he also hypothetically be one of the best professional players of all the current college players? Thus, shouldn't he eventually become a great professional player, seeing as practically all NFL players played college football?
No. By "relative," I mean that there are certain threshold requirements for success at each level. Let's say, for sake of simplicity, that we measure specific skills (speed, IQ, height, vertical, strength, etc) on a scale of 0.0 (worst) to 10.0 (best). On the scales, let's have 3.0 correlate to the average ability of a major college conference football/basketball player, and 7.0 correlate to the average ability of an NFL/NBA player.
Now, let's say a college football player is a 7.0 for speed. That makes him very fast compared to his fellow NCAA athletes. When running to the outside, he'll get to the corner before the defender most of the time and streak down the field. Unfortunately, once this player moves to the pros, he'll realize that NFL defenses are far faster than NCAA defenses, and his attempts to get to the corner will be foiled. Many of Ron Dayne's Wisconsin runs in this video that went for touchdowns or long gains would not have been nearly as successful in the pros, and indeed they weren't. Comparatively, in basketball, a foward who is 6'8" may be able to fight for boards effectively in college, but for a 6'8" forward to be a successful rebounder will be a great challenge in the NBA.The point I am trying to get at is that a rating of 7.0 versus 9.0 may not make a tremendous difference in college, while it makes a world of difference in the pros. All of Ron Dayne's long touchdown runs in college would still be long touchdown runs even if Dayne's speed was that of Chris Johnson's. The added speed would certainly be a help in college and make Dayne even more of a force, but Dayne's speed was enough for the job as it was. Clearly, the New York Giants completely ignored this fact, drafting Dayne with the 11th overall pick, enamored with his college fame and Heisman trophy.
Dayne is my example of a GICNIP, a player who is great in college, but nothing in the pros. His talent level was simply not sufficient to succeed at the next level. Other GICNIPs include Michael Vick and Vince Young, who could not overcome their lack of passing accuracy and football IQ, Jason White, who could not overcome his lack of natural passing ability (horrible mechanics), Adam Morrison, J.J. Redick, and Casey Jacobsen, who could not overcome their lack of athleticism, and many others you can probably think of.
If a player is to excel in the pros, he needs to either be consistently above 7.0 in his skills, or have at least one skill that is truly phenomenal (extremely fast i.e. Joey Galloway, extremely good shooter i.e. Ray Allen).
The classic GICNIP is Tyler Hansborough. Undoubtedly, Hansborough is one of the best college basketball players in the game, but his game will not translate to professional basketball. He doesn't have great athleticism (not that quick, not that explosive, can't jump that high), doesn't have much size (only 6'8"), and while he overpowers a lot of defenders to score now, that tactic will certainly not work at the next level.
For football, Tim Tebow is the next classic GICNIP. While he can throw a good deep ball and has good size, parts of his game surely will not translate to being a professional quarterback (they are below 7.0 on my scale). His passing mechanics are poor, and he won't have enough accuracy or touch to succeed as a passer in the NFL. Maybe Tebow will find another position, but otherwise he will be a peasant's Michael Vick.
No comments:
Post a Comment