Falcons DC Dean Pees calls young NFL coaches “entitled” and “spoiled”

[JohnNord]

This is a great video from Falcons DC Dean Pees in regards to the recent movement of hiring the young analytics-based, fairly inexperienced HC’s in the NFL.
 

Yes, there’s a bit of “back in my day” in this rant but the overall message is spot on…you need to your dues to be an effective leaders.
 

It is funny because analytics Twitter has been up in arms trying to misrepresent what he said.  Call me crazy - but I like this guy:

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by JohnNord

[Warcodered]

I loved his plan for Josh, if only he took the bus that day.

[TheyCallMeAndy]

Interesting for sure. 

[TBBills]

He is just an old grumpy man afraid the younger guys are going to take his job b.c he isn't a good DC anymore.

 

The old "Back in my day" well back in yoru day people didn't realize there was easier ways to do things. No one needs to aline the fields to be a good coordinator... what old man talk.

Look at all those grumpy old thumbs down people.

Edited January 8, 2022 by TBBills

[dickleyjones]

cringeworthy

[Warcodered]

 

 

Feels like he's correct about what he's saying, only issue is it comes off a little too anti analytics.

 

Computers and analytics aren't the end all be all, but they are a useful tool, you still have to coach.

Edited January 7, 2022 by Warcodered

[TheFunPolice]

Well, he does have a point about analytics I think.

 

There's this idea that whatever the formula says is always correct. Going for it on 4th down every time it's short yardage can also get you beat (see the Chargers this year). Circumstances matter. 

 

Plus the analytic spreadsheet people are insufferable lately. Josh Allen is still a bust to them, because their pivot table in Excel says so. 

 

Analytics area great tool but the idea that they are the be all and end all of coaching just doesn't work when you're dealing with human beings. 

 

Jets Bucs game is a great example last week. Brady gets to within 4 late, but then the Jets drive the ball all the way down the field to inside the Bucs 10, which was a surprise given how they had gone 3 and out a bunch. So the Jets are feeling great. Then it gets down to 4th and short. 

 

Analytics says go for it. And you're the Jets, so why not? It's not like the game really meant anything either way, other than the W. But nobody's playoff position changes and the Jets are dead in the water anyway. 

 

However, I would argue that you kick the FG there and go up 7, putting ALL the pressure on Brady. Worst case scenario he goes all the way down the field and ties you. Once you miss the 4th down and Tampa players are jumping all over the field celebrating there's a feeling of "here we go" that comes with being human that the spreadsheet doesn't and cannot account for. 

 

Brady has said it multiple times: he looks at it as he already lost, but now he suddenly has a chance to win. Thus, ZFG. 

 

The Jets had already won, but now they have a chance to lose. We saw how it went. You play totally different in those cases. 

 

That game was 100% going to end the way it did as soon as they missed the 4th down. Even though the "odds" of Brady taking them 93 yards in under 2:00 with no timeouts were supposedly low, we all knew they were close to 100%. 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by TheFunPolice

[BuffaloBillyG]

Spot on about analytics. They can be a helpful tool to incorporate, for sure. 

 

But they cannot factor in specific events in what is happening to a team currently in the field. Way too many variables to be relied on 100%. A computer can't look a guy in the eye and say "He wants this more than normal. I trust him". 

[WhoTom]

I don't know - I get an "old man yells at cloud" feeling from his little tirade.

 

He creates a false dichotomy with respect to analytics by assuming that the only thing the coach looks at is the spreadsheet. I'm sure they're taking into consideration the weather conditions, how the offense and defense are playing, who's on the other side of the ball, etc. It's not an either/or between those factors and analytics - they're just adding the analytics to the equation.

 

Back in my day, we didn't dis other coaches. 🙂

 

[gonzo1105]

Its always a fine line with conversations like this. Older people like Pees are going to side with him cause they are the I paid my dues people and since I did it other people should have to as well. 

 

Younger people, who are usually more tech saavy are going to say why do it that way when we can do it quicker with Tech. 

 

Part of me agrees with him particularly the coaching relationship building needs to be personal and allows for your players to approach you about a variety of things. Part of me was like not everyone has to be like you where they worked the lower levels for 20 years before they got their shot. 

 

The funny part about it is I worked in the coaching world for a decade and its very much a not what you know business but a who you know business. I would almost guarantee Pees knew someone in the NFL that helped him get that job more so than on the merit of his work at Findlay College and Kent State

[GunnerBill]

I am sure he is right about the entitlement of young coaches. I see it in my own profession. The conversation I have most with young people just starting out is prioritise learning the job and you will climb the ladder. But prioritise climbing the ladder you will never learn the job. There is a generation of 20 somethings who just want to get to the top as fast as they can by any means possible. I had a guy work for me who got there in 4 years working his way up from the bottom. It took me 11 to get to that same level and I am only 10 years older than him so not like a totally different time. He was awful. Because he hadn't learnt the job. There was no substance behind anything he did. He worked for me for 18 months and I basically had to start from scratch teaching him the things I was taught right at the start of my career. Wouldn't shock me at all to know the same exists in coaching.

 

On analytics I know what he is trying to say but he didn't express it very well. 

24 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:

Its always a fine line with conversations like this. Older people like Pees are going to side with him cause they are the I paid my dues people and since I did it other people should have to as well. 

 

Younger people, who are usually more tech saavy are going to say why do it that way when we can do it quicker with Tech. 

 

Part of me agrees with him particularly the coaching relationship building needs to be personal and allows for your players to approach you about a variety of things. Part of me was like not everyone has to be like you where they worked the lower levels for 20 years before they got their shot. 

 

The funny part about it is I worked in the coaching world for a decade and its very much a not what you know business but a who you know business. I would almost guarantee Pees knew someone in the NFL that helped him get that job more so than on the merit of his work at Findlay College and Kent State

 

He worked for Saban at Michigan State. So when the HC job at Kent State went south Saban was his in with Belichick. Oh and of course Saban started out at Kent State so I am sure he put in a good word for Pees to get that job too.

Edited January 7, 2022 by GunnerBill

[gonzo1105]

13 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

I am sure he is right about the entitlement of young coaches. I see it in my own profession. The conversation I have most with young people just starting out is prioritise learning the job and you will climb the ladder. But prioritise climbing the latter you will never learn the job. There is a generation of 20 somethings who just want to get to the top as fast as they can by any means possible. I had a guy work for me who got there in 4 years working his way up from the bottom. It took me 11 to get to that same level and I am only 10 years older than him so not like a totally different time. He was awful. Because he hadn't learnt the job. There was no substance behind anything he did. He worked for me for 18 months and I basically had to start from scratch teaching him the things I was taught right at the start of my career. Wouldn't shock me at all to know the same exists in coaching.

 

On analytics I know what he is trying to say but he didn't express it very well. 

 

He worked for Saban at Michigan State. So when the HC job at Kent State went south Saban was his in with Belichick. Oh and of course Saban started out at Kent State so I am sure he put in a good word for Pees to get that job too.

Right but that’s what I’m saying. A lot of good coaches get passed over for high level jobs because they didn’t luck into knowing someone. There are a ton of D3 and D2 guys who are really good but because they don’t know a heavyweight will never get the chance. That’s what’s wrong with the profession in general it’s a good old boys network which is why you constantly see damn that guys getting another chance again? 

[Jerome007]

24 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

I don't know - I get an "old man yells at cloud" feeling from his little tirade.

 

He creates a false dichotomy with respect to analytics by assuming that the only thing the coach looks at is the spreadsheet. I'm sure they're taking into consideration the weather conditions, how the offense and defense are playing, who's on the other side of the ball, etc. It's not an either/or between those factors and analytics - they're just adding the analytics to the equation.

 

Back in my day, we didn't dis other coaches. 🙂

 

Yep. Results matter. And most young coaches in the NFL seem to do pretty good. So they surely must be focused on other stuff than analytics... If young coaches were having dismal results, of course he'd have a point. But it's not the case.

[Nextmanup]

He actually made several points not totally related to one another.

The one thing that I find interesting is his discussion about young coaches not being able to stand in front of a room and talk to people.  They have to hide behind email or a text.  

 

This is a really interesting trend and it's permeating throughout society now.  

 

The internet has been around long enough now that an entire generation of adults have grown up, if they wanted to, living in a fake world called "social media" and not being around human beings.  They only now how to interact with humans through a computer.  

They don't know how to talk to real humans face to face, interact with them, or get along with them.

And it's a HUGE emerging problem for employers across America.

I would imaging a number of people here fall into this category, whether they realize it or not.

 

 

Edited January 7, 2022 by Nextmanup

[JGMcD2]

34 minutes ago, TBBills said:

He is just an old grumpy man afraid the younger guys are going to take his job b.c he isn't a good DC anymore.

 

The old "Back in my day" well back in yoru day people didn't realize there was easier ways to do things. No one needs to aline the fields to be a good coordinator... what old man talk.

He's afraid younger guys are going to take his job? He's been a great DC for 15 years. He retired and came back because Arthur Smith asked him... and he loved working with Arthur Smith. He didn't NEED to come back. 

 

Easier doesn't necessarily mean better and easier doesn't necessarily mean you learn as much. Nowhere does he say you need to line a field to be a good coordinator... he says it makes you appreciate what you're doing more. He's spot on - having to start at the bottom makes you FAR more aware of everything going on around you when you get to the top. Being able to relate to the last guy on your staff makes a world of difference. He's not saying analytics are bad... he's saying they're not the only thing.

 

Relationships > Analytics 

 

I'm a 20-something working in professional sports that agrees with everything that he says... I guess I'm an old man. 

[Jerome007]

Just now, Nextmanup said:

The one thing that I find interesting is discussion about young coaches not being able to stand in front of a room and talk to people.  They have to hide behind email or a text.

Name one?

 

Again, results matter. Most young coaches do fairly good. Some don't... just as some old coaches massively succeed and some don't.

 

But are there young coaches not able to speak to players and journalists and hiding behind a screen? Really?

 

 

[Buffalo Boy]

   Spot on.

   Not just about coaching but about a generation who have grown up with ZERO self formed/ learned interpersonal, face to face social skills.

    Computers and cell phones have created a different way of living. Some of it good but some bad.

    There is a commercial about one of the big pizza companies giving charity to the mom and pop restaurants because people are too lazy to actually either go to a restaurant or pick their own food up….WTF has happened to this country?

    Get a car delivered to you ( get screwed on the deal)

    Sell your house without listing it ( get screwed on the deal)

    Get anything without any work or discomfort but pay a hefty premium and think you are winning due to convenience.

    Yeah, Coach here is preaching to a bunch of us oldsters😎

[CaliBills]

3 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

He actually made several points not totally related to one another.

The one thing that I find interesting is discussion about young coaches not being able to stand in front of a room and talk to people.  They have to hide behind email or a text.  

 

This is a really interesting trend and it's permeating throughout society now.  

 

The internet has been around long enough now that an entire generation of adults have grown up, if they wanted to, living in a fake world called "social media" and not being around human beings.  They only now how to interact with humans through a computer.  

They don't know how to talk to real humans face to face, interact with them, or get along with them.

And it's a HUGE emerging problem for employers across America.

I would imaging a number of people here fall into this category, whether they realize it or not.

 

 

 

I don't know man.  

 

I am employed by a company that has a 73 year old CEO who might talk in front of people but really only when the news is good.  He hides behind email and or other staff to enforce anything that could be considered negative or strict.  

 

So age I do not think is the issue.  Technology use is the issue and simply stating younger generations are the one's being effected is a bit narrow.  Boomers are using technology just as much as the younger generations.  IE See Facebook.  Hell my parents (boomers) send text to wish Happy Birthday or even to chat vs just calling.  I find myself having to call them.  

 

Also, There are many young CEO's that are perfectly fine with talking face to face. Or younger people in general.  

 

Technology is the problem and if young kids don't learn how to communicate face to face then that is the result of bad parenting.  Just my opinion.  

 

 

 

[BBills_88]

The Analytics gave Mc Dermott the incorrect information when the Jags kicker nailed the 56 yarder.

[Dopey]

14 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

He's afraid younger guys are going to take his job? He's been a great DC for 15 years. He retired and came back because Arthur Smith asked him... and he loved working with Arthur Smith. He didn't NEED to come back. 

 

Easier doesn't necessarily mean better and easier doesn't necessarily mean you learn as much. Nowhere does he say you need to line a field to be a good coordinator... he says it makes you appreciate what you're doing more. He's spot on - having to start at the bottom makes you FAR more aware of everything going on around you when you get to the top. Being able to relate to the last guy on your staff makes a world of difference. He's not saying analytics are bad... he's saying they're not the only thing.

 

Relationships > Analytics 

 

I'm a 20-something working in professional sports that agrees with everything that he says... I guess I'm an old man. 

You have an old soul. And I like it.