(12-23-2019, 01:41 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(12-23-2019, 01:19 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: I think you may be exaggerating Tony’s experience a bit. No doubt he has more experience in FO and the business-side of football, but I’d be surprised if he’s capable of schooling most diehard fans. Coaches spend decades learning about the X’s and O’s, and they spend much of their time doing it. While it isn’t absolutely necessary, Tony doesn’t even have experience playing football, and I’d be surprised if the coaches are spending time teaching him how to review players and plays as they do. Being good at this job requires a lot of time, and it’s hard to imagine Tony dedicated enough of it when he’s splitting it between football, soccer, and wrestling (and whatever else).

  Tony claims to have been a diehard (analytical) fan since childhood (he was predicting super bowl victors on his local radio station in eighth grade) and on through his college years at Illinois where he began dabbling in analytics. He has run an analytics firm since 2012. 

How exactly is he supposed to have analyzed situational football statistics if he doesn't know the x's and o's? 

I think you are underestimating the work he's put into this endeavour. 

The "never playing football" thing has been debunked a hundred times over by successful coaches and executives that never played. 
But to your point - Tony briefly coached a college intramural football team when he was a senior in high school. Their regular coach was his mentor and asked him to fill in while he was ill. I doubt that was haphazardly doled out to a kid who wasn't already student of the game.  

I find it unwise to make assumptions about a person's knowledge and understanding of a topic based on a personal perception formulated with limited scope.

Most of the analytics is math. My impression was that it’s based on numbers and stats which most people have access to. I do believe, if done properly, it has a place in scouting. I’d even bet he’s pretty good at it but I’m not sure that makes him an X’s and O’s kind of guy. 

The whole not having played football comment was only to emphasize that I don’t think he has experience evaluating players, and he doesn’t have the benefit of learning the sport (and what’s expected) while playing. I don’t believe it’s necessary; I’m just saying it’s another missing piece for him. 

I’m not foolish enough to think I can school most coaches or GMs—even the Gus Bradley and Gene Smith types. As bad as they were, they’ve been doing this all their life, and their lives were likely 100% football. I just don’t think that describes Tony, and I think that’s what it takes to be good at that job. 

I don’t think Tony is stupid. I think i just doubt he’s good enough to do anything (at this moment) involved in evaluating talent successfully.

---