Going for Bust

 Hello loyal readers,

Summer has finally settled here in the PNW and we're in that typical September stretch that reminds everyone that it does indeed get warm here. Temps are hovering around 90+ with the weekend showing 100+ days. Thankfully the air conditioner is working well, and the fridge is pumping out vast quantities of fresh ice for the blender bottle. 

I was reading an article on Josh Rosen, the top 10 college quarterback drafted out of UCLA by the Arizona Cardinals, then dumped a year later to the Miami Dolphins who are allegedly looking to trade him again. It would be his third team in three years, and many prognosticators are labeling him as a bust. 

I am not well versed enough in football, especially at the professional level to know what makes an athlete a bust or not until well after their career has taken off, but it does seem to be that after being ranked as an athlete worth drafting in the first round, to label him a bust given his rather unorthodox career would be harsh, and uninformed. 

Arizona is not a franchise that one would consider stable, and stability in most professional sports leagues is the equivalent of finding a unicorn. For every Patriots, Steelers, there are the Browns, and any number of franchises where turnover is not just an everyday occurance, it's practically the culture. A year without turnover is seen as a fluke. 

Is Josh Rosen a bust? I don't believe anyone can say with any certain conviction that he is, or isn't because he hasn't been given the opportunity to prove either correct. 

It seems that in the sporting world, everyone, despite their experience, the league history, believes that athletes are a plug and play commodity where regardless of what your current team looks like, you should instantly be able to succeed with minimal support. 

There are true busts out there - no need to name names when a Google search will bring up hundreds - but there are also arguments to be made where a so called bust is labeled a bust to save the franchise and coaches from embarrassment. Turnover in the head coach, or assistant coaches, constantly learning a new system, or being drafted into a system, say the 4-3 only to discover one year in that the new coordinator is now switching to the 3-4 would make most everyone struggle.

Imagine for a moment that this is everyday life outside the athletics world. You are hired right out of college, and dropped into the middle of a Fortune 500 company that is struggling and the pressure to right the ship and turn it around is entirely on your shoulders. You have bosses and coworkers, but everyone is looking at you because you have been deemed the, "savior." You were hired over everyone else and now everyone from the janitor to the CEO/Owners/Board are looking at you, a single person to somehow get this back on track. 

It does not matter that you aren't seasoned or that the boardroom is much different than the classroom where results matter and people's lives change depending on your decisions and actions. It doesn't matter that the company has been on a downward spiral for years and doesn't have the credibility needed to attract high profile employees from other successful companies who could help you. It's on you.

The expansion franchise, Houston Texans took David Carr as their quarterback, number one in the 2002 draft. His tenure in Houston did not turn out well, and he is widely considered to be a bust based on the fact that he was drafted number one. Yet, when you dig through the story, and you don't need to dig far, you realize that anyone in that position likely would have been a bust. A brand new franchise, building it's very first team. A rookie quarterback thrust into the spotlight on day one who finishes his first year being sacked an NFL record 76 times, not counting the times he was hit. Basically a young athlete was running for his life the entire time he was with Houston, not being protected by his line, or his coaches, or his GM. Tim Couch for the expansion Browns was much the same. A brand new team, absolutely no chance of success, no pieces around him.

In our real world example, you would fail. That Fortune 500 company would flounder and you'd be fired and labeled as someone who couldn't lead the company. The only companies who would come for you are likely companies in the same position as the one who let you go, companies with little more to them than the name. 

David Carr might be a bust. But look at the history of the Texans since their inaugural season in 2002. 17 seasons, only six playoff appearances, zero championship game appearances. 131-157 overall record excluding the playoffs where they are 4-6.

The Browns who were brought back in 1999 have had one double digit win season, but 16 double digit loss seasons. 

The definition of a bust is varied, but labeling someone a bust is a title that needs to be handed out carefully. The situation that individual might find themselves in, and all leagues are set up where the best overall athletes in the draft go to the worst franchises, is likely extremely difficult - see the Houston Texans - or impossible - see Cleveland. 

And we see the reverse of this applied to athletes who come out of highly successful programs only to discover that perhaps the talent they put on display isn't quite what it is when they are with a less successful program or a program with a different philosophy. Matt Cassel took over for Tom Brady in 2008 when Brady was lost for the year and went 11-5. The Chiefs traded for him to be their franchise quarterback, and he was unable to perform at the same level. Call it a different team in different places, but you can see the same sort of argument on its head, going from success to failure.

We could get long here when tying this into rowing. I did open with rowing not being a sport you necessarily see busts in, yet you do. 

I put it simply that there are two types of collegiate head coaches. Juniors as well, but generally I see this more in college. 

You're either at teacher who believes that the athletes coming in have a skill set and it is your job to continue to develop and hone those skills.

Or...

You're a manager and you believe that the work is and should be done by those before you, whether it be the junior coaches, or the novice coaches, and that it's your job to put the athletes into proper order and combination. You simply need to push the buttons in the correct sequence and success will come. 

In the first, the story ends there. There might be athletes who do not perform the way that you imagined they would when you were recruiting them, or when you saw them as novices - assuming you're a junior coach - but they likely find their way into a boat and contribute positively toward the program's direction. 

In the second, you will find busts. Busts for a myriad of reasons, but usually starting or ending with a lack of development. You've handed the keys to the kingdom so to speak to these athletes, and expected the work to be done for you, either by them, or by those who coached them first. In this situation, your team culture likely doesn't exist or is poor to say the least because there either isn't a culture, or it's one that has no substance. Athletes are highly regarded come in, but unless they perform up to your expectations immediately, they aren't valued. Those who do "perform" are overvalued. 

Honestly, this is getting a bit long. To sum up, there are busts but I do not see a bust as a lack of talent. I see it as either a flaw in the personality, something that should have been picked up on - and often when they talk about the bust, you hear all the warning signs that were there (see Ryan Leaf) - or a lack of effort. But if we look at the busts, and look at their situations, you're going to find more often than not that no one put into that situation would have found any level of success.