[RailRoadRetrievers]

I don't know if this topic has been discussed or not, but I am often puzzled and think about this.......

The Mike Shannahan Theory in relation to dog training. For those of you or are not familiar with the former coach of the Denver Broncos, it was believed by him and by many that it was not the running backs talent that made them the great running back, it was the system that favored a lesser talented back. In other words, running back A was par to sub-par in a typical system, but when running back A played for the Broncos, he was a top five running back, not based solely on his own abilities but because of the system itself.

Soooooo...............

The dogs you see field trial champions, master hunters, and so forth. Are some of them products of the system or just talented talented animals. Talent has to be there, but is it the system that can produce the results, and other systems that can't.

Is there a trainer(s) out there that believes their system is what produces the results, not so much the dogs breeding, color, high level of potential, but their system. Would they go as far as to say their system they don't need to wash dogs, because their system produces every time.

You hear about dogs who are washed by the best of the best, but can go on to another trainer have have success, is it that trainers system or the level of the dogs talent?

 

[Leglifter]

I think that like people, different dogs will do better under different systems. I don't believe that talent is static and I have never believed in the one right way. So in short it is a combination of system and dog. They dogs talents have to be matched with the right system.

 

[captainjack]

Are you saying that you or I could play running back in Shannahan's system? I don't thing Mike is saying that either.

It appears to me that Mike is saying, give me any of the top 50 or so running backs in the world, and I can make them a top 5 running back with my system.

I'd say there are a number of pros that could take a top 50 dog and produce a great dog (they were already top 50 when they got there).

I am of the opinion that some retriever trainer's systems are more likely to get the maximum out of any given dog while other's systems may get results only from a particular type dog.

 

[Howard N]

The way Leglifter sees it is pretty much the way I see it also.

 

[Hambone]

I agree. The running backs at Shannahan's level are already the best of the best and have been "trained" by several coaches along the way in high school and college. That comparison is like saying the pro would start with all his dogs having a FC.

 

[Howard N]

That comparison is like saying the pro would start with all his dogs having a FC.

I disagree, there are a heck of a lot more professional level running backs than there are FC's.

Maybe QAA level would be closer?

 

[Hambone]

Howard, If you are looking at it in terms of numbers maybe so. In general there are a lot more football players than FT dogs but I get your point. A running back at the pro level has been selected as the best of the best from high school, then best of the college players. My point was that they are pretty darn good to even make it to the pros. Fun to discuss but hard to make a comparison.

 

[Franco]

If Shannahan's system was so good, why did he get fired?

Now Shan is in the NFC East, a much tougher Division than the AFC West. We'll see if his system is any good.;-)

 

[captainjack]

I disagree, there are a heck of a lot more professional level running backs than there are FC's.

Maybe QAA level would be closer?

there are 173 active RBs on NFL rosters, 207 if you include FBs (which I don't think Mike was), 253 if you include all unsigned draft picks, injured players, etc. How many FCs are out there now?

 

[Mike Boufford]

If Shannahan's system was so good, why did he get fired?

Now Shan is in the NFC East, a much tougher Division than the AFC West. We'll see if his system is any good.;-)

If Shanahan had been coaching the Lions, he would be out of a job right now, and probably in a mental institution.

Dog and handler act as a team and sometimes those teams don't mesh properly. There isn't necessarily failure, but optimal results don't take place. The dogs gets placed with someone else, and that's where things mesh. The best "system" in the world isn't going to provide strong results if the handler and the dog don't work well together.

 

[limiman12]

I will say that the "GREAT" FC's are like when Clinto Portis was with DENVER, all pro without a doubt, in another system Portis is still pretty good, but in that system he was GREAT. The FC's that are competitve but not "GREAT" (mentioned in the top five dogs) are either out of this world dogs in the less then perfect system, or good dogs in the right system, but I still wish Shanahan had not traded Portis, I am sure there are pros that wish they had held on to certain dogs

 

[limiman12]

I disagree, there are a heck of a lot more professional level running backs than there are FC's.

Maybe QAA level would be closer?

Out of curiosity then how many ACTIVE FC and AFC's are there?????

Would be in the neighbor hood of 90 pro running backs, only about thirty would be classified as a feature back, which I would classify the same as being top dog on a pro's truck

 

[EdA]

retrievers and running backs is a poor analogy

Retrievers

1. Do not have a "ride" hence no need to pimp it

2. Do not demand attention

3. Cannot speak therefore are not required to make complete coherent sentences

4. Do not hangout with unsavory characters

5. Do not hangout at strip clubs

6. Do not wear a king's ransom in jewelry

7. Do not have 14K gold grills

8. Tattoos are only for identification

9. Do not hold out for more money when they still have an existing contract

10. Are not jealous or demand a trade when a new retriever arrives on the truck

It is difficult to ruin a very talented dog, possible but difficult. The best trainer in the world cannot train talent only enhance what is already there.

 

[Joe Brakke]

I would think a good system that is followed consistantly will produce consistantly a X level dog regardless of talent and the amount of time. That same system with a natural or highly driven dog can achive higher degrees of performance (X to the power of 3) in a shorter period of time. There are plenty of first round draft picks that never made it through their first year as a pro.

Now take a unique case like Dual Ch. Banchory Bolo (1915) where the system failed him until he met Lady Howe and her method of training. If it was not for Lady Howe, Dual Ch. Banchory Bolo (1915) would have been put down at the age of 2.
http://www.lorkenfarms.com/banchory_bolo.htm

 

[RailRoadRetrievers]

Are you saying that you or I could play running back in Shannahan's system? I don't thing Mike is saying that either.

.

No, I said "Talent has to be there"

 

[RailRoadRetrievers]

If Shannahan's system was so good, why did he get fired?

Now Shan is in the NFC East, a much tougher Division than the AFC West. We'll see if his system is any good.;-)

Are you really doubting his coaching abilities? The man couldn't draft good defensive talent. He is good, really good.

1836, the lowest total of rushing yards since 1994, the year before Mike arrived. From 1995-2008 the Broncos had 9 seasons of 2,000 or more yards rushing.

His system must suck.......

 

[BonMallari]

the flaw in the OP Shanahan theory is that he also had a HOF QB and a great RB in Terrell Davis..he has neither with the Redskins, if he had waited another year the Dallas job would have fallen in his lap..where he would have a fumbling QB and no apparent healthy RB

as far as retrievers go..trainers rarely get a chance to see the talent beforehand, the amateur makes a guess based on the dogs lineage before "drafting" the dog...the pro is saddled with the dog by an excited owner hoping that the Pro can weave their magic and make that preverbial silk purse out of a sow's ear..

Are the great Amateur trainers very good at "drafting" talent or do they have a knack of picking potentially good dogs and bringing out their full potential

 

[DSemple]

retrievers and running backs is a poor analogy

Retrievers

1. Do not have a "ride" hence no need to pimp it

2. Do not demand attention

3. Cannot speak therefore are not required to make complete coherent sentences

4. Do not hangout with unsavory characters

5. Do not hangout at strip clubs

6. Do not wear a king's ransom in jewelry

7. Do not have 14K gold grills

8. Tattoos are only for identification

9. Do not hold out for more money when they still have an existing contract

10. Are not jealous or demand a trade when a new retriever arrives on the truck

It is difficult to ruin a very talented dog, possible but difficult. The best trainer in the world cannot train talent only enhance what is already there.

Wow Ed, you came close to making a humorous post.

 

[Jared77]

I think the Mike Shannahan system works because its NOT focused on the RB. Its about the offensive line and the play calling, and because of that the backs were more successful. I think he preferred a type of RB but wasn't as bound to a very specific type of back to be successful.

Terrell Davis is a classic example of this. So is Emmett Smith. Both are pretty good backs but played in systems that were perfect fits for their skills. Emmitt Smith would not be the All Time leading rusher if he played for anybody else. I think he'd be viewed about as good as Eddie George.

Its no different than the Tampa 2 defense, or the Spread offense in college. Look at what Rich Rodriguez is trying to do at Michigan. He doesn't have spread type of players in that system so he's unsuccessful.

I've trained with people like this too. They have a certain style and in order to be successful they need a dog with certain tendencies. Give them that dog and they're VERY successful. Without a dog that fits their system it gets washed as a failure. The dog had good genetics and initially showed what the trainer/handler wanted so it was selected, but being a bad fit the dog couldn't develop and was washed.

I think there are certain players and dogs that have so much talent and raw genetics they are going to be great almost by default. Barry Sanders is a classic example of this. He played on a horrible team but still good enough to be considered one of the great all time rushers. Jim Brown is another example. Imagine what Jim Brown could have done with the Cowboys of the 90s? Or Barry Sanders if he played for the Bronco's in Shannahan's system?

Because those great dogs/players are pretty infrequent I think the system is more important and getting the right dog/players to fit it are the key.

 

[Franco]

Are you really doubting his coaching abilities? The man couldn't draft good defensive talent. He is good, really good.

1836, the lowest total of rushing yards since 1994, the year before Mike arrived. From 1995-2008 the Broncos had 9 seasons of 2,000 or more yards rushing.

His system must suck.......

Big difference between coaching in the weakest Division in the NFL and now the second toughest Division in the NFL.

He'll be gone after the 2013 season. His best days were in Denver.

Anyway, I agree with Jared77's take on the original question.;-)