CrossFit Athletic Group

I recently learned that Mrs. Gloria's mother was a well-known reporter who ran her own radio show and newspaper column back when they lived in Mexico. One of the things she always preached to the young Mrs. Gloria (who was probably not referred to as "Mrs. Gloria" at the time) was, "Who, What, Where, When, Why, How: anyone that calls themself a good reporter can answer all six of those questions, and if you can't answer one of them then you don't publish the story."

In 2021 I spent two weeks scouting for The Family while they were playing in the final Nike national tournament called the Peach Jam:

Watching in layers. I think there are three ways to watch a game:

1. Watch for who wins and who loses (aka, what a fan does)
2. Watch for which players are good and which players are not so good
3. Watch for habits and tendencies.

The further you go in the checklist the more understanding of the actual thing you need, and the more focussed the viewing has to be. This is exactly why I love college football: I watch it purely from a fan's eye view. When I watch basketball I am looking for more than the final score, or which players are good. Tendencies are things players do more often than not (#32 touched the ball 14 times and shot 11 of them) and habits are things players do without even thinking about it (#3 was always looking up in the stands, so when trash talking to him make sure to let him know the scouts saw that).

After marinating on that for a year and some change, I think the model from "Mrs. Mrs." Gloria might describe how I see games being observed a little more accurately.

What. This is the layer casual fans are on: what happens next? The NBA and NFL - and to some extent CFB - are promoting this layer of fandom now by including betting lines on every analysis, and therefore trying to scoop as many outsiders as possible to join the game on some layer. Game and individual player highlights usually fall in this category.

Who. Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Who are the good teams and who are the bad teams? This is where I'm at with college football. I love trying to find which players are good and also which players I like for no apparent reason. This is where opinions mostly come into play: Jalen Hurts or Justin Fields? Jalen Waddle or Jaxson Smith-Njigba? These arguments mean absolutely nothing - mainly because we're comparing two offensive guys who never play against each other, let alone play on the field at the same time - but they're super fun to take part of. Advanced statistics are in this category also, as they attempt to quantify things that have happened in the past to make comparing seem more simple.

----------- ENTERTAINMENT LINE -----------

How. Now we're getting into the realm of analysts, tv personalities, true students of the game, and random Twitter nerds. They see something happen and their knowledge of the sport can explain how that happened, whether that's a play's design or the footwork of a specific player. Still deals with things that already happened.

Where & When. Scouting, scouting, and more scouting. The one thing I do know about science is that it's only valid if it can predict something, and there lies the scientific part of scouting. Do you know where your eyes are supposed to go and when they're supposed to go there.

Why. This, to me, is where the true inner-circle has their value, and it's what scouting can't account for. JJ McCarthy had a lot of opportunities to run the ball on read options but didn't. Cade McNamara had a lot of opportunities to run the ball on read options but didn't. Shea Patterson had a lot of opportunities to run the ball on read options but didn't. Scouts can see that, plan against it, train their defense to look for it, and blog about it, but it still doesn't answer the important question of why that's happening. At it's deepest level, this level of fandom is where coaches are.

...........

The main reason I like watching March Madness right now is because of a concept called "blocked practice" - doing the same thing over and over and over again in close sequence of itself - which means I can learn more from watching four games within 2 hours than I can watching 4 games over the course of 2 weeks (the usual Tuesday/Saturday format). There are other factors at play also that make the quality of basketball more revealing than usual: limited scouting, which equalize some coaching/resource advantages; survive and advance format puts more tension on higher-ranked teams and forces lower-ranked teams to go all-in on what they have; best announcing teams (with a third commentator) that get to be more reactive and less scripted, and matchups of the best teams from each conference.

Anyone notice the effect crashing the offensive glass has on negating offense on the other end? Anyone notice how changing momentum is almost always done by everything besides making a shot? Anyone notice how few called plays actually go as called, and just turn into dudes hooping? Anyone notice how rhythm happens at around that 80% speed, and the effect of defenses that force the offense out of that? For the Coach Caseys and Mels and Mr. Robinsons and the rest of the basketball junkies, this tournament gives a great opportunity to move past watching for pure entertainment value and watch instead for habits, tendencies, themes, and outliers.

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with soaking in the pure bliss of watching a bunch of white dudes go nuts on Kansas either. Just know there is an opportunity to be had if you're willing to go there yourself, or even observe the layers of the people watching the game around you.