Dr. Mike Marshall in Cherry Hill NJ

[FindAGap12]

I just came from the annual Coaches Clinic in Cherry Hill. I was very impressed with how it was run, and impressed with the quality of speakers (Billy Ripken, Don Slaught, Skip Bertman, etc).

Mike Marshall is an occasional topic here. I am familiar with his beliefs, and his presentation of hisPitching motion vs. the traditional motion., so I was curious to see how he would do there, and how other coaches would respond to him.

I went to see him on Thursday night, and thought he did a decent job of presenting his material, and not confusing the audience with his anatomical references.

However, Friday's General Session, in front of over one thousand people, did not go so well. To say he bombed would be an understatement. His first 30 minutes went OK. But at this point he got lost in his video presentation, and the anatomical references got so confusing that dozens and dozens of people just started to walk out, and the crowd just started talking amonst themselves, over Dr. Marshall. The room noise was equal to that of Dr. Marshall for the last 15 minutes of his presentation and never quieted back down to silence. It was extremely uncomfortable in the room and you had to feel bad for the guy, but he came off as extremely unprepared.

If anyone else happened to be there on Friday, I think that they would agree that they've never seen anyone lose a room like that so badly...and it had as much to do with the unorganized presentation (faltering video, jumping from subject to subject) as it did with his unorthodox beliefs.

[Jake Patterson]

I just came from the annual Coaches Clinic in Cherry Hill. I was very impressed with how it was run, and impressed with the quality of speakers (Billy Ripken, Don Slaught, Skip Bertman, etc).

Mike Marshall is an occasional topic here. I am familiar with his beliefs, and his presentation of hisPitching motion vs. the traditional motion., so I was curious to see how he would do there, and how other coaches would respond to him.

I went to see him on Thursday night, and thought he did a decent job of presenting his material, and not confusing the audience with his anatomical references.

However, Friday's General Session, in front of over one thousand people, did not go so well. To say he bombed would be an understatement. His first 30 minutes went OK. But at this point he got lost in his video presentation, and the anatomical references got so confusing that dozens and dozens of people just started to walk out, and the crowd just started talking amonst themselves, over Dr. Marshall. The room noise was equal to that of Dr. Marshall for the last 15 minutes of his presentation and never quieted back down to silence. It was extremely uncomfortable in the room and you had to feel bad for the guy, but he came off as extremely unprepared.

If anyone else happened to be there on Friday, I think that they would agree that they've never seen anyone lose a room like that so badly...and it had as much to do with the unorganized presentation (faltering video, jumping from subject to subject) as it did with his unorthodox beliefs.

I was hoping to visit him in Feb/Mar I would be interested in any one elses thoughts on his presentation.

Gap, what was the differences between Thursday and Friday?

Did the coaches find his message or his presentation material the problem?

What was the general conscensus of his views?

Jake

[FindAGap12]

Jake,

The main difference between Thu and Fri was that he had no coherent message on Friday. He used way too many anatomical references, failed analogies, and his mistakes using the videotape doomed him. He kept pressing the wrong button and it would turn the video off, the video had sound (himself talking), so he was talking over himself on the video, and there was alot of dead space, waiting for the video to cue to the right place (there was alot of "ok, he should throw this thing any minute now...")


The general consensus of his views was that he is too scientific in his presentation (the guy next to me muttered "what the f*&%" after hearing a string of five or six different anatomy terms), his motion is too hard to teach, and incredulence to whehter or not his motion could be effective.

If he went there to convert people, he needed to do a better job of relating to the average person.

[Jake Patterson]

This seems to be a conscensus.

[scorekeeper]

The general consensus of his views was that he is too scientific in his presentation, his motion is too hard to teach, and incredulence to whehter or not his motion could be effective.

I just have to ask. Is it the problem the messenger or the message?

IOW, let’s assume Nolan Ryan, Dick Mills, Roger Craig or some other generally accepted “expert” found a way to teach exactly the same thing, but never mention MM. Would what he advocates still be viewed as poorly as it is?

Judging by what you said about his being accepted on one day but not the next, it sure seems more like it’s the messenger than the message.