Jimmy Greaves was the most prolific goal scorer England ever had.
He was being interviewed about how he scored so many goals.
He said, “I’d reckon to get in the box 400 times a year.
About 200 times the ball would come across.
About 100 times I’d connect with it.
About 50 of those would be on target.
About half of those I’d put beyond the goalie.
And 25 goals a season would do me.”
So there it is from the greatest striker: do it by the numbers.
When I started my first job, I was like most juniors.
A lot better at print than TV.
So that was all anyone ever gave me: press briefs.
I wanted to learn about TV, but it was a vicious circle.
You’re not good at TV: so they don’t give you any TV briefs: so you never get good at TV.
I had to find a way to break the circle.
So after work, when all the senior teams had gone to the pub, I’d take the TV briefs off their desks and photocopy them.
Then I’d work late at night writing scripts.
Then present them in the morning before they got in.
It didn’t make me a lot of friends with the senior creatives, but in that first year at BMP I got six commercials made.
One of them was very good, two were okay, and three were bad.
But at least I was getting practice at TV.
In order to get 6 commercials made in those days, you would have to make at least 20 animatics for testing.
To get 20 animatics made, you’d need to have presented about 60 scripts to clients.
To get 60 scripts presented you’d need to show the creative director over 100.
And you’d probably have another 100 that weren’t good enough to show him.
That’s 200 scripts to get 6 commercials.
So there you have it.
A Career in Advertising: The Jimmy Greaves Method.
RSS Feed
Twitter
Email
The Greaves model applies to almost everything.
There’s quite a good book called the Medici effect which quotes research showing that everyone produces their best work at the stage of their life they produce the most work.
The year Newton wrote Principia Mathematica he wrote a load of complete crap.
Reminds me of a friend in university who chatted up every girl in the pub or club and by the end of the night he ws bound to pull one.
Could it be alternatively phrased as ‘throw enough shit at the wall and some of it will stick?’
That’s exactly my strategy too Toufic.
I used to do the same when I was a junior many years ago. Only thing is, we didn’t have a lot of clients so I actually nicked the CD’s briefs. (In turn, he nicked some of my ideas.)
I’m all for competition; just that these days, some agencies seem to think youth = good ideas and senior = safe. Not entirely true, of course.
Think what has swung the odds technology. Younger people are faster with computers and so are able to do more finished visuals in less time.
Yea, I know: the FInkies of this world say we should judge work based on ideas, not execution.
Phil, If you delete the word ’shit’ I agree.
That’s why I said there’s probably another hundred ideas that you wouldn’t show the creative director.
Like everyone else, I did more then my share of shit, but I tried to make sure it never left the office.
Hello Dave.
Off topic but it’s bothered me for a while and you have just done it so maybe it is not incorrect after all. So…is it not ‘more thAn’ rather than ‘more thEn’?
I was always sure people were being silly when saying ‘then’ instead of ‘than’ but after reading this blog for a while and never noticing an incorrect spelling or whatever, maybe I am the silly one…and I owe my girlfriend an apology…Thanks.
Sorry Anon,
Your girlfriend’s right and I’m sloppy.
I think my fingers are too fat, or the keys are too close together.
Dear Dave
Whilst I’m not fundamentally disagreeing with you, I’m not worthy, but couldn’t it also be said that one can get confused by the numbers too. Howard Hughes got himself into a pickle in the editing room when he produced way too much footage for Hell’s Angels.
John W. I take your point, but he was wasting time and money at the expensive end of the process.
Sam Goldstein often had a writer spend a year rewriting a screenplay.
When he was asked why he spent so much on a writer he said he wanted it perfect when it came to shoot.
So he didn’t waste a minute with dozens of crew, and hundreds of actors standing around trying to get it right.
It was much more efficient to spend time and effort getting it right at the beginning of the process.
Bit like Fawlty Towers, I think - the way the shows were done, rather than how the hotel was run. John Cleese took longer than usual to do the scripts. He and his then wife wrote and re-wrote, And wrote again. They didn’t make that many episodes but the DVDs are still selling like mad. And even planes offer the audio version as in-flight entertainment.
Dave, I was right. My girlfriend says THEN. Not anymore though. Thanks for clearing that up. Still waiting on my Trott badge!
Peace out.
Haha, this is so funny.
The ‘throw shit’ comment reminds me of my graphic design buddies who are too scared of a blank page to ever do anything.
I reckon I throw shit all day, that’s my job. Thats why great ideas happen in the pub, because you’re relaxed. Of course my shit is finest, creative shit. wonderful shit that most people would envy.
Great post Dave.x
Hi Dave,
Another great post, that resonates with me. Im conflicted about the notion of generating as many ideas as possible and seeing, “what sticks to the wall.”
Through experience Ive seen that some ideas I didnt think were,” right, ” were actually the solution. But on the other hand I feel like I need to show that I have a sense of good judgement and often have dissuaded partners who wanted to show work to the C.D. that I didnt feel was very good. Thoughts?
Thanks.
I love the way numbers work like this…
the post made me think of Derren Brown’s The System
Great use of the technique - and nifty production values to boot!
worth a watch it is. a good piece of storytelling if nothing else.
Ah yes, but where in the box?
While most strikers run where they think the ball is going to go, the great strikers run where they think no one else will run. On the basis that the ball probably won’t reach them - but if it does, they’re unmarked.
Michael Owen does it. Henry does it. Torres does it. Dimitar Berbatov does it.
Actually, no, he doesn’t run. But I love watching pundits complaining that he isn’t “busting a gut to get to the post”, when by simply ambling along slower than everyone else, he ends up unmarked with all the time in the world to get a shot away if the ball comes anywhere near him.
This is the hallmark of strikers who, we’re told “drift in and out of the game”. They don’t want to be in the game. They want to be apart from it. From their perspective the game is drifting towards and away from them, but when it drifts towards them they’re unmarked.
I suspect Greaves did this too. Not just 400 runs into the box, but 400 runs where no one else was running. (Although to be honest I only really remember him in his later days at West ham when he wasn’t exactly at his peak.) This would explain why Alf Ramsey would prefer Geoff Hurst - a striker who made the proper runs (brilliantly) - to a striker who would naturally want to take up positions that didn’t make sense on the blackboard in the dressing room.
Anyway, there may be an advertising analogy here. Or not. Dave would know.
An interesting comparison Mark.
Absolutely agree about Greaves, Hurst and Ramsey.
A tactician will always prefer someone predictable.
That’s also why naturally gifted players don’t make great managers, they can’t pass it on because it’s instinctive.
Players who’ve had to work at it make better managers.
Look at the difference between Bobby and Jackie Charlton as players and as managers.
Between Bobby Moore and Harry Rednapp.
Kenny Dalglish and Alex Ferguson.
Bobby Robson and Glenn Hoddle.
(Incidentally, that’s not a bad analogy for writers/ADs becoming creative directors.)
And you tell that to young people nowadays and they just don’t believe you.
Those that try harder often do better.
Just like Gary Player, “The more I practice, the luckier I get…”