|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 20, 2009 12:01:07 GMT -6
A columnist for a media outlet asked me what, in my view, made a "good college coach"? For starters, I think the only difference between a college coach and a coach elsewhere is the college guy has to recruit (and maybe a pro coach has to deal with media or certain player egos in a different way than college or high school guys do). Second, I think there's a dimension that he's not asking about, which is what makes someone a successful builder of men, which I think many on here would agree is really the better barometer than just winning games. (John Wooden thought so; build men first and winning will come.)
But I'm curious what people here think, in a sentence or two. His ideas were like "beat everyone they play" or "develop talent" or "makes adjustments."
I think I would say it's about getting the most out of players, which involves developing them, showing them that you care, and giving them the tools to succeed.
As a big Xs and Os guy I do tend to emphasize the need of putting kids in position to succeed (can't develop guys and then ask them to do the impossible), but all that is meaningless unless you've taught them how to succeed within your fancy Xs and Os.
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Jul 20, 2009 15:54:39 GMT -6
IN a word PASSION
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Jul 20, 2009 15:56:46 GMT -6
yknow, Ill follow up with the passion thought- I have heard way too many times some coaches grip about the kids and the coach gets negative and starts spouting off on what he wont do , what hes not willing to do to be successful.
What makes a coach successful is the passion that drives him hard enough so that he is willing to pay the price for success.
Even on a "bad day" when some negative thoughts enter my head I think to myself "so then what ARE YOU DOING TO MAKE THE SITUATION BETTER???"
|
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Jul 20, 2009 16:47:18 GMT -6
Passion for football and kids, knowledge ,and the ability to teach
|
|
|
|
Post by endersgame on Jul 20, 2009 16:52:55 GMT -6
A good coach is a good teacher.
To the mods: I replied earlier to this thread, but the post never showed up. I tried it again (I lost the contents of the first post), but it also didn't work for the second time. What gives?
|
|
|
|
Post by rcole on Jul 20, 2009 16:53:06 GMT -6
Not really answering your question, but something dcohio said made me think of one of my favorite quotes...and it may offer something to this conversation...
Teddy Roosevelt...."Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
|
|
|
|
Post by jpdaley25 on Jul 20, 2009 17:46:03 GMT -6
Sometimes it's luck; sometimes it's quality. Some guys think its one, when it's really the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Jul 20, 2009 19:39:45 GMT -6
Easy Answer, GOOD PLAYERS!
College football is all about recruiting. Recruiting is all about judging talent and people.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 20, 2009 20:42:22 GMT -6
If you are in college, the bottom line is recruiting. If you can do anything else, thas great, but if you cannot recruit you won't be "coaching" very long.
The most underrated element of coaching (for me) is the ability of TEACHING.
Not the whooping, hollering, dramatics, and cliches...but getting down in it, connecting with another person and imparting something of value to them. You truly cannot teach unless you make a personal connection with another person. Sure, I could talk at you, yell at you, and repeat words at you, but if I cannot develop trust, that I have your best interest at heart, it will never sink in, germinate, and grow.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcole on Jul 20, 2009 20:50:18 GMT -6
BINGO! We have a winner!
|
|
|
|
Post by coachbdud on Jul 20, 2009 21:35:30 GMT -6
a good coach flat out works his competition. In the NFl and college we here stories of coaches sleeping in their offices because they are up all night. I know i have spent entire weekends in front of my tv rewinding tape over and over again looking for something that can give my team the edge. It takes hours of work just to get that 1 step advantage over your opponent.
Echo the other posters in saying you must be a teacher. It doesnt matter how much you know unless you can pass that wisdom on to your team
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 20, 2009 22:00:21 GMT -6
If you are in college, the bottom line is recruiting. If you can do anything else, thas great, but if you cannot recruit you won't be "coaching" very long. The most underrated element of coaching (for me) is the ability of TEACHING. Not the whooping, hollering, dramatics, and cliches...but getting down in it, connecting with another person and imparting something of value to them. You truly cannot teach unless you make a personal connection with another person. Sure, I could talk at you, yell at you, and repeat words at you, but if I cannot develop trust, that I have your best interest at heart, it will never sink in, germinate, and grow. I am going to disagree here with my buddy. I wouldnt say TEACHING is the MOST underrated. At least with coaches, enough would recognize the importance of teaching that I wouldnt say it was the most underrated. I would say the MOST UNDERRATED element of coaching is PROBLEM SOLVING. Being able to analyze your needs, figure out a way to address those needs. To me, this can encompasses things such as long term player personnel management, practice organization, synchronizing drills to scheme, developing and implementing a vision. |
|
|
|
Post by rcole on Jul 20, 2009 22:24:28 GMT -6
I've seen very few great teachers in the style that Brophy described.
I've seen lots of coaches who study the game tirelessly. Know schemes and their adjustments backward and forward. Study and implement all of the best practices in the profession in the realm of X's and O's, practice organization, game planning, drills, etc....who could not or perhaps rather did not do a great job of teaching or ,as Brophy put it, connecting. There are a ton of highly football educated gurus out there who are mostly bundles of ego that couldn't get a kid to actually play better, understand, or play above their talent if their lives depended on it. They are very good at lamenting the kids shortcomings and cursing them out when they don't perform at the level of the coaches ego. With the availability of information today, you almost have to be an idiot not to have the X's and O's, practice organization, drills, etc. All of that stuff a monkey could do. It can be frustrating dealing with peers and colleagues who know so much but have no "touch" for dealing with kids and improving their play. Your talent as a coach lies there. The kids you have are the kids you have...now go make them play better (oh, and make them better men/leaders along the way). When they fall short, don't panic or bitch and moan...Just go back to your bag of tricks (drills and original knack for getting your point across, ability to connect) and make them a little better, then a little better, and keep hacking away at it until you have yourself a decent, maybe even good, perhaps great football player. Hooting and hollering, down grading, brow beating isn't going to make them play better, and neither is our brilliant mind for schemes and game plans if we are not great teachers.
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Jul 21, 2009 2:43:08 GMT -6
I think what brophy is really saying is that RELATIONSHIPS make the coach successful.
Thats actually a great thought, often overlooked. I mean we dont talk much about how to improve relationships with coaches, admin, faculty, boosters, players, parents, our own family etc...but if you dont have relationships in order you arent going to be successful.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Jul 21, 2009 5:35:20 GMT -6
Head College football coaches do not make their living teaching. They are selling. Salesmen selling their program to get the best talent. The good ones can evaluate talent. High school head football coaches and college head football coaches are two different things.
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jul 21, 2009 8:15:44 GMT -6
I think what brophy is really saying is that RELATIONSHIPS make the coach successful. Thats actually a great thought, often overlooked. I mean we dont talk much about how to improve relationships with coaches, admin, faculty, boosters, players, parents, our own family etc...but if you dont have relationships in order you arent going to be successful. Saw a quote recently by Monte Kiffin (he said he didn't invent it) saying how the kids won't begin to listen until they know you care |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Jul 21, 2009 9:37:38 GMT -6
A good DC doesn't need 15 ways to scheme a zone blitz.
He just needs to communicate effectively to his players WHY and HOW.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jul 21, 2009 14:18:00 GMT -6
If you are in college, the bottom line is recruiting. If you can do anything else, thas great, but if you cannot recruit you won't be "coaching" very long. The most underrated element of coaching (for me) is the ability of TEACHING. Not the whooping, hollering, dramatics, and cliches...but getting down in it, connecting with another person and imparting something of value to them. You truly cannot teach unless you make a personal connection with another person. Sure, I could talk at you, yell at you, and repeat words at you, but if I cannot develop trust, that I have your best interest at heart, it will never sink in, germinate, and grow. Ed Orgeron, considered to be one of the very best, if not best recruiter in College football, failed miserably at Mississippi. Being a great recruiter doesnt hurt, but it's not everything. Tom Osborne was a part in coaching 5 National Title teams and in those 35 years, maybe 1 top 10 recruiting classes. Many in the 25-35 area though. |
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jul 21, 2009 14:22:55 GMT -6
IMO:
Being a GREAT decision maker
Being able to process information quickly and effectively at every level. Which means understanding critical success factors, what data you need for every decision you need to make, how to get it, and how to proccess it. That means from coaching personnel to recruting info, to trends, to Xs and Os.
Decision making and management are decision making and management, no matter what field you choose.
Effective management also means you are a good teacher and mentor to your sub managers and field personnel. Sound familiar?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Jul 21, 2009 14:53:08 GMT -6
Just look at the title of a book by Woody Hayes.
You win with people.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jul 21, 2009 15:25:31 GMT -6
Ed Orgeron, considered to be one of the very best, if not best recruiter in College football, failed miserably at Mississippi. Being a great recruiter doesnt hurt, but it's not everything. Ed Orgeron "failed miserably" by not dominating the SEC with Ole Miss in 3 years. (?) That is rather intellectually dishonest to the rest of us. How did Houston Nutt do with Orgeron's players? Orgeron sucks so bad, he is now the assistant head coach and recruiting coordinator at Tennessee. I do not quantify recruiting classes by Lemmings or Rivals rankings, but by how that talent shows up on the field (enter Nick Saban and Julio Jones). Osborne was a great recruiter, as well. He and Epley did well to develop the talent he brought in. It was the speed of the recruiting classes of Spurriers, Johnsons, Ericksons, and Bowdens that made their reign so brief, and what changed the game from what it was 10 years ago. NCAA is ALL ABOUT recruiting |
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jul 21, 2009 16:18:35 GMT -6
You made my point for me, the data speaks for itself.
Ogreron went 3-8, 4-8 and 3-9 with his systemm his decision making, his priorities and his recruits
His last season his only wins were vs Lousiana TEch, Northwestern State ( who are they) and Memphis, getting outscored 241- 342,
In the 5 seasons before he got there, they were 35-25 with a whopping 21 SEC wins ( average of over 4 per year)
In 3 seasons Ogerons had 3 total wins in SEC, average of 1 per year vs:
to a 3-9 Mississippi State ( no other wins in SEC), 4-8 Vandy ( 1 other win in SEC) and 3-8 Kentucky ( 2 wins in SEC, over Vandy/Miss State).
Following year, pretty much same kids, different HC, different system, the kids go 9-4, outscoring the opposition 417 to 249
a 260 point turnaround
Mississippi didnt dominate the SEC, they didnt even win a single league game in 2008. That is a fact, it is in the record books, no dishonesty.
Pretty compelling data, if not overwhelming.
Orgeron is a great recruiter, he failed as a HC. He is the epitome for the arguement against "it's all about recruting"
You have to be able to develop players, make great decisions, manage etc per my previous post.
Osborne was great at coaching and developing players. no one ever put him in a top 10 or even 20 as a recruiter. Many of the kids he went for, no one else wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 21, 2009 16:30:09 GMT -6
Dave--I agree with you 100% about Decision Making being the most important aspect of coaching. Basically stating my "problem solving" post in a different way.
I think it is important to recognize that "coaching" and being a head coach are not synonymous. Many people have different talents.
Brophy... 3 Sec Wins, and only 2 overall wins against +.500 teams, academic issues, 20 player disciplinary scandal. I agree it is hard to say one fails miserably in such a short time span, but i wouldn't say this was successful at all. This was further exacerbated by Coach O's personality and DECISION MAKING (personal and professional) ... he is the type that people are going to want to SEE FAIL. It is just the way he comes off. Coach O is probably one of those that is NOT suited to be a header, but will be VERY successful in his current role at TENN.
That said, I would also say that we are splitting hairs a bit. Being a great problem solver/decision maker would have to INCLUDE a recruiting aspect. Getting the RIGHT players for YOUR place..players that fit in philosophically, culturally, physically... all would fall under that role.
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jul 21, 2009 16:47:01 GMT -6
[quote author=coachd5085 board=general thread=31632 post=304034 time=1248215409 Coach O is probably one of those that is NOT suited to be a header, but will be VERY successful in his current role at TENN.
[/quote]
I agree 100%, with someone else at the helm setting priorities, making the big decisions, setting direction and reeling him in when needed, just like Carrol did at USC. He won't be a HC again.
Incredible recruiter by anyones definition. Poor HC by most definitions.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcole on Jul 21, 2009 17:54:27 GMT -6
In high school the head coach has to be able to teach the game to the kids because he is usually a position coach and coordinator. He has to teach the game to his assistants because he can't just go out and hire great experienced guys. Often the kids have never even played the sport and sometimes neither have some of his assistant coaches. There is no doubt that the decision making is extremely important. I just think in my experience it is more rare to find those who are great teachers and connectors and much more common to find good decision makers. In fact I would argue that if I am a great teacher and connector that my work Monday through Thursday will by far win me the game over your great decisions. We get into this mentality sometimes like Friday night is this bout between two great coaching minds as if the kids are hooked up to us electronically. A great teacher has the kids executing his great decisions because they learned them before the game...not just because he said so in the heat of the moment. Remember, I don't have to fool the other coaches, just the other kids. The most brilliant decision maker can't get all of those decisions effectively made and implemented on a Friday night if the kids have not already gained a thorough understanding of the game, philosophy, and decisions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2009 18:09:32 GMT -6
When I was in college, I was lucky enough to have been under 2 different head coaches, we were the last place team just about every year. My 1st HC, was a guy who was stuck in the past, refused to change his game, no matter what, was criticized heavily by just about everyone, for his "outdated" schemes, and a somewhat pig headed refusal, to change. We went season after season losing, and we went through some wars too, alot of people were frustrated with our record... now given we werent winning games, but he was like a father to every one of us, he would come up to the dorms and talk, he would joke with the team, was always interested in hearing about your family, would often, come up to the dining halls and eat with the team, he even talked to kids that just supported the team. He had an amazing ability to make you beleive, in something, like it was the greatest achievement known to man, something as simple as a dive play. We never went into a game thinking we were there to lose..though that's all we did.
The second coach , was rather well known coach with a winning reputation, actually brought a few more wins to the team, however he was very businseeman like, he really had no time for anyone following practices like the 1st one did, he didn't ever ask about things off the field unless one of our kids was in trouble, he was often very sarcastic, and had zero tolerance for the shortcomings of others ...Now statistically speaking, #2 was the better coach, hands down, slightly better record, brought a few more kids to the school, got our name in the paper in the win columns for once. However within a few years again we were at the bottom of the division again, and were struggling with recruiting.
Given these were 2 great coaches, and the second coach finally vaulted us into a brief wining period, but I can say with a fair amount of certainty that if push came to shove, most of us would be standing behind #1. I think that's what makes a great coach, someone who you trust, and beleive in no matter what
We'd follow Coach #2 into a game
We'd follow Coach #1 into a war
Just my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 21, 2009 18:13:14 GMT -6
a good coach to me is one that
1. get more out of his players than the players think they can do
2. puts them in situations where they can have success
#1 is an art
#2 is a science
mixing them together?
priceless
|
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Jul 21, 2009 18:27:36 GMT -6
In high school the head coach has to be able to teach the game to the kids because he is usually a position coach and coordinator. He has to teach the game to his assistants because he can't just go out and hire great experienced guys. Often the kids have never even played the sport and sometimes neither have some of his assistant coaches. There is no doubt that the decision making is extremely important. I just think in my experience it is more rare to find those who are great teachers and connectors and much more common to find good decision makers. In fact I would argue that if I am a great teacher and connector that my work Monday through Thursday will by far win me the game over your great decisions. We get into this mentality sometimes like Friday night is this bout between two great coaching minds as if the kids are hooked up to us electronically. A great teacher has the kids executing his great decisions because they learned them before the game...not just because he said so in the heat of the moment. Remember, I don't have to fool the other coaches, just the other kids. The most brilliant decision maker can't get all of those decisions effectively made and implemented on a Friday night if the kids have not already gained a thorough understanding of the game, philosophy, and decisions. My post specifically addressed coaches making good decisions about: coaches, players, priorities, direction of the program, trends as well as schemes, Xs and Os Good decision makers process data well per my post. They analyze and figure out where their critical success factors are and how/when to deploy resources to the problem. They weigh out decisions with valid data and reason, like all good decision makers do. Most games are won well before game day based on the above decisions, a handful are decided on game day decisions. Some guys are very good at it, I worked for several that could processs info better and faster than anyone in their field and they were great, others just arent cut out for it. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 21, 2009 18:34:10 GMT -6
In high school the head coach has to be able to teach the game to the kids because he is usually a position coach and coordinator. He has to teach the game to his assistants because he can't just go out and hire great experienced guys. Often the kids have never even played the sport and sometimes neither have some of his assistant coaches. There is no doubt that the decision making is extremely important. I just think in my experience it is more rare to find those who are great teachers and connectors and much more common to find good decision makers. In fact I would argue that if I am a great teacher and connector that my work Monday through Thursday will by far win me the game over your great decisions. We get into this mentality sometimes like Friday night is this bout between two great coaching minds as if the kids are hooked up to us electronically. A great teacher has the kids executing his great decisions because they learned them before the game...not just because he said so in the heat of the moment. Remember, I don't have to fool the other coaches, just the other kids. The most brilliant decision maker can't get all of those decisions effectively made and implemented on a Friday night if the kids have not already gained a thorough understanding of the game, philosophy, and decisions. I don't think you understood what Coach Cisar meant by decision making. He was not referring to play calling or scheming exclusively. In fact, I would argue they aren't the main components of his "decision making" answer. --edit...i see coach cisar beat me to the reply |
|
|
|
Post by rcole on Jul 21, 2009 19:01:38 GMT -6
got it. I just kept thinking of the brilliant scientist who has the quick mind and often has absolutely no ability to communicate or relate knowledge to others. I actually had a Poli-Sci professor like that in college...he only kept his job due to international prominance...brilliant...could not teach a lick.
|
|
