|
|
Post by julien on Jun 19, 2011 23:48:32 GMT -6
Coaches,
I think you may be interested to hear that one:
Last season a European powerhouse hired 2 US Coaches and fired them after only a couple of weeks...
Why?
Because the US coaches (hired for the season only) wanted to change every thing from practice to scheme.
This team is known to be the strongest football program in France. At that time, they have won 5 National Championship in a row and a bunch of youth bowl too. They have a huge history and tradition. They have also produced 5 NFL Europe players a few years ago...
My question: what do you think of this call?
|
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jun 20, 2011 5:56:29 GMT -6
Before they hired the coaches, they had a responsibility to outline expectaions. If the expectations were for these guys to come in and maintain the status quo, that should have been clear in the interview.
If it WAS, then shame on the coaches.
If it was NOT, then shame on the organization.
|
|
|
|
Post by julien on Jun 20, 2011 8:21:47 GMT -6
Before they hired the coaches, they had a responsibility to outline expectaions. If the expectations were for these guys to come in and maintain the status quo, that should have been clear in the interview. If it WAS, then shame on the coaches. If it was NOT, then shame on the organization. It was for sure Loch. I know quite well this organisation and when they "talk" with potentials US imports (players or coaches) it's in a business mode. This season they hired a US OC/HC from Western Oregon... The guy is awesome and will probably coach over there next season. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 20, 2011 8:45:42 GMT -6
Not every coach is a good fit for every job.
|
|
|
|
Post by ajreaper on Jun 20, 2011 13:06:29 GMT -6
Why would you go outside of your country and hire American coaches with the expectation they'd just keep right on doing what the team had always done? I am sorry but that makes no sense. I'd also add that perhaps these coaches wanted to raise the organization up another notch rather then just be satisfied with the staus quo. Winning and having success just means you are doing it better then the other teams there in France it does not mean it would be viewed as quality football, fundamental or techniques outside of Europe- not saying thats the case but it is possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by 42falcon on Jun 20, 2011 13:13:45 GMT -6
Why would you go outside of your country and hire American coaches with the expectation they'd just keep right on doing what the team had always done? I am sorry but that makes no sense. I'd also add that perhaps these coaches wanted to raise the organization up another notch rather then just be satisfied with the staus quo. Winning and having success just means you are doing it better then the other teams there in France it does not mean it would be viewed as quality football, fundamental or techniques outside of Europe- not saying thats the case but it is possible. You don't need to live in USA to have quality football in terms of fundementals and such. I agree though that you don't go hire a coach from anywhere and expect him to do the same as what was done before. If that is what you want promote from within the old org structure. The team probably saw that these changes would threaten their success and decided to go a different route. It is odd but there are a lot of odd things in this game... |
|
coachriley
Junior Member
"Tough times don't last; Tough people do."
Posts: 406
|
Post by coachriley on Jun 20, 2011 18:37:02 GMT -6
I don't know what kind of success these US coaches had before they went over to Europe, but I just wanted to add that not every coach in the US is successful or truly knows what they are doing. I know everyone here has known coaches like that (not that I am a genius but I have met some that have no interest in getting better and just want the title of coach). Just my 2 cents
|
|
|
|
Post by julien on Jun 21, 2011 4:49:03 GMT -6
Why would you go outside of your country and hire American coaches with the expectation they'd just keep right on doing what the team had always done? I am sorry but that makes no sense. I'd also add that perhaps these coaches wanted to raise the organization up another notch rather then just be satisfied with the staus quo. Winning and having success just means you are doing it better then the other teams there in France it does not mean it would be viewed as quality football, fundamental or techniques outside of Europe- not saying thats the case but it is possible. No offense but you probably don't know what football environement looks like here... That being said, I understand your point. The thing is you can't come over and change about everything in a bit because most of the time US Coaches/Players come for only 1 season... THAT does not make sense. |
|
|
|
Post by julien on Jun 21, 2011 23:24:23 GMT -6
Maybe they just weren't good coaches. Just because they were from the USA doesn't make them better/smarter coaches than the guys already there. I think it's like everywhere else... There are bad and good program... Bad and good coaches... |
|
|
|
Post by ajreaper on Jun 22, 2011 11:44:32 GMT -6
Why would you go outside of your country and hire American coaches with the expectation they'd just keep right on doing what the team had always done? I am sorry but that makes no sense. I'd also add that perhaps these coaches wanted to raise the organization up another notch rather then just be satisfied with the staus quo. Winning and having success just means you are doing it better then the other teams there in France it does not mean it would be viewed as quality football, fundamental or techniques outside of Europe- not saying thats the case but it is possible. No offense but you probably don't know what football environement looks like here... I have a fair idea or I'd not have suggested what I did. I would presume the coaches they hired had more then acceptable resumes and made their way through an interview process prior to be hired and were released because they clearly saw room for growth- that the team/organization could improve but what was wanted was just more of the same. In that case why bring in outsiders and why bring in coaches from the U.S. at all if they are typically one and done? Why hire anyone and expect them to do essentially what has always been done? There are many ways to skin the cat and every head coach has their own belief on how things should be done, if you want the same old, same old hire from within. |
|
|
|
Post by lassen on Jun 22, 2011 12:57:48 GMT -6
The biggest problem with hiring within, in Europe, is that it might not be possible. This year, I was hired from within, and made a demand that if I were to HC this team, I wanted assistant coaches. We now are five coaches in total, but the previous 5 years, before I was hired, we have only had 1 or 2 coaches, so if they had decided to resign, we would have had to bring in someone from outside.
In Denmark, no danish coach will move across country for a coaching job. So the only option if coaching talent is not available in your area, is to bring in an American.
I do agree with you, that it would be better to do differently, if it is not what you want, but there might not be a choice.
Last year, we had a bad situation, with the American coach we hired. I took the job prior to this season, to avoid any more turbulence in the coaching staff/systems run, etc.
Our plan now, is to bring in qualified assistant coaches/import players, who can help a relatively young and inexperience HC, while operating within my system.
I believe this is the best situation for us, but I do know that this is not possible in all clubs over here and can clearly understand Julien's question.
But as of the question, considering the large part of a clubs budget a coach will cost, and the effect a wrong decision will have on the team (as in people won't keep paying if they think something is rotten), then surely an organisations athletic director/board, should have ideas as to which systems should be run, and therefore hire accordingly. If you want to run Wing-t, because you know the typical players you get are more suited for this, don't hire a Air-raid coach, just because he is good at his job.
My oppinion is that American coaches do not understand why players won't spend every afternoon/evening at practice. I know I would, but our coach last year ended up scaring away 30% of our team because he wanted to practice 3-4 times a week.
Although I agree this would benefit us if we did, we won't get better as a team, if we can't field 11 guys because the rest feel as if they don't have a life besides football.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 22, 2011 13:06:43 GMT -6
The biggest problem with hiring within, in Europe, is that it might not be possible. This year, I was hired from within, and made a demand that if I were to HC this team, I wanted assistant coaches. We now are five coaches in total, but the previous 5 years, before I was hired, we have only had 1 or 2 coaches, so if they had decided to resign, we would have had to bring in someone from outside. In Denmark, no danish coach will move across country for a coaching job. So the only option if coaching talent is not available in your area, is to bring in an American. I do agree with you, that it would be better to do differently, if it is not what you want, but there might not be a choice. Last year, we had a bad situation, with the American coach we hired. I took the job prior to this season, to avoid any more turbulence in the coaching staff/systems run, etc. Our plan now, is to bring in qualified assistant coaches/import players, who can help a relatively young and inexperience HC, while operating within my system. I believe this is the best situation for us, but I do know that this is not possible in all clubs over here and can clearly understand Julien's question. But as of the question, considering the large part of a clubs budget a coach will cost, and the effect a wrong decision will have on the team (as in people won't keep paying if they think something is rotten), then surely an organisations athletic director/board, should have ideas as to which systems should be run, and therefore hire accordingly. If you want to run Wing-t, because you know the typical players you get are more suited for this, don't hire a Air-raid coach, just because he is good at his job. My oppinion is that American coaches do not understand why players won't spend every afternoon/evening at practice. I know I would, but our coach last year ended up scaring away 30% of our team because he wanted to practice 3-4 times a week. Although I agree this would benefit us if we did, we won't get better as a team, if we can't field 11 guys because the rest feel as if they don't have a life besides football. Coach, these are adult club teams? |
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Jun 22, 2011 13:52:41 GMT -6
Silly, I'm an I-Form ISOand a 3-4 slanting D. It's what I know.
If you hire me, that's what we're running. period. That would be made crystal clear...my guess is there was a total breakdown in communication or there is a LOT more to this story.
|
|
|
|
Post by jjkuenzel on Jun 22, 2011 23:16:49 GMT -6
I will say this about being an American coach over in Europe, not every successful coach in the states is a good fit over in Europe. It takes a special/open minded to coach to fit in and be successful. The American coaches who can do that tend to stick around and are in high demand.
European clubs know and understand that not every American coach and player will fit in over in Europe. When it becomes clear that there is just not a good fit for whatever reason, quite frankly it is just best to cut bait and salvage what can be salvaged. The club and the organization is going to do what is best for the overall good of the team instead of just structurally changing the organization for one season/coach.
Coaches that want to make significant structural changes with a previously successful organization had better have a very strong track record of success in Europe. In my opinion, there are only half a dozen guys over there right now who have the juice to do that. If a coach isn't one of those guys, he might as well buy his plane ticket home.
|
|
|
|
Post by julien on Jun 23, 2011 11:34:15 GMT -6
I will say this about being an American coach over in Europe, not every successful coach in the states is a good fit over in Europe. It takes a special/open minded to coach to fit in and be successful. The American coaches who can do that tend to stick around and are in high demand. European clubs know and understand that not every American coach and player will fit in over in Europe. When it becomes clear that there is just not a good fit for whatever reason, quite frankly it is just best to cut bait and salvage what can be salvaged. The club and the organization is going to do what is best for the overall good of the team instead of just structurally changing the organization for one season/coach. Coaches that want to make significant structural changes with a previously successful organization had better have a very strong track record of success in Europe. In my opinion, there are only half a dozen guys over there right now who have the juice to do that. If a coach isn't one of those guys, he might as well buy his plane ticket home. Totally AGREE! |
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jun 23, 2011 17:11:55 GMT -6
Sometimes you need to go in an change everything. Sometimes you dont and shouldn't. I've been in both situations.
1st situation.
A flexbone option team with a strong winning record and great athletes loses its coach just before August to a better offer from a larger program. The coach that comes in has no opportunity to recruit and has that team and it’s a very good team.
But he wants to run his system. His system is pro style power football and he is going to put it in that year come hell or high-water. He didn't get to recruit anyone to come play in his system. He has no one on his team with a tight end skill set. He has no fullbacks on his team. Half of his skill players are A backs who's skill set has no role in his offense. He has no true one cut half back. His guards aren't pulling guards. His all-conference quarterback is the best runner in the conference and his offense has no QB runs.
It was a disaster. He totally lost the upper class as we couldn't for the life of us figure out why our best player was handing the ball off 30 times a game to running back by committee as the coach searched for that great half back that wasn't on the team. We knew full well that our QB needed to have the ball in his hands if we were going to win. Our team goals going into the season were to win the conference and go undefeated. We were at that level. Our goal was not to spend the season trying to find a new offensive identity because we didn’t' need one. We were {censored} good at what we did and there was total rebellion.
Contrast that to where I'm at now. Coach was fired I don’t want to get into the details. The area is urban with great athletes but for some reason we had always been a run heavy team. New coach comes in and recognizes the athletic ability that we have and we go spread.
It was a total success.
There are times you should change and there are times you should not. No matter how good your system is sometimes you simple cant run it because it will fail and you will be fired. It aint the Xs and Os it’s the jimmies and the Joes. Your Xs and Os may not be right for those jimmies and Joes. You also have to get your players to buy into your new system. It is very hard to down right impossible to get a winning team to buy into a new system. Winning players are not interested in finding a new identity. They are interested in perfecting what they are already doing.
|
|
