Coaching Carosel

[Reagan]

56 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I know a coach who won a state championship at a school after having average seasons prior. Went to another school and had more losing seasons than winning seasons. But because he won one state championship he should be considered elite?

No.  Has to be 2 or more.  The reason is just because of that scenario you stated.  

[oldschool2]

10 hours ago, Reagan said:

Good coach no.  Elite coach yes.  Very few have what it takes to win a state championship.  If it's easy, then every coach would win some.   But, the subject was Briles and Finney.      Briles = Elite Coach      Finney = Good Coach    Oh, by the way -- This year's matchup:      Briles  47    Finney  28!

I halfway expected a response similar to that.  So by your definition, Phil Danaher wouldn't be considered an elite coach?  Even though he has won more football games than any other Texas high school football coach to have ever coached.  Good to know.  I'll be sure and send UIL and email asking them to put an asterisk by his name in the coaching Hall of Fame.  Also, you do realize that there are quite a few coaches to have won a state championship and then never even gotten close again, right?  Most of them, in fact.  So.. were they only "elite status" that one year?  Because I personally know of coaches that have won a state title and missed the playoffs in their careers after doing so.  I just wanna make sure I'm understanding how to describe a coach when someone asks me.  

And yeah.. let's compare the game they played against each other, because that definitely closes the case.  Not surprised by that response either, btw.  Someone who thinks that winning a state championship makes someone a better coach than someone that hasn't would definitely think that the results of one game also proves that someone is a better coach.

To be clear: I'm not pro Finney or anti Briles, just exposing some ignorance. 

[Reagan]

3 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

I halfway expected a response similar to that.  So by your definition, Phil Danaher wouldn't be considered an elite coach?  Even though he has won more football games than any other Texas high school football coach to have ever coached.  Good to know.  I'll be sure and send UIL and email asking them to put an asterisk by his name in the coaching Hall of Fame.  Also, you do realize that there are quite a few coaches to have won a state championship and then never even gotten close again, right?  Most of them, in fact.  So.. were they only "elite status" that one year?  Because I personally know of coaches that have won a state title and missed the playoffs in their careers after doing so.  I just wanna make sure I'm understanding how to describe a coach when someone asks me.  

And yeah.. let's compare the game they played against each other, because that definitely closes the case.  Not surprised by that response either, btw.  Someone who thinks that winning a state championship makes someone a better coach than someone that hasn't would definitely think that the results of one game also proves that someone is a better coach.

To be clear: I'm not pro Finney or anti Briles, just exposing some ignorance. 

LOL!  You got a degree for that?!

BTW -- Would I consider Scott Surratt a better coach than Phil Danaher --Yes!   Only a fool would think other wise!!  One is an Elite coach and one is a Great coach. 

[oldschool2]

16 hours ago, AEIOU said:

Is going further than Art Briles yours?

The conversation in question.. (the one I was in), was comparing Coach Briles to his predecessor implying that because Briles had won state titles previously that he was automatically a better coach.  But actually, no.   My opinion on what makes a good coach is someone that gets the most out of their players or more.  I think that wins/losses is a fraction of what makes someone good.  I personally think some of the best coaches to have ever lived have never won a championship.  It's easy to win with better players than the team you're playing against. 

[oldschool2]

13 minutes ago, Reagan said:

LOL!  You got a degree for that?!

BTW -- Would I consider Scott Surratt a better coach than Phil Danaher --Yes!   Only a fool would think other wise!!  One is an Elite coach and one is a Great coach. 

Not exactly sure what you're talking about ^.. but ok.  It doesn't take a degree to realize that someone thinking that winning a state title (based on that) is an "elite" coach is IGNORANT. 

Oh look, another category.  So we have elite coach, good coach, and now great coach.

Let me ask you this, knower of all things coaching.  Could Art Briles, Scott Surratt, or any other coach you want to add.. go to any school in the state and win a title?  Or even make the playoffs?

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, oldschool2 said:

Not exactly sure what you're talking about ^.. but ok.  It doesn't take a degree to realize that someone thinking that winning a state title (based on that) is an "elite" coach is IGNORANT. 

Oh look, another category.  So we have elite coach, good coach, and now great coach.

Let me ask you this, knower of all things coaching.  Could Art Briles, Scott Surratt, or any other coach you want to add.. go to any school in the state and win a title?  Or even make the playoffs?

I'm glad you asked.  Yes, I have 4 different categories of coaches:  Poor, Good, Great and Elite.   Every one of them is earned.

And yes, I think any one you named could go any where and win a State Championship.  It may take a few years to get it going.  It took Briles 6 years to achieve his first Title.  Then went on to win 4 out of 7 years.  If you, or anyone else, are actually interested, go back and see how Stephenville was doing in football before Briles got there.   Not very good!  So, let me ask you:   The coaches you mentioned -- what in their history makes you think they couldn't go anywhere and win a Titie?  Again, I wouldn't put Mr. Danaher in the same category with Gordon Wood and G.A. Moore.  These 2 have earned their Elite status.  Again -- the Elite category is not very crowed.  Just my opinion!

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, oldschool2 said:

Not exactly sure what you're talking about ^.. but ok.  It doesn't take a degree to realize that someone thinking that winning a state title (based on that) is an "elite" coach is IGNORANT. 

Oh look, another category.  So we have elite coach, good coach, and now great coach.

Let me ask you this, knower of all things coaching.  Could Art Briles, Scott Surratt, or any other coach you want to add.. go to any school in the state and win a title?  Or even make the playoffs?

Go back and look at my hi-lited post.  LOL!!

[oldschool2]

10 minutes ago, Reagan said:

I'm glad you asked.  Yes, I have 4 different categories of coaches:  Poor, Good, Great and Elite.   Every one of them is earned.

And yes, I think any one you named could go any where and win a State Championship.  It may take a few years to get it going.  It took Briles 6 years to achieve his first Title.  Then went on to win 4 out of 7 years.  If you, or anyone else, are actually interested, go back and see how Stephenville was doing in football before Briles got there.   Not very good!  So, let me ask you:   The coaches you mentioned -- what in their history makes you think they couldn't go anywhere and win a title?  Again, I wouldn't put Mr. Danaher in the same category with Gordon Wood and G.A. Moore.  These 2 have earned their Elite status.  Again -- the Elite category is not very crowed.  Just my opinion!

I don't want to seem like I'm picking on a certain school or anything..but ok.  So Art Briles or Scott Surratt could win state championships at.. Freer? Monte Alto? Tornillo? Tarkington?  Chester (in 11 man)?  Any Pasadena ISD school?  If you really think so then we might as well stop debating.  It would be pointless.  I'm sure you also think that Tod Dodge could go from Austin Lake Travis to Travis High School (less than 20 miles apart) and win a title.  Who, by the way, is an elite coach to your standards.  Even though after winning 4 titles at Southlake Carroll went to UNT and got fired after going 0-30..or something like that.

Like I said..ignorance. 

I'm not saying they aren't excellent coaches.. possibly the best in the business and undoubtedly know more about the game than most of us ever will.  Briles is one of the innovators of the spread offense which changed the game.  I'm just saying that winning a state title doesn't make you a better coach than someone that hasn't. Not exclusively.  Which is what started this whole conversation. 

 

22 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Go back and look at my hi-lited post.  LOL!!

No I saw it. "LOL!  You got a degree for that?!"  I'm saying that what exactly are you talking about?  What do my college degrees (which you have no clue about) have anything to do with my proving your ignorance?  Because it doesn't take a degree of any kind for that.  You don't even know that I have one.  Speaking intelligently and using common sense isn't an indicator of a college education. 

[AggiesAreWe]

So how long before Briles wins a state title at Mount Vernon?

[oldschool2]

20 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

So how long before Briles wins a state title at Mount Vernon?

I'm betting Briles leaves the first chance he gets.  I just don't see him staying at MV very long.  My opinion.  A better question would be to ask how long it takes for Westerberg to win one at BH.  It seems like a somewhat comparable situation to me.

[AggiesAreWe]

1 minute ago, oldschool2 said:

I'm betting Briles leaves the first chance he gets.  I just don't see him staying at MV very long.  My opinion.  A better question would be to ask how long it takes for Westerberg to win one at BH.  It seems like a very comparable situation to me.

I only ask because I agree that there is not a coach out there that could go ANYWHERE and win a state championship.

[oldschool2]

12 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I only ask because I agree that there is not a coach out there that could go ANYWHERE and win a state championship.

I'm glad we agree.  Even the greatest of coaches need other factors other than their coaching ability in order to win a title.  Or.. most people would agree with that. 

[AEIOU]

3 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

The conversation in question.. (the one I was in), was comparing Coach Briles to his predecessor implying that because Briles had won state titles previously that he was automatically a better coach.  But actually, no.   My opinion on what makes a good coach is someone that gets the most out of their players or more.  I think that wins/losses is a fraction of what makes someone good.  I personally think some of the best coaches to have ever lived have never won a championship.  It's easy to win with better players than the team you're playing against. 

Everyone’s intitled to their opinion. 

[NetCat]

Isn't this thread supposed to be about coaching changes?

[WOSgrad]

3 minutes ago, NetCat said:

Isn't this thread supposed to be about coaching changes?

It is, but since is the thread about coaching changes and moves, Reagan has taken the opportunity to AGAIN pimp out his boyfriend.

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, AggiesAreWe said:

So how long before Briles wins a state title at Mount Vernon?

it's hard to tell how long he stays.  If he's there a while i would say give him 7 years.  It took  him 6 years to achieve his elite status at Stephenville.  But, I would tend to believe that some bigger school will wise up and hire him.  Again, just my opinion.

[Reagan]

29 minutes ago, NetCat said:

Isn't this thread supposed to be about coaching changes?

Feel free to post something concerning the original topic.  We are just having a respectful side discussion.

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I only ask because I agree that there is not a coach out there that could go ANYWHERE and win a state championship.

Let's look at the  PN-G situation.  The coach they have is a decent coach and runs a respectable program.   But, he had basically an all American QB and couldn't do anything with him.  Do I think Surratt, Briles, Buchanan or Dodge could have won 1 or 2 Sate Titles with him?  Absolutely I think they could.   But, although it's pure speculation, I'll ask one more time:  What in their past as coaches makes one think they couldn't?!

[AEIOU]

Gilmer is open now....... Wonder how many from SETX will be interested. 

[AggiesAreWe]

11 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Let's look at the  PN-G situation.  The coach they have is a decent coach and runs a respectable program.   But, he had basically an all American QB and couldn't do anything with him.  Do I think Surratt, Briles, Buchanan or Dodge could have won 1 or 2 Sate Titles with him?  Absolutely I think they could.   But, although it's pure speculation, I'll ask one more time:  What in their past as coaches makes one think they couldn't?!

You said "anywhere". I disagree.

And no matter how "elite" a coach can be, a 1 man team doesn't win state titles at the 5A and above level.

[oldschool2]

10 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Let's look at the  PN-G situation.  The coach they have is a decent coach and runs a respectable program.   But, he had basically an all American QB and couldn't do anything with him.  Do I think Surratt, Briles, Buchanan or Dodge could have won 1 or 2 Sate Titles with him?  Absolutely I think they could.   But, although it's pure speculation, I'll ask one more time:  What in their past as coaches makes one think they couldn't?!

So is an all American quarterback a requirement?  Or comparable skill player.. I'm trying to grasp your thinking.  Which you're entitled to, as mentioned above.  I personally think it's silly to think that a team will win a state championship based solely on the head coach.  But that's me.  

Answer the question I posed earlier to AAW.  How long will it take Westerberg to win one at BH?  The chances of him staying there for a long period of time are probably far greater than the chances of Briles staying at MV 6 or 7 years.  

[PlayActionPass]

Not a single coach has ever won a state championship without talent. It just does NOT happen.

[oldman]

8 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

So is an all American quarterback a requirement?  Or comparable skill player.. I'm trying to grasp your thinking.  Which you're entitled to, as mentioned above.  I personally think it's silly to think that a team will win a state championship based solely on the head coach.  But that's me.  

Answer the question I posed earlier to AAW.  How long will it take Westerberg to win one at BH?  The chances of him staying there for a long period of time are probably far greater than the chances of Briles staying at MV 6 or 7 years.  

How did BH get dragged into this conversation?    

[AggiesAreWe]

2 minutes ago, PlayActionPass said:

Not a single coach has ever won a state championship without talent. It just does NOT happen.

Thank you. The notion that coaches like Briles, Surratt and others can go ANYWHERE and win a state championship is ridiculous. Those guys can spend 15 years at some schools that I will not mention and would not come close to winning a state championship.

[oldschool2]

6 minutes ago, oldman said:

How did BH get dragged into this conversation?    

He's the closest thing to the coach being discussed.  An elite coach (Westerberg) according to an aforementioned theory that came to a school that hasn't won a state championship in a long time.  According to the person I'm conversing with, it should happen within 7 years or less.  I was just making sure I was understanding him correctly.