Does Coahing make a difference in winning and how far you go

[mwm4795]

In a resent discussion some someone posted that some area’s naturally have more talent that other’s. That Coaching don’t make that big of a difference and it’s the Bobby’s and Joe’s not the X’s and O’s. In my opinion Coaching makes the world of difference if your team does good or not and it is their job not to overlook talent and call the correct plays. What is your opinion??

[GoDogs27]

Seriously?! I don't think anyone is saying coaching doesn't matter. Great coaches can get the max out of their players even in "down years" talent-wise. I know I'm a homer, but I don't think anyone would disagree that Neumann has done this many times. That to me is the big difference on the high school level.. High school coaches have to live with the hand they are dealt. There's no recruiting. I look in certain years at Ozen and Central for example. Huge talent pool but poor coaching. Coaching is extremely important and it starts at the middle school level to make sure the kids are getting bigger and stronger and in shape..

[shooter]

TALENT wins! You can take bad or adequate coaching at best and win a few games if you have some talent, you can take average talent and excellent coaching and win a bunch; no coaches are winning without talent!

[liltex]

Jerry Stewart & Joel Hancock came together to Dayt 17 yrs ago to start building a tradition nuff said ;)

[ya_know]

Takes a good combination of both.  The coaching has to be good, but also you have to have some kids.  Like shooter said, you can win some games on talent alone.  I believe if you are consistently going 7-3, 8-2, then you probably have a good combination of both.

[Mike George]

[quote name="shooter" post="1319649" timestamp="1352039295"]
TALENT wins! You can take bad or adequate coaching at best and win a few games if you have some talent, you can take average talent and excellent coaching and win a bunch; no coaches are winning without talent!
[/quote]



I used to think the same way, but that was before I was introduced to the Jerry Stewart coaching philosophy. Ever since he arrived in Dayton he's made a difference. He stepped in, removed staff he felt was either negative or non-productive, replaced them with others he knew were positive and productive, and began writing a new tradition of Dayton Bronco Football - a tradition of winning, by the way.

In his 16 years as head coach and now 2nd year as AD, the Dayton Bronco football team has won more district titles than in all the years combined before he and his staff got here. Now, I used district titles rather than playoff numbers because the rules for getting into the playoffs became much more liberal when they started adding playoff teams to where four times as many teams get into the playoffs than did for the most of the history of Texas football.

The fact that coaching is everything is proven by the fact that in the wake of the Broncos' many victories are many teams who had scads more talent that Dayton had, but it didn't matter because the Broncos were better coached. You won't find a football coach out there who will disagree - it's all in the record books. Dayton can beat you no matter what kind of talent you have. Ask Kerrville Tivy.

The point was reinforced on the college level when Art Briles came to Baylor. Now, the difference between college and high school is you determine your own talent through recruiting, so not only does a coach have to be "great" in the X's and O's, but he's also got to be a great recruiter. Not only that, but he also has to know the talent and be able to develop that talent. Some say he was only successful because he had RG3. Well, who's the #1 offensive team in the entire country right now? Remember, other great coaches such as Mack Brown didn't see RG3 as a QB, but rather as a WR or defensive back. Art saw him not only as a QB, but one who could win the Heisman and told him so when he recruited him to Baylor.

No, talent is important, but it takes a seat in the back of the bus to coaching. Coaching is EVERYTHING, because without it, you can have all the talent in the world, but you're going to lose to a team that is properly and very well coached.

[Txdragon]

Good talent will make bad coaching still look good. Great coaching will make bad talent look good.

[mwm4795]

Thanks for all your comments and insight. I myself once saw a new coach come into a school that had a loosing record make changes and find hiden talent on the kick off team that wound up being one of the top rushers that year.
So from what I am reading if correct a bad or not so talented coach could take a program that had some talented players year in year out and atleast make the playoffs and somethimes when talent is higher that normal make it to the 2nd round but thats a far as they would get.
Correct

[Guest]

In the larger schools the talent level is more equal as they pull from a large student population. A talented group of players is more impactful in the smaller schools which is why teams such as Groveton with 17 seniors in 2010 was very good and then went back down. Deweyville has a very good junior class and they have done well this year and will do better next year. SA has 17 seniors who have been on varsity starting as sophmores, they were 3-7 that year, 8-3 last year, and will make a deeper run this year. Next year SA will step back. Alto is where SA was last year, they will be better next year.

Good coaching will always maximize what is available and minimize the damage in lean years. Keith Gardner will not be a better coach next year but he will make it deeper in the playoffs than this year. Wayne Gandy was no less of a coach the last 2 years than he is now , yet everyone was questioning his offense and coaching abilities the last 2 years. Now Joaquin is undefeated and ranked #5 in the state. He is doing the same thing this year that produced losing records the last two years. The only thing that changed was the talent level on the team.

Every coach knows that success comes down to the players. Without players who can play they will not have success.

[shooter]

I also think that critically important is knowing how to place your personnel. Sometimes a new coach comes in and has a much better grasp of how to utilize personnel and sometimes this is the biggest reason some new coaches experience rapid success.

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

[quote name="shooter" post="1319872" timestamp="1352055416"]
I also think that critically important is knowing how to place your personnel. Sometimes a new coach comes in and has a much better grasp of how to utilize personnel and sometimes this is the biggest reason some new coaches experience rapid success.
[/quote]...ala Todd Dodge  ;)

[PN-G bamatex]

The question isn't whether or not coaching makes a difference. The better question is how much of a difference it makes and just how it makes that difference. Honestly, that varies from situation to situation, school to school, community to community and season to season.

[ya_know]

mwm4795:
I am assuming you are asking this question because of the school you support.  Do you not feel the coaching is up to par, if so why?  Also, how long have you been around the school you support?

[beechnut]

Coach Mac @ Huffman is a great chap but gets out coached in big games. Case in point when he faces CS and coldspring. Previous Coach Baker was a legend and beat West Orange biggest win in school history. Looses to Shepherd who looses to Liberty? Scratching my chin. 

[ya_know]

So are you saying talent wise Huffman and Coldspring are the same?

[pirates78]

To quote Tony Dungy, "Talent doesn't win football games."

[JesseJames]

[quote name="89falcon" post="1319826" timestamp="1352052217"]
In the larger schools the talent level is more equal as they pull from a large student population. A talented group of players is more impactful in the smaller schools which is why teams such as Groveton with 17 seniors in 2010 was very good and then went back down. Deweyville has a very good junior class and they have done well this year and will do better next year. SA has 17 seniors who have been on varsity starting as sophmores, they were 3-7 that year, 8-3 last year, and will make a deeper run this year. Next year SA will step back. Alto is where SA was last year, they will be better next year.

Good coaching will always maximize what is available and minimize the damage in lean years. Keith Gardner will not be a better coach next year but he will make it deeper in the playoffs than this year. Wayne Gandy was no less of a coach the last 2 years than he is now , yet everyone was questioning his offense and coaching abilities the last 2 years. Now Joaquin is undefeated and ranked #5 in the state. He is doing the same thing this year that produced losing records the last two years. The only thing that changed was the talent level on the team.

Every coach knows that success comes down to the players. Without players who can play they will not have success.
[/quote]
+1

[Cougtalk]

[quote name="shooter" post="1319649" timestamp="1352039295"]
TALENT wins! You can take bad or adequate coaching at best and win a few games if you have some talent, you can take average talent and excellent coaching and win a bunch; no coaches are winning without talent!
[/quote]

If this statement was true then Crosby would have beat Vidor last year.

Vidor was the better coached team and won because of it... big i might add.

[pirates78]

Coug if I could j would +1 on a great unbiased factual post.

[Knoddy1]

several years ago Bridge city had a coach (can't remember his name) He brought the wing T with him and did ok but not great. The one year he had 17 players get scholarship at some level, no school in this area came close in that area, he did manage to not make the playoffs which I thought was mind boggling, a really good coach would have taken that bunch a long way. Get yourself a good head coach give him time to surround himself with his choice of assistants and the winning will take care of itself.

[Aggieallstar]

Yes. Look at Vidor.

[dustoff03]

Absolutely!

[shooter]

Cougtalk,

You can't take an apples and make them strawberries, but you can take both and make fruit salad! Teams that win have talent and other intangibles. How many players can you name  on a losing team? How many players can you name on a winning team? Talent matters, just ask all the unemployed coaches.

Great discussion guys!

[JB94]

Yes - see Jasper post Walkoviak. A bad coach with good talent can have a mediocre team. Conversely, a good coach that knows how to utilize mediocre talent can win most games.

[robanadana]

Good coaching makes all the difference. Ask SoulJa. Central has tons of talent but can't do anything with it in the present situation. Jeff has had 12 years to develop Vidor from little league up and look where he's at now. Playoffs 3 of the last 4 years. Montana is a special kid but I promise you he was developed. During past coaching regimes, he may not have even played. Y'all know how much BigDog and I agree however this time we do: Nederland starts early with their kids and this is why they typically are better trained than their opponent. If you want to see how well coached the other team is, watch their offensive / defensive line play and how disciplined they are. You are only as good as your program is.