cowboybish
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 744
- Reaction score
- 1,533
Which - Talent or Coaching is more important? Can an average talent team w good coaching beat a very talented team with average coaching. Which team wins 2 of 3?
Which - Talent or Coaching is more important? Can an average talent team w good coaching beat a very talented team with average coaching. Which team wins 2 of 3?
That's very very close to what I was going to say.both matter but if you don’t have the talent your done.
But they had a great defense most years and arguably the best QB.Look at the Patriots.
They have been the model and they won a lot of games with smart football players who just do their job.
But have never won it all w/o major talent.Look at the Patriots.
They have been the model and they won a lot of games with smart football players who just do their job.
In the NFL the overall talent is close and why On Any Given Sunday still applies. And so many upsets but most games are handicapped within 7 points.Which - Talent or Coaching is more important? Can an average talent team w good coaching beat a very talented team with average coaching. Which team wins 2 of 3?
And luck and bad calls. Should've won the ice bowl w/ Meredith, and the super bowl vs the Colts w/ Morton. Neither loss was due to talent.Landry is the only HC in NFL history to take 4 different QB’s with same franchise to a championship game . But only won a Super Bowl with 1 of them. Talent matters.
But they had a great defense most years and arguably the best QB.
We had enough talent to win. Maybe not in all of the key positions but close.And luck and bad calls. Should've won the ice bowl w/ Meredith, and the super bowl vs the Colts w/ Morton. Neither loss was due to talent.
Great combination. Arguably best QB this era and best Defensive guru.They have run the best schemes in the league for years.
They have been scheme > team.
Yeah, this is the one where you were inferring that Landry lost due to talent. It wasn't that in several playoff losses. In the Colts game, we actually recovered a fumble, and they gave the recovery to the Colts. Weird crapp.We had enough talent to win. Maybe not in all of the key positions but close.
Packers one of if not greatest team all time. I’d argue they had more talent than us.
Colts is a good example of upset. We gave that game away. But Colts had Legit talent. A totally dominating team just 2 years early upset by Jets.
As far as Landry not having success without talent , I was referring to the early 60’s and late 80’s.Yeah, this is the one where you were inferring that Landry lost due to talent. It wasn't that in several playoff losses. In the Colts game, we actually recovered a fumble, and they gave the recovery to the Colts. Weird crapp.
It takes both. Great coaching can make the most of lesser talent but will still lose out eventually to greater talent. We’ve seen it at all levels.I think it is an exercise in futility to try to compare talent vs coaching. I think the best coaches get the most out of their talent, and I think the best coaches become the best coaches because of their access to talent. It's a perfect binary system that feeds itself.
Being a former coach I'd love to say coaching, but talent wins more often than not in the NFL and NCAA. HS and below is a toss up.Which - Talent or Coaching is more important? Can an average talent team w good coaching beat a very talented team with average coaching. Which team wins 2 of 3?