Coach this, coach that, does it really matter?

[SteveOS]

I sort of understand the move to get Jason Garrett, to help Romo, I'm fine w/ him being OC. What I don't understand is this. What real difference is it going to make who we bring in as a head coach? I mean, if we bring in a defensive minded coach, what good is it, if the talent isn't there? Maybe the players we have just aren't that good? Maybe they are and we aren't utilizing their strengths, who really knows. I'm just throwing it out there, someone explain it to me. I'm not coming with anything but my opinion, hopefully someone can rationally tell me why I'm thinking this way.

Look at Billick for the Ravens. He was supposed to come in and save the day for Baltimore by bringing his high powered offensive schemes, they are now a "Defensive" team, or at least have been for quite some time. Who was DC before Rex Ryan? It was the coach of the Bengals, Marvin Lewis, who's defense isn't great, to say the least. The offense is leaps and bounds better than their defense. What about ole' Mr. Saunders for the Skins? He was "Supposed" to bring a high powered offense to D.C., they looked worse on offense this year, than last year. There are a few coaches out there that work out, Smith for the Bears, he was brought in for defense, the defense is solid, but how much of that is Smith and how much of that is Rivera? I could go on and on with this, but I hope you get the idea.

What I'm trying to say is, it's all about talent, I'm not so sure about the actual coaching per say. I mean sure, there aren't many Belichick's in the world and maybe some coaches have the "Will Power" to motivate the players, but who should really get the credit here? I think it's the talent, more so than the coaches. Look at what Switzer did, he won a Super Bowl and he was a joke of an NFL coach. The Boys had some serious talent, maybe the Boys at present aren't what they are all cracked up to be.

This isn't a flaming post or one to start arguments, I'm not busting balls here, just wanting to hear from you guys, what are your thoughts on coaching and talent? Does it really matter? And if so, how much does it really matter? Or maybe I'm just completely not making any sense, which is entirely possible, since I babbled on for quite a bit w/o proof reading this thing, lol.

 

[parchy]

what are your thoughts on coaching and talent? Does it really matter?

In one big, big word: Yes... it matters. A lot.

 

[BlueStar22]

what are your thoughts on coaching and talent? Does it really matter? And if so, how much does it really matter?

I do think talent is a lil bit more important than coaching but they both pretty much go hand and hand. That's why it irks me to see so many people trashing Norv Turner. He didn't have talent in D.C. and he took a job in Oakland that no one wanted and we all know how they've faired since they had a team full of granddaddys.

 

[rangers71]

All of these guys know how to coach. You have to have talent. Doesn't matter if it's Parcells, Belichick, or Norv Turner. They all have to have talent to succeed. The other important part is surrounding yourdelf with good people.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Of course both are important.. don't know if I could rank one over the other. The difference is the coach. Some coach's use a scheme and the players fit that scheme.. others, uses the players to dictate the scheme he runs. Just because one coach wasn't successful, another coach can take the same players and win it all. The talent was there, but the new coach saw something that the other coach didn't,, and was able to use the talent more effectively. So yes, the coach matters,, but only if he has talent.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Coaching absolutely matters. In fact, the talent level between teams is actually very small (Oakland excluded). The difference usually comes down to coaching and game planning.

Kinda like not going after a secondary signed off the street, gameplan kinda matters.

 

[hank2k]

I sort of understand the move to get Jason Garrett, to help Romo, I'm fine w/ him being OC. What I don't understand is this. What real difference is it going to make who we bring in as a head coach? I mean, if we bring in a defensive minded coach, what good is it, if the talent isn't there? Maybe the players we have just aren't that good? Maybe they are and we aren't utilizing their strengths, who really knows. I'm just throwing it out there, someone explain it to me. I'm not coming with anything but my opinion, hopefully someone can rationally tell me why I'm thinking this way.

Look at Billick for the Ravens. He was supposed to come in and save the day for Baltimore by bringing his high powered offensive schemes, they are now a "Defensive" team, or at least have been for quite some time. Who was DC before Rex Ryan? It was the coach of the Bengals, Marvin Lewis, who's defense isn't great, to say the least. The offense is leaps and bounds better than their defense. What about ole' Mr. Saunders for the Skins? He was "Supposed" to bring a high powered offense to D.C., they looked worse on offense this year, than last year. There are a few coaches out there that work out, Smith for the Bears, he was brought in for defense, the defense is solid, but how much of that is Smith and how much of that is Rivera? I could go on and on with this, but I hope you get the idea.

What I'm trying to say is, it's all about talent, I'm not so sure about the actual coaching per say. I mean sure, there aren't many Belichick's in the world and maybe some coaches have the "Will Power" to motivate the players, but who should really get the credit here? I think it's the talent, more so than the coaches. Look at what Switzer did, he won a Super Bowl and he was a joke of an NFL coach. The Boys had some serious talent, maybe the Boys at present aren't what they are all cracked up to be.

This isn't a flaming post or one to start arguments, I'm not busting balls here, just wanting to hear from you guys, what are your thoughts on coaching and talent? Does it really matter? And if so, how much does it really matter? Or maybe I'm just completely not making any sense, which is entirely possible, since I babbled on for quite a bit w/o proof reading this thing, lol.

Excellent post! Coaching only matters if the talent is relatively close. I can think of MANY examples of coaches with big reps (due to the fact that they had great players) getting exposed when they went somewhere with less talent or the talent where they were dropped off.(Best example is New England/ Belichek -suddenly beatable after all). We still need some better players first and foremost.