Taking a survey. Who has more influence on wins and losses?

[dcfanatic]

Taking a survey.

Who has more influence on wins and losses: players or coaches?

Can I get a percentage.

 

[Everlastingxxx]

Good question. I will go with players.

 

[BHendri5]

Bad Question, sometimes it is the players and sometimes it is the coaches. Yes the players go out onto the field and play, but it is the coaches that comes up with the gameplan, and all throughout OTAs, trng camp and the weekly practices as well as signing and drafting the type of players they want on their teams, plus they have to be able to switch gears while the game is ongoing if their original gameplan does not seem to be working, they have to be able to call plays that will help their offenses or defenses out, putting them in successful situations, I would say at the least it is equal, at the most the coaches have more effect on the game

 

[Jimz31]

Well.....it's the coaches responsibility to put the players in the best position to succeed....somtimes I wonder if that has been done.

AND, it is the players responsibility to execute.....

So, if the coach puts them in the position to succeed, it is 50/50.

If the coach does NOT do that, it would be 100% players since they had to overcome being put in a negative situation.

This year, I'd say that it was 60-40 players. I'm telling you, we would have been ALOT better off with just 5 more runs by FJ per game....MBIII is just a drive killer....same thing with the Razorback at times. Too many questionable situational play-calls. 2nd in total yards and middle of the pack in points....that's too much of an indictment right there.....too many drive killers.....

 

[dcfanatic]

Bad Question, sometimes it is the players and sometimes it is the coaches. Yes the players go out onto the field and play, but it is the coaches that comes up with the gameplan, and all throughout OTAs, trng camp and the weekly practices as well as signing and drafting the type of players they want on their teams, plus they have to be able to switch gears while the game is ongoing if their original gameplan does not seem to be working, they have to be able to call plays that will help their offenses or defenses out, putting them in successful situations, I would say at the least it is equal, at the most the coaches have more effect on the game

He only wrote bad question because I asked it. Then he proceded to take time to answer it, lol.

:laugh1:

 

[sonnyboy]

Short term it's the players, long term it's the coaches.

 

[Kangaroo]

Taking a survey.

Who has more influence on wins and losses: players or coaches?

Can I get a percentage.

It takes both it is not all players and it is not all coaches

A coach can help fill in holes with quality players when a star goes down sometimes sometimes not.

It is not one or the other it takes both we seen less talented teams win because they have good players and great coaching.

 

[Ratmatt]

players

 

[Monster Heel]

Players.

You have to ask yourself how the same players can constantly run hot and cold so much though.

 

[Phoenix]

Taking a survey.

Who has more influence on wins and losses: players or coaches?

Can I get a percentage.

This is a harder question than appears. In the end, I would have to go 60% to 40% in favor of players, only because they have GOT to execute the game plan on the field that the coaches have devised. So to be clear, I say 60% players, 40% coaches.

But that is certainly an interesting question. And I can see some situations, some games, where that ratio might change. Either way. But my answer is from an overall perspective.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Depends on the talent level of the players.


If your players are average.......coaching is way more important


If your players are studs...........coaching is not that big of a deal.




Example.....Really doesnt matter who the coach of the Colts is, as long as they have Manning they are going to win 12 or 13 games every year.

 

[BlindFaith]

I think the biggest influence on wins and losses are injuries.

Now in the past I would have said players have more influence than coaching, but I'm swinging more towards coaching being a bigger factor.

Bad play calling and bad schemes are hard to overcome simply with talented players.

I think it is easier to do so on defense, because it is more reactionary. But playing the right scheme or calling up the right blitz or coverage at the right time is important.

On offense, the players are held solely to the discretion of the play caller. Each play - blocking assignments, reads, routes, all of it - are designed by the offensive coordinator. If that person can not figure out how to take advantage of what the defense is doing or is simply not instinctive enough to find a balance, then the offense will struggle.

Now, if the players don't play up to their potential, then coaching is moot. And I think that is a big part of team failure as well. Guys work hard and dominate in college. Get to the pros. Get a big fat contract and say "Why risk getting hurt? or Why try hard now that I'm a millionaire?"

So, I guess they all matter. It's a balance. Bad coaching can ruin a team, but a very talented team can probably overcome some bad coaching. A poorly talented team can win a couple of games with great coaching, but will almost always lose out to a more talented team.

 

[Doomsday101]

I would say 60/40 Players. No doubt coaches are part of it as well but you need good players to have a chance

 

[CATCH17]

Players 100%

Barry Switzer won a Superbowl... Ok?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

He only wrote bad question because I asked it. Then he proceded to take time to answer it, lol.

:laugh1:

It can be a bad question and it can still be answered...not sure why that would be funny.

I also happen to think he nailed it with his answer.

Too many people in this world think everything is a black and white or yes and no answer to questions or situations when in truth there is normally a balance between them that fit in the gray areas.

Love,
Fence Sitter
(insider joke for some fellow fans here)

 

[THUMPER]

Because winning and losing is based on a large number of factors, not just 2, I would give this percentage breakdown:

35% players executing
32% coaching - preparation, practice, playcalling
15% health (suspensions would also be included here)
8% luck - balls bouncing off a guy's foot, etc.
7% game stuff - officiating, weather/field conditions, crowd noise, etc.
3% front office - putting the right players & coaches together

And these percentages change if one or more is a bigger factor in a particular game. Crowd noise was a much bigger factor in the Minnesota game than it is any other time.

I would also factor in matchups because sometimes certain teams just matchup better than others. We matched up well with the Eagles this year but not with the Giants even though we were the better team. Some teams can exploit weaknesses that others can't based on players with a unique skillset (a WR like Randy Moss for instance). That works both ways though and at times we can exploit another team's weaknesses, but I guess that would be part of coaching and playcalling.

Please feel free to adjust these percentages as you see fit. They were mostly to show an example and not intended to be exact.

 

[BrassCowboy]

Bad Question, sometimes it is the players and sometimes it is the coaches. Yes the players go out onto the field and play, but it is the coaches that comes up with the gameplan, and all throughout OTAs, trng camp and the weekly practices as well as signing and drafting the type of players they want on their teams, plus they have to be able to switch gears while the game is ongoing if their original gameplan does not seem to be working, they have to be able to call plays that will help their offenses or defenses out, putting them in successful situations, I would say at the least it is equal, at the most the coaches have more effect on the game

I have to agree, it is a ill-designed survey question because there are influences both ways. I would say the players, but if the OC told the team to run the kill clock play (throw the ball to the ground) all game long, then the result would be a loss but the players would of played it to perfection.
vice versa where the coaches could call the absolute best play for a def. lineup but players just fall down. Coaches played perfect, players screwed it up.

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

Taking a survey.

Who has more influence on wins and losses: players or coaches?

Can I get a percentage.

I'll go with players because no matter how well a coach gameplans for the opposition if the players do not execute it will be all for naught...

A percentage is hard to give IMO, because it's hard to gauge sometimes if the players were ill-prepared or just executed poorly on the field...

 

[Vtwin]

You have to have good players AND good coaching to win a championship.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I'd say at least 70% of it falls on the players. The other 30% is divided up between coaching, lucky or unlucky breaks (such as how the schedule falls, injuries, etc).

The thing is that you can have the best coaches in the world and have an average team if the players simply can't execute what the coaches want. But on the other hand you can have average, or less, coaches and still win it all (Switzer anyone?), cause the players out play the coaching problems.