Which is the most important for success?
Printable View
Which is the most important for success?
It's mostly COACHING! It certainly helps to have abundant talent, but a good coach can get the most out of the talent he has.
Coaching for sure. A good coach can take average talent and make deep runs. A good coach can take awful teams and make them competitive, but most good coaches dont stick around in awful programs.
I'm going to say coaching also. Talent will get you were you want occasionally.........but coaching is sustainable. You don't have to look far to see it.
We certainly don't.:blush:Quote:
Originally Posted by lostaussie
That was embarrassing the other night. I haven't seen us be beat down like that since the '70s. We need some wholesale changes in our coaching staff. The head coach needs to have some fire, instill discipline, and hold everybody accountable, players and coaches alike. We're not seeing that at all. I don't dislike our defensive coordinator as a person, but he hasn't produced a decent defense (save a couple of years when we have 5 to 7 D1 players) in his time here. I don't care whether our offense is good or not (which it's not this year), I would LOVE to see us learn how to play DEFENSE. I think losing Kurt Traylor was almost as big a loss as losing Jeff. Our O-line just isn't getting the job done. This is the worst offense we've had in a couple of decades, and our defense isn't any better. We are not very good even on special teams.
It's time for some wholesale changes, in my opinion. We need to spend the money and rebuild.
Now you see how those teams felt when the Bucks would destroy them. It always better when Gilmer is good though.Quote:
Originally Posted by waterboy
I already knew how it felt, :D! I was here during the '70s, when whoopings were dealt to us repeatedly. We had poor coaching then, too. Dare I say we had every bit as much talent in them days that we have now. And that doesn't even count the talent that walked the halls because of the coaching. We will be back. I just hope sooner than later. Like I said, we need to make some definitive changes to continue the tradition that Traylor revived during his tenure. We will also have to spend a little money to get the better coaches here.Quote:
Originally Posted by orange machine
Would Kurt Traylor come back if the position opened up?
I agree whole heartedly...……….Robinson's football record the past 11 seasons bears that out.Quote:
Originally Posted by orange machine
I think coaching also.Even if the kids have talent you have to a coach to show them what to do with it.
Had a friend tell me the other day that coach T at WOS told him that after 4 games he don't know if he can coach these kids or not but come Monday we gonna find out who can and who can't.lol
I doubt he would, but I wouldn't mind seeing it. I would hope we would spend the money to bring in a good defensive coordinator, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgs
Coach Bob Shipley (a very good coach) says " You got to have the Horses !!!
I have to be careful about what I say on here because lots of folks know who I am. First of all I don't think the position is going to open up and I'm not sure I want it to anyway. What I want to see is some fire, some intensity and some discipline which we have lacked since Jeff left. We have slowly been letting this thing get away from us and now it's starting to snowball.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgs
Now back to your original question. At the time that Kurt left I didn't know if he was HC material. Looking back I'm not sure he shouldn't have been given a chance. 1st HC job, fire, intensity, discipline. He has shown it at REL. His progress is evident. I wonder what he could have done with an established program. We shall never know.
Exactly. Gilmer won't ever again have a coach as charismatic as Jeff Traylor. He was a Texas high school football coach out of central casting. I thought of Jeff every time I'd watch Kyle Chandler play Coach Taylor (eerily close to our coach's last name) on "Friday Night Lights."Quote:
Originally Posted by stardog
Traylor didn't have to go get the horses. They came to him. Reverse recruiting just within the rules.
We now have a transient coaching staff, having lost most of the original Traylor staff and even quite a few from the Turner staff (and losing Kurt was big, no doubt), and we also no longer have the same reliable contingent of "Jimmys and Joes" year after year.
Moreover, we have a practically nonexistent fanbase compared to what we had, say, 10 years ago. Football at all levels is fading away. "Peak football" was reached in Gilmer almost 10 years ago during the Stump Godfrey era.
Maybe we in Gilmer deserve this. Still, I know the Buckeyes have not given up and I know Coach Turner had an impossible act to follow and yet has coached in 13 playoff games in three seasons with an overall record of 39-8. Not too shabby.
You're right in that it's likely the AD/HC position won't open up until Coach Turner retires. People at the time of his hiring didn't know if he had the right temperament to be HC. Some people were saying Alan Metzel probably was the better choice, or even Kurt. I still think we can win with Turner, but I would still like to see us go out and get a really good defensive coordinator, and maybe even an OL coach. I've been saying it for years as you well know, and I'm going to stick to my guns on the DC. I shudder to think how many more possible championships we would've had if we stressed defense more. This year is an anomaly offensively. I do think we miss Kurt more than people think. His offensive lines were top notch and consistent in his time here. I just don't think Turner was able to replace the coaches that Jeff had with coaches that are in the same mold, and that's the biggest difference. When Jeff did lose one of his coaches, he was able to replace him with a comparable coach. In other words, he was better at the political part and getting what and who he wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by lostaussie
I didn't mean for this to turn into a Buckeye crying thread!Quote:
Originally Posted by waterboy
If you want to win titles you've got to have a lot of both..the sliding scale can vary....
I'll say this...with terrible talent there's a ceiling to how far a coach can take you....
With great talent there is no ceiling
Good assessment Matt, I believe there are 3 key factors that go along with what you said to produce a program:Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew328
1) Kids - This is the talent level along with the dedication these players have to the program.
2) Coach - Like Matt Said, this determines if a group will reach its full potential, fall short to very short of potential, and a select few coaches can get players to collectively over achieve their potential.
3) Community - This is the third element of a programs culture. You need buy in and support for the players and coaches, parents need to allow the coach to push players out of their comfort zone.
The above factors create a culture for programs, I will say that the Coach really is at the core of a programs potential. Carthage would be talented without Surate, but im doubting you have anything close to the dynasty he has produced.
LHs current HFC/AD is a winner, he will take 2-8s and make them 9-3s, give him 8-3s and he will give you a real shot at a title. His expectations are off the charts and being a part of his program means something, it comes with a great price. But you wont have a shot at beating the Carthages of the world with anything less.
I would rather have a team full of star players and an average coach than the opposite
Surprised some of the Wimberley folk have not honed in on this one. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by oldtownag
That’s DeSoto every year, and still only title to show for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saggy Aggie
To be fair DeSoto would probably have 3 titles if not for a guy named Kyler and a school with 6600 kidsQuote:
Originally Posted by LHPfactory
Good coach... sure but a good coach will tell you that you can't do it without the Johnnys and Joes.
I am just asking...but what progress has LEe shown? They are about where they were for the last 5-6 years..5-5 type of teamQuote:
Originally Posted by lostaussie
If I'm not mistaken the year before he got there Lee won a couple of games. Didn't they go 6-4 last year? Heck I could be wrong. It's not like I keep up with them that closely. I know they have struggled some this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Txbroadcaster
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by LHPfactory
Yes, Lee went from 2-8 in '16, to 6-4 last season in Kurt's first year, their best season since going 6-6 in 2009. Lee is 1-3 thus far this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by lostaussie
It is the Johnny and Joes folks and I will say that I have seen a lot of good Coaches make teams and players much better yet their Coaching record would not indicate how good of a Coach they actually have been.
I tend to agree with LHPfactory. There are so many variables that go into winning a championship, let alone winning multiple championships. You can't do it without great kids. And those kids need talent. They don't need to be elite-level talent, or even the most talented on the field at any given time. But you can't win a championship without at least a decent amount of skill. You just can't. But that's where coaching comes in. Great coaches can always get the most out of their players, regardless of the skill level of those players. But even a great coach can't take a team with zero talent and go 16-0. Community support is HUGE. It breeds selflessness. And it breeds confidence, which breeds pride, which breeds growth, which breeds success, which breeds more success. And lastly, you need a little luck, to be honest. You need the ball to break your way more times than not. You need the calls to go your way more times than not. You need key cogs to stay healthy for 16 games and however many countless practices. Great teams with great kids and great coaches and great community support have come up short because of some bad luck along the way. It's part of the game and always will be. If you have the first three ingredients, you can reduce the amount of luck you need, but you can never fully factor it out.
yes they were 2-8 the year before...If I remember right their QB got hurt early in that year but from 2013 they have beenQuote:
Originally Posted by lostaussie
4-6, 5-6, 5-5, 2-8, 6-4 and this year 1-3 so far
I am not saying he will not turn it around some..but they are basically a .500 team again....That 2004 fluke run to the title IMO almost hurt the program more than it helped because it created a false narrative that Lee was a state power in the mind of the Lee fan base.
It would be tough for any coach to win consistently at Lee. The same program at the high school level is not being taught to the kids in the junior high schools in the city, so the coaches and kids are already behind the curve. It is kind of a death zone for high school coaches, to be honest. I'm not sure what the answer is to making the Tyler schools consistent winners, but it's going to take a LOT of people on the same page to get things turned around, in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Txbroadcaster
It depends, if the program has never really been good then coaching. If the program has a tradition of success and expectation of winning then talent.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtownag
Stephenville for example was a doormat before Briles but he changed the culture 30 years ago (i cant believe it has been that ong.). Stephenville has had 27 winning seasons with 28 playoff appearances since then. The Jackets had only had 34 winning seasons and 6 playoff appearances in the previous 68 years of football. With that said the Jackets five titles have all come with a D1 athlete playing QB; four other years the Jackets made it to the semi's for a total of 9 semi-final appearances and all but one of those years the Jackets had D1 talent under center.
So to create a winning culture I say coaching is most important but to be a champion takes both.
Both! A good coach can take a group of players and get them to play at a higher level. A crappy coach, one that belittles those same players, will have them play at the level the coach tells them they are. Great talent is awesome, but if it's limited to one or two, it probably won't make a huge difference. As important is a cohesive team...coaches and players. That can be magic!
I believe it takes both, but I think the edge goes to coaching. A solid coach can bring up a mediocre program to a high level program. Throw in a few true athletes and it becomes an elite program. Far too many examples of it at the HS and college levels. A mediocre coach with a a bunch of high level athletes seems to result in an above average team but not an elite team, mostly due to, IMO, the me first attitudes of some higher level athletes.
I completely agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by panfan