Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What's more important, Talent or Coaching?


Ricky Spanish
 Share

Recommended Posts

I read somewhere (can't remember where don't ask me to cite it) that good coaching can really only add 2-3 wins per season. The vast majority of the wins were said to come from talent on the roster. That's not to say you wouldn't prefer to have a good coach over a bad one, but they can only do so much.

As of right now, we seem to be devoid of both talent, and good coaching, so I have a few questions:

  • In your opinion, what is the ratio of Coaching to Talent in terms of a team's overall record?
  • Which is worse on our team, the coaching or the talent (or both equally suck)?
  • Based on your previous response, who is at fault the most between the coaching staff and the FO?

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wilks vs Rhule was a huge difference with the exact same roster and no offseason to install Wilks’ defense or offense. Coaching matters most IMO as long as it’s not an extreme difference in talent. Let Andy Reid coach our Cam, Luke team and we would have been in the playoffs every year.

  • Pie 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I read somewhere (can't remember where don't ask me to cite it) that good coaching can really only add 2-3 wins per season. The vast majority of the wins were said to come from talent on the roster. That's not to say you wouldn't prefer to have a good coach over a bad one, but they can only do so much.

As of right now, we seem to be devoid of both talent, and good coaching, so I have a few questions:

  • In your opinion, what is the ratio of Coaching to Talent in terms of a team's overall record?
  • Which is worse on our team, the coaching or the talent (or both equally suck)?
  • Based on your previous response, who is at fault the most between the coaching staff and the FO?

 

The margin of talent in the NFL is so small that coaching matters even more. 

Every team has weaknesses and strengths, good coaching knows how to exploit the other teams flaws while limiting their own. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know, I’ve seen some talented rosters with some horrible seasons and vice versa.

I look at it more like good coaching gets you X amount of points per game. Like you can have  a 14 point roster and 20 point roster, but good coaching can get you that extra 7 points to push you over. Then again you can have a 7 point roster playing a 28 point roster and no matter how good your coaching is you can’t make the difference.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talent is more important.

 

You're not winning a championship without talented players. We have seen some of the best coaches in history just become another coach the moment they lose a superstar.

 

BB was the GOAT HC when he had Brady. Without Brady nobody has thought of the Pats as a contender.

 

Greg Popovich was one of the best HC in NBA history when he had Tim Duncan. He's now been coaching a team that has been in the lottery for multiple years now.

 

Players make coaches, always have always will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this level, you can't win without both, but talent is more important than coaching.

The best coaching at this level just can't win if they don't have the talent.  But the best talent can absolutely carry bad coaches to success and can even take them on deep playoff runs.

But in the end, you still need elite coaching to win a SB unless you happen to strike gold with the right talent, like we almost did in 2015.

Talent is more important as the base of a team

Coaching is more important to consistently win and contend at the highest of levels, but it can't do so without that base first.

Edited by tukafan21
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ricky Spanish said:

I read somewhere (can't remember where don't ask me to cite it) that good coaching can really only add 2-3 wins per season. The vast majority of the wins were said to come from talent on the roster. That's not to say you wouldn't prefer to have a good coach over a bad one, but they can only do so much.

As of right now, we seem to be devoid of both talent, and good coaching, so I have a few questions:

  • In your opinion, what is the ratio of Coaching to Talent in terms of a team's overall record?
  • Which is worse on our team, the coaching or the talent (or both equally suck)?
  • Based on your previous response, who is at fault the most between the coaching staff and the FO?

 

I think taking something intangible like “good coaching” and trying to quantify it with “2-3 more wins” is trying to make a complete crapshoot guess sound intelligent. 
 

No matter how much sense we try to make of the world, some things aren’t explainable numerically. 
 

A great team is a combination of coaches putting players in situations that take advantage of their strengths, the players having strengths that can be put in position for an advantage, leadership at the player level that holds everyone accountable, and full buy-in by those players. Leadership and buy-in build a circular momentum, with everyone feeding off each other momentum, and that leads to chemistry, and success.

 

Special teams are a perfect storm of these things.

 

2015 was that. 

 

2023 lacks all of that by the looks of it, but one of those things being off can have a cascade affect on all the others. 
 

That why you see a coaching change turn a team around. Or one star player lifting his peers (Luke).

 

Without being in the building, it’s hard to tell if it’s all the above that is wrong, or just one or two things (coaching/o-line maybe?).

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably a mix of both. We don’t have enough dawgs on the team/ coaching doesn’t adjust or get creative. No one would thrive in this hogwash. Baker looks legit with an aging Bucs roster. I’d be willing to bet the house that Darnold would kill it in SF. We aren’t doing much correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...