This is from poster VT..He made this statement that I think is facinating and absolutely critical to figure out..
I agree that its a major part of his job...but dont you think belicek brings a schematic intelligence that helps the pats win?
how far can what we think cambell has, take us, what happens when we go against a coach that can do both?
-
I'm trying to figure out what kind of record an elite coach would get us to in this spot, like if Jim Harbaugh or Bruce Ariens took over what would they get us to? Because if Campbell doesn't prove to be elite we should move on and take our chances even if that means letting a potentially good coach go in Campbell. I think he needs to get us to 9 wins at least, which would be close to a 70% win percentage on the rest of the season or I would move on.
-
-
Another attribute I believe he has in spades and that is his ability to make players feel accountable...it's a big deal to have that presence and leadership..ain't no way your gonna play half assed and have him not see it not be afraid to call you out
-
When I look at the model coaches (Shula, Walsh, Belichick, etc...) they have a system in place rather than playing amateur psychologist and cognitive-behavioral therapists. Not saying that learning how to relate to players differently isn't a component, but definitely not the key component.
I think successful coaches have a system that demands "discipline" and if players aren't disciplined to follow that system they find their *** off the team. Watch clips of the Patriot players on the sidelines and what is everyone saying and bought into, "Do your job!"
An example is Jonas Gray. After being late for a team meeting following a 201 yard performance, Belichick flat out put him in the dog house and eventually cut. He didn't waste his time trying to understand him and figure out how to motivate him to be on time for meetings. Similar with Randy Moss. Belichick didn't coddle him. Moss bought into the system, at least for a while.
I remember a story one of the Dolphin players in the 70s shared that a teammate showed up late after a night of partying and hopped the fence at the practice field to try and sneak in. Shula saw it and made hop the fence off the field and the player was cut that day.
I think great coaches understand that players that lack discipline and don't buy into their system are like cancer to a team.
An example of the opposite, I remember an interview with Matt Millen (GM of the Lions) was asked about reports Mike Williams (WR, USC, #10 pick in 2005 draft) was late for meetings, etc... and Millen's response was he was still a kid (I think 20 at the time) and would probably grow out of it (something along those lines). I know Millen was the GM, but the point is coaches (and organizations) that don't demand discipline, regardless of player's personality and skill will fail.
I do think great coaches are able to maximize a player's talent by putting them in places to succeed and detailed coaching. For example, Butler (last year's Super Bowl hero) was actually burned against the practice squad when they ran the same play he intercepted to seal the victory against the Seahawks. Belichick didn't try to motivate him to try harder, he gave him clear instructions how to jump that route.
I also think great coaches are flexible in their system based on the skills of his players. Shula went from running the ball to an air attack once he saw Marino. Whereas, Jimmy Johnson's (a great eye for talent and manipulating the draft) failure in Miami had to do with his inability to be flexible in his system. He tried to force Miami into Dallas offensive system. Unfortunately, Miami didn't have a back like Emmit Smith and preventing Marino from being able audible was a big mistake.
Game time!!gunn34, UCF FINatic and DolphinGreg like this. -
I think it's obvious that coaches need to bring something to the team in terms of strategy but I think it's ridiculous to point to a couple of guys like Belichick and Walsh who are very 1-sided in their expertise (defense and offense, respectively) as being proof of something.
It's not as though Belichick and Walsh have won every single title. What the great coaches do is highlight the strengths of their team whether it be Csonka as a RB or Marino as a QB.
Look at Jimmy Johnson. There's a HC who built a dynasty on a relatively simple 4-3 stack concept. You draft the right players, demand discipline, foster competition and attitude and you can win a title or two in the NFL. We have to be careful we don't make an argument that's too extreme. You can make a million dollars in business without being an expert in economics. And you can certainly go too far with the X's and O's when you get a coach who gets away from the meat and potatoes of what the NFL is about--Chip Kelly, Bill Lazor, etc.
I think we miss a lot of what actually goes on as well. We sit here and talk as though everyone has clearly defined roles and that we know what those are and quite frankly that's insulting to the complexities involved. Coaching isn't as complicated as we make it out to be in terms of strategy nor is it likely that Dan Campbell is as incompetent as many will assume he is.gunn34 and adamprez2003 like this. -
Walsh was a master psychologist
-
It is way too early to have this discussion, but why not. The head coach needs to have a vision for the team. He needs to understand how they are going to win. He needs to define an identity for the team. He needs to push the team each week to become this blue print. It is that simple. The problem is bringing that image into reality.
The players, the coaching staff, and the front office all need to work to this vision for the team to be successful. Campbell has been very clear about his vision for the team. I believe his vision agrees with the vision both T-Bomb and Hickey have for the team. In that respect, I believe Campbell would be a good fit for our head coach.
The challenge is adjusting the schemes, goals, and game plan to utilize the talents of your current players to realize your vision. You never get a perfect fit, but you get the most out of the talent available. For one game, Campbell and his staff accomplished this goal. Part of realizing this vision is evaluating your opponent and developing a game plan that allows your players to meet your vision for the team. The game plan has to change, yet you want that vision to be met each and every week.
I cannot tell you at this point how the plan has to change for the Texans. Clearly, minimizing the impact of the Watt is part of the changes. -
gm is the most important position. the accumulation of talent will win over the startegies of most coaches. there are exceptions of course (shula, gibbs, walsh as geniuses philbin, glanville as dunces) but overall its the talent acquisition game that decides it. we went into this season with a paper thin oline and when albert got hurt our offense took a nosedive. he returns and we score 31. thats a gm decision, thats not even on philbin other than he got rid of incognito which would have prevented that from happening. defensively our dline was banged up all year. they get two weeks rest, heal up and bang, sack city. tannenbaum has to shore up the oline next year, find a linebacker and two defensive backs. not easy but not impossible. (would have been easier if philbin didnt get rid of vontae and smith) they dont have to be all pros they just have to be serviceable
gunn34 likes this. -
Here's another example- think back to your first few jobs and the first real jerk of a boss who was on a power trip and talked down to everyone. That person made everyone worse employees by bringing them down and the entire company suffered because of it. On the other hand, a strong leader can have just the opposite effect and bring employees way up, and that's exactly what we've seen out of Campbell.
He made practices fun again yet also trained everyone super-hard...which is also VERY UNCOMMON in the NFL. It obviously worked though, so what Belichek or someone else would do doesn't matter. Belichek would also cheat...and then look the media in the eyes and demand an apology for being called a cheater after he's caught dead to rights. Do we want Campbell to be someone like that as well? Or do we just want him to be who he already is?
For the moment, Campbell is the man and he's making every employee inside the stadium feel important...which elevates everything all-around. The comparisons are useless because there are a lot of ways to inspire, and the way we have in front of us is obviously the right approach for today. That's all that matters at this point. -
That puts the goal for Campbell to be in the 8-4 +/- 1 range.
My caveat is that I view the record in games decided by 7 points or less to be more or less 50-50 ball games and historically there hasn"t been any coach that can sustain a significantly better than 50% record in close games. So if we go 9-3 under Dan but go it's because we went 6-1 in one score ball games (like we did in Sparano's first year) then I think it's smoke and magic.Pandarilla likes this. -
IF he can get this team to play hard, be competitive in every game and win 5-6 more games I will have seen enough to think he deserves a HC opportunity.gunn34 likes this. -
-
Man I'm so happy with that performance, and was so sick of Queasy I'm ready to give Campbell an extension now.