Talent Vs Coaching | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Talent Vs Coaching

D

DolphinVJ

Active Roster
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
279
Reaction score
118
Location
Northern California
As I have watched some games the last few weeks and seeing the success of New England and Indy, I am wondering if talent is overrated. For example, arguably Dolphins have more talent on defense than both Indy and NE and yet our production/performance was no where close to theirs. I do realize that you have to big-time talent at QB, a Pass Rusher, a CB and a LT probably to be successful as a Team but most other positions can be coached/taught with the right system and with players who are smart and self-motivated. 2018 Jaguars are a example of lacking most of these despite enormous talent. Hoping our new coaching staff bring these to the Dolphins.
 
Coaching without talent can make you win but never compete for Super Bowls. Talent without coaching just gets people fired … first the coaches, then lesser players, then more vocal players, and finally the GM.

Talent has a shorter window. Running backs have like 3-7 years typically. QB's have 10-18 years typically. Coaches have 20+ years typically. Given where to start, I'd always take the Coach, provide him with what he needs (like a GM to get him the talent). Eventually, the coach will win some, get more talent and then challenge. Most coaches hate their talent acquirers, complain a lot and try to undercut their GM's until the Head Coach has all the power. But he's a great coach because he has devoted all of his time to coaching. Anyone who devotes all his time to coaching cannot possibly be a great talent acquirer. So supporting the coach, typically means brokering peace between someone who has time and ability picking players (GM/scouts) and helping the Head Coach realize that he cannot possibly devote the time needed to be good at it.

Head Coaches that are great keep succeeding, mostly by finding ways to utilize the talent they have. The talent pool in the NFL is pretty uniformly high. The difference between great rosters and bad rosters isn't nearly as stark as people think. That's why someone like Jim Harbaugh or Sean McVay can be an overnight success. It's the reason so many new teams get into the playoffs each year. It's also the reason why a Super Bowl participant like Denver or Atlanta can lose a few key players and plummet from the edge of greatness to utter mediocrity. But, if you have a good coach, he can make a huge difference, even without the best roster.

Don Shula won the most games in NFL history. I think he only had like 1 or 2 losing seasons EVER. How is it possible to be drafting towards the end of the draft every year yet keep winning? Good talent scouts? Maybe, we've definitely had some in our time. But more importantly, good coaches use who they have and find a way to hide/minimize their weaknesses and utilize/emphasize their strengths. It's about the music the orchestra makes … not who has the best tuba players.
 
Absolutely talent is overrated. It’s the NFL everyone is talented. Look at Chris Hogan for example, couldn’t make our roster when we had terrible wr’s yet here he Ian catching like 7 balls for 180 yards in the afc championship for the Pats. Now I don’t think he’s grown into an elite talent player but with the right scheme and coaching, players produce at a higher level
 
I think when you see your guys in position getting beat you need better players but when you see brain farts it's coaching. The Houston game was an example for us of where the coaching should take the hit. Blown coverages all over the place. If I'm building a team in 2018 coaching and smart players would be my first 2 initiatives but obviously the player has to at least be talented enough to play in the NFL. Basically I'd want a good scheme and guys that can execute the scheme consistently to the point where everything the other team does is earned meaning they beat someone physically. There are so many boneheaded coaches and players in the NFL today that strategy can win you a lot of games but I don't think it can put you over the top. Closest we've come to seeing it here in the last 15 years is Sparano/Pennington. We were a smart football team who didn't give games away and we won lots of games but faltered against teams that matched the coaching (or were better) and flat had better players. You need talent sprinkled in to get over the top. I'm going to lose credibility here, if I have any, but I think Gase had the right idea with the offense in 2018 but injuries (I know excuses, excuses) derailed his plan so we really don't know how it would have turned out. The defense was just poorly coached and I don't think much was going to change there. I also think the interior line on defense was a major weakness we couldn't overcome. We have some good rotational guys but I think we need one more guy who is better than all of them or progression from Godchaux/Taylor but I don't want to happily adjust their progress.
 
You need to have an overwhelming amount of talent to pick up the slack of a 2nd rate coach. Think Barry Switzer on the Cowboys 1995 SB team. Great coaching without great talent and great talent without great coaching gets in you in contention for a playoff spot.

Great coaching and great talent working hand in hand and that's how you build a dynasty and contend for Super Bowls.
 
There's a happy medium... really it's a system and getting everybody to buy in. There are QBs out there like Peyton Manning who can make any WR look like a number 1. There are also systems like Gary Kubiak's offense where the OL will consistently be very good and you are guaranteed a 1000 yard rusher.

In the end you need an organization that knows the type of player they want in order to succeed.
 
Damien Williams was torching teams on the Chiefs, and he was our 3rd string RB. Idk, I think our team is exceptionally flawed on the coaching staff, there are so many players that leave here and actually look the part to make me think we do have talent.
 
Last edited:
artdnj said:
I think it's a combo but top notch coaching can mask deficiencies in players more than players masking poor coaching imo.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'll not give the whole sermon, but every team has a LOT of average players. Good coaching makes the unit play well
 
MARINO1384 said:
Absolutely talent is overrated. It’s the NFL everyone is talented. Look at Chris Hogan for example, couldn’t make our roster when we had terrible wr’s yet here he Ian catching like 7 balls for 180 yards in the afc championship for the Pats. Now I don’t think he’s grown into an elite talent player but with the right scheme and coaching, players produce at a higher level
Click to expand...
I think you've missed the talent at QB on this analysis. It ain't Belichick or McDaniel throwing him the ball.
 
MARINO1384 said:
Absolutely talent is overrated. It’s the NFL everyone is talented. Look at Chris Hogan for example, couldn’t make our roster when we had terrible wr’s yet here he Ian catching like 7 balls for 180 yards in the afc championship for the Pats. Now I don’t think he’s grown into an elite talent player but with the right scheme and coaching, players produce at a higher level
Click to expand...

How can talent be overrated? Look at what Mahomes did for that offense/team compared to Alex Smith.
 
superphin said:
You need to have an overwhelming amount of talent to pick up the slack of a 2nd rate coach. Think Barry Switzer on the Cowboys 1995 SB team. Great coaching without great talent and great talent without great coaching gets in you in contention for a playoff spot.

Great coaching and great talent working hand in hand and that's how you build a dynasty and contend for Super Bowls.
Click to expand...

Barry Switzer was a great coach. In fact, that was the first and best litmus test question my friends immediately used for newcomers to the sports betting scene. It was absolutely uncanny. When we asked about Barry Switzer and received the standard reply about lousy coach winning with Jimmy Johnson's players, we adopted a little shared grin because we knew that guy had no chance in that town. He was going to watch every game and subjectively grind himself out with one conventional wisdom gaffe after another.

But if we got the rare positive response, then we immediately took notice. I am still friends and colleagues with some of those guys today. I'll never forget when my friend Paul and I asked a newcomer named Larry about Switzer at the Frontier sportsbook. Larry rattled off everything relevant, including Switzer's bowl record against excellent coaches like Paterno, Bowden and Osborne, along with the fact that Switzer won the Super Bowl with a team that had just been dethroned as Super Bowl champ. It was an unheard of feat. Only George Halas had managed it, before Switzer. Now Belichick has joined them. In fact, Belichick can do it for the third time if he wins this Super Bowl. But overall it is a horrendous situational scenario yet Barry Switzer did a remarkable job overcoming it in 1995.

The Patriot team cannot be used as good example for anything. Once Belichick departs I'm sure we won't see many -- if any -- forthcoming examples of a team winning the title just one season after being dethroned. Sometimes there will be an entire decade without a playoff victory for that lot, let alone a title.

That guy Larry Mathews was incredibly sharp. I may have mentioned him previously but I'm not sure of that. Unfortunately he bragged about his winnings too much. We kept warning him to shut up. Eventually Larry was found dead in the desert, spring 2004.
 
AdamC13 said:
I think you've missed the talent at QB on this analysis. It ain't Belichick or McDaniel throwing him the ball.
Click to expand...

Great post. Talent gap from team to team is overrated, especially at positions like offensive line which are manned by 5 players.

But quarterback is an entirely different story. Cream to Crowd is a cavernous gap. I always have to laugh at the modest pay differential between those types, when it should be many multiples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom