Troy Stradford On Coaching Search | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Troy Stradford On Coaching Search

SmokyFin

SmokyFin

Starter
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
2,294
Former Fin Troy Stradord called in today on 790 and weighed in on coaching in the NFL. One key thing he pointed out, which most people here don't seem to understand, is that ALL NFL coaches know their X's and O's very well. What determines success is how the players execute those X's and O's on the field.

He felt the most important things a coach does is in the days leading up to the games and how he motivates and how he prepares his team for unexpected things that the other team may throw at them in the game.

But basically he was just stressing that it's THE PLAYERS that determine a team's success.

Any halfway decent coach that's given enough talent is going to win, whether that coach is Mora, Gailey, Mike Shula, etc. Everyone needs to quit obsessing over the new head coach and worry more about if we have the right people in charge of acquiring personnel.
 
Sorry, but it's just not that simple. While the coach doesn't win/lose games, he does help with the preparation, plays, formations, gameplans, motivation and in some circumstances player personnel. While some coaches get lucky in one/two years with great players carrying them, it never lasts because the coach lacks the intangibles that make players better and work as a "team". I know that sound cliche' but it's what makes the difference between a .500 team and a s-bowl team. While some teams have a slight advantage in talent levels, for the most part all teams in the nfl are pretty close in overall talent (or at least should be). That would mean that nearly all the teams should finish around .500 if the coaches are pretty much the same, right ? No, the difference in the NFL is that the really good teams have talent and coaches who can maximize the most from their players. Can't think of too many s-bowl champs where I could say that coach sucked, his players sure carried him all the way! A good coach is essential to the success to any good team and I can't imagine too many people on this board would disagree with that.
 
JFoxx said:
Sorry, but it's just not that simple. While the coach doesn't win/lose games, he does help with the preparation, plays, formations, gameplans, motivation and in some circumstances player personnel. While some coaches get lucky in one/two years with great players carrying them, it never lasts because the coach lacks the intangibles that make players better and work as a "team". I know that sound cliche' but it's what makes the difference between a .500 team and a s-bowl team. While some teams have a slight advantage in talent levels, for the most part all teams in the nfl are pretty close in overall talent (or at least should be). That would mean that nearly all the teams should finish around .500 if the coaches are pretty much the same, right ? No, the difference in the NFL is that the really good teams have talent and coaches who can maximize the most from their players. Can't think of too many s-bowl champs where I could say that coach sucked, his players sure carried him all the way! A good coach is essential to the success to any good team and I can't imagine too many people on this board would disagree with that.
Click to expand...

Good point with Belichick being the best example. They definitely don't have the best talent in the league, but he always gets the maximum out of each one. When Troy Brown stripped the Charger who just made the interception (forget his name) he saved the game for the Patsies. All of BB's players have this kind of mentality. I'm no Patsy lover, but it would be sweet to have a Dolphins coach that instills this type of behavior in ALL of his players.
 
SmokyFin said:
Former Fin Troy Stradord called in today on 790 and weighed in on coaching in the NFL. One key thing he pointed out, which most people here don't seem to understand, is that ALL NFL coaches know their X's and O's very well. What determines success is how the players execute those X's and O's on the field.


.
Click to expand...


Just because he used to put on a helmet and run into people head first does not mean he knows much more than anyone else about the coaching side of the game.

To me his comment is idiotic.
It's not about knowing X's and O's.
Lots of people "know X's and O's".

It's about knowing how to put those X's and O's in position for plays better than the next guy among other things. In a league like the NFL where talent levels are pretty even between the top teams coaching strategies are extremely important.

To be a champion you have to have both sides, talent and coaches. He makes it sound like we should just hire Anthony Robbins and we'd be fine. :rolleyes2
 
JFoxx said:
Sorry, but it's just not that simple. While the coach doesn't win/lose games, he does help with the preparation, plays, formations, gameplans, motivation and in some circumstances player personnel. While some coaches get lucky in one/two years with great players carrying them, it never lasts because the coach lacks the intangibles that make players better and work as a "team". I know that sound cliche' but it's what makes the difference between a .500 team and a s-bowl team. While some teams have a slight advantage in talent levels, for the most part all teams in the nfl are pretty close in overall talent (or at least should be). That would mean that nearly all the teams should finish around .500 if the coaches are pretty much the same, right ? No, the difference in the NFL is that the really good teams have talent and coaches who can maximize the most from their players. Can't think of too many s-bowl champs where I could say that coach sucked, his players sure carried him all the way! A good coach is essential to the success to any good team and I can't imagine too many people on this board would disagree with that.
Click to expand...


You said it! Just look what Sean Payton did this year in NO. I think he takes the majority of the applause for what is happenning there.
 
chdoyle said:
You said it! Just look what Sean Payton did this year in NO. I think he takes the majority of the applause for what is happenning there.
Click to expand...

He does, and he shouldn't. New Orleans has had a lot of the pieces in place for the last couple of years--that's why a lot of people kept picking them to do big things, and were extremely disappointed when they flopped.
 
A coach (Lombardi or someone) once said something along the lines of coaches who can blackboard the X's and O's are a dime a dozen, but coachs who can get inside their players and motivate are rare... not exactly like that, but it's on Head Coach, and that is why we need a competitive young coach. Why did Schotty take his name out?
 
chdoyle said:
You said it! Just look what Sean Payton did this year in NO. I think he takes the majority of the applause for what is happenning there.
Click to expand...

What Sean Peyton did was inherit a team that made some great personnel moves before this season. Mainly bringing in Drew Brees and Reggie Bush along with some other good moves as well. That's what turned the Saints around so drastically, not some rookie coach.
 
GridIronKing34 said:
A coach (Lombardi or someone) once said something along the lines of coaches who can blackboard the X's and O's are a dime a dozen, but coachs who can get inside their players and motivate are rare... not exactly like that, but it's on Head Coach, and that is why we need a competitive young coach. Why did Schotty take his name out?
Click to expand...

There's a LOT of truth in that. ALL of these coaches know the game. The best qualities a good head coach needs to have are good leadership abilities and great motivational abilities. That's why I'm so adamant about giving Mike Singletary a chance to coach this team.

But it's ALWAYS the players that determine 90% of a team's success.
 
Coaching is so overrated it's freaking ridiculous. As I've said before, I would take a very talented team coached by Wannstedt over a team full of mediocre talent coached by Bellichick, Parcells or whatever "great" coach you want to throw out there. The players are 90% of the equation.

For four seasons from 1986-89 Miami never won more than 8 games and went 6-10 one year. I guess Shula forgot how to coach during that period?? He no longer knew how to prepare, motivate or make adjustments or do anything else a head coach is supposed to do..... OR MAYBE, he simply didn't have the talent to work with at that time. The defense was terrible as was the running game. It was only due to Marino and the Marks Bros. that we won as many games as we did. Without Dan we would have been lucky to win 4 games a season then.

If Shula had started out his career with that kind of talent on his team he might have been fired and people would have been saying the same things about him as they're saying about Mora or Gailey.
 
All coaches know X's and O's huh?

All musicians know their instrument, but some know them better than others and thats what makes them great. Same with coaches.
 
Alex44 said:
All coaches know X's and O's huh?

All musicians know their instrument, but some know them better than others and thats what makes them great. Same with coaches.
Click to expand...

No, what makes them great is they have GREAT players running those plays. The so-called "bad" coaches on the other hand will almost always have average or worse players running their plays. You switch places with the talent and coaches and 99% of the time the results would be the same.
 
I forget who it was but another coach commented on Don Shula by saying something to the effect of:

He could take his players and beat yours and take your players and beat his own.

Good coaching is not overrated.
Problem is that level of coaching is not easy to find.

You strive to have the best on both ends of your team.
Strategy and talent.
That's why Stradford's comments were absurd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom