What is more important than a new head coach? | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

What is more important than a new head coach?

In your opinion, what is more important going foward?

  • A quarterback

    Votes: 63 77.8%

  • A head coach

    Votes: 18 22.2%
  • Total voters
    81
dlockz said:
brad johnson, trent dilfer, also Eli manning was not a great qb when they won the superbowl he had a mediocre season 23 tds 20 int with like a 74 qb rating when they won it all. top qb is important but coach controls the team.
Click to expand...

And you could add Big Ben in there as a game manager for his 1st Superbowl. If i recall right he had the lowest qbr for the Superbowl game of any winning QB.
 
people that think a great qb can win it all by himself I think seriously dont understand football. A coach is the most important but his decisions at who his qb are really make or break him.
 
Personally, I think a Free Safety or Kick Returner may be more important than a Head Coach. As I've tried to point out in other threads, the history of coaches going to the Super Bowl, whether they won or lost, and then going to another team, is dismal. The vast majority failed to have success elsewhere, and there are enough examples of those kinds of moves that the study is valid. Did their coaching skills erode? Not likely. They were just lucky enough the first time around to have really good players, almost without exception including a star QB. The GM is way more important than the head coach (bad news for us, because we're still stuck with Ireland).

Think about it - what head coach would you take over Troy Polamalu or Devin Hester?
 
People rave about Belichick, but he did not have success in Cleveland, or in New England until Brady became his QB. When Brady went down in 2008, he won 11 games with a still-solid defense, plus Randy Moss. That would not happen today - with their horrible defense, they woud become the Colts if they lost Brady.
 
Sarnics13 said:
Using the Colts as an example is kind of silly......when Manning went down they lost their coach AND their QB. They lost the whole offensive game plan.
Tom Brady is crazy talented, but look at the whole offense. Their WR corps is not even close to stellar outside of one TE, their rushing attack isn't even worth talking about and their defense is pathetic. The scheme and game planning makes them what they are and they play to Brady's strengths. Coaching!

Do any of you "QB first" folks really believe that if we had Brady on our team the last 3 seasons we would have gone to the playoffs with Sparano at the helm?? We probably have a better season no doubt, but not drastic. Now, put Moore or Henne on the Pats..........do they go to the bottom of the division? No, they don't. They don't win quite as many, but they still are a contender. I think that the QB makes a difference of course, but the coaching makes a team a force.
Click to expand...

I think you're not appreciating that Brady IS the Patriots OC. Just as Manning was for the Colts.

To answer your question, with a much better defense than the Patriots have, there is no doubt in my mind that the Dolphins would have been in the playoffs the last 3 years with Brady at our helm.
 
It's economies of scale, basically, when you're debating whether you'd rather have a shiny QB or a shiny HC.

Hiring the right coach is going to allow him to build up a system, thus minimizing risk more than if you're going to simply count on a QB to have dynamite years year in and year out, as well as staying healthy. In the "I want a QB before anything" scenario, you're placing a considerable amount of risk on the gamble that the QB you're looking at may or may not be able to lead your team to victory. Hiring a coach that builds a good system will allow you to stay competitive, sell tickets and merch, etc., in the search for a QB to run said offense.

Don Shula built a system for Bob Griese to thrive in, he changed it to allow David Woodley and Don Strock to succeed, then he changed it to allow Dan Marino to be the centerpiece of the team

Bill Walsh built a system. In said system, it allowed Joe Montana and Steve Young to both win SB's.

Bill Belichick built a system that allowed Tom Brady and Matt Cassel to be successful

The coach has to be able to put his talent in the right position to succeed. If you've got a bunch of talented players and a bumbling idiot for a HC, then the chances are that you're not going to have a very successful year. Of course, there are occasions where you win in spite of coaching, but that doesn't happen all that often.

When the HC fails, it's a bigger systematic failure than if a QB fails. If the coach fails, then you have to scrap the entire thing you've been building for and start completely anew, hindering your progress for a few years (on most occasions). When the QB simply sucks, you just get rid of him and throw someone or something new in until it sticks.

Coaching is more important, IMO, mostly because of the level of risk involved.
 
dlockz said:
brad johnson, trent dilfer, also Eli manning was not a great qb when they won the superbowl he had a mediocre season 23 tds 20 int with like a 74 qb rating when they won it all. top qb is important but coach controls the team.
Click to expand...

Yeah but Eli was playing at an elite level in the post season and he's the main reason why they won the super bowl, he has been phenominal in the post season and he continued that today by beating the 49ers. Eli is a winner
 
dlockz said:
people that think a great qb can win it all by himself I think seriously dont understand football. A coach is the most important but his decisions at who his qb are really make or break him.
Click to expand...

I think that this really sums it up... The two go hand in hand and there are many instances where the system made the QB... They are equally important to the success of the team and a good coach can compensate for a weaker QB as easily as a good QB can compensate for a weak coach...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom