How much do coaches matter ?

[*bengalfan74*]

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/nfl-black-monday-insights-how-much-do-coaches-really-matter

There's been a bunch of cross talk as there almost always is this time of year about ML's job. And the other coaches for that matter.

How much of a difference does it make at the NFL level ? Here's some interesting insights from  Harvard study. It's a couple years old but still very applicable.

"Overall, great managers create value and organizational performance by deploying and leveraging the resources at their disposal more effectively than their less capable counterparts.

Furthermore, though managerial ability does indeed significantly affect resource productivity and organizational performance, this effect is more pronounced in the case of less resource rich portfolios. "

[motoarch]

Didn’t read.


Bill Belichick

[kevin]

The history of football shows good coaches win, and bad coaches lose. Paul Brown, Lombardi, Tom Landry and on and on. It just so happens the Chiefs have a good head coach as do Saints. Every team has players, but not every teams has a top head coach. Head Coaches account for Play-Offs and Super Bowls.

[*PhilHos*]

Look no further than Cleveland. Hue Jackson as coach like 1 win and 1 tie. Fire him AND the OC. Interim coach is like 5-2 or something. Coaching CLEARLY makes a difference.

[*bengalfan74*]

(12-28-2018, 10:57 AM)kevin Wrote: The history of football shows good coaches win, and bad coaches lose.  Paul Brown, Lombardi, Tom Landry and on and on.  It just so happens the Chiefs have a good head coach as do Saints.  Every team has players, but not every teams has a top head coach.  Head Coaches account for Play-Offs and Super Bowls.

Exactly

(12-28-2018, 11:00 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Look no further than Cleveland. Hue Jackson as coach like 1 win and 1 tie. Fire him AND the OC. Interim coach is like 5-2 or something. Coaching CLEARLY makes a difference.

There are exceptions to nearly every rule. Generational QB's change the equation, Manning, Brady and so on. Every now and then there are teams that are just loaded with talent and they win above their coaching.

But for the other 29 or 30 teams every season coaching is the difference maker.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

Football, more than any other stick and ball sport, is a game of strategy. Coaching is absolutely a huge part of this particular game.

[HarleyDog]

Coaching is very important. So many things involved like game planning, accountability, clock management,etc. our coach has none of these skills which is why we’re 0-7. He may show sparks of some of these things but it’s not consistent. Leadership is key to winning. You could have the best soldiers in the world, but with bad leadership, you may win a few battles but will not win the war.

[motoarch]

(12-28-2018, 11:33 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Exactly


There are exceptions to nearly every rule. Generational QB's change the equation, Manning, Brady and so on. Every now and then there are teams that are just loaded with talent and they win above their coaching.

This is where I’m not so sure in some cases.

I think manning would have won a super bowl regardless of the coach because he was that good. His last year not withstanding. That was all defense. So this goes to your point.

I’m not as sure about Brady and don’t see him going to 8 SBs without BB. I think if you swapped them out and make Brady a colt and manning a patriot; Brady never wins a super bowl and manning wins 10.

I’m not saying Brady isn’t good. I’m saying without bb he never reaches his full potential and history remembers him as a above average QB.

Manning basically is his own coach. He did need someone to help hit his apex. But imagine if he and BB could have combined powers!

[fredtoast]

Coaching obviously makes a big difference, but pretty much every coach ever has a had a losing season when he did not have talent.  It takes both talent and coaching to win it all.

If you read the article it says basically that talent can win with out great coaching, and that coaching has the greatest effect when there is less talent.  I agree with this.

But this whole argument can be turned into a circle with the argument that "talent" is something that is developed by coaching.  This is true to some point, but in the NFL even the best teams have high draft picks that flop, so, again, it takes talented players for a coach to win. 

[*bengalfan74*]

(12-28-2018, 12:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Coaching obviously makes a big difference, but pretty much every coach ever has a had a losing season when he did not have talent.  It takes both talent and coaching to win it all.

If you read the article it says basically that talent can win with out great coaching, and that coaching has the greatest effect when there is less talent.  I agree with this.

But this whole argument can be turned into a circle with the argument that "talent" is something that is developed by coaching.  This is true to some point, but in the NFL even the best teams have high draft picks that flop, so, again, it takes talented players for a coach to win. 

And this is really the point Fred.

You, yourself claim Mike Brown has handicapped Marvin with less talent than __________________ insert team name here. This is the thing.

Marvin Lewis isn't capable of coaching up, scheming, game planning, exploiting the oppositions weakness, that we need with the talent level we have.

We're by no means and haven't been talentless. It's just beyond Marvin's ability to be able to exploit what talent he has above the competition game in game out.

Marvin to win would have to have that elite, generational QB, or that world class Oline, the 85 Bears defense, and so on. He's not able to out football the better teams in the league. 

He doesn't have the ability to bring out the best from all the players he has. He says this is what we're doing and that's it. That only comes together and works against the lesser teams in the league.

We need a much better coach to have any chance under Mike Brown, it's just that simple.

[MentalRage]

If you want to know if coaching matters just look at what Sean Mcvay did with Jeff Fisher's roster.

[fredtoast]

(12-28-2018, 12:56 PM)MentalRage Wrote: If you want to know if coaching matters just look at what Sean Mcvay did with Jeff Fisher's roster.

The first thing they did was add talent to Jeff Fishers roster.

Not saying that McVay is not a better coach than Fisher, but talent still makes a huge difference.  If we added 4 First Team All Pro players to our roster I'd say Marvin would look like a lot better coach.

[THE PISTONS]

I've often felt that Marvin was at his best when we had a mediocre roster. He could squeak 6-8 wins out.

I've felt he was at his worst in the playoffs. When you get to the playoffs you face the best teams and best coaches generally. That's where we got exploited although our rosters always have had major weaknesses like LB's that can't cover a TE or a bad Center.

People forget that in the playoffs sometimes the great Mike Zimmer's defenses have caused us to lose some of the games by not being able to stop the run. Some our offense left us down. It's a mix.

[Shake n Blake]

(12-28-2018, 01:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The first thing they did was add talent to Jeff Fishers roster.

Not saying that McVay is not a better coach than Fisher, but talent still makes a huge difference.  If we added 4 First Team All Pro players to our roster I'd say Marvin would look like a lot better coach.

Who were the 4 first team all-pro players the Rams added?

[fredtoast]

(12-28-2018, 02:13 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Who were the 4 first team all-pro players the Rams added?

Whitworth
Suh
Talib
Marcus Peters

[Circleville Guy]

Coaching doesn’t matter if you have crappy talent but if your talent is borderline or better then it obviously matters.

[BengalChris]

(12-28-2018, 12:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Coaching obviously makes a big difference, but pretty much every coach ever has a had a losing season when he did not have talent.  It takes both talent and coaching to win it all.

If you read the article it says basically that talent can win with out great coaching, and that coaching has the greatest effect when there is less talent.  I agree with this.

But this whole argument can be turned into a circle with the argument that "talent" is something that is developed by coaching.  This is true to some point, but in the NFL even the best teams have high draft picks that flop, so, again, it takes talented players for a coach to win. 

Yeah, but some coaches consistently lose even with talent and some consistently don't develop talent and some consistently have flopping 1st round picks. Usually, however, coaches don't get to display all these losing traits because they are fired long before they can display them all. Merv is a special case in that he's survived long enough to show us each of these losing traits.

[Shake n Blake]

(12-28-2018, 02:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Whitworth
Suh
Talib
Marcus Peters

Suh, Talib and Peters weren't added til this year. The Rams started winning last year. 

The Rams went from 4-12 to 11-5 when they switched from Fisher to McVay, and that was before 3 of those players were added.

[MentalRage]

(12-28-2018, 02:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Whitworth
Suh
Talib
Marcus Peters

Besides Whitworth it was pretty much the same team when McVay took over. The Rams didn't add Suh, Talib, Peters, and Cooks until this season.

In Jeff Fisher's last year (2016) they went 4-12 and only scored 224 points while giving up 394.

In Sean McVay's first year their record jumped to 11-5 with 478 point scored compared to 329 given up.

That's a huge jump from 2016-2017. That's coaching.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(12-28-2018, 10:41 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/nfl-black-monday-insights-how-much-do-coaches-really-matter

There's been a bunch of cross talk as there almost always is this time of year about ML's job. And the other coaches for that matter.

How much of a difference does it make at the NFL level ? Here's some interesting insights from  Harvard study. It's a couple years old but still very applicable.

"Overall, great managers create value and organizational performance by deploying and leveraging the resources at their disposal more effectively than their less capable counterparts.

Furthermore, though managerial ability does indeed significantly affect resource productivity and organizational performance, this effect is more pronounced in the case of less resource rich portfolios. "

Matters a hell of a lot that is for damn sure. Every team has talented players in the NFL, the difference ends up
being the coaches and why guys like Belichick win even when their best players go down. For instance a good
coach could coach up these LB's into atleast being able to fill a hole and to cover atleast serviceable.

Marv might be a good DC but he is just not a good HC like Belichick is and it really shows.