FanNation | The Republic of Sport

Community

Dan TM is Stupendous Man won the Throwdown.

chrono8008

Throwndowns: 15
Record: 9 - 5 - 1
Evanston , IL
All Throwdowns

Votes

Throwndowns: 80
Record: 53 - 23 - 4
A place, IL
All Throwdowns

Votes

What is more effective in football? A coach who is a hard*ss or a "player's" coach? (FN FFL Tourney Loser's Bracket)

Dan TM is Stupendous Man said 07/24, 11:24 AM
Player's coaches are all the rage these days, thanks to Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith's Super Bowl appearances. Jeffri Chahida pointed out in an ESPN.com article last month that 5 of the 7 head coaches hired this offseason are "player's coaches." But just looking at this year is rather short-sighted. The story was very different just a year ago.

Until the Colts' championship, the last Super Bowl-winning player's coach was Mike Holmgren. Mike Shanahan, Dick Vermeil, Bill Belichick, Brian Billick, Jon Gruden, and Bill Cowher were all hard**** in some sense of the word. They distanced themselves from their players, were heavy disciplinarians, and earned respect that way.

And even in this past season, the top three Coach of the Year candidates - Billick, Sean Payton, and Eric Mangini - all fall on the hard**** side of the spectrum. All three improved their team's record by 6 wins or more.

The success stories of Smith, Dungy, Holmgren, and Andy Reid are far outweighed by the "player's coach" failures of recent years: Jim Mora, Jr., Pete Carroll, Steve Mariucci, Norv Turner, Mike Tice, Steve Spurrier, Romeo Crennel, and Art Shell come immediately to mind.

chrono8008 said 07/24, 01:29 PM
You make a good case for hard*ss coaches. But I've got to say players' coaches are better.

But, first, was Vermeil really a hard*ss? Didn't he cry all the time, or something? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, but I'm pretty sure that was Vermeil.

Players' coaches allow there to be a more calm atmosphere in the locker room. Their coaches aren't in their faces, screaming at the top of their lungs, and basically, making themselves look like fools. If you're a players' coach, players feel more comfortable around you and have a better relationship.

And furthermore, when you tell someone they need to play better, they know it means something. Hard*ss coaches always yell at their players, so after awhile, it's like the players aren't even listening. And those players lose respect for their coach, rather than gain it. But if you're a laid-back coach, the players know they've got to be better when you tell them.

I'm not saying a coach should sit around and wait for his team to play well. That's not what a players' coach is. They should be active in pushing their team, but they shouldn't be a "hard*ss" about it.They should not be in their players' faces every time they mess up.

Dan TM is Stupendous Man said 07/24, 03:25 PM
Certain types of players respond better to a player's coach, certainly. But the reverse is also true. Some players need a coach who will drive them and ride them and push them. In fact, this method has proven more likely to improve a player.

Look at Belichick's history of taking nobodies and making playmakers out of them. Same for Cowher. Then look at Dungy - he won the Super Bowl because he had a team full of players who were supposed to be great from the beginning. Manning, Wayne, Harrison, Tarik Glenn, Freeney, and Addai were all 1st-rounders. Look at Lovie - his handling of Rex Grossman was the ultimate example of being a player's coach, and Rex got worse and worse as the season progressed.

A good "hard*ss" doesn't "make himself look like a fool" when he's yelling. Did Bill Cowher ever look like a fool for yelling about a bonehead penalty? Tom Coughlin gives hard*ss coaches a bad name, but don't assume they're all like him. A good hard*ss coach is an emotional leader, showing his passion for winning. Part of that passion is yelling when things don't go right. Personally, I think Lovie's lack of reactions to Grossman's terrible INTs looked a little foolish.

chrono8008 said 07/24, 04:46 PM
Some "hard*ss" coaches do, indeed look like fools when yelling. I'm not talking about when they're arguing a blown call. I'm talking about when they scream at their players. After a while, the players don't even respond to that. They can't respect someone who's always blowing their top.

Actually, you're quite mistaken about Grossman. He didn't steadily decline the whole year; it was an up-and-down path. Sometimes he was great, sometimes he wasn't. He was showing a lot of potential when he was good,so a good coach would have kept him in there. Did they really have any other choice? If Grossman HAD been getting worse the whole year, Lovie would have done something. But that wasn't the case. Just look at the game-by-game logs, and you'll see he wasn't getting worse every game.

But, more importantly, that has nothing to do with being a "players' coach." Just because he's friendly with the players doesn't mean he's afraid to bench somebody.

If you want an example of being afraid to bench someone, look no further than "hard*ss" Bill Cowher. Even with Big Ben struggling, he wouldn't put in Batch. Ben finished with worse stats than Rex, in fact.

A players' coach is better.

Dan TM is Stupendous Man said 07/24, 05:09 PM
You can't compare Big Ben to Rex. Ben is a former Super Bowl winner who had achieved a 90+ QB rating his first two years in the league. He was coming back from a terrible injury, and that's why his season was bad. And his season did improve - in the last five weeks of the year, he had three games with a 97 or better QB rating, one with an 85.1, and his worst was a 47.2, against the best defense in the league, Baltimore.

Rex, on the other hand, had a game with a 1.3 rating, and then had one WORSE THAN THAT! In between came some decent performances, but they were against St. Louis, Tampa Bay, and Detroit - not exactly heavyweights. Ben's average QB rating from week 6 on was 92.75; Rex's was 63.24. Oh, and his total rating for the year was better than Grossman's, too, which makes you flat-out wrong.

Do you have any hard evidence to support your argument? You haven't really said anything concrete yet. And don't point at this year's Super Bowl, because I've already responded to that.

chrono8008 said 07/24, 06:20 PM
Whoa, whoa, WHOA!!!

I'm sorry if I offended you, but I have plenty of stats right here:

2006 - ROETHLISBERGER:

18 TDs, 23 INTs.

2006 - GROSSMAN:

23 TDs, 20 INTs.

I am clearly NOT completely wrong.

Here are some more stats for you:

SUPER BOWL:

ROETHLISBERGER:

9-21, 123 yards, 0-2 TD-INT.

GROSSMAN:

20-28, 165 yards, 1-2 TD-INT.

There.

Anyway, back to the topic.

And yes, I am going to point to last year's Super Bowl, because, no, you didn't completely respond to it. Tony Dungy was a players' coach. So was Lovie Smith. And who did they beat in their Conference Championships? Bill Belichick and Sean Payton, two of the NFL's hard*sses.

The hard*ss approach has failed several times. It's happened with Tom Coughlin, Nick Saban, and even Bill Parcells. All three of them had good teams to work with that never accomplished much.

A players' coach is better than a hard*ss.

Report Offensive Throwdown

Comments (21)

Most Recent Comment Add Comment RSS

Here's who I see as a hard*ss, and who's a player's coach:

HA: Cowher, Gruden, Parcells, Marinelli, Martz, Coughlin, Schottenheimer, Fox, Childress, Payton, Nolan, Mangini, Shanahan, Dennis Green

PC: Jauron, Dungy, Gibbs, Mora Jr., Carroll, Mariucci, Smith, Turner, Edwards, Tice, Reid, Holmgren, Crennel, Kubiak

Somewhere in the middle: Del Rio, Fisher, Marvin Lewis, McCarthy, Linehan

If you disagree with these labelings, we can argue it down here.

An SI.com and CNN Digital Network Site

Search

Already a member?

What is more effective in football? A coach who is a hard*ss or a "player's" coach? (FN FFL Tourney Loser's Bracket)

chrono8008 beat Dan TM is Stupendous Man 18 to 6

Add a comment