Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="shantydaze, post: 2311319, member: 666"] I am not sure this is entirely true. NFL success seems to be based on either great quarterback play or a great defense. A coach is important as he needs to create a offensive and defensive philosophy around the players on the team and, in the case of a quarterback, an offensive philosophy that can be run long-term that accentuates the quarterback's strengths. This is one of the reasons many teams, other than the Patriots, struggle when a back-up quarterback plays. Yes, there is a talent discrepancy, but also the new quarterback may not have the same strengths as the starter. In the college game, I would argue whether it is more coaching oriented. Even schools like Alabama and Michigan, which get great recruiting classes year in and year out, had down periods because of poor coaches. Also, while there are some programs that win because of a constant influx of talent, those are few and far between. The programs that are successful long-term are those that are able to win due to a coaching philosophy that matches the strengths of the players the school can easily recruit. In an area with speed, but lack the big bodies that is needed for great offensive line play, go to a spread offense. In an area with big bodies, but not as much speed, run the ball and use a pro-style passing game. These are coaching decisions and those coaches that cannot adapt their philosophies to the natural recruiting advantage of their school are doomed to fail, while coaches that can do so may be successful and be a perennial bowl team. I would agree that those teams in the top 5 usually are those with either a pipeline for great talent (Alabama, OSU) or have a found/developed a rare great talent. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?