re: Which is most important--good coaching or talented football players?

quote:

---

But it's such a fine line between bust and Heisman-caliber performance. Talent can fall both ways.

---

everything is a marginal difference. But there is not only great coaching or terrible coaching with no in between.

quote:

---

Bad coaching can take talent and make it mediocre or worse piss-poor...great coaching can bring you to that next level where you're winning awards and going on to the next level

---

Bad coaching might lose you games and good coaching can get more out of talent and win more games, and that in turn leads to awards, but talent gets you to the next level, regardless. As long as the player himself is working hard, scouts for the next level can see it.


Plenty of guys have turned out great seasons in the pros for shitty teams. Plenty of guys from crappy teams have gone on to the next level, be it college to pro or HS to college.

quote:

---

Who knows how good Ron Powlus could have been...but he chose Notre Dame which was still mid-transition from the option offense with Lou Holtz.

---

That's more a scheme fit. But did they run exclusively option with Mirer? I don;t recall, but he was after Rice, who they did run only option. Mirer was pretty good and was the #2 pick either way, so I'm thinking either Powlus was over rated or he didn't do the work he needed to.

quote:

---

...talent does NOT rise to the top but itself

---

Talent shines thru bad coaching more than good coaching wins with no talent. You can't look at it in zero sum terms like you are doing. Saban would not have won 3 MC in 9 years if he stayed at MSU. His first year at Alabama they went 7-6, was that because he had a bad year coaching or because he didn't have the talent yet?