What is a good cfb coaches process?

Guys like Saban, Jimbo, Urban Myer, know how to build winning programs.

1. Find the most incompetent AD in the country.
2. Give him a binder prepared by your greasy used-car salesman pal.
3. Immediately accept whatever terms offered without negotiating. **THIS IS IMPORTANT**
4. Promise the fans whatever they want to hear.
5. ??? (Don't worry you can figure this part out as you go.)

Has anyone been able to make chicken salad out of chicken shite yet?

quote:

---

what are the major parts of a good process and what could coach O do to emulate coach Sabans process? A good process is the most important part of cfb coaching and many think Orgeron is process challenged if he even has one. He maybe just calls his process a plan. Also using the word 'process' often when talking to the press is very important for high level coaching and I have never once heard Coach O say the word.

---

HC should coach his coaches.

There's too much to do, you get more "coverage", i.e. more impact on more players, by A) communicating what you want strategically B) expectations on a individual level (that's what position coaches are for) and C) making sure A & B match across the board, with your coaches, to fit the overall plan.

In short, delegate, but with a whole lot of oversight of those delegated too.

If you have 9 other coaches basically coaching like you would, you are having 9X the impact. So instead of coaching 100 players, coach those 9 coaches.

Saban runs a team like a business. Each coach is a "department". You have goals and expectations from each department. It's his job to make each department pull in the same direction that he, the CEO, has decided to go in.

Yes, he does 1 on 1 coaching. All good CEO's do some "management by walking around". However, if he has to chew an individual players arse, his coach is going to get some. The assumption is that if a player has failed, his "department's" coach has ALSO failed.

quote:

---

what are the major parts of a good process and what could coach O do to emulate coach Sabans process?

---

Saban is a once in a generation coach. Most of us will never see someone replicate what he has done

Guys like Bowden, Paterno, Spurrier, etc are looked at as legends and they only have 1 or 2 titles.
Saban has 6

Recruiting is the lifeblood of CFB. Saban is damn good at it and Bama spends an enormous amount on resources. Both Bama and UGA spend the most money on recruiting and it's a huge factor on why both of them are on top of the world in cfb today. As a gameday coach Saban is actually mediocre, but whens the last time you felt that someone actually had better players than Alabama.

quote:

---

What is a good cfb coaches process?

---

I'm guessing this is stemming from our discussion earlier.

For my part, I would say that a process begins with an overarching philosophy. As a HC, what is your philosophy? When I think of the difference between someone that doesn't have a process and someone that does, I think of the difference between a pretty good chess player and the chess master. A pretty good chess player can make solid perfunctory moves that make the most sense in the moment, but a chess master makes his moves in service of a grand strategy.

A philosophy is important because it provides a blueprint as to what you need to do. Look at O's comments about his philosophy and what he ended up doing. First he said he's a pro style guy. Then when he got that job he says now you have to run the spread. Then he hires Matt Canada.

What is the common denominator between the three? Is there any consistency between what he said and what he ended up doing? If you're committed to the spread for instance, after you didn't get Kiffin, why didn't you get the next best guy that runs his philosophy? That guy not available? Get the next best guy that runs it. If you have to go down to choice #4 that runs Kiffin's strategy, the strategy that you said you wanted, isn't that a superior choice than the guy that's the best at what he runs but runs something that you don't even like? This is part of the reason why I call into question if he he even has a strong idea of what he wants to do.

You say "of course he does." Why do you assume he does? Why don't you question why he does what he does and simply assume that there's a method to it? From my observation, O is like the guy that makes the best move in the moment, without regard to how this fits in to what he wants.

Sure if you're able to get all of the best players, do that. But the Meyers, the Sabans had to have something to fall back on before they started loading up on the players. They had to rely on strategy before the players flocked to them in droves. Even Miles had a strategy, dated as it was.

what could be better than a binder? ....TWO BINDERS!!!!!