Coach Scotty 1st year Spring Practice
- Thread starter utep2step
- Start date
Of course you didnt.
Its just football a kids game. I didn't know football was played in a notebook. Have you ever heard of Gronk and the notes he took??
This dude is going to be something special. I stopped renewing my season tickets when Price left, but this dude has made me renew without coaching a single game yet.
Learning the playbook, film study against opponents and film study of spring practice. And if you want to internalize and digest what Coach Walden is saying, taking notes is a good idea. Learning in general can be aided by good note taking.
N
Note taking is for those future coaches not for players like Randy Moss, Gronk, and Aaron Jones. You just telling Randy Moss run a straight line, Gronk just get open, and just handing it off to Aaron Jones.
Yall can’t be that bored to be actually entertaining this shit…
This is how he tells everyone here he doesn't know shit about football, without actually saying he doesn't know shit about football.
How many times do have you seen Aaron Jones run into a brick wall where there is no way to go. He is running the the play ,that OC drew up and it didn't work and Aaron Jones goes the other way breaking tackles and then scores a TD.
You know how many players save coaches jobs. It's funny how you think coaching really matters?? It's all about talent, the teams with the best talent wins. It's really just that simple.
Do you just voice every thought that pops into your head?
Oh really? Then I guess 14, 15 or 16 seeds never win games in the tournament. It's very much about coaching.
I bet Fili’s the the type of person who scratches his ass in public and looks around to see if anyone’s watching because he wants to sniff his fingers.
That's basketball and plus that doesn't happen a lot. Do you think Utep would ever beat Alabama? Let's say Utep was coached by Tom Landry in his prime against a Alabama?
The Dominican national team is coached by coach Cal. Do you think they would beat a Team USA team coached by me??
To win you need the most talented players. Everyone knows that, why you think schools/pro teams, spend millions to get the top recruits. In soccer teams spend millions on kids not even old enough to play for them. How many times have we been in class, and the athlete next to us gets all the good grades, but they can't read? I've worked with this guy that used to play for the Raiders. Huge guy but he wasnt really smart. He had issues and spoke like a kid. We all know these athletes get passed through school without having to do any real school work. Maybe the only ones would be are athletes going to Harvard or Princeton.
I don't know, that's why they play the games. If the best talent always wins, why not just crown a champion off paper. Obviously good coaches have taken less talented teams and coached them up to defeat superior teams all through the history of sports. No one is dismissing talent, but your refusal to acknowledge the role coaches play is ignorant and a bad look for you. Please tell me you're trolling us and not really this dumb about sports.
Players win championships not coaches. Coaches give suggestions and somewhat help prepare. But at the end of the day it's the players responsibility to perform. Coaches call plays and call timeouts, thats all they do. It's the players responsibility to practice and work on it's talent. In the Olympics, who breaks the world records and win the Gold Medals? Does Usain Bolt have the world record, or is it his trainer/coach?
You can't compare team sports to individual sports when it comes to coaching- totally different situations. However, in team sports, coaching can, and actually does make a difference. Again, that's why they play the games. A team may have some talent, but good coaches bring out the best of said talent, and as a result, are able to defeat superior teams. So, players AND coaches win championships, and these coaches do much more than, "somewhat help prepare." Since you want to talk Olympics, the 1980 USA Hockey team is a perfect example of a group of players, vastly inferior to the Soviets, that because of coaching, were able to win the gold medal.
Wrong coaches don't win championships, it is the players. I mean come on . Can a coach teach Vince Carter how to dunk between the legs 360? I like how all these coaches get credit like Coach Cal, Coach K and Nick Saben. Their getting way too much credit. Phil Jackson, how much credit do you give him? It is the teams with the best talent that wins. Who gets the credit for Stephen Curry having the 3 point record? When I was at the game yesterday, I saw Curry working before the game 2hrs early. He was the only one there shooting. Steve Kerr wasn't out there with him. actually Josh Hart was also out there shooting early. Josh Hart himself yesterday played 48 minutes. Tom Thibo wasn't out there for 48 minutes. Deuce McBride scored 23 points and guarded Steph Curry all night . It's falls on the players to win the games. That's why you want to try and get the best. If Scotty Walden had the option to trade his roster for Alabama rosters. He would do it in a heartbeat.
This thread has definitely taken a detour from the original intent, but I decided "what the heck" and add my two cents since it's been a slow day for me.
I actually kind of side with Fili on this one, although maybe not quite so radically. In my opinion, and in a nutshell, I believe while coaching is important, talent is more important.
I also think that role and impact of a coach varies completely from the high school (and below) ranks, to college, and through the pros. Obviously, the first priority in the businesses of college and pro ball is to win, and the first step is to bring the most talent possible. That said, if the talent level is relatively similar, good coaching does factor in. So, really, both talent and coaching are a factor. I must say I have seen guys who I considered poor bench coaches, still win because they were able to bring in superior talent.
I actually kind of side with Fili on this one, although maybe not quite so radically. In my opinion, and in a nutshell, I believe while coaching is important, talent is more important.
I also think that role and impact of a coach varies completely from the high school (and below) ranks, to college, and through the pros. Obviously, the first priority in the businesses of college and pro ball is to win, and the first step is to bring the most talent possible. That said, if the talent level is relatively similar, good coaching does factor in. So, really, both talent and coaching are a factor. I must say I have seen guys who I considered poor bench coaches, still win because they were able to bring in superior talent.
Last edited:
I'm not denying talent is more important, but he's saying coaching is not important at all, and that is categorically not true. There are too many examples of teams with mediocre talent and great coaching, defeating teams with superior players. I acknowledge it takes both to win, he doesn't.
I’m going to use the UTEP upset over Kansas or Georgetown as my example. Coaching is very important. Will coaching win every time…no. But with the better coach, you always have a chance to upset the more athletic team. Yes, the Don Haskin teams of the 80’s and early 90’s had the high talent for a mid major but they never had the same talent as the P5s even then. But with Don Haskins coaching, they always had a chance. Don’t disrespect the importance of the coach. That’s why the Fab five didn’t win the Natty.
It’s a mix of coaching and talent. Take Pep Guardiola. Masterful tactician, but overthinks like hell (see UCL final vs Chelsea).
Pep Guardiola on Marcelo Bielsa: "Give him my Barcelona and you will see how he will win titles." "Give me Leeds, I would still be in the Championship. I wouldn't have achieved promotion."
I don’t see Coach Walden over thinking, but like what one poster said here, he’ll give his best since he wants to go far in his career. I have faith he’ll give us a bowl win
Pep Guardiola on Marcelo Bielsa: "Give him my Barcelona and you will see how he will win titles." "Give me Leeds, I would still be in the Championship. I wouldn't have achieved promotion."
I don’t see Coach Walden over thinking, but like what one poster said here, he’ll give his best since he wants to go far in his career. I have faith he’ll give us a bowl win
Last edited:
Since you're citing Steve Kerr as an example. In his first year with the Warriors (2014-2015), he took 9 of Mark Jackson's (2013-2014) guys, including Curry, Thompson, Green, Barnes, Bogut, Lee, Ezeli, Speights, and Iguodala, and went from 51 to 67 wins in one season! Don't tell me coaching didn't play a huge part in that. Hell, even the Warrior players said so themselves.
So you think a person with talent, but not the right form, is going to beat another person with equal talent, but had better coaching?
Case in point: Don Haskins. He brought out the very best of the players he had who were often overlooked by other programs. Yes, coaching matters when the talent level is not exactly the best.
To me a coach is like and advisor . A coach will advise a player what to do, and it's that players choice if he is going to do what the coaches says . Example: Phil Jackson will advice Jordan what to do. I don't know who drew up the play? for Jordan to pass it to Kerr, or when Jordan crossed up Byron Russell to take the winning shot.
But at the end of the day it is the players responsibility to win and to practice. That's what makes a player great. How many times have we heard of Kobe Bryant going to the gym at night practicing his craft, while the other players went to go party . A coach can only do do so much . Walden is not going to put a player out there that has no talent. It's that players responsibility to get better , if that player doesn't get better he will stay on the bench, or keep writing notes on a notepad.
Coaching matters but a coach needs a player with talent. The players with most talent are very hard to get. That is where a coach is needed, that is where Scotty Walden comes in. Dimel and Kugler didn't get the players with talent and look what happened?? They had recruiting classes ranked in the bottom. Scotty Walden, in his first season got the number one recruiting class. It's so much more fun calling plays with a player that has talent. It's so much much more easier for a coach to call plays, when you have players like Aaron Jones and Patrick Mahomes.
I am with Fili in this one. Talent almost wins.
It’s the reason teams recruit, it’s the reason professional teams draft. Coaching is important when talent is mostly even, upsets happens because of the human element.
Haskins was a legend but when he didn’t have talent, he lost.
You can always make the arguments with outliers, but those are the Disney Movies.
If you take an El Paso HS and give them the Duncanville Football Roster and their 40 D1 kids and give the Duncanville Staff an El Paso HS Roster, Duncanville still destroys the El Paso team.
It’s the reason teams recruit, it’s the reason professional teams draft. Coaching is important when talent is mostly even, upsets happens because of the human element.
Haskins was a legend but when he didn’t have talent, he lost.
You can always make the arguments with outliers, but those are the Disney Movies.
If you take an El Paso HS and give them the Duncanville Football Roster and their 40 D1 kids and give the Duncanville Staff an El Paso HS Roster, Duncanville still destroys the El Paso team.
It's both for sure: Bad Coaching, lack of motivation and terrible execution with talent will lose to teams as talented and more talented and sometimes less talented. Good coaching with less, but decent talent will beat teams with less talent, equal talent and sometimes more talent. Yes of course if its overwhelming talent it'll beat less talent, everyone knows that. The comparisons being made are apples and oranges. UTEP and most mid majors don't have the talent to beat the Bog Boys no matter who's coaching. There are occasional exceptions of course, but more than not the overwhelming talent prevails. Now..... Anyone actually want to talk about the Spring Practices?
Coaches teach the game and also decide who plays and when. As we know this can have a big effect on winning and losing.
If talent is roughly equal, the better coach will win most of the time.
If talent is marginally worse, a better coach will win occasionally.
if talent is way worse, a better coach probably won't make a noticeable difference
If talent is way better, a worse coach probably won't make a noticeable difference.
Within CUSA, there generally isn't a huge difference in talent, so coaching can make a difference of a few games per year. I have no doubt that Dimel personally cost us 2-4 games every year.
At the same time, Nick Saban probably wouldn't have won a lot of games with what Kug left behind.
So yeah, both matter. But within a conference, a better coach may win you two more football games with the same talent, and that does make a difference.
If talent is marginally worse, a better coach will win occasionally.
if talent is way worse, a better coach probably won't make a noticeable difference
If talent is way better, a worse coach probably won't make a noticeable difference.
Within CUSA, there generally isn't a huge difference in talent, so coaching can make a difference of a few games per year. I have no doubt that Dimel personally cost us 2-4 games every year.
At the same time, Nick Saban probably wouldn't have won a lot of games with what Kug left behind.
So yeah, both matter. But within a conference, a better coach may win you two more football games with the same talent, and that does make a difference.
Similar threads
