Can a non "guru" coach succeed?
It appears that successful coaches are so-called gurus in one aspect of the team. Some are offensive gurus such as Urban, while some are defensive gurus such Saban. Is there any successful program where the coach is not really good in one aspect of the football? By the way, this seems to be more of a case in college football than in NFL where there are many so-called CEO coaches (e.g., Harbaugh brothers).
In case of UM it seems that both Bo and Carr where the CEO types while RR was the guru. Hoke is obviously the former.
November 11th, 2013 at 10:27 AM ^
Absolutely. It's the same way a non-guru ceo or president can as well. To go even further, it actually is the same way anyone who's a shining example of the Peter Principle can find success in a position that's over their heads: You just need to know how to put the right people around you, delegate your tasks appropriately and roll heads when the job's not getting done. When said person fails to recognize his subordinates who his own success depends on are failing or when he doesn't have the balls to cut ties with that person, that's when the person's own inadequacies start to shine through and leads to their eventual downfall.
November 11th, 2013 at 10:56 AM ^
I've thought about the PP quite a bit in relation to Michigan football lately.
Not a pleasant thought.
November 11th, 2013 at 11:44 AM ^
You're absolutely right. I love Hoke as a guy and how much he knows and respects Wolverine tradition, but if he and his current situation doesn't scream Peter Principle, I don't know who does...
November 11th, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^
Hoke will find out if hitching his wagon to a horse named "Al" was the right long-term career move.
As has been stated since his hiring, Hoke sees Michigan as his "destination job". What will it take before he realizes that his long-term prospects of coaching Michigan are hitched to his coordinators and that quite possibly one of those coordinators may prove to be his undoing?
November 11th, 2013 at 10:37 AM ^
if you think Bo is the same type of coach as Hoke, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF_Gh__hPC4
Watch how involved Bo is with the offense. It will make you shed tears.
November 11th, 2013 at 10:55 AM ^
then I started the clip of Bo leading practice. Once Bo started yelling at his players, my dog got up and left the office.
November 11th, 2013 at 6:01 PM ^
In fairness, Hoke is pretty involved with the defense. He does a lot of the DL coaching himself.
November 11th, 2013 at 10:37 AM ^
November 11th, 2013 at 11:10 AM ^
but we have absolutely no idea whether he is willing to let "his" coaches go, ala Beilein, let alone be willing to change any direction whatsoever. He might---I hope so.
November 11th, 2013 at 11:11 AM ^
The best coaches actually adapt and change to their personnel. Mack Brown's offense transformed for Vince Young and Colt McCoy. In hoops, Beilein completely changed his offensive style for his most talented team ever and has virtually scrapped his old trademark 1-3-1.
Elite coaches don't run power because that's what they want to run. They stick to what they do best.
November 11th, 2013 at 11:26 AM ^
I haven't been following U-M as closely as I have EMU for the past couple years, but I will take English as an example. He is a defensive guru that couldn't take it to the next level as Head Coach. Many people here will say that he was dealt a shitty hand of cards at EMU. To some extent I may agree with them, but having watched his players at EMU, I don't think they are that bad but they were being shoehorned into a system that matched their talents. We had Alex Gillett, who would have been great in a spread type system...but instead he gets shoehorned into the pro-offense. Like you said, I think the better coaches adapt their system to the players they have and not the other way around.
November 11th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
This is the first time I've ever heard of RE being called a "guru."
November 11th, 2013 at 11:49 AM ^
Allegedly he was a defensive guru.
November 11th, 2013 at 11:55 AM ^
Couple of points:
1. From what I understand, our football program costs much less to run than does OSU's. Maybe there is a reason why they have been more succesful in recent years.
2. If a head coach is either an offensive or defensive specialist, in order to do one, you must know the other. Mattison, to plan his defensive schemes, must understand what an offense will first do.
While Hoke knows something about O and D, it is doubtful his skill set comes close to what a former OC or DC knows. This is not a good thing, obviously.
November 11th, 2013 at 6:06 PM ^
I'm not sure that's fair. As a guy who's been a head coach for 11 seasons now, he's been supervising the work of his DCs for a long time - and is likely closely involved in crafting the defensive gameplan anyway.
November 11th, 2013 at 9:21 PM ^