Coaching without talent.

#1

VOLSnTITANS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
353
Likes
40
#1
I'm make it short and simple. Clemson without the top player and qb? The Patriots without tom brady? Can't make it to the playoffs? But The Steelers with Ben back? The titans with Tannehill playing his best? Jim harbough without top recruits and players? But went to a Superbowl with a loaded nfl team? Saban in the nfl? No qb or players,couldn't get to the playoffs? Saban in college with the top players and recruits year in and year out? Dynasty. U need a top qb to succeed in football. Not every time. But almost every time,unless you have a top #1 defense,then you can have a game manager qb. But that only happens every so often.
 
#3
#3
I'm make it short and simple. Clemson without the top player and qb? The Patriots without tom brady? Can't make it to the playoffs? But The Steelers with Ben back? The titans with Tannehill playing his best? Jim harbough without top recruits and players? But went to a Superbowl with a loaded nfl team? Saban in the nfl? No qb or players,couldn't get to the playoffs? Saban in college with the top players and recruits year in and year out? Dynasty. U need a top qb to succeed in football. Not every time. But almost every time,unless you have a top #1 defense,then you can have a game manager qb. But that only happens every so often.
You think that was short and simple? I would call it rambling. I was waiting to see if you were ever going to actually make a point.
 
#4
#4
You don't have to have a great quarterback but you do have to have a good quarterback. sometimes I think the term game manager and bad quarterback are mistaken. Even a game manager has to be a good quarterback.
I agree with this. If you're going to win a championship with a poor to average quarterback (or a QB that the coaching staff feels they need to hide or protect from himself), then you need a generational defense like the 2000 Baltimore Ravens or 1985 Chicago Bears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HalfullVol
#5
#5
I agree with this. If you're going to win a championship with a poor to average quarterback (or a QB that the coaching staff feels they need to hide or protect from himself), then you need a generational defense like the 2000 Baltimore Ravens or 1985 Chicago Bears.
Or Alabama almost every time they won a National title.
 
#6
#6
Or Alabama almost every time they won a National title.
I don't even think Bama can get away with that style anymore though. Opposing offenses are better now, and Saban has adjusted his offensive style accordingly. Saban's defenses aren't nearly as good these days either. I think it's a combination of his defenses having a tough time with the wide open style of today's offenses and the fact that he has had a revolving door on his coaching staff.
 
#7
#7
Alabama has had a mediocre defense for 3 years. Ga has a top defense right now. How'd that matchup go? Today's offenses trump defenses
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
#8
#8
Alabama has had a mediocre defense for 3 years. Ga has a top defense right now. How'd that matchup go? Today's offenses trump defenses
Another big reason for this that I forgot to mention in my previous post is the targeting penalties. Defenses used to be able to head hunt. Taking that element away from defenses has had a major positive impact on offensive output (both yards and points).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raebo
#9
#9
I'm make it short and simple. Clemson without the top player and qb? The Patriots without tom brady? Can't make it to the playoffs? But The Steelers with Ben back? The titans with Tannehill playing his best? Jim harbough without top recruits and players? But went to a Superbowl with a loaded nfl team? Saban in the nfl? No qb or players,couldn't get to the playoffs? Saban in college with the top players and recruits year in and year out? Dynasty. U need a top qb to succeed in football. Not every time. But almost every time,unless you have a top #1 defense,then you can have a game manager qb. But that only happens every so often.
Theres no excuse for getting dominated by KY. Out coached
 
#10
#10
Losing to Kentucky kills this argument, they're 2-4 and not very good. I do agree you need a QB that can elevate your team, that we certainly don't have along with several other spots that are lacking.. This team has more holes than they have solutions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: knox73
#11
#11
Losing to Kentucky kills this argument, they're 2-4 and not very good. I do agree you need a QB that can elevate your team, that we certainly don't have along with several other spots that are lacking.. This team has more holes than they have solutions.
They are not very good, have terrible QB play, but they are a hell of lot more physical up front on both sides of the ball than we are...Plus, their secondary actually covers WRs...
 
Advertisement



Back
Top