Ohio Vol
Inquisitor of Offense
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,057
- Likes
- 128
Every time I see a coaching-related thread, someone's naming Jon Gruden as being a good candidate to take over at UT. Frankly, I can't see why.
Here are my issues, and this goes for any time you're talking about coaching.
1) A coach's demeanor doesn't really go far in how successful his team is. When Steve Spurrier took over in Washington, he promised early hours and daily golf on his part. The Redskins didn't win anything, but they finished ahead of a few of the "typical NFL coaches".
See also Tony Dungy, roundly criticized for a number of years for being "too mellow". He turned Tampa from Orangesicle-clad weiners into Super Bowl contenders.
2) What separates good coaches from bad coaches is how willing they are to adjust. A good coach will look at his personnel and say "You know, I love my system and all, but I don't think I have the guys to run it well. I'll make some adjustments at the base level to further enhance our positives and conceal our negatives."
A bad coach says "Personnel be damned, this is MY system and it's being run this way! I don't care that my quarterback has the mobility of a decomposing corpse, we're running the single wing!"
3) Creativity is a must-have in the coaching ranks. I hate to say it, but Urban Meyer is the best offensive mind since Bill Walsh. He has made myriad changes every season. This goes back to point #2. His 2002 Bowling Green playbook looks nothing like 2004 Utah, which looks nothing like 2005 OR 2006 Florida. The general principles are the same, but even the basic formations are dramatically different. Even blocking schemes for plays that carry over are different.
On the defensive side of the ball, GT's coordinator (whose name escapes me) is a defensive genius.
And Charlie Weis is not. Notre Dame losing to Navy in a few weeks will show that.
4) What makes Jon Gruden special? Here's what I can come up with
-- He's younger than normal
-- He's practically insane
-- He won a Super Bowl with Tampa in his first year, thanks to a healthy dose of Tony Dungy's fundamentally-sound coaching and a lot of fortuitous occurrances
-- He looks like Chucky
-- Since winning a Super Bowl, Gruden's Bucs are 27-37. They have made the playoffs once since, losing to an average Redskins team
All in all, it sounds like someone who's had success early and will be able to coast on that for a long time. Don Shula did it with Miami (two Super Bowl wins in his first three years overshadows the fact that he was generally mediocre over the ensuing 23 years), and apparently Gruden is trying the same thing. You'd think for all the complaining about Fulmer on that very same topic, it would eliminate Gruden from even being mentioned.
I don't think for a second that Gruden is a "genius", or that he's "fundamentally focused". I think he's a typical humorless, high-strung NFL coach who needs to make a point out of how little he sleeps to show everyone how dedicated he is. I don't buy for a second that he would be remotely successful at the college level, let alone in the SEC.
Here are my issues, and this goes for any time you're talking about coaching.
1) A coach's demeanor doesn't really go far in how successful his team is. When Steve Spurrier took over in Washington, he promised early hours and daily golf on his part. The Redskins didn't win anything, but they finished ahead of a few of the "typical NFL coaches".
See also Tony Dungy, roundly criticized for a number of years for being "too mellow". He turned Tampa from Orangesicle-clad weiners into Super Bowl contenders.
2) What separates good coaches from bad coaches is how willing they are to adjust. A good coach will look at his personnel and say "You know, I love my system and all, but I don't think I have the guys to run it well. I'll make some adjustments at the base level to further enhance our positives and conceal our negatives."
A bad coach says "Personnel be damned, this is MY system and it's being run this way! I don't care that my quarterback has the mobility of a decomposing corpse, we're running the single wing!"
3) Creativity is a must-have in the coaching ranks. I hate to say it, but Urban Meyer is the best offensive mind since Bill Walsh. He has made myriad changes every season. This goes back to point #2. His 2002 Bowling Green playbook looks nothing like 2004 Utah, which looks nothing like 2005 OR 2006 Florida. The general principles are the same, but even the basic formations are dramatically different. Even blocking schemes for plays that carry over are different.
On the defensive side of the ball, GT's coordinator (whose name escapes me) is a defensive genius.
And Charlie Weis is not. Notre Dame losing to Navy in a few weeks will show that.
4) What makes Jon Gruden special? Here's what I can come up with
-- He's younger than normal
-- He's practically insane
-- He won a Super Bowl with Tampa in his first year, thanks to a healthy dose of Tony Dungy's fundamentally-sound coaching and a lot of fortuitous occurrances
-- He looks like Chucky
-- Since winning a Super Bowl, Gruden's Bucs are 27-37. They have made the playoffs once since, losing to an average Redskins team
All in all, it sounds like someone who's had success early and will be able to coast on that for a long time. Don Shula did it with Miami (two Super Bowl wins in his first three years overshadows the fact that he was generally mediocre over the ensuing 23 years), and apparently Gruden is trying the same thing. You'd think for all the complaining about Fulmer on that very same topic, it would eliminate Gruden from even being mentioned.
I don't think for a second that Gruden is a "genius", or that he's "fundamentally focused". I think he's a typical humorless, high-strung NFL coach who needs to make a point out of how little he sleeps to show everyone how dedicated he is. I don't buy for a second that he would be remotely successful at the college level, let alone in the SEC.
