Jump to content

Nice guy coaches versus mean ones


Recommended Posts

Has there ever been a study as to whether hard as* coaches are more successful than nice guy coaches in the NFL? I mean going back over the last couple Jauron, Gailey, and Rex were all either nice guys and or players coaches. It didn't work out too well. Marrone was a hardas*, say what you want him but he was able to get too 9-7 that one year. Then again Marv really wasn't a hardas*.

 

Not sure where McDermott lies. Yeah just kind of wondered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there ever been a study as to whether hard as* coaches are more successful than nice guy coaches in the NFL? I mean going back over the last couple Jauron, Gailey, and Rex were all either nice guys and or players coaches. It didn't work out too well. Marrone was a hardas*, say what you want him but he was able to get too 9-7 that one year. Then again Marv really wasn't a hardas*.

 

Not sure where McDermott lies. Yeah just kind of wondered.

....if we revert to the teachings of Management 101...."respect is earned and not commanded".......Coughlin tried to be da Fuhrer and finally learned his way (I think).....Marrone professed "culture change" to Brandon during interview process and in his daily calls of job interest, which got him hired....only problem was Doug alienated EVERYBODY with his General Patton like dictatorial style.......somewhere in between is "fair but firm" which I think McCoach will employ from what I've seen so far....in spite of diva personalities and the white gloves CBA.................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall that Jauron teams lacked effort. Defensively, 'bend not break' was tough to watch, but did keep us in many games. Biggest problem was his total ineptitude when it came to understanding how to run an NFL offense.

 

I don't think you need to be a 'hard case', but you do need to be ruthless. I'm hopeful that McDermott understands this, but also that players need to know where they stand. No point saying that you aren't going to tolerate slackness, if you aren't prepared to do something about it.

 

In that respect, Belichick doesn't mess about. It's very much 'shape up, or be shipped out', one way or another. However, you don't ofen hear any bleating about it from those guys who have been shipped out - probably because they knew where they stood. But he also knows when to take his foot off the pedal, and will do stuff like take the players out to the movies, as an example.

 

If there are guys who aren't going to put the work in, then an example or tow might have to be made, but so long as what is expected has been publicly laid down, then there should be no complaints or recriminations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Players stop giving full effort for "players coach," bring in the disciplinarian. Players in mutiny in response to firm disciplinarian, bring in the nice guy. So it is and always has been, and that applies to a great extent in all walks of life where effort and commitment are key. In other words, I don't think one is better than the other; one is better in any given situation, and in the Bills situation it was necessary to do a 180 from Rex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think coaches with really good qbs do better than coaches with bad qbs.

And of course be willing to bend rules and cheat and when get caught deny, redirect and then use the "false claims" to motivate your players and director of cheating to work harder.

And the most important part - bring in coaches which know what you do not know and listen to them while being able to differentiate between bull rhetoric and solid ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...."an organization takes on the characteristics of its leader"....Dopey Dickie Jauron and "Club Med"....Marrone and pseudo "General Patton"....Train Wrecks and "Barnum & Bailey".....McCoach?....so far seems resolute, organized and no nonsense firm but fair.....stay tuned.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rochesterfan has done IMO a very thorough research on NFL HC success so perhaps he will see this thread and be gracious enough to chime in.

 

Myself personally,

 

Having proven coaches/systems under you that fit your vision of what a winning football team should look like,

 

is off to a good start.


I think coaches with really good qbs do better than coaches with bad qbs.

and this ^^^

Edited by Figster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think its obvious that a coach with a good QB can overcome , make -up for any character flaws regarding him or as it relates to the team. but look at billick with dilfer, or levy with kelly vs hostedler and parcells. . no exact science here..IMHO, you dont want greggo or rex, you want competancy.. i guess there is no right answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think its obvious that a coach with a good QB can overcome , make -up for any character flaws regarding him or as it relates to the team. but look at billick with dilfer, or levy with kelly vs hostedler and parcells. . no exact science here..IMHO, you dont want greggo or rex, you want competancy.. i guess there is no right answer.

Not unless we can clone BB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you equating mean to demanding?

 

A coach can be a nice guy or a mean guy. He can be demanding to be the best or assume best will happen naturally.

 

The best combo is a nice guy who demand the most from the players. You can be demanding without being mean spirited or degrading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rochesterfan has done IMO a very thorough research on NFL HC success so perhaps he will see this thread and be gracious enough to chime in.

 

Myself personally,

 

Having proven coaches/systems under you that fit your vision of what a winning football team should look like,

 

is off to a good start.

and this ^^^

....good idea 'Fig......he is probably one of the most astute and knowledgeable posters who was on our "BBMB refugee boat"... :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...