new coach
- Thread starter jrhitman
- Start date
I don't know if this is appropriate and your assumptions seem skewed. There are plenty of good Coach's out there. They make squat so, for all of them, it's love of the game.
There are only 2 Coach's I know that can make a Champion from nothing and do it with lesser players. That's Bill Belichick and Bill Parcells. Despite other historic Coach's out there, I think even a Vince Lombardi would be far removed from his element today.
The point is, if you have the players, there are lots of Coach's in VA that can make it to that Championship game. Frankly, I can't recall any team making it to that game without next level players on board. Those kids don't come along often. Having a lot of them increases your chances significantly. Gretna had their run of luck with great athletes playing in a low Division. Now they have the same talent level of other schools, they wonder why they're not winning Championships each year. Then they blame the Coach. Then they slide back further and back stab the Coach's that led them to Championships years ago and snicker when they're not as successful elsewhere.
I think it goes more to the point that Gretna's run is done. They won with the Coach's they had in place because of the players they had, not because of the Coach. Plenty of other Coach's from VA could have been there and won with the players Gretna had at the time. Look at Barry Switzer. Think the Cowboys won the Super Bowl because of the Coach, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
The Vic Hall days are over. Be grateful if you had a chance to see a player on your team that's once or twice in a lifetime and move on.
There are only 2 Coach's I know that can make a Champion from nothing and do it with lesser players. That's Bill Belichick and Bill Parcells. Despite other historic Coach's out there, I think even a Vince Lombardi would be far removed from his element today.
The point is, if you have the players, there are lots of Coach's in VA that can make it to that Championship game. Frankly, I can't recall any team making it to that game without next level players on board. Those kids don't come along often. Having a lot of them increases your chances significantly. Gretna had their run of luck with great athletes playing in a low Division. Now they have the same talent level of other schools, they wonder why they're not winning Championships each year. Then they blame the Coach. Then they slide back further and back stab the Coach's that led them to Championships years ago and snicker when they're not as successful elsewhere.
I think it goes more to the point that Gretna's run is done. They won with the Coach's they had in place because of the players they had, not because of the Coach. Plenty of other Coach's from VA could have been there and won with the players Gretna had at the time. Look at Barry Switzer. Think the Cowboys won the Super Bowl because of the Coach, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
The Vic Hall days are over. Be grateful if you had a chance to see a player on your team that's once or twice in a lifetime and move on.
don't agree with everything you are saying. you say you need as a hs coach first class players to win a championship well right here in my back yard and used to be your back yard ken brown won state championships with very few major college players and few division 2 players. tim coleman won state championships with the same caliber players with neither coach having a pro player. if you have a coach that teaches team concept and recognizes hs talent and most of all put those players in the right position like these two are the best I have ever seen it can be done! also you can be a coach with all the talent in the world and you don't teach team ball and put them in the wrong positions you will not be a success in the hs level. so you are right that you need good talent but you don't always need d1 talent on the hs school level.
i'm sure there are other posters around the state that know of coaches like brown and coleman but they are two of them that come to mind.
i'm sure there are other posters around the state that know of coaches like brown and coleman but they are two of them that come to mind.
There are good Coach's that make solid programs year in and year out. They can make a difference in getting to the playoffs by stressing fundamentals, discipline to avoid mistakes and proper motivation.
The Coach's you speak of were long ago. Lombardi's Packers aren't going to beat many, if any, of today's NFL teams. But you have to hand it to Coleman for what he's accomplished at FCS. 5 years ago, they didn't even have a football program. Now they're a State Champion for small privates. But honestly, that FCS team would have trouble against any of the local teams in the Burg. There's not many they could beat. And you'd be hard pressed to find a team in the last decade that has won a State Championship without some significant next level talent so I'd like to keep the discussion within this century.
Regardless, I do respect your opinion on this and won't quibble. The point of my little rant was how one poster hated on his current Coach and on those Coach's in the past that helped his team win State Championships but were not as successful when they moved on. I didn't like it. You can win games with a good Coach. You can even win some you should not. But in this day and age, if you don't have the goods, you're taking that long bus ride home.
The Coach's you speak of were long ago. Lombardi's Packers aren't going to beat many, if any, of today's NFL teams. But you have to hand it to Coleman for what he's accomplished at FCS. 5 years ago, they didn't even have a football program. Now they're a State Champion for small privates. But honestly, that FCS team would have trouble against any of the local teams in the Burg. There's not many they could beat. And you'd be hard pressed to find a team in the last decade that has won a State Championship without some significant next level talent so I'd like to keep the discussion within this century.
Regardless, I do respect your opinion on this and won't quibble. The point of my little rant was how one poster hated on his current Coach and on those Coach's in the past that helped his team win State Championships but were not as successful when they moved on. I didn't like it. You can win games with a good Coach. You can even win some you should not. But in this day and age, if you don't have the goods, you're taking that long bus ride home.
Damn Shaunty, that was one of the most congenial reply's to something you disagree with, that I think I've ever seen you post. Old age is mellowing you.
And, by the way, I agree with much of what you said, as well as what Skynard's thoughts are. I think it is obvious that even the best coaches can't consistantly be champions without getting lucky and have some special talent move through his program once and awhile.
Nor, can a talent laden program consistently come out on top with mediocre coaching. We have all seen a lot of disappointing outcomes with teams that had talent to spare and just couldn't get the job done.
It takes the convergence of the two. The first one mostly luck of the draw. The second the school can have a lot to say about.
The key here is "consistently". Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then.
And, by the way, I agree with much of what you said, as well as what Skynard's thoughts are. I think it is obvious that even the best coaches can't consistantly be champions without getting lucky and have some special talent move through his program once and awhile.
Nor, can a talent laden program consistently come out on top with mediocre coaching. We have all seen a lot of disappointing outcomes with teams that had talent to spare and just couldn't get the job done.
It takes the convergence of the two. The first one mostly luck of the draw. The second the school can have a lot to say about.
The key here is "consistently". Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then.
Skynard and I go back awhile and don't think it started friendly. Anything but.
Over the years, I've personally seen what his intentions are and the good he does for the Community. He is a very good man whose interest is the good of the local youth.
I've adjusted to read between the lines of his posts and get his actual point. Knowing who he is and what he does in the Community makes it easier because I can discern his intentions. But his writing is horrible. He can't concede even when proven wrong and I can understand why folks get as frequently upset with him as I used to. His relationship with local TV Sport's man Mike Neville has mellowed him significantly and his responses are far more PC than they used to be.
Bottom line is, he's a good man. I'm not going to bash the crap out of him like I used to if I can help it.
Actually, I think 25% or more of the Coach's in the State can win a Championship if they get the right talent. That's just IMO and I have no facts to support it. Merely an assumption based on knowing how dedicated many of these guys are. I agree though, consistency is the sign of a good program. You're going to see a Salem and a Powhatan in the mix every year. Just an example.
I only want my hogs to find truffles. They get a higher price per ounce than gold ($600+) . I'll leave the acorns to the squirrels.
Over the years, I've personally seen what his intentions are and the good he does for the Community. He is a very good man whose interest is the good of the local youth.
I've adjusted to read between the lines of his posts and get his actual point. Knowing who he is and what he does in the Community makes it easier because I can discern his intentions. But his writing is horrible. He can't concede even when proven wrong and I can understand why folks get as frequently upset with him as I used to. His relationship with local TV Sport's man Mike Neville has mellowed him significantly and his responses are far more PC than they used to be.
Bottom line is, he's a good man. I'm not going to bash the crap out of him like I used to if I can help it.
Actually, I think 25% or more of the Coach's in the State can win a Championship if they get the right talent. That's just IMO and I have no facts to support it. Merely an assumption based on knowing how dedicated many of these guys are. I agree though, consistency is the sign of a good program. You're going to see a Salem and a Powhatan in the mix every year. Just an example.
I only want my hogs to find truffles. They get a higher price per ounce than gold ($600+) . I'll leave the acorns to the squirrels.
are you saying Tim coleman and Ken Brown couldn't win in todays game. I beg to differ that point. they were great coaches and know the game of football in any era. they knew talent and put them in the position to give courtland and spotsy a chance to win without many studs. sorry to differ with you shaunty but a good coach is a good coach in any era!
Then we'll disagree David. I think Coleman would get Spotsy to the playoffs. Most teams make it now anyway. Still way better than where the Knight's are now. Championship? Not gonna' get there without the goods. I don't care who's Coaching them.
I absolutely agree a good Coach is a good Coach. You'll get a consistent product on the field every year. You also seem to forget there was no Riverbend, Massaponax or Chancellor to thin the herd in the days of those Coach's. In Spotsy, you went to Post Oak or Courtland. That was it.
I absolutely agree a good Coach is a good Coach. You'll get a consistent product on the field every year. You also seem to forget there was no Riverbend, Massaponax or Chancellor to thin the herd in the days of those Coach's. In Spotsy, you went to Post Oak or Courtland. That was it.
Completely different mind sets regarding offense and defense. The athletes are also at a whole different level. If you were able to take one of today's teams and send them back in time to play the Packers, a 2015 team would almost certainly crush them. Compared to the 2015 team, the Packers would be small, weak, slow and completely unable to deal with variations in offenses and defenses. At that time, very few players and organizations even utilized weight training and off-season conditioning. Off season, for them, was beer lifting. For these aspects alone, IMO, a number of College teams would crush them also.
Like trying to teach my senile 93 old father to use a computer. Just never gonna' happen despite every best effort. It's a world he will never understand.
Like trying to teach my senile 93 old father to use a computer. Just never gonna' happen despite every best effort. It's a world he will never understand.
its where you put your people. how many times you see a team that has a team full of look alike d1 prospects and they play a team with no where near the athletes the other team has and the lesser team wins. give you a example: a couple years ago one of the freedom teams triple a came to play Jm. that team had at least 10 or 12 players that looked like d1 prospects. everyone at maury said what a good looking team it was. well jm beat them so bad Serbay started subbing early in the third quarter. now it was evident it was bad coaching because the coaches had players in the wrong positions. yes the jackets had some good players but no d1 players and very few college players on any level. another example was until a few years ago Charlottesville had a terrible football program but had some of the best looking athletes you could ever see. JM played them and beat them to death.
now i'm glad you pointed out ponax. coach Luden lost everything last year but as you know we did them 2 times on tv and if you looked at their team they had really few d1 looking players but coach Luden put them in the correct positions and their record speaks for itself. Gus Little was the only one and the teams in the commonwealth most looked better than the ponax players but who won!
my point is yes you can't win states if you have players that can't chew chewing gum and walk at the same time but even if you have better athletes if you don't recognize how to utilize their talent and put them in the right positions you are not going to win. the serbays browns and colemans are the best at that.
now i'm glad you pointed out ponax. coach Luden lost everything last year but as you know we did them 2 times on tv and if you looked at their team they had really few d1 looking players but coach Luden put them in the correct positions and their record speaks for itself. Gus Little was the only one and the teams in the commonwealth most looked better than the ponax players but who won!
my point is yes you can't win states if you have players that can't chew chewing gum and walk at the same time but even if you have better athletes if you don't recognize how to utilize their talent and put them in the right positions you are not going to win. the serbays browns and colemans are the best at that.
The Freedom team you mentioned is 15 - 87 since they opened in 2005. Since that time they've had 2 "0" win seasons and four 1 - 9 seasons. They've never won more than 4 games in a season. But you thought they had a slew of DI players. Seriously? They were just in the wrong positions? Seriously? Some of the best athletes I could ever see? I don't mind being proven wrong David but you don't need to exaggerate ludicrously to make your point. That fact is they didn't win a game the 1st year JM played them. They only won 1 game the next year they played the Jackets. And they were Division 5, not 6. These are facts. They sucked. Blaming the Coach for not being able to put his next level players in the right position to win is a cop out to support your own opinion. You know you can't win that game with me and I'll call you out on it every time.
I do agree with the job Ludden did this year. Who would think you could replace so many DI players. The JR QB Benden came from nowhere and may have been even better than the QB Trice from the year before, rushing for 1555 yards and 31 TD's.. And damn, that triple option, no huddle offense is tough to stop. They also reloaded with beasts at the line of scrimmage and LB Gus Little was a stud with a dozen offers. Despite replacing 23 Seniors, Ponax absolutely reloaded and that is a tribute to Ludden, who's been Coaching for 31 years. My point is, he posted another undefeated regular season in a tough CommonWealth District but did not lack for talent.
Now, if you want to say the Serbay's, Brown's and Coleman's do incredible things with what they have available, I agree. There are few Coach's that can make something from nothing. These can. Still have to make that long bus ride home when you get deep into the playoffs and you don't have the goods. Smoke and mirrors can only get you so far when you meet another good Coach with a disciplined team and exceptional talent.
I do agree with the job Ludden did this year. Who would think you could replace so many DI players. The JR QB Benden came from nowhere and may have been even better than the QB Trice from the year before, rushing for 1555 yards and 31 TD's.. And damn, that triple option, no huddle offense is tough to stop. They also reloaded with beasts at the line of scrimmage and LB Gus Little was a stud with a dozen offers. Despite replacing 23 Seniors, Ponax absolutely reloaded and that is a tribute to Ludden, who's been Coaching for 31 years. My point is, he posted another undefeated regular season in a tough CommonWealth District but did not lack for talent.
Now, if you want to say the Serbay's, Brown's and Coleman's do incredible things with what they have available, I agree. There are few Coach's that can make something from nothing. These can. Still have to make that long bus ride home when you get deep into the playoffs and you don't have the goods. Smoke and mirrors can only get you so far when you meet another good Coach with a disciplined team and exceptional talent.
Freedom D1? Skynard ?
I think we can mostly agree that quality coaching wins consistently , quality coaching +talent= championships. Shauntclair 7 Freebird 0.
Alright, this argument was one of my pet gripes. If you brought the 1962 Packers here just as they were they would get crushed. They had 240 pound linemen. If they had the chance to us modern training techniques and nutrition they'd be good.
This works both ways. If you're going to send a team back in time, are you going to make these modern guys get a job in the offseason and undiscover creatine?
Point taken and a good one. GB could bulk up. Nutrition and training would be better. Jerry Kramer and Forest Gregg could grow into serviceable OLinemen but they'd still be smallish. Ray Nietche could be a beast LB. He was 6'4" and 240, even in 66'. Paul Horning would still a good size FB. And they would be no question, the heart would be there for all.
Still don't think the athleticism would be there for the Packers. You don't train and nutrition speed. That's something you're born with. That, to me, is the biggest difference in today's Football at every level and why, IMO, the Packers would still get crushed.
Nice point though. Thanks for posting. Certainly detracts from my opinion.
Still don't think the athleticism would be there for the Packers. You don't train and nutrition speed. That's something you're born with. That, to me, is the biggest difference in today's Football at every level and why, IMO, the Packers would still get crushed.
Nice point though. Thanks for posting. Certainly detracts from my opinion.
freedom did have a lot of guys with D1 size and with good athletic ability. I even made the remark to some the JM coaches after the game and they also said they was some good looking athletes and looked better than their record! the coaches had some of the players out of position as I tried to tell shaunty. he thinks the only way a team can win is they have talented players but I have seen teams win because they out coach the other team by having less talented players playing in their best positions that suits the team making the team function as a team rather than individuals. that's what happened when Tim Coleman in our last championship beat a great Amherst team that destroyed every team they played and was # 1 in the state but came to post oak and the lesser knights took the title and the lancers never scored. spotsy 26 Amherst 0. not always does the team with the better talent win as in this case.
you mean i'm only down 7 to 0 to shaunty? that's good I got him right where I want him. LOL.
you mean i'm only down 7 to 0 to shaunty? that's good I got him right where I want him. LOL.
Looks like you are conceding in two of the three categories! you are not posting someone that hasn't been around the block! I knew that freedom has had a bad team as they never won a game that year! but i have seen many more games than you my friend and that team had at least 10 or so D1 size athletes. now they might not even went to college but they had that size and athletic ability. i said they had the size and ability weather that happened to them i don't know. by the way i saw them and you didn't so how can you grade them or have a opinion of their size and ability? look up the record of the charlottesville teams. they were full of good looking D1 prospects but like i say with poor coaching not recognizing the best spot for them to play best for the team they won very few games for years! my point is you can have the best looking studs in the state but if you don't have a good enough coach to see the best spot for them and the team you get beat.
now you might think you can get the best of me than you are wrong! you have a opinion and that's fine as i do too. no one is wrong but my point is valid that a lot of time some teams have talent but their coaching is not up to par for the talent they have. YOU DON'T NEED A TEAM WITH TREMENDOUS TALENT TO WIN THE STATE! i just gave you a example when the much more talented Amherst team that killed everybody they played that year but the much smaller less talented boys from post oak took it to them and sent them back to Amherst with their tails between their legs! how about little old Culpeper that had no chance going down to Hampton and whipping a D1 powerhouse Hampton loaded with D1 prospects! no D1 prospects on Culpeper but they played as a team with much lesser talent. seen a lot old friend and i'm hard to fool when it comes to my favorite sports hs athletics.
now you are up 7 to 0 and for the record i ain't keeping score so i'm not arguing with you any more. if it makes you feel better YOU WIN!
now you might think you can get the best of me than you are wrong! you have a opinion and that's fine as i do too. no one is wrong but my point is valid that a lot of time some teams have talent but their coaching is not up to par for the talent they have. YOU DON'T NEED A TEAM WITH TREMENDOUS TALENT TO WIN THE STATE! i just gave you a example when the much more talented Amherst team that killed everybody they played that year but the much smaller less talented boys from post oak took it to them and sent them back to Amherst with their tails between their legs! how about little old Culpeper that had no chance going down to Hampton and whipping a D1 powerhouse Hampton loaded with D1 prospects! no D1 prospects on Culpeper but they played as a team with much lesser talent. seen a lot old friend and i'm hard to fool when it comes to my favorite sports hs athletics.
now you are up 7 to 0 and for the record i ain't keeping score so i'm not arguing with you any more. if it makes you feel better YOU WIN!
Again, a discussion with teams in this century would be appreciated.
All due respect, you are not a good evaluator of athletic talent and never have been. You could claim watching a million games. That has nothing to do with making your judgement good. In today's HS football, you do need a team with superior athletic talent to win State. IMO. Doesn't mean you have to have the best but you need a flock of really Superior players just to get to the final. Find an example to support your contention within this Century and I'll concede the point, even though it may only represent 1 or 2% of the overall results.
All due respect, you are not a good evaluator of athletic talent and never have been. You could claim watching a million games. That has nothing to do with making your judgement good. In today's HS football, you do need a team with superior athletic talent to win State. IMO. Doesn't mean you have to have the best but you need a flock of really Superior players just to get to the final. Find an example to support your contention within this Century and I'll concede the point, even though it may only represent 1 or 2% of the overall results.
oh ok I can't evaluate talent huh! glad you think so! some people can't see the trees for the woods! you said at first that you had to have exceptional talent to win the state and I just named teams that didn't have that type talent that beat hot shot talented teams for championships! I guess they were better talented than I thought being i'm a poor judge of players! if you think I think that teams with awful talent can win the championships I feel sorry for you! i'm saying that you can win them with good players without D1 talented players. you are not giving credit to a great coach like Tim Coleman that beat a awesome Amherst team loaded with great talent for the state title! also he beat a very talented salem team. he had no D 1 players with a qb that couldn't throw the ball in the ocean and one good burly running back that played in a small college! think if he didn't know where to play his less talented players they could do that? how many times have you see awesome talented teams never get to the playoffs because of poor coaching? now maybe you are a poor judge of good coaches! oh I keep forgetting you now live in the SHOW ME STATE! I guess sometime you can still be shown and you don't believe!
tell you what Einstein. before I judge talent any more I will get your opinion on the players before I post anything! you win 7 to 0 so don't worry be happy!
tell you what Einstein. before I judge talent any more I will get your opinion on the players before I post anything! you win 7 to 0 so don't worry be happy!
I made a mistake in saying you couldn't judge talent. You do know a talented player when you see one. I referred to next level talent, where they should go at that level and whether they should go at all. I should have been more specific. My bad and just IMO so take it for what it's worth.
Again, I simply asked for teams in this Century. My contention is the game has changed. Yours is that a good Coach with some decent HS talent can go all the way. Simply give an example of a team in this Century that supports your theory. That gives you 84 Championship games to choose from and you only need 1.
This does not deny a good Coach can make a difference. The year to year consistency of certain programs supports that. I simply contend a good Coach can no longer take you to the promised land without that next level talent to back them up. And I never said, they had to be DI's. Don't misread.
Again, I simply asked for teams in this Century. My contention is the game has changed. Yours is that a good Coach with some decent HS talent can go all the way. Simply give an example of a team in this Century that supports your theory. That gives you 84 Championship games to choose from and you only need 1.
This does not deny a good Coach can make a difference. The year to year consistency of certain programs supports that. I simply contend a good Coach can no longer take you to the promised land without that next level talent to back them up. And I never said, they had to be DI's. Don't misread.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
ND-Indiana game proving football fans are the same everywhere- Latest: CountryClubJoesSecretAlias
-
-
-
-