pyledriver80 said:
As a matter of fact, coaches are completely unimportant outside of the play-calling and overall scheme they apply. Coaches get the blame when things go wrong which is unfair at times. It's like 4th and 26. It was the right Defense to be in but the guys just didn't make the play they were supposed to.
I feel strongly about this. We can draw up the plays, teach the plays, etc BUT it comes down to the players to execute them. Motivation has to be individual. The right personel, the right scheme and TALENT will trump "motivation" every time.
with all respect, i couldnt disagree with you more. sounds like a cop-out for average coaching.
good players motivate themselves, sure, but teams personify their leader and when a team has an intense leader who finds creative ways to get more out of their players (call that motivation if you will), you see it on the field. look at pittsburgh or hell, even vince lombardi. im convinced that vince wasnt the greatest play caller of his day -- im sure he was good -- but he had a way to get as close to 100% out of his players.
the sales staff that works for me generally does well. they're paid on 100% commission so for someone to insinuate that they dont need motivation because putting money in their pocket and paying rent should be enough for an adult to perform is just not true. i do a lot of little things all the time, one on one conversations, getting in people's heads, promoting other people's situations, whatever... i can almost ALWAYS see a direct correlation to performance based on a motivational "tactic" i might choose to employ.
sometimes there's an intangible that is not measurable, something that goes way beyond just talent. that's not to say that a poor team will beat a very talented team because they get good motivation from their coach but consistant performance at a high level has a lot to do with coaching and leadership.
as a coach, if you havent read 21 irrefutable laws of leadership then you're selling yourself and your team a bit short.
mike sherman is a perfect example. great organization, im sure on paper the team was prepared as hell, but he had no intensity and his team reflected that. you can point to a .667 winning percentage and ill point to a team that should have one at LEAST one more super bowl during that era.
again, no offense with any of this.