Execution - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Execution (/thread-23581.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Execution (/thread-23581.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Execution - Goose - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 12:20 PM)BostonCard Wrote: It’s also worth noting that perhaps the biggest indictment against the staff is that there continue to be breakdowns in execution. execution issues do not absolve the staff, given that the players were recruited and developed by the staff.Hear Hear! Play calling can't fix guys who can't play, either because they themselves are not able or their coaching hasn't been effective. In any case, it is the staff's responsibility to deliver the goods.
BC
RE: Execution - Row80Critic - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 11:58 AM)M T Wrote: Any plan can be ruined by poor execution. Just as you say that you can't blame everything on execution, you can't say that plans are intrinsically flawed just because you seem to want to never blame execution.
Swapping the coaching staff between Alabama and Paly wouldn't change the result of a game between the two. The Paly players can't execute the same as the Alabama players.
On the first point, that is unquestionably true. Execution is an important part of winning a football game, without doubt. My point is simply that execution alone does not explain all poor results. Bad plans and bad decisions, perfectly executed, can still lose. And to your point, great plans, poorly executed, can also lose. To assume the latter and ignore the former is just a bit too convenient for coaches in my opinion, especially when the ignored part is the elephant in the room.
On the second point, your example is true, but only proves that there are limits to how much coaches can do. Switch the coaching staff between Stanford and Michigan and I suspect it would prove (or already has proved) that coaching -- while not limitless -- can significantly affect a team's performance. It's probably too obvious to even make that point, even if coaches like to pretend otherwise when they fixate on execution.
RE: Execution - yvonne - 10-20-2022
I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
RE: Execution - Red80 - 10-20-2022
It didn't take long for me to realize, starting back when I was playing Pop Warner football, that play-calling gets better when you have better players or the right players for a particular offense.
Stanford's offense is limited and punchless because its talent is limited. They don't have the horses to run, nor does their perimeter people scare anyone. No matter what type of system a team decides to use, offensively or defensively, it is TALENT that determines success more than anything else.
Stanford's talent has dropped off woefully in the past few years. I could clearly see the decline by the spring of '19.
Additionally, Stanford looks A LOT like all their opponents when it comes to offensive formations and the type of plays they run. They're trendy.
When Stanford was winning P12 Titles and 10 games a year, they did not look like ANYONE on the schedule. They've been trying to screw the circle into the square peg for the last four seasons.
RE: Execution - cardcrimson - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 03:19 PM)yvonne Wrote: I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
Et tu, Brute?
RE: Execution - BostonCard - 10-21-2022
(10-20-2022, 03:19 PM)yvonne Wrote: I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
Quote: That seems a bit extreme for an underperforming coach.
BC
Great minds think alike, no?
BC
RE: Execution - gailtate - 10-21-2022
(10-20-2022, 03:19 PM)yvonne Wrote: I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
In the immortal words of John McEnroe, "YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!"
RE: Execution - Phogge - 10-21-2022
If Shaw's kids aren't set for life I'd be surprised.
RE: Execution - yvonne - 10-21-2022
(10-21-2022, 11:15 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(10-20-2022, 03:19 PM)yvonne Wrote: I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
Quote: That seems a bit extreme for an underperforming coach.
BC
Great minds think alike, no?
BC
Probably more like "sick minds," but OK, I'll take "great."
RE: Execution - BostonCard - 10-21-2022
The typical retort is “so do feeble minds”
BC
RE: Execution - PAsportsfan - 10-21-2022
(10-20-2022, 03:19 PM)yvonne Wrote: I think you guys are taking this get rid of the coach thing way too far. I mean, the guy's got kids! Think of them.
What's the count up to now? $35--$45 million??? Couple more years/buyout, +$10 million.
I know the Bay Area is expensive...kids, grandkids, great grandkids should be ok...
RE: Execution - yvonne - 10-21-2022
I guess some people don't appreciate gallows humor.
https://youtu.be/OjYoNL4g5Vg
RE: Execution - Phogge - 10-22-2022
Crimson... we are in another club. "Small Minds." I'm OK with that. State and Jesuit educated. Bingo.
RE: Execution - cardcrimson - 10-22-2022
(10-22-2022, 08:21 AM)Phogge Wrote: Crimson... we are in another club. "Small Minds." I'm OK with that. State and Jesuit educated. Bingo.Indeed. That said, parchment has nothing to do with it. . . .