[OutsiderFan]

Living in CT, I get plenty of exposure to UConn.  Last week a local news station asked one of his players to describe what makes Auriemma so great and different than other coaches.  Her response:

Most coaches drill you on something until you get it right.  Geno drills us until we can't get it wrong.

This really was insightful.  It suggests how obsessed Auriemma is about execution.  Other coaches of course preach it, but it would seem there aren't that many that really obsess about it.  This also suggests the UConn playbook isn't very big.  You can't have infallible execution when there are so many things to execute. 

This is the philosophy that Chip Kelly, Gus Malzahn, and Art Briles, and Pete Carroll have had so much success following.  It's a keep it simple, let the players play, and make them perform as a result of countless repetitions of simple tasks, philosophy.  It flies in the face of the "we'll out-scheme them" approach Bill Walsh made so famous.  More success will be had with better execution of more complexity, but good coaches know you can't sacrifice execution just to have more complexity.  This was Jeff Tedford's downfall at Cal, IMO.  He had a complex scheme, but sacrificed execution to have it, and that led to his own execution.

[OutsiderFan]

Living in CT, I get plenty of exposure to UConn.  Last week a local news station asked one of his players to describe what makes Auriemma so great and different than other coaches.  Her response:

Most coaches drill you on something until you get it right.  Geno drills us until we can't get it wrong.

This really was insightful.  It suggests how obsessed Auriemma is about execution.  Other coaches of course preach it, but it would seem there aren't that many that really obsess about it.  This also suggests the UConn playbook isn't very big.  You can't have infallible execution when there are so many things to execute. 

This is the philosophy that Chip Kelly, Gus Malzahn, and Art Briles, and Pete Carroll have had so much success following.  It's a keep it simple, let the players play, and make them perform as a result of countless repetitions of simple tasks, philosophy.  It flies in the face of the "we'll out-scheme them" approach Bill Walsh made so famous.  More success will be had with better execution of more complexity, but good coaches know you can't sacrifice execution just to have more complexity.  This was Jeff Tedford's downfall at Cal, IMO.  He had a complex scheme, but sacrificed execution to have it, and that led to his own execution.