(07-09-2022, 08:19 PM)msqueri Wrote: I think USD, Stanford, 49ers, and Michigan is far more evidence/variety of levels when it comes to succeeding at all levels than USC and Seahawks, not to mention the point about Carroll failing in the NFL before succeeding later in his career. Carroll has succeeded at two levels, Harbaugh three, and far greater variety of situations.You are correct, although I think it points out that the metrics are difficult to define. The situations were all materially different. What works in one situation does not work in another. In many cases (IMHO at least) coaching success is often a matter of the stars aligning. One might ask, for example, what would have happened at Stanford if Toby were not already on the roster? You have to be a good coach to take advantage of the situation, but some situations are much "easier" than others. JH certainly benefited from relatively low expectations when he arrived at three of these levels. The teams were not good and were not expected to be good. Michigan was different, there were very high expectations. Carroll was under pressure at U$C from day 1, especially because he was the third choice. Apples and pears.
(07-09-2022, 08:19 PM)msqueri Wrote: I think USD, Stanford, 49ers, and Michigan is far more evidence/variety of levels when it comes to succeeding at all levels than USC and Seahawks, not to mention the point about Carroll failing in the NFL before succeeding later in his career. Carroll has succeeded at two levels, Harbaugh three, and far greater variety of situations.You are correct, although I think it points out that the metrics are difficult to define. The situations were all materially different. What works in one situation does not work in another. In many cases (IMHO at least) coaching success is often a matter of the stars aligning. One might ask, for example, what would have happened at Stanford if Toby were not already on the roster? You have to be a good coach to take advantage of the situation, but some situations are much "easier" than others. JH certainly benefited from relatively low expectations when he arrived at three of these levels. The teams were not good and were not expected to be good. Michigan was different, there were very high expectations. Carroll was under pressure at U$C from day 1, especially because he was the third choice. Apples and pears.
(07-09-2022, 05:32 PM)Goose Wrote:(07-09-2022, 05:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:It is interesting to note that Carroll was not always able to deliver wins. He was fired twice as an NFL head coach and had a record of 33-31 in the NFL when he went to U$C. At U$C he was very successful initially and then tailed off a bit. His record there was 97-19. The performance at U$C is IMHO unquestionably a great coaching record. Subsequently his tenure at Seattle has been very good but not superb. He has a .619 winning percentage and has not repeated his Super Bowl win in 2013. Applying the "Just win baby." criteria is perhaps more complex that it appears. Just for comparison, JH's winning percentage at Michigan is .717. Lloyd Carr's is .753.(07-09-2022, 11:31 AM)msqueri Wrote: Just an absolutely incredible coach. Now that Urban Meyer has failed in the NFL, I am not sure there is a coach in the sport who has succeeded at all levels like Harbaugh has. Phenomenal coach.
I agree fundamentally with your post; Harbaugh is a phenomenal coach and a master turnaround artist. In the end, results are what matters, and Harbaugh has them in spades.
That being said, Pete Carroll probably takes issue with the quoted passage, given that, at every level, he has achieved what has eluded Harbaugh: a national championship (two, actually) in college, and a Super Bowl championship (ironically, beating Harbaugh’s Niners along the way).
BC
(07-09-2022, 05:32 PM)Goose Wrote:(07-09-2022, 05:07 PM)BostonCard Wrote:It is interesting to note that Carroll was not always able to deliver wins. He was fired twice as an NFL head coach and had a record of 33-31 in the NFL when he went to U$C. At U$C he was very successful initially and then tailed off a bit. His record there was 97-19. The performance at U$C is IMHO unquestionably a great coaching record. Subsequently his tenure at Seattle has been very good but not superb. He has a .619 winning percentage and has not repeated his Super Bowl win in 2013. Applying the "Just win baby." criteria is perhaps more complex that it appears. Just for comparison, JH's winning percentage at Michigan is .717. Lloyd Carr's is .753.(07-09-2022, 11:31 AM)msqueri Wrote: Just an absolutely incredible coach. Now that Urban Meyer has failed in the NFL, I am not sure there is a coach in the sport who has succeeded at all levels like Harbaugh has. Phenomenal coach.
I agree fundamentally with your post; Harbaugh is a phenomenal coach and a master turnaround artist. In the end, results are what matters, and Harbaugh has them in spades.
That being said, Pete Carroll probably takes issue with the quoted passage, given that, at every level, he has achieved what has eluded Harbaugh: a national championship (two, actually) in college, and a Super Bowl championship (ironically, beating Harbaugh’s Niners along the way).
BC
(07-09-2022, 09:32 PM)PAsportsfan Wrote: Carroll??? the guy who cheats at USC and gave away a Super Bowl by taking the ball out of Lynch’s hands and throws an int from the one yardline!!!
What kind of idiot takes the ball away from their best player!!!!
(07-09-2022, 09:32 PM)PAsportsfan Wrote: Carroll??? the guy who cheats at USC and gave away a Super Bowl by taking the ball out of Lynch’s hands and throws an int from the one yardline!!!
What kind of idiot takes the ball away from their best player!!!!
Quote:This is not even close to correct. The correct number was 6 (4 of whom were true frosh), due to FIVE OL getting injured for the season. Of course, 11 still isn't enough to begin with.
Quote:This is not even close to correct. The correct number was 6 (4 of whom were true frosh), due to FIVE OL getting injured for the season. Of course, 11 still isn't enough to begin with.
(07-09-2022, 10:10 PM)Mick Wrote: Wasn't Carroll's winning percentage at USC around 86%? Much better than McKay and Robinson? I think only Howard Jones had a better winning percentage than Carroll at USC.The record I cited says 84%. There is, IMHO no way one can deny that at U$C Carroll was a great coach. As far as "Pete the Cheat" accusations, I suspect Carroll followed a strict "Don't ask, don't tell, don't know" policy. I think many coaches do that. They themselves don't cheat, but they tolerate (and perhaps intentionally hire) those that do. How much that affected the W-L column at U$C is, at least IMHO, doubtful. Great football coach, lousy human being.
(07-09-2022, 10:10 PM)Mick Wrote: Wasn't Carroll's winning percentage at USC around 86%? Much better than McKay and Robinson? I think only Howard Jones had a better winning percentage than Carroll at USC.The record I cited says 84%. There is, IMHO no way one can deny that at U$C Carroll was a great coach. As far as "Pete the Cheat" accusations, I suspect Carroll followed a strict "Don't ask, don't tell, don't know" policy. I think many coaches do that. They themselves don't cheat, but they tolerate (and perhaps intentionally hire) those that do. How much that affected the W-L column at U$C is, at least IMHO, doubtful. Great football coach, lousy human being.
(07-09-2022, 03:15 PM)Mick Wrote:(07-09-2022, 02:35 PM)akiddoc Wrote:(07-09-2022, 12:02 PM)ajpaly Wrote: Harbaugh was a tireless recruiter and would go as far as spending the night at recruits' homes. He was also an innovator. Instead of waiting to check grades and transcripts near a recruits final season, he identified talented and intelligent kids earlier in the process and encouraged them to take AP classes to enhance their chances of getting accepted by their senior year.
Shaw doesn't appear to put the hard work in recruiting like Harbaugh. You could find Shaw at a basketball game the night before National Signing Day looking relaxed. I doubt Harbaugh did the same. He'd be on the phone all night convincing fence-sitters to come to Stanford.
Forgot to add that Shaw's recruiting classes often went unfilled with many spots remaining open. If memory serves, one of the recruiting classes had only 14 signed football players. That's unacceptable. I remember one year when our lone O-line recruit was a gentleman named Oser...and he medically retired soon thereafter. Not long ago, due to injuries and lack of bodies, we were down to one scholarship athlete on the O-line and that was a true freshman. Shaw's low recruiting numbers came back to bite us.
Looking at grades and AP courses early wasn't Harbaugh's idea. Those of us on the Bootleg at the time had been clamoring for this for quite some time, and it was suggested to Harbaugh as soon as he arrived.
Does Shaw do this? Is he a lazy recruiter?
(07-09-2022, 11:31 AM)msqueri Wrote: I think he's an incredible coach. Fundamentally, I like to judge people by results. Here are his results:
* University of San Diego: took a team that had never even won a conference championship and in his second and third years went undefeated in conference and 11-1 overall each year. No coach since him has ever had as good a season.
* Stanford: took a team that hadn't made a bowl for six years and was coming off a 1-11 season and immediately turned it around to successively more winning seasons every year, culminating in the first top five season the program had had in 70 years. In the following decade the program got back to the top five once.
* 49ers: took a team that hadn't been to a conference championship in 14 years and got them to the conference championship three straight years. In the seven years without him the team has made the conference championship twice.
* Michigan: took a team that had been top 20 once in the previous seven seasons and has now had them top 20 five times in the last seven seasons.
Just an absolutely incredible coach. Now that Urban Meyer has failed in the NFL, I am not sure there is a coach in the sport who has succeeded at all levels like Harbaugh has. Phenomenal coach.
Maybe his supporting cast is a big part of the success, but doesn't he get the credit for that? Head coach is the CEO. The goal for the product is wins. He orchestrates - ALWAYS - wins unlike what the teams he leads have any right to expect based on what came before him. He's as good as it gets as a coach. But in the college game at least 50 percent of coaching is recruiting. He has a ceiling on what he can accomplish compared to, frankly, better/more likeable people like Nick Saban and Ryan Day.
Anyway, I really don't think you should diminish supporting cast. Harbaugh has hired over a dozen coaches who went on to become head coaches at the college or NFL level. Aside from Shaw they haven't achieved great success, but the fact he has an eye for leadership others also come to trust in says a lot. And if you don't buy that, my estimation of Harbaugh's coaching really comes down to the scoreboard. His track record at USD, Stanford, San Francisco, and Michigan is beyond stellar.
I have two friends who are phenomenal salespeople. They instantly generate revenue. One joined a firm and generated their fifth largest client that year. They fired her and their next year's revenue increase was halved, and then halved again the second year after she left. They lost out on, conservatively, $20 mms. in revenue those two years. Another joined a firm and led them to their best revenue increase across two decades. They let him go.
Both had personality issues. Both made people stretch -- uncomfortably -- for success. Some people are like that. Many people can't take people with those personality styles.
(07-09-2022, 03:15 PM)Mick Wrote:(07-09-2022, 02:35 PM)akiddoc Wrote:(07-09-2022, 12:02 PM)ajpaly Wrote: Harbaugh was a tireless recruiter and would go as far as spending the night at recruits' homes. He was also an innovator. Instead of waiting to check grades and transcripts near a recruits final season, he identified talented and intelligent kids earlier in the process and encouraged them to take AP classes to enhance their chances of getting accepted by their senior year.
Shaw doesn't appear to put the hard work in recruiting like Harbaugh. You could find Shaw at a basketball game the night before National Signing Day looking relaxed. I doubt Harbaugh did the same. He'd be on the phone all night convincing fence-sitters to come to Stanford.
Forgot to add that Shaw's recruiting classes often went unfilled with many spots remaining open. If memory serves, one of the recruiting classes had only 14 signed football players. That's unacceptable. I remember one year when our lone O-line recruit was a gentleman named Oser...and he medically retired soon thereafter. Not long ago, due to injuries and lack of bodies, we were down to one scholarship athlete on the O-line and that was a true freshman. Shaw's low recruiting numbers came back to bite us.
Looking at grades and AP courses early wasn't Harbaugh's idea. Those of us on the Bootleg at the time had been clamoring for this for quite some time, and it was suggested to Harbaugh as soon as he arrived.
Does Shaw do this? Is he a lazy recruiter?
(07-09-2022, 11:31 AM)msqueri Wrote: I think he's an incredible coach. Fundamentally, I like to judge people by results. Here are his results:
* University of San Diego: took a team that had never even won a conference championship and in his second and third years went undefeated in conference and 11-1 overall each year. No coach since him has ever had as good a season.
* Stanford: took a team that hadn't made a bowl for six years and was coming off a 1-11 season and immediately turned it around to successively more winning seasons every year, culminating in the first top five season the program had had in 70 years. In the following decade the program got back to the top five once.
* 49ers: took a team that hadn't been to a conference championship in 14 years and got them to the conference championship three straight years. In the seven years without him the team has made the conference championship twice.
* Michigan: took a team that had been top 20 once in the previous seven seasons and has now had them top 20 five times in the last seven seasons.
Just an absolutely incredible coach. Now that Urban Meyer has failed in the NFL, I am not sure there is a coach in the sport who has succeeded at all levels like Harbaugh has. Phenomenal coach.
Maybe his supporting cast is a big part of the success, but doesn't he get the credit for that? Head coach is the CEO. The goal for the product is wins. He orchestrates - ALWAYS - wins unlike what the teams he leads have any right to expect based on what came before him. He's as good as it gets as a coach. But in the college game at least 50 percent of coaching is recruiting. He has a ceiling on what he can accomplish compared to, frankly, better/more likeable people like Nick Saban and Ryan Day.
Anyway, I really don't think you should diminish supporting cast. Harbaugh has hired over a dozen coaches who went on to become head coaches at the college or NFL level. Aside from Shaw they haven't achieved great success, but the fact he has an eye for leadership others also come to trust in says a lot. And if you don't buy that, my estimation of Harbaugh's coaching really comes down to the scoreboard. His track record at USD, Stanford, San Francisco, and Michigan is beyond stellar.
I have two friends who are phenomenal salespeople. They instantly generate revenue. One joined a firm and generated their fifth largest client that year. They fired her and their next year's revenue increase was halved, and then halved again the second year after she left. They lost out on, conservatively, $20 mms. in revenue those two years. Another joined a firm and led them to their best revenue increase across two decades. They let him go.
Both had personality issues. Both made people stretch -- uncomfortably -- for success. Some people are like that. Many people can't take people with those personality styles.
(07-10-2022, 03:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(07-10-2022, 02:12 PM)gailtate Wrote: More recently was his oblivious disregard for what was happening with regard to early commits.
What exactly was "happening with regard to early commits?"
(07-10-2022, 03:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(07-10-2022, 02:12 PM)gailtate Wrote: More recently was his oblivious disregard for what was happening with regard to early commits.
What exactly was "happening with regard to early commits?"
(07-10-2022, 04:04 PM)gailtate Wrote:(07-10-2022, 03:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(07-10-2022, 02:12 PM)gailtate Wrote: More recently was his oblivious disregard for what was happening with regard to early commits.
What exactly was "happening with regard to early commits?"
He ignored the talent scooped up by recruiters who capitalized on the "early" recruit dates -- ahead of the LOI deadline. Unwise.
(07-10-2022, 04:04 PM)gailtate Wrote:(07-10-2022, 03:44 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(07-10-2022, 02:12 PM)gailtate Wrote: More recently was his oblivious disregard for what was happening with regard to early commits.
What exactly was "happening with regard to early commits?"
He ignored the talent scooped up by recruiters who capitalized on the "early" recruit dates -- ahead of the LOI deadline. Unwise.
