You can debate if talent or coaching matters more--although the fact that it's a team sport strongly suggests coaching, players need to work together well--but you can't debate that coaching really matters and that some exceptional coaches can go very far with talent that isn't exceptional. Brian Kelly coming in to the Big East and mopping the floor with everyone with a program nobody could ever claim got elite talent is a perfect example.
I think the saying about "it's not the X's and the O's, it's the Jimmy's and the Joes" has to do with scheme. And of course scheme is important. But even more important is player development -- physically, mentally, and emotionally (for instance, just as you say, the ability to work with teammates).
I'd say scheme is at least as important as player development, but both go back to coaching. How many coaches, like talent agents, recruit people with natural talent only to do the wrong things with them and ruin their potential?
With respect, I'm not sure your reasoning is entirely valid. Yes, the talent gap is a big problem. But when it's eliminated, as we all hope it will be, then the quality of coaching will be important in determining how well we do. In other words, good recuitment, although absolutely essential, will not by itself make us successful.
Actually, the talent gap makes coaching even more important. The only way to be competitive when your talent is weaker is coaching.
He's the Man of Shifting Goalposts. The only thing that doesn't change is that Schiano cannot be blamed for anything, the Infallibility Principle.
That remains to be seen. You are literally the only person watching college football that thinks talent is the only thing that matters. That's your story and you're sticking with it. I suspect you never played sports or lifted weights. Hence, the lack of awareness of how important good coaching is.
I agree with your point. I never played sports (at least not at a level that anyone could conceivably think was good) or lifted weights aside from a few dumbbells. But I taught for a living, and so I know that good teaching (which is a lot of what coaching is) is essential no matter how talented a student (player) is.
Just an FYI: recruits aren't picking USC for a field house. Tons of Rose Bowl trophies are a better draw. Also, offense that doesn't make you want to die.
www.latimes.com
How did anyone ever get recruits without a field house??Lincoln Riley believes a new facility is key to being successful. Greg Schiano believes the same. Better send them a memo.
Eighteen months later, in a statement announcing the new performance center, the coach called the facility “an absolute game-changer.”
“Even before I took this job, I outlined things that I thought were gonna be really, really key to this place being successful,” Riley said in January.
It was no secret that new facilities were high on that list. Just 18 months into his tenure, plans are already set for a performance center that Riley calls “an absolute game-changer”.
Lincoln Riley believes a new facility is key to being successful. Greg Schiano believes the same. Better send them a memo.
Eighteen months later, in a statement announcing the new performance center, the coach called the facility “an absolute game-changer.”
“Even before I took this job, I outlined things that I thought were gonna be really, really key to this place being successful,” Riley said in January.
It was no secret that new facilities were high on that list. Just 18 months into his tenure, plans are already set for a performance center that Riley calls “an absolute game-changer”.
Lincoln Riley calls USC plans for facility upgrades 'an absolute game changer'
USC President Carol Folt revealed plans for a new football performance center in addition to a new stadium for women's soccer and lacrosse.
For RU keeping up with the Joneses with facility upgrades now is easier than matching the NIL money recruits make at the Jones' house.
It's easier to raise money for something like a fieldhouse than for NIL. Alums are used to providing money for facilities -- NIL is new and still strange. The idea of college athletes being compensated in any way beside a scholarship is anathema to some. You are a regular reader of this board and so you've seen lots of examples of these attitudes toward NIL.
People are entitled to donate to what they are most comfortable donating to. You can try to persuade them to donate to the collective for NIL, or to donate to Rutgers to hire someone other than Schiano, but it's ultimately their decision. I can understand why alums might be uncomfortable supporting NIL more than I can understand "Schiano or bust." Certainly it would be foolish for Rutgers to say, "gee, we won't take your fieldhouse donations because we think it's more important that you donate to the collective for NIL."
www.cbssports.com
