Critiquing coaches

[PapaBear]

We pay our money, we're entitled to our opinions.

But I'm curious ... Given the enormous amount of preparation that goes into a game plan, who among us feels truly qualified to critique the playcalling (or any other decisions) of a Division I head coach?

[Fordham]

there are times when it's obvious and this is when i feel qualified.

[colgate13]

semi-qualified - and only of my own team.

I think we all have our biases of what plays we like in what situations and maybe there is some merit there, but without having practiced with the team all week and watched the game film, it's all just conjecture.

[DemiGS]

We pay our money, we're entitled to our opinions.

But I'm curious ... Given the enormous amount of preparation that goes into a game plan, who among us feels truly qualified to critique the playcalling (or any other decisions) of a Division I head coach?

I've been a vocal critic of Mike Sewak's performance at GSU, and I even believe it's time for the program to move beyond the Sewak era; but I hope I've never implied that *I* could coach the team better. But I have watched the games over the years and notice a marked decline in the teams play. We could be entirely objective and deal with numbers. There have been two dark periods in GSU football history, and both began (and in the first case) ended almost as soon as the Head coach arrived, or left.

[Jacks99]

I think it's ok to give general comments or question moves. But the fact is that we won't ever have all the information on a given situation that they have. Especially with a game that is fast moving like football.

There will be a few "obvious" situations or mis calls. For example, failing to get time-outs called in time at the end of the game.

They should however be judged on the overall success, such as multiple losing seasons. Always dropping the big/close games.

So mainly I'm in favor of language like "I wonder why.." or "surprised they didn't.." instead of "they should have" etc.

[ngineer]

In the course of a game, Lehigh will run 70-80 plays. There are always going to be a few that one will wonder why. I can only think that a number of plays are called based upon expected tendencies of the opponent, as well as some being called to 'set up' the defense for, hopefully, a big play.
At the same time, I've always been of the school that if something is working, keep at it until the defense shows it can stop you. The one call that really grates me is when a team drives inside the ten, mostly on the ground, and then all of a sudden starts throwing the ball.
But I do know the coaches spend a tremendous amount of time planning their game calling strategies. The most successful,and the ones I've admired the most, are the ones that can make the adjustments at halftime and during the game based on what the opponent is doing.

[Husky Alum]

When NU played GSU, I second guessed the hell out of Hager's play calling in OT, saying it was predicatable and that he'd run the same play on first down in OT the last 3 times NU played OT under him.

Turns out our OC had the wrong down and called the wrong play, as he thought it was second down.

DUH.

Heck, I played FB in HS and was recruited to most of the 1-AA schools in NE, and I second guess about 10 plays a game, but mostly its in good fun.

The problem I have is when I'm sitting in the stands and I can call our plays because of trends. There are times when we'll break the formation, I'll recognize our formation and the defensive set and be able to pick the play, but I'm not sure its because we're predictable or b/c I know something about football.

[OL FU]

It is the right of every fan to critique the coach. I do it constantly but with the knowledge that I have 1/1000 of the knowledge of the players, the opponents, etc. So while I second guess, I don't assume I am correct. It is part of the fun, the celebration and the heartache.

I love it when the the play starts and I say "what the heck are they doing?" and then the play works and I say " That coach is smart". OF course I have said the opposite also. :mad:

[bainsey]

who among us feels truly qualified to critique the playcalling (or any other decisions) of a Division I head coach?

The trouble with this question, PapaBear, is forces people to look in the mirror, and some people are too scared to do so.

Over the past few years, I've developed the paradigm that I don't tell a surgeon how to cut, and I don't tell an electrician how to wire, so how can I tell a professional coach how to coach?

That being said, fans lash out at coaches for any other business reason: they're not getting what they want. In addition, we're all so passionate about sports, that we think we know as much as those who have studied the game, their players, and their opponents very intensely. Meanwhile, the rest of us show up just for the games, and read a few articles in the local paper about our teams. Enough to criticize? Hardly, but coaches should always remember to consider the sources.

[PapaBear]

I am constantly amazed at how level-headed and well thought-out the replies are on this board, to controversial topics.

It'd be my honor as a coach to be critiqued by any of the people who responded to my question.

Thanks, y'all.

[colgate13]

It'd be my honor as a coach to be critiqued by any of the people who responded to my question.

Just let us know what team to watch, and we'll be sure to let you have it! ;)

[MR. CHICKEN]

RUN DUH PIGGY KEELER.......RUN!.........xlolxxlolxxlolx......... BRAWK!

[Eaglegus2]

I may critique the coach, but no way am I an authority on running a football team. Lately, GSU has become so one-dimensial that a high schooler could determine which play would be called.

Georgia Southern has gotten away from the plays that have made them a winner in the past. I do blame this on the OC.

Should the losing and undisciplined play of the Eagles continue, you will see another name with Coach leading the way.

[MR. CHICKEN]

GUS........MAY WANNA GET..."TUBBY"......OUTTA MOTH BALLS!.......JES' UH IDEAH...DERE...LAD!........DEN YA'LL WILL BE LIKE WOFFORD....TRIPLE-0 + WING-T!.........:nod:.........BRRAAAWWWWKKKKK!

[Catsfan]

I tend to get more exercised over the fact a team doesn't have plays in its repertoire. For example, there are games when it seems a screen pass is definitely worth trying, but some coaches refuse to call it, or if by some chance they do, it's obvious it was never run in practice.

[SoCon48]

Many coaches don't like screen passes because they are one the most high risk type plays in football. They make absolutely beautiful interception returns. :cool:

[OL FU]

Many coaches don't like screen passes because they are one the most high risk type plays in football. They make absolutely beautiful interception returns. :cool:

Yeah just ask Western Carolina Fans :)

[FightinBluHen51]

I tend to get more exercised over the fact a team doesn't have plays in its repertoire. For example, there are games when it seems a screen pass is definitely worth trying, but some coaches refuse to call it, or if by some chance they do, it's obvious it was never run in practice.



I couldn't agree more! And the reason for that is, because it might be high risk, high reward. Screens are VERY effective at getting a team that likes to blitz a lot out of blitzing, same thing with running them out of blitz packages.


Do I know everything about football, not a cold chance in hadites, but, I do pay my money, and I do get a right to complain when I don't get to see tons of points, or good defense played. When it's apparent that you don't adjust to try and stop what the other team is doing on offense, or finding a way to move the ball on the other team, obviously, there are things even the dumbest fan can see.

[SoCon48]

[QUOTE=FightinBluHen51]I couldn't agree more! And the reason for that is, because it might be high risk, high reward. Screens are VERY effective at getting a team that likes to blitz a lot out of blitzing, same thing with running them out of blitz packages.


Yep, and a couple TD interceptions get people who like screen passes out of screen passes. Nothing is more beautiful than a cornerback intercepting a screen on the dead run.

[FightinBluHen51]

[QUOTE=FightinBluHen51]I couldn't agree more! And the reason for that is, because it might be high risk, high reward. Screens are VERY effective at getting a team that likes to blitz a lot out of blitzing, same thing with running them out of blitz packages.


Yep, and a couple TD interceptions get people who like screen passes out of screen passes. Nothing is more beautiful than a cornerback intercepting a screen on the dead run.
And nothing is more beautiful than a screen pass going for a 45+ yard TD for the offense either. It works both ways.

[Jacks99]

I am constantly amazed at how level-headed and well thought-out the replies are on this board, to controversial topics.

It'd be my honor as a coach to be critiqued by any of the people who responded to my question.

Thanks, y'all.


I've been very impressed with the posters on this board so far. The fans of DI-AA must be in a class among themselves as well as the programs!

[Eaglegus2]

GUS........MAY WANNA GET..."TUBBY"......OUTTA MOTH BALLS!.......JES' UH IDEAH...DERE...LAD!........DEN YA'LL WILL BE LIKE WOFFORD....TRIPLE-0 + WING-T!.........:nod:.........BRRAAAWWWWKKKKK!


Mr. Chicken............you think that Mr. Tubby would mind a climate without snow, but plenty of gnats?

If so, we may drop him a line.

[Kill'em]

If you want to see criticism of a head coach go check out the GSU board. Jeez, you'd thought there was a revolt going on.

[MR. CHICKEN]

Mr. Chicken............you think that Mr. Tubby would mind a climate without snow, but plenty of gnats?

If so, we may drop him a line.

ACTUALLY GUSSY...................DUH TUBSTER..........SPENDS HIS WINTERS IN FLORIDA...........AN' COULD TALK UH LEOPARD OUTTA HIS SPOTS...WHEN IT COMES TA RECRUITIN' DEM SOUTHERN STATES GOLDMINES!.......BRAWK! :rotateh: