What exactly does the head coach do?

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by Grid, Jan 3, 2006.

  1. Grid

    Grid Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    4,299
    Likes Received:
    244
    Seriously? I mean.. we had a defensive genius for a head coach, but our DC ran the defense and it sucked. Pendry and Palmer ran the offense and it sucked. Our strength was our special teams which was ran by Marciano...

    I know people will disagree with that ST comment but thats not the point.. the point is that our "head coach" seemed more like a figurehead than someone who actually DID anything. Is that fairly common with head coaches? if so.. why are we bothering to debate about who the best choice is? Shouldnt we be looking at who is available to be our OC and DC, and just pick the guy who looks best on TV for our HC?:tv:
     
  2. stevo3883

    stevo3883 All Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    733
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    h-town
    well, our special teams kind of sucked at the most important spot. the kicking game. we missed so many crucial kicks this year, and the punting seemed much worse than last year.

    the only good part about special teams was the KR, and that can be attributed to MAthis more than any coach (the old cliche, you cant teach speed)
     
  3. See, and I fear that this could possibly happen to Kubiak, Linehan, or any other coordinator that we want to hire as a HC. It's important to know who they are bringing in for coordinators as well.
     
  4. Bubbajwp

    Bubbajwp All Flopper

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    101
    Location:
    In the Warehouse
    Motivation
     
  5. ArlingtonTexan

    ArlingtonTexan Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,159
    Likes Received:
    465
    Yeah, I am guilty on the Mariciano front. if you say that Joe M. did a better job in relation to most of the other Texans coaches then I listen. In terms of the overall league he is a decent enough to keep around, but I don't see him as truly special.

    As for the head coach, it really becomes an administative and motivational position more than a hands on teaching job. The headcaoch gets the "joy" of organizing everything, constantly talking to the media, and taking blame for pretty much anything that goes wrong.
     
  6. tulexan

    tulexan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    5,080
    Likes Received:
    106
    I think it depends on the head coach. Some delegate responsibilities to coordinators, some like to be the play caller.
     
  7. Double Barrel

    Double Barrel Modified Simian

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    Messages:
    33,026
    Likes Received:
    2,887
    Location:
    Onward, Upward, and back into the Trees
    BINGO! I agree with this take 100%. :ok:

    Each HC has a different style of running his team. Some are very hands on, even calling plays (ie. Billichick this year calling offense). Some are very oriented towards scheming for each game, doing crazy things like planning against opponents weaknesses, and even changing gameplans between games. Strange concept in the Capers era, but hopefully we soon have a HC that can grasp these things.
     
  8. Grid

    Grid Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    4,299
    Likes Received:
    244
    if thats the case though.. then what is the point of getting a guy like Kubiak?

    I mean you cite his success with Plummer.. his dominant running game.. his Oline.. the zone blocking.. all of that.. but if we make him HC, he wont be in charge of all of that anymore.. so even though you are hiring him based on what he has done, you cant really expect him to bring that same success to the team in the head coaching position can you?

    makes me think that a guy like Herm Edwards or Chucky is a better decision..and then make sure they you get some very talented coordinators to back him up. Basicly..someone whos main forte is motivation and game planning.
     
  9. BINGO! I agree with this take 100%.

    If Kubiak is taking credit for Shanahans hands on approach then that makes me wonder about his skills.
     
  10. ArlingtonTexan

    ArlingtonTexan Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    6,159
    Likes Received:
    465
    Your argument has merit, but also is the reason you often see some many retreads. Management often thinks that a person who has a handle on the administrative aspects of the job with good connections in the coaching profession to get good assistants is the more favorable choice. In the interview process, coaches will be asked about their ability to get quality assistants and often this is one of those reason we don't see why one guy gets the job over another.

    Anytime someone hires an assistant who has not been a headcoach is projecting (or edcuated guessing) as to the ability of the assistant to be organized and perform as a leader of men.
     
  11. tulexan

    tulexan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Messages:
    5,080
    Likes Received:
    106
    Just working in a coach's system can make a someone a good coach. They have experience in a successful system and generally run a similar one of their own when they are the coach. Look how many good coaches have come out of Parcell's team. Bellicheck, Weis, Carroll, and a bunch more. Also look at all of the coaches that have come out of Bill Walsh's system. Shanahan, Holmgren, Gruden, Mariucci, and many more coordinators including Kubiak. Coordinators are becoming so valuable to teams that Nick Saban has coordinators and then under study's to the coordinators in case they are hired by another team.
     

Share This Page