Being a college coach is more akin to being a CEO, though. You're a big part of the equation when it comes to the talent you have to work with. You're the GM and the coach.
What does that have to do with overachieving though - my OP?
I understand that NIL plays a role. I also understand that we typically find ways to scrap together defensive talent yet we don't do the same on offense.
Why do you think that it is? It's always been that way at PITT for the most part. High profile offensive players in HS typically carry a bigger price tag whether that was b4 or after NIL. They're known commodities. Successful defensive guys are often really good athletes who aren't developed and often play a different position in HS. It's easier to "develop" defensive talent as a whole. It's pretty hard to "develop" a QB whether he's played it his whole life and it's damn near impossible to have him come from another position.
Perhaps a coach who doesn't admit to devoting 85% of his time (or whatever the number he gave was) to one side of the ball would be best.
This is just naïve statement that was taken out of context. How much do you think Saban spent developing offensive game plans and scheme on a day to day basis? He let his OC's coach.
I spent a week at Michigan when Harbaugh had Don Brown as a DC. Outside of the stretch period, I never saw Harbaugh doing anything with the defense, he was with the offense all the time.
Spurrier and Leach were notorious for not even knowing the names of the defensive players.
If you ever go to a clinic and listen to the HC speak about scheme, I've never heard one talk about the side of the ball they didn't coach prior to being a HC. I've never heard Urban, Leach, Kiffin, Riley, etc speak about defense in those settings.
Duzz has more then his share of warts, but this isn't one of them.
