With all the posts about firing PN, Whipple, the staff, etc..., and about how we never really hire good coaches, I thought I'd start a post on what makes for a great coach. Here are my thoughts based on having been an athlete (in sports other than football), having had terrible, good, and great coaching, my experience of having played on a college lacrosse national championship team, and having been an assistant coach on a championship h.s. team, with comments about where I see PN in this:
From my sense, this makes him a good coach but not a great coach. I think to be a great coach you need to hit on all of these. Looking at other coaches, they fail in other categories.
- The coach has a strong overall philosophy that covers both offense and defense, and allows the same attitude to be in both (PN started with this being physical and aggressive on both offense and defense, but is now only doing this on defense).
- The coach is both big pictured and detail-oriented so that players always know what they're trying to accomplish and the skills to accomplish this--examples in CFB and PFB: Nick Saban, Dabo Sweeney, Jackie Sherrill, Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, Mike Tomlin, Bill Belichick, Pete Carroll (PN, I believe is big pictured, but only detail-oriented on defense--Matt Canada brought that on offense, but Whipple does not).
- The coach has an even-tempered, but high-level intensity that rubs off on players, giving them a sense of determination to play well and overcome adversity (PN has more of a passionate intensity, which means that both he and the team go through periods where they lose intensity, especially when things are going too well--Bill Cowher was afflicted by this at times, too).
- The coach has a structured program that demands personal accountability rather than imposed accountability (PN seems to have this, and the program seems well-run and the players seem motivated to be self-accountable).
- The coach creates a community of players where they support, teach, and lift up each other (PN seems to have done this, and the players genuinely seem to feel like they are part of a family).
- The coach has both a teaching mindset but lets the players play, meaning that they spend a lot of time on the fundamental, but do allow players do great things as long as they stay in the structure (I believe PN does this, although sometimes he gives them too much latitude, which creates bone-headed mistakes when the great players try to do too much)
From my sense, this makes him a good coach but not a great coach. I think to be a great coach you need to hit on all of these. Looking at other coaches, they fail in other categories.
