When is it the Coach's Fault?

[JohnBM01]

This is something I've been curious about. A team tanks in their division, don't make the postseason, players getting into all kinds of trouble... but when is the coach to blame? Or what if even the administration of a sports team is to blame for a team's failure?

Think of coaches in any sport in which fans point to the coach as for the reason why a team is unsuccessful. Think of when the University of Kentucky fans basically ran Tubby Smith out of town to where Tubby went up to get the University of Minnesota pointed in the correct direction. So...

...when is it the coach's fault (any sport)?

 

[granturismohero]

Probably when a team has a history of sucking...

 

[JohnBM01]

THANK YOU!!! This thread as pretty dead until you came along. The Nationals picked up a new coach while ditching the other.

This thread was deep in the Mariana Trench until it was finally revived. Anyone else want to contribute?

 

[Omnis]

Whenever your team has to compete in a losing atmosphere and with a loser mentality, it's the Coach's fault. Look at the Miami Dolphins. Wannstedt had mediocre records after making the playoffs, but the attitude became that the team was just stuck in that standing-- not able to ascend to the next level. He got the boot, and all of the coaches since then were never able to break the loser attitude until Sparano and the Tuna came to town. The front office didn't help, but when life gives you Cleo Lemon, you try your best to make Lemonade anyway.

 

[Philly]

Here in Seattle, we have a long history of teams sucking and pointing the blame. In the case of the Mariners, our recruiting is terrible. I haven't followed baseball in a while, but when I don't recognize anybody on the field when I knew everybody just three or four years ago, that can't be good. And this is a case of the managers just not being able to put together a decent team of players.

Look at the Washington football team. We had Ty Willingham coaching us here recently. And I guess practices for football consisted of groups of guys standing around and rapping or wrestling. And I'm guessing we can blame that on the coach.

 

[Danoff]

I think there definitely needs to be a substantial period of time given to any coach to set his team up. Some NFL teams seem to like to rotate coaches through once every year or so - and that's absolutely absurd. I don't think you can evaluate a coach - especially a head coach - in that amount of time. Coaches are long-term decisions.

With an offensive or defensive coordinator (or the equivalent in other sports), you can tell how they're doing by the success or failure of formations and play calling. With the head coach I tend to look more toward recruiting and motivation.

A few example of NFL coaches that shouldn't have been ousted include Shanahan and Schottenheimer. Another interesting case is Coughlin. Coughlin was heavily criticised right up to the Giants' epic superbowl victory, and many of the reasons he was criticized were valid - the team was losing focus, playing lazy, and generally appeared unmotivated and disorganized. All things I'd lay square on the coach. But when they did win the superbowl, they did it with a huge squad of rookies - meaning they had an amazing recruiting year the previous february and made good on developing those recruits in ridiculuos time (not to mention who they were up against). That's something else I'd tend to lay on the coach. So Coughlin leaves me conflicted.

One coach I haven't developed any respect for is Wade Phillips. And, switching to college ball for a moment, Pete Carrol strikes me as a coach that consistently undercuts his recruitment. 'SC is stacked with talent year after year, and somehow Carrol lets them drink the coolaid every year and fall prey to a stanford or UCLA that they shouldn't lose to. Honestly, everyone knows the Pac-10 is light on talent Pete, how can you take all those talented guys and not go undefeated year after year? Not that I'd get rid of Pete, he's obviously an awesome coach. He just has his weakness.

Sticking with college football for a moment - when the Texas Longhorns lost to Texas Tech last year (costing them a national championship), that loss was squarely on the coaches. Granted that the team had a murderous schedule that no college team could be expected to survive, but they came so close! They had every opportunity to run the clock down before scoring the go-ahead TD late in the game, and the coaches somehow didn't make that happen. Not that I'd get rid of Brown either. He's obviously very good at what he does, and I love his attitude in press conferences, but damn that mistake cost an awful lot.

 

[Omnis]

Yeah, danoff, but the thing with rotations has more to do with atmosphere than W:L ratio. The dolphins training camp is on my school campus. You could just see the difference in behavior between Cam Cameron's team and what is now Sparano's team. Sparano would've been a huge improvement even if we had a losing record. Nick Saban was the same way, but he probably saw the situation deteriorating so he packed up and went to Bama.

I totally agree on mike and marty though. They got booted over wins and losses, not team attitude.

 

[Nicksfix]

This is a subject that always seems to get me.The coach is only as good as what the front office gives him to work with.Sure the coach is responsible for keeping up moral,calling plays,setting rosters.BUT,what the sad part is,that people blame the coach for a losing season,hmmmmmm lets look at something here :

Was it the coach's fault when the football got fumbled away to the other team while they are driving and deep in the red zone ?

Was it the coach's arm who threw that costly interception ?

Was it the coach's fault the a player got a defensive penalty which kept the other teams drive alive,ultimately resulting in a winning score for the opposition ?

Was it the coach who stood up at the plate and watched 3 strikes go by,without so much as taking a swing at anything ?

Was it the coach who threw that 90mph "meatball" across the plate to give up that 3 run dinger which cost them the game ?

See where I'm coming from ? The coaches recieve way to much flack about things that the players themselves do,things that they as professional players should know better than to do,but yet,it's the coach's fault ? The coach does have some inluence as far as a game outcome will be,but it's not entirely his fault.

 

[Omnis]

This is a subject that always seems to get me.The coach is only as good as what the front office gives him to work with.Sure the coach is responsible for keeping up moral,calling plays,setting rosters.BUT,what the sad part is,that people blame the coach for a losing season,hmmmmmm lets look at something here :

Was it the coach's fault when the football got fumbled away to the other team while they are driving and deep in the red zone ?

Was it the coach's arm who threw that costly interception ?

Was it the coach's fault the a player got a defensive penalty which kept the other teams drive alive,ultimately resulting in a winning score for the opposition ?

Was it the coach who stood up at the plate and watched 3 strikes go by,without so much as taking a swing at anything ?

Was it the coach who threw that 90mph "meatball" across the plate to give up that 3 run dinger which cost them the game ?

See where I'm coming from ? The coaches recieve way to much flack about things that the players themselves do,things that they as professional players should know better than to do,but yet,it's the coach's fault ? The coach does have some inluence as far as a game outcome will be,but it's not entirely his fault.

Your examples depend on the sport. Coaches have a much larger impact in NFL football than, say, MLB. And the "What the FO giveth" argument doesn't always apply either. The Dolphins certainly didn't have any S-class talent (except for Jake Long) according to the talking heads, and they were AFC East champions last season.

 

[granturismohero]

THANK YOU!!! This thread as pretty dead until you came along. The Nationals picked up a new coach while ditching the other.

This thread was deep in the Mariana Trench until it was finally revived. Anyone else want to contribute?

Your welcome dude.

 

[a6m5]

There are many reasons to fire a coach. But half the time, they get fired, because: 1) They are not in charge, like the owners, presidents, general managers. 2) There are no "Coaches Union".

Only sport I (kind of)follow is the NBA. In this league, coaches get fired for teams underachieving, losing, not reaching the Playoffs, etc., etc. Often, if not most of the time, it's beyond head coach's control. That's when the reasons 1 & 2 comes into play. I love the NBA Player's Association.[/sarcasm]

 

[Northstar]

Really the only level where I can honestly blame the coach is on the college level since they have more control over the team than at the pro level. At the pro level there are just too many people in the decision making process to really lay 100% blame on anyone.

However coaches are right behind the referee's in the scapegoat list.

 

[a6m5]

I don't know about the sports you watch, but in the NBA, officiating is a joke most of the time. If we showed the kind of inconsistency those J.A.'s show at their work, most of us would be fired at our jobs.

 

[Northstar]

I don't know about the sports you watch, but in the NBA, officiating is a joke most of the time. If we showed the kind of inconsistency those J.A.'s show at their work, most of us would be fired at our jobs.

That is just because they have money invested in the games.

Really though in most sports the referees style's are well known and the teams should adapt their gameplan to fit their officiating style.

 

[a6m5]

I do, now, firmly believe that without the money, you can't have a decent league. And with the money, you won't have a level playing field.

I'll stop here. Good discussion, but bit off-topic(sorry, John ).