Guess who said this:

bobongo

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,750
MWBATL said:
I don't believe he intimated that he did, just that whatever CGC says behind closed doors os more important than what he says to the press.
Click to expand...
I believe that's true, and if CGC presents a rosier picture to the press than to his players it does no harm in the locker room - in fact, if anything it probably helps.

But in the present case with the Illini coach, there's no way public shaming is going to be ameliorated by anything he says in private. It's simple - nothing good can come out of throwing your players under the bus - players who are supposedly doing the best they can and just don't have the talent. If they're doing the best they can do, that's all anyone can ask, period. He didn't say he thought they could do better. He just said in essence that they weren't very good.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,113
forensicbuzz said:
In public. What's said behind the closed doors and in the locker room is much more important. Too many people are too worried about what CGC does or says to the public.
Click to expand...
I hear you, but what he says in private to the team or in public to the media or fans means nothing at this point. What matters is what he says on the field from 60:00 to 0:00. I admit I’ve bought into his words and they helped get thru years 1 and 2. Great, fantastic. But I am starting to feel like the second girlfriend because he still hasn’t introduced me to his friends. I posted earlier that the month of October would tell me what I need to know about him as a coach. Pitt-Duke-UVA-VT. No juggernauts, just teams like us. We had a buy this week so if UVA manhandles us or we look lost then that would tell me more than any words. I’m past words. It’s all about 60:00 to 0:00.
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,062
Location
North Shore, Chicago
SOWEGA Jacket said:
I hear you, but what he says in private to the team or in public to the media or fans means nothing at this point. What matters is what he says on the field from 60:00 to 0:00. I admit I’ve bought into his words and they helped get thru years 1 and 2. Great, fantastic. But I am starting to feel like the second girlfriend because he still hasn’t introduced me to his friends. I posted earlier that the month of October would tell me what I need to know about him as a coach. Pitt-Duke-UVA-VT. No juggernauts, just teams like us. We had a buy this week so if UVA manhandles us or we look lost then that would tell me more than any words. I’m past words. It’s all about 60:00 to 0:00.
Click to expand...
I get this.

Me? I've not reached that point yet. I still believe he's building what needs to be built and is growing as he continues to gain experience. I get that others are not as patient as I am. I still think, especially with a young coach (and I consider him a young coach), it's a disservice to the team and coach to really judge before Year5, but that's my arbitrarily set line based on my experience.
 
MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,873
Different Coach, but still pretty shocking. Check out Saban in this clip:



Pretty cool and he is funny off the cuff when he isn’t mad at the team’s performance. Just goes to show you that there coaches are whole people not just the personalities we sometimes ascribe them to be.
 
ilovetheoption

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
bobongo said:
How so? I'm just asking - I don't know much about the guy except he took UVa to the Orange Bowl two years ago. Give us a rundown...
Click to expand...
He's a SUPER weird dude, man. Like, he's absolutely a solid football coach. I've said that if "VORP" were a coaching thing, he would have an ACC VORP of "0", meaning he's like EXACTLY a middle of the road ACC quality coach. Over time, he'll win exactly as many games as you "program fundamentals" suggest you should. Which, if you're at a P5 school, means you're a pretty good football coach, compared to the general population. At this level, he's nothing special, one way or the other. He's got a pretty high variance, but at a school like UVa, which (in my opinion) has "meh" fundamentals, over time, he'll give you "meh" results. He'd win at FSU. He'd lose at Wake.

His particular brand of "meh" is just super duper weird and awkward. We're not an amazingly fun team to root for, at the moment.
 
4shotB

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,133
ilovetheoption said:
He's a SUPER weird dude, man. Like, he's absolutely a solid football coach. I've said that if "VORP" were a coaching thing, he would have an ACC VORP of "0", meaning he's like EXACTLY a middle of the road ACC quality coach. Over time, he'll win exactly as many games as you "program fundamentals" suggest you should. Which, if you're at a P5 school, means you're a pretty good football coach, compared to the general population. At this level, he's nothing special, one way or the other. He's got a pretty high variance, but at a school like UVa, which (in my opinion) has "meh" fundamentals, over time, he'll give you "meh" results. He'd win at FSU. He'd lose at Wake.

His particular brand of "meh" is just super duper weird and awkward. We're not an amazingly fun team to root for, at the moment.
Click to expand...
@ilovetheoption - You are here quite a bit (and provide great perspective for which we are grateful). We have a small but vocal contingent that were displeased with our previous two coaches who apparently were this kind of "results getter" as you describe. They did at GT what most decent P5 coaches would do (jury is out of course on our current guy). Is the Uva fan base similar to ours? - in other words, do you have people who want you to be Bama on Saturdays and Uva Monday through Friday? Or are the overwhelming majority of your fans content to be what you have historically been (outside of the pretty good Welsh years). as laways, your insight is informative and appreciated.
 
ilovetheoption

ilovetheoption

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,816
4shotB said:
@ilovetheoption - You are here quite a bit (and provide great perspective for which we are grateful). We have a small but vocal contingent that were displeased with our previous two coaches who apparently were this kind of "results getter" as you describe. They did at GT what most decent P5 coaches would do (jury is out of course on our current guy). Is the Uva fan base similar to ours? - in other words, do you have people who want you to be Bama on Saturdays and Uva Monday through Friday? Or are the overwhelming majority of your fans content to be what you have historically been (outside of the pretty good Welsh years). as laways, your insight is informative and appreciated.
Click to expand...
I think all football fans are sort of the same, honestly.

I was thinking about this exact thing over the last 20 minutes or so.

There is some psychology at play (and, I'm not a psychologist, so apologies in advance if this is stupid). Basically, there are VERY few people who are going to outperform the mean, even at this level.

Football x's and o's are largely a "solved game" to use language you guys like :). There are very few scheme surprises. There are uncommon things, of course, but the "Best" things are largely known. That's why everybody largely runs the same stuff. Recruiting is less so, but still largely so. There is a "recipe" for recruiting, and it's the rare guy who can significantly outperform the baseline level of competence at any given school.

What this means is that the OVERWHELMING majority of time...(forgive me)...."It is what it is". Given a large enough sample size, most schools are going to be what they're going to be. Guys good enough to outperform the school are going to advance. Guys not good enough to achieve the "mean competence" of the conference are going to get fired.

With that in mind, what differentiates coaches at a school is LARGELY 1) Variance, and 2) Style. What it's largely NOT is 3) Results.

This is where the psychology comes in. A coach that goes 9-3 one season and 3-9 the next is ALWAYS going to get a longer rope than a coach that consistently goes 7-5. Why? Over time it's the same, right? It's because we're human beings and we have something called hedonic adaptation. Additionally, the 9-3 season allows us to hope "hey, maybe we're onto something here, maybe we've turned a corner. Maybe this is the new normal". It's not, obviously, but the point of fandom is to have fun, and that's fun to imagine. The 7-5 coach doesn't allow us to have that belief. Chan Gailey and Paul Johnson. Which was more fun? To me, OBVIOUSLY Paul Johnson on the variance front, though you could ABSOLUTELY make an argument that over time he's no better a results guy than Chan Gailey. (I'm not sure I agree, but you get the point). So, that's variance.

Second is style. So if we're going to accept that "over any 10 year period, GT will average 7-5 per year" (roll with me here), then the question becomes "am I going to have fun watching those 70 wins and 50 losses or am I not going to have fun?". I'm going to watch 70 wins and 50 losses, I (grudgingly) acknowledge that, so that given those constraints, are those 300 hours best spent watching GT football, or would I prefer to have a mowed lawn, or have gone to the gym 120 times, or whatever? So what is fun? Well, that's different for different people. Geoff Collins is not fun for me. I wouldn't spend my time watching those games. Bronco Mendenhall is not fun for me. I watch MUCH less UVa football than I used to. Paul Johnson is fun. Mike Leach is fun. Jamie Chadwell is fun.

But that's me.

To some people Geoff Collins is super fun! Some people find the rah-rah cheerleading and the schtick. TO ME, he's a high-bullsh!1 guy. To somebody else, he's a passionate, high energy guy who loves GT and will do whatever it takes to win. To each their own.

So, with those two factors, you take the coach, and you take the collective personality of the fanbase, and you see how long a coach is there.

Are there exceptions? Of course. Dave Clawson appears to be able to outperform, and appears to want to stay at Wake. In that situation they build a statue for him in 20 years (unless the hedonic adaptation takes over, and they start getting above their raisin).

But exceptions are exceptions for a reason, they're not the norm, so you can hope for exceptions, but not be crushed when you get the norm.

I think most fans get that (underneath it all). Sure there are dummies, and people in their 20's and this and that, but we're mostly all grown-ups, here. I think the whole "think we're alabama on saturdays" is kinda largely a function of the fact that we're on a college football message board. We have self-selected for being the most dedicated, interested people about GT football on earth. We're choosing to spend our Thursday afternoon talking about it. We're probably the 1000 most interested people on the planet. On any given topic, the 1000 most interested humans are going to be VERY interested.

Sorry for War and Peace, but I guess my point is, "on message boards, yes, we're all the same. In real life, none of us are like that" . If it's fun, we're fine. If it's not, we're not.

At least, that what I think.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,589
ilovetheoption said:
I think all football fans are sort of the same, honestly.

I was thinking about this exact thing over the last 20 minutes or so.

There is some psychology at play (and, I'm not a psychologist, so apologies in advance if this is stupid). Basically, there are VERY few people who are going to outperform the mean, even at this level.

Football x's and o's are largely a "solved game" to use language you guys like :). There are very few scheme surprises. There are uncommon things, of course, but the "Best" things are largely known. That's why everybody largely runs the same stuff. Recruiting is less so, but still largely so. There is a "recipe" for recruiting, and it's the rare guy who can significantly outperform the baseline level of competence at any given school.

What this means is that the OVERWHELMING majority of time...(forgive me)...."It is what it is". Given a large enough sample size, most schools are going to be what they're going to be. Guys good enough to outperform the school are going to advance. Guys not good enough to achieve the "mean competence" of the conference are going to get fired.

With that in mind, what differentiates coaches at a school is LARGELY 1) Variance, and 2) Style. What it's largely NOT is 3) Results.

This is where the psychology comes in. A coach that goes 9-3 one season and 3-9 the next is ALWAYS going to get a longer rope than a coach that consistently goes 7-5. Why? Over time it's the same, right? It's because we're human beings and we have something called hedonic adaptation. Additionally, the 9-3 season allows us to hope "hey, maybe we're onto something here, maybe we've turned a corner. Maybe this is the new normal". It's not, obviously, but the point of fandom is to have fun, and that's fun to imagine. The 7-5 coach doesn't allow us to have that belief. Chan Gailey and Paul Johnson. Which was more fun? To me, OBVIOUSLY Paul Johnson on the variance front, though you could ABSOLUTELY make an argument that over time he's no better a results guy than Chan Gailey. (I'm not sure I agree, but you get the point). So, that's variance.

Second is style. So if we're going to accept that "over any 10 year period, GT will average 7-5 per year" (roll with me here), then the question becomes "am I going to have fun watching those 70 wins and 50 losses or am I not going to have fun?". I'm going to watch 70 wins and 50 losses, I (grudgingly) acknowledge that, so that given those constraints, are those 300 hours best spent watching GT football, or would I prefer to have a mowed lawn, or have gone to the gym 120 times, or whatever? So what is fun? Well, that's different for different people. Geoff Collins is not fun for me. I wouldn't spend my time watching those games. Bronco Mendenhall is not fun for me. I watch MUCH less UVa football than I used to. Paul Johnson is fun. Mike Leach is fun. Jamie Chadwell is fun.

But that's me.

To some people Geoff Collins is super fun! Some people find the rah-rah cheerleading and the schtick. TO ME, he's a high-bullsh!1 guy. To somebody else, he's a passionate, high energy guy who loves GT and will do whatever it takes to win. To each their own.

So, with those two factors, you take the coach, and you take the collective personality of the fanbase, and you see how long a coach is there.

Are there exceptions? Of course. Dave Clawson appears to be able to outperform, and appears to want to stay at Wake. In that situation they build a statue for him in 20 years (unless the hedonic adaptation takes over, and they start getting above their raisin).

But exceptions are exceptions for a reason, they're not the norm, so you can hope for exceptions, but not be crushed when you get the norm.

I think most fans get that (underneath it all). Sure there are dummies, and people in their 20's and this and that, but we're mostly all grown-ups, here. I think the whole "think we're alabama on saturdays" is kinda largely a function of the fact that we're on a college football message board. We have self-selected for being the most dedicated, interested people about GT football on earth. We're choosing to spend our Thursday afternoon talking about it. We're probably the 1000 most interested people on the planet. On any given topic, the 1000 most interested humans are going to be VERY interested.

Sorry for War and Peace, but I guess my point is, "on message boards, yes, we're all the same. In real life, none of us are like that" . If it's fun, we're fine. If it's not, we're not.

At least, that what I think.
Click to expand...
Brilliant post. Well stated....
 
Top