Love the podcast. But I have a question about the argument that Wilcox has the “answers” but is somehow still failing the test.
An example given was the 2 pt try. Which was in theory the right answer, but because of execution it still failed.
Do you think an argument can be made that even if a coach has the right “answer” you still need to take into consideration what your players are actually able to execute? Isn’t that part of coaching. Do you really want your punter to be throwing to your long snapper?
A better example. The last sequence setting up the FG attempt. Maybe to run on 3 straight plays to set up the FG was the “correct” answer. And yes, your D1 college kicker should execute that kick. But at the same time, you have ample evidence that your kicker has been having trouble executing that kick.
I guess what I’m saying is that, to be a good college coach, knowing the answer is only half the job. The other is knowing what your personnel can and cannot execute. If your team is continuously failing to execute, is it possible that’s on you as the coach for asking your players to do something they simply cannot do consistently. Shouldn’t a good coach be able to adapt?
I’d argue that the sign of a good coach is not merely just to know the answer. The sign of a good coach is to put your players in the best possible position to succeed. I think those are two very distinct things.
Thank you for listening. Great question and will try to circle back on this next week.
Regarding your comment & question:
I’d argue that the sign of a good coach is not merely just to know the answer. The sign of a good coach is to put your players in the best possible position to succeed. I think those are two very distinct things.
I see this similarly but with a different lens. I do agree that the sign of a good coach is to know the answer and put your players in the best possible position to succeed. However I think Wilcox has done that quite well (look at the 4th & 1 defensive call). At some point, your players have to execute.
The post game presser he listed out every single one of Pitt's tendencies, what they had scouted and how they scripted against it.
I can guarantee that 2 pt conversion was set up over the course of the first 6 games and we failed to execute it.
I have zero excuses for the play calls when we got to field goal range. My open question would be if JW makes his worst decisions when he has already seen his team fail to capitalize on the opportunities in front of them. Perhaps it was the first half drive that was in FG range where Nando takes a sack and then 66 takes a 15 yard unsportsmanlike that spooks him from pressing the gas.
Schematically though, I think Wilcox is excellent and I just don't have an answer for why the hell we can't get this team to break through the ceiling.
Love the podcast. But I have a question about the argument that Wilcox has the “answers” but is somehow still failing the test.
An example given was the 2 pt try. Which was in theory the right answer, but because of execution it still failed.
Do you think an argument can be made that even if a coach has the right “answer” you still need to take into consideration what your players are actually able to execute? Isn’t that part of coaching. Do you really want your punter to be throwing to your long snapper?
A better example. The last sequence setting up the FG attempt. Maybe to run on 3 straight plays to set up the FG was the “correct” answer. And yes, your D1 college kicker should execute that kick. But at the same time, you have ample evidence that your kicker has been having trouble executing that kick.
I guess what I’m saying is that, to be a good college coach, knowing the answer is only half the job. The other is knowing what your personnel can and cannot execute. If your team is continuously failing to execute, is it possible that’s on you as the coach for asking your players to do something they simply cannot do consistently. Shouldn’t a good coach be able to adapt?
I’d argue that the sign of a good coach is not merely just to know the answer. The sign of a good coach is to put your players in the best possible position to succeed. I think those are two very distinct things.
Yo!
Thank you for listening. Great question and will try to circle back on this next week.
Regarding your comment & question:
I’d argue that the sign of a good coach is not merely just to know the answer. The sign of a good coach is to put your players in the best possible position to succeed. I think those are two very distinct things.
I see this similarly but with a different lens. I do agree that the sign of a good coach is to know the answer and put your players in the best possible position to succeed. However I think Wilcox has done that quite well (look at the 4th & 1 defensive call). At some point, your players have to execute.
The post game presser he listed out every single one of Pitt's tendencies, what they had scouted and how they scripted against it.
I can guarantee that 2 pt conversion was set up over the course of the first 6 games and we failed to execute it.
I have zero excuses for the play calls when we got to field goal range. My open question would be if JW makes his worst decisions when he has already seen his team fail to capitalize on the opportunities in front of them. Perhaps it was the first half drive that was in FG range where Nando takes a sack and then 66 takes a 15 yard unsportsmanlike that spooks him from pressing the gas.
Schematically though, I think Wilcox is excellent and I just don't have an answer for why the hell we can't get this team to break through the ceiling.