buffaloboyinATL Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 In other words, we always talk about coaches as being either an Offensive minded coach or a Defensive minded coach. Such as: McDermott. - Defense Andy Reid. - Offense John Harbaugh - Defense Sean McVay. - Offense Bruce Arians - Offense Kyle Shanahan - Offense Matt Patricia - Defense Etc, etc... This got me thinking, do all head coaches typically fall into one category or the other, or are there coaches who are just considered "football guys" without really having a focus one way or the other? The closest that I can think of is Belichick, who started as a Defensive guy but seems to be known for his Offensive strategy now as well. This also got me thinking that Buffalo seems to almost always choose Defensive minded Head coaches, except for maybe Marv Levy who I believe was Offense, but I am honestly not sure.
Real McClappy Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 I would hope it is to win! They have to focus on all 3 phases of the game. If not the door is not far away typically. 1
Mat68 Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 I think McDermott has done the best job since Levy of being more head coach, instead of head Co Ordinator. He has an idea of what he wants on offense. I think he understands that against the best teams the offense has to be more aggressive and score more points. 1 1 1
buffaloboyinATL Posted January 7, 2020 Author Posted January 7, 2020 Just now, Real McNasty said: I would hope it is to win! They have to focus on all 3 phases of the game. If not the door is not far away typically. Agreed, but unless I am wrong, all head coaches are typically categorized as Defensive-minded or Offensive-minded. I understand that they ultimately need to focus on the all 3 phases, just thought it was interesting that I usually think of a coach as one or the other. I guess the fact that a "special-teams" coach was hired as a head coach got me thinking about this...
Chaos Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 Seems like a good question. Most HC's played at some level. And typically moved to coaching on the same side of the ball as they played. Most head coaches have experience as a DC or OC prior to being a HC. Its seems rare for someone to move from DC to OC or vice versa, so I think almost all head coaches are presumed to be more expert on side of the ball than the other. 1
Chris66 Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 Very few head coaches have the ability to coach both sides of the ball anymore. I can think of a handful. Belichick Caroll Harbaugh Flores
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 50 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said: Agreed, but unless I am wrong, all head coaches are typically categorized as Defensive-minded or Offensive-minded. I understand that they ultimately need to focus on the all 3 phases, just thought it was interesting that I usually think of a coach as one or the other. I guess the fact that a "special-teams" coach was hired as a head coach got me thinking about this... but if you're hired as a HC and knowing which way your background tends you to lean, don't you hire and trust a coordinator that is the opposite of your background leanings?.....TONS of TBD posts saying the "conservative offense" has McDermott's stamp because of his defensive background.....so is Daboll handcuffed?......or....does McDermott NOT have the element of trust in his OC to shore up the "other side"?......do we get to the point where "it's the offensive personnel stupid" mantra goes away?.....don't the GOOD coaches game plan to personnel strengths?....again, is that a Daboll weakness or McDermott limitation?.....
WhoTom Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 (edited) The phrases "offensive-minded" and "defensive-minded" are only relevant to the coach's background, but to say that's a single focus is overly simplistic. A good DC has to have a solid understanding of offensive strategies, since he needs to design schemes to defend against them, teach his players how to recognize certain formations, etc. Likewise, a good OC needs to know the nuances of defensive schemes so he can design plays to beat them, teach the QB how to read a defense, etc. By the time a coordinator gets to be a HC, he's well-versed in offense and defense (and ST, for that matter), regardless of what his coordinator position was. In short, an effective tactician knows his opponents inside and out. That's why the best computer security people are former (or current) hackers - they know the minds of their opponents. Edited January 7, 2020 by WhoTom 1
TroutDog Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, WhoTom said: The phrases "offensive-minded" and "defensive-minded" are only relevant to the coach's background, but to say that's a single focus is overly simplistic. A good DC has to have a solid understanding of offensive strategies, since he needs to design schemes to defend against them, teach his players how to recognize certain formations, etc. Likewise, a good OC needs to know the nuances of defensive schemes so he can design plays to beat them, teach the QB how to read a defense, etc. By the time a coordinator gets to be a HC, he's well-versed in offense and defense (and ST, for that matter), regardless of what his coordinator position was. In short, an effective tactician knows his opponents inside and out. That's why the best computer security people are former (or current) hackers - they know the minds of their opponents. Nailed it. If you’re a DC, you know O formations and tendencies and vice versa. Given this, I’d argue that you’re a ‘football coach’ either way. I suppose the argument could be made about fundamentals on the ‘opposing’ side of your strength but that’s where coordinators and position coaches come into play.
White Linen Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 17 hours ago, WhoTom said: The phrases "offensive-minded" and "defensive-minded" are only relevant to the coach's background, but to say that's a single focus is overly simplistic. A good DC has to have a solid understanding of offensive strategies, since he needs to design schemes to defend against them, teach his players how to recognize certain formations, etc. Likewise, a good OC needs to know the nuances of defensive schemes so he can design plays to beat them, teach the QB how to read a defense, etc. By the time a coordinator gets to be a HC, he's well-versed in offense and defense (and ST, for that matter), regardless of what his coordinator position was. In short, an effective tactician knows his opponents inside and out. That's why the best computer security people are former (or current) hackers - they know the minds of their opponents. I don't think it's about single focus because that would be ridiculous of a HC. I think it's more that your background as an offensive or defensive coach is your expertise. We all know these coaches spend hours and hours away from their families obsessing over their craft. McD was a safety when he played, then he moved his way up the ranks on the defensive side of the ball as defensive quality control - DB coach - LB coach - back to secondary coach - D coordinator, etc etc. So every hour of film, every drill, every fundamental, every OTA, every TC, every game day strategy has been defensive oriented - obviously. He knows how to teach defense. He can spot and recognize real time issues that happen on a defensive play. He can identify areas that need improvement fundamentally on defense. He knows that the DT didn't to X or the LB opened up his hips too soon or the DB took the wrong angle, etc etc. Of course these men are all wicked smart and they understand offense as they've spent their lives defending against it. But the instincts aren't on that side of the ball and they aren't teachers of each of the positions. I know they can and have knowledge of everything but it's not their expertise. It's for those reasons I identify a coach as minded on one side of the ball.
Recommended Posts