A look at Coach Golden's 8 pillars: Football Scenario

[Angry Ibis]

I thought kicking the 49 yard field goal was a terrible decision.....even though we made it and yes I agree I would have gone for it.

It just leads me to the discussion I think is worth having: if this in-game decision-making is an issue, how do we remedy this deficiency? Also, wouldn't it be indicative of the type of mentality going into game prep?

If they are analyzing being down three scores in the 4th quarter in game prep, we would be concerned about that too.

Yes, thank you. I figured someone would go down this path. The point is you add up a bunch of data points - this football scenario being one of them - and you ask what it means to the big picture. After I wrote the post, I thought of what it specifically meant to Golden's "8 pillars" approach. What do these seemingly narrow/small decisions (that add up to make a difference) mean in light of this framework he has in place?

I'm looking for a silver lining or, in its absence, a legitimate reason to even further lower my hopes and expectations.

There are multiple pieces of this, but I will attack two of them - high level - fan view and football view -

As a fan, the data will start with the result and go back from there.
- We lost and are unhappy, so the data points will align with what we want or expect. In this scenario, Coach D, Y u no coach good?

- So the decision to kick vs go for it looks better or worse depending on the fan's emotion. That was a huge kick by a struggling kicker in a big game. It got points on the board and cut slightly into their lead.

- Angry fan may say: We need 7 points not 3. If he misses the kick, fans say we should have gone for it because we are down a lot and the defense sucks. But if we go for it and miss, fan is ready to scream out "take the points" now they have great field position and our defense sucks.

- For your point of 4 down territory, I like your thinking, but angry fan will twist that decision too. We go and get it, great. We fail, and it is what is Coley thinking putting the D back on the field. The defense sucks.


From the football perspective, I think the data is used to determine the best outcome going forward and saying did we make the best decision in that position at that time.
- FG - points on the board, kickoff and try to create a turnover using the model they have had "success" with coming behind 3 times already this year. The defense forced three fumbles but could not recover them. The plan almost worked again, this may not be good news for angry fan.

- 4th down territory -- I think the 4th down territory question needs a specific team mindset to run. Where prior to the 4th quarter jump around, the staff says, we are down, we came back before, we are going balls out on offense, every series is a 4 down series. Offense get ready to drive this out, and defense be ready to get the ball back. Then jump around. Personally I feel there is a distinction from the normal pump up when you add in the 4th down mindset.


To your point, what does that collection of data point and decisions mean -- for angry fan - we are screwed. For coaching staff, could mean that despite a crappy result, the right decisions were made at the right times enough times that the ship is in the right direction just not moving fast enough.

 

[Canesfan1899]

I feel like the whole mentality this year on the defensive side of the ball has screamed passive, bend don't break characteristics. Knowing the defense is struggling should dictate going for it in this instance and telling your senior QB on 3rd down that we have 2 downs to get the 1st, get positive yards on 3rd down and give yourself a chance on 4th. The inability to punch anyone in the mouth with either lines is concerning and makes me wonder how much the players are buying in.

 

[NotoriousJJE]

My problem is that this is the first time all year the team quit.

That's the truth.

They wanted this game more than us fans did. They knew what it meant. When things started going wrong, they panicked, and then they quit. From the pressers that's what they keep alluding to. That's on Golden and the assistants, but it is largely on the team.

I think a large part of our problem is that we STILL do not have senior leadership. Morris is not a natural leader, that's a problem. Hurns looks like the only senior leader on the team and is only beginning to emerge in that position. Green is not a leader, KC is not a leader, Seantrel, AJ, list goes on and on.

From the teams I have been on, you need guys that the youngins look up to, want to be like, guys that can rally the others. They can't be all effort guys either, they need to be studs. Who is our guy? Coaches can only do so much.

We need a natural leader who lives by Golden's pillars to be the guy. I think we have them, the problem is that they are underclassmen. The Howard's and Johnsons of the team...

 

[BosCane]

The scenario:

Down 42-24, Miami gets the ball at their own 37 yard line. They have 3 timeouts. They throw 3 straight incomplete passes and are 4th and 10 from the 37 yard line. Miami selects to punt the ball.

Was this the right or wrong choice in this scenario?

It was horribly wrong. I was furious and yelling with all my might.

First of all, I hated the 3rd down call. You KNOW, given the score and game situation, that you NEED a first down there. I saw that as 4 down territory before the 3rd down play. So I was hoping they would call a high percentage play that would be a solid bet for 6 or 7 yards (but could easily end up being more with our fellas). Instead, Morris threw a low percentage pass.....and it was still there, but he missed a bit high. Killer.

4th and 10. You still HAVE to play to win. You need that first down, you know you need 3 scores and time is running low. You go for it knowing that play is your last hope in the game. By punting, you have NO HOPE. You are just pinning VT back hoping the bad field position means they won't continue to score on us. It was the equivalent of waving a white flag and hoping for mercy. AND I ******* HATED IT.

Thats my $0.02.

 

[Angry Ibis]

I feel like the whole mentality this year on the defensive side of the ball has screamed passive, bend don't break characteristics. Knowing the defense is struggling should dictate going for it in this instance and telling your senior QB on 3rd down that we have 2 downs to get the 1st, get positive yards on 3rd down and give yourself a chance on 4th. The inability to punch anyone in the mouth with either lines is concerning and makes me wonder how much the players are buying in.

I don't see Morris having that killer instinct. But that is probably me being the fan. His results are not where I would like them to be so I nitpick about his making sure his hat is fresh and clean after each 3 and out.

I'm sure if Winston was throwing INTs all over the place or missing open reads, his pregame comedy routine would lose its luster to his followers.

 

[Canesfan1899]

I feel like the whole mentality this year on the defensive side of the ball has screamed passive, bend don't break characteristics. Knowing the defense is struggling should dictate going for it in this instance and telling your senior QB on 3rd down that we have 2 downs to get the 1st, get positive yards on 3rd down and give yourself a chance on 4th. The inability to punch anyone in the mouth with either lines is concerning and makes me wonder how much the players are buying in.

I don't see Morris having that killer instinct. But that is probably me being the fan. His results are not where I would like them to be so I nitpick about his making sure his hat is fresh and clean after each 3 and out.

I'm sure if Winston was throwing INTs all over the place or missing open reads, his pregame comedy routine would lose its luster to his followers.

I don't think Morris has it in him either but at some point you almost have to force it out of him. After Duke got hurt should have been that moment, but at some point we really need to see him show some more leadership than what we have seen thus far.

 

[NateDogg]

Lu, of those 8 pillars I would say Attitude, Passion, Preparation and Empowerment are missing from this team.

Attitude - Team has none, they don't have that edge to them that makes them enjoyable to watch. They show up play and everything seems like its suppressed.
Passion - Don't see this either, seems to me like guys just go through the motions on the field very robotic like
Preparation - See GT, UNC and Wake game. I think for UF and FSU and VT we actually came out prepared but for the last two we just unraveled.
Empowerment - I think Golden and coach D do not empower their guys to bring the best out of them. I believe they micro manage and suppress the natural athleticism and instincts the players may have

All of the above is reflected on game day and some of the poor choices that are made such as punting the ball in the scenario you mentioned above.

 

[Canesfan1899]

The scenario:

Down 42-24, Miami gets the ball at their own 37 yard line. They have 3 timeouts. They throw 3 straight incomplete passes and are 4th and 10 from the 37 yard line. Miami selects to punt the ball.

Was this the right or wrong choice in this scenario?

It was horribly wrong. I was furious and yelling with all my might.

First of all, I hated the 3rd down call. You KNOW, given the score and game situation, that you NEED a first down there. I saw that as 4 down territory before the 3rd down play. So I was hoping they would call a high percentage play that would be a solid bet for 6 or 7 yards (but could easily end up being more with our fellas). Instead, Morris threw a low percentage pass.....and it was still there, but he missed a bit high. Killer.

4th and 10. You still HAVE to play to win. You need that first down, you know you need 3 scores and time is running low. You go for it knowing that play is your last hope in the game. By punting, you have NO HOPE. You are just pinning VT back hoping the bad field position means they won't continue to score on us. It was the equivalent of waving a white flag and hoping for mercy. AND I ******* HATED IT.

Thats my $0.02.

You hit the nail on the head, you play to win not keep the score close going into the 4th quarter.

The VT that walked into no life stadium was a team that we should beat with or without Duke, and should have been far more aggressive in trying to take the game to them and doing everything in our power to take Logan Thomas out of the run game.

 

[D.L.I.N.K.D.A.GR8]

I thought kicking the 49 yard field goal was a terrible decision.....even though we made it and yes I agree I would have gone for it.

It just leads me to the discussion I think is worth having: if this in-game decision-making is an issue, how do we remedy this deficiency? Also, wouldn't it be indicative of the type of mentality going into game prep?

If they are analyzing being down three scores in the 4th quarter in game prep, we would be concerned about that too.

Yes, thank you. I figured someone would go down this path. The point is you add up a bunch of data points - this football scenario being one of them - and you ask what it means to the big picture. After I wrote the post, I thought of what it specifically meant to Golden's "8 pillars" approach. What do these seemingly narrow/small decisions (that add up to make a difference) mean in light of this framework he has in place?

I'm looking for a silver lining or, in its absence, a legitimate reason to even further lower my hopes and expectations.

There are multiple pieces of this, but I will attack two of them - high level - fan view and football view -

As a fan, the data will start with the result and go back from there.
- We lost and are unhappy, so the data points will align with what we want or expect. In this scenario, Coach D, Y u no coach good?

- So the decision to kick vs go for it looks better or worse depending on the fan's emotion. That was a huge kick by a struggling kicker in a big game. It got points on the board and cut slightly into their lead.

- Angry fan may say: We need 7 points not 3. If he misses the kick, fans say we should have gone for it because we are down a lot and the defense sucks. But if we go for it and miss, fan is ready to scream out "take the points" now they have great field position and our defense sucks.

- For your point of 4 down territory, I like your thinking, but angry fan will twist that decision too. We go and get it, great. We fail, and it is what is Coley thinking putting the D back on the field. The defense sucks.


From the football perspective, I think the data is used to determine the best outcome going forward and saying did we make the best decision in that position at that time.
- FG - points on the board, kickoff and try to create a turnover using the model they have had "success" with coming behind 3 times already this year. The defense forced three fumbles but could not recover them. The plan almost worked again, this may not be good news for angry fan.

- 4th down territory -- I think the 4th down territory question needs a specific team mindset to run. Where prior to the 4th quarter jump around, the staff says, we are down, we came back before, we are going balls out on offense, every series is a 4 down series. Offense get ready to drive this out, and defense be ready to get the ball back. Then jump around. Personally I feel there is a distinction from the normal pump up when you add in the 4th down mindset.


To your point, what does that collection of data point and decisions mean -- for angry fan - we are screwed. For coaching staff, could mean that despite a crappy result, the right decisions were made at the right times enough times that the ship is in the right direction just not moving fast enough.

Good stuff right there... I've been an angry fan since the game was tied at 7-7.. the forced fumble by Gunter that was recovered by va tech for a score was mind blowing... I was livid to say the least

 

[Biscuits]

Those pillars look like a bunch of horse**** to me. Gratitude? Partnerships? Empowerment?

Is this a football team or a HR department? He hanging this up in the locker room?

 

[NVA CANE]

The scenario:

Down 42-24, Miami gets the ball at their own 37 yard line. They have 3 timeouts. They throw 3 straight incomplete passes and are 4th and 10 from the 37 yard line. Miami selects to punt the ball.

Was this the right or wrong choice in this scenario?

It was horribly wrong. I was furious and yelling with all my might.

First of all, I hated the 3rd down call. You KNOW, given the score and game situation, that you NEED a first down there. I saw that as 4 down territory before the 3rd down play. So I was hoping they would call a high percentage play that would be a solid bet for 6 or 7 yards (but could easily end up being more with our fellas). Instead, Morris threw a low percentage pass.....and it was still there, but he missed a bit high. Killer.

4th and 10. You still HAVE to play to win. You need that first down, you know you need 3 scores and time is running low. You go for it knowing that play is your last hope in the game. By punting, you have NO HOPE. You are just pinning VT back hoping the bad field position means they won't continue to score on us. It was the equivalent of waving a white flag and hoping for mercy. AND I ******* HATED IT.

Thats my $0.02.

You hit the nail on the head, you play to win not keep the score close going into the 4th quarter.

The VT that walked into no life stadium was a team that we should beat with or without Duke, and should have been far more aggressive in trying to take the game to them and doing everything in our power to take Logan Thomas out of the run game.

IMO that is in Golden's DNA. His football philosophy is prevent defense and prevent offense. Golden doesn't play football to win, he plays to not lose. Its just another aspect of his passivity that is maddening to me. Perfect example, the UF game. We are lighting UFs defense up, they are tired and don't know what hit them. We suddenly go into a shell, sure UF made some adjustments, but for the rest of the game we literally play to not lose. With some aggressive play calling we could have blown that game wide open but instead we sat on the lead.

Against teams of equal or greater talent and strength that is how Golden approaches games. Look at the FSU game. Prevent defense. Play to not lose. Bend dont break, play to not lose, sit on a lead against UF, play to not lose. Punt on 4th and 10 against VT (as was the example by Lu), play to not lose.

IMO, that is one of Golden's biggest if not the biggest flaw. If he can shed that aspect of himself then we just may have a great coach. If not well.....

 

[OldhamA]

Golden is not innovative in the least - he is also extremely conservative. He is one of the many "lose less badly" coaches coaching. They are a dime a dozen, and they almost never win. In football, you must take chances to win, especially when you are behind. The football gods smile upon the brave. Anyone who has read enough of Gregg Easterbrook's columns on football has seen enough statistics on taking chances versus "playing it safe" (which is actually not playing it safe, but playing to lose while mitigating the difference in the final score). Playing it safe is a loser's mentality that will not win championships.

I think this is partly true.

He definitely strikes me as a "my team isn't going to make mistakes. I'm relying on your team making them" kind of coach, which is fine when you have more talent. Obviously that doesn't work when the **** hits the fan.

He has shown balls with his playcalling in the past though.

 

[CaneHammer]

Lu what about the way we started the 2nd half.. can we discuss that as well?

1&10 - Va Tech encroachment
1&5 - Crawford rush middle for 3 yards
2&2 - Morris Incomplete Pass
3&2 - Edwards stretch right 0 yards...
4&2 - Punt

If your the OC beggining the 2nd half down 14 given 5 yards would you use the same strategy on 2&3rd down????

Ewf. 1st and 5 from a nice spot and we go into a shell. That was ****ing brutal.

No, I don't even use that approach on 1st and 5. In the first half, we threw the ball 5 out of 11 times on first down. As the game got tighter and VTech took the lead, we went back to running the ball on 1st down. Remember that pass to Hagens against UNC that Morris missed? That's the specific play I call on 1st and 5.

That 3 and out was a killer.

YES!!!! Thank you! I wanted to vomit when i saw those three plays...

1st and 5 im definitely using play action with hagens slipping out to the flat... Or i would of dialed up the quick screen coley scored on to hurns to show them we're still running our offense you're going to have to stop us. I felt as if Coley lost hope in the unit as a whole with the play calling when we had good position and they gave us 5 yards to start the 2nd half smh

I agree. That span of plays right there lays out exactly what our OC (and HC) thinks of our QB. Down 14 and needing to swing momentum and he would rather put the ball in Clements' and OL's hands into probably the best run defense we have faced (maybe sans a healthy FL) than put it into our Senior snickers eating QB's.

 

[AUcane]

Lu what about the way we started the 2nd half.. can we discuss that as well?

1&10 - Va Tech encroachment
1&5 - Crawford rush middle for 3 yards
2&2 - Morris Incomplete Pass
3&2 - Edwards stretch right 0 yards...
4&2 - Punt

If your the OC beggining the 2nd half down 14 given 5 yards would you use the same strategy on 2&3rd down????

Ewf. 1st and 5 from a nice spot and we go into a shell. That was ****ing brutal.

No, I don't even use that approach on 1st and 5. In the first half, we threw the ball 5 out of 11 times on first down. As the game got tighter and VTech took the lead, we went back to running the ball on 1st down. Remember that pass to Hagens against UNC that Morris missed? That's the specific play I call on 1st and 5.

That 3 and out was a killer.

That's 2 straight games where the opening drive of the second half (in both games, it was a pivotal drive) was woefully bad.

Questionable play calling and lack of execution at critical points in the game. After those 2 drives you can just see the wind leaving the sails of this team.

 

[Big Sky Cane]

Its a great post Lu, and is definitely a topic worth discussing. However, one of those pillars is 'choices', and before i can really start to determine if we have the people on staff who can make the right choices on game day...i am still reserving judgement as to whether we have a CEO (golden) that can start making difficult choices OFF the field.

If he cant do that, the choices in game will be irrelevant. At this point, adapting the defense to their audience instead of force feeding the same **** would be a step in the right direction. Most off us want heads to roll (me included) but my god, year 3 and our (HIS) defense is still demonstrating the same ineptitude.

If he looks himself in the mirror (teaM(e)) and is willing to adapt (choices) maybe we can start to show a little on defense.

Brotha, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I believe it all comes together. I don't have an answer. I just have a ****load of questions.

I agree with the premise of your post, I just don't think a lot of coaches make those tough choices. Do you have any good examples of coaches you think make great strategic in game decisions that are say "outside of the box".

 

[LuCane]

Its a great post Lu, and is definitely a topic worth discussing. However, one of those pillars is 'choices', and before i can really start to determine if we have the people on staff who can make the right choices on game day...i am still reserving judgement as to whether we have a CEO (golden) that can start making difficult choices OFF the field.

If he cant do that, the choices in game will be irrelevant. At this point, adapting the defense to their audience instead of force feeding the same **** would be a step in the right direction. Most off us want heads to roll (me included) but my god, year 3 and our (HIS) defense is still demonstrating the same ineptitude.

If he looks himself in the mirror (teaM(e)) and is willing to adapt (choices) maybe we can start to show a little on defense.

Brotha, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I believe it all comes together. I don't have an answer. I just have a ****load of questions.

I agree with the premise of your post, I just don't think a lot of coaches make those tough choices. Do you have any good examples of coaches you think make great strategic in game decisions that are say "outside of the box".

I don't think they have to be "outside the box" to be good decisions. They just have to be sharp. And, no, I can't give you any specific examples b/c it's not something I list when I see it (next weekend I'll look out for it).

Chip Kelly when he was at Oregon is someone who came to mind in terms of strategic decisions. As much as I hate to admit it, Urban Meyer was solid in this area playing with the time, field and game scenarios. I like Kevin Sumlin's approach to the game. I was always a big Gary Patterson fan since the day MedleyCane (he went by a different username then) introduced him as an up-and-comer. I don't want to make him into a legend before he's even done anything, but Malzahn is ahead of the game. My favorite coach in the NFL is Sean Payton. He's always anticipating.

As you can probably tell, there are personal preferences and there's some bias listed above. And, I acknowledge that you're likely right: the vast majority of coaches put up a framework, recruit well, use their resources. That's their equation. They don't need to seek that "extra" for a competitive edge.

My opinion is that Miami needs more. We need more because we have to do more with less (resources). We were always on the edge of innovation when it came to game speed, then Erickson, then Butch's absolutely weird evaluation ability. Right now we're trying to be a leader in "culture." We say the right things. We jump around as a group. We need to win to validate that stuff, though. Like I said in your thread, Golden will have plenty of chances. Hope he puts it together.

 

[skyman]

Its a great post Lu, and is definitely a topic worth discussing. However, one of those pillars is 'choices', and before i can really start to determine if we have the people on staff who can make the right choices on game day...i am still reserving judgement as to whether we have a CEO (golden) that can start making difficult choices OFF the field.

If he cant do that, the choices in game will be irrelevant. At this point, adapting the defense to their audience instead of force feeding the same **** would be a step in the right direction. Most off us want heads to roll (me included) but my god, year 3 and our (HIS) defense is still demonstrating the same ineptitude.

If he looks himself in the mirror (teaM(e)) and is willing to adapt (choices) maybe we can start to show a little on defense.

Brotha, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I believe it all comes together. I don't have an answer. I just have a ****load of questions.

I agree with the premise of your post, I just don't think a lot of coaches make those tough choices. Do you have any good examples of coaches you think make great strategic in game decisions that are say "outside of the box".

I don't think they have to be "outside the box" to be good decisions. They just have to be sharp. And, no, I can't give you any specific examples b/c it's not something I list when I see it (next weekend I'll look out for it).

Chip Kelly when he was at Oregon is someone who came to mind in terms of strategic decisions. As much as I hate to admit it, Urban Meyer was solid in this area playing with the time, field and game scenarios. I like Kevin Sumlin's approach to the game. I was always a big Gary Patterson fan since the day MedleyCane (he went by a different username then) introduced him as an up-and-comer. I don't want to make him into a legend before he's even done anything, but Malzahn is ahead of the game. My favorite coach in the NFL is Sean Payton. He's always anticipating.

As you can probably tell, there are personal preferences and there's some bias listed above. And, I acknowledge that you're likely right: the vast majority of coaches put up a framework, recruit well, use their resources. That's their equation. They don't need to seek that "extra" for a competitive edge.

My opinion is that Miami needs more. We need more because we have to do more with less (resources). We were always on the edge of innovation when it came to game speed, then Erickson, then Butch's absolutely weird evaluation ability. Right now we're trying to be a leader in "culture." We say the right things. We jump around as a group. We need to win to validate that stuff, though. Like I said in your thread, Golden will have plenty of chances. Hope he puts it together.

Besides Patterson those guys all seem to be offensive coaches. They always seem to be more aggressive and Defensive seem to be conservative also. Offensive are more willing to take chances and play the numbers (not necessarily gamble).

 

[Big Sky Cane]

I don't think they have to be "outside the box" to be good decisions. They just have to be sharp. And, no, I can't give you any specific examples b/c it's not something I list when I see it (next weekend I'll look out for it).

Chip Kelly when he was at Oregon is someone who came to mind in terms of strategic decisions. As much as I hate to admit it, Urban Meyer was solid in this area playing with the time, field and game scenarios. I like Kevin Sumlin's approach to the game. I was always a big Gary Patterson fan since the day MedleyCane (he went by a different username then) introduced him as an up-and-comer. I don't want to make him into a legend before he's even done anything, but Malzahn is ahead of the game. My favorite coach in the NFL is Sean Payton. He's always anticipating.

As you can probably tell, there are personal preferences and there's some bias listed above. And, I acknowledge that you're likely right: the vast majority of coaches put up a framework, recruit well, use their resources. That's their equation. They don't need to seek that "extra" for a competitive edge.

My opinion is that Miami needs more. We need more because we have to do more with less (resources). We were always on the edge of innovation when it came to game speed, then Erickson, then Butch's absolutely weird evaluation ability. Right now we're trying to be a leader in "culture." We say the right things. We jump around as a group. We need to win to validate that stuff, though. Like I said in your thread, Golden will have plenty of chances. Hope he puts it together.

Those Chip Kelly (even though he's gone) decisions reared their ugly head this past week against Stanford. Often times those decisions just turn out to be ******* retarded and arrogant. I agree with the need for solid, good, statistically based (your situation as an example) and sharp decisions on game day. Not really a fan of the Chip though, because you'll get your smug **** pushed in against a solid team when making those choices.

It's like a Baseball manager who keeps his closer in the pen for the ninth, even though 2-4 is due up in the eighth. It's common sense for me, but 99% of the time the Manager saves his closer for the ninth.

 

[LuCane]

I don't think they have to be "outside the box" to be good decisions. They just have to be sharp. And, no, I can't give you any specific examples b/c it's not something I list when I see it (next weekend I'll look out for it).

Chip Kelly when he was at Oregon is someone who came to mind in terms of strategic decisions. As much as I hate to admit it, Urban Meyer was solid in this area playing with the time, field and game scenarios. I like Kevin Sumlin's approach to the game. I was always a big Gary Patterson fan since the day MedleyCane (he went by a different username then) introduced him as an up-and-comer. I don't want to make him into a legend before he's even done anything, but Malzahn is ahead of the game. My favorite coach in the NFL is Sean Payton. He's always anticipating.

As you can probably tell, there are personal preferences and there's some bias listed above. And, I acknowledge that you're likely right: the vast majority of coaches put up a framework, recruit well, use their resources. That's their equation. They don't need to seek that "extra" for a competitive edge.

My opinion is that Miami needs more. We need more because we have to do more with less (resources). We were always on the edge of innovation when it came to game speed, then Erickson, then Butch's absolutely weird evaluation ability. Right now we're trying to be a leader in "culture." We say the right things. We jump around as a group. We need to win to validate that stuff, though. Like I said in your thread, Golden will have plenty of chances. Hope he puts it together.

Those Chip Kelly (even though he's gone) decisions reared their ugly head this past week against Stanford. Often times those decisions just turn out to be ******* retarded and arrogant. I agree with the need for solid, good, statistically based (your situation as an example) and sharp decisions on game day. Not really a fan of the Chip though, because you'll get your smug **** pushed in against a solid team when making those choices.

It's like a Baseball manager who keeps his closer in the pen for the ninth, even though 2-4 is due up in the eighth. It's common sense for me, but 99% of the time the Manager saves his closer for the ninth.

Fine line between aggressive and that "arrogance" you reference. I get it. Personally, I prefer to err on the aggressive side. That's personal preference. As for decision-making, those in-game decisions and an overall approach is based on a mix of feel and statistics (tendencies/data). I believe in science.

 

[Angry Ibis]

Its a great post Lu, and is definitely a topic worth discussing. However, one of those pillars is 'choices', and before i can really start to determine if we have the people on staff who can make the right choices on game day...i am still reserving judgement as to whether we have a CEO (golden) that can start making difficult choices OFF the field.

If he cant do that, the choices in game will be irrelevant. At this point, adapting the defense to their audience instead of force feeding the same **** would be a step in the right direction. Most off us want heads to roll (me included) but my god, year 3 and our (HIS) defense is still demonstrating the same ineptitude.

If he looks himself in the mirror (teaM(e)) and is willing to adapt (choices) maybe we can start to show a little on defense.

Brotha, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I believe it all comes together. I don't have an answer. I just have a ****load of questions.

I agree with the premise of your post, I just don't think a lot of coaches make those tough choices. Do you have any good examples of coaches you think make great strategic in game decisions that are say "outside of the box".

I don't think they have to be "outside the box" to be good decisions. They just have to be sharp. And, no, I can't give you any specific examples b/c it's not something I list when I see it (next weekend I'll look out for it).

Chip Kelly when he was at Oregon is someone who came to mind in terms of strategic decisions. As much as I hate to admit it, Urban Meyer was solid in this area playing with the time, field and game scenarios. I like Kevin Sumlin's approach to the game. I was always a big Gary Patterson fan since the day MedleyCane (he went by a different username then) introduced him as an up-and-comer. I don't want to make him into a legend before he's even done anything, but Malzahn is ahead of the game. My favorite coach in the NFL is Sean Payton. He's always anticipating.

As you can probably tell, there are personal preferences and there's some bias listed above. And, I acknowledge that you're likely right: the vast majority of coaches put up a framework, recruit well, use their resources. That's their equation. They don't need to seek that "extra" for a competitive edge.

My opinion is that Miami needs more. We need more because we have to do more with less (resources). We were always on the edge of innovation when it came to game speed, then Erickson, then Butch's absolutely weird evaluation ability. Right now we're trying to be a leader in "culture." We say the right things. We jump around as a group. We need to win to validate that stuff, though. Like I said in your thread, Golden will have plenty of chances. Hope he puts it together.

Is Sumlin a benefactor of Johnny Football or is he himself the goods at the top level of College Football? At one time, I thought Meyer was a stud coach, but has he done it without elite players and/or assistants -- what happened at UF after tebow, harvin, the pouncey sisters and Hernandez? --- he brought in some top notch recruits, but could not achieve the greatness even with a top recruit at QB. Again he finds himself with a great QB and a talent plus against every conference team. Point is - is he good, or just as good as his elite players?

In a case of do the players make the coach or the coach make the players, let's entertain our rivals from FSU and their longtime defensive coordinator Mickey Andrews --- great, legendary, creative......with Deion, Buckley, Jones, Brooks, etc, etc...running over the ACC in a time when the 4th string at FSU could start at most ACC programs and before the change in scholarship limits. A great run he had -- against most teams, but not always against Miami, Florida, Notre Dame (ie the good teams) and he was impressive. But then the scholarship limits came in and adjustments needed to be made. He could not adjust when the playing field was leveling off. Did he forget how to coach football in the ACC or was he merely made great by the greatness of his elite players?

chicken or the egg