Tech Head
Buzz
Posts : 57
Join date : 2008-03-27
 | | Subject: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self Thu May 15, 2008 5:45 pm | |
| Post below accident 
Last edited by Tech Head on Fri May 16, 2008 4:28 am; edited 1 time in total | |
|
Tech Head
Buzz
Posts : 57
Join date : 2008-03-27
| | Subject: Re: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self Fri May 16, 2008 4:14 am | |
| - Tech Head wrote:
- After listening to Bill the Navy beat writer it got me thinking about 3 distinct ways GT coaches have challenged players. I will try to describe these 3 ways, and give my take on the Right Approach to this question. I will look at this question from two angles. How much each approach keeps players accountable to a higher expectation, including discipline, negative evaluation, and dialogue. The other is how much does each approach keep the head coach accountable to the fans, players, and himself.
1. GOL- Accountability to Players-Man this guy was intense and a great football coach. However, who can ever forget his comment to former GT running back after the player made a mistake late in the game that cost us the game (can't remember if the player either ran out of bounds or fumbled) where he called the player STUPID after the game. Man that was harsh. O’Leary was very intense no BS allowed coach. He kept his players accountable, would not mind evaluating them in front of the media as well. Another unforgettable memory was O’Leary putting an OLmen in a drill running the football with no blocking because he didn't block for his teammates the previous play. The OLmen got destroyed and O’Leary showed his intense behavior again. He was notorious for never allowing a player be late to a meeting, not letting players wear red, and making sure every players showed up to class. In fact he was quoted as saying most of his job was making sure players went to class and did the academic part of their responsibility.
Accountability to himself- I think early on GOL kept himself very accountable to the fans, himself, players, and the staff. Early on he stated that he even enjoyed having fans complain about calls, disgruntled about results, and most moaning because it meant he had raised Tech expectations. However, toward the end of his stay at Tech he started getting a little defensive IMO. He has the famous inner circle quote in the paper in response to negative reactions to Tech underachieving one year. This circle included the fans on the outside of the circle. He was much more defensive to questions, and poor results toward the end. However, overall he held himself accountable
2. Chan Gailey Accountability of players- Gailey had the approach that these guys are adults and I need to be buddies with them. Seems he did relate to the players, but the question is did they respect him and did he put enough boundaries around them. With the team split sounds like he did not keep the O and D accountable to each other, and was constantly defending the player’s performances rather than pushing them IMO.
Accountability of himself- This is where Gailey was the weakest. Always defensive to the media, never admitting to mistakes, and feelings of people attacking him. The comment about UGA just being a game shows how defensive he really was, couldn’t admit that he has just failed, and you can't change things that you don’t admit. He never seemed to have the desire to get better than where he was at, and that was mostly due to not admitting where he was at.
3. Paul Johnson Accountability of players-This guy is an O’Leary on steroids! That one story Bill gave about a player making a mistake in practice and he told the player if he finds himself in a game to call a timeout so that they can take him out of the game. He publicly is honest about poor performances of individuals and coaches. From what I heard he is doing the same thing as O’Leary in regards to making sure players are going to class and staying out of trouble. From the interview from Bill it sounds like PJ not only has his players fear him/respect, but also relates to the players well do to his honesty. Bill stated that he has never told a lie. The way Bill makes Paul sound like a mythical founding father figure  ; I don't think he will be lying on his resume. 
Accountability of self- This guy holds himself to the utmost standard. Many of his quotes he attacks himself for not coaching good enough, and promised to do better. According to Bill PJ did not take losing his first season very well. PJ did not sleep, worked harder, and challenged himself to do better.
Tech Head analysis and score (1 meaning light-10 meaning strong)
GOL AP (accountability of players) 11
GOL AS (Accountability of self) 8
Chan Gailey AP-3
Chan Gailey AS-3
Paul Johnson AP-11
Paul Johnson AS-11 (GOL on steroids!)
I tend to lean toward GOL, and PJ style. I think as a coach you must have respect and a healthy level of fear. Now at the same time you have to have an emotional connection to your players. However, being buddies is not how you do it IMO. You develop the emotional connection by demonstrating to the players that you care about them, honesty, and respect. I do think some of O’Leary, and Paul's tactics/ one liners are too much at times. Calling a player stupid, or belittling them is IMO not the best approach. However, I was not there and those behaviors are far outweighed by their great job of pushing the players, taking care of the players with healthy boundaries, and giving the players honest direction in life. As far as accountable to self I think Paul Johnson is the most ideal. From the Bill interview it sounds like if Paul Johnson doesn't succeed at first he will work harder, and if he doesn't succeed after that he will work even harder. That is my kind of coach! Even if he only wins 7 games per year I will be so much more excited about Tech Football because I share so many values that Paul shares.
 Tech Head | |
|
GT_Fox
Buzz
Posts : 76
Join date : 2008-04-23
Age : 39
Location : Smyrna, GA
| | Subject: Re: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self Fri May 16, 2008 9:07 am | |
| I think you just scored a  with that analysis of our past coaches. I also agree with the style of GOL and CPJ. I think that collegiate atheletes, especially the incoming freshmen and RS freshmen need a coach that will be in their face accountable. With a coach being buddy buddy with them all the time there isn't as much respect as when they take the coach's criticizism and punishment because of mistakes they made. When a coach has more of a CPJ style, to me players end up giving more respect to them because they see how the challenges and "tough love" made them into better players and better men. Just my 1 1/2 cents  | |
|
Tech Head
Buzz
Posts : 57
Join date : 2008-03-27
| | Subject: Re: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self Fri May 16, 2008 3:16 pm | |
| | |
|
GT_Fox
Buzz
Posts : 76
Join date : 2008-04-23
Age : 39
Location : Smyrna, GA
| | Subject: Re: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self Wed May 21, 2008 12:05 pm | |
| | |
|
Sponsored content
| | Subject: Re: The right ApproachCoaches challenging Players/self | |
| |
|
