SnoSki
Full Member
Assuming that "winning games" is the result of the formula, and not part of the formula..I'd venture to say that a championship team is:
40% Head coach : Coach has to not only be a good motivator, but also a good evaluator, talent developer, disciplinarian and part-time PR guy. This is why guys like Saban, Patterson and Petersen are top-rated these days. They seem to do all of the above very well.
33% Caliber of recruit: Kind of speaks for itself. Even CGP's Rose Bowl class had highly-rated (more starsies) recruits mixed in with the 2 star guys.
10% Fanbase: Much less important than HC or the players themselves, but not irrelevant. Loyal fans can help improve a struggling team into brighter days and help make sure that the falls into down years are slower and not much of a fall. Fickle fans are a detriment, and I think we can all agree there. On the same note, stupid fans (such as the ones that provide illegal benefits) can be bad as well.
7% Athletic department and University Admins: TCU struggled in the mid-to-late 20th century because the admins in Sadler didn't care at all about sports. Additionally, even when the admins put great effort into sports (such as V. Boschini and co), their desires can be unfulfilled without a great leader like CDC and his staff.
5% Coaching support staff, aka coodinators, positions coaches, equipment managers: A good set of coodinators (like [Gary Danielson] Bumpass and Fuenderson, Burns, Haverty, Tademy, etc) is very important to include. Maybe even more than I have on here. We missed Glasgow in the secondary this year as shown in the SMU and Baylor games.
3% Facilities: You can have all of the above and do pretty well, but without decent facilities it will be hard to not only recruit good players but also develop the ones you do get. Additionally, a good stadium attracts the casual fan and helps bring in additional revenues for the program.
2% Equipment, uniforms, etc: The smallest portion of the list, but still worth at least a category of its own. Recruits like to wear nice jerseys, cleats, and workout clothes and having a strong connection with a manufacturer like Nike (such as Oregon has, and like we're getting into) can be only a positive when it's done right.
I think we're on the right track on all of these things. In short, you can havre great facilities, a great admin and a great collection of recruits, but if you don't have a solid head coach you are bound to struggle (see Ohio State post-Tressel, Florida post-Urban, and USC, post-Carroll).
Anyone else have a thought on this? Changes?
40% Head coach : Coach has to not only be a good motivator, but also a good evaluator, talent developer, disciplinarian and part-time PR guy. This is why guys like Saban, Patterson and Petersen are top-rated these days. They seem to do all of the above very well.
33% Caliber of recruit: Kind of speaks for itself. Even CGP's Rose Bowl class had highly-rated (more starsies) recruits mixed in with the 2 star guys.
10% Fanbase: Much less important than HC or the players themselves, but not irrelevant. Loyal fans can help improve a struggling team into brighter days and help make sure that the falls into down years are slower and not much of a fall. Fickle fans are a detriment, and I think we can all agree there. On the same note, stupid fans (such as the ones that provide illegal benefits) can be bad as well.
7% Athletic department and University Admins: TCU struggled in the mid-to-late 20th century because the admins in Sadler didn't care at all about sports. Additionally, even when the admins put great effort into sports (such as V. Boschini and co), their desires can be unfulfilled without a great leader like CDC and his staff.
5% Coaching support staff, aka coodinators, positions coaches, equipment managers: A good set of coodinators (like [Gary Danielson] Bumpass and Fuenderson, Burns, Haverty, Tademy, etc) is very important to include. Maybe even more than I have on here. We missed Glasgow in the secondary this year as shown in the SMU and Baylor games.
3% Facilities: You can have all of the above and do pretty well, but without decent facilities it will be hard to not only recruit good players but also develop the ones you do get. Additionally, a good stadium attracts the casual fan and helps bring in additional revenues for the program.
2% Equipment, uniforms, etc: The smallest portion of the list, but still worth at least a category of its own. Recruits like to wear nice jerseys, cleats, and workout clothes and having a strong connection with a manufacturer like Nike (such as Oregon has, and like we're getting into) can be only a positive when it's done right.
I think we're on the right track on all of these things. In short, you can havre great facilities, a great admin and a great collection of recruits, but if you don't have a solid head coach you are bound to struggle (see Ohio State post-Tressel, Florida post-Urban, and USC, post-Carroll).
Anyone else have a thought on this? Changes?
