We hear the phrase "coaching them up" a lot. So much that it is often used as joke here. But what does this really mean when people identify coaches that are good at "coaching them up"? I believe it is a euphemism for a lot more but what is it?
"Coaching Them Up"
- Thread starter Killjoy
- Start date
its a phrase we now use because we wont be signing 4 star players any more. when we had brew, we were all about stars, now we know we won't get lots of 4 star or 5 star players so now we are confident that kill will "coach them up" to make up for it. we're fans so we are inclined to this line of thinking. i'm fine with it as kill is a real coach and not a salesman. just as long as he brings more success than mase then we're good to go.
BarnBurner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 19,831
- Reaction score
- 4,552
- Points
- 113
Coach Em Up
Doesn't matter the level. The majority of guys can't coach. They have success when they stumble on special players. Others are successful year in year out because they have the ability to coach. The formula how they do it is different for each guy. Genuinely caring and believing in their players is likely the first ingredient for all successful guys. And Not just saying it. In football, conditioning has to be a major component. Changing culture. Discipline. Getting kids to trust you beyond how they have felt about other coaches....so they'll listen and try to do what you ask rather than just nod and give it lip service. Building individual relationships. It's about how much trust there is between player and coach. That is the difference between just being their coach and "coaching em up". Trust. Belief in one another. Not just saying the words....believing it.
Doesn't matter the level. The majority of guys can't coach. They have success when they stumble on special players. Others are successful year in year out because they have the ability to coach. The formula how they do it is different for each guy. Genuinely caring and believing in their players is likely the first ingredient for all successful guys. And Not just saying it. In football, conditioning has to be a major component. Changing culture. Discipline. Getting kids to trust you beyond how they have felt about other coaches....so they'll listen and try to do what you ask rather than just nod and give it lip service. Building individual relationships. It's about how much trust there is between player and coach. That is the difference between just being their coach and "coaching em up". Trust. Belief in one another. Not just saying the words....believing it.
Bisker82
Death From Above
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2009
- Messages
- 532
- Reaction score
- 21
- Points
- 18
Asinine. You have absolutley no idea if Coach Kill & company will land any 4 or 5 star players. Success breed success. If Kill can start a consistent winning tradition, then the recruits will respond to that.
"Coaching them up" means getting the kids to realize & achieve their potential through discipline & hard work. It's not some flippant euphemism that you seem to want to make it.
RodentRampage
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 9,467
- Reaction score
- 198
- Points
- 63
Agreed. We have no reason to think that Kill will not be able to recruit. Winning is the best recruiter there is. Part of a coach's job is to teach the players to be better players, to get the maximum out of them, whether or not the player is self-motivated.
Agree with AA, coach Kill never said he does not want highly ranked kids, he basically said he does not trust them for individual evaluations. (Technically I guess you could say his argument is that even if the rankings are statistically significant, they are not that accurate by individual, so they do not help him.) Anyway, Brewster liked all of the recruit ranking stuff, while Mason and Kill think they are useless. if we were to have a highly ranked player it would be by coincidence with Coach Kill while it would be an objective for Brewster.
Still, the more successful we are, the more likely our classes will have higher rankings, because I am sure there are some higher ranked kids the staff would like to recruit, but know are out of reach at the moment.
Still, the more successful we are, the more likely our classes will have higher rankings, because I am sure there are some higher ranked kids the staff would like to recruit, but know are out of reach at the moment.
BarnBurner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 19,831
- Reaction score
- 4,552
- Points
- 113
LonelyIowaGopher
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Messages
- 167
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Since when...
Since when did the Minnesota Gopher football program land "a lot" of four and five star recruits?
"Coaching up" is what the coaches at schools like Wisconsin, Iowa and TCU have done for ten years and more. It is also just good coaching, as in good teaching. If you're looking for a program loaded with four and five star recruits, start following the SEC. I wouldn't miss a televised SEC game on late Saturday afternoons on CBS in the fall.
Since when did the Minnesota Gopher football program land "a lot" of four and five star recruits?
"Coaching up" is what the coaches at schools like Wisconsin, Iowa and TCU have done for ten years and more. It is also just good coaching, as in good teaching. If you're looking for a program loaded with four and five star recruits, start following the SEC. I wouldn't miss a televised SEC game on late Saturday afternoons on CBS in the fall.
WAGopher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 3,559
- Reaction score
- 1,767
- Points
- 113
To me there are 2 kinds of coaching, planning and implementing Xs and Os, and coaching fundamentals and execution. Some coaches do better at Xs and Os and others do better at making the team better football players. The best coaches can do both and I think 'coaching players up' requires a coach that does well with fundamentals and execution.
GopherFan75
Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Messages
- 770
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
It is an excuse for people who don't think you need talent to win.
RodentRampage
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 9,467
- Reaction score
- 198
- Points
- 63
No, it is not. No one has claimed that you don't need talent to win. You seem to think you don't need coaching to win. Why are some coaches able to get good results with less regarded recruits? It is because they are good at teaching players to be better players. Your position is based on the assumption that Kill will not be able to recruit. What evidence do you have for this?
SmokeyGopher
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 141
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
Regardless off star rating you still want to coach them up. I think he is saying he wants players to improve. What good is a 4 star recruit that doesn't improve?
GopherFan75
Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
- Messages
- 770
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I have never once said Kill cannot or will not be able to recruit. Feel free to point out where I have said this.
Southoftheriver
Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2011
- Messages
- 71
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 6
IMO coaching players up has as much to do with the quality of the asst. coaches and OC/DC. If these guys can build trust with the players and get them to buy in on what you're selling, you have a chance. Sure the HC is important, but the assistants play a vital role in player buy in, especially when you're changing over....again and again and again
"Coach them up" is no different than any of Brewster's quotes. It's funny because it's a different group of people that have latched on to what Kill has said, but it's still just words. It's ridiculous to believe that you can take a bunch of kids that other schools have evaluated and decided not to offer and have a level of success that exceeds those schools. The talent versus coaching argument is a non-issue, because we need BOTH. Firing Brewster did not mean we needed to hire a coach who had serious questions about his ability to recruit. I hope Kill can recruit and it's way too early to judge him, but nobody can argue that the early results are promising.
Southoftheriver
Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2011
- Messages
- 71
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 6
Would it be fair to compare Kill's results to Brewster's 3.5 years from now?
dpodoll68
Elite Poster
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 19,268
- Reaction score
- 868
- Points
- 113
What are you talking about? I absolutely can, and will, argue that the early results are promising.
Consider:
A) Kill had zero experience in a BCS conference as a player or coach before being hired by Minnesota. The same can be said for most of his assistants as well.
B) He managed to retain the services of several players (the McAvoys, Matilus) who had multiple BCS offers.
C) He managed to retain the services of several key in-state recruits (Olson, Crawford-Tufts, Westerhaus).
D) He augmented those retained by adding several prospects with multiple BCS offers (Gardener, Montgomery, Amaefula).
E) He brought over the top end of his NIU class, players that he had been recruiting for a long time and whom he knew fit his system well.
F) He shored up our special teams weaknesses by bringing in an experienced BCS kicker who can play and contribute immediately.
G) He has convinced several quality players (many/most of whom could've taken scholarships at a lower level) to walk on here and compete for a scholarship, thus both adding to the roster depth and saving scholarships for use elsewhere either this year or into the future.
And he has done all of this in a little less than 2 months. Your overarching point is correct in that we truly can't judge his recruiting for several years, but to say that a positive argument cannot be made is ridiculous.
RodentRampage
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 9,467
- Reaction score
- 198
- Points
- 63
No. I will not.
You claimed "It is an excuse for people who don't think you need talent to win."
YOU point out anyone who said you don't need talent.
RodentRampage
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2008
- Messages
- 9,467
- Reaction score
- 198
- Points
- 63
And what are the "serious questions" about Kill's ability to recruit?
The fact that the vast majority of the kids he's been able to get a verbal from have not had another BCS offer. The fact that we've had kids on campus choose Southern Miss and Florida International over the Gophers. The fact that, arguably, his two best recruits have both de-committed. The fact that we will likely end up 10th in the Big Ten in recruiting. The fact that he's never recruited at the BCS level and the vast majority of his staff has not either. The Pittsburgh coach, who came from Tulsa, has had more success on the trail than Kill (including beating him out for Carrington) in a much, much shorter period of time.
We will see how Kill does in his first full class, I hope he succeeds.