Do coaches that were former players (1 Viewer)

[Biabreakable]

I was just thinking about this in regards to Mike Singeltary, Gary Kubiak and probably some others I don't remember right now.

Do you think it is an advantage for these former player coaches over other coaches?

I am thinking it helps because young players may have more respect for a coach who has played at the pro level before. But there are tons of great coaches who never played pro. Tuna, Madden ect.

Just wondering what you might think the differences are and if there is an advantage for some coaches who were former players? And if so what are they? And how might that affect the way you see their players?

Hope this makes sense. Kind of having a hard time coming up with the right way to ask this question.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

I don't think there is a significant advantage. Either you have the skills to lead a team, or you don't.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

 

[Biabreakable]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

Thanks for the info.Where did you get this from?

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

Thanks for the info.Where did you get this from?

I looked them all up. I did make an error though as Tony Dungy also won as coach and player.

 

[Baby]

Note: Steve Marucuri SP? (Former 49ers Coach) played Football IN GENERAL for 1 week as a player. LOL.

 

[Truman]

Good info here. Obviously track record plays a big part in credibility for anyone taking on a new role. It would add to a new coach's credibility, but their track record as a coach would play a much larger role, particularly if they have been a part of the organization.

 

[two_dollars]

Do you think it is an advantage for these former player coaches over other coaches?

Short answer: No.Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

 

[Bri]

I was just thinking about this in regards to Mike Singeltary, Gary Kubiak and probably some others I don't remember right now.Do you think it is an advantage for these former player coaches over other coaches?I am thinking it helps because young players may have more respect for a coach who has played at the pro level before. But there are tons of great coaches who never played pro. Tuna, Madden ect.Just wondering what you might think the differences are and if there is an advantage for some coaches who were former players? And if so what are they? And how might that affect the way you see their players?Hope this makes sense. Kind of having a hard time coming up with the right way to ask this question.

I don't remember Kubiak playing much.Anyhow, there's a double-edged sword at play here. To revert to hoops for a sec, Larry Bird and Magic had a hard time understanding/relating to the simple fact that everything didn't come easy to the players and that players weren't as "obsessed" with the game as they were. I'm struggling to word that so...go gentle on the replies please.Take a guy like Singletary. It's probably fair to assume he knows linebackers as well as anyone in the league but, can he break it down enough for the players to learn from him? Or does he leave alot assumed as it's so familiar to him?Other positions, I think we'll see how he does.IMO Jack Del Rio was a tough hard nosed player that wasn't as quick and smooth as he was about brute. He's got the Jaguars being a similarly tough group but, it's very odd that their "quick smooth" positions don't do well. Sadly they're often the star positions that get teams to the Supe. Great CBs, QBs, WRs etc. Jeff Fisher, on the other hand seems to have learned about the trenches from his playing days. He has made it apparent that he cares first and foremost about winning in the trenches, for pretty much his whole career. The Titans have really been fortunate/coached well on the lines. They went from some HOFers and team HOF types to the current group with ol Mawae and two super T's. On the DL it's much of the same just with depth and rotation more in mind.Outside of that the other positions seem secondary.WR(like BB and BP at times in their career) only need to be effective, not exceptional until now when they have a very good team and have the opportunity to add them.All in all it's gone from McNair to Young with Kerry filling in. Very unexciting.The secondary is littered with (mostly) later picks and cheaper FAs. I can go on and on, it starts at the lines and goes outward. Some-and this is why Fisher is great- of it is simply this coach can teach and if they can land the right prospect, he can make him effective. **One could rightfully give Mike Munchak lots of credit. That would also fit in here. I think if DelRio were to have better lines we'd know more about him as a coach. **Fisher and Singletary are supposedly in touch a bunch. Fisher is well known for being a teacher of proper technique. Good or not, FAs will leave Hou/Ten well drilled. Is Singletary? Will he be? Coaches believing proper technique is where it all starts goes back a long long ways but it can be difficult with today's pampered players. ALOT of new coaches (positional too) have a rapport with today's pampered players by being almost easy going. That can bite a head coach when he needs to put his foot down. It seems far better to have that in a positional coach.

 

[Bri]

I could totally see Peyton having a hard time like Bird/Magic if he were to be a head coach

 

[Biabreakable]

I could totally see Peyton having a hard time like Bird/Magic if he were to be a head coach

Interesting. Because many people see him as a coach on the field.I think Brad Johnson might be a good QB coach if he wants to be. Pretty sure the Vikings messed up having him coach for them though.

 

[Truman]

Peyton would be most effective coaching linemen. He has a real emphasis on protection and taking advantage of mismatches. I think he'd be an outstanding HC, though former Qbs don't tend to head down that path.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

 

[Bri]

I could totally see Peyton having a hard time like Bird/Magic if he were to be a head coach

Interesting. Because many people see him as a coach on the field.

But he has (arguably) the most important position. It's a king leading the bishops and knights. Could he teach a king?

 

[Matt Waldman]

It's a fun question. You don't have to play football to have the skills of being an excellent tactician, manager of processes, and leader of people.

I do find it interesting that former QBs (correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Gruden was a college QB for a minute) Gruden and Steve Van Buren were very hard on their teams.

Gary Kubak was a pretty solid back up for Elway. I remember him coming into games in relief of Elway after an injury and doing a very good job.

I think there might be merit to the idea that players who were superstars have very low tolerance for anything less than perfection because they were so talented that they have difficulty coping with players that make mistakes that can be corrected. Their anger probably grates on players and drives the guys that could be decent contributors with work into a shell. I'd think a player like Marino would be a horrible coach. But two middling LBs like Marty Schottenheimer and Bill Cowher were strong NFL coaches.

Add John Madden to the lis of former players. He was a lineman drafted by the Eagles. Not sure he played very long, but he was originally a player.

Bill Belicheck

 

[Biabreakable]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I am still curious about this.If I knew of a database to track it I think this could be one block in a running track of all coaches across the league. Which could have other things added like total offense/defense for each respective year for each coach as well as other things.Maybe I am just dreaming here. But it would be nice to look at probabilities for these things and be able to apply them in analysis on team projections.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I am still curious about this.If I knew of a database to track it I think this could be one block in a running track of all coaches across the league. Which could have other things added like total offense/defense for each respective year for each coach as well as other things.Maybe I am just dreaming here. But it would be nice to look at probabilities for these things and be able to apply them in analysis on team projections.

Exactly 50% of coaches in NFL history have been players, but that's obviously skewed towards the early days of football. In '08, 11 of the 35 HCs were former NFL players; 9 of the 33 HCs were former players.

 

[Biabreakable]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I am still curious about this.If I knew of a database to track it I think this could be one block in a running track of all coaches across the league. Which could have other things added like total offense/defense for each respective year for each coach as well as other things.Maybe I am just dreaming here. But it would be nice to look at probabilities for these things and be able to apply them in analysis on team projections.

Exactly 50% of coaches in NFL history have been players, but that's obviously skewed towards the early days of football. In '08, 11 of the 35 HCs were former NFL players; 9 of the 33 HCs were former players.

Are you getting this from PFR or what source?Thanks for the info btwIt might be trivial but I find interesting nonetheless.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I am still curious about this.If I knew of a database to track it I think this could be one block in a running track of all coaches across the league. Which could have other things added like total offense/defense for each respective year for each coach as well as other things.Maybe I am just dreaming here. But it would be nice to look at probabilities for these things and be able to apply them in analysis on team projections.

Exactly 50% of coaches in NFL history have been players, but that's obviously skewed towards the early days of football. In '08, 11 of the 35 HCs were former NFL players; 9 of the 33 HCs were former players.

Are you getting this from PFR or what source?Thanks for the info btwIt might be trivial but I find interesting nonetheless.

I've got a database that has this information.

 

[Christo]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I don't see why. It's a completely different skill set.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I don't see why. It's a completely different skill set.

About 1 in every 100-150 players become NFL HCs. Less than one in a million non-players become HCs.

 

[Christo]

Of the 25 coaches to win Super Bowls, only 8 actually played in the NFL (Dungy, Cowher, Ditka, Flores, Knoll, Landry, Shula, McCaffertey). A few others were drafted but didn't play (Billick, Holmgren, Parcells). Tom Flores and Mike Ditka are the only two who won the Super Bowl as both coach and player.

The pool of people who have never played in the NFL is many, many, many times larger than the pool of players who have played in the NFL. I can look into this later, but I'm not sure what the ratio is of coaches who have played in the NFL to coaches who have not. But there's no doubt that step one to becoming a good, bad or SB winning head coach is to be an NFL player, first.

I don't see why. It's a completely different skill set.

About 1 in every 100-150 players become NFL HCs. Less than one in a million non-players become HCs.

That doesn't support your statement. It ignores the millions of people who have no ambition to be a NFL HC. If you could come up with the success rate of non-NFL players with ambitions to become NFL coaches, you might be on to something.

 

[heidbrink]

People who are good at a thing are not necessarily the best coaches of said thing. Those who are blessed with the amazing skills and work ethic required to be elite talent sometimes have a hard time understanding why others cant just "do it like i do".

This is true in all things not just football. For example, do you think Albert Einstein would make a good algebra 1 professor?

It really requires a different set of skills to do a thing and to teach a thing.

btw. I really like what I'm reading about Mike Singletary in particular. He seems to really be connecting well with his players.

 

[Biabreakable]

I've got a database that has this information.

Ok. And forgive me if you already do this but what about taking this a few steps further? By looking at the coach for each respective year and how the team performed in offensive and defensive categories. For assistants you of course would be more specific in looking at the performance of the position(s) they coached that season.For exmple here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/BeliBi0.htm

Rather than rankings however yards/run/pass/rec and likewise for yards against on defense might be more useful and what these rankings are derived from.

And really if the coach was a former player or not may not be relevant to these things. But maybe it is.

A running database of this information can be useful to look at when there are coaching changes in the league. You can look at the coaches track record and try to guesstimate how they will perform in the new role or with the new team. If this is already put together then makes for easy updating each season.

I have always tried to judge each of these situations individualy (as I would continue to do) but my judgements are more subjective and have no hard data to support them. At least in a relative sense because I am not comparing each coach to all of the other coaches that hold the same position on other teams. I think this could be valuable to look at more objectivly.

If or how much one might use such information to influence their team rankings would probably be small or not at all. Or maybe this actualy has more predictive power than I imagine. A 2-5% bump either way would be significant.

Never seen anything like this done before.

 

[Sweet Love]

I went to the same college as Bellicheck and Mangini and it was a small, liberal arts school, that literally had one of the worst D-III programs in the nation. While Bellicheck is our measure (best HC today), his father was a longtime coach at Navy and he got his first job through connections. I know many on this board do not care for Mangini, but he was an academic All-American at said school and got his first job through Bellicheck with the Browns in the early-mid 90s...at the end of the day, it is like business in general. It is not what you know, but WHO you know.