🏈 Recruiting vs Coaching - What matters most?

[Bo]

Another example that talent can win games without great (or even good) coaching:

Mike Shula had a 10 win season.

 

[It Takes Eleven]

Plenty of coaches you could have used to make this statement, and you pick Paul Johnson. What on earth made you think of him? Does someone here actually think he is a high caliber coach?

Paul Johnson is the bestest coach in the world. He's the Chuck Norris of the coaching world. He's so tough he has eleven toenails.

 

[bamatommy]

I think it's recruiting AND coaching. It's both, not either/or.

 

[Duder]

This 3 vs 4 vs 5 star crap is so over blown. To think that a room full of grown men would gather to watch some kid play games with hats is really pathetic. A coach is what makes the biggest difference. The ideal example is Cincinnati under Brian Kelly. Another good example is Navy under their current and previous coach. What about Utah? TCU? Really? How the heck could they win with such lowly ranked talent? Do you really think that because Notre Dame hasn't been at the top of recruiting that they won't be in the top 5 in the next couple of seasons? You can bet they will be. SC's classes have been very weak, yet they won the SEC east last year. How about Arkansas' previous classes? I don't recall Oregon being ranked in the top 5 in classes in the previous years.

Remember when everyone was pathetically acting like fools without a life over Terrell Pryor? How many national titles has he brung?
How about the ranking system? Was Javier Arenas really only a 2 star prospect? Was Nick Fairly only a 3 star? I remember when Jasper Sanks was considered the top prospect in the country by multiple services. Do you even know who the heck he is or which SEC school he played for? How did Nick Fairly get to be the top pick in the draft if he was only a 3 star?
This stuff is way overblown, especially when it comes to linemen.

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to get top notch talent, but what happens after they get to school is much more important. I say if a coach is dependent on signing a top 5 class in order to be a championship caliber team, he's not that great of a coach. This recruiting ranking stuff and which player does or doesn't choose Bama is so irrelevant. ...And to think some poor saps lack a life to such an extent they'd get on facebook and beg some kid to come to Bama? Really? Really? :headscratch:

Coaching is certainly more important. Citing Auburn as an example--Ronnie Brown was a 3 star running back, hell even Mark Ingram was a 3 star--obviously coaching brought those young men along very quickly. Coaching is more important because you can coach someone up, but you can also coach them down Alabama and Auburn have both seen our fair share of that over the years.

I will say that recruiting isn't too far behind coaching, however. Yeah TCU, Utah, Boise et. al. have done wonderfully without world beating talent. However, they have also gotten it handed to them when they had a shot at the big boys. Hawaii/UGA comes to mind quickly.

I really think you hit the nail on the head. It is a necessary evil to mix in some of the top flight high school players because quite frankly, they do turn into top flight collegiate talent. Tuberville struggled in his waning years at Auburn to pick up 4-5 star recruits and look at where it got us. On the other hand, see Chizik's first year for a quick turn around with pretty much the same players.