What matters more Xs and Os or Jimmies and Joes

Coaching or talent? Talent or coaching?

I’ve had numerous conversations with people over the years about what means more to a team’s level of success. I am amazed by the amount of people that believe it is only one or the other. You’ve heard the statements, “This team sucks because of coaching!” or “Any coach can just roll out the ball and win with this talent.”

I strongly believe both matter. You could have a basketball team of midgets and not even John Wooden will coach that team to a .500 record. On the other hand, you can take the super team the Golden State Warriors have just assembled. It looks great on paper, Kevin Durant joining Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green. True, you could probably hire the plumber to get this Warriors team to the Western Conference semifinals. However, it takes one with coaching prowess to match wits with someone like say Gregg Popovich or even Doc Rivers.

In San Francisco, the 49ers fired Jim Harbaugh after four seasons (2011-2014) despite three NFC Title Game appearances and a Super Bowl appearance. San Francisco replaced him with Jim Tomsula, who was fired after one season. The 49ers went 5-11 and while roster defections to players like Patrick Willis, Justin Smith and frank Gore to name a few did him no favors, with Tomsula’s game management skills (of lack of), I strongly don’t think he wins even with a good roster. On the other hand, you can dig Bill Walsh out of the grave and I don’t think last year’s San Francisco team breaks even.

There might be isolated cases where either statement can be true but for the most part, neither one is accurate. Former Justin-Siena High (Napa, CA) baseball head coach Allen Rossi, the best high school baseball coach I covered in my 18 years as a sports reporter once told me off the record, “talent and coaching is a package deal.” I don’t quote people off the record but this is one time I will make an exception.

Rossi led the Braves to a 252-72 mark on two separate stints (1999-2006; 2012-2015) to go along with six CIF Section titles (one in the Sac-Joaquin and five in the North Coast). Was he blessed with talent? Heck yes. You can begin with current Major Leaguer Brett Wallace and keep going. However, in the first year of both stints, Rossi took over teams that had been floundering and made an immediate impact. The Braves entered 1999 not having a winning season since 1989. The Braves went 17-9 in 1999. Justin entered 2012 coming off an 11-14 season. In 2012, Justin went 21-8 and reached the semifinals of the NCS Div. IV playoffs.

The dynamics, however, are different at the high school level because you have to play the hand you’re dealt. It’s not like a college coach who can go out and recruit his or her talent or a professional coach that can go out and sign free agents.

At the high school level, however, you do need to have some talent level that occasionally resembles elite at the large school level because those schools are likely to have some players that go on to play at the Div. I college level. At the small high school level, however, you can win without elite level talent but if you have an established culture and coaching continuity, you can win with strong coaching. Some of the best small high school coaches I covered besides Rossi include but are not limited to Rich Cotruvo (Justin football), Bill Foltmer (Middletown football), Brandon Farrell (St. Helena football), Leon Feliciano (Tomales football), Herschel Sandler (St. Patrick’s/St. Vincent and St. Helena wrestling), Gary Pickle (Clear Lake softball) and John O’Connor (Justin softball).

Those coaches may have had seasons where they had some top-flight talent but they also repeatedly took mid-level talent and got them to perform like a well-oiled machine.

At the college level, specifically football and basketball, guys like Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Mike Krzyzewski, John Calipari to name a few are considered the creme de la creme in the coaching ranks. Though their track record speaks for itself, there is also a narrative that some may preach that their programs will attract elite level talent and have enormous resources so how could they not win big at those schools. While it is true that those programs have built in advantages, I also have no doubt that any of those coaches can walk into floundering programs with less resources and instantly make them better. On the other hand, a “C” level coach is not going to walk into their current programs and win at the same level as those coaches.

The argument that I most finding intriguing at the pro level is when people look at Phil Jackson’s coaching legacy. Jackson guided his teams to a record 11 NBA titles (six with the Chicago Bulls and five with the Los Angeles Lakers). I will always consider Red Auerbach, who guided the Boston Celtics to nine NBA titles, the superior coach because he built the Celtics dynasty from the ground up.

The Bulls and Lakers teams that Jackson took over from Doug Collins and Del Harris respectively were ready made teams that had pieces in place. However, as much as I dislike Jackson because he is a pompous/arrogant ass, I do give the man credit for guiding those teams to greater heights.

Anyone that believes the “anyone could coach those teams to titles because they had Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal” is also fooling themselves. If it were really that easy, then shouldn’t Collins or Harris have led them to titles? Though I do not believe either coach attains the level of success Jackson did, they have at least some sweat equity in that success.

Another polarizing argument in pro sports that I always find intriguing is former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka. Thanks to an all-time great defense, maybe the best ever with apologies to the 1975 Pittsburgh Steelers, the 1985 Bears went 15-1 on the way to winning the Super Bowl. Though he was blessed with a great team in 1985, he did not just walk into a great team either. Ditka took over as Bears head coach in 1982. Since winning the NFL title in 1963, Chicago had four winning seasons between then and 1982. To that end, Ditka played a role in getting the Bears where they reached.

With Ditka, you can say he’s the reason the Bears won a Super Bowl but you can equally say he’s the reason they only won one Super Bowl.

So what matters more, Xs and Os or Jimmies and Joes. They both matter. I’ll give coaching the nod but not by much, I’ll say a 60-40 ratio. Why? Because no matter how talented a player is, he or she still for the most part yearns for leadserhip.