Cowherd this morning... 45 min after the announced permanent hire of the USC coach that was filling in. Cowherd said the coach was a good choice because USC is already a glamour program, you don't need a glamour coach. Just somebody who can really coach. Pointed out how well the team makes in-game adjustments, as all great coaches can do. By the 4th qtr Sat night, they owned UCLA.
Think 77 and others have pointed out the remarkable (spelled awful) stat of how the team finishes when behind at the half. Isn't that the stat that is 0-11? When has this team looked better and better as the 2nd half unfolds toward the finish? How many times has the team found a way to lose it's hold on a game late in the 4th qtr? Dropped punt snap, or missed extra point, and last year unable to make a first down and the punt and let UCLA take a long play and complete a drive for the win. Or give up two quick TDs to Tech within about 3 min. And so on. Before all that, it was unable to even score in the 3rd quarter at times.
Cowherd went on... it's not about wins and loses... it's about coaching. Can you coach. Does the game show that you coached through to a win, or held on for a win, or took a win? That somehow you over took the opposition, both players and opposing coach(es) alike?
In all the stats and records and game-to-game outcomes and how those games progressed, where are we seeing really top-notch coaching? It's almost as if the players somehow make a play, or don't. There is no guiding or inspiring hand to bring about the probable outcomes.
Cowherd also said great coaches do lose, yes, but not by much. Do not get that out-played or out-coached. Kelley lost to Clemson and Stanford, but just barely. Just how those games went. The Stanford one, anyhow.
Cowherd also said great coaches and their programs don't routinely beat themselves. Hardly ever. You have to really play well and be prepared, to beat them.
-
Like x 3
Last edited by a moderator: Nov 30, 2015