Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610
Those listed teams haven't had the player talent or when they did, the breaks didn't go their way. Players and variance explain it all.
If you'd read the article, you'd know regression to the mean is a thing. Also, Goff is a second year QB who clearly has made the second year jump, they put a lot of talent around him on the offense, and they already had a talented defense. Player talent and variance. Harbaugh's situation is similar, already talented team that finally got something out of the QB position and regressed to the mean based on player talent and variance.
That's not to say I don't think either of them are talented head coaches. They are, but if either one of them had the Browns roster this year, they wouldn't be much better than 0-10, maybe 1-9 or 2-8. Why? Because that roster is bad by NFL standards. The talent on the roster is much more determinant of the team's overall success than anything any coach can do except constantly and consistently cheat.
|
Explain the Vikings then? Bradford, Bridgeport and Keenum have all had success. Many times, this was the case when there was very little talent around them.
The Vikings running game and O-Line were terrible last season. The previous two seasons, they had very little at talent at WR.
But somehow, Zimmer keeps winning. I guess that's not coaching though. It must just be luck.