Had a debate and bringing to the masses. Would you prefer an offensive-minded head coach or a defensive-minded head coach. Your head coach will likely call plays whether it's defense or offense, which leaves needing another coach to call plays on the other side of the ball. It feels like there are more young and "up-and-coming" offensive coaches that fall under the same branch of strategy. This means there are theoretically more candidates to replace offensive coordinators if your coach leaves. Compare that to an offensive head coach, where there may not have as many defensive options to replace an outgoing coach. A defensive coach should theoretically have a better chance of sustaining success over a longer period of time right?
Would you rather have a defensive or offensive minded head coach?
- Thread starter SChopeful
- Start date
Defensive gurus are far more rare than offensive gurus. Head coaches are the staple of your program, they won't go anywhere. Good defense is the backbone of a program and good offense is the catalyst that can elevate your program from good to great. I would rather deal with attrition on offense than defense. It's easier to replicate.
Offensive minded. A system like Heupel’s is a magnet for talent that wants to put up big numbers. All you need when you have a fast offense is a defense that gives up more than you score. It doesn’t have to be a shut down defense to win a lot of games.
Buddy of mine in college was a 3 year starting OG.
He argued the best head coaches was always on offense. I think he ment offensive line men
There's a reason Corch left the SEC. I'm curious to see how long Heupel and Freeze 2.0 stroll. When you get good on good you better be able to play defense or reinvent your offense every 3 years.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.