Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Maybe this is worth its own thread.  I guess nobody would argue against it being highly important in CFB.  Maybe.  

Given the recent coaching changes (and suspension etc.), I was wondering how important it is in several aspects of the game.  Obviously, there is recruiting, some coaches recruit better than others, or some programs do anyway.  Part of that is simple geography.

There is selecting good assistants.  The OC and DC positions may be in some ways more critical on GD, not sure.

There is game preparation, practice, film study, etc., much of which falls to the coordinators etc.  Underlying this is overall scheme, up tempo, run clock, balance, whatever.

There is game day management, start to finish.  And of course public relations.

Anything else?  How much impact would it have on a competitive game for the head coach to be absent, but to have participated in every other aspect of the contest?  I personally think a Spurrier on the sideline is worth say 3 points versus a Richt, but that is a guess.  Maybe a Richt is a neutral factor, and some coaches are negatives.  Is 3 points fair?

I'm not talking about playing Austin Peay, but a team that can beat you of course.

It's impressive to me how much the HC can change a program from mediocre to very good or excellent.  Maybe some of this is random luck.  Some isn't.  Some coaches do well at every step on the ladder.  A lot go from coordinator) to HC at a large program.  Do we know if Kirby Smart is an excellent head coach yet?  Or did he catch one season of lightning?

Spurrier is my example of a superb GD coach.  It was if he could read the mind of his opponent.  And his general offensive schemes were effective of course at least at Florida.  He is said to be bored with recruiting, which I can understand.  Smart has been superb at recruiting, but that could be geography to a large extent.

The coach at Purdue seems to have made a difference in a tough situation.  Is he a great coach or just one who was a bit lucky?  Urban Meyer has been very good at four programs.  Saban has been very good at two, and mediocre at one.  Spurrier was a bust in the NFL, as was Saban as I recall.  How about Franklin, Harbaugh, Dantonio (who I think is excellent as a HC)?

Thoughts?

We’re comparing different head coaches to each other, or the impact of not having one and the shuffling that happens?

The right head coach in the right spot could mean everything, but the reasons are defuse. Spurrier was really smart, but some of that was just seeing the game in a different way no one had thought of. 

We’re comparing different head coaches to each other, or the impact of not having one and the shuffling that happens?

The right head coach in the right spot could mean everything, but the reasons are defuse. Spurrier was really smart, but some of that was just seeing the game in a different way no one had thought of.

Everything here is accurate. I'll use our school as an example.

The guy in charge now is a perfect fit. The prior guy was the worst possible fit, but I wouldn't say he's a bad coach given what he did at Utah State. The prior guy to the prior guy was almost a great fit - take away the quirks and he's there.

Only one of these three has proven he could build a program, however. HCPC comes close, because he had to do a re-build after Gerry's two years, and was on his way to a rebuild at Pitt. He wasn't there long enough to see it through, but there were signs.

So, program builder, program manager, hiring manager, game manager, recruiter and baby sitter are all part of the job. Only a select few are "great" at all of those, but to win, you have to have a guy that is at least "good" at all of them.

I'm pondering the impact of a HC on Game Day.  Let's stipulate Spurrier is one of the best (it doesn't matter if that is true) and say Orgeron is one of the worst.  What is the point advantage conferred in that?  Assume the teams are equally talented etc.

The OSU situation is slightly different, but I presume Day or whoever is a decently competent coach.

Using OSU as an example is pretty clear to me. 2010, Tessel's last year, OSU goes 12-1 and wins the Sugar Bowl. 2011, Tressel gone, Fickel in, OSU goes 6-7 and loses the Gator Bowl. 2012, Fickel gone, Urbie in, OSU goes 12-0 and sits home due to tattoos. So yeah, coaching matters, even at OSU.

Every loss but one was by one score, so, Fickell could have been the key factor.  Of course the next season OSU blew out teams, so the "point differential" was a lot year over year.  They also had 5 players suspended 5 games.

well, if the head coach is also the O coordinator and play caller such as Osborne or Frost it makes more of a difference obviously

Some head coaches are just much more hands on with the entire team and staff than others

another huge factor is the drop off to the next coach up that would assume the head coach position 

For UW? about 35 points, give or take. HCPC calls all the plays.