Vince Lombardi

[connoisseur series500]

I wasn't really following football during the Vince Lombardi years. His record in winning Super Bowls is hard to beat, but what I'd like to know is, why was he considered a great coach beyond just winning games? Was he considered great simply because he won so many games?

Was he an innovator in any way? Was he lucky by having great players? Tom Landry developed the shotgun formation (I think!) and other great coaches have invented certain formations. What did Lombardi do? Was he just a great motivator?

[GA Russell]

Conn, if Lombardi didn't have such a great winning percentage, he wouldn't be quoted. That's a reality of sports. Another reality is the likelihood that a success in sports will be painted as a great man.

He said a number of quotable comments about winning and what it takes, and these have been picked up by motivational speakers and sales departments.

By the way, before Tom Landry got ahold of Roger Staubach, I remember the San Francisco 49ers using the shotgun as their regular formation. Their quarterback was Billy Kilmer. I think Red Hickey was their coach then. Of course, the 49ers didn't have the success the Cowboys did back then.

[connoisseur series500]

So in your mind he wasn't necessarily a great coach?

I mean, I've got no axe to grind. I'm just curious. My NFL team (NE Patriots) is handled by a great coach. I think that I can see why he is a great coach.

1. He is clever at selecting the right mix of players on his team, which includes dumping star players whom he might feel are either past their prime or whose value doesn't quite match salary cap realities.

2. He is a workaholic who devises masterly defensive plans each week.

3. Loves to place players in multiple roles. This confuses the heck out of opposing offenses and defenses.

4. Seems able to turn rookies and previously-nondescript free agents into very good football players.

I've probably left out other reasons, but I'd like to know what made the great coaches "great." Bill Walsh developed the West Coast Offense. What did the other great coaches do?

Edited January 25, 2004 by connoisseur series500

[Jazzmoose]

I wish I could answer, but Lombardi was before my time. Not for following his team, but before my time in the sense of being able to make any intelligent analysis. I most definitely followed football at the time, and was a hard core Packers fan. I remember getting in my first fight at school because another kid had the audacity to claim that Unitas was a better quarterback than Bart Starr. (Yeah, he was right, and I suppose I'd have a strong desire to somehow track him down and apologize, but what the hell, he kicked my ass anyway! ) But I was way to young to have any understanding on a high enough level to say why he was considered great. My guess, not to take anything away from the man, was that he was the first "name coach" of the television era...

[JSngry]

Lombardi practiced and preached the macho (as it pertained to sports) ethic in a very visible manner when that ethic was at its apex (not for nuthin' was he a hero of Nixon, not that that has any relevance here). That, his record (how many championships in the '60s?), and the love-him-in-spite-of-it-all attitude of his former players are the recipie for a legend, I'd think.

[jlhoots]

Bart Starr, Paul Hornung, Jim Taylor, Max McGee, Boyd Dowler, Ray Nitschke, etc., etc.

Plus he was apparently able to motivate people to play above their potential.

[John L]

He put together a great team with little to start with. He was tough and had respect from his players.

I am not an expert, but his play calling always seemed to be quite innovative. It had the element of surprise that would always seem to catch the defense in the wrong formation. Of course, today, the science of audibles and play action has been taken to a new level. I am not an expert, but my feeling is that Lombardi was a bit ahead of his time in that department. On 3rd and 1, he made you worry about the deep pass.

By the way, I think that the 49ers were using the shotgun with Y.A. Tittle back in the 50s, before Landry became a coach.

Edited January 26, 2004 by John L

[connoisseur series500]

OK, let's expand the discussion.

What made other coaches great? Perhaps Jim Sangry could offer his opinion on Tom Landry (assuming you did think he was a great coach.)

Regarding the shotgun formation: is it fair then to say that Landry really made it into a real weapon?

Did Landry invent the so-called "flex defence?"

What about Chuck Noll? He had dominating teams. Was he a great coach? He sure had the players.

Don Shula always won. He had to have been a great coach.

George Halas? Marv Levy? Bud Grant? Don Coryell? John Madden? Ted Marchibroda? Just a few names to consider. Tell us why you think a particular coach was "great."

[Brad]

It's a little bit of what Jim and John said. He was a great motivator, fearless and inspired fear and loyalty in ohters. If Lombardi said it, it must be true. He, from what I remember, didn't have much respect for less than perfect execution and having said all that, he was loved by his players. I don't know if you remember that photo of Jerry Kramer looking up at him as they carried him off the field after one of his super bowl victories. That is love and respect.

[connoisseur series500]

It's a little bit of what Jim and John said. He was a great motivator, fearless and inspired fear and loyalty in ohters. If Lombardi said it, it must be true. He, from what I remember, didn't have much respect for less than perfect execution and having said all that, he was loved by his players. I don't know if you remember that photo of Jerry Kramer looking up at him as they carried him off the field after one of his super bowl victories. That is love and respect.

Well this makes sense. Great motivator and someone who elicited respect.

How about some of the other great coaches?

[kh1958]

OK, let's expand the discussion.

What made other coaches great? Perhaps Jim Sangry could offer his opinion on Tom Landry (assuming you did think he was a great coach.)

Regarding the shotgun formation: is it fair then to say that Landry really made it into a real weapon?

Did Landry invent the so-called "flex defence?"

What about Chuck Noll? He had dominating teams. Was he a great coach? He sure had the players.

Don Shula always won. He had to have been a great coach.

George Halas? Marv Levy? Bud Grant? Don Coryell? John Madden? Ted Marchibroda? Just a few names to consider. Tell us why you think a particular coach was "great."

Tom Landry was a great coach. From 1966-1985, his team made the playoffs in 18 out of 20 consecutive seasons, went to five Super Bowls, winning two, and losing the other three in down-to-the-wire thrillers.

I believe that Landry actually invented the 4/3 defense when he was an assistant coach at the New York Giants (Lombardy was also an assistant coach there). In addition, the zone defense was invented to combat Landry's schemes on offense with Bob Hayes.

[minew]

If Lombardi said it, it must be true. He, from what I remember, didn't have much respect for less than perfect execution and having said all that, he was loved by his players.

I think this is a lot of it: total intolerance for imperfection. Walsh, for example, would respond to crucial mistakes by simply saying, "That cannot happen" and you knew you were gone. Parcells certainly exhibits this quality.

Not everyone can pull it off, though. Players have to buy in. They do with Parcells and Belechik b/c they have skins on the wall. When Haslett tries it with the Saints, I think they just tune him out.

[Chuck Nessa]

I always enjoyed his Charlie Brown soundtracks.

[maren]

I always enjoyed his Charlie Brown soundtracks.

Tee-hee!

[connoisseur series500]

I always enjoyed his Charlie Brown soundtracks.

You just saying this Chuck, or do you really like the Charlie Brown tracks? Of course, I like them.

BTW, excellent posts, kh1958 and Minew.

I guess I forgot about how great Tom Landry was. I think everyone pretty much recognizes Bill Walsh as an offensive genius.

Minew: One aspect of Bill Parecells' greatness is recognition of good football players. It came out this season that he was trying to get RB Rudi Johnson of the Bengals, who has since turned out to be a terrific prospect and has made Corey Dillon expendable. Parcells was able to see all this before it came to pass. Amazing sense of player recognition...

Edited January 27, 2004 by connoisseur series500

[Dave James]

I think Lombardi demanded from others exactly what he demanded of himself and that tended to set the bar pretty high. Of course, no coach is going to be "great" unless he wins and in order to win, you've got to have the horses. As we all know, he had 'em in spades. Even now, I can could probably name 15-20 of his players from that early '60's era, and I couldn't stand the Pack. But, having great players is one thing. Molding them into a great TEAM is something else entirely.

I still love some of the motivational phrases he coined. Wasn't he the "there's no "i" in team" guy? And I know he originated one of my favorites, "show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser." I've used that phrase to justify my less than exemplary behavior in a number of different sports.

You have to wonder how a guy like Lombardi would have made out in today's NFL. I have to think not so well.

Up over and out.

[Man with the Golden Arm]

[connoisseur series500]

You have to wonder how a guy like Lombardi would have made out in today's NFL. I have to think not so well.

Why do you say that?

[JSngry]

To go back a little, and to contribute nothing, I was NOT a fan of Tom Landry or the Cowboys. Hated them and their robotic methodologies, to say nothing of the incredible hypocrisy and moralistic B.S. That ran through the organization. Didn't become a Cowboys fan until the Jones massacre, and although things got worse it terms of the teams PUBLIC "morality" image than they were during the Landry/Schramm years, they haven't really gotten worse. The team was comprise of coke heads and degenerates back then too, but all this bs about "America's Team", "God's Team", and the using of the genuinely clean Roger Staubach to shine so brightly as to blind the public and the media as to how rotten things really were off the field and with the front office's business dealings made it seem like Cowboy Camelot or some such.

In retrospect, I can see that Landry was a great coach for his time, but truthfully, he was a limited one, qualities which are not mutually exclusive of course. He had his own little world, for football and life alike, and he was able to make it work over the course of a truly remarkable arc. But when both the game and the players began to pass him by, his vanity (which was significant) and/or general cluelessness rendered him both incapable and unwilling to make even minor adjustments, and he would have gone down in disgrace, I think, as a King Lear-ish type figure if Jones hadn't have handled his dismissal as cloddishly as he did.

[PHILLYQ]

Conn,

I tend to think that Lombardi would be a great coach today for two main reasons:1) His attention to detail, & 2) His ability to motivate his players. In those two respects he is very much like a present-day very successful coach, Bill Parcells.

The only problem Lombardi would have today is with the salary cap & the attendant instability that causes on team rosters. In his time, you had some good players and you kept them until they couldn't produce enough for the team. Now, a good player may only be around for a few years, and then he's off to another team. The obverse side of that is if a team makes a mistake in signing someone, they either have tio take a salary cap hit or live with an unproductive player for a season or two. Even given that, I believe that Lombardi would adapt and figure out how to get the best out of a constantly shifting roster, and his ability to motivate and his attention to detail would give him a leg up on many other coaches.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Belichik is a great coach, no question about that, but his GM should get some credit for drafting well, stockpiling draft picks and managing the salary cap so well.That has become very important in the present age of the salary cap.

[Dave James]

Conn 500 - I guess I just have a hard time seeing his style fit with present day players. He's old school all the way and today's NFL is a brave new world. I'm not saying it would have been impossible for him to adapt, but I think it might have seriously compromised his values and I'm not sure he'd be willing to do that. I'll tell you one thing, I'd love to put Joe Horn in Mr. Peabody's Wayback Machine, send him back to Green Bay in about 1963 and have him pull that cell phone stunt. He'd have hit the waiver wire the next morning.

I think it was Lombardi who espoused the "act like you've been there before" approach when it comes to scoring. I just don't see actions like Horn's or Tyrell Owens' or sack dancing or choreographed multi-player post TD celebrations peacefully co-existing with the Lombardi philosophy.

Up over and out.

[GA Russell]

Lombardi coached only one set of players in Green Bay. The team had stunk prior to his arrival, so the team had a number of good young high-draft-pick players when he joined Green Bay in '59. He coached them till they got old together, and then retired to the front office. The team collapsed immediately thereafter.

In fairness to him, when he joined the Redskins as coach in '69, he immediately turned a perenially crummy team into a somewhat competitive team.

Gen. Eisenhower said that nothing improves morale more than victory. Lombardi put his players through hell, but it paid off so they were willing to go along.

Edited January 28, 2004 by GA Russell

[connoisseur series500]

Belichik is a great coach, no question about that, but his GM should get some credit for drafting well, stockpiling draft picks and managing the salary cap so well.That has become very important in the present age of the salary cap.

Actually, New England does not have a GM. Belichick serves that function along with his close associate Scott Pirolli, who is head of player personnel. The two have been together a long time and collaborate on player decisions. I even remember reading somewhere that the two are related through marriage. Belichick says that they both search for players then "bounce" the ideas off each other. They both have a good sense for the type of players that would do well under the Belichick system.

When BB first came to New England four seasons ago, it was easier to find players for his system as he brought over some people from the Jets and from the rest of the league that he had coached. This has changed over the years and for the last couple of years they've had to start with "unknowns" like everyfone else. They had a superb draft in 2003 and their free agent crop has really worked out. Looks like the two of them have made the transition nicely.

Scott Pioli will become a GM for another team at some point. He's just too good at what he does. It's inevitable.

I think Bill Parcells is another great coach with tremendous recognition of good players. He will make Dallas a very hard team to beat. He's one of the best, in my opinion, and BB learned from him.

[Brad]

Speaking of Parcells and why he is considered a great coach, a couple of years ago Imus told a story on the air that when he was in the hospital with a collapsed lung, Parcells came to visit him and give a pep talk. Imus said that after that visit and the motivational talk he got, he could see why Parcells was a great coach. There was more to it than that but when he relayed the story on the air I found it fascinating.