This might be considered cheating, since it's a follow up to my question (below) from the AQA thread:
I was actually asking about Gus' offense from a schematic perspective when I mentioned "enduring competitive advantage." I'm curious whether you have any concern that Gus is a football version of Will Hunting (please bear with me). Someone without extensive and sophisticated formal training (like a janitor or a lifelong high school coach) is sometimes capable of incredible brilliance. This brilliance, in some cases, comes in part from the fact that they can look at problems with fresh eyes and without the encumbrance of received biases. It also comes in part from incredible talent and natural aptitude. That kind of untamed brilliance is uniquely suited to create breakthroughs, but science and math and football evolve beyond breakthroughs incrementally over time. That incremental progress is often made by those well versed in the fundamental elements of a field of study (the people that weren't well suited to make the breakthrough in the first place). In other words, the brilliance necessary to make a breakthrough is often not sufficient to sustain and evolve the field of knowledge after the breakthrough.
Gus skipped over the formal training that comes from working in sophisticated environments and made a breakthrough that has been widely imitated. His system created extraordinary stress on the defense through pace, misdirection, and, at its best, a quarterback that could ruin a crashing defensive end's day. Since Gus brought his offense to the SEC, it seems as if defenses have learned to mitigate some of the stresses from Gus' pre-snap motion and Gus has dramatically slowed the offense down (maybe in anticipation of some future anti-HUNH rule coming down the pike). Concurrently, other coaches around the country have used elements of Gus' offense and found ways to combine them with more traditional elements to reduce the need for ultra-mobile quarterbacks and breakneck pace.
We've heard that Gus' passing schemes are not extremely sophisticated, and we don't seem to have confused anybody all year. It's hard to separate the quarterback performance this year from the scheme, but the transition of the offense doesn't appear to have been a rousing success even independent of the QB issues. You also mentioned yesterday that Gus is wary of outsiders, so it seems unlikely that he will be tapping the collective wisdom of the coaching community to evolve his offense. So, do you think his lack of training in a sophisticated environment where he learned some of the "fundamentals" will ultimately prevent him from adapting his offense effectively, or is Gus so brilliant that he will overcome that deficiency over the long run?
Thanks!
Do you think that Gus' lack of experience in a sophisticated environment (like being a GA/analyst/assistant coach in a successful college coaching tree or in the NFL) where he had a chance to learn how to teach the "fundamentals" has hampered him in creating an enduring competitive advantage without a) a unique athlete at quarterback and/or b) a full speed HUNH?
As I look at this with a relatively uneducated eye and no insider access, it seems as if Gus' brand of offense has been successful because it defied the higher level coaching orthodoxy, and as a result, Gus sees very little value in seeking the wisdom of that same old(er) guard to fill in his weak spots. Gus seems to prefer acolytes to mentors (or peers, for that matter). If you're not comfortable answering, no worries!
JAY G. SAYS: That's an interesting idea, actually, though I don't think it affects him maintaining an "enduring competitive advantage." I think that's messed up because of some lackluster recruiting/development on the DL and, as we discussed earlier, this obvious step away from the read-option attack in favor of more run-pass balance. I wonder if always being in charge has made him less attentive to elements of the operation that are very important to assistants like recruiting, time with players away from the practice field, etc.
I appreciate your response, and I hadn't actually considered the idea that Gus' meteoric rise might have actually deprived him of the perspective gained from climbing the ladder. That's a really interesting idea (maybe more interesting than my original question). Hidden tradeoffs are everywhere.As I look at this with a relatively uneducated eye and no insider access, it seems as if Gus' brand of offense has been successful because it defied the higher level coaching orthodoxy, and as a result, Gus sees very little value in seeking the wisdom of that same old(er) guard to fill in his weak spots. Gus seems to prefer acolytes to mentors (or peers, for that matter). If you're not comfortable answering, no worries!
JAY G. SAYS: That's an interesting idea, actually, though I don't think it affects him maintaining an "enduring competitive advantage." I think that's messed up because of some lackluster recruiting/development on the DL and, as we discussed earlier, this obvious step away from the read-option attack in favor of more run-pass balance. I wonder if always being in charge has made him less attentive to elements of the operation that are very important to assistants like recruiting, time with players away from the practice field, etc.
I was actually asking about Gus' offense from a schematic perspective when I mentioned "enduring competitive advantage." I'm curious whether you have any concern that Gus is a football version of Will Hunting (please bear with me). Someone without extensive and sophisticated formal training (like a janitor or a lifelong high school coach) is sometimes capable of incredible brilliance. This brilliance, in some cases, comes in part from the fact that they can look at problems with fresh eyes and without the encumbrance of received biases. It also comes in part from incredible talent and natural aptitude. That kind of untamed brilliance is uniquely suited to create breakthroughs, but science and math and football evolve beyond breakthroughs incrementally over time. That incremental progress is often made by those well versed in the fundamental elements of a field of study (the people that weren't well suited to make the breakthrough in the first place). In other words, the brilliance necessary to make a breakthrough is often not sufficient to sustain and evolve the field of knowledge after the breakthrough.
Gus skipped over the formal training that comes from working in sophisticated environments and made a breakthrough that has been widely imitated. His system created extraordinary stress on the defense through pace, misdirection, and, at its best, a quarterback that could ruin a crashing defensive end's day. Since Gus brought his offense to the SEC, it seems as if defenses have learned to mitigate some of the stresses from Gus' pre-snap motion and Gus has dramatically slowed the offense down (maybe in anticipation of some future anti-HUNH rule coming down the pike). Concurrently, other coaches around the country have used elements of Gus' offense and found ways to combine them with more traditional elements to reduce the need for ultra-mobile quarterbacks and breakneck pace.
We've heard that Gus' passing schemes are not extremely sophisticated, and we don't seem to have confused anybody all year. It's hard to separate the quarterback performance this year from the scheme, but the transition of the offense doesn't appear to have been a rousing success even independent of the QB issues. You also mentioned yesterday that Gus is wary of outsiders, so it seems unlikely that he will be tapping the collective wisdom of the coaching community to evolve his offense. So, do you think his lack of training in a sophisticated environment where he learned some of the "fundamentals" will ultimately prevent him from adapting his offense effectively, or is Gus so brilliant that he will overcome that deficiency over the long run?
Thanks!
