After UGA rolled UF this weekend, Smart was asked about the importance of recruiting, and essentially said his job was 25% scouting, 50% recruiting, and 25% coaching.
Here's the full quote (and source):
It's 25 percent evaluation, it's 50 percent recruiting and another 25 percent coaching," Smart said. "But if you don't recruit guys, you don't have a chance. Just go look at the best teams out there. They've got good football players.
The importance of recruiting is well documented, but I don't think I've seen a coach blatantly say that 75% of his job/success happens before the players even step foot on campus.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
"I find that my steaks taste better than at other restaurants because I use Hokkaido Wagyu ribeye that costs $350 a pound"
Somewhere between the OP and your quote, my brain jumped straight to this old gem from The Onion: An Open Letter to a Starving Child
But there's more to it than just star rankings - recruiting also means making sure you get kids who are mentally prepared to make the requisite sacrifices to be part of a championship-caliber team. Talent alone isn't enough.
I think that's where the 25% evaluation comes in.
100%. If talent alone was able to get them where they needed to be, Miami would never have fallen into disrepair.
No one - not even Kirby Smart - is saying talent alone is enough to win. But I do think it's noteworthy that a coach says 75% of his job is just getting the right kids (in terms of talent and potential) in the room.
Given that our current coach wants to be a 'development program,' and we are/will be back in the coaching market soon, I think it's worth noting just how much of an emphasis one of the best coaches in the game puts in recruiting, relative to development.
Our oc is 90% game prep and 10% telling the players on how to execute
Woah woah woah, Kirby. Are you trying to tell me that back to back bottom 3 in the ACC recruiting classes aren't going to give us a chance to compete at a high level?
That's the most ludicrous crap I've ever heard.
He's not wrong...but Cincinnati says hello
But yes, to achieve long-term success you need good recruiting year-in, year-out
Cincy recruits well relative to their AAC peers. They have a talent advantage over every AAC team outside of UCF potentially in a given year or two, but the last two years they have had the most talent for sure.
Also, Cincy beat a now 2-6 Navy 27-20 last weekend, and was only up 2 late in the 3rd quarter on a 1 win Tulane team last week. I don't think Cincy is undefeated right now in a P5 conference.
Oklahoma played Tulane even closer and needed a miracle lateral-hand-off to beat Kansas despite having more talent than their conference peers. Plus barely beat a coterie of other mediocre teams, usually in one-score coin-flip outcomes. Cincinnati has destroyed almost everyone on their schedule, and aside from Navy no game was within one score (including against top-10 Notre Dame). The occasional close-game isn't, on it's own, indicative that team is under-performing, especially when they are blowing out the rest of the competition. They also arguably have the best win out of all the top 5 teams.
Arguably is a key word on that best win out of the top 5 teams. ND has played a bunch of mediocre teams as equals (including us, Florida St, and TOLEDO). I would still take a healthy Ole Miss over them on a neutral field without a question. They are a one loss big name (Notre Dame), so they are the best win on paper, perhaps because of poll rankings, but if you've watched them play this year I strongly disagree. Also Oregon's win over Ohio State is almost certainly the best win of the one loss teams.
I agree that Oregon's is better but they are #7 and have squeaked by against lesser competition more than any of the other highly ranked teams. I'd consider the quality wins of Ole Miss (Bama), Auburn (UGA), Michigan (Sparty) to be roughly equivalent to a ND win, all of those teams have had occasional poor performances. My point isn't that one is clearly better than the other, just that you're criticism of Cinci also applies to every other team near that ranking
Nearly that same Cincy team took nearly the same GA team to a last second field goal last year.
That 25% coaching is a big percentage.
Oh hey Captain Obvious
This is the primary lesson of the Saban coaching tree
I'm pretty sure it goes back to long before there was such a thing as a Saban coaching tree...
"You win with people"- Woody Hayes
there's something subtle, yet, important about this quote.
He didn't say you win with recruits. He didn't say you win with players. He didn't say you win with athletes. He didn't say you win with coaches.
I agree, but the whole point is you can't just win through being a tactical genius.
Yes. But while recruiting is 50% of it, that's just a mouse on a wheel.
It's like a football practice facility - you must have one to not fall behind, but having one doesn't make you better. If you simply put in the recruiting effort at Georgia, you're going to recruit well...and well enough to win at a high level.
But the other 50% is what will ultimately determine your success. That's where programs like Texas and USC and Florida and FSU and Miami, etc. have failed in recent years.
Urban Meyer used the quote "A player beats a play every time."
Obviously having the talent is most important. I wonder how well a team of a talent composite of X could compete with a talent composite of Y. I'm sure people have done the math to give a floor/ceiling based on this
That 25% coaching is so important to crossing the finish line undefeated.
You don't do the 25% coaching, and well, you get Miami, Texas, and USC. They end up being only 75% of their worth.