1 of 1- DucksReign
- Banned
Offline - Registered: 12/29/2019
- Posts: 1,289
Agree or Disagree with Canzano's 3 points?
I agree with all 3 but not entirely with all his reasoning. However I think he is correct with his overall premise for each point.
- Phil
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 12/29/2019
- Posts: 2,065
Re: Agree or Disagree with Canzano's 3 points?
I pretty much agree with his 3 points except for his last on some level.
The 3rd one about an identity is less of an issue than he's making it. I don't think it's necessary a good thing and box yourself in with a niche identity. Some teams that have a niche identity are a result of not being able recruit well. WSU had the air raid and still has an aggressive offensive identity. It's worked for the players they have to work with, but that's the point. They can't recruit well and couldn't bring in NFL lineman and Mike Leach developed that identity with what he had to work with.
Mario didn't quite live up to the toughness identity. Dwelling on an identity can be a bad thing. Sometimes you need to adapt with what you have. Coming up with an identity before you start and being rigid with it isn't necessarily a good thing.
Lanning is a defensive specialist and I would assume he wants to develop a strong defense. Hopefully he doesn't just try to box himself in and be a defensive team without putting much emphasis on offense.
Do the best teams have to have a specific identity? Isn't it just about being the best on all levels? I just asked myself what is Alabama's identity? I did a quick search on the matter which led to that exact question to Saban back in October. His response Well, I’d say right now, based on what we just did,” Saban said, “that’s still sort of up in the air.” It sounds like Saban was still trying to figure that out after several games. It wasn't something he tried to manifest before the season started.
- DucksReign
- Banned
Offline
- Registered: 12/29/2019
- Posts: 1,289
Re: Agree or Disagree with Canzano's 3 points?
Phil wrote:
Lanning is a defensive specialist and I would assume he wants to develop a strong defense. Hopefully he doesn't just try to box himself in and be a defensive team without putting much emphasis on offense.
Good points yet I am also reminded of the saying, "If you don't know where you are going then any road will take you there."
As per your point above...Lanning hired a pretty experienced DC, Tosh Lupoi, despite himself being a defensive guy but his hires on offense point to exactly what you fear...
Dillingham is on his 4th OC job in 5-years at age 31 and his offense was in the bottom third of the ACC.
The new RB coach, Locklyn at age 44 has ONE year of coaching that position in college (at Western Kentucky) and a couple of years ago was a weight room assistant.
The new TE coach, Drew Mehringer at age 34 was so good at Texas from 2017-2019 that Florida Atlantic swooped in an stole him...then after one season he took his talents to college football powerhouse New Mexico before Lanning "convinced" him to come to Oregon.
Sounds to me like Lanning has already conceded offensively.
Compare that to USC where Lincoln Riley, an offensive guy, hired Josh Henson from Texas A&M as his OC and 20-years of coaching experience at age 44...you can Google his credentials. Riley also hired experienced Alex Grinch as his DC.
That is the difference between a head coach with experience (Riley) and one with no experience (Lanning).
But "Cristobal's Disease" is rampant in the Oregon fan base where only recruiting matters and the definition of a great coaching staff is how well they recruit. Coaching is buried further down the list. Thankfully my doctor has vaccinated me and assures me I am totally immune from "Cristobal's Disease" after struggling with it for four years.
- •
Thread Starter- WoodburnDuck
- Member
Offline
- Registered: 12/30/2019
- Posts: 332
Re: Agree or Disagree with Canzano's 3 points?
I pretty much agree with his 3 points except for his last on some level.
The 3rd one about an identity is less of an issue than he's making it. I don't think it's necessary a good thing and box yourself in with a niche identity. Some teams that have a niche identity are a result of not being able recruit well. WSU had the air raid and still has an aggressive offensive identity. It's worked for the players they have to work with, but that's the point. They can't recruit well and couldn't bring in NFL lineman and Mike Leach developed that identity with what he had to work with.
Mario didn't quite live up to the toughness identity. Dwelling on an identity can be a bad thing. Sometimes you need to adapt with what you have. Coming up with an identity before you start and being rigid with it isn't necessarily a good thing.
Lanning is a defensive specialist and I would assume he wants to develop a strong defense. Hopefully he doesn't just try to box himself in and be a defensive team without putting much emphasis on offense.
Do the best teams have to have a specific identity? Isn't it just about being the best on all levels? I just asked myself what is Alabama's identity? I did a quick search on the matter which led to that exact question to Saban back in October. His response Well, I’d say right now, based on what we just did,” Saban said, “that’s still sort of up in the air.” It sounds like Saban was still trying to figure that out after several games. It wasn't something he tried to manifest before the season started.
I agree. Meaningful identities are usually organic and develop over time. For example: I doubt Canzano daydreamed in college thinking, "OK, someday I'll lose my hair, write antagonistic columns, and speak with self-proclaimed no-BS candor, all of which will lead to having a radio show I can call The Bald-Faced Truth."
Tweet