How Do You Define an Elite Coach?

[bullets13]

On 3/10/2026 at 10:47 PM, Reagan said:

If one has that kind of record for that long and you haven’t won a State title then is something wrong.  If State titles were easy every coach would have 30 of them.  But it’s NOT easy.  That’s what distinguishes elite coaches from everyone else.  You got to ask yourself:  why does Surratt have so many State titles and Danaher has none?  Luck?  I think not.  You might actually think that there might a difference in coaching ability concerning Surratt and Danaher?  My opinion is there is a difference!  Don’t get me wrong, Danaher was a great coach.  I’m sure he ran a respectable program.  Honest question:  Out of the two coaches mentioned, if you had to hire a coach, which one would you hire and why?

Between 1944 and 1983 Calallen had ONE 10-win season. Danaher won 10 games his second season there, then went on to win 10+ games in 30 out 36 seasons, with one of those six being an 8-2 covid season. He made the state semis 12 times and the finals twice. So the question is did he make it that far and then choke? Did he make it that far and then run into a superior coach every time? Or as common sense would dictate, perhaps he coached in a region without an abundance of talent, got far more out of that lesser talent year in and year out than any coach in that region ever has, and consistently took his teams as far (or even further) than the team should've been expected to go every year. Danaher could 1000% have won several championships with the talent that SS has had at Carthage. SS wouldn't have won more than 1 or 2 (and quite possibly zero) had he coached Calallen the last 20 years instead of at Carthage. 

Interesting side note: Danaher's Calallen teams lost to La Marque in the state semis 6 years in a row in the 90s. Between 1995 and 2006 La Marque won 5 state titles and played for 3 more, with 2 different coaches leading them there. Those two coaches made it to the regional finals ONCE in 22 combined seasons at the other schools they coached at. In between those two coaches was a third coach who led La Marque to the 4th round three times in four seasons, despite never having a season better than 3-7 anywhere else. So, were they elite coaches who forgot how to coach when they left La Marque, or did La Marque have elite talent that a couple of good coaches took advantage of while they were there? I'm pretty comfortable stating that Danaher would've won a few state titles if he'd coached La Marque's incredible talent instead of in the football graveyard of southTexas.  I'm also pretty comfortable saying that Danaher could've gotten hired into any number of jobs where he'd be better equipped to win a state championship if he'd chosen to. 

[BBtater984]

Why isn't Belichick winning in college? He was an elite HC in the NFL... right?  Why didn't Urban Meyer win in the NFL? He was an elite HC in college... right? Could go on & on about who's elite and who's not, or what makes that HC elite and this one not elite, but the hill that I will die on is the coach that gets the most out of his players, the HC that can motivate the unmotivated, the coach that can turn an "I" player into a team player. The coach who has all his players buy into his program, buy into his way of doing things, his standards. There will be a few (coaches, parents, community members) who know who those HC are cause most of us are not behind the scenes, in the locker rooms, on bus rides to and from games, or in those private one-on-one talks. 

And NO not all coaches can get that out of players!

[outanup]

Danaher was elite, IMO...

[Matthew328]

I've enjoyed reading this thread...there's so many factors involved....another common example pointed out is Todd Dodge...he won a ton at Southlake and Westlake...not so much at his other stops...its definitely a combination of many factors and I think "fit" as well

[oldschool2]

2 hours ago, Matthew328 said:

I've enjoyed reading this thread...there's so many factors involved....another common example pointed out is Todd Dodge...he won a ton at Southlake and Westlake...not so much at his other stops...its definitely a combination of many factors and I think "fit" as well

One of too many examples to give.  There's only one person here that believes it's only about coaching.. and that "elite" coaches can win a state championship no matter where they are.  

[AggiesAreWe]

Coaching matters. A lot! But having really good players matters more.

It's been proven over and over again.

[old guy 71]

19 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Coaching matters. A lot! But having really good players matters more.

It's been proven over and over again.

Interesting thread, but something that hasn't been mentioned, is money. Not just the AD/HC salary, but base pay for teachers and assistant coaches, and Stipends. What is spent on Weight room, Facilities, indoor practice fields ? Some schools have advertising set up through their privately  donated electronic scoreboard ,that generates money for the Athletic programs , while some Admins take that money and  put in the regular school budget. All of the above weighs a lot toward the difference between a good coach and becoming an elite coach and winning a Title. jmo

[oldschool2]

56 minutes ago, old guy 71 said:

Interesting thread, but something that hasn't been mentioned, is money. Not just the AD/HC salary, but base pay for teachers and assistant coaches, and Stipends. What is spent on Weight room, Facilities, indoor practice fields ? Some schools have advertising set up through their privately  donated electronic scoreboard ,that generates money for the Athletic programs , while some Admins take that money and  put in the regular school budget. All of the above weighs a lot toward the difference between a good coach and becoming an elite coach and winning a Title. jmo

That matters for sure.. but I think the way it matters is by way of households that are able to provide the tax revenue that contributes to those means of advertising (facilities, salaries, stipends, etc.).  Here's a great article outlining the obvious differences in the financial situations of Austin High School and Austin Lake Travis High School: 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Two high schools not very far apart with similar(ish) enrollments.  Austin High has roughly 2400 students.. which is much less than LT, but 2400 is plenty to field a decent football team in almost all cases.  Vastly different average household incomes, though.  You have kids from LT driving BMW's to planet fitness during the summers to meet an ex pro-athlete for a workout.. while Austin High kids might be sitting at home or working a summer job to help put food on the table.

This applies at every classification across the state (country).  There are always exceptions, but more times than not:  High household income, 2 working parents, spending summers at strength/speed camps, not having to work summer jobs, having a reliable vehicle to make it to weight room/school, running with kids in similar situation, access to best facilities money can buy, personal trainer, personal tutor, etc. etc. etc.... A kid with access to the list I just gave will ALWAYS have a leg up on a kid that doesn't.  Now multiply that by entire teams/programs.  Start looking at the average household income of the schools that are habitually making deep runs.  The income translates to living situation.. which translates to property taxes.. which is a huge contributor to how public schools pay for facilities and teachers/coaches/stipends.  

[Setx fan]

3 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

That matters for sure.. but I think the way it matters is by way of households that are able to provide the tax revenue that contributes to those means of advertising (facilities, salaries, stipends, etc.).  Here's a great article outlining the obvious differences in the financial situations of Austin High School and Austin Lake Travis High School: 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Two high schools not very far apart with similar(ish) enrollments.  Austin High has roughly 2400 students.. which is much less than LT, but 2400 is plenty to field a decent football team in almost all cases.  Vastly different average household incomes, though.  You have kids from LT driving BMW's to planet fitness during the summers to meet an ex pro-athlete for a workout.. while Austin High kids might be sitting at home or working a summer job to help put food on the table.

This applies at every classification across the state (country).  There are always exceptions, but more times than not:  High household income, 2 working parents, spending summers at strength/speed camps, not having to work summer jobs, having a reliable vehicle to make it to weight room/school, running with kids in similar situation, access to best facilities money can buy, personal trainer, personal tutor, etc. etc. etc.... A kid with access to the list I just gave will ALWAYS have a leg up on a kid that doesn't.  Now multiply that by entire teams/programs.  Start looking at the average household income of the schools that are habitually making deep runs.  The income translates to living situation.. which translates to property taxes.. which is a huge contributor to how public schools pay for facilities and teachers/coaches/stipends.  

And coaches need to understand what situation theyre in. Kid A might have great support, financial backing, and access to all these different things while kid B might not even eat a decent meal outside of school or have a decent bed to get a good night of rest in. Those factors can show up in behaviors and habbits sometimes and if you don't consider  different living situations you might assume kid B is less deserving because he might seem less disciplined or motivated. You invest a little extra effort into kid B and you've got a diamond in the rough a lot of times though. I've seen it happen way too many times. It takes a special kind of coach in those situations though

[oldschool2]

7 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

And coaches need to understand what situation there in. Kid A might have great support, financial backing, and access to all these different things while kid B might not even eat a decent meal outside of school or have a decent bed to get a good night of rest in. Those factors can show up in behaviors and habbits sometimes and if you don't consider  different living situations you might assume kid B is less deserving because he might seem less disciplined or motivated. You invest a little extra effort into kid B and you've got a diamond in the rough a lot of times though. I've seen it happen way too many times. It takes a special kind of coach in those situations though

I would wager that a higher percentage of coaches know what they're dealing with in that regard.. than the percentage of parents that know that their kid is in this situation.  Please note:  I'm not being judgmental nor am I saying that those kind of obstacles are impossible to overcome.. just stating that statistically it can make quite a difference.   Anyone that argues it doesn't is just ignorant on the subject.. or naive.  

[Setx fan]

22 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

I would wager that a higher percentage of coaches know what they're dealing with in that regard.. than the percentage of parents that know that their kid is in this situation.  Please note:  I'm not being judgmental nor am I saying that those kind of obstacles are impossible to overcome.. just stating that statistically it can make quite a difference.   Anyone that argues it doesn't is just ignorant on the subject.. or naive.  

Its a difference in knowing and understanding. Coaches who understand will realize there's a different approach needed. But as I said before it takes a special coach in those situations.