[RavennaAl]

So you would account for his playmaking abilities over his passing or tweaking skills. Would you say then, that you would give 50% to playmaking, 25% to tweaking and 25% to passing?? Or maybe 70% playmaking, 15% tweaking and 15% passing?

But, couldn't it also be argued that the guy who runs the same play and gains 20 yards everytime is simply going with what works? I mean, if it ain't broke, don't fix it? He may only have 2 or 3 plays, but if they work, they work.

I'm trying to figure out what the ideal mixture of skills is for a coach. I'm thinking that a guy who can make his bases really strong would probably win more often simply because it's hard to stop another team when your guys are going backwards every play. Also a guy who can complete every pass would be hard to stop simply because if he sends out 5 recievers every play, someone is bound to be open.

In real life, it seems that the only thing that matters is winning and loosing. Great coaches are judged by the number of wins or championships that they get. In miniature football, would you still only count wins and loses, or would you have to consider other aspects that you don't account for in NFL and college?