|
Post by Wolfgang on Dec 21, 2006 16:08:59 GMT -5
You can be an excellent coach or an excellent trainer or an excellent recruiter, but that does not entitle you to the "genius" label.
Thanks, in advance.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Dec 21, 2006 16:45:18 GMT -5
"Nobody in the game of football should be called a genius. A genius is somebody like Norman Einstein. " Joe Theisman
Just substitute volleyball for football and we will have it right. Oh and Albert for Norman. That Joe Theisman, really putting that Notre Dame education to work. I would ask for the degree back if I were ND.
|
|
|
Post by pedro el leon on Dec 21, 2006 16:47:57 GMT -5
I'm sorry to break it to you peeps, but the truth is, there are no geniuses in volleyball. Only some smart peeps. And there are a lot of smart peeps in the world. So, no biggie. The janitor at my middle school graduated high school as valedictorian at the age of 13, had 5 degrees by 20 years old, and has 3 doctorates. "Why?" asked the local newspaper reporter doing a story on him about why he is a janitor. "Because I like the atmosphere at this school." was his reply. The moral of the story? Never say there are no geniuses in any profession. Because that is just flat out wrong. Of course, my old janitor is also a consultant at the PNNL.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Dec 21, 2006 17:05:17 GMT -5
Say what you want about McLaughlin but his team has been in the Final Four 3 out of the last 4 years. This sums it up.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Dec 21, 2006 17:06:29 GMT -5
I don't know if he is a genius....or any coach is a genius. If he was a genius he wouldn't be coaching. It only takes true idiots to decide to be a volleyball coach, knowing your going to be scrutinized by everybody..... It does make me wonder why they do it sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by SaltNPepper on Dec 21, 2006 17:08:06 GMT -5
Last year when Nebraska were blown out by Washington . . . . For what it is worth, Nebraska lost last year to Washington by the scores of 30-25, 30-25, & 30-26. I probably wouldn't call that a blow out, but they were clearly soundly beaten in a sweep. This year's losses by Washington to Stanford were 30-12, 30-25 and 30-15. I'm not sure what it takes to be considered a blown out in a match, but in my book, Washington was blown out of the first and third games. It takes a lot for me to leave a match early no matter who is playing, but that is one match that I left in the third game before it was "officially" over because there was not doubt of the outcome. . . . . knowing your going to be scrutinized by everybody when your team makes it to the final 4 three years in a row, and wins one national championship. . . . I've seen this reference about Washington being the only team to make it to the Final 4 the last three years several times now by various posters. Any while it is an important fact, I don't think that tells the whole story about Final 4 appearances in the last 3 years. Here are a few others: Team | Matches Won/Lost | National Championships | Championship Matches Played | Final Fours | Games Won/Lost | Stanford | 3-1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 10-4 | Nebraska | 3-1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 9-5 | Washington | 2-2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7-6 | Minnesota | 1-1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3-4 | UCLA | 0-1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1-3 | USC | 0-1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1-3 | Santa Clara | 0-1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0-3 | Tennessee | 0-1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0-3 |
Three teams have a NC. Two Teams are 3-1 in Final 4's matches. The team with the best Final 4 record in games won/lost is Stanford - Nebraska 2nd and Washington 3rd. IMO, it is in poor taste for anyone to criticize McLaughin as coach as he has proved he is one of the best in this country. (Just like I think it was in poor taste to criticize Cook last year for their lost to Washington).
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 21, 2006 17:33:46 GMT -5
"Nobody in the game of football should be called a genius. A genius is somebody like Norman Einstein. " Joe Theisman Just substitute volleyball for football and we will have it right. Oh and Albert for Norman. That Joe Theisman, really putting that Notre Dame education to work. I would ask for the degree back if I were ND. Is Joe a protege of Yogi Berra?
|
|
|
Post by pedro el leon on Dec 21, 2006 18:24:40 GMT -5
^^that number for games won/lost is wrong for uw, in the last 3 years they: lost 1-3 stanford ('04 semi) won 3-0 tennessee ('05 semi) won 3-0 nebraska ('05 final) lost 1-3 stanford ('06 semi) so they are 8-6, not 7-6. Not a big deal at all, but one more game won looks that much better. and I know I'm really going to sound like I'm making excuses right now, but this is dead true, Washington was better than Stanford in '04. Anybody who watched the matches would say the same. yes, stanford won 2 out of 3, but that included a 1 in 100,000,000 comeback (minus Tomasevic, mind you) where washington completely out played them no less. And washington had two major injuries in the semis to ST and CM.
|
|
|
Post by Ye Olde Dawg on Dec 21, 2006 19:24:05 GMT -5
Check your numbers Pedro. We lost 0-3 to Stanford in the '06 semis. My summary of this season is: not bad for a "rebuilding" year. Remember all the starters we lost from that championship team? UW was doing very well to go anywhere in the tournament, much less make it to the final four. Yes, I'd say the team was blown out by Stanford. We had consistency problems all season long -- but I'd chalk it up to being human. Getting to the FF was an accomplishment. I wish I could have a more considered opinion of the match itself, but like a lot of people in the Seattle area we lost power at a very bad time if you're a volleyball fan. I didn't get to watch or tape the match, and all I know about it is what I've seen in print since then.
|
|
|
Post by pedro el leon on Dec 21, 2006 21:00:25 GMT -5
oh yeah, lol, i'm still in denial.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Dec 21, 2006 21:37:54 GMT -5
I'm sorry to break it to you peeps, but the truth is, there are no geniuses in volleyball. Only some smart peeps. And there are a lot of smart peeps in the world. So, no biggie. The janitor at my middle school graduated high school as valedictorian at the age of 13, had 5 degrees by 20 years old, and has 3 doctorates. "Why?" asked the local newspaper reporter doing a story on him about why he is a janitor. "Because I like the atmosphere at this school." was his reply. The moral of the story? Never say there are no geniuses in any profession. Because that is just flat out wrong. Of course, my old janitor is also a consultant at the PNNL. The janitor who is also a genius is such a cliche now. See, e.g., "Good Will Hunting". Okay, to rephrase, except for the janitorial field which has a high concentration of geniuses, no one in volleyball is a genius. Thanks, in advance.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Dec 21, 2006 22:51:02 GMT -5
Not sure we should be throwing the genius tag on anybody. They are both among the top of their profession. Way to much was made out of Mclaughlins genius as it relates to the "cauldron" it is a concept that has been around for a long time, and was not even developed by Mclaughlin. It was created by Anson Dorrance at North Carolina. Read "traing soccer champions" it is a great read for any coach in any sport. Feel free to use the genius tag as often as you please in regards to Dorrance. I hate soccer but you are 100% correct on this.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 21, 2006 22:54:02 GMT -5
Pedro, I'm not sure Washingtons combined points in the three games were enough to win a game.
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Dec 21, 2006 23:10:31 GMT -5
Pedro, I'm not sure Washingtons combined points in the three games were enough to win a game. 52? Wins most games I have seen. Actually, every game I have seen.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 22, 2006 8:27:51 GMT -5
Husky vb fan, thanks for clearing that up and for recognizing the tongue and cheek of the post.
|
|