Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 16:44:50 GMT -5
Being a JUCO coach isn't relevant. A whole bunch of JUCO coaches can recruit really well, especially where I live with Illinois Central, Lincolnland, and Parkland. The question is can that JUCO coach follow rules. Does the coach have the technical knowledge to succeed. Does the coach have relevant contacts. Sometimes its the administration that needs to dig deeper, not just the coach. Being a JUCO coach isn’t relevant?! So you are upset because she coached JUCO and is a female? Her resume speaks for itself. I’m sure all the relevant contacts she has have great things to say about her technical knowledge, following rules, and ability to succeed at Div 1. I get where you are coming from, Trish Knight didn’t prove herself but that doesn’t mean no other female who has coached at the junior college level won’t succeed. Try reading without personal bias, huh? I'm on record on a regular basis (along with Spikeninja I think) that a coach's level is irrelevant to ability to be successful. If anything, 'big time' programs should mine other levels much more often than hire D1 retreads with mediocre records. The reality is though that the coach needs to follow rules, have technical knowledge, and have the contacts. Some integrity is useful but not as common as I would hope. As for the coach in question, we will see. It's easy to coach the places she has been at with significant support and a lack of rules enforcement. It is another to succeed without support financially or administratively. I don't know her, but I know the way Hutchinson used to run. There wasn't much oversight there and a lot of...extra help...available for athletes.
|
|
|
Post by karellen on Jan 15, 2019 17:02:29 GMT -5
we really need to stop with the "other more candidates applied and school would not talk to them" garbage.
even if "more qualified" people applied...1) That is only someone's opinion from the outside looking in and that person's opinion, as far as the school is concerned, does not mean jack...2) just because someone else appears to be more qualified on paper, that does not winning candidate is NOT qualified. The winning candidate clearly had qualities the school was looking for and their opinion is the only one that matters.
Every year we go through this and there is only one hire I can think of in the last 10 - 15 years that was really questionable, but again, my opinion from the outside does not matter.
If you really want to have this discussion, create a new thread.
Can we get back to job news please?
I will start --
the winds of change in the Midwest alluded to earlier has nothing to do with my guess (DePual assistant), Lake Erie, or any other guess that has been floated so far...And no, there are no clues any where in this statement.
|
|
|
Post by saywhatnow on Jan 15, 2019 18:21:59 GMT -5
we really need to stop with the "other more candidates applied and school would not talk to them" garbage. even if "more qualified" people applied...1) That is only someone's opinion from the outside looking in and that person's opinion, as far as the school is concerned, does not mean jack...2) just because someone else appears to be more qualified on paper, that does not winning candidate is NOT qualified. The winning candidate clearly had qualities the school was looking for and their opinion is the only one that matters. Every year we go through this and there is only one hire I can think of in the last 10 - 15 years that was really questionable, but again, my opinion from the outside does not matter. If you really want to have this discussion, create a new thread. Can we get back to job news please? I will start -- the winds of change in the Midwest alluded to earlier has nothing to do with my guess (DePual assistant), Lake Erie, or any other guess that has been floated so far...And no, there are no clues any where in this statement. Insert a thunderous hand clap...
|
|
|
Post by azvolleydad on Jan 15, 2019 18:50:01 GMT -5
. . . . the winds of change in the Midwest alluded to earlier has nothing to do with my guess (DePual assistant), Lake Erie, or any other guess that has been floated so far...And no, there are no clues any where in this statement. The board game "Clue" is made by Hasbro. If there are "no clues" in your statement, then the current school does not currently have a male coach: No Has Bro!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 19:47:21 GMT -5
couple of northeast schools have started interviews this week... mangoes only from what I can tell
|
|
|
Post by noreaster14 on Jan 15, 2019 21:37:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by spikeninja on Jan 15, 2019 21:58:49 GMT -5
Being a JUCO coach isn’t relevant?! So you are upset because she coached JUCO and is a female? Her resume speaks for itself. I’m sure all the relevant contacts she has have great things to say about her technical knowledge, following rules, and ability to succeed at Div 1. I get where you are coming from, Trish Knight didn’t prove herself but that doesn’t mean no other female who has coached at the junior college level won’t succeed. Try reading without personal bias, huh? I'm on record on a regular basis (along with Spikeninja I think) that a coach's level is irrelevant to ability to be successful. If anything, 'big time' programs should mine other levels much more often than hire D1 retreads with mediocre records. The reality is though that the coach needs to follow rules, have technical knowledge, and have the contacts. Some integrity is useful but not as common as I would hope. As for the coach in question, we will see. It's easy to coach the places she has been at with significant support and a lack of rules enforcement. It is another to succeed without support financially or administratively. I don't know her, but I know Hutchinson. There's not much oversight there and a lot of...extra help...available for athletes. I agree, on a case by case basis. The big problem is AD's dont care to do the work or have the coaching experience to do their homework on making a hire. In this case, I think there are major issues going from JUCO to D1. Let's look at the big differences. 2 year vs. 4 year. Your recruiting mistakes are a 3 semester problem at juco. 2 semester if you dont run spring which many jucos dont. Sorry, playing beach and lifting 3 times a week isnt spring. Spring. Its critical to establishing player development and system modification. If you dont have experience with it or know how to utilize it, it's going to put you behind your experienced coached programs. The competition GAP. How many truly tough matches does a high level juco play per season. 4 maybe 5? At division 1, you can lose to anyone. If you can get international players that your opposition can't, you can roll out a lineup sheet and basically guarantee a high degree of winning. Scouting and video exchange. How many juco teams have and or do extensive match breakdown. How many have Datavolley for both themselves and their opponents. Compliance understanding. Academic requirements and monitoring. Etc.... That's just off the top of my head. Theres more. But lets chew on that. Overall, I think JUCO to D1 is an awful steep curve. One that historically has not demonstrated a lot of success. But it's a juicy chance to make a great press release and a female hire. That is the primary impetus of most administrations. Dont look like the good old boy and go focus on the programs that make boosters happy.
|
|
beast
Sophomore
Posts: 115
|
Post by beast on Jan 15, 2019 22:30:57 GMT -5
beast: Are you saying that you know there were "experienced, successful, D1 male coaches" who applied to both USC Upstate and ETSU and were never contacted at all about the position? If I recall correctly, I do agree with what you say about the lack of administration support from USC Upstate. I would not say it if I did not know.
|
|
beast
Sophomore
Posts: 115
|
Post by beast on Jan 15, 2019 22:33:34 GMT -5
Of course a nice or great person. What does that have to do with that AD avoiding experienced successful D1 male coaches? As usual, we will see in 3-5 years. I love when folks say that because I assume you were privy to the whole applicant pool, you were privy to those “successful D1 male coaches” interviews as well. These comments crack me up because there have been no not successful D1 males hired ever... There were no interviews for them.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Jan 15, 2019 22:36:51 GMT -5
|
|
beast
Sophomore
Posts: 115
|
Post by beast on Jan 15, 2019 22:37:33 GMT -5
Another Wow!!!!! Thinking back to the JUCO Coach that jumped all the way to Div 1 that went to Texas Tech. And it didn't work, in fact it went even further south. Some said it was surprising and a few defended her saying, as usual, she's a great person, she will do great. Again, some really good males with high quality successful Div 1 experience not even talked to. And she talks about the support of the administration!!! Yo, she needs to read bews papers, check facts, talk to the ex coach, talk to people in Spartanburg. Being a JUCO coach isn’t relevant?! So you are upset because she coached JUCO and is a female? Her resume speaks for itself. I’m sure all the relevant contacts she has have great things to say about her technical knowledge, following rules, and ability to succeed at Div 1. I get where you are coming from, Trish Knight didn’t prove herself but that doesn’t mean no other female who has coached at the junior college level won’t succeed. Agreed! First off, do NCAA coaches even follow their own rules? Technical knowledge is completely laughable as I have found many JC coaches to be better about teaching the technical game than any 4-year at any level. That is not a blanket statement, obviously many JC's suck, but many DI's do too. She averages over 30 wins per season and has been successful at every stop turning every program into a national contender. This Hall of Fame coach did all of that while having 6 kids including one with special needs. GTFO for anyone who even sniffs at the idea that this isn't a good hire. Ronda doesn't take jobs where she can't be successful. Being a JC coach gives her the experience of not having the support of other schools while still having to find a way to be successful. The "Successful" (and likely entitled) DI coaches people are talking about will do nothing but complain/blame failures on the resources and support they don't have. If you are a program with little resources compared to others, but want success do you really look to hire "successful" DI coaches who are used to having an open checkbook and personal assistants to take care of everything? Or do you hire someone with a pedigree of taking a nothing, with nothing, and turn it into something people talk about? Again, great hire and congrats and good luck to Ronda! Never ever said those successful D1 male coaches were strictly from fully funded "used to having an open checkbook and personal assistants to take care of everything" programs. Plenty of D1 mid-majors, small private schools where those coaches grinded and had success with no assistants or just 1.
|
|
beast
Sophomore
Posts: 115
|
Post by beast on Jan 15, 2019 22:39:34 GMT -5
The biggest difference from going from a successful DI program to a smaller DI program...regardless of gender...is budget and support. I have seen countless hires over the years where a coach gets their first HC job at a DI school and they end up failing and leaving after a few years because they are not used to working with less resources that they were used to at their previous program that was successful. Being that this coach is coming from JC in my mind is irrelevent, i'm sure the biggest factor will be, can she be successful with the level of support and resources given... managing resources, and learning how and what to delegate to whom... No, the biggest factor is and always be - can she recruit, train and match coach D1.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jan 15, 2019 22:50:24 GMT -5
Try reading without personal bias, huh? I'm on record on a regular basis (along with Spikeninja I think) that a coach's level is irrelevant to ability to be successful. If anything, 'big time' programs should mine other levels much more often than hire D1 retreads with mediocre records. The reality is though that the coach needs to follow rules, have technical knowledge, and have the contacts. Some integrity is useful but not as common as I would hope. As for the coach in question, we will see. It's easy to coach the places she has been at with significant support and a lack of rules enforcement. It is another to succeed without support financially or administratively. I don't know her, but I know Hutchinson. There's not much oversight there and a lot of...extra help...available for athletes. I agree, on a case by case basis. The big problem is AD's dont care to do the work or have the coaching experience to do their homework on making a hire. In this case, I think there are major issues going from JUCO to D1. Let's look at the big differences. 2 year vs. 4 year. Your recruiting mistakes are a 3 semester problem at juco. 2 semester if you dont run spring which many jucos dont. Sorry, playing beach and lifting 3 times a week isnt spring. Spring. Its critical to establishing player development and system modification. If you dont have experience with it or know how to utilize it, it's going to put you behind your experienced coached programs. The competition GAP. How many truly tough matches does a high level juco play per season. 4 maybe 5? At division 1, you can lose to anyone. If you can get international players that your opposition can't, you can roll out a lineup sheet and basically guarantee a high degree of winning. Scouting and video exchange. How many juco teams have and or do extensive match breakdown. How many have Datavolley for both themselves and their opponents. Compliance understanding. Academic requirements and monitoring. Etc.... That's just off the top of my head. Theres more. But lets chew on that. Overall, I think JUCO to D1 is an awful steep curve. One that historically has not demonstrated a lot of success. But it's a juicy chance to make a great press release and a female hire. That is the primary impetus of most administrations. Dont look like the good old boy and go focus on the programs that make boosters happy. If an applicant for the USC Upstate job has experience with all of those D1 'challenges' then they haven't been winning because successful D1 coaches aren't applying for that job. The hiring options for a program like this are usually people with unsuccessful D1 experience or successful non-D1 experience. I see no issue with them taking a bit of a gamble on a JUCO winner.
|
|
|
Post by oldman on Jan 16, 2019 9:07:32 GMT -5
we really need to stop with the "other more candidates applied and school would not talk to them" garbage. even if "more qualified" people applied...1) That is only someone's opinion from the outside looking in and that person's opinion, as far as the school is concerned, does not mean jack...2) just because someone else appears to be more qualified on paper, that does not winning candidate is NOT qualified. The winning candidate clearly had qualities the school was looking for and their opinion is the only one that matters. Every year we go through this and there is only one hire I can think of in the last 10 - 15 years that was really questionable, but again, my opinion from the outside does not matter. If you really want to have this discussion, create a new thread. Can we get back to job news please? I will start -- the winds of change in the Midwest alluded to earlier has nothing to do with my guess (DePual assistant), Lake Erie, or any other guess that has been floated so far...And no, there are no clues any where in this statement. Insert a thunderous hand clap... I have often sat for hours to contemplate the sound of one hand clapping.
|
|
|
Post by reader on Jan 16, 2019 9:30:32 GMT -5
I mostly have to settle for no hands clapping.
|
|