|
Post by NobodySpecial on Dec 15, 2005 13:06:36 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2005 13:35:09 GMT -5
Congrats to Cook, a well-deserved honor. He has assembled one of the best teams ever.
And kudos to McLaughlin, Patrick and Wallace who all excelled as well, both in coaching and building their programs.
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 15, 2005 16:41:51 GMT -5
Congrats to Cook, a well-deserved honor. He has assembled one of the best teams ever. And kudos to McLaughlin, Patrick and Wallace who all excelled as well, both in coaching and building their programs. Given what they had to work with ,and how well they worked with it, both Patrick and Wallace deserved the award more than Cook, given what he had to work with How many AA's on his team? Hell if they weren't here he should have been fired!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2005 16:43:15 GMT -5
But who got all those players to Lincoln? Cook. That's part of COY, imho.
And it's not like Stanford where you can pluck the AAs off the trees on campus...
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 15, 2005 17:18:07 GMT -5
But who got all those players to Lincoln? Cook. That's part of COY, imho. And it's not like Stanford where you can pluck the AAs off the trees on campus... Not sure which of two schools is plucking more of the talent these days but it's pretty tough to make a Kentucky Derby winner out of a mule, just like it is a lot tougher to get to the FF with a moderate amount of talent minus AA' s as compared to the guy who is loaded with talent, including AA's and makes it to the big dance. I guess the real problem here is in how we define the job performance of a coach! Like so many other awards, this one has a certain amount of politics involved just like some of the ludicrous choices on this year's AA teams!
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 15, 2005 17:54:23 GMT -5
Wallace and Carlson would have been fine choices as well, But John is also very deserved. I think coaching is defined by many things, recruiting, actual developing of talent, program development etc... Of course John has talent but he is responsible, for attracting that talent and developing it. Wire to wire #1 rank, and the attention that program gets, involves more pressure than I'm sure Carlson, Wallace can dream of. Cook also took off-season risks in bringing in Griffin, going to a 6-2 playing without a Libero. Also, this isn't political, it is voted on by coaches, and John is certainly never accused of being the most popular.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Dec 15, 2005 19:27:43 GMT -5
Congrats to Cook, a well-deserved honor. He has assembled one of the best teams ever. And kudos to McLaughlin, Patrick and Wallace who all excelled as well, both in coaching and building their programs. Given what they had to work with ,and how well they worked with it, both Patrick and Wallace deserved the award more than Cook, given what he had to work with How many AA's on his team? Hell if they weren't here he should have been fired! Who recruited all of those AA players? How many of the AA players on the team this year were expected to be AA level players when they first showed up to Lincoln? Pavan and Larson we big news for sure, however, how about the others? Recruiting and training is part of coaching. Any of the coaches with teams playing at the Final Four this year deserved consideration for COY, as did others who's teams were eliminated earlier in the tournament. JC just happened to get the award this year.
|
|
|
Post by TheRange on Dec 15, 2005 19:51:54 GMT -5
I think the fact that he and his staff were able to develop players like Elmer and Houghteling, who were not AAs coming into Nebraska like Pavan and Larson (eventually maybe), is being lost in the discussion. Doing more with less is great, but making less into more is pretty impressive too.
|
|
hare
Freshman
Posts: 62
|
Post by hare on Dec 15, 2005 23:10:47 GMT -5
I think the answer to the question I have seen on this post several times is the guy who is now coaching at Kentucky.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 16, 2005 0:09:28 GMT -5
Hare, that is absurd. Skinner is a great coach and one of my best friends, his contributions withstanding, this is Cook's program.
|
|
|
Post by lilred on Dec 16, 2005 0:26:17 GMT -5
At first I would agree with the "if you do more with less philosophy" when choosing the COY. But things to remember:
1. Hougteling wasn't even going to play volleyball and only played club her senior year in HS 2. Elmer supposedly wasn't even allowed to practice her freshman year 3. Busboom didn't set until her senior year in high school (and it showed) She may not be the prettiest setter but she is still getting the job done 4. Recruiting Maggie Griffin and running the 6-2 and pairing her up with Elmer. Timing is everything with the middle attack. He was taking the chance that Griffin would get that timing down faster in 2 months even though Busboom had two years with Elmer
They all would be deserving. These are just things to consider before you say "oh yeah its easy when you have four all americans" He just happened to win this year.
|
|
|
Post by aaronic on Dec 16, 2005 5:43:47 GMT -5
Okay yada yada yada on making something out of less....
So what do you think of the TN coach, Patrick??? I think he falls under that don't you think he's done even more than COOK? I mean can you seriously tell me that he(Patrick) has done anything less with what he had...? C'mon most of his players weren't even Fab 50's. I'm sure he had a much harder time recruiting than Cook.....
I'm not trying to argue and say that he isn't deserving of it, i'm just pointing out someone was just as deserving(or even more).
But I don't really care because this award is something that no one really remembers; it's not as important as POY.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Dec 19, 2005 11:40:31 GMT -5
I think now it's pretty obvious that the 2005 COY award went to a coach who grossly undervalued the importance of a good libero.
|
|