Huskers vs A&M

[Deleted]

Perhaps the word challenge would be better than motivate. Intensity is a coaching issue, that is created in practice, maintained in practice. John Cook did an amazing job motivating Jenny Kropp to play at a higher level. She was very average playing for Terry Pettit. I don't doubt Cook's ability to motivate individuals, I wonder why this group struggles with maintaining any level of intensity. Perhaps it's because the bench is not deep and the athlete knows they can play at any level regardless of the outcome because there is no one to replace them(not necessarily the Huskers but kids in general.) Mancuso needs to play like a senior!

[holidayhusker]

I guess it depends on what your definition of motivation is?? I agree with you on the most part but that Michael Jordan mentality is rare. These kids are recruited for their raw talent and hopefully the competitive equasion is part of that. To expect girls in their late teens and early twenties to always be charged up and ready for every game is unrealistic. I do think it is the coaches job to always be finding ways to bring intensity to those who are not in the correct frame of mind . If they cannot be motivated then bye bye scholarship.

[Keystonekid]

Holiday, no doubt. Do you think for a second Cook isn't intense and motivated every day? If the Huskers aren't motivated ( I am sure they are) it isn't from a lack of staff pushing. People do need to realize the season is very taxing, that is why teams don't go undefeated no matter how good they are.

[gobigred]

I can understand Keystone's point. But I still don't fully agree with it. It is his job to realize that these girls, while extremely talented, can become complacent and leave the team vulnerable. Cook needs to do whatever it takes to motivate this team and get them to play up to their potential night in and night out. Whether that means coddling a freshman or getting in the face of a senior. Whatever it takes.

With that said, it's not an easy task. When you don't get challenged everynight, like in the Pac-10, it can be difficult. I give Dave Shoji at Hawaii a lot of credit. For as weak as the WAC can be, they almost never lose conference matches, and they haven't exactly been world-beaters lately.

[Kampy]

eov said:

If the Huskers were playing perimeter defense which they usually do then Busboom was not getting to the corner. She really struggled last night, caused lots of communication errors.

Baylor said something last Saturday during the Colorado match broadcast that Busboom was dealing with an ankle injury. Maybe she is not 100% healthy.

[mischievious]

kampy said:

eov said:

If the Huskers were playing perimeter defense which they usually do then Busboom was not getting to the corner. She really struggled last night, caused lots of communication errors.

Baylor said something last Saturday during the Colorado match broadcast that Busboom was dealing with an ankle injury. Maybe she is not 100% healthy.

I think her stupid sweatband is affecting her play and not for the better.

On topic, if only the coach's responsibility to motivate the players, what purpose is there to have a captain? Aren't captains supposed to motivate their teammates?

[2c]

Do you TRULY feel the coach has that much impact during the course of a match. If a player isn't taking care of her responsibilities, the other players on the court are or should hold her accountable. For the most part, once the match starts, the coach is just a cheerleader or an obnoxious fan. OK, sometimes they call the correct zone to serve. The coaches job is 99% leading up to the match.

[SaltNPepper]

2c said:

Do you TRULY feel the coach has that much impact during the course of a match. If a player isn't taking care of her responsibilities, the other players on the court are or should hold her accountable. For the most part, once the match starts, the coach is just a cheerleader or an obnoxious fan. OK, sometimes they call the correct zone to serve. The coaches job is 99% leading up to the match.

Interesting point. I'm not sure I agree with it, but it reminds me of watching Mick Haley in the 1995 National Championship match between Texas and Nebraska. It was late in the match and during several timeouts, he never even got up from his chair to talk to his team. Guess he felt he had good leadership within the team and there wasn't really anything that he needed to say that he had not already told them.

(It didn't work by the way.)

[holidayhusker]

2c said:

Do you TRULY feel the coach has that much impact during the course of a match. If a player isn't taking care of her responsibilities, the other players on the court are or should hold her accountable. For the most part, once the match starts, the coach is just a cheerleader or an obnoxious fan. OK, sometimes they call the correct zone to serve. The coaches job is 99% leading up to the match.

Letting the players " police," each other during a match is asking for a very uncomfortable playing situation among team members. Nothing would destroy a team faster then allowing personality conflicts to get out of hand.

[Deleted]

I think giving players responsibility is ok at the college level if everyone can accept their "roles". People were worried about Pavan barking at Holloway a few matches ago. I watched those two very closely on Wed, there is NOTHING wrong with their relationship, just two very competitive people.

I think the Huskers lack of depth might be hurting their internal motivation to be at their best all of the time. That isn't a character slam on them, it's human nature. You're always going to work just a little harder knowing that if you don't you're out. Now that doesn't always work either as some players can't handle that pressure.

This is going to be a very interesting post season!!!

[Keystonekid]

Holiday, couldn't disagree with you more. Great teams are "player", not "coach" driven.

[vbking]

eov said:

People were worried about Pavan barking at Holloway a few matches ago. I watched those two very closely on Wed, there is NOTHING wrong with their relationship, just two very competitive people.

There is absolutely no problem between Pavan and Holloway. If you watched them closely on Wednesday, you could see two occasions where they were actually laughing at each other over silly plays.

[cinnamonopus]

I think that once the players step on the floor, it's up to them. There are a few things a coach can do to push them along, but the work has to have been before that point, in practice. Then once they're on they floor, they have to do their jobs. And I think no amount of practice time, no matter how good and intense, makes up for actual game situations.

I don't think Nebraska's current situation has as much to do with the coach motivating them or not. I think it has a lot more to do with not being challenged enough in-game as they've gone along this season, and the psychological cushion of being number 1 for so long. I believe motivation comes from within, and they've been motivated enough to get by, but little more. They haven't had to dig deep enough. You need to be chased to find that motivation, and they hadn't been. Until Colorado.

[The Bofa on the Sofa]

What a bizarre discussion.

Anyone who manages people understands that getting them do the things you want is a dicey game. Some people might need a kick in the arse. Others might do better if you back off. Moreover, there is an issue of timing, because people who might respond better at one time to aggresiveness might be better to back off at a different time.

But here's the deal: in order to know which approach works best requires that you know the people very well, so that you will know how they respond to different approaches. John Cook and his staff know the players very well. They work with them in one-on-one situations, and they work with them in team situations, and they work with them in game situations. During that time, they learn a lot about each's personality, and how to work with them.

John Cook is a good enough coach to know all this and will chose methods he thinks are appropriate for the time. I don't know if he is always using the best methods, and he could be wrong, but I do this: none of us here have any clue about what is the best way to handle any of these kids, nor what is the best way to motivate them. Unless you were their club/high school coach and can say, "When she was playing for me, I did X and it seemed to work," then you are all blowing smoke.

It would be one thing if he were Rob Patrick, who is constantly berating all his players, but from what I have seen from Cook is that he picks his moments. That tells me he is doing it when he thinks it will be most effective.

[Deleted]

pablo said:

What a bizarre discussion.

Anyone who manages people understands that getting them do the things you want is a dicey game. Some people might need a kick in the arse. Others might do better if you back off. Moreover, there is an issue of timing, because people who might respond better at one time to aggresiveness might be better to back off at a different time.

But here's the deal: in order to know which approach works best requires that you know the people very well, so that you will know how they respond to different approaches. John Cook and his staff know the players very well. They work with them in one-on-one situations, and they work with them in team situations, and they work with them in game situations. During that time, they learn a lot about each's personality, and how to work with them.

John Cook is a good enough coach to know all this and will chose methods he thinks are appropriate for the time. I don't know if he is always using the best methods, and he could be wrong, but I do this: none of us here have any clue about what is the best way to handle any of these kids, nor what is the best way to motivate them. Unless you were their club/high school coach and can say, "When she was playing for me, I did X and it seemed to work," then you are all blowing smoke.

It would be one thing if he were Rob Patrick, who is constantly berating all his players, but from what I have seen from Cook is that he picks his moments. That tells me he is doing it when he thinks it will be most effective.

You hit the nail on the head!! The more I think about the match on Wed and this team and the past Husker teams under John Cook his approach has been very different in terms to how he seems on the bench. I think many of us Husker fans just expected a more re-energized Husker team after the "come to Jesus" experience they got at Colorado.

What I also keep thinking, and I'm not predicting the same outcome but this team reminds me a lot of the 2000 group in that they won a lot of matches playing pretty ugly ball!

The Huskers have a huge challenge ahead of them having to play the regionals on the road against a host school and potentially even playing the first two rounds on the road. IF they manage to survive this I LOVE our chances of winning it all at the Qwest!!