|
Post by AntennaMagnet on Jan 11, 2007 10:56:36 GMT -5
Some really good stuff here. Just a few responses:
Izzy: I agree title IX was used by some ADs to diminish mens programs under the name of parity. Bad decision and not title IX's fault. In fact, one southern college eliminated scholarship based sports entirely and yet expanded the number of intercollegiate sports for both men and women ! Interestingly, they also increased the percent of minority students when they eliminated athletic scholarships (as opposed to the usual argument for keeping scholarships in that it provides economically disadvantaged minority students an opportunity to attend college, regardless of the graduation rate).
Phaedrus: you're right on target regarding the developmental phase of coaches...I guess I just don't see a concerted effort in the Big 10 or Pac 10 to identify female "rising stars" and agressively develop them through a formal program that could be used for all young coaches. Right now, its the old Mediaval system of Knight and Paige apprenticeship.
Simplycurious: if recruitment is the juggernaut that imposes on family time, then perhaps my idea of a NCAA clearing house for student athletes being matched to one of ten programs they identify as their top choices would be a good way to go.
Donneyp: Let's rumble later.
GoBruins: if 100% of VB coaches were women, at least one of them would win the NCAA championship, thus smashing the ridiculous myth that women coaches can't win the big one in VB. With all the top recruits concentrated in a handful of teams, you could replace all of the male with female coaches in those programs and one of the women would come out on top.
|
|
|
Post by mrhand on Jan 11, 2007 11:05:34 GMT -5
Some really good stuff here. Just a few responses: Phaedrus: you're right on target regarding the developmental phase of coaches...I guess I just don't see a concerted effort in the Big 10 or Pac 10 to identify female "rising stars" and agressively develop them through a formal program that could be used for all young coaches. Right now, its the old Mediaval system of Knight and Paige apprenticeship. How would you like these rising stars to be developed? I guess I just don't understand what it is you think isn't being done for female coaches. There are a number of really good female coaches that, for whatever reason, have chosen to stay where they are. Litzau at UWM, for one. Avery at Valpo. Dunbar, until this year, at C of C. Stokes at Missouri State. Somera decided to leave the PAC 10 for the SEC. Kordes said she wasn't interested in IU. Kathy George is a success story in the Big Ten. She hasn't won any conference titles yet, but she's doing a really good job with the Spartans.
|
|
|
Post by volleydog on Jan 11, 2007 11:45:46 GMT -5
GoBruins: if 100% of VB coaches were women, at least one of them would win the NCAA championship, thus smashing the ridiculous myth that women coaches can't win the big one in VB. With all the top recruits concentrated in a handful of teams, you could replace all of the male with female coaches in those programs and one of the women would come out on top. Are you kidding? If we put cats in all the head coaching positions, then we would have the first cat to ever win a championship as well!! I have a problem with discrimination in any form.....even reverse discrimination that you seem to support in order for women to get ahead. I believe mrhand had a excellent point that there isn't as many avenues for men on the men's side of the game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2007 11:54:44 GMT -5
It's not going to work with cats. Some fool from the stands is going to dangle some string and all hell's going to break loose.
|
|
|
Post by artvandelay on Jan 11, 2007 12:01:33 GMT -5
Intersting thread. I applaud those who avoid the pc crap and say what's one their mind.
I agree that some women have moved up the career ladder faster than their talent would have allowed a man, thus exposing them as inexperienced and ultimatlely they are run out or walked out of the game. Also, male head coaches are ENCOURAGED to hire at least one female assistant. Female assistants will get hired before a male counterpart w/ more experience.
Another reason their is a lack of top level female coaches, may be simply the top level players are choosing to play for men.
Now the fun part is why is this happening? Anyone care to share?
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jan 11, 2007 12:02:36 GMT -5
It's not going to work with cats. Some fool from the stands is going to dangle some string and all hell's going to break loose. ![](http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Cats/VolleyCat.jpg) I think it might be an illegal back-row block.
|
|
|
Post by volleydog on Jan 11, 2007 12:08:26 GMT -5
It's not going to work with cats. Some fool from the stands is going to dangle some string and all hell's going to break loose. true true........ I was going to say dogs, then I thought I was going to be accused of comparing women to dogs and all the crap that would go along with it. So I decided to use cats. ;D
|
|
|
Post by cougvb on Jan 11, 2007 12:24:33 GMT -5
. On the national scene, no female-coached team has won an NCAA championship. In fact, only one (Mary Wise) has even made it to the final four. This despite that fact that around 50% of the head coaches in Division I are female. . Elaine Michaelis took BYU in the late 90's. Didn't Texas Arlington go one year with a female? Was it Lisa Love? Maybe that was before NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Jan 11, 2007 12:44:52 GMT -5
Those cats paws are way too wide and straight up, not penetrating the net. Somebody care to make a sexist joke about women with their claws out who could make a better coach, in this case? (Since it's a male cat on a male team there must be a male coach.) As a past practicing lawyer, and corporate employee I would make the following points; lawyers in general tend to change jobs almost as much as volleyball coaches, at least at the upper level; it's part of the working culture that there is less loyalty, more outsourcing. Corporate VP's last about 18 months, then time to try another solution. Professional women have also been making progress/strides in adapting to family life, whether by having men participate more, etc. I assume the experience and mentoring referred to would be as an assistant coach; from what I can see and understand the assistants do a lot of the grunt work in scouting and recruiting and that must put as much strain on a female assistant as head coaching would. The Pac-10 exemplifies what Title IX is all about and the resulting tension; tremendous pressure to win and perform, so the schools will go with proven entities at head coach (adding Arizona State to the list), and you can't really indict any given choice at coach, yet the end result is a continued male dominance. And you need the horses to win, and the best players will go with the proven winners. I doubt seriously that a promoted hot shot male assistant, with no proven background as head coach, could recruit well enough to get a championship in the Pac 10. And finally, any studies done on why female high school graduating players would favor a male coach over a female coach, or vice-versa? Obviously it varies case by case, and I would think it has to do with sensitive coaches v. yellers and how that fits into a girls family background. But in general, I would think female coaches are more sensitive to female players feelings than male coaches (I'm thinking Shaw at Stanford, a very successful women's team coach who is simply going to coach, not hold your hand much) and does that affect anything?
|
|
|
Post by AntennaMagnet on Jan 11, 2007 15:04:30 GMT -5
Baywatcher, good musings.
With regard to recruiting in the PAC 10, I really don't think the coach sells some of the schools as much as the school sells itself. Great talent would flock to Stanford even if they had Basta the cat as a coach.
For the academically talented athlete, USC, UCLA, CAL and Stanford are "no brainers" for quality scholastics. The other PAC 10 schools also enjoy pretty good academic reputations, so there will never be a dearth of interested student athletes quite independently of the coach.
It is true that students and families naturally migrate to winning programs. Everyone wants to be on a winning team. This human trait tends to skew things so the rich in talent continue to stay rich while other programs dream about the final four to little avail. For this reason, it might be good to consider a way to disperse athletic talent more evenly, thus leveling the playing field for all coaches while at the same time reducing recruitment costs (time and money). A match system, similar to one used by post-graduate medical programs, would be one potential solution whereby colleges and students can match up.
|
|
|
Post by destrier on Jan 11, 2007 16:01:19 GMT -5
On the national scene, no female-coached team has won an NCAA championship. In fact, only one (Mary Wise) has even made it to the final four. You're mistaken; Cathy George, then with Texas-Arlington, was the first coach to lead her school to the Final Four.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Jan 11, 2007 16:58:45 GMT -5
Mary's the only female to coach in an NCAA final and the only female to coach in more than 1 final 4.
But is this just limited to volleyball? Soccer seems to be dominated by male coaches. There are just a handful of female coaches at the top programs, only a few have been to the college cup(Final 4) and only 1, Becky Burleigh at Florida, has won a national championship. Women's hoops seems to have more female coaches than other sports, but still a lot of the top programs have men coaching. I don't think you can single out volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Jan 11, 2007 22:30:53 GMT -5
Antenna, when you first mentioned getting rid of recruiting and matching players with schools I was laughing. Then you mentioned in another post. Now I just think you are sipping too much Jack & Coke. The PC crowd is getting slapped along side the head and I love it. Can we just hire the best people for the job in all facets of life without some group bitching.
|
|
|
Post by doc on Jan 11, 2007 22:34:46 GMT -5
Antenna, I don't know in what role you are involved in the volleyball scene (player, coach, fan), but I'm tired of the political correctness that permeates today's society so I'm just going to speak my mind... 1. Title 9 has already ruined men's collegiate volleyball as well as other sports, why can't female activists just simply understand that men (on average) are more interested in being involved in athletics than women? I'm all for equality, in fact I am a coach and make my living and supporting my family by doing so. 2. With so many more men applying for jobs, are you saying that men should be penalized for their sex? Because that is exactly what is happening... There are kids (yes kids) coming out of college getting head coaching jobs at large colleges with no experience simply because they happen to be female. Men who apply for that job and have much more experience are being shut out in favor of this. 3. Recruiting by committee... are you kidding me? I'm not even going to get started with that. 4. Everyone has to make choices in life. Coaching is a lifestyle choice. I'm tired of everyone wanting the world to change around them. If you want to be a soldier and you happen to be female, should we bring the kids over to be with mommy? No either dad steps up or they go to day care. If my wife had a great job offer, I would consider staying home with the kids if that is what had to be done. If you are not willing to do that then find a job at Sears. Basically our nation is a bunch of oversensitive pansies!!!! When a woman does a good job she gets promoted, simple as that. Too many are being given jobs too early and being burned out because they don't know how to coach yet. I'll be back when I have something else to rant about... I love your fire! ![8-)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/cool.png)
|
|
|
Post by volleydog on Jan 11, 2007 22:50:29 GMT -5
Antenna, when you first mentioned getting rid of recruiting and matching players with schools I was laughing. Then you mentioned in another post. Now I just think you are sipping too much Jack & Coke. The PC crowd is getting slapped along side the head and I love it. Can we just hire the best people for the job in all facets of life without some group bitching. Amen
|
|