|
|
Post by bkedane on Jun 30, 2014 15:35:19 GMT -5
Interesting. My perception is that that most people considerably undervalue the importance of assistant coaches. At the programs with which I'm most familiar, assistants are in some cases the primary trainers and in other cases assistants do the primary scouting work. In every case assistants are heavily involved with all recruiting. Things may be different at different levels of play --- I'm familiar mostly with B1G and Pac12 programs. In these conferences, however, training and scouting and recruiting are all important and have a great impact on results. I think people undervalue this work and the efforts of those doing it. In what way do you think assistants' contributions are overvalued by fans? Any successful program has a head coach who runs the show; asst's are simply an extension of his or her philosophies and training styles. Asst's do the recruiting grunt work, but do not close any deals. Why do programs remain successful as asst's come and go, because the person in charge is in charge. I think you're right about some programs but wrong about others. At some programs assistants are not simply extensions of head coaches - the head coaches are far more flexible and open to assistants autonomous decisions than that. Sure the head coach is the boss and the final decision maker but that doesn't mean the assistants are little robots. About programs that remain successful despite changes in assistant coaches I'd say this. First, not all programs *have* stayed successful across as assistants have changed. Some have and some haven't. Second, some programs have remained successful even as *head* coaches have changed -- should we conclude from this that the previous and current head coaches in such situations don't have a significant impact? |
|
|
|
Post by volleytology on Jun 30, 2014 15:45:33 GMT -5
Any successful program has a head coach who runs the show; asst's are simply an extension of his or her philosophies and training styles. Asst's do the recruiting grunt work, but do not close any deals. Why do programs remain successful as asst's come and go, because the person in charge is in charge. I think you're right about some programs but wrong about others. At some programs assistants are not simply extensions of head coaches - the head coaches are far more flexible and open to assistants autonomous decisions than that. Sure the head coach is the boss and the final decision maker but that doesn't mean the assistants are little robots. About programs that remain successful despite changes in assistant coaches I'd say this. First, not all programs *have* stayed successful across as assistants have changed. Some have and some haven't. Second, some programs have remained successful even as *head* coaches have changed -- should we conclude from this that the previous and current head coaches in such situations don't have a significant impact? Name some examples of programs where an asst left and that was the reason the program tanked ? and for your second question; absolutely some schools are VERY attractive (campus beauty, education, conference, location, etc) and should have an excellence chance of volleyball success regardless of who's in charge |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 30, 2014 15:48:33 GMT -5
I think you're right about some programs but wrong about others. At some programs assistants are not simply extensions of head coaches - the head coaches are far more flexible and open to assistants autonomous decisions than that. Sure the head coach is the boss and the final decision maker but that doesn't mean the assistants are little robots. About programs that remain successful despite changes in assistant coaches I'd say this. First, not all programs *have* stayed successful across as assistants have changed. Some have and some haven't. Second, some programs have remained successful even as *head* coaches have changed -- should we conclude from this that the previous and current head coaches in such situations don't have a significant impact? Name some examples of programs where an asst left and that was the reason the program tanked ? and for your second question; absolutely some schools are VERY attractive (campus beauty, education, conference, location, etc) and should have an excellence chance of volleyball success regardless of who's in charge Wisconsin. |
|
|
|
Post by volleytology on Jun 30, 2014 15:58:52 GMT -5
Name some examples of programs where an asst left and that was the reason the program tanked ? and for your second question; absolutely some schools are VERY attractive (campus beauty, education, conference, location, etc) and should have an excellence chance of volleyball success regardless of who's in charge Wisconsin. What asst left in 2008 ? |
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Jun 30, 2014 16:25:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 30, 2014 16:34:32 GMT -5
Wisconsin went from great to good when CJL left, and good to not good when Wilde left (circa 08) |
|
|
|
Post by volleytology on Jun 30, 2014 16:38:13 GMT -5
Wisconsin went from great to good when CJL left, and good to not good when Wilde left (circa 08) CJ left after 2004; check out Wisconsin's record in 05, 06 and 07. I don't think you can say an asst's leaving is felt 4 years after they depart ?! |
|
Skull Bones
Sophomore
You can be tough, as long as you’re not toxic. Some coaches don't know the difference.
Posts: 165
|
Post by Skull Bones on Jun 30, 2014 16:51:28 GMT -5
Sooooo... who gets the job?
|
|
|
|
Post by MTC on Jun 30, 2014 17:58:40 GMT -5
I think head coaches, just like business managers and supervisors, know when they hire someone who is over-qualified for that job they will be moving on after few years 9 times out of 10. It has happened to me repeatedly and yet I always look to hire the most qualified person. Head coaches realize that in their profession the future is now and failure can stall or ruin a career. IMO recruiting is the lifeblood of any sport and should be done by all the coaching staff.
|
|
Skull Bones
Sophomore
You can be tough, as long as you’re not toxic. Some coaches don't know the difference.
Posts: 165
|
Post by Skull Bones on Jun 30, 2014 20:43:47 GMT -5
My money is on Leserman.
|
|
|
|
Post by notpriddy (COIF) on Jul 1, 2014 8:14:29 GMT -5
I forgot to mention that Coach Miller who left his assistant position at Illinois to become the head coach of St. Louis U, also attended the first rounds of the NCAA tournament last spring at the U of I. He was visiting with his wife and baby. Anyone who has been around Illinois volleyball, the Hamblys and their two daughters, the Miller family, or the Conners family with their two young sons knows that Illinois volleyball truly is a family affair. I know many programs tout the family aspect of their volleyball program, Illinois truly lives it. The NCAA is having a women's volleyball tournament in the spring? Mea culpa! I'm old...I have half-zheimers! |
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Jul 1, 2014 12:00:47 GMT -5
Why would Hambly want to hire a lesser man? |
|
|
|
Post by itsallrelative on Jul 1, 2014 12:56:58 GMT -5
Why would Hambly want to hire a lesser man? are you misquoting Pearl Jam, now? |
|
|
|
Post by stansgridiron on Jul 1, 2014 23:07:54 GMT -5
Laura Debruler WILL be a UI assistant at some point, but this may be a year early for her.
|
|
Skull Bones
Sophomore
You can be tough, as long as you’re not toxic. Some coaches don't know the difference.
Posts: 165
|
Post by Skull Bones on Jul 9, 2014 12:04:47 GMT -5
Why would Hambly want to hire a lesser man? HA! I see what you did there.  |
|
