Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 14:19:42 GMT -5
Being an excellent player has no correlation to being an excellent coach. Well, I guess your theory is being tested to the max at Illinois where the head coach, both assistant coaches, and the volunteer coach all were excellent players (either USNT and/or pro)...and they took a team that didn't even make the playoffs two years ago to the Final Four last year. Your generalization would be more accurate if you had said: being an excellent player isn't a requirement for being an excellent coach, but it could be a significant additional factor if the other skills needed are already present or being developed with experience. So ONE team is proof? Seriously? |
|
|
|
Post by Steve MiZOO on Jul 20, 2019 14:41:50 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 20, 2019 15:22:50 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end. Are you new to how message (discussion) boards work? SMH |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 20, 2019 16:02:59 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end. Name a Power 5 coaching hire under the age of 27 with no more than 2 years of coaching experience. I’ll wait. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 16:27:38 GMT -5
Since this has clearly ruffled some feathers, for those of you upset, would your response have been in this situation as the AD?
What would be a wiser choice in late July than to make the current assistant coach the interim head coach?
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve MiZOO on Jul 20, 2019 19:04:10 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end. Name a Power 5 coaching hire under the age of 27 with no more than 2 years of coaching experience. I’ll wait. Technically it's 3 years, as the Taylors started during the 2016 season. I don't know what your cut off is, but I'd imagine you'd scoff at that too. I don't have a rolodex of who's who when it comes to inexperienced hires, but it'd be silly to act as if it doesn't happen here and there. I can only recall local figures off the top of my head, like when Quin Snyder was hired on at Mizzou to coach the basketball team. He only had 2 years as an assistant coach at Duke. In professional sports, Mike Matheny was named manager of the St. Louis Cardinals w/ ZERO years of professional coaching. And let's be honest, Being a "Power 5" isn't equal across the board in every sport so it's not a consistent standard in which to draw comparison. As much as my rooting interests lie in the SEC, this isn't football and it's painfully obvious it doesn't stack pound-for-pound to the Big Ten when it comes to volleyball. If people want to look at it as a big risk, well I would argue that a respectable Missouri program can afford to roll the dice, unlike a school that is a perennial top ten/title contender. |
|
|
|
Post by hoosierdraft on Jul 20, 2019 20:45:16 GMT -5
I’m pretty sure Josh and Molly Taylor have been assistants with the program for the last 4-5 years. They know how to run practices, schedule travel and from what I have been told are very organized. The women on the team love them! Young coaches need to start somewhere and being mentored by the Kreklows the last few years was a great way to start their coaching careers. I’m not worried about Mizzou at all. Both came in at the 2017 season. That means 2 years experience, not 4-5 years. Not exactly the same. One was an assistant coach, the other a volunteer assistant coach. Neither one would get an interview at a D1 program if they submitted a resume for a head coach position. All the best to the Kreklows in their retirement. They've run a good program. This is not a good way to start a new chapter in Missouri Volleyball. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jul 20, 2019 21:01:51 GMT -5
Since this has clearly ruffled some feathers, for those of you upset, would your response have been in this situation as the AD? What would be a wiser choice in late July than to make the current assistant coach the interim head coach? Under normal circumstances, the interim hire makes sense. But if I had an inkling as AD that the timing was designed to force my hand, I would have seriously considered other options. |
|
|
|
Post by bkedane on Jul 21, 2019 9:42:43 GMT -5
Since this has clearly ruffled some feathers, for those of you upset, would your response have been in this situation as the AD? What would be a wiser choice in late July than to make the current assistant coach the interim head coach? Run a search. Post the position. It would attract some excellent applicants even at this late date. |
|
|
|
Post by pepperbrooks on Jul 21, 2019 9:53:14 GMT -5
Since this has clearly ruffled some feathers, for those of you upset, would your response have been in this situation as the AD? What would be a wiser choice in late July than to make the current assistant coach the interim head coach? It completely makes sense for Taylor to be at the helm for this season. After that, there should probably be a search. |
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Jul 21, 2019 20:20:24 GMT -5
Well played.
|
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 21, 2019 21:05:50 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end. It’s not like Missouri is in the Big 10 or Pac 12. I’m sure you think they will do just fine. Frankly, given the state of the SEC after Florida, Kentucky (who Missouri was going to lose to regardless of who was coach) and LSU and Tennessee (who Missouri could challenge and win with the right execution), it’s not that hard to “do fine”. This team lost one starter. They could probably challenge for a 5th-7th place finish even without a coach. I frankly don’t care who is the Missouri coach for this season, but come on, a player who just graduated college 4 years ago is NOT experienced to be the head coach of a D1 NCAA at large quality team. That says nothing of whether or not Missouri will actually be good this year under himI’m speaking in pure optics. Saying that they apparently do have the “necessary experience” just seems so disengenous. |
|
|
|
Post by jayj79 on Jul 21, 2019 22:17:29 GMT -5
I hope they have an excellent season (except for when they play the team I root for), just to prove the haters wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by notpriddy (COIF) on Jul 22, 2019 6:00:22 GMT -5
I do have a dog in this fight, and that is two former Illini who were starters for Mizzou last season! The two, junior OH Kylie Deberg and junior MB Tyanna Omazic, were both crucial to the success that the Tigers experienced last season. The Kreklows retirement seems to have been well-timed as far as leaving the two new young coaches with a lot to work with. There will be pressure for this coaching duo to at least come close to what was accomplished last season when Mizzou finished (24-8 overall, 13-5 SEC). If I were the AD, my concern would be for the future of Mizzou volleyball. What will be the impact of future Missouri recruiting in having two inexperienced young coaches out on the recruiting trail? What will be their pitch when they are talking to future Mizzou players and their parents? Kylie and Tyanna had great sophomore seasons tearing up their SEC foes. I will be rooting for their continued success in the coming season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve MiZOO on Jul 22, 2019 6:39:48 GMT -5
Yeezus, why is there this constant back and forth about whether or not the Taylor's have the necessary experience or not? They haven't even had one game under their belt yet. New young coaches have been hired across all sports since... Forever. This is a pointless debate as the lack of a prior head coaching gig doesn't guarantee success nor failure. Now I'm no Amazing Kresking, but I think they'll do fine. The bottom line is they have the job for the season so we'll see if they are in over their heads or not by the end. It’s not like Missouri is in the Big 10 or Pac 12. I’m sure you think they will do just fine. Frankly, given the state of the SEC after Florida, Kentucky (who Missouri was going to lose to regardless of who was coach) and LSU and Tennessee (who Missouri could challenge and win with the right execution), it’s not that hard to “do fine”. This team lost one starter. They could probably challenge for a 5th-7th place finish even without a coach. I frankly don’t care who is the Missouri coach for this season, but come on, a player who just graduated college 4 years ago is NOT experienced to be the head coach of a D1 NCAA at large quality team. That says nothing of whether or not Missouri will actually be good this year under himI’m speaking in pure optics. Saying that they apparently do have the “necessary experience” just seems so disengenous. "Saying that they apparently do have the “necessary experience” just seems so disengenous." I never made that claim so that is a strawman. All I've done is just point out that it's not unheard of for coaches, that have little to no experience, to be hired from time to time. As I've previously stated, for better or worse they have the job for the year and that their lack of an extensive resume doesn't automatically equate to failure.
Unless you or others tell me otherwise, I'm going on the assumption you have no first hand knowledge of the culture around the program and how the Taylor's have handled their leadership roles and their recruiting responsibilities. The Kreklow's have stated they wouldn't have stepped down had they not felt the program was in good hands. Unless you think they are being "disingenuous," I'm just going to trust their assessment for the time being. I make no guaranteed predictions and the naysayers may be proven right by season's end.
|
|
