|
|
Post by baytree on Dec 21, 2019 13:20:34 GMT -5
The article answers its own questions without the author even knowing. "Booth has had opportunities to take more lucrative jobs, but there were other considerations." Coach Booth certainly is qualified but chooses to stay at Creighton. So... Let's say there is an equal number of men and women that have what it takes to be a coach at a top 10 program (50 each sex). It takes years to work your way through the ranks to get one of these jobs. Let's say 15 years (low but for illustrative purposes let's us it. If just 10% of the women make a decision each year not to take the next step needed to move up like Coach Booth for personal reasons, the the pool of 50 women goes 45 the first year. 45 to 41 second year, and so forth year. By year 15 there are only 11 women left in the pool that have taken the steps to coach an elite team. If we go out 20 years in this progression we get only 6 women qualified. There is nothing wrong with these choices made by the women. Its their choice. But it is a major reason there are few women at the top of NCAA volleyball. Nothing sexist its just math. Did you miss the part of the article where men are allowed to make mistakes that women aren't and that men seem to get more opportunities when they're young? (I.e., are hired based on potential whereas women aren't) The article didn't really get much into WHY women might choose to stay assistants other than the two reasons above but I wouldn't guess that sexism had nothing to do with it. It's probably not the only reason but I'd be shocked if it weren't a significant factor. |
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Dec 21, 2019 13:23:20 GMT -5
Does he not understand the implication of what he's saying here?
He did sound like a idiot who is clueless. Or very defensive. (non-exclusive or here) |
|
|
|
Post by oldman on Dec 21, 2019 13:25:31 GMT -5
The article answers its own questions without the author even knowing. "Booth has had opportunities to take more lucrative jobs, but there were other considerations." Coach Booth certainly is qualified but chooses to stay at Creighton. So... Let's say there is an equal number of men and women that have what it takes to be a coach at a top 10 program (50 each sex). It takes years to work your way through the ranks to get one of these jobs. Let's say 15 years (low but for illustrative purposes let's us it. If just 10% of the women make a decision each year not to take the next step needed to move up like Coach Booth for personal reasons, the the pool of 50 women goes 45 the first year. 45 to 41 second year, and so forth year. By year 15 there are only 11 women left in the pool that have taken the steps to coach an elite team. If we go out 20 years in this progression we get only 6 women qualified. There is nothing wrong with these choices made by the women. Its their choice. But it is a major reason there are few women at the top of NCAA volleyball. Nothing sexist its just math. Did you miss the part of the article where men are allowed to make mistakes that women aren't and that men seem to get more opportunities when they're young? (I.e., are hired based on potential whereas women aren't) The article didn't really get much into WHY women might choose to stay assistants other than the two reasons above but I wouldn't guess that sexism had nothing to do with it. It's probably not the only reason but I'd be shocked if it weren't a significant factor. What is the articles proof of mistakes men make that women aren't allowed to make? |
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Dec 21, 2019 13:27:06 GMT -5
Did you miss the part of the article where men are allowed to make mistakes that women aren't and that men seem to get more opportunities when they're young? (I.e., are hired based on potential whereas women aren't) The article didn't really get much into WHY women might choose to stay assistants other than the two reasons above but I wouldn't guess that sexism had nothing to do with it. It's probably not the only reason but I'd be shocked if it weren't a significant factor. What is the articles proof of mistakes men make that women aren't allowed to make? The article doesn't offer any proof of anything. It's not that kind of article. You were using it to support your personal belief. It offered no proof of that either. |
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Dec 21, 2019 13:36:00 GMT -5
He did sound like a idiot who is clueless. Or very defensive. (non-exclusive or here) Defensive is the way I read it now that I went over it again |
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Dec 21, 2019 13:37:20 GMT -5
That it is either not or much less true in women's basketball or softball pretty much says it all. For both, there are at least as many opportunities to coach men in the same or equivalent sports (men's basketball and baseball). That is not as true for volleyball, with many many fewer opportunities to coach men. Increasing the opportunity for men to coach men will increase the opportunity for women to coach women.
This will remain essentially unchanged as long as schools are allowed to cut funding for men's sports in order to fund the same or equivalent women's sports. If not allowed, then schools would need to eliminate or reduce opportunities to play football. There is absolutely no need for football to have 85 scholarships or 100+ rosters. Return to some form of limited substitution (requiring that interior linemen play both ways, for instance) could allow significant reductions in football scholarships and roster sizes.
|
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Dec 21, 2019 13:39:14 GMT -5
Or very defensive. (non-exclusive or here) Defensive is the way I read it now that I went over it again Yes but being dense and not understanding something (when it's helpful to you to not understand it) is one kind of defensiveness. A pretty common one in my experience. |
|
|
|
Post by pepperbrooks on Dec 21, 2019 14:00:49 GMT -5
I’d suspect some ADs still don’t believe a coach who’s a mom will be fully invested, an outdated idea. I also believe some women aren’t interested in what they believe might be a job that compromises their parenting role. Those sorts of assumptions really only serve to unnecessarily complicate the actual issues. YOu have no idea what AADs think or whether some women are or are not interested in the position. Well I’ve actually heard from coaches who said they didn’t want to go from a mid major to Power 5 because of the change to their family dynamic. And yes, I’m trying to put myself in the mindset of an AD and why they may not choose a woman. What do you think the issues are. |
|
|
|
Post by oldunc on Dec 21, 2019 14:07:05 GMT -5
The article answers its own questions without the author even knowing. "Booth has had opportunities to take more lucrative jobs, but there were other considerations." Coach Booth certainly is qualified but chooses to stay at Creighton. So... Let's say there is an equal number of men and women that have what it takes to be a coach at a top 10 program (50 each sex). It takes years to work your way through the ranks to get one of these jobs. Let's say 15 years (low but for illustrative purposes let's use it. If just 10% of the women make a decision each year not to take the next step needed to move up like Coach Booth for personal reasons, the the pool of 50 women goes 45 the first year. 45 to 41 second year, and so forth year. By year 15 there are only 11 women left in the pool that have taken the steps to coach an elite team. If we go out 20 years in this progression we get only 6 women qualified. There is nothing wrong with these choices made by the women. Its their choice. But it is a major reason there are few women at the top of NCAA volleyball. Nothing sexist its just math. While not necessarily untrue, I don't think that really addresses the fundamental question of why, in a sport whose participants are overwhelmingly female, is the pool of male coaching candidates anywhere near the size of the pool of female candidates? There are cases- John Dunning comes to mind- of coaches that weren't players, but not many, and no particular reason why that group should exclude females either. Actually, most of the male coaches seem to have been setters, an even smaller pool. I wonder how many male cheerleading coaches there are. |
|
|
|
Post by akbar on Dec 21, 2019 14:52:07 GMT -5
I'd imagine the male/female ratio in coaching pretty closely reflects the male/female ratio in Athletic Directors. I wonder if this theory would hold with Womens soccer and Softball coaches in the collegiate ranks. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Dec 21, 2019 15:00:11 GMT -5
Defensive is the way I read it now that I went over it again Yes but being dense and not understanding something (when it's helpful to you to not understand it) is one kind of defensiveness. A pretty common one in my experience. Sheff was unprepared for this question, but I read his response very differently. He’d obviously like to think ADs chose based on quality of applicant, but saying that as a man may be easy because as an man he is blind to any biases in hiring, and possibly the beneficiary of such biases, and because it makes him as a guy in a B1G coaching job look good. it’s clear he doesn’t know why there is disproportionate representation - it’s beyond his mandate and he is really focused on the team right now. He was trying to keep himself from rambling, which he is prone to, because I’m sure he’s thought about it, but maybe not that clearly. I actually think it is a bit of a problem. But I also think it is a complex problem in volleyball with many causes and a more complex problem to solve. I’m not sure I could have given a coherent answer. As he stated, if everything else was equal, as an AD he probably would opt for the woman. I do kind of resent the subliminal suggestion in the story that his never having played has anything to do with his qualifications. He’s proven himself at multiple locations. |
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Dec 21, 2019 15:07:14 GMT -5
Yes but being dense and not understanding something (when it's helpful to you to not understand it) is one kind of defensiveness. A pretty common one in my experience. Sheff was unprepared for this question, but I read his response very differently. He’d obviously like to think ADs chose based on quality of applicant, but saying that as a man may be easy because as an man he is blind to any biases in hiring, and possibly the beneficiary of such biases, and because it makes him as a guy in a B1G coaching job look good. it’s clear he doesn’t know why there is disproportionate representation - it’s beyond his mandate and he is really focused on the team right now. He was trying to keep himself from rambling, which he is prone to, because I’m sure he’s thought about it, but maybe not that clearly. I actually think it is a bit of a problem. But I also think it is a complex problem in volleyball with many causes and a more complex problem to solve. I’m not sure I could have given a coherent answer. As he stated, if everything else was equal, as an AD he probably would opt for the woman. I do kind of resent the subliminal suggestion in the story that his never having played has anything to do with his qualifications. He’s proven himself at multiple locations. Still sounds defensive to me. I'm sure he's thought about it before and the quoted answer deflected, which is a form of defensiveness. He avoids the question.
ETA: If he would have said what you say here: "As a man, it's easy for me to think that they chose the best person instead of hiring me, in part, bc of conscious and unconscious biases, but I don't know. I'm not the right person to ask" would have been less defensive and more honest. He didn't say that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2019 15:30:35 GMT -5
Yes but being dense and not understanding something (when it's helpful to you to not understand it) is one kind of defensiveness. A pretty common one in my experience. Sheff was unprepared for this question, but I read his response very differently. He’d obviously like to think ADs chose based on quality of applicant, but saying that as a man may be easy because as an man he is blind to any biases in hiring, and possibly the beneficiary of such biases, and because it makes him as a guy in a B1G coaching job look good. it’s clear he doesn’t know why there is disproportionate representation - it’s beyond his mandate and he is really focused on the team right now. He was trying to keep himself from rambling, which he is prone to, because I’m sure he’s thought about it, but maybe not that clearly. I actually think it is a bit of a problem. But I also think it is a complex problem in volleyball with many causes and a more complex problem to solve. I’m not sure I could have given a coherent answer. As he stated, if everything else was equal, as an AD he probably would opt for the woman. I do kind of resent the subliminal suggestion in the story that his never having played has anything to do with his qualifications. He’s proven himself at multiple locations. He wasn't brief because he is "focused on the team". He was brief because his cognitive dissonance wouldn't allow him to be thorough. The notion that "I hope the best candidate gets hired" is spurious because how does he know he's the best candidate? How does he know there isn't a female coach out there that'd do better with what he has got? But he can't acknowledge it's a problem because the moment he does, he'd have to accept that he has a degree of privilege that he's never considered... Cognitive dissonance at its finest. |
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Dec 21, 2019 15:41:18 GMT -5
I think there is bias in hiring women's volleyball coaches and I would like to see more women as head coaches and at bigger programs. I also think it's common that a woman is elevated into a bad head coaching job, fails (because it's a bad job), and sours on coaching entirely. We see it all the time where a young coach gets no support and falls flat on their face, just like anyone else would have.
There is an added problem of AD's reaching out to the same couple people for advice on hiring volleyball coaches.
Something else I think about: there are nine schools with D1 titles. How many have *ever* had a female head coach, at least since 1990? USC and Hawai'i? Penn State hasn't been open for 40 years, Nebraska once since the 80s and Stanford only twice.
There are probably another 10 schools that *could* win a title. How many of them have ever had a female coach? Florida and BYU have been very close, but what other schools in the next tier have a history of hiring women? I guess my point is that when volleyball is structured in a way that only a handful of schools can win a title, until women are getting those jobs, they aren't going to win one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2019 15:44:46 GMT -5
This is definitely not an easy thing to pinpoint or rectify. Certainly not overnight. It certainly warrants more depth than this NY Times piece is able to devote to it.
If I were to hazard a guess I would say that we are still struggling with cultural ideas of coaching and leadership generally. There are plenty of people, even some women, who believe that things like being president is a job for men. While that is minority thinking, it still exists. I am not sure asking Sheffield and McCutcheon (Or Mcguyre or Hambly) that question at that time is the right way to nudge the beast on this issue as they are kind of immersed in their own teams right now.
What I would like to know from women who are coaches or who want to be is are you being discouraged from the profession? Do family, friends, advisors, etc. tell you to pursue something more realistic? Are you not finding opportunities? Culturally, sports has historically been the domain of men. What is the size of the pool of female coaches compared to men? When the likes of Sheffield and McCutcheon were hired at their current jobs, were there female applicants with competitive resumes? I am guessing with McCutcheon you were not going to find a resume more impressive than his, male or female.
Just feels like we lament this issue and put a lot of blame on Athletic Directors/Departments when it goes deeper than that. Encourage your daughters to become coaches if that is what they want to be. And over time I think the numbers will start to balance out more as more and more women pursue that career.
|
|
