GETTING OUT COACHED

[luv4sports]

Lots of posts are talking about high school coaches and lots of posts are talking about college coaches.

There is a big difference because college coaches can go out every year and recruit players who they feel will fit a specific mold and work on their team. Do they want a point guard that can score or one who is the epitime of unselfishness?High school coaches have to play with the hand they are dealt.

Considering that difference, which coach makes more of a difference to his team, the college coach or the high school coach?

[snakeinthegrass]

Unionvegas is a smart alec jerk

[mirrorman]

Great players make coaches look great. Coaches can not hit free throws, lay-ups, jump shots or threes. Coaches can not take a charge. Coaches can not set picks or make the extra pass. Coaches can prepare, motivate and lead. It's up to the players to make it happen on the floor. It's up to the parents to provide support and encouragement. They need to be as positive as possible. Negativity only makes things worse. I agree that some coaches are better than others, just like players. Some coaches have certain skills that others don't. But the majority of the coaches that I know are doing it for two simple reasons...Love of the game and love of the student athletes. They give their players everything they've got. And who are you or I to judge if that's enough? If the players will give in return and sacrifice what the coaches sacrifice, then you will see a winning program and a championship calibur team. It has to go both ways. It has to be a total team effort. Everyone must play their own role from the coaches all the way DOWN to the parents.

[southpaw24]

The concept of the post is getting out coached.  I strongly disagree that UT should not have been in that game, I think that with some decent coaching they should have won the game.

 

The CONCEPT of the post concerned what a difference a "coach" can make.  Buzz let his team down by not having them better prepared to start the game, and totally mismanaging the end of the game.

 

That game was lost by the coach, not won by superior talent.

then we agree to disagree... you can make your facts say what you want, i can make mine say what i want... THAT was the concept of the post...

Edited January 26, 2004 by southpaw24

[arnwine]

Southpaw,

 

Back to our original thesis, how important is a coach, I say extremely important. Players have to execute, but it is the coach's job to put them in a position to succeed.

 

Great players will not make a great coach, but a great coach can make a good team great.

[snakeinthegrass]

Most good coaches know when they were out coached and the ones that dont aren't good coaches anyway. Players have off nights -officials do and yes all good coaches do.

[arnwine]

I agree snake!

 

Who are the "good" coaches and who are the ones "that just don't know?"

[southpaw24]

i go back to what i said on the 2nd page of this thread... not my original line, got it from another coach... the best coaches are the ones who teach the game... if you're not teaching, you're not coaching... if i have correctly deduced hardball's intent, the coach in question has a hard time with this... fortunately for this coach, some good players have helped to cover the coach's inadequacies to those with an untrained eye... hardball is able to see beyond the smoke and mirrors and politics to come to a realization...

[arnwine]

Well said southpaw!

[twhoops]

Alot of interesting points have been made on this thread. I'll have to disagree that coaching is more important than talent. I've seen more bad coaches make it to the state tournament with talent than good coaches with out it.

 

Arnwine says alot of stuff that I agree with, but there are a few things that are really off the wall. "Basketball is easy to teach" he says. "Kids have been associated with it for a long time and therefor have an understanding of the game." "Hopefully you don't have to teach them how to rebound, dribble, and shoot at the high school level." He says.

 

These are all fine and good if the kids are taught how to play in Junior High. Sometimes coaches cannot be as successful as they could because of limitations to which they can be involved in their feeder programs.

 

Look at great coaches like Jim Brown (Jackson County), Kevin McMillan (Martin Westview), David Russell (Gibson County formerly of Bradford) and Randy Frazier (Gleason) to name a few. All of which coach or are heavily involved in the selection of the coaches in their feeder programs.

 

It's not that these guys have some magic potion of success, they just get to teach their players three years longer than most, which in girls basketball is like a lifetime. Sure they are great coaches because they teach the game - plain and simple at it's purest level - fudamental skills.

Edited January 29, 2004 by twhoops

[arnwine]

I have a question. Have the rules changes as to whether the high school coach can work directly with the middle school programs in the off season?

 

From what I remember they couldn't work with 8th graders, but can they work with 7th graders?

[salty]

I have read this thread stem to stern. There can be no doubt.

 

Arnwine is an expert on being outcoached.

 

Who says experience doesn't count for much?