Womens College Coaching Hotseat

eastbaysoccer said:
Great news for OSU as I believe this is not a good hire. He was a lost a lot of games while at USF. It’s easy to recruit and win for US Soccer. ;)
Click to expand...

totally agree..how these coaches keep getting jobs and higher national team jobs is beyond me. A guy with his pedigree (in name only) would only draw kids...but this isn't the case...
 
Why aren't Cal Poly and UCSB coaches on the hot seat? They haven't done anything in a long time? Also, SDSU should really look at replacing Frisen...the program isn't where it once was and the best kids are transferring like crazy.
 
Cal poly coach loved and and can leave on his own terms. Probably the same at UCSB. Both jobs are stepping stone jobs. Same for SDSU. Pay not great at either place.

Plus most AD’s don’t care about women’s soccer. Their success is probably tied into the success of the revenue generating sports.
 
But that's the problem...the schools i've mentioned above haven't cut the mustard in recent years (UCSB has had "some" success). I don't see why AD's don't give a crap about soccer and just let it be...
 
Swoosh said:
Care to elaborate? He has all of zero wins as a head coach.
Click to expand...

Yup and beggers can't be choosers. It is not like any program can ask for the established, winning track record, head coaches to up and leave. "Hey, Paul! Hey, Anson! Hey, Amanda! Come and coach up here!" Obviously it does not work like that and it is one reason why successful head coaches tend to stay put for a good while.

In this case, if you take a close look at Oregon's scores over the last two years, you see something that is pretty consistent. Most losses are one-goal, many of those goals (and tying goals in 4 of their 5 ties this year) came on late (70+ min) goals. Despite a poor record, the roster is competitive. Can it win? Can a coach make a difference? Can a new GK make a difference? Can a year of experience for a very good freshman class make a difference? Can a coach create a buzz that helps with recruiting? If they follow up with wins, yes.

I look at the "coaching hotseat" discussion really differently than most b/c the criticisms are usually logically sound but practically unrealistic. The criticisms assume that each vacancy has an abundance of candidates, that the right coach can recruit in Stockton or Moraga or anywhere else and compete, that the resources and interest of the athletic department are fungible among sports (maybe there is some acknowledgment that football and men's hoops are different), etc. I look at it more practically - what type of coach can Program X attract. And I think Oregon has done a really good job in getting someone who knows the game, has worked in college and has coached the most important position on the field. Those are ingredients to make a big change in a year and that can create momentum. So, yeah. I think it is a good hire.
 
dk_b said:
Yup and beggers can't be choosers. It is not like any program can ask for the established, winning track record, head coaches to up and leave. "Hey, Paul! Hey, Anson! Hey, Amanda! Come and coach up here!" Obviously it does not work like that and it is one reason why successful head coaches tend to stay put for a good while.

In this case, if you take a close look at Oregon's scores over the last two years, you see something that is pretty consistent. Most losses are one-goal, many of those goals (and tying goals in 4 of their 5 ties this year) came on late (70+ min) goals. Despite a poor record, the roster is competitive. Can it win? Can a coach make a difference? Can a new GK make a difference? Can a year of experience for a very good freshman class make a difference? Can a coach create a buzz that helps with recruiting? If they follow up with wins, yes.

I look at the "coaching hotseat" discussion really differently than most b/c the criticisms are usually logically sound but practically unrealistic. The criticisms assume that each vacancy has an abundance of candidates, that the right coach can recruit in Stockton or Moraga or anywhere else and compete, that the resources and interest of the athletic department are fungible among sports (maybe there is some acknowledgment that football and men's hoops are different), etc. I look at it more practically - what type of coach can Program X attract. And I think Oregon has done a really good job in getting someone who knows the game, has worked in college and has coached the most important position on the field. Those are ingredients to make a big change in a year and that can create momentum. So, yeah. I think it is a good hire.
Click to expand...

I have other reasons why I think this is a good hire but they are more personal so not really relevant to the broader discussion.
 
If he’s able to maximize the talents of his roster and places kids in areas to succeed, can recruit and is a good person then I would say he’s a good hire.

Zero D1 victories and goal keeping coach are a concern but perhaps he was the best candidate that accepted the job. Maybe he works out.

I’m waiting to see who got the UW job.
 
dk_b said:
I think that is the part that is often overlooked when people discuss these coaching openings. I, for one, will be rooting hard for him to succeed in Eugene.
Click to expand...

If you're looking for the big time college experience, Oregon doesn't get much better than that. State of the art facilities, good sport culture and the college scene is great. Not sure why they haven't been able to turn the tide. While he has good NT credentials, not sure how well he'll do in the X's and O's category...will probably hire a great assistant to help in that area.
 
Agreed on the points above.

Curious to see who goes to pacific and SMC also.
Both good jobs for an assistant that has NOT been given a chance.

Pacific started mostly F/S out there and looked competitive vs. USF/USF/Gonzaga.

SMC loses a good number of senior starters and contributors.

Pacific probably the better job to succeed.
 
SoccerJones said:
If you're looking for the big time college experience, Oregon doesn't get much better than that. State of the art facilities, good sport culture and the college scene is great. Not sure why they haven't been able to turn the tide. While he has good NT credentials, not sure how well he'll do in the X's and O's category...will probably hire a great assistant to help in that area.
Click to expand...
Problem with Oregon is they are in a conference with:

USC, CAL, UCLA, Stanford, etc. all elite schools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top