RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Dawn Staley New USA National Team Coach

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 5:43 pm    ::: Dawn Staley New USA National Team Coach Reply Reply with quote

Not a big fan of power 5 coaches (throw in UConn too) doing the national team gig because of the inherent recruiting advantage. On the men's side with Coach K, on the women's side with Geno. On the men's side Calipari is doing it this summer with U19s. Staley now. Prefer to see WNBA coaches or mid major coaches do it because the recruiting advantage is nullified. Am I alone in this thinking?


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 4956



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 7:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I agree with your point.


Ay Mate



Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Posts: 589



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 7:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 54137
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.



_________________
Look out Music City, 'cause I'm here now and I ain't never leavin'
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


I think it has. Now you have to be a winning program too. The elite kids aren't going to flock to Wake Forest if their coach became the USA team coach. Generally yes he has recruited very well but on an individual level you never know which elite player prefers UConn because of the USA Basketball connections that other colleges may not have. It's not like he gets every recruit but I think some recruits like at UConn as the best chance for them to play on the USA team right or wrong. And when he's no longer the USA coach he will still recruit well but I think then Dawn Staley will gain from this.

The only issue to me is because the best players pick the same schools you are really limiting your pool when picking college coaches. There are probably a lot of good coaches out there who aren't household names because they don't get the elite player, but if you gave them a Wilson and Coates they'd be darn good too.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8171
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Are you crediting his '09 and '10 NCs to that gig?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.


Last edited by cthskzfn on 03/10/17 7:14 pm; edited 2 times in total
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 8:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Here's an article that discussed Coach K's recruiting advantage with USA Basketball. Why wouldn't a women's USA coach not have similar advantages?

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba-needs-to-pull-stars-from-usa-basketball--which-is-showcasing-only-duke-s-coach-044717393.html


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting?


Without a doubt.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting?


Without a doubt.


Here's one thing that goes under the radar. Geno is recruiting really well right now but since becoming USA Basketball coach, I think he is recruiting LESS because sometimes in the summer he may have USA Basketball commitments when AAU is going on. No other coach could possibly spend less time watching top targets and recruit better. Geno gets to miss sitting in a gym from 8 AM to 10 PM watching mediocre AAU basketball while every coach he competes with has to. But then he can call them on the phone and say he's coaching the USA team and they will be in awe.

So now Dawn will probably spend less time recruiting and recruit better. There was a legit question to how she would recruit after Wilson and Coates left because they were local kids and her other big names were transfers but its not sustainable to exepct all conference kids to transfer in.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This was completely predictable. USA basketball was going to pick one of their assistants or age group coaches and Staley was in line. She was the obvious choice.

I'm not convinced she's that great a strategic or gametime coach, especially on offense, but the U S has such a talent advantage at the Olympic level they're going to win gold regardless of who's coach.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 9:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
but the U S has such a talent advantage at the Olympic level they're going to win gold regardless of who's coach.


Which to me is a reason why they can afford to go outside the box and hire some non-big names instead of just picking the established college coaches. But they rarely do.
You mention offense, how about the Drake coach? She has them top 20 in the country with a bunch of under the radar recruits putting up big numbers. How would her system look when you put elite talents in there? This could help boost their resume to get the bigger jobs later on too.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 3660
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/17 11:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Staley was always the most predictable choice. She has a very, very long history with USA Basketball as a player and coach, and was clearly next in line.

Sure, she'll get a recruiting advantage because her resume will have a big extra credential, but as others have mentioned, she'll lose some recruiting gym time when the SNT is practicing.
readyAIMfire53



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 5208
Location: Durham, NC


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 2:38 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Durantula wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


I think it has. Now you have to be a winning program too. The elite kids aren't going to flock to Wake Forest if their coach became the USA team coach. Generally yes he has recruited very well but on an individual level you never know which elite player prefers UConn because of the USA Basketball connections that other colleges may not have. It's not like he gets every recruit but I think some recruits like at UConn as the best chance for them to play on the USA team right or wrong. And when he's no longer the USA coach he will still recruit well but I think then Dawn Staley will gain from this.

The only issue to me is because the best players pick the same schools you are really limiting your pool when picking college coaches. There are probably a lot of good coaches out there who aren't household names because they don't get the elite player, but if you gave them a Wilson and Coates they'd be darn good too.


Playing college ball for the Olympic Coach has proven to increase the odds of making the final squad over players playing at a higher level. Because of the "comfortability" factor.Wink I see you and your (unearned) Gold Medal Swin Cash! Because - shucks - Geno loved him some Swin and had the power to choose her to get that medal for sitting on the bench.

I hope Dawn chooses a fave player over a high achieving Husky just to hear the whining of Husky nation. And spreadsheet after spreadsheet proving the Husky player deserved the spot. Laughing



_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.

~rAf
Happycappie25



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 3828
Location: QUEENS!!!!


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 6:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Throw in the comments from Parker and I see it too...saw something similar when Dorrance coached the USWNT (although that was more clear cut to the point I always heard it that the NCAA was investigating because the NT and UNC were becoming one in the same)...not saying suddenly staley will become Geno or geno would become average LOL...doesn't work that way...Geno is still one of the best ever to coach the game...but the fastrack to the NT and the professional advantages that carries...lets just say it cant hurt.

As for school advantage...im crossing the gender line but its one of my fave examples...do you know WHY the dream team is one short from having all the players in the HOF...Coach K...there was one token required slot for a college athlete as a nod to the past teams of amateur players. It went to Laettner over Shaq...something that would have ripples later. While the Wikipedia article is heavy handed (read written by a Dukie)...it was basically coach K being the assistant (also a nod to the college days) if shaq was selected that would have made poor PJ the only person affiliated as a player or coach the lone person not in the Naismith on that team...Laettner ended up a career role player keyword career...playing 10 seasons but he was no shaq (or zo the other runner up)

As for the Isiah Thomas snub controversy...that's a different thread LOL



_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8099



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 11:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Just a bit of counterpoint: When Tara VanDerveer coached the USA team in 1996 and took a year off, Stanford felt the effects for several years thereafter.

Of course, it's a different day now, but it does impact recruiting because of the time commitment involved.

In general, though, I'd agree that it's a slight advantage -- but potential Olympians have mostly played USA Basketball before going to college and have established a reputation and made connections, so I don't know that they'd worry that much about who the coach is. Not to mention the fact that a junior in high school right now, the prime recruit, is unlikely to be on an Olympic team until after she has played professional basketball for a year or two, which would be 2024 or so.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 12:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Just a bit of counterpoint: When Tara VanDerveer coached the USA team in 1996 and took a year off, Stanford felt the effects for several years thereafter.

Of course, it's a different day now, but it does impact recruiting because of the time commitment involved.

In general, though, I'd agree that it's a slight advantage -- but potential Olympians have mostly played USA Basketball before going to college and have established a reputation and made connections, so I don't know that they'd worry that much about who the coach is. Not to mention the fact that a junior in high school right now, the prime recruit, is unlikely to be on an Olympic team until after she has played professional basketball for a year or two, which would be 2024 or so.


Unless you go to the school of the coach where you can be on the team while still a student even as All WNBA 1st team players are left home, and how many UConn players got asked to camps and were on exhibition game rosters while still in college?

We're talking about the most elite players. How many of them think "if Dolson can do it, I certainly can too, if I go there I can get onto the USAB National Team.". You only need one or two who are already considering that school to have that hope become the thing that pushes them to commit.

Maybe that's why Geno waited so long for it to be public that he would not be coaching again. Might as well get as many #1 recruits as possible to commit while the Olympic carrot was still theoretically hanging out there.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8099



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 1:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You could be right, but expecting a high school junior, 16 or 17, to be thinking about something that will happen after she gets out of college is giving her a lot more credit than my experience suggests that she deserves.

For example, I don't think many of them grasp how much money they could possibly make if they seriously honed their craft in college. Even a non-WNBA career could generate six figures a year in income for ten years, and as I constantly point out, not too many young women in their 20s are drawing down $150,000 while living in Europe.

So Samantha Smooth, Class of 19, who has yet to nail down her final SAT score, is going to think about her potential spot on the US National Team in 2026 when she decides on college? Especially knowing that the coach recruiting her won't be the head coach then?

And again, almost all of the kids at that level have already played or will play USA Basketball so it's not like they need any special ticket to get evaluated.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Conway Gamecock



Joined: 23 Jan 2015
Posts: 613
Location: Here


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 1:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Happycappie25 wrote:
pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Throw in the comments from Parker and I see it too...saw something similar when Dorrance coached the USWNT (although that was more clear cut to the point I always heard it that the NCAA was investigating because the NT and UNC were becoming one in the same)...not saying suddenly staley will become Geno or geno would become average LOL...doesn't work that way...Geno is still one of the best ever to coach the game...but the fastrack to the NT and the professional advantages that carries...lets just say it cant hurt.

As for school advantage...im crossing the gender line but its one of my fave examples...do you know WHY the dream team is one short from having all the players in the HOF...Coach K...there was one token required slot for a college athlete as a nod to the past teams of amateur players. It went to Laettner over Shaq...something that would have ripples later. While the Wikipedia article is heavy handed (read written by a Dukie)...it was basically coach K being the assistant (also a nod to the college days) if shaq was selected that would have made poor PJ the only person affiliated as a player or coach the lone person not in the Naismith on that team...Laettner ended up a career role player keyword career...playing 10 seasons but he was no shaq (or zo the other runner up)

As for the Isiah Thomas snub controversy...that's a different thread LOL


Regarding Laettner, you may be correct in describing whatever influence Coach K had in selecting the player, but you're applying too much hindsight to the sequence of events: that year Laettner was far away the better rounded and more highly decorated college player than O'Neil was. If Shaq had been picked over Christian for the Dream Team, with the passing of time it would have been considered a smart move, but in 1992 it would have caused a media outrage....


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 3:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
You could be right, but expecting a high school junior, 16 or 17, to be thinking about something that will happen after she gets out of college is giving her a lot more credit than my experience suggests that she deserves.

For example, I don't think many of them grasp how much money they could possibly make if they seriously honed their craft in college. Even a non-WNBA career could generate six figures a year in income for ten years, and as I constantly point out, not too many young women in their 20s are drawing down $150,000 while living in Europe.

So Samantha Smooth, Class of 19, who has yet to nail down her final SAT score, is going to think about her potential spot on the US National Team in 2026 when she decides on college? Especially knowing that the coach recruiting her won't be the head coach then?

And again, almost all of the kids at that level have already played or will play USA Basketball so it's not like they need any special ticket to get evaluated.


You deal with them regularly, but my guess is "she can get me onto the Olympic team" is a hell of a lot easier concept to grasp than " I can probably improve my draft position by eight spots if I increase my 3 pt shooting percentage by ten percent." Plus, the former is easy - just sign on the line- while the latter requires lots of continuous work.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 5:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
You could be right, but expecting a high school junior, 16 or 17, to be thinking about something that will happen after she gets out of college is giving her a lot more credit than my experience suggests that she deserves.

For example, I don't think many of them grasp how much money they could possibly make if they seriously honed their craft in college. Even a non-WNBA career could generate six figures a year in income for ten years, and as I constantly point out, not too many young women in their 20s are drawing down $150,000 while living in Europe.

So Samantha Smooth, Class of 19, who has yet to nail down her final SAT score, is going to think about her potential spot on the US National Team in 2026 when she decides on college? Especially knowing that the coach recruiting her won't be the head coach then?

And again, almost all of the kids at that level have already played or will play USA Basketball so it's not like they need any special ticket to get evaluated.


I don't think its that far fetched because the best players get into the USA Basketball system at age 15-16 and from then they dream of continuing on to the 17s, 18s, and the college aged competitions. They see Geno as the coach and think their goals can be reached if they play for him, if not for just the system he runs will give them a leg up over kids who go to other schools with very different styles of play. I mean you ever hear of people thinking that UConn commits at the younger age groups have a leg up in try outs. Not saying its true but there are USA Basketball factors that a kid could consider outside of just making the USA Women's National team when she's just 16. Its about playing for the coach who coaches all these legends of the game. Coach K having Kobe or whoever name drop and say how good of a coach he is will resonate in recruiting. If some US WNT players talk up Staley it helps recruiting.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8171
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 7:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Are you crediting his '09 and '10 NCs to that gig?




Anyone?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
SCGamecock



Joined: 31 May 2015
Posts: 49



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 8:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The only recruiting advantage I see this having for SC is that it gives more legitimacy to Dawn as a coach. Sure, she's now won multiple SEC regular season and tournament titles and in line to win more but to be HC of the Women's National Team is a tip of the cap essentially... I can't see any elite recruit picking SC over UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor or Tennessee just because Dawn is the HC of the Olympic team. Sure, it's going to sound nice when Dawn is promoting herself and her program in a recruit's living room.. but that title itself is not going to be what decides it for a recruit.


Happycappie25



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 3828
Location: QUEENS!!!!


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 9:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Conway Gamecock wrote:
Happycappie25 wrote:
pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Throw in the comments from Parker and I see it too...saw something similar when Dorrance coached the USWNT (although that was more clear cut to the point I always heard it that the NCAA was investigating because the NT and UNC were becoming one in the same)...not saying suddenly staley will become Geno or geno would become average LOL...doesn't work that way...Geno is still one of the best ever to coach the game...but the fastrack to the NT and the professional advantages that carries...lets just say it cant hurt.

As for school advantage...im crossing the gender line but its one of my fave examples...do you know WHY the dream team is one short from having all the players in the HOF...Coach K...there was one token required slot for a college athlete as a nod to the past teams of amateur players. It went to Laettner over Shaq...something that would have ripples later. While the Wikipedia article is heavy handed (read written by a Dukie)...it was basically coach K being the assistant (also a nod to the college days) if shaq was selected that would have made poor PJ the only person affiliated as a player or coach the lone person not in the Naismith on that team...Laettner ended up a career role player keyword career...playing 10 seasons but he was no shaq (or zo the other runner up)

As for the Isiah Thomas snub controversy...that's a different thread LOL


Regarding Laettner, you may be correct in describing whatever influence Coach K had in selecting the player, but you're applying too much hindsight to the sequence of events: that year Laettner was far away the better rounded and more highly decorated college player than O'Neil was. If Shaq had been picked over Christian for the Dream Team, with the passing of time it would have been considered a smart move, but in 1992 it would have caused a media outrage....


wont derail because this is a WBB thread...but I remember (tho I was 12) even then there was talk of Zo or Shaq...what made shaq more interesting was he was drafted before the games, which made the argument more interesting and why there was debate at the time despite the college accolades.



_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 857
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 10:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Can someone show me a pattern where being appointed the USA head coach has demonstrably and successfully influenced their recruitment? This is not a rhetorical question. Thank you



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10566
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 10:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Just a bit of counterpoint: When Tara VanDerveer coached the USA team in 1996 and took a year off, Stanford felt the effects for several years thereafter.

Of course, it's a different day now, but it does impact recruiting because of the time commitment involved.


And Tara was a One-And-Done deal. Some might say her time away might have been a negative, no? And....she didn't go for the next umpteen years, and I doubt had any inclination to even *think* that she'd be able to parlay that into recruiting power.

Geno, otoh, stayed on as UConn coach, and could have touted his laurels to kids like Breanna, Moriah, and even further back: "I'm the Olympic Coach, and (a high % of) my players are Olympians". I can't imagine that DIDN'T happen.

Yeah, as someone else stated....our embarrassment of riches in the Talent Pool kind of makes the choice of US Coach moot regarding skill/experience, but the ramifications for an active college coach could be big. I just think college coaches should be eliminated from consideration. There's enough other, highly qualified people that could do it.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/17 11:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Allisha Gray, a junior guard for the Gamecocks, figures Staley’s new job will be a boon on the recruiting trail.

“It’s awesome,” Gray said. “It’s like, ‘Wow, you’re playing for the coach who is going to coach in the Olympics.’ ”

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/sports/college/university-of-south-carolina/usc-womens-basketball/article137886318.html#storylink=cpy


About Tara, Stanford's recruiting pool is so small due to admissions that it may be a unique situation where she may not be equipped to take full advantage of that situation.


RavenDog



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5369



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 10:27 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Specifically, what actual proof do you have of this statement? Would he have not won all these championships, if he had not been USA's coach?

Would Tuck, Stewart and Moriah not have chosen UConn if he wasn't the USA coach? How about Samuelson, Collier and Williams? Do you know of any recruits who have stated they chose UConn because Geno was the USA coach?

Was Dawn Staley's success at USC driven by being a USA coach? What about Doug Bruno and the other assistant coaches?



_________________
CORINNE BAILEY RAE
The Heart Speaks In Whispers

Fabulous 5
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4122
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 10:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SCGamecock wrote:
The only recruiting advantage I see this having for SC is that it gives more legitimacy to Dawn as a coach. Sure, she's now won multiple SEC regular season and tournament titles and in line to win more but to be HC of the Women's National Team is a tip of the cap essentially... I can't see any elite recruit picking SC over UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor or Tennessee just because Dawn is the HC of the Olympic team. Sure, it's going to sound nice when Dawn is promoting herself and her program in a recruit's living room.. but that title itself is not going to be what decides it for a recruit.



Very good point. SC is still a growing program and hasn't established its dominance yet with a national championship. This may help, but they'll still need that little thing. As for comparing it with Tara and Stanford, don't. Just don't. Stanford's rigorous admission standards put it almost in the Ivy League category. SC's aren't nearly that tough.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8099



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 10:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I agree it looks great on the resume, and it can impress a potential recruit in the same way winning national titles and conference champions can.

But let's say a player is aware of the Olympic coach and has Olympic dreams -- that means she also knows, at age 17, that when she's ready to try out for the Olympic team there will be a different person in charge.

My feeling is that this is just yet another anti-Geno straw man, which does get annoying after a while. I'm in California and my only interactions with Geno have been extremely brief, so I have trouble relating to the well of vitriol the haters can draw on so consistently.

Hey, he's arrogant but he's a great coach, one of the best ever, and if he had never been Olympic coach, his teams would still be really, really good.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4122
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 10:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't think Geno is arrogant. I think he's a little brash, but not necessarily arrogant. Those are two different things. I think he is an amazing coach. i don't know how I'd feel about having a daughter play for him; it would depend on her personality, I think. Some kids can take the kind of relentless pushing and his kind of sideline chatter, and what I've heard from little bits of practice video that have leaked out; some require a different style. But assuming my daughter were good enough, wanted to play for him, and felt she could deal with it, sure. He is a great coach.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
SCGamecock



Joined: 31 May 2015
Posts: 49



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 11:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
SCGamecock wrote:
The only recruiting advantage I see this having for SC is that it gives more legitimacy to Dawn as a coach. Sure, she's now won multiple SEC regular season and tournament titles and in line to win more but to be HC of the Women's National Team is a tip of the cap essentially... I can't see any elite recruit picking SC over UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor or Tennessee just because Dawn is the HC of the Olympic team. Sure, it's going to sound nice when Dawn is promoting herself and her program in a recruit's living room.. but that title itself is not going to be what decides it for a recruit.



Very good point. SC is still a growing program and hasn't established its dominance yet with a national championship. This may help, but they'll still need that little thing. As for comparing it with Tara and Stanford, don't. Just don't. Stanford's rigorous admission standards put it almost in the Ivy League category. SC's aren't nearly that tough.


I never even mentioned Stanford or Tara Vandeveer.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 3660
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 12:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:

But let's say a player is aware of the Olympic coach and has Olympic dreams -- that means she also knows, at age 17, that when she's ready to try out for the Olympic team there will be a different person in charge.


If the Olympic coach is in charge for eight years, as Geno was, this scenario is realistic and has in fact happened. Breanna Stewart was recruited in high school, played for UConn, made the U.S. senior national team, and played in the Olympics, all while Geno was the coach.

However, having interviewed Stewart extensively when she was a junior and senior in high school, I'm quite sure she was destined for UConn regardless of who was or would be the Olympic coach.
Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 12:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
I agree it looks great on the resume, and it can impress a potential recruit in the same way winning national titles and conference champions can.

But let's say a player is aware of the Olympic coach and has Olympic dreams -- that means she also knows, at age 17, that when she's ready to try out for the Olympic team there will be a different person in charge.

My feeling is that this is just yet another anti-Geno straw man, which does get annoying after a while. I'm in California and my only interactions with Geno have been extremely brief, so I have trouble relating to the well of vitriol the haters can draw on so consistently.

Hey, he's arrogant but he's a great coach, one of the best ever, and if he had never been Olympic coach, his teams would still be really, really good.


How is it anti-Geno when the same things are being said about Coach K, Sean Miller, John Calipari, etc. Maybe it truly is that everyone in the coaching business sees this as a recruiting advantage to coach USA basketball? Men or women, Geno or no Geno. You are the one making it about Geno... did you just ignore the article about Coach K?

The same question arose when Shaka Smart coached the U18s http://www.espn.com/blog/ncbrecruiting/on-the-trail/insider/post?id=16014 is it a coincidence that a struggling Texas program got an official visit from 5 star Mo Bamba when every other school he is considering is good? Does it hurt that Shaka Smart coached him at USA Basketball? How often do 5 stars from NYC even look at Big 12 schools?

To other national columnists like the one at Sports Illustrated, this isn't even a debate, the question isn't even IF it is an advantage, its accepted that it is. http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2014/09/18/mike-krzyzewski-team-usa-recruiting-duke-blue-devils

Mike Krzyzewski insisted Thursday that, no, coaching Team USA does not give him a recruiting advantage.

This is, of course, ridiculous.


Durantula



Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 4503



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 12:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Here's another one. In 2012 CBS polled around 100 college coaches, the ones who actually recruit these kids, about whether Coach K has an advantage coaching USA Basketball. http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/19788727/critical-coaches-how-much-is-coach-k-helped-by-team-usa

The question: Has Mike Krzyzewski earned a recruiting advantage because of his association with USA Basketball?

Yes: 71 percent
No: 29 percent

"Every elite-level recruit in America dreams of one day winning an Olympic Gold. Do you know how many days in a row Duke could send out a USA basketball mail without having to use the same picture of Coach K twice? I'd bet they could go a year, easy. He's proved himself as the best coach in the world. He's coached LeBron, Kobe and Durant and got them all to buy in for a common purpose. Come on. Huge advantage. And it's deserved."

"It increases his celebrity. People are saying, 'There's my future coach.' And he's got a network of people. He can get in touch with Kobe and LeBron whenever he wants."

"It's huge because everyone watches the Olympics."

"He can send a text to a kid -- and the kid can watch him coaching the Team USA on TV."

"He's getting a lot of facetime."

"It's huge in recruiting. He has the best players in the world on his side."

"It's a massive advantage. You don't think he's constantly talking to kids and name-dropping LeBron, Kobe and KD? There are kids out there thinking, 'If he's good enough to be their coach, he's good enough to be my coach.' That's tough to counter."


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 4122
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 1:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SCGamecock wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
SCGamecock wrote:
The only recruiting advantage I see this having for SC is that it gives more legitimacy to Dawn as a coach. Sure, she's now won multiple SEC regular season and tournament titles and in line to win more but to be HC of the Women's National Team is a tip of the cap essentially... I can't see any elite recruit picking SC over UConn, Notre Dame, Baylor or Tennessee just because Dawn is the HC of the Olympic team. Sure, it's going to sound nice when Dawn is promoting herself and her program in a recruit's living room.. but that title itself is not going to be what decides it for a recruit.



Very good point. SC is still a growing program and hasn't established its dominance yet with a national championship. This may help, but they'll still need that little thing. As for comparing it with Tara and Stanford, don't. Just don't. Stanford's rigorous admission standards put it almost in the Ivy League category. SC's aren't nearly that tough.


I never even mentioned Stanford or Tara Vandeveer.


No, you didn't, someone else did. I was consolidating posts. Don't be so freaking defensive!



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 54137
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 1:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RavenDog wrote:
pilight wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
You honestly think that Geno coaching the national team has boosted their recruiting? He was getting great recruits long before he ever coached the national team.


When Geno was appointed head coach of Team USA in 2009 he had only five national championships and was five years removed from the most recent one. Since his appointment he's won six national championships in eight years and is favored to win again this year. He's gotten an enormous advantage from being head coach of Team USA.


Specifically, what actual proof do you have of this statement? Would he have not won all these championships, if he had not been USA's coach?

Would Tuck, Stewart and Moriah not have chosen UConn if he wasn't the USA coach? How about Samuelson, Collier and Williams? Do you know of any recruits who have stated they chose UConn because Geno was the USA coach?

Was Dawn Staley's success at USC driven by being a USA coach? What about Doug Bruno and the other assistant coaches?


I'd have to be a mind reader to obtain what you're looking for. The proof is in his results, which were dramatically better while he was coach of Team USA than they had been before he took the job.



_________________
Look out Music City, 'cause I'm here now and I ain't never leavin'
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10566
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 1:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
But let's say a player is aware of the Olympic coach and has Olympic dreams -- that means she also knows, at age 17, that when she's ready to try out for the Olympic team there will be a different person in charge.

See: the Breanna Stewart example. And I think it goes back even further, but ya, it's REAL.

ClayK wrote:
My feeling is that this is just yet another anti-Geno straw man, which does get annoying after a while. I'm in California and my only interactions with Geno have been extremely brief, so I have trouble relating to the well of vitriol the haters can draw on so consistently.

You may be familiar with the alleged "well", but I haven't seen it HERE, in this thread: it's just a re-hashing of Old-But-Very-True Facts. Relax! Cool



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 857
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 1:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

In both case both Geno and Coach K, thier's were an established successful program before they took the reins of the Olympic team and thus were able to attract the top players before their tenure started, long before. I do not believe that their tenure as a the USA coach can ever be considered a tipping point for their successful recruitment. It was there already as by the time Geno had, as mentioned, five NC's with and additional two without the benefit of being the USA head coach. Coach resume is just as established as Geno before assuming the top job for USA men's basketball.

I doubt going forward if Dawn will out recruit Muffet, Brenda, Geno
or Tara because of her new position.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 251



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 9:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

. Battlelines have been drawn. Some people believe it has an effect, and some don't, and I believe it does for reason already explained. I would say more but I can't do it without going on a rant against Geno and K.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 10:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The bottom line is that it creates a lousy appearance for USA Basketball which should be enough whether the effect is real or imagined. It's something they should avoid for their own good and the good of the game. Especially when it's easy enough to avoid the appearance.

When 71% of men's coaches believe K gets a recruiting advantage from being Olympic coach, then there IS a problem that should be avoided. The perception is a problem whether the recruiting advantage is real or not. And I expect you'd get a similar result on the women's side.


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 13686
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/11/17 11:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It's one reason that I believe that coaches should be on a four-year cycle and not kept on longer like Geno or K were.

It's also why I think coaches should be picked whose accomplishments have earned the slot. Don't just give the slot to someone who has managed one Final Four in her 16-year coaching career, when there are coaches who have done a lot more.


SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 585



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/17 1:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Funny. I thought the title read that Dawn is the new coach..crazy how Geno has been the obsession of so many..


FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 466



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/17 10:26 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Back in the olden days, the coach picked an asst coach who went on to become the next coach. This allowed more great coaches to be involved, provided some continuity, and ensured that the new coach had some experience dealing with Olympic procedures. I would favor returning to this system. The US has enough capable and deserving coaches to make it work.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/17 1:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
Back in the olden days, the coach picked an asst coach who went on to become the next coach. This allowed more great coaches to be involved, provided some continuity, and ensured that the new coach had some experience dealing with Olympic procedures. I would favor returning to this system. The US has enough capable and deserving coaches to make it work.


I don't think it's the job of a coach to choose his or her succesor. That's far too biased and cliquish. USAB needs to make those choices.


FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 466



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/17 6:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fine, then let the HC submit a list of acceptable AC candidates to USAB, and let them choose. I can't see how USAB is currently doing a great job at avoiding bias and cliquishness (is that a word?) by letting anyone stay on for 2 Olympics in a row.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 11191



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/17 10:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
Fine, then let the HC submit a list of acceptable AC candidates to USAB, and let them choose. I can't see how USAB is currently doing a great job at avoiding bias and cliquishness (is that a word?) by letting anyone stay on for 2 Olympics in a row.


USAB isn't doing a good job. That's kind of the point of this thread.

But letting coaches pick their own successors is a step back, not forward.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2637



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/13/17 1:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Isn't the point to pick the best available coach? Even if we agree that the position affords some degree of advantage in recruiting should avoiding that be the primary factor in choosing a coach? Who is USA supposed to pick? Should it be done by lottery?

There is an assumption that every coach in college and the pros is eager for the job but I'm not so certain. Both Geno and Dawn served as assistants prior to becoming National team head coaches. There are probably a lot of coaches who aren't interested in spending 4 or 8 years serving as an assistant before getting the HC job.

Coaches have always had advantages of all sorts. Schools that can afford to provide luxurious living arrangements for athletes and/or provide more extensive tutorial services have an advantage over schools with limited budgets. Schools that take teams on summer trips and Thanksgiving vacations to the Caribbean or to Hawaii have an advantage. Schools that get on national TV on a regular basis have an advantage. And coaches that hold summer camps on campus have long had a huge edge in recruiting. I don't remember anyone ever complaining that Summit shouldn't have been able to have extensive contact with HS stars at her summer camps. While I don't think this is another anti-Geno thread, it's odd that none of these other obvious advantages some coaches have/had have never been a topic here.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin