Do we (WBB fans) assess male and female WBB head coaches equally?

[Orangutan]

If you are complaining that UConn fans say McGraw whines too much to the refs,,
Well she does. If you are saying that ND fans don’t complain and dislike Geno, well they do. So what?

Neither of those is an accurate characterization of my post.

 

[hussybulldog]

We need to start a new forum for PC here in every aspect of life.... Well I have to say PC is killing some of the joy on this board

 

[UConnCat]

For the record, I consider Walz the biggest sideline complainer/whiner in all of WCBB and have said that here in posts. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

... And while we're at it, I suspect Tyler's gender played a big role in his getting the job in the first place - in the year 2014, I can't see a Twyla Summitt, or any female, being offered a head coaching position one year out of college... Yes, his mother did too, but that was back when the head coach was also washing the players' uniforms and getting paid $250/month.

With all due, I disagree, 100 percent.

Tyler Summitt got the job.
Twyla Summitt would have been offered the job.
Tyler Smith/Jones/Madison/Otfinoski/Bartelson would never have even been considered for the job.
Twyla Smith/Jones/Madison/Otfinoski/Bartelson would never have even been considered for the job.

It was not Tyler Summitt's gender that played a role in his getting the job in a first place. It was his last name and who his mother was.

As an aside (and a truly minor point, but a correction to the quoted comment), he was not one year out of college, but two. He graduated in 2012 and spent two seasons as an assistant coach at Marquette, leaving in April 2014 to assume a head coaching position at LaTech.

@EricLA
@ucbart

 

[uconnell]

Neither of those is an accurate characterization of my post.

Maybe not, just getting it off my chest. Maybe more to come later.

 

[cohenzone]

Interesting thread. But the critical factor is what a university’s expectations are from a Men’s program coach than from a women’s program, especially for institutions with more or less decent men’s programs. I think coaches in the women’s game get much more slack and stick much longer in the job with mediocre to poor records. Andy Landers was my favorite example. While it’s changing a little, how long will Duke stick with Macallie ? Coach K wouldn’t last beyond three years in the men’s program with a similar record I think it’s partly because women’s hoops aren’t big revenue producers and partly and somewhat related, because historically women’s hoops was and still is at many school a secondary sport.

 

[nwhoopfan]

While it’s changing a little, how long will Duke stick with Macallie ?

Add Warlick at Tennessee. Any coach in men's D1 hoops at a school with a proud tradition, who recruited that well but had that relatively poor of results would've been gone years ago. The 6 game losing streak probably would've brought about an immediate firing. Steve Alford was let go from UCLA mid season this year. This is a very good point, expected and acceptable results is VERY different comparing men's college bball to women's, regardless of gender of the coach.

 

[Monte]

Much ado about nothing!

 

[EricLA]

With all due, I disagree, 100 percent.

Tyler Summitt got the job.
Twyla Summitt would have been offered the job.
Tyler Smith/Jones/Madison/Otfinoski/Bartelson would never have even been considered for the job.
Twyla Smith/Jones/Madison/Otfinoski/Bartelson would never have even been considered for the job.

It was not Tyler Summitt's gender that played a role in his getting the job in a first place. It was his last name and who his mother was.

As an aside (and a truly minor point, but a correction to the quoted comment), he was not one year out of college, but two. He graduated in 2012 and spent two seasons as an assistant coach at Marquette, leaving in April 2014 to assume a head coaching position at LaTech.

@EricLA
@ucbart

FWIW I would love to see Twyla Uhrman...!!

 

[cohenzone]

Add Warlick at Tennessee. Any coach in men's D1 hoops at a school with a proud tradition, who recruited that well but had that relatively poor of results would've been gone years ago. The 6 game losing streak probably would've brought about an immediate firing. Steve Alford was let go from UCLA mid season this year. This is a very good point, expected and acceptable results is VERY different comparing men's college bball to women's, regardless of gender of the coach.

Warlick and Kevin Ollie are interesting by comparison. Both anointed from being a key assistant. Ollie actually notched an NC and three years later he was gone. Holly might not last beyond this year, but even at a school with UTs tradition she has been given a lot of rope. Im
Old enough to remember when Gene Bartow who replaced John Woiden (I’m actually in LA for a week visiting my son who lives a short walk to UCLA). Bartow’s teams were actually fairly decent, but expectations were so high that even with a few 20 win seasons he was gone after a relatively short tenure.

 

[uconnell]

Interesting thread. But the critical factor is what a university’s expectations are from a Men’s program coach than from a women’s program, especially for institutions with more or less decent men’s programs. I think coaches in the women’s game get much more slack and stick much longer in the job with mediocre to poor records. Andy Landers was my favorite example. While it’s changing a little, how long will Duke stick with Macallie ? Coach K wouldn’t last beyond three years in the men’s program with a similar record I think it’s partly because women’s hoops aren’t big revenue producers and partly and somewhat related, because historically women’s hoops was and still is at many school a secondary sport.

True but also women coaches do not get paid anywhere men coaches do and women sports are like minor sports in Some schools so the AD treats them as such.

 

[hussybulldog]

True but also women coaches do not get paid anywhere men coaches do and women sports are like minor sports in Some schools so the AD treats them as such.

Nowadays the women BB coaches are paid rather handsomely, looking at ND, TN, Duke, Ok, Texas, Stanford, SC, and the assistant coaches at Conn. One cannot argue just because it is a woman sport, it cannot be treated as a minor sports. Should a women’s soccer team coach be paid as much as a football coach? They need to look the revenue. Am not saying that there is no disparity, you need to compare with male coaches in women BB. Lots of women BB teams headed by male coaches are minor sport teams at their college

 

[uconnell]

True

 

[svetbird]

I think there is something to this, but also of note most of the great coaches right now are women. Besides Jeff, Geno is the only man at the very top of the sport. We usually take our anger out on other schools that are competitive with us, and most have female coaches. I respect the hell out of the coaching jobs that Muffet does , I also hate the way she lets her players behave. That wouldn't change no mater what her sex was.

 

[triaddukefan]

I think there is something to this, but also of note most of the great coaches right now are women. Besides Jeff, Geno is the only man at the very top of the sport. We usually take our anger out on other schools that are competitive with us, and most have female coaches. I respect the hell out of the coaching jobs that Muffet does , I also hate the way she lets her players behave. That wouldn't change no mater what her sex was.

What about Vic S from Miss State?

 

[svetbird]

What about Vic S from Miss State?

yah forgot about him, but I still think there are a lot more woman coaches at the top of the sport now than men.

 

[triaddukefan]

I dont roast coaches (except for one) ... but in terms of likability... the coaches I like the most on average are the men. In terms of the ACC... there are 5 male coaches .. 10 female ones. I like 3 of the men coaches.... I only like 1 maybe 2 of the female coaches in the league...

 

[MSUFan2003]

I've never noticed this. I haven't seen any evidence that would support that assertion at all.

 

[nwhoopfan]

I think there is something to this, but also of note most of the great coaches right now are women. Besides Jeff, Geno is the only man at the very top of the sport.

Not sure I agree with this. Vic has been to 2 straight National Championship games and OSU and UO have risen rapidly w/ Rueck and Graves. Tara and Muffet are the two closest to Geno in terms of career achievements, but which other female coaches are you considering great?

 

[svetbird]

ara an

I'm thinking Kim Mulkey and Dawn specifically obviously Tara, Muffet, even Holly (not because she is good but because of the school she coaches for) have huge standing that most men do not in the sport. I probably should have said high profile instead of great (not that most of those aren't great).

 

[jonson]

Add Warlick at Tennessee. Any coach in men's D1 hoops at a school with a proud tradition, who recruited that well but had that relatively poor of results would've been gone years ago. The 6 game losing streak probably would've brought about an immediate firing. Steve Alford was let go from UCLA mid season this year. This is a very good point, expected and acceptable results is VERY different comparing men's college bball to women's, regardless of gender of the coach.

I think this suggests that there are really two issues involved: 1) whether gender makes a difference in how fans evaluate and/or respond to coaches within a given sport, in this case women's basketball; and 2) whether ADs tend to have lower standards/expectations for, and/or place less value on, women's sports than they do men's. (The latter has to be limited to non-revenue producing sports, since most institutions depend upon football and men's basketball to help cover the cost of all non-revenue producing sports.)

From what I can see, there is evidence that the standards/expectations/responses for the two are reversed: higher standards for/greater criticism of women within, in this case, wbb, but, on the part of at least some ADs, a tendency not to value women's sports as much as they do men's (again, with men's basketball and football typically being in a different category because of the revenue they produce).

But all of this is obviously very complicated. For example, Warlick, Aston, and Close get the "can recruit but can't coach" label in part, I believe, because they are associated with schools that many believe should have a leg up in the sport (and in part because they really don't seem to be very good coaches). Bruno isn't associated with such an institution, so he gets praise rather than criticism. And when someone like Scott Rueck builds a strong program at an institution where the odds are very much against him, then he gets enormous praise and very little criticism--and rightly so, I should add. So context matters. On the other hand, although there was a lot of criticism of V. S.'s behavior when Mississippi State visited Eugene last fall, it seemed to me to fall well short of the comments that are often directed agains Kim Mulkey's behavior on the sidelines, and she is an equally talented coach imo. So maybe what we're are talking about involves the effect of gender on expectations regarding public behavior as well as (or more than?) those that have to do with results on the court and x's and o's.

As for #2, I can only provide an example from Oregon, where the extraordinarily successful coach of a softball program with a passionate following just left because the AD here wouldn't pay him a salary approaching the one currently given to the school's baseball coach, who has not been very successful, whose program runs a bigger deficit than softball, and has nothing like the following (and attendance) that softball has. In both cases the coaches are men, so issue #1 isn't relevant, but the disparity between the treatment of these two non-revenue generating programs suggests that gender--in this case the gender of the student athletes--has, unconsciously or not, led to a fairly clear bias in favor of an unsuccessful men's sport over a relatively similar and very successful women's one. This may, of course, simply be an Oregon problem, but I suspect it doesn't end here.

 

[nwhoopfan]

I'm thinking Kim Mulkey and Dawn specifically obviously Tara, Muffet, even Holly (not because she is good but because of the school she coaches for) have huge standing that most men do not in the sport. I probably should have said high profile instead of great (not that most of those aren't great).

Okay, interesting distinction between high profile and great. Probably Brenda Frese could be mentioned as well?

 

[nwhoopfan]

Wow, that's a big ball of wax @jonson ! I have not payed close enough attention to the difference in dynamics between baseball and softball. One sport where I believe women's generates more fan interest and media attention, and I also think larger salaries for coaches, is volleyball. Male coaches have left men's volleyball to coach women's volleyball. Not sure that occurs in any other sport.

 

[HuskyMJ]

I think this suggests that there are really two issues involved: 1) whether gender makes a difference in how fans evaluate and/or respond to coaches within a given sport, in this case women's basketball; and 2) whether ADs tend to have lower standards/expectations for, and/or place less value on, women's sports than they do men's. (The latter has to be limited to non-revenue producing sports, since most institutions depend upon football and men's basketball to help cover the cost of all non-revenue producing sports.)

From what I can see, there is evidence that the standards/expectations/responses for the two are reversed: higher standards for/greater criticism of women within, in this case, wbb, but, on the part of at least some ADs, a tendency not to value women's sports as much as they do men's (again, with men's basketball and football typically being in a different category because of the revenue they produce).

But all of this is obviously very complicated. For example, Warlick, Aston, and Close get the "can recruit but can't coach" label in part, I believe, because they are associated with schools that many believe should have a leg up in the sport (and in part because they really don't seem to be very good coaches).

Explain to me why UCLA should have a leg up in the sport? Their history in women's basketball is not very good. Southern Cal's is better. Close gets criticized when she has taken UCLA to the Elite 8 once, and UCLA had only gone one other time? Three sweet 16s in a row, UCLA only had 3 other sweet 16 appearances in their history. I never hear about high expectations on Mark Trakh at USC.

Why should UCLA have any higher expectations than Southern California, a program with actual history in WBB with Cheryl Miller, Tina Thompson and other greats? You see, Close gets way more criticism than say Mark Trakh who is 13-8 and 3-7 in the PAC. This is after adding Kayla Overbeck via transfer, Mariya Moore via transfer, and returning a key nucleus of players who had Southern Cal on the brink of a tourney bid. In contrast UCLA lost two super stars Canada and Billings, and are still doing better than USC

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

In my opinion, the issue is that there are no female head coaches of men's teams, but lots of men coaching women's teams. I think the perception and the reality is that men are taking jobs that should more frequently go to women.