Mighty Ohio State loses to....

[speedoo]

Pac 12 powerhouse Washington State (3-5).

OSU is a joke.. Tayler Hill is a nice player but thinking she is AA caliber is well, silly.

Jim Foster may be Geno's pal, but he is not much of a coach.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

OK. If you say so. You must have an awful lot of wins to know that about Jim Foster. I'm sure Geno would agree with you NOT.

To some degree, Foster's teams do underperform. They are consistently good, never achieve great, sometimes have bad games, and have a bad record of early NCAA exits. They also have a lot less talent than UConn. And he's no Geno.

In other words - OSU is not a joke and Jim Foster is not "not much" of a coach. I am appalled to read that. He hasn't made OSU into another UConn and he's not Geno. News Flash - neither is anyone else.

 

[willtalk]

MMM ....second unranked Pac 12 team in as many nights to knock off a ranked team. Perhaps the Pac 12 isn't as weak as some might assume.

 

[Icebear]

MMM ....second unranked Pac 12 team in as many nights to knock off a ranked team. Perhaps the Pac 12 isn't as weak as some might assume.

If so, that is promising but it hasn't been the case in awhile.

 

[UcMiami]

OK. If you say so. You must have an awful lot of wins to know that about Jim Foster. I'm sure Geno would agree with you NOT.

To some degree, Foster's teams do underperform. They are consistently good, never achieve great, sometimes have bad games, and have a bad record of early NCAA exits. They also have a lot less talent than UConn. And he's no Geno.

In other words - OSU is not a joke and Jim Foster is not "not much" of a coach. I am appalled to read that. He hasn't made OSU into another UConn and he's not Geno. News Flash - neither is anyone else.

I do think there are some coaches out there who have incredible win totals and consistently decent teams, but are not necessarily great coaches. The win totals are generated by longevity more than greatness, and it has really only been the last 20 years where people in general have taken WCBB coaching/programs seriously. A lot of these coaches started in a time and built up win totals when the game was less competitive. We have a threads on these coaches from time to time with only the names changing:
Sylvia
CViv
Jim
Andy
etc.

 

[HuskyNan]

Geno has said a couple of times that kids are different than they were 20 years ago. They have shorter attention spans and tend to close off from others through iPods, etc. He's mentioned having to change the way he coaches in order to get the resilts he wants. Perhaps other coaches haven't adapted as well.

 

[meyers7]

Pac 12 powerhouse Washington State (3-5).

OSU is a joke.. Tayler Hill is a nice player but thinking she is AA caliber is well, silly.

Jim Foster may be Geno's pal, but he is not much of a coach.

Almost anytime Buckeyes lose is a good thing.

 

[tennparker3]

Tayler Hill is an All-American caliber player. Not to start an argument but she is IMO. Easily the best defensive player at her position and easily one of the fastest first steps in the country along with being above average at everything else. I hate OSU with a passion but I watch them just to watch her. If they didn't have her they would be a Big 10 cellar team this year. IMHO she would start for UConn, Baylor, Stanford, Duke, or anyone else for that matter.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I do think there are some coaches out there who have incredible win totals and consistently decent teams, but are not necessarily great coaches. The win totals are generated by longevity more than greatness, and it has really only been the last 20 years where people in general have taken WCBB coaching/programs seriously. A lot of these coaches started in a time and built up win totals when the game was less competitive. We have a threads on these coaches from time to time with only the names changing:
Sylvia
CViv
Jim
Andy
etc.

Except for Sylvia, coaches that have large numbers of victories and no National Championships.

I disagree that they specifically built up their totals "back when", rather, they all have 40 year or so careers. They all still win north of 20 most seasons. They are all "good", none of them are under consideration for "greatest". The problem is - who has been definably better except for Pat and Geno - maybe Leon, maybe Tara (although she has been around since when, too)? And yes, they have all struggled (Pat did too) with today's kids. Makes you respect Geno all the more, no??

 

[rjuconn]

Back when Tayler Hill was at Mpls South (Minnesota), setting the state's all-time scoring record (since broken by Vanderbilt recruit Rebekah Dahlman), it was rumored that UConn was possibly interested in her. She definitely had/has the skills to play for any program in the country. I figured at a top-tier program she'd be a first-player-off-the-bench type of kid (sort of like Brianna Banks is right now) who could add instant offense. She's exceeded that so far (as Banks is in the process of doing).

 

[UcMiami]

Except for Sylvia, coaches that have large numbers of victories and no National Championships.

I disagree that they specifically built up their totals "back when", rather, they all have 40 year or so careers. They all still win north of 20 most seasons. They are all "good", none of them are under consideration for "greatest". The problem is - who has been definably better except for Pat and Geno - maybe Leon, maybe Tara (although she has been around since when, too)? And yes, they have all struggled (Pat did too) with today's kids. Makes you respect Geno all the more, no??

I agree that they did not 'specifically' build up their totals 'back when' but the reason they get as much respect as they do is because of their win totals being in the 600+ range and a lot of that is due purely to longevity. 20 wins with cupcake OOC and each conference having at least 5 bottom dwellers is not that big an acheivement, and it was even easier when each conference had only a couple of schools that actually cared what happen with the women's team.
What I was suggesting is that win totals are not that significant a determiner of greatness in the WCBB ranks and there are some much younger coaches with many fewer wins that are probably better than some or all of the above list.
What is impressive with Pat and Tara and Geno (and Muffett and ...) is that they have both the high win totals from longevity and have continued to be competitive most years for NCAA titles in a much more competitive environment. With the exception of CViv's run 5 years ago I don't think any of the coaches listed have been to a final 4 in 15 years.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I agree that they did not 'specifically' build up their totals 'back when' but the reason they get as much respect as they do is because of their win totals being in the 600+ range and a lot of that is due purely to longevity. 20 wins with cupcake OOC and each conference having at least 5 bottom dwellers is not that big an acheivement, and it was even easier when each conference had only a couple of schools that actually cared what happen with the women's team.
What I was suggesting is that win totals are not that significant a determiner of greatness in the WCBB ranks and there are some much younger coaches with many fewer wins that are probably better than some or all of the above list.
What is impressive with Pat and Tara and Geno (and Muffett and ...) is that they have both the high win totals from longevity and have continued to be competitive most years for NCAA titles in a much more competitive environment. With the exception of CViv's run 5 years ago I don't think any of the coaches listed have been to a final 4 in 15 years.

I'm not sure Jim Foster ever has, to get back to the original point. But I looked up his w/l record and his winning percentage. His winning percentage makes CVS look like chopped liver (sadly). Check it out, the NCAA has a searchable database, or I am sure it is on the OSU site.

Foster has earned a rep for not finishing, Sylvia for playing cupcakes OOC, Andy for not winning the big one and losing to Tennessee regularly, etc. Yes, there are younger good coaches without the high win total (although longevity is part of the greater picture, as well). Win percentage - and I repeat Fosters is excellent and best at OSU compared to Vandy or St. Joeseph's - is another good indicator. No, Foster hasn't competed for an NCAA title - so by that standard, I suppose some consider him a failure. However, so few have - and some of them no one considers "great" - plus there are 300 NCAA division I schools (at least) whose WBB fans would be very happy to have had their team with OSU's results.

 

[UcMiami]

I'm not sure Jim Foster ever has, to get back to the original point. But I looked up his w/l record and his winning percentage. His winning percentage makes CVS look like chopped liver (sadly). Check it out, the NCAA has a searchable database, or I am sure it is on the OSU site.

Foster has earned a rep for not finishing, Sylvia for playing cupcakes OOC, Andy for not winning the big one and losing to Tennessee regularly, etc. Yes, there are younger good coaches without the high win total (although longevity is part of the greater picture, as well). Win percentage - and I repeat Fosters is excellent and best at OSU compared to Vandy or St. Joeseph's - is another good indicator. No, Foster hasn't competed for an NCAA title - so by that standard, I suppose some consider him a failure. However, so few have - and some of them no one considers "great" - plus there are 300 NCAA division I schools (at least) whose WBB fans would be very happy to have had their team with OSU's results.

I think CViv and Andy have suffered percentage wise in being in the BE and SEC and generally looking up at CT, ND, TN, LSU, and Vandy. Jim has benefitted from been the big dog in a weaker Big10 (as has Tara in the Pac10.)
On longevity I agree - but there are coaches out there who are 8-10+ years into their careers with good win percentages but that don't yet have the totals to be 'noticed' and that I would take over many near the top of the total wins list.