Charliebball
**
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 12,861
- Reaction Score
- 46,085
Vanderbilt's White/Peck Talk About Female Coaches
- Thread starter Charliebball
- Start date
Carnac
That venerable sage from the west
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2015
- Messages
- 15,932
- Reaction Score
- 78,988
Being a huge fan of WCBB in general, a UConn women's fan specifically, I'm a little bias when it comes to the dynamics in this particular sport. I think WCBB would grow a little in popularity if and when the average on-looker (non-WCBB fan/observer) realizes that the women are very talented, and NOT trying to compete with the men, except in the areas of attendance and financial support.
They simply want the same level playing field that is afforded to the men. I'm also guessing that they (collectively) do not want to be compared to the men in athleticism or talent. It's widely known and accepted that the women's game will never be as popular, attended or embraced as the men's. The disparity in the coverage between the two during the recent NCAA tournament proved that.
There were multiple shows on various channels daily, devoted to in-depth coverage and analysis of the men's games. Perhaps I missed it, but I'm not aware of coverage similar (or remotely close) for the women. It's been proven across the country that colleges that actively and aggressively support their women's BB program, have teams that are highly competitive and successful every year. These teams also experience a minimal amount of turnover at the head coach position. There's not a female coach in the country that does not embrace the concept of equal pay for equal work.
Being a WCBB coach (like the men) is a 12 month a year job. There are a myriad of components that go on behind the scenes that coaches engage in. Duties and tasks that are never publicized or mentioned outside of office doors. As Peck and White said in the article, "failure is not a bad thing, but an opportunity to get better". Unless you're one of the top 1-2 % percent of coaches in WCBB, (Arriemma, Summit, Muffet M, VanDerveer, Doug Bruno, Andy Landers, etc), you're going to get fired. No doubt they would like to see the same type of "recycling" in the women's game as seen in the men's.
They simply want the same level playing field that is afforded to the men. I'm also guessing that they (collectively) do not want to be compared to the men in athleticism or talent. It's widely known and accepted that the women's game will never be as popular, attended or embraced as the men's. The disparity in the coverage between the two during the recent NCAA tournament proved that.
There were multiple shows on various channels daily, devoted to in-depth coverage and analysis of the men's games. Perhaps I missed it, but I'm not aware of coverage similar (or remotely close) for the women. It's been proven across the country that colleges that actively and aggressively support their women's BB program, have teams that are highly competitive and successful every year. These teams also experience a minimal amount of turnover at the head coach position. There's not a female coach in the country that does not embrace the concept of equal pay for equal work.
Being a WCBB coach (like the men) is a 12 month a year job. There are a myriad of components that go on behind the scenes that coaches engage in. Duties and tasks that are never publicized or mentioned outside of office doors. As Peck and White said in the article, "failure is not a bad thing, but an opportunity to get better". Unless you're one of the top 1-2 % percent of coaches in WCBB, (Arriemma, Summit, Muffet M, VanDerveer, Doug Bruno, Andy Landers, etc), you're going to get fired. No doubt they would like to see the same type of "recycling" in the women's game as seen in the men's.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2014
- Messages
- 9,874
- Reaction Score
- 29,425
Not sure about that. Until Tara brought it up the other day I hadn't thought about the "less recycling" thing. But, before they get fired and need to be recycled, it does appear that WCBB coaches in general have a lot longer leash - much less pressure to win and many more chances than MBB coaches before they get fired for performance.