Interesting Question for MDIA Coaches

[champp]

This was posted in a laxpower forum. Though stemmed from the resignation of Coach Harkins, I do not want to get into a FSU-specific discussion. I would just like to hear other MDIA coaches opinions on the subject.

"That is the problem with club lacrosse that wishes to be virtual varsity. It is essentially run by the players with a coach that is anything but omnipotent. A successful sports team is not a democracy but rather a dictatorship and these club teams are inherently democratic.

A coach needs to be able to order and discipline, but how do you effectively do this to your boss when your boss is a student club president?"

Thoughts?

[mholtz]

Simple. Don't let it be this way. Convince the leadership of the club (this may take a year or 3) that the only stable influence on the team is the coach. Team presidents come and go. The coach is what stays around.


Basically at Michigan State, we have a dictatorship, but the students run all the financials of the team. They have input into everything that happens, and we respect that input, but ultimately the choice is that of the coach. This seems to work pretty well for us.

The coaches don't have anything to do, however, with the running of the financials. I am an assistant coach, and I have my name on the account (mostly for transition from one treasurer to another) but the treasurer has the check book. This does a few things.

1. allows the team to feel safe about their money
2. removes any possibility of suspecion that the coaches are taking money from the team, or wasting money.

[John Paul]

I agree with Matt, although we take it a step farther as the coach here has complete control of the financials, overseen by the Rec. Sports supervisor so there are checks and balances that protect the team and the coach.

At our level it's hard to find a qualified coach willing to take complete control (and all the work and long-term commitment that goes with it). Once you find that person, it's often a battle with the university to recognize the coach as the team representative - which is just as important. Then it's usually a 3 or 4 year process, maybe even longer, as the coach establishes control over a traditional club team attitude and system.

[Sonny]

I agree with John Paul and Matt Holtz. For me - I think it's inappropriate that any club team has the authority to fire a coach in the middle of a season because they don't like the direction the team is going. Obviously, if a coach does something illegal or unethical - those are immediate grounds for dismissal.

However, it's an entirely different thing if a few players don't like the coach and/or his practice/game decisions. (Even if those players are the team captains and/or team leadership.)

I'm not disputing the fact that collegiate sports clubs are student led organizations. But to "change boats" in mid-stream is unwise, short-sighted, and problematic on many levels for MDIA teams. Best to save decisions about the coaching staff for the off-season.

[slider]

There has to be accountability on both sides. Stability, among other factors, is crucial to the long-term success of MDIA teams. We have a lot of talented players throughout the country, but until we see more program continuity, we won't see parity in the MDIA. What can teams do to create a more stable environment for their programs?

[Tarzan]

Lax Power argument: The initial crux of the argument is incorrect. The players did not fire the coach, he resigned.

I believe that the best programs are a dictatorship with advisors…captains, assistant coach(es). Essentially, coach is top dog, if you have a problem tell the captains and they talk to the coaches, but the head coach’s word is still final. W&L’s are the most important thing out there. I agree with Slider…Stability is important and concentration of the decision making is a key element in that stability.

[Dan Wishengrad]

I think I'm qualified to weigh in here.

I took over as head coach at UW in 2000, two years after the previous coach (Herb Hoffman) stepped down. The team was in shambles, but there was some talent mixed in with the rookies. We had losing seasons in 2000 & 01, then won the PNCLL (thanks in no small part to SFU's eligibility issues that year) and took a 15-0* record to St. Louis (*21-7 loss to SFU turned to a forfeit win), where we lost three straight to CSU, A&M and V-Tech. My reward was to be asked to step aside. The team's officers did this respectfully, thankful for all that I had done, and asked me please to stay on with the team as General Manager, and lead them in the search for my own replacement. I spent about 24 hours pouting. then wholeheartedly accepted. Setting up the team's interview with Dejon Hush still stands as one of my smartest coaching moves to date. Our guys were smart enough to recognize a need to upgrade the coaching while keeping some continuity, too.

[Kyle Berggren]

The key is team buy in, complete team buy in. Dictatorships work great if no one wants to coup. I went through it last year, and now part of this year. Half the team wanted to win at any cost, the other wanted to drink and didn't care about showing up to practice, it was about fun. This year, we want to win and work hard, its great. Just need to keep the player's attitude, and my attitude, up and focused on our goals. Some people are just big distractions, and even though it is a dictatorship, the buyin can keep your players straightening out each other, in a positive way.

[Coach Peterson]

Coaching isn't a dictatorship, it never can be. But it isn't a democracy either. A good coach (at any college level) leads by both listening and guiding a team, helping the players to develop team goals as a team with guidance from the coach then making decisions that support those team goals. If the team goals are partying and having fun at the expense of practicing and getting better, then the coach must find a way to either support those goals or convince the players that those shouldn't be the right goals for the squad. If you view a coaching situation as a dictatorship, you're probably a coach for all the wrong reasons. Even in D-1 sports like basketball, a dictatorship coach soon loses the best recruits and his best players transfer. Our coaching situation changed this year to accomodate another coach that we needed in our program. I share my title as co-head coach because it was the right thing to do for the program, the coaches and the players.

The best coaches convince their players that what they want the players or team to do will lead to the results the players seek whether or not your "boss" is the Athletic Director or the players. That doesn't mean the best coaches don't work their players hard, and sometimes make decisions that are unpopular with a player or players, but it means they do it only after they convince their players that their system and their ideas will work. Coach Wooden from UCLA was a tough coach to play for, and had high expectations about what his players should do, including dress and conduct codes that were strict. But he worked hard to get his players to buy into what he wanted them to do and why he instituted the rules had had. He relates that one of his happiest moments EVER came not from winning his first national championship, but after winning his first NCAA. He had benched one of his star players who didn't play well and sat for most of the game and coach Wooden was worried about how the player would feel about being benched in the championship game. The player said to him in the locker room, "Coach, I understand, I wasn't playing well and you made the right decision to sit me tonight." Only then did Coach Wooden truly feel good about his first national championship.

When you truly care about your players, it's never a dictatorship. You can be strict so long as you have the respect of the players and they believe that what you're doing will lead to the goals they share.

Coach Seaman moved on from JHU after he didn't live up to the expectations the alums and AD had of him. Same with a coach at a club program. If you're a good coach and you care about the players and the program, the players will recognize that. If you are a "my way or the highway" coach, you will probably see the highway before too long whether your boss is the AD or the team captains.

I do agree that sometimes teams make mistakes about who to hire or fire as coaches, but so do ADs and anyone else who makes those decisions. Maryland's AD, Debbie Yow, probably should have hired Gary Gait as their men's head coach. She didn't and MD has underachieved in the playoffs in my opinion. The UCSB team captains had the opportunity back in the late 80s and early 90s (three separate times) to hire Flip Naumburg as their head coach and they didn't. He's proved to be a great coach at the college level and has won more MDIA championships than any other coach. I wonder how many championships UCSB would have if Coach Naumburg was UCSB's coach for the past decade. I don't know and no one does, but it's just what happens. Everyone makes mistakes. But the best coaches and players learn from them.