| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| How good a coach is Holly Warlick? |
| One of the best |
|
11% |
[ 6 ] |
| Above average |
|
37% |
[ 20 ] |
| Average |
|
41% |
[ 22 ] |
| Below average |
|
9% |
[ 5 ] |
| Poor |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 53 |
|
| Author |
Message |
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8227
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
 Posted: 06/13/14 1:53 pm ::: Rate Holly Warlick as a Coach |
Reply  |
|
Please be thoughtful and consider all the elements of a coach's job description, including for example:
- Recruiting (which I think is the most important attribute, but you don't have to).
- Technical coaching of individual and team offense.
- Technical coaching of individual and team defense.
- Motivating players individually and as a team.
- Developing players.
- Presenting a positive, professional and appealing public image of her program and university. |
|
And1
Joined: 19 Feb 2014
Posts: 150
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 2:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I voted above average. I find the crusade against HW on this and other boards laughable. People expect her to perfectly fit the shoes she has inherited and that is a lot to ask. I feel she has done a respectable job. Tenn continues to get good recruits and this is not a coincidence. Contrary to what various critics hope for, they will be in the NC conversation for awhile with Warlick at the helm and I think they will win sooner rather than later.
|
|
Youth Coach
Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 4760
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 2:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I say above average.
I think she's gotten more out of this most recent group of players than 99 percent of other coaches could've gotten. None of the players ranks as an all-time great in my opinion and for them to get as far as they got the last couple of years has been because HW (and the staff) figured out ways to capitalize on what talent they had and hid the talent deficiencies for as long as possible. |
|
Martini Man
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 4399
Location: Canada
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 2:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Average. And considering the average coach isn't that good....
As for recruiting, she's just getting lucky because of the history of the program. If Tennessee wasn't what it was in the past, Holly wouldn't be getting anyone better than the average coach does.
Player developement. Close to zero. At least so far. I'll wait to see though next season to see if Russell improves any.
Motivating. Not that much. I've seen them great one game and piss poor the next one or two. Good motivating means her players come out on fire every game and take no possessions off. Can you really say I am wrong on this one?
_________________
Cheers Mate!!
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 3:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Man, tough crowd. I think it's a little too early to be judging her. Taking over for a legend is hard to do...it's much better replacing the person that replaced the legend.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7842
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 4:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Above average. Tennessee is still righting itself from the downward spiral of Pat's illness, which I think was a whole lot more insidious than most folks will even begin to admit and started to affect her coaching and decision making for a couple of years before she even knew she had it. (speaking from more than a little experience with dementia in the family here) It's hard to step into the shoes of a legend, as someone else pointed out, and I doubt if even the young Pat Summitt could step into Pat's shoes now. It would be like taking over for God! I think Holly's doing a fine job of putting her own brand on the program and with the help of her assistants will continue to do so. A lot of the carping is just because she's not Pat. Well, Pat didn't do so well her last few years either. Give it a freaking REST already!
And just remember, Huskies fans, it could happen to YOU! And one day it will, there will be no more Geno.
_________________
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.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
vickilz
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 138
Location: Chicago, IL
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 4:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Right now, I have to say average. I think she has potential to be well above average, but imo, she still has to prove herself.
I agree, taking over for a legend is a very difficult task, but I also think she's riding the coattails of that legend a little.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 4:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Man, tough crowd. I think it's a little too early to be judging her. Taking over for a legend is hard to do...it's much better replacing the person that replaced the legend. |
I agree. The first year, with Pat hovering directly over her shoulder, hardly counts. So at this point, I'm not sure.
But there are reasons for concern. Supposedly, the recruiting classes have been very good, but the results haven't quite matched the hype. Does that mean the recruits aren't quite as good as advertised, or is that they don't play up to their potential in Knoxville?
Either way, it falls on the coach. I believe she has two years left on her contract, and I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't get to finish it out. The Tennessee women's basketball brand was once the brightest in the land; now it's obviously behind UConn, and could fall behind Louisville if present trends continue.
Dave Hart has to protect that brand, and if Warlick can't go deep into postseason, then I think it becomes a business decision to bring in a Kim Mulkey or someone like that and promise to bring back the glory days. If Hart waits too long, the short memories of recruits could make Tennessee the next ODU.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7842
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 4:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Man, tough crowd. I think it's a little too early to be judging her. Taking over for a legend is hard to do...it's much better replacing the person that replaced the legend. |
I agree. The first year, with Pat hovering directly over her shoulder, hardly counts. So at this point, I'm not sure.
But there are reasons for concern. Supposedly, the recruiting classes have been very good, but the results haven't quite matched the hype. Does that mean the recruits aren't quite as good as advertised, or is that they don't play up to their potential in Knoxville?
Either way, it falls on the coach. I believe she has two years left on her contract, and I wouldn't be surprised if she didn't get to finish it out. The Tennessee women's basketball brand was once the brightest in the land; now it's obviously behind UConn, and could fall behind Louisville if present trends continue.
Dave Hart has to protect that brand, and if Warlick can't go deep into postseason, then I think it becomes a business decision to bring in a Kim Mulkey or someone like that and promise to bring back the glory days. If Hart waits too long, the short memories of recruits could make Tennessee the next ODU. |
It may surprise you to learn that Dave Hart does not give a flying flip about women's basketball..or any other women's sport, to be quite accurate. And he is also probably the second most hated person on the UT campus (the top position going to his superior, the chancellor, Jimmy Cheek). If Hart can ruin all the women's sports at UT, he will. He's already trying.
_________________
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.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
~UK~
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 364
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 4:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Warlick is average because she doesn't have her own style. She's seems to be trying to emulate PS instead of doing things her own way and being creative. The game has changed & it doesn't appear that Warlick has adjusted. She's very fortunate to have Kyra Elzy on staff because she can bring in the recruits. Whether Warlick can develop them remains to be seen.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 5:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I am curious with whom those who voted "one of the best" consider her to be a peer. With Auriemma, McGraw, VanDerveer, Blair, Mulkey, Walz? Or are they defining the group of "best" far more broadly?
|
|
Martini Man
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 4399
Location: Canada
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 5:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ~UK~ wrote: |
| Warlick is average because she doesn't have her own style. She's seems to be trying to emulate PS instead of doing things her own way and being creative. The game has changed & it doesn't appear that Warlick has adjusted. She's very fortunate to have Kyra Elzy on staff because she can bring in the recruits. Whether Warlick can develop them remains to be seen. |
This!!!
I thought Summitt was a great coach obviously, but the coaching world was starting to pass her by. She didn't change her style with the times and I think her team kinda started to sputter because of it.
Warlick is just copying her style to the T and I didn't see any progress with the team from the games I've watched. Dawn Staley is coaching with the times and it's showing. Warlick? No.
_________________
Cheers Mate!!
|
|
bullsky
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 20310
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/13/14 11:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Bottom line: Tennessee has consistently exited the NCAA tournament a round or two early the last couple of years and recent Lady Vol graduates have performed better after leaving than they did during their time in Knoxville.
Of course the Tennessee fans will call me a hater because she's Pat's girl but she's average at best. As one of the best programs in the history of women's basketball, you'd think they'd pursue someone greater.
_________________
"Don't do something until you get it right, do it until you can't do it wrong."
- Geno Auriemma
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/14 11:10 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Hart may be hated, and may be a jerk, etc., but he has a job to do.
So why would he want to get rid of a money-making sport? Why would he want to kill off women's sports, and women's basketball? Do you feel that the administration had meetings and said "Downgrade everything except football and men's basketball"?
I just don't see how that makes sense from any perspective.
Hart may be incompetent, but from the outside, forcing Summitt out was a necessity. The other moves inside women's athletics I really can't comment on, but in terms of just women's basketball, hiring Warlick was a nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball. If he really wanted to be a jerk, he would have totally cleaned house.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
PRballer
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2544
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/14 11:28 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Clay, while Louisville has done a great job and is showing a lot of growth under Walz, I don't think the Lady Vols brand is close to falling behind them to #3 in the sport. I'd argue that spot is still held by Stanford.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8227
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/14 11:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| I am curious with whom those who voted "one of the best" consider her to be a peer. With Auriemma, McGraw, VanDerveer, Blair, Mulkey, Walz? Or are they defining the group of "best" far more broadly? |
I didn't have anything fixed in mind when I decided to use the word "best" in the poll. However, considering there are 349 D1 head coaches, "best" could reasonably be interpreted mean a lot more than just the top six or seven.
In addition, if one considers recruiting to be the most significant ingredient to winning, I think it's quite reasonable to rate Holly as the recruiting equal of the coaches you cite, at least for the short term she's been in office so far. |
|
PRballer
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2544
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/14 12:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Clay, while Louisville has done a great job and is showing a lot of growth under Walz, I don't think the Lady Vols brand is close to falling behind them to #3 in the sport. I'd argue that spot is still held by Stanford.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7842
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/14/14 12:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Hart may be hated, and may be a jerk, etc., but he has a job to do.
So why would he want to get rid of a money-making sport? Why would he want to kill off women's sports, and women's basketball? Do you feel that the administration had meetings and said "Downgrade everything except football and men's basketball"?
I just don't see how that makes sense from any perspective.
Hart may be incompetent, but from the outside, forcing Summitt out was a necessity. The other moves inside women's athletics I really can't comment on, but in terms of just women's basketball, hiring Warlick was a nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball. If he really wanted to be a jerk, he would have totally cleaned house. |
Clay, you are obviously talking very much from the outside so I'm not going to engage you further on this except to say one thing. Apparently what Heartless Dave has in mind is to totally eliminate the "Lady Vols" brand and make everything strictly "Volunteers". This is not sitting at all well in Knoxville, as you can imagine. He also dismantled the women's athletic department and fired perhaps the best trainer in the country (Jenny Moshak), who, with some others, has filed a HUGE anti-discrimination lawsuit. Hopefully this takes him down.
_________________
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.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
bekcat1
Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 874
Location: The ATL
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 9:46 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Hart may be hated, and may be a jerk, etc., but he has a job to do.
So why would he want to get rid of a money-making sport? Why would he want to kill off women's sports, and women's basketball? Do you feel that the administration had meetings and said "Downgrade everything except football and men's basketball"?
I just don't see how that makes sense from any perspective.
Hart may be incompetent, but from the outside, forcing Summitt out was a necessity. The other moves inside women's athletics I really can't comment on, but in terms of just women's basketball, hiring Warlick was a nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball. If he really wanted to be a jerk, he would have totally cleaned house. |
Clay, you are obviously talking very much from the outside so I'm not going to engage you further on this except to say one thing. Apparently what Heartless Dave has in mind is to totally eliminate the "Lady Vols" brand and make everything strictly "Volunteers". This is not sitting at all well in Knoxville, as you can imagine. He also dismantled the women's athletic department and fired perhaps the best trainer in the country (Jenny Moshak), who, with some others, has filed a HUGE anti-discrimination lawsuit. Hopefully this takes him down. |
This board has more than it's fair share of folks who just plain dislike Tennessee, and that clouds the judgement. Hiring Holly was more than a "nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball", hiring Holly was hiring a qualified assisstant who has been ready to take over a D-1 program. Holly was in consideration for a number of HC positions, turning them down to stay with UT. That loyalty paid off, and deservedly so. This poll is a bit premature, as she has only been in her position officially two years now. That's just not enough time to judge anybody, but around here, it's not only enough time, but some have Holly getting canned. It's ridiculous.
The OP says recruiting is the most important aspect. Holly's three recruiting classes have been stellar. They have not only been full of talent, but have filled needs the team has had. In my opinion, she has been above average, based on recruiting, based on conference championships, based on making the NCAAs, based on continuing the tradition that her mentor started, and doing it in her own way.
As for Dave Hart, if he isn't hell bent on destroying women's sports, please do tell about the facility Alabama' WBB team plays their games in, then get back to us. Tell us about Florida State's women's athletics and get back to us.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 1:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bekcat1 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Hart may be hated, and may be a jerk, etc., but he has a job to do.
So why would he want to get rid of a money-making sport? Why would he want to kill off women's sports, and women's basketball? Do you feel that the administration had meetings and said "Downgrade everything except football and men's basketball"?
I just don't see how that makes sense from any perspective.
Hart may be incompetent, but from the outside, forcing Summitt out was a necessity. The other moves inside women's athletics I really can't comment on, but in terms of just women's basketball, hiring Warlick was a nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball. If he really wanted to be a jerk, he would have totally cleaned house. |
Clay, you are obviously talking very much from the outside so I'm not going to engage you further on this except to say one thing. Apparently what Heartless Dave has in mind is to totally eliminate the "Lady Vols" brand and make everything strictly "Volunteers". This is not sitting at all well in Knoxville, as you can imagine. He also dismantled the women's athletic department and fired perhaps the best trainer in the country (Jenny Moshak), who, with some others, has filed a HUGE anti-discrimination lawsuit. Hopefully this takes him down. |
This board has more than it's fair share of folks who just plain dislike Tennessee, and that clouds the judgement. Hiring Holly was more than a "nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball", hiring Holly was hiring a qualified assisstant who has been ready to take over a D-1 program. Holly was in consideration for a number of HC positions, turning them down to stay with UT. That loyalty paid off, and deservedly so. This poll is a bit premature, as she has only been in her position officially two years now. That's just not enough time to judge anybody, but around here, it's not only enough time, but some have Holly getting canned. It's ridiculous.
The OP says recruiting is the most important aspect. Holly's three recruiting classes have been stellar. They have not only been full of talent, but have filled needs the team has had. In my opinion, she has been above average, based on recruiting, based on conference championships, based on making the NCAAs, based on continuing the tradition that her mentor started, and doing it in her own way.
As for Dave Hart, if he isn't hell bent on destroying women's sports, please do tell about the facility Alabama' WBB team plays their games in, then get back to us. Tell us about Florida State's women's athletics and get back to us. |
Explain further ... I'm not familiar with either situation.
And let's say you're right. What would be the motivation behind destroying women's athletics? I don't think Hart could do so without the backing of the administration, or at least some of the administrators.
I guess one answer would be pure misogynism on the part of several powerful people at all three universities. I don't really see another, though, but maybe I'm missing something.
What motivations would any administrator have for turning women's sports into a bad program, especially one like Tennessee women's basketball, which actually came close to breaking even, or even making money? I'm willing to be convinced ...
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 6:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bekcat1 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Hart may be hated, and may be a jerk, etc., but he has a job to do.
So why would he want to get rid of a money-making sport? Why would he want to kill off women's sports, and women's basketball? Do you feel that the administration had meetings and said "Downgrade everything except football and men's basketball"?
I just don't see how that makes sense from any perspective.
Hart may be incompetent, but from the outside, forcing Summitt out was a necessity. The other moves inside women's athletics I really can't comment on, but in terms of just women's basketball, hiring Warlick was a nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball. If he really wanted to be a jerk, he would have totally cleaned house. |
Clay, you are obviously talking very much from the outside so I'm not going to engage you further on this except to say one thing. Apparently what Heartless Dave has in mind is to totally eliminate the "Lady Vols" brand and make everything strictly "Volunteers". This is not sitting at all well in Knoxville, as you can imagine. He also dismantled the women's athletic department and fired perhaps the best trainer in the country (Jenny Moshak), who, with some others, has filed a HUGE anti-discrimination lawsuit. Hopefully this takes him down. |
This board has more than it's fair share of folks who just plain dislike Tennessee, and that clouds the judgement. Hiring Holly was more than a "nod to the glorious past of Tennessee basketball", hiring Holly was hiring a qualified assisstant who has been ready to take over a D-1 program. Holly was in consideration for a number of HC positions, turning them down to stay with UT. That loyalty paid off, and deservedly so. This poll is a bit premature, as she has only been in her position officially two years now. That's just not enough time to judge anybody, but around here, it's not only enough time, but some have Holly getting canned. It's ridiculous.
The OP says recruiting is the most important aspect. Holly's three recruiting classes have been stellar. They have not only been full of talent, but have filled needs the team has had. In my opinion, she has been above average, based on recruiting, based on conference championships, based on making the NCAAs, based on continuing the tradition that her mentor started, and doing it in her own way.
As for Dave Hart, if he isn't hell bent on destroying women's sports, please do tell about the facility Alabama' WBB team plays their games in, then get back to us. Tell us about Florida State's women's athletics and get back to us. |
Cut it with the persecution complex. It has nothing to do with "disliking Tennessee."
Your so called defense actually presents the major condemnation. Hiring a "qualified" assistant may be fine for many or even most other programs. Maybe Warlick was ready to take over at a MAC school, or even at Alabama or Mississippi. But Tenn is arguably the best coaching job in WCBB and frankly hiring an assistant should not have even been considered. Tenn could and should have hired a proven, top notch, experienced head coach.
If Warlick had all those years as an assistant at another school, she would haven't gotten the time of day at UT. She was hired for one reason and one reason only - as a continuation of the Pat era. Which is also why she won't be fired, because that would be seen as an end and repudiation of the Pat era. Fans were unwilling to let go and move forward with a new coach who might change things. Maybe Warlick will work out as a great success through blind luck, but Tennessee deserved a better, proven, top flight coach.
As for recruiting, the school recruits itself. You could grab someone off the street and they'd recruit well in WCBB at Tennessee. It's like USC in football. They always recruit well, regardless of how good or bad the coach might be.
Besides, if recruiting was actually the biggest measure of a great coach, McCallie would universally be viewed as one of the very best coaches in the game.
|
|
rizla
Joined: 29 Jul 2008
Posts: 8
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 8:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
OK Art,
Name your "should have hired a proven, top notch, experienced head coach."
Gotta be gettable too.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 9:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| rizla wrote: |
OK Art,
Name your "should have hired a proven, top notch, experienced head coach."
Gotta be gettable too. |
Gettable is a key point - a lot of top notch coaches would be unlikely to want to step into the Tennessee job after Pat. It's close to a no-win situation.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 9:48 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| rizla wrote: |
OK Art,
Name your "should have hired a proven, top notch, experienced head coach."
Gotta be gettable too. |
Gettable is a key point - a lot of top notch coaches would be unlikely to want to step into the Tennessee job after Pat. It's close to a no-win situation. |
For the Tennessee job? I think Geno, Muffet and Tara are the only three certain "no"s. So take your pick. And it was two years ago too; Graves and McGuff were available at the time. Do you really think Walz wouldn't jump at the Tenn job, just like Strong bolted for the Texas football job?
They'd want to know Pat was out and that they were truly in charge. And Pat's not out which is why they have Holly.
If Tenn was willing to move on and really hire a big time coach to take over, they could. But they aren't willing to move on.
Big time coaches have big egos. It goes with the job. Virtually any of them would jump at at the chance to take the biggest program back to the top. That stuff about "no one wants to replace a legend" gets repeated by fans, but it's nonsense and those programs never have any problem finding plenty of people willing to take the risk. They just need the will to try.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/15/14 10:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| rizla wrote: |
OK Art,
Name your "should have hired a proven, top notch, experienced head coach."
Gotta be gettable too. |
Gettable is a key point - a lot of top notch coaches would be unlikely to want to step into the Tennessee job after Pat. It's close to a no-win situation. |
For the Tennessee job? I think Geno, Muffet and Tara are the only three certain "no"s. So take your pick. And it was two years ago too; Graves and McGuff were available at the time. Do you really think Walz wouldn't jump at the Tenn job, just like Strong bolted for the Texas football job?
They'd want to know Pat was out and that they were truly in charge. And Pat's not out which is why they have Holly.
If Tenn was willing to move on and really hire a big time coach to take over, they could. But they aren't willing to move on.
Big time coaches have big egos. It goes with the job. Virtually any of them would jump at at the chance to take the biggest program back to the top. That stuff about "no one wants to replace a legend" gets repeated by fans, but it's nonsense and those programs never have any problem finding plenty of people willing to take the risk. They just need the will to try. |
So there you go: "They'd want to know Pat was out and that they were truly in charge."
Pat's ongoing presence is a huge reason why the job would look like even more of a trap than it would have been if she had retired and gone off to Bora Bora.
And you're not trying if you can think of only three people who wouldn't have taken the job under those circumstances. You can add CVS and probably Mulkey to the list, just to name two.
Also, unlike men's basketball, which has a history of people being peripatetic and a lot less job security in the medium run, WCBB coaches are more likely to stay in place. Heck, after 2006, I figured that Brenda Frese would be taking the next big opening - it was consistent with her history - but she's still at Maryland, and I'm not sure even a job like Tennessee could get her to leave.
|
|
|
|
