default
Member
Do wins alone count in most people's book on being a successful coach in high school or should other factors come into play that are important too?
default
Member
There are many factors that go into making a successful coach. Some of the factors are subjective, while others are objective. Winning is the most easily measured of the objective factors. In most instances winning percentage will be taken into account in determining if a coach is "successful". It should always be balanced against the resources that a coach has and the environment within which he/she is coaching. We all know that some schools provide better resources to athletics, and some sports within a school district are better supported by the community then others. Given a few of these parameters, the subjective items that I would consider, would be things like, does the coach have a plan in place to develop players. Is the team a credit to the school? There are very few things that I find more distateful then a team in any sport that wins, and never exhibits sportsmanship or class. Are the members of the team learning the fundamentals of the game? It is difficult to determine talent, but a team can play the game up to their ability and not have the talent to win. With all that double talk being said there are people that should not be head coaches, or coaches of any kind. Knowing the game, caring for the kids, teaching good techniques are part of what make a head coach, but they are not the only thing. There are intangible qualities that don't follow a set formula that allow some coaches to bring out the best in their team. However well intentioned we may be, we don't all have them.
default
Member
No, in my opinion ,a quality coach is one that can teach fundamentals and instill a winning attitude in his or her players,sometimes you just don't have the talent to win.The key is, can the coach get the best out of the talent they have. For example, in softball or baseball if you don't have pitching it is difficult to win on a consistant basis,but did the coach develop the players they have?If they are a highschool coach ,what are they doing to build the program? Are they involved in middleschool and liitle league? etc...
default
Member
I agree with what sbd says. In my mind you can break it down into 3 catagories. 1) Are you teaching and getting the best the team can perform on the field? 2) Does the coach have a posisive and solid relationship with the players and parents? 3) How good are the organizational skills? Meaning have they procured all the equipment the team need for the season by replacing worn or missing uniforms and jackets, bats, helmets, training needs and working with the boosters and organizing team fundraising? Wins do count to a lot of people but if the team doesn't have the developed talent to get those wins yet then you should have patience. If the team does have the talent but still looses the it's the coaches part to take the blame, after all anybody remember John Cooper?
default
Member
That depends, what has the AD setup as goals for the program.
default
Member
At any level BELOW high school, teaching & learning should be the emphasis. Winning is important at that level, but should take a back seat to learning the game. If kids do not learn fundamentals and are not taught "how to win" at the younger ages, you will wind up with a mix of mediocre players at the high school level.
At the high school level, winning should be the emphasis, but in recent years, an "ice cream" mentality has developed. I think the root of this comes from parents of kids who were not properly taught fundamentals at an earlier age, and now expect a high school coach to teach them. Sorry folks - by high school it's too late to learn to catch and throw. How can you expect a high school coach to have a successful winning program if he or she's having to teach the stragglers things they should have learned in 5th grade? It's like having a 5th grader in a high school physics class. Not very productive.
"Responsibility" is the keyword here. A responsible high school coach should take charge of the feeder system for the high school, and make sure qualified coaches are teaching proper fundamentals at the middle school level. The successful coaches do that - the failing coaches do not. Is everything in the system controllable by the high school coach? Probably not, but that does not take away the burden of responsibility!
With all that said - YES - a successful high school coach must be a winning coach. It's not ALL of the formula, but it's a very important part that has been pushed to the back burner by making excuses.
At the high school level, winning should be the emphasis, but in recent years, an "ice cream" mentality has developed. I think the root of this comes from parents of kids who were not properly taught fundamentals at an earlier age, and now expect a high school coach to teach them. Sorry folks - by high school it's too late to learn to catch and throw. How can you expect a high school coach to have a successful winning program if he or she's having to teach the stragglers things they should have learned in 5th grade? It's like having a 5th grader in a high school physics class. Not very productive.
"Responsibility" is the keyword here. A responsible high school coach should take charge of the feeder system for the high school, and make sure qualified coaches are teaching proper fundamentals at the middle school level. The successful coaches do that - the failing coaches do not. Is everything in the system controllable by the high school coach? Probably not, but that does not take away the burden of responsibility!
With all that said - YES - a successful high school coach must be a winning coach. It's not ALL of the formula, but it's a very important part that has been pushed to the back burner by making excuses.
default
Member
In the area and scool district that I live in we have a talent base that cover many quality select teams. These girls are getting great instruction until they hit the high school level. The high school coach does not understand the game and will not take help from all the select coaches in this area. It is getting to the point where when these young ladies get to their freshman year they are not playing for the high school. They are working with their other private instructers and waiting for the summer season to arrive. I coach a group of U-12 girls from this area and I will allow any of them to play for this coach. This is where I would say a coach has failed and you noticed I said nothing about winning or losing
default
Member
While I would generally agree that there is much more to coaching than winning, and that the best coach is one who gets the most out of his or her players, the problem is that "getting the most" is very subjective, and no one will ever agree on how this is measured. I would argue that at the high school level, a coach who continues to teach the girls, and gets the most out of them will win over time. I think coaching is a huge factor in high school sports, though it will often take several years for the good coach to make his or her mark on a program, and sometimes this isn't allowed to happen. Dedication and year-round commitment are just as important to be a good high school coach, as they are to being a good high school player. Doing things like securing the funding, equipment, assistant coaches and facilities are not to be taken lightly either. And, last but not least, encouraging and even assisting the girls to get outside instruction, and to play travel ball are absolutely essential as well. I cringe every time I hear about a HS coach who discourages or is an obstacle to his or her girls playing travel ball. If a coach does all of these things, I will guarantee you that they will win over time, and you will find more and more girls wanting to play for them which will only increase the talent pool.
