#1. Do coaches really care about their players or are they more concerned on the success of their programs and willing to turn through players just so say they have been successful? #2. If a program had a successful regular season but lost in the first round of the tournament would you still consider the program to have had a successful year? #3. If the best player on team had a mediocre year and others players struggled throughout the year should the coach still receive accolades for a good year? #4. Are coaches suppose to coach the team or are they also suppose help players become better players which will in return make the team strong? Or maybe a combination of both? #5. If the coach never really provides individual instructions to his players to help them play better is he really a good coach? #6. If the coach is the ultimate authority on and off the field does the team really have any leadership on the field? #7. Is is common for players to disassociate themselves from a college program after they graduated? #8. Is it fair for a coach to say they've given up on a player his 2nd yr?
1. Do you think its fair that college coaches jobs depend on the competitive performances of 18-22 year old men-boys ? 2. Do you think coaches must continually try to bring in better players year to year to stay competitive? 3. Do you think a player who has not contributed, statistically, in his first two years, is usually going to be by-passed in favor of a first year potential phenom? 4. Do you think an institution, once a program makes it to the NCAA tournament, expects that program to return and then advance farther every season? 5. Do you know what the ratio of HS prospects contacted to student-athletes enrolled is for the typical college program? 6. Do you think schools like UCSB and Virginia Tech will ever make it back to the Final Four? 7. Are you at Northwestern?
Bottomline: Coaches care about winning. the players who will keep him winning or get him the fastest are the ones he cares about other than that I belive the majority of them could care less. College soccer as is all collegiate sports, a business
You seem to be really negative towards coaches and I am not sure if it is one in particular, but your 5 posts have all been questioning, if not ripping, coaches. I think it is safe to say you are somehow related to a player, probably a current one, and are most likely a parent... correct me if I am wrong. The one thing that has always stricken me as funny is how the parents of players who dont play (as much) immediately blame the coach rather than considering that their kid isn't good enough. So I will say this: 1) There are 11 spots on the field in soccer. Most teams have 25-30 players. That means 19 players dont start, and 12 or so players dont see the field in a game. Simple math will tell you that almost half of the team doesnt play during each and every game. 2) Everyone who makes a DI squad was a very good player in HS, ODP, Club, etc. Every single player on the team has a great soccer resume, so it comes down to who works the hardest in practice, and who fits into the team chemistry/strategy the best. 3) All parents see are the games: who is on the field and who is on the bench. They don't see practice, they don't see team meetings or offseason workouts. They don't see who shows up late for practice or goes through the motions rather than busting their butt. All parents see are the games and they base whether or not they like a coach on that. There are 18-24 games a year, but there are 4 months worth of practice So if you are a parent, and you base your decision on whether a coach is good or not on if your kid plays during a game, you are completely mistaken in your judgement. The only people who know what goes on everyday with a soccer team are the coaches and players, and it has always been amusing to see parents bitch about their son not playing when they have 5% of the information that the coaches and players have.
Bottomline: Coaches care about winning. the players who will keep him winning or get him the fastest are the ones he cares about other than that I belive the majority of them could care less. College soccer as is all collegiate sports, a business Coaches do not realistically care about individual players., ony during recruitment
I beg to differ...coaches most certainly do care about the players during practices, games, travel behavior, bench attitude, how they respond to their teammates, if they are supportive even when not playing, if they do show improvement in the off-season, if they stir up trouble off the field in the dorms, if they have the ability to see beyond their own desires ...it is a team sport. Every player contributes to the overall chemistry, good or bad. And every contribution is important, good or bad. Most coaches don't have time to baby-sit the "high maintenance" player or two when they're dealing with 25 personalities. So, if those high-maintenance players leave of their own accord, dealing with 23 players and a lot less baggage is always the preferred route. The season is taxing enough...most coaches are not licensed in psychology. Disgruntled players exist on nearly every team. How they choose to express it (or not) is a critical factor in a team's make up. In Europe, they don't have to stand for this sh*t, the players are in a different mind-set. You hear it all the time when an American goes overseas and finds out there are 2-3 players at every spot capable of starting and practice sessions are paramount to maintaining one's spot in a line-up. The pampered kid in the US who has been sucked up to his entire soccer career and then doesn't start in college has no way iof knowing how to deal with this frustration, unless he was raised with certain values that permit him to see beyond his own nose.
Coaches really only care about the players and how all the things you mentioned will affect their abiltiy to play,compete and promote the coaches program. You are fooling yourself if youthink the majority of coaches out there really care about their players as student/athletes. Its the athlete part they care about, that is whom their job depends upon. I am not saying this is a good or bad thing. Collegiate athletes and their parents need to realize this. It is a business and everyone,players and coaches both have jobs to do.
The issue for players and our parents the problem is coaches mislead us during the recruiting process stating how much they really lead us and how much we can really help their program. But only once we're there do one realize we were sold a bill of goods.
Excellent post! I also want to add that anyone complaining that coaches care too much about winning, I guess the way I look at it their job is on the line every game and quite honestly whether or not they retain their position is a direct result of team performance. In addition, from what I've seen coaches care enough about players to give them a chance to show them what they are made of. It's up to the individual players whether they do enough to catch (and keep) the coaches eye. They (the players) have been given that chance. What becomes of that chance lies completely in the players hands (or feet considering we're talking soccer)
From conversations with mny former players and their families that have gone on to play college soccer, I think a big factor in degree of caring is whether the player is receiving any athletic aid or not. Players who are truly recruits (receiving athletic aid ) get a lot more opportunities to succeed than those who do not ( basically walk ons). This only makes sense since the coach has invested his or her scarce program money in the recruited player and must have developed a liking for that player in order to make an athletic offer. I counsel high school age players that they are better off (all other things being equal like the colleges are equal academically and in cost) to go to a top D2 school that offers athletic aid rather than take a no-aid D1 walk on offer. Even if the D1 coach tells you that he or she is offering a guaranteed roster spot the player is still thought of as a walk on if no athletic aid is involved. Obviously not every school is like this but from a lot of experience in our area of the country, it seems to be a general rule.
So these chances players supposedly get, so what each player is evaluated equally and even more so fairly? Are these supposed chances given and OPENLY communicated between coach and players? Most players ask for nothing more than to treated fair in regards to their soccer aspirations the each same of what a coach would expects to return to a player in the soccer program. To bad the shoe doesn't fit both ways.
So, from your personal experience you're saying that this doesn't happen? Would you care to cite some examples of exactly what it is you mean? Plus, it's important to remember players are free to leave a program that's not the right fit for them. Some will leave, while others will take on the challenge of working hard and I have seen a player that had very little playing time through his junior year really step up to the plate, work hard and be rewarded in the end with a lot of playing time. I also believe that chips on shoulders are sometime very noticable, even if the player themself thinks he's keeping his negative attitude to himself.
Do you think any good coach goes into the preseason and tells each player how much time they will play? No they tell the players what they have to do to contribute to the program. Some kids will contribute on the field, others will have to contribute from a practice standpoint. Preseason every year will separate those who have put in the hard work and are dedicated to the team from those who either aren't talented, aren't hardworking, aren't committed to the team, or aren't ready for college soccer -- Or a combination of the four. But every kid should and probably does get a chance. The kids may not know when their chance is, but is it right for a kid to only work hard when they know their chance is on the line? No, the players should be working hard all the time, trying to get better as an individual as a team. Thats what a dedicated, committed player does. The selfish ones would be the ones who whine about not getting a chance, or only working hard when it is communicated to them that now is their chance And a good coach will recognize those types of players, the ones who aren't having immediate playing times but continue working hard, and reward them. As for the welfare of the players, at the end of the day, they are given the chance to graduate from a four year university that other kids don't get the chance and would die for. But these kids have to remember that in most cases, soccer got them into school, and while their soccer career may not proceed as hoped, they still walk out with a degree.
Very good point. I think that's what surprised me the most with the Horizon leagues list of honor roll students. Schools that I thought would put academics first must not if they can only muster one on the list for the fall. Secondly, it's very important to remember the commercial the NCAA runs about how many NCAA college athletics there are, and how few will go on to be professional in something other than their chosen sport.