I think there are a lot more professional coaches (people who set out to coach for a living) than you think there are.That is by far the exception. And those coaches most likely were offered extra duty pay and arm twisted into it.
The coaching courses are offered to anyone, but the great coaches almost always have experience in the sport (or a similar sport) and natural ability with motivation or teaching.
Edit: for a long time, back before high risk testing and national standards, standard phrases in ads for teaching positions were “Coaching Available”, “extra duty pay with qualifications” or similar. It meant the school was looking for coaches and would let them have a classroom position. That’s how a lot of those not great players you remember from school ended up with coaching duties.
I want to see a great collage B Ball player. (Auto incorrect in action.The most successful Collage Basketball Head coach over the last 23 years never played basketball in Collage or the Pros. He has won almost 84% of the 779 games he has coached.
He is a great people person and knows how to teach and motivate young men who come to his program. That skill does not require having played the sport. at all.
There are many examples of successful coaches who never played the game. Just because you are an excellent athlete does not mean that you relate well with others or can communicate and teach.
That is NOT what I am saying, I am saying shouldn’t the highly qualified pool of coaches be similar in make up to either the athletes in the sport or the country as a whole? There is a big difference between that question of merit based hiring and quota based hiring.lol yes lets pick and choose coaches based on the color of someone's skin and not on there merit. Worked out so well for the vice president position lol
sociality is regressing
That is NOT what I am saying, I am saying shouldn’t the highly qualified pool of coaches be similar in make up to either the athletes in the sport or the country as a whole? There is a big difference between that question of merit based hiring and quota based hiring.
I refer you to posts 1-4 in this thread for the problem.Demographics shouldn't have anything to do with it.
Hopefully, team owners hire those folks that they think have the best chance of getting their team to Daytona.
I don't personally walk into an activity and start counting skin colors to see if the ratio is appropriate for my purposes. It's irrelevant.
I saw. A bunch of cry babies that think they're owed something that somebody else has.I refer you to posts 1-4 in this thread for the problem.
A view similar to your attitude is what should be used, but I do not think it is.
Let me ask it in simpler terms, why is it the owners think only white head coaches can get the job done? More colleges have the “a great coach is a great coach” thing figured out.lol yes lets pick and choose coaches based on the color of someone's skin and not on there merit. Worked out so well for the vice president position lol
sociality is regressing
Where did this come from? What team owners think this? I'm asking. I don't know any of them.why is it the owners think only white head coaches can get the job done?
Ask limp in post 9.Where did this come from? What team owners think this? I'm asking. I don't know any of them.
Wait... You said it.
You tried to attribute what you said to somebody else.
At least try to keep up with the conversation.
Better yet, besides the Olympics, go back to watching whatever sport season it is now, B Ball, Hockey or ice turtle racing.
I don't know that this is true.why is it the owners think only white head coaches can get the job done?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?