What does being a former Olympian have anything to do with one’s ability to coach?
I never could understand that concept.
Perhaps being exposed to high level competition and coaching does not transfer after all at least in this case. I would think there would be a recruiting advantage, but the other poster thought the location diminished attractiveness.
There are of course exceptions but across any sport, very rarely do the best players turn out to be the best coaches. Actually a lot of times it is the last-on-the-depth-chart type of player that turns out to be a very good coach. Theories I've seen is that players who have a lot of natural talent don't really have to work at it as much as the players who love the game but are not as physically talented. They have to be better students of the game and have to out-work and out-think their more talented teammates/competition to 'make it'. I mean Georgetown just fired Patrick Ewing as the men's basketball coach after a very poor tenure.
She should have never been hired in the 1st place. She had ZERO college coaching experience. Not as an assistant at a D1, not as a head or assistant at DIII. So to start with, she had never even recruited. As we all know, recruiting and retaining those players are vital to a program making any strides forward. I don't know what the "other issues" are with Looney, but it seems that if teams are not performing well, the unhappy players get louder and louder in an administration's ear. Let's see who the next sucker is to take the job at Lindenwood and see how they do. Programs lose consistently for a reason, even when there are rotating coaches. I can't imagine Lindenwood caring very much about their women's hockey program when they are hiring coaches based on solely on playing experience.
There are of course exceptions but across any sport, very rarely do the best players turn out to be the best coaches.
I do think that there are certain traits of high-performing players that are useful as coaches. For example, both the Wisconsin (Johnson) and Minnesota (Darwitz) have coaches on their staffs who were Olympians. What do they have in common? They were both coach's kids. When that is true, I think that from a young age, you think of the game from another perspective. You are more likely to think about the game in terms of all the players on the ice, everyone on the bench, the full roster. The big picture is something you have grown up with, not something you start to think about when your playing days are over.
"... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling
I’m reading a book by Keith Gave right now called “a miracle of their own” about the 98 Olympic team and it talks about Looney’s success in building grassroots girls hockey. I wonder if she’ll return to something like that. There’s definitely a market for someone to play that role in cities across America.
She should have never been hired in the 1st place. She had ZERO college coaching experience. Not as an assistant at a D1, not as a head or assistant at DIII. So to start with, she had never even recruited. As we all know, recruiting and retaining those players are vital to a program making any strides forward. I don't know what the "other issues" are with Looney, but it seems that if teams are not performing well, the unhappy players get louder and louder in an administration's ear. Let's see who the next sucker is to take the job at Lindenwood and see how they do. Programs lose consistently for a reason, even when there are rotating coaches. I can't imagine Lindenwood caring very much about their women's hockey program when they are hiring coaches based on solely on playing experience.
The positive from it is that the AD is in his first year and saw past what the previous AD (that hired her) tolerated.
I’m reading a book by Keith Gave right now called “a miracle of their own” about the 98 Olympic team and it talks about Looney’s success in building grassroots girls hockey. I wonder if she’ll return to something like that. There’s definitely a market for someone to play that role in cities across America.
I think maybe Winny Brodt-Brown, the first winner of the Minnesota Ms Hockey Award in 1996, might be an example of somebody that serves that function pretty well in the Twin Cities/Minnesota area.
I’m reading a book by Keith Gave right now called “a miracle of their own” about the 98 Olympic team and it talks about Looney’s success in building grassroots girls hockey. I wonder if she’ll return to something like that. There’s definitely a market for someone to play that role in cities across America.
She played a great role in that by trashing the last 2 youth organizations that she was running. Anyone getting an application from her would do well to put it in the shredder.
Mark Johnson has quite the coaching tree. Isn't LIU's coach (Kelly Nash) a former Badger, too?
Yes, And 'associate head coach' (or something like that) Jinelle Zaugg Siergeij at St Cloud. And Carla MacLeod is the Czech Republic national team coach right now.
For example, both the Wisconsin (Johnson) and Minnesota (Darwitz) have coaches on their staffs who were Olympians. What do they have in common? They were both coach's kids. When that is true, I think that from a young age, you think of the game from another perspective. You are more likely to think about the game in terms of all the players on the ice, everyone on the bench, the full roster. The big picture is something you have grown up with, not something you start to think about when your playing days are over.
I agree with this 1000% percent.
Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
"Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"
Comment