I know of a few schools that will never reduce or take away a scholarship as long as the player has not quit, broken any rules and is academically elegible. A coach can cut them but the institution still honors the scholarship.
quote:I know of a few schools that will never reduce or take away a scholarship as long as the player has not quit, broken any rules and is academically elegible. A coach can cut them but the institution still honors the scholarship.
hisbiggestfan,
You would do everyone a big favor by revealing which schools those are.
quote:Originally posted by hisbiggestfan:
I know of a few schools that will never reduce or take away a scholarship as long as the player has not quit, broken any rules and is academically elegible. A coach can cut them but the institution still honors the scholarship.
I believe the Big 10 as a whole has that policy
Pepperdine's head coach, Steve Rodriguez, told a group of parents essentially the same thing. He said if he gives a scholly, it is good for as long as the kid is at Pepperdine, even if he isn't good enough to play. Rodriguez said that if that happens, it is HIS mistake, and he wouldn't pull the scholly. He added that the college would not support him if he tried to pull the scholly anyway.
I was very impressed, because I was always under the impression coaches refused to renew scholarships rather routinely in the case a player wasn't up to snuff.
I was very impressed, because I was always under the impression coaches refused to renew scholarships rather routinely in the case a player wasn't up to snuff.
quote:Originally posted by hisbiggestfan:
I know of a few schools that will never reduce or take away a scholarship as long as the player has not quit, broken any rules and is academically elegible. A coach can cut them but the institution still honors the scholarship.
So if a kid is cut and not on the roster, does the scholarship still count against the 11.7?
Won't happen but yes and they can only roster 34 now.
quote:Originally posted by BobbleheadDoll:
Won't happen but yes and they can only roster 34 now.
So actually the college is paying someone to not work (in the business sense)? Why would a Coach ever do that? Wouldn't it have to be some kind of discipline problem? If so, why would the institution want to honor that type of student with a scholarship? If not, why wouldn't you make them be a Manager or Grounds type worker to earn their money?
quote:Originally posted by Fungo:
powertoallfields,
Great question. I wouldn't count on it. This is where the "business" side of baseball rears it's ugly head. I like analogies. Lets say I live on a fixed income of 11.7 thousand dollars a year. I lease a small apartment on a 12 month lease for $500 a month. It turns out this is a better apt than I thought. It's well insulated and the neighbors are great. The next year it comes time to renew my lease. I'M NOT GOING TO OFFER TO PAY MORE BECAUSE IT HAS OUTPERFORMED MY EXPECTATIONS. I might be FORCED to pay more if I cannot get it at last year's price but I'm not going to OFFER more. My goal is to improve MY life therefore I can't afford to "give" my money away ---- I'll take the money I don't have to spend and buy me a new HD TV! Now I have a nice apartment and a nice TV. (or in your case another "good" player)
Fungo
PS: Unlike individuals, Coaches cannot "save" scholarship money one year and apply it to a recruit next year, so if they don't use 11.7 (fully funded D-1) they can distribute that amount to their players. By the same token they can "ask" or "force" a player to give up some of their scholarship for any reason --- Let's say to sign a another much needed player.
Fungo,
Yeah, that was my first instinct. I look at it just like getting a job. Hire in for the most you can get for the place you want to work, because nothing is guaranteed if it's not in writing. Some people do get raises, even these days, but they aren't guaranteed. You can always transfer if they don't treat you fairly, but the rules have made that kind of difficult. I guess it kind of equates to a non-compete clause in a contract, but it's not really the same.
Power thems the rules. If you give a BB scholarship it is for one year. Academic portion is based on GPA. No coach would cut a BB scholarships player unless there were real good reasons. He loses a roster spot as well as tying up the money for that year..
quote:Originally posted by BobbleheadDoll:
Power thems the rules. If you give a BB scholarship it is for one year. Academic portion is based on GPA. No coach would cut a BB scholarships player unless there were real good reasons. He loses a roster spot as well as tying up the money for that year..
Yeah, that's what I meant. I couldn't figure out why a Coach would do that. I would think it would have to be bad enough to get expelled from the school too.
This one caught my attention. Do they lie? I think some probably do to some extent but I think many times a player hears something a little differently than what the coach is actually saying. What you really need to look out for is coaches who recruit by talking negatively about another program rather than just talking postively about his own program. That is distrubing. To me that is a test of character.
quote:Play hard quote:
That is distrubing. To me that is a test of character.
Recruiting is a business, and in business you are always comparing your product with the competitions. Except for those programs who can sell their name alone, most others are carrying the same "shopping list" of players who suit their needs. With that said you also have to be open minded enough to weigh what is said, both good and bad.
quote:Originally posted by Play hard:
This one caught my attention. Do they lie? I think some probably do to some extent but I think many times a player hears something a little differently than what the coach is actually saying. What you really need to look out for is coaches who recruit by talking negatively about another program rather than just talking postively about his own program. That is distrubing. To me that is a test of character.
I am with you on this one. Mine narrowed his choice down to two. The night he returned from his first visit from one school, the other coach (not the HC) called, all he could do was bash the coaches and program of the school son just visited. Never once did son hear a negative word about the other program from the other coaches.
I am not sure that coach realized how close son was to committing to his school, what he did totally turned off son. He didn't even want to go on the official visit, that would have been his pitching coach. That was totally classless. You don't seel your program by being negative about another.
Confidant coaches do not have to bash other coaches during the recruiting process. To me that also is a test of character.
As far as lying, I think that much of it is the perception of the one who thinks that they lied. You usually see this when the outcome doesn't work the way they want it. I don't know too many people or players who have claimed that coaches lie.
quote:Originally posted by TPM:
Confidant coaches do not have to bash other coaches during the recruiting process. To me that also is a test of character.
Bash is a word that is commonly used in a negative context, but, when comparing different "apples" it can be used to describe differences in similar environments. For instance, a player is being recruited by competing schools and Coach A from the Univ of X says....
Coach B and his program at Univ of Y do not have the academic support that we provide and the graduation rates prove that.
BASH or NOT?
Coach B and his program over recruit and sign more players than they need. Here are the numbers.
BASH or NOT?
Our facilities at the U of X far exceed those at the U of Y.
BASH or NOT?
Coach B and his program redshirts Freshman X% of the time. We try to carry a manageable roster with few redshirts.
BASH or NOT?
Coach B and his program schedules "patsies", we schedule the best, to be the best
BASH or NOT?
Some may see these examples as "Coach/program bashing", I see them as answers to questions a parent should eventually ask anyway. "Deceitful lies" are one thing, "truthful comparisons" are another. I would rather have honest answers about school comparisons than a "wishy-washy" coach that won't share an honest observation. I'll then judge the validity. IMHO
BASH is one of those words that can have many levels of perception but you have to listen and digest the opinions before forming your own. I don't know that a coach pumping up his program versus another can be a reason to challenge his character.
RZ
great points---those are comparisons given to a recruit so he can make a valid decision
To me that is not "bashing" at all---
great points---those are comparisons given to a recruit so he can make a valid decision
To me that is not "bashing" at all---
It's not bashing if your telling the truth and can substantiate your claim.
I would agree the coaching staffs of the top 25 programs are pretty straight forward in their recruiting practices, inevitably they are bombed with prospects and blue chippers alike. I also believe these same teams are chasing after the same talent. These kids probably know quite a bit about a program and it's tendancies. And will make an informed decision.
My concern is about the 2nd & 3rd tier programs, the coaches who are scratchin to make a jump to the next level and will do whatever it takes. Maybe it's a new head coach to the program that has little or no history. For this reason I think the NCAA did a real diservice to players not being able to transfer out of one D1 to another D1 without sitting out a year.
I would agree the coaching staffs of the top 25 programs are pretty straight forward in their recruiting practices, inevitably they are bombed with prospects and blue chippers alike. I also believe these same teams are chasing after the same talent. These kids probably know quite a bit about a program and it's tendancies. And will make an informed decision.
My concern is about the 2nd & 3rd tier programs, the coaches who are scratchin to make a jump to the next level and will do whatever it takes. Maybe it's a new head coach to the program that has little or no history. For this reason I think the NCAA did a real diservice to players not being able to transfer out of one D1 to another D1 without sitting out a year.
dswann
I am old school--meet them face to face---read their eyes and how does their handshake feel
I am old school--meet them face to face---read their eyes and how does their handshake feel
A coach with confidence in his ability and the ability of his recruits/players has far too much to say about his program than to speak negatively about another.A good salesman in my business is the one that gives you complete and honest information about his product.If a recruit asks about another program then you sell your product better than theirs.Recruits are smarter than you think and now have more information before the process even begins.Speaking negativley about another program has come back to bite more than a few.
It was just a real turn off in the process to hear that sort of thing from professionals.Most often the information given by someone not close to the program is hearsay anyway.JMHO.
It was just a real turn off in the process to hear that sort of thing from professionals.Most often the information given by someone not close to the program is hearsay anyway.JMHO.
quote:Originally posted by dswann:
It's not bashing if your telling the truth and can substantiate your claim.
Exactly
I would agree the coaching staffs of the top 25 programs are pretty straight forward in their recruiting practices, inevitably they are bombed with prospects and blue chippers alike. I also believe these same teams are chasing after the same talent. These kids probably know quite a bit about a program and it's tendancies. And will make an informed decision.
IMO you're right, the top programs can prance their "dog-n-pony" shows through a living room without much sell. They may not get their stud but in most cases there's another pony at the door to take his place and fill and sustain the herd. An inexperienced assistant coach may take offense to a "loss" probably because he told the boss he had the recruit in hand, but for the most part "come-see-come-sa", that player will be replaced.
My concern is about the 2nd & 3rd tier programs, the coaches who are scratchin to make a jump to the next level and will do whatever it takes. Maybe it's a new head coach to the program that has little or no history.
I still follow my first thread that "bashing" can be an informative form of research if the listener does their part by "digesting" the claim. Coaches are competitive beasts and personally I'd like to see a little fire towards the competition because that's what I'll get on the field. While I respect those top tier coaches I sometimes question how they would do, and what extent they would go to fill a team with a finite group of resources, a non-hotbed recruiting area, and a program that cannot sell itself with past history.
quote:While I respect those top tier coaches I sometimes question how they would do, and what extent they would go to fill a team with a finite group of resources, a non-hotbed recruiting area, and a program that cannot sell itself with past history.
Couple of things, I said bashing and that is a lot different than pointing out differences between two programs. I think we are all intelligent enough to know when a coach may be pointing out differences or bashing. Don't insult our intelligence here.
You do not try to sell your program by negatively attacking the character of a coach or his coaching staff, which is what I orignally stated in my post, however only one part was quoted, not the entire post. You can point out differences between two programs without making it personal. That's a real turn off for most. That's not how you get kids to commit to your program. After looking back, these were not the only coaches that took this beating, every program seemed to be lacking something but their program, that's not how you do it.
I agree with what play hard posted, and again state that real professionals confidant in themselves and their programs do not have to speak negatively of other individuals and how they run their program.
When my player called some coaches to tell them that he would not be attending their OV, most congratulated him and told him what a good choice, not "you will be sorry". Top 25 programs are all most likely recruiting the same players and most do it professionally and not out of desperation. If you hear that negative talk about others, stop and think what issues that coach may be having that he can't get players to committ other than bash others.
You do not try to sell your program by negatively attacking the character of a coach or his coaching staff, which is what I orignally stated in my post, however only one part was quoted, not the entire post. You can point out differences between two programs without making it personal. That's a real turn off for most. That's not how you get kids to commit to your program. After looking back, these were not the only coaches that took this beating, every program seemed to be lacking something but their program, that's not how you do it.
I agree with what play hard posted, and again state that real professionals confidant in themselves and their programs do not have to speak negatively of other individuals and how they run their program.
When my player called some coaches to tell them that he would not be attending their OV, most congratulated him and told him what a good choice, not "you will be sorry". Top 25 programs are all most likely recruiting the same players and most do it professionally and not out of desperation. If you hear that negative talk about others, stop and think what issues that coach may be having that he can't get players to committ other than bash others.
quote:Originally posted by Play hard:
Most often the information given by someone not close to the program is hearsay anyway.JMHO.
Programs commenting on other programs, unless unscrupulous, are usually in tune with the other schools "happenings" either through experience or discussions with other coaches referred to as a "coaching network". Like most things in life, blatent lies, or self serving exaggerations sooner or later come back to haunt you to that same group and that is the kiss of death. JMO
quote:Someone was quoted:
I think we are all intelligent enough to know when a coach may be pointing out differences or bashing. Don't insult our intelligence here.
There I go again
. I'm sorry for insulting everyone's intelligence, that was not my intent, nor am I qualified 
. The intent was to point out that "bashing" with negative statements about another coach/program can also be viewed as a learning experience and not a judgment on character. As rz1 is sent back to his familiar seat.
btw- Your original quote was not about bashing a coaches character it was.....
quote:Someone was quoted:
....all he could do was bash the coaches and program of the school son just visited.
Well, whatever the source that is just what I call gossip.Best to look at the coaches background,the state of the program etc.. All the other is just opinion or gossip. I stand my ground.. more times than not the negative talk does not help win a recruit and many times gets back to that coach from the player being recruited.Integrity counts for a great deal to me.
Maybe some of those top tier coaches cut their teeth in an environment just like you described in your post. Most Coaches do not start out coaching at a top 25 school. Many earn their stripes proving they can win and build a program with less before they get more. Thats exactly why many of them actually get the job they have because they have proven they can do it with less than they are going to be offered to do it with in their new job.
I can name numerous coaches at very successful programs now that coached at schools that previous to there arrival were dismal programs or at least average at best. They are where they are because of what they were able to accomplish when others could not.
I can name numerous coaches at very successful programs now that coached at schools that previous to there arrival were dismal programs or at least average at best. They are where they are because of what they were able to accomplish when others could not.
quote:Originally posted by Play hard:
Well, whatever the source that is just what I call gossip.
Would you accept opinions/gossip of competitors when shopping for insurance, a car, refrigerator, or a dog? Or would you just go to the manufacturers site and accept that?
How about a babysitter or housekeeper? Would you want to hear as many opinions as possible if presented and you sort them out?
btw- Play hard I'm not insulting you, just trying to carry on a discussion that may have varying opinions. Integrity and honesty counts for a great deal to me also but sometimes those qualities cannot be judged until the real intent of the statements disclosed are fleshed out.
quote:Originally posted by Coach May:
Maybe some of those top tier coaches cut their teeth in an environment just like you described in your post. Most Coaches do not start out coaching at a top 25 school. Many earn their stripes proving they can win and build a program with less before they get more. Thats exactly why many of them actually get the job they have because they have proven they can do it with less than they are going to be offered to do it with in their new job.
I can name numerous coaches at very successful programs now that coached at schools that previous to there arrival were dismal programs or at least average at best. They are where they are because of what they were able to accomplish when others could not.
Great point Coach. My question is do you think their tactics toward recruiting were more "cut throat" when they were breaking in and developing programs than when they have the program as a selling point on its own?
Thats a good question. I am sure that like all people they learn as they go. They adjust to the situation they are in. I believe that the really good ones are better judges of character than they are baseball ability. They have the ability to foster an environment where its more important what you can do for the program than what the program can do for you.
They have the ability to foster an environment where its more important what you can do for the program than what the program can do for you.
My biggest nightmare, you buy into a guys schtick. You do your due digience, it checks out. And your kid shows up with 60 other guys who are trying to make the team. Is there a ceiling on how many players a coach can recruit, if so is it published?
My biggest nightmare, you buy into a guys schtick. You do your due digience, it checks out. And your kid shows up with 60 other guys who are trying to make the team. Is there a ceiling on how many players a coach can recruit, if so is it published?
quote:Originally posted by dswann:
......if so is it published?
Thanks dswann I was trying to say that except it took me a lot longer and still don't think I did it.
As parents, we really don't have a clue into the inter-workings of college programs regardless of what we might think. We can guess, we can dig and look for something that's not published, or we can get pointed in the right direction by a coach trying to sell his own program. The recruiting window is not open long for coaches and players alike, as a result coaches many times throw all the cards on the table in order to get their guy.
quote:the ability to foster an environment where its more important what you can do for the program than what the program can do for you.
well said Coach May
I believe this is the number one attribute of a successful college program. Each program has a 'culture' and that carries far more gravity than the talent or the facilities. I have seen both the good and the bad and watched kids I cared a great deal for suffer in bad culture and prosper in great ones.
As for the coaches in smaller programs changing once they make the big time,I don't buy that. People don't change their ethics just because they have the big job. They just take it to the next level.
I do not just look at the internet for anything. As someone says you look them in the eye, ask questions, talk to the captains of the teams, players that get to play,players that do not get to play, parents of those same kids. You ask about the philosophy of the program, you find out how they practice by going to a few. You might also be suprised that your kid sees things you do not see.
As for the big programs having too many players, you have to admit many, many players want that chance to play at that school. Some have the confidence that they came make it and stay and some decide it is too much for them. Each kid has a different mentality. Some like that competition and some are intimidated by it, for those kids it is best to move on.
As Coach May said the best teams are the ones who play for the team, win or lose.
Any coach that promises playing time is telling a lie or he will not make it in the the business for long.
I do not think that anyone insulted me. I just guess we will have to agree to disagree.
I do not just look at the internet for anything. As someone says you look them in the eye, ask questions, talk to the captains of the teams, players that get to play,players that do not get to play, parents of those same kids. You ask about the philosophy of the program, you find out how they practice by going to a few. You might also be suprised that your kid sees things you do not see.
As for the big programs having too many players, you have to admit many, many players want that chance to play at that school. Some have the confidence that they came make it and stay and some decide it is too much for them. Each kid has a different mentality. Some like that competition and some are intimidated by it, for those kids it is best to move on.
As Coach May said the best teams are the ones who play for the team, win or lose.
Any coach that promises playing time is telling a lie or he will not make it in the the business for long.
I do not think that anyone insulted me. I just guess we will have to agree to disagree.
quote:As for the coaches in smaller programs changing once they make the big time,I don't buy that. People don't change their ethics just because they have the big job. They just take it to the next level.
I do not just look at the internet for anything. As someone says you look them in the eye, ask questions, talk to the captains of the teams, players that get to play,players that do not get to play, parents of those same kids. You ask about the philosophy of the program, you find out how they practice by going to a few. You might also be suprised that your kid sees things you do not see.
Great point about attending practices. Rarely do kids know anything about the college game prior to entering it. Unless they live right by a big named school, a lot of kids may not have ever even seen college game let alone a practice. Having witnessed how things work is a great way to figure things out.
I saw a lot of posts defending bigger schools and throwing 2nd and 3rd tier schools under the bus for the chance to "make the jump" to a higher level. Understand one thing and that is that baseball is just like everything in life. The habits of coaches apply to all levels. Recruiting is a relevant business. Big schools don't have blue chippers knocking their doors down like it used to be. With the internet and all these summer teams that have came about over the past 5 years or so these kids are highly marketed. Every big program in the world knows about them. It used to be that if there was a stud in Northwest Florida then he was probably going to go to Florida State. Now everyone in the country knows about him and are wining and dining him to win his commitment. It may not seem so when the dust settles because everyone gets the best players. But the bigger schools are fighting each other for the best of the best. Like i said every school in the country knows about them.
Mid major schools recruit the next flight of players against other mid major schools. Those schools are going to fight it out for the best in that group. And on down the line it goes. Recruiting in every program is the same. It's all relevant to your competition.
quote:But the bigger schools are fighting each other for the best of the best. Like i said every school in the country knows about them.
IMHO The "best of the best" don't end up in school anyway, they sign pro out of HS. That leaves the "rest of the best" and IMO the top recruit at most mid-majors would eventually be a contributing player at any "elite" school in the country. Parity at the top portion of the player pool is increasing in numbers along with geographical influences, and with only so many elite schools available the talent pool is going to be spread around to everyone. Include those good players who go to school for specific education reasons and I think you will find the major differences between power and mid-major is depth, especially on the bump.
Recruiting in every program is not the same. Some programs have a recruiting base that will provide them a large portion of the players needed to compete at a high level year in and year out. They will then go out and selectively recruit for needs not met within that recruiting base.
For instance take a look at Coastal Carolina. South Carolina is a small state. Coastal can not recruit the same way that South Carolina and Clemson recruit and compete at the level those schools do. They must cast a wider net and expand their recruiting zone. Coach Gilmore can not approach recruiting like Coach Tanner or Coach Leggett.
Each situation offers a different set of challenges at each school. If a program can win its recruiting base and then selectively win those wars for top players they are going to be in good shape. Some programs will never win the recruiting war in their neighborhood on a consistent basis. They must recruit differently to compete at the other schools level.
North Carolina did not start winning at the level they are winning now until they started winning the battles in state on a consistent basis. Then they were able to attract some outstanding players from out of state to fill in the holes that were not met by in state talent. Depending on your recruiting base , the amount of talent that is there , the amount of competition for that talent , your recruiting will differ from one school to the next even though your competing at the same level of competition.
If you can not keep the talented players in state in state and at your school , you are going to struggle. Unless you are very good at getting multiple talented players from out of your area willing to come to your school and compete. For instance Coastal Carolina.
Everyone knew when Coach O'Sullivan went to UF that he would build a powerhouse and do it rather quickly. #1 He would keep the home grown talent in Gainesville. #2 He is a guy that would be able to cherry pick outside his base to fill in the holes not met by his base.
Each situation requires a different approach. Recruiting is understanding what your base is and then winning that first. Then its being capable of going to Delware , Rhode Island , Hew Hampshire etc and cherry picking that talented LHP to fill in that need. That is just an example.
Miami has 32 players on its 09 roster. 25 are from florida. That means 7 players from the entire nation are on their roster outside the state of Florida. Now contrast that to some programs that do not have that type of recruiting base. Its all relevant to what type of recruiting base you have , what type of competition do you have within your base , can you win that base and can you go outside it and get some players that can help you win.
People wonder here in NC why football struggles so much at the major college level. They only need to look at the top rated players in state every year that trek off to Ga , Fla , Clemson etc. So if you have a strong base of recruiting and you are winning that you are only really "working" on a few kids that you are selectively going after from outside your base. If you dont have a strong recruiting base or can not compete against the likes of USC or Clemson for example you better be capable for going outside that base and getting talented players that can compete. Some are outstanding at doing that. Some struggle doing that. Its alot tougher than many think. And it is definitely not the same for every school. In fact its alot different for many.
For instance take a look at Coastal Carolina. South Carolina is a small state. Coastal can not recruit the same way that South Carolina and Clemson recruit and compete at the level those schools do. They must cast a wider net and expand their recruiting zone. Coach Gilmore can not approach recruiting like Coach Tanner or Coach Leggett.
Each situation offers a different set of challenges at each school. If a program can win its recruiting base and then selectively win those wars for top players they are going to be in good shape. Some programs will never win the recruiting war in their neighborhood on a consistent basis. They must recruit differently to compete at the other schools level.
North Carolina did not start winning at the level they are winning now until they started winning the battles in state on a consistent basis. Then they were able to attract some outstanding players from out of state to fill in the holes that were not met by in state talent. Depending on your recruiting base , the amount of talent that is there , the amount of competition for that talent , your recruiting will differ from one school to the next even though your competing at the same level of competition.
If you can not keep the talented players in state in state and at your school , you are going to struggle. Unless you are very good at getting multiple talented players from out of your area willing to come to your school and compete. For instance Coastal Carolina.
Everyone knew when Coach O'Sullivan went to UF that he would build a powerhouse and do it rather quickly. #1 He would keep the home grown talent in Gainesville. #2 He is a guy that would be able to cherry pick outside his base to fill in the holes not met by his base.
Each situation requires a different approach. Recruiting is understanding what your base is and then winning that first. Then its being capable of going to Delware , Rhode Island , Hew Hampshire etc and cherry picking that talented LHP to fill in that need. That is just an example.
Miami has 32 players on its 09 roster. 25 are from florida. That means 7 players from the entire nation are on their roster outside the state of Florida. Now contrast that to some programs that do not have that type of recruiting base. Its all relevant to what type of recruiting base you have , what type of competition do you have within your base , can you win that base and can you go outside it and get some players that can help you win.
People wonder here in NC why football struggles so much at the major college level. They only need to look at the top rated players in state every year that trek off to Ga , Fla , Clemson etc. So if you have a strong base of recruiting and you are winning that you are only really "working" on a few kids that you are selectively going after from outside your base. If you dont have a strong recruiting base or can not compete against the likes of USC or Clemson for example you better be capable for going outside that base and getting talented players that can compete. Some are outstanding at doing that. Some struggle doing that. Its alot tougher than many think. And it is definitely not the same for every school. In fact its alot different for many.
quote:For instance take a look at Coastal Carolina. South Carolina is a small state. Coastal can not recruit the same way that South Carolina and Clemson recruit and compete at the level those schools do. They must cast a wider net and expand their recruiting zone. Coach Gilmore can not approach recruiting like Coach Tanner or Coach Leggett.
I agree with that.
The cool thing is they won't cry in their beer and make excuses about things. They are the type of guys who will role up their sleeves and outwork their excuses.
CD all you have to do is spend about 1 minute around Coach Schnall and Coach Gilmore and you know right away why they are so successful. No one is going to outwork or out coach those guys. And the fact is they have some extremely talented hard nosed players. They are a model for success imo. They do it the right way.
Excellent post CM. Not sure if eveyone really understands that most coaches have a method to their recruiting.
BTW, you have a pm.
BTW, you have a pm.
quote:Coach May quote:
No one is going to outwork or out coach those guys.
Don't you think that's true in many other places big and small but because their base is limited, spread thin, and they don't have those local "sure bet" recruits that they do not get credit where credit is due for their coaching talents. Being a mid-major and Northern advocate I feel that those coaches are not given their dues over coaches in high profile programs. One that comes to mind who's name some mightl recognize but most will say "WHO is Gordie Gillespie" .
I think its very true. You take a coach who has limited resources to start with. Facilities that are good but not up to the level of teams he must compete against. A recruiting base that can not support his programs needs on its own vs competing against programs that do. That same coach goes out and recruits players that fit his program. Players that on the surface do not pass the "eye" test in many cases but can flat out play. That same coach develops his players and instills a team mentality and a pride in their program mentality. And all he does is not only compete against those other schools but wins as well. Those guys have my utmost respect. They work their butts off. Many players come out of these programs far better off in the end as players than they ever would have going to much higher profile programs imo. They take on the mentality of the coach. "We are going to work harder than everyone else because we have to. We are going to compete harder than everyone else because we have to. We are going to prove that we can and will play with anyone , anytime and any place."
The fact is some of the best college coaches there are , are guys many will never hear about. If they had what others had to work with they would be college baseball household names. When you consider what they achieve with the cards they have in their deck vs what others have achieved with the cards they have , its no contest.
Some coaches go out and find talent. And then they work very hard to develop it. Some coaches collect talent. And when they dont develop or pan out they recruit over top of them.
The fact is some of the best college coaches there are , are guys many will never hear about. If they had what others had to work with they would be college baseball household names. When you consider what they achieve with the cards they have in their deck vs what others have achieved with the cards they have , its no contest.
Some coaches go out and find talent. And then they work very hard to develop it. Some coaches collect talent. And when they dont develop or pan out they recruit over top of them.