on 4/7/2023, 11:14 am, in reply to "Re: not big on WBB, can somebody explain the attraction with Wynn??"
here's the data from the other board:
again, could someone explain in a compelling manner what in hades am I missing ??
an average finish of 5th, before the NCAA year
never won a Big West title, won the auto-bid once,
so basically 1 in 14 actual 'titles' over 7 years
it just seems like there is so much 'recency bias' even then the 'recency' of the UW record seems to not even be relevant, i.e. make excuses for non-performance.
2009–10 Long Beach State 13–17 9–7 T–4th
2010–11 Long Beach State 8–23 6–10 6th
2011–12 Long Beach State 14–18 7–9 7th
2012–13 Long Beach State 16–16 9–9 5th
2013–14 Long Beach State 17–15 8–8 T–6th
2014–15 Long Beach State 22–10 9–7 4th
2015–16 Long Beach State 24–9 12–4 T–2nd 
Previous Message
we should not hire coaches based on the Beach being 'convenient' for a coach.
bigger fish to fry with MBB anyway.
Previous Message
If I was in their position, I probably would punt on WBB coach for a year, and make an assistant the interim.
alternately, hire or seek a consultant - but even consultants have agendas and their 'network'.
look, hiring a HC isn't complicated. even a new AD may not have the best 'network' for WBB.
everybody assumes you need to wait for the permanent AD, I don't agree, a permanent AD doesn't necessarily need to have to hire every coach, as it is they have to evaluate 15 or so coaches anyway once they arrive.
they could have a couple of existing coaches part of an eval committee, we have very good coaches knowledgeable of how a HC candidate needs to communicate and can discern their background
let's face it WBB is not a big draw, it's a financial black hole. just the Wynn evaluation seems to be a bit of LCD thinking for the situation. I just get the impression her record is being puffed up a bit based on the positives of a 2-3 good years out of 12 or so for her entire coaching career. people making 'excuses' for a coach for the negatives, but accentuating the positives is IMO a bit of an unbalanced evaluation
Previous Message
Do you think Jane and Ted would hire Jody or anyone to a 5 year deal, knowing we're going to have a new A.D. in a few months? That would be total lunacy... Previous Message
lol,
ok, here's what I don't get. what is so stellar about her record
really? that the last 2 years at Beach were really good?
that's the basis for hiring a coach that was 'ok' and then flubbed on the job she took to leave
I still just do not get it. maybe someone can explain the 'fascination' with this coach more clearly
at Beach, people want to 'settle' for something 'comfortable' Previous Message
it is like a known product that we know and she showed in her last 2 years a winning record -- we could go out and find an up and coming assit. that we could bring for 5 years or so -- and if he or she is very successful in that time frame he or she most likely would look for greener pastures and we would be back trying to hire another up and comer who might bolt after 3 or 4 years -- it is a crap shoot -- jody's husband is a coach at uci so maybe jody would be with us for a longer period of time this time around --- just have to wait and see ------------------------- Previous Message
#1) she totally failed at her last job
#2) she did about what expected, before she bailed at Beach to leave for other job, see #1) above
isn't Beach supposedly a high tier Big West job expected high tier performance?
so what exactly was so 'great' as to make it some 'great' hire
just asking,
or is this another fear hire, so hire 'ok' because we could 'do worse'?
or is it another matter of people like 'nice guys' or in this case a 'nice girl' ?
just kinda confused on this one.
127
Message Thread
« Back to index