(03-09-2016 12:34 AM)MotoRocket Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 08:14 PM)RocketBBallFan Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 07:17 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 06:47 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  IMO opinion, it's ok for a coach to name names to the press, if he is also willing to name himself and the coaching staff for the mistakes they made too. The coach is the CEO the bottom line has to begin and end with him. If he's willing to step up and say "I" didn't call the right plays or "MY" defensive scheme isn't working, or "I" should have called my timeouts, then he can continue on and point out which players didn't do enough. That's a characteristic of a great coach, and there aren't many that you see take responsibility directly for things like that.

Kowalczyk does that regularly. And his criticism of others is pretty mild. Much ado about nothing.

Yes, he does take his share of the blame. He mentioned two specific instances last night in which he should have called a timeout late in the game.

Not only late in the game - what about when EMU went on the run in the first half and Toledo had like 3 turnovers in a row. No T.O. taken then - and lead continued to grow. That was when I stopped watching.

And EMU didn't let UT go more than 2 baskets in a row without calling a to

When K talks about players he doesn't even come close to to going over the line. I want to hear his take on the players and himself.

(03-08-2016 04:21 PM)Dwight Wrote:  I'd like to see how a coach would react if a player criticized the coach to the press. I suspect that the coach wouldn't be such a "big boy" then. He'd probably use his position of authority to penalize the player.

It is part of a coach's job to offer constructive criticism to help the player improve, but it need not be public. If a coach wants to find fault publicly, then he should take responsibility for his team's performance and find fault with himself.

I don't think part of being a big boy is accepting public criticism from your coach. I certainly wouldn't like it if my boss did that to me, and I'm a big boy, if you're just measuring by age.

You are 100% right. No one likes being embarrassed publicly! Real leaders in any situation do not use that type of motivation. For those who think publically criticizing a player is a good motivator, I suggest reading some of John Wooden's books on leadership. Words from the greatest coach of all time.

I am with you Dwight. I am mature by age, haven't a "boy" in so many I years I forgot when I actually was one. I would not respond well to public criticism. In fact, I might respond the opposite.

Thanks for sharing your values.

(03-09-2016 08:38 AM)UT! Wrote:  When K talks about players he doesn't even come close to to going over the line. I want to hear his take on the players and himself.

Exactly.

(03-09-2016 11:24 AM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(03-09-2016 08:38 AM)UT! Wrote:  When K talks about players he doesn't even come close to to going over the line. I want to hear his take on the players and himself.

Exactly.

The only thing that matters is how the players respond to the criticism being aired out publicly. People do not respond well to a "parent-child" style of leadership anymore. They have options and where there are no viable options, they will find some other way to protest the treatment.

I have no idea if that is what is at play here, but it seems to be a distinct possibility. If the players are not bought into his style of leadership that allows them to feel humiliated, it doesn't matter how he justifies it. Unless you have followers, you are not a leader - and it will eventually get you fired.

It's the "blame game" I think I don't want to hear from a coach. That's different than discussing a player's strong points and areas of needed improvement (and how the coaches are going to help the player make them) publically.

"such and such didn't.." Sorry, not interested in that type of public coaching. That's for personal communication with hard examples. Ultimately, the coaches are paid to recruit players they can teach to do the things needed. It's the coaches' job to design the game plan around how far along the players are in attaining and implementing that knowledge. Best coach wins. Worst coach loses. That's where the buck stops.

We had two scholarship players (both freshmen) that did not get much playing time this season. Any word on whether they are staying with the program or transferring out?

(03-09-2016 05:38 PM)eastisbest Wrote:  It's the "blame game" I think I don't want to hear from a coach. That's different than discussing a player's strong points and areas of needed improvement (and how the coaches are going to help the player make them) publically.

"such and such didn't.." Sorry, not interested in that type of public coaching. That's for personal communication with hard examples. Ultimately, the coaches are paid to recruit players they can teach to do the things needed. It's the coaches' job to design the game plan around how far along the players are in attaining and implementing that knowledge. Best coach wins. Worst coach loses. That's where the buck stops.

Very well put- if Kowslczyk was saying "Zack missing that defensive assignment cost us the game" I'd be upset as well. What I hear is "Stuckey is a sophomore and we need him to be more of a vocal leader" or "Taylor doesn't have a three point shot and we don't want him putting those up". In his first year, when he was awfully frustrated and could easily have ripped across for everything I recall him expressing remorse for taking a player out with five minutes left when the guy had 19 and was one shy of his first twenty point game. So it goes both ways. If he was treating people poorly I doubt Pearson and Smith and Drummond and Weatherspoon and Taylor et al would transfer here.

(03-09-2016 05:56 PM)H2Oville Rocket Wrote:  

(03-09-2016 05:38 PM)eastisbest Wrote:  It's the "blame game" I think I don't want to hear from a coach. That's different than discussing a player's strong points and areas of needed improvement (and how the coaches are going to help the player make them) publically.

"such and such didn't.." Sorry, not interested in that type of public coaching. That's for personal communication with hard examples. Ultimately, the coaches are paid to recruit players they can teach to do the things needed. It's the coaches' job to design the game plan around how far along the players are in attaining and implementing that knowledge. Best coach wins. Worst coach loses. That's where the buck stops.

Very well put- if Kowslczyk was saying "Zack missing that defensive assignment cost us the game" I'd be upset as well. What I hear is "Stuckey is a sophomore and we need him to be more of a vocal leader" or "Taylor doesn't have a three point shot and we don't want him putting those up". In his first year, when he was awfully frustrated and could easily have ripped across for everything I recall him expressing remorse for taking a player out with five minutes left when the guy had 19 and was one shy of his first twenty point game. So it goes both ways. If he was treating people poorly I doubt Pearson and Smith and Drummond and Weatherspoon and Taylor et al would transfer here.

When Coach K informed his Green Bay players that he was leaving for the Toledo job, Rian Pearson told him immediately afterwards that he was going with him. That says a lot about how he treats his players.