Log Mountain boy, I dont feel that I can go with you on this one. In high school unless you are private, you still have to play the cards you are dealt no matter how many you have to choose from. It is still possible to have 1200 kids and only have 3 good basketball players from that group and 12 average joes, especially since the emergence of, dare I say, Soccer.

Log Mountain boy, I dont feel that I can go with you on this one. In high school unless you are private, you still have to play the cards you are dealt no matter how many you have to choose from. It is still possible to have 1200 kids and only have 3 good basketball players from that group and 12 average joes, especially since the emergence of, dare I say, Soccer.

 

A good coach develops a program. It starts with camps in the summer. I think it can be built from the ground up. Then once a student gets to high school a good coach can develop players into good basketball players.

I feel like those things hope to keep the skills fresh and of course develop a few more along the way but the truth is, you cant make a player great. That player becomes great because they want to be great. In college and the pros it is somewhat different.

Coaches can only do so much to develop talent ... they have to have talent with which to work.

I have seen more coaches let talent go uncharted than I have seen coaches produce diamonds from dirt.

Coaches can only do so much to develop talent ... they have to have talent with which to work.

 

I agree everyone doesnt have a Bud Mackey or Darius Miller. A lot of schools have that calibur athlete, but do not develop them. That being said South Laurel didnt have better athletes than anyone else, neither did Mason Co. when they won. Also Apollo wasnt that athletic last year either. But good coaches work and develop players and create the right attitude surrounding a program.

 

Its like Bell Co in football. Bell Co is good because the coaching staff creates an attitude for success with the program.

I just think so much depends on the kid, how hard they are willing to work on their own, how much time they spend on the weights, etc. It can go on and on. Coaching a skill or set of skills is the easiest part of coaching to me. The one thing that you touched on lmb that I completely agree with you on is the attitude part. That is sometimes more important than the muscle fibers or genes themselves.

I agree everyone doesnt have a Bud Mackey or Darius Miller. A lot of schools have that calibur athlete, but do not develop them. That being said South Laurel didnt have better athletes than anyone else, neither did Mason Co. when they won. Also Apollo wasnt that athletic last year either. But good coaches work and develop players and create the right attitude surrounding a program.

 

Its like Bell Co in football. Bell Co is good because the coaching staff creates an attitude for success with the program.

You're talking "athletes" and I'm talking "talent" ... not always the same thing.

A non-talented athlete is just as much good as a talented non-athlete; not much good at all. Believe me, I know.

I just think so much depends on the kid, how hard they are willing to work on their own, how much time they spend on the weights, etc. It can go on and on. Coaching a skill or set of skills is the easiest part of coaching to me. The one thing that you touched on lmb that I completely agree with you on is the attitude part. That is sometimes more important than the muscle fibers or genes themselves.

 

I think it is usually a 2-way street. Players need the proper guidance to reach their potential and coaches need players with the ability and work ethic. Also good coaches are able to get most kids to work as hard as they can.

Now that is as true as a statement that can be made. Well said. Now come and tell my players that, maybe they will listen to you.

A non-talented athlete is just as much good as a talented non-athlete; not much good at all. Believe me, I know.

Not exactly. Both have some value if properly utilized ... it's the non-talented non-athletes that don't amount to much. :lol:

True.

You're talking "athletes" and I'm talking "talent" ... not always the same thing.

 

I believe most guys who are fairly tall and athletic have talent, but what they need is basketball skills. Good coaches can develop these skills with the proper amount of time and finding these guys at a young enough age.

Wow! What's the big suspense???

 

Talk of the 10th Region Tournament was that Mike Reitz has resigned at Campbell County and will take the head coaching job at Harrison County, where his son will be a sophomore.

 

Lee Kendall, according to the rumor, was headed to the Fillies program to coach the girls.

 

Don't shoot the messenger!

 

 

Is it a sure thing that he resigned or just a rumor?