Poll on ESPN about Coaches and what their most important job is

[bugatti]

PERFECT question. My father taught me growing up that I am responsibile for my own actions and the repurcussions that come with those actions. Nice post Woodsrider.

And as we know many of these kids come from deprived environments with no maternal or paternal guidance. Often times a college coach may be that first person.

[bugatti]

To those who have posted who think it's all about winning, you make me sad!

 

Don't you worry about the young men and women later on in their lives, if they don't make it to the next level? What do they have if they don't make it to the next level but memories of what they did playing the game and today, you can't get a job with memories.

 

How many young men and women who played College sports move on to play Pro sports?

 

As the NCAA commercial explains, most of us go on to other careers, other than in sports!

 

I also agree that it isn't fair for a Coach to have a better than .500 record, graduate his players, be a good role model for the students and the Community where the University is located and then to get fired.

 

Universities were indeed founded for students to get a education and improve their lives and thus make our Country a better place to live. Can you name me one Universities that was built to win a NCAA Title and not for it's students to get an education!

 

Are sports important/fun? Yes, but not at the expense of getting all students a better education!

 

The vote to win is sad, but it is the reality of the situation. Let me break it down like this. Coaches are really serving to a few different audiences. To the athletes themselves they must be a role model, push them to make grades, and get them to win. To the University they must protect integrity and deliver victories. To boosters you must put on a good front but win on the field of play as your department relies upon that. To most fans they want a good product to cheer for and to win. There is one common denominator in all of this.

 

Coach Cal is the best example. Besides winning on the court, he is paid $4,000,000 to do the following: graduate students, secure money, recruit, be the face of the University, protect the integrity of the institution, be charitable, place an exciting product on the court, do speaking engagements for the University, etc. Winning enhances all of these things and the University knows this. I again reiterate, when the University makes it their top priority for coaches to "be a good role model" and "graduate students" then we can talk about the role of a coach. It is just not the case. Coaches do not receive pay raises for A+'s and being a good father figure. In principle I agree with you.

[5wide]

Perhaps what is sad is that we demand too much of the coaches...a coach, as bugatti has elaborated, is required to do all of the above. Ultimately, winning is the primary thing when it comes to getting hired and fired. But, if a coach wins but doesn't represent the university well, or has a poor track record with his players in the classroom, he will get criticized. A coach is just one man. Granted he has a bigger impact on his players lives than most, he shouldn't be held singly responsible for their actions.

 

Simply put, most people expect a coach to do all of those things.

 

On the flipside, what would your top priority be as a coach? Most of us do what is required to keep our job. Winning is required for a coach. He can only do so much. If a kid doesn't listen or won't take the classroom seriously, Coach Cal or anyone else can't force them to do anything.

 

So, there's my opinion. I believe too much blame (and likely credit) for what their athletes do away from the court (or field) is laid at the coach's feet. That's what is sad to me.

[FC]

Do any head coaches have contract incentives for graduation rates? Many have incentives for wins, championships, and their team's on the field/court performance. I think it is a bit naive to think that colleges hire coaches to make sure student athletes graduate. That is what the professors are for. Colleges pay coaches a lot more than they pay professors. Obviously there is a great many more professors than coaches, but a winning football or basketball program can generate a huge amount of revenue for the school and IMO that is the coaches job, to develop a successful program and win. In 2006 the average D1 head football coach's salary was $950k. The average salary for a Harvard professor was $135k. One of the lowest paid coaches in 2006 was at Arkansas State, he made $140k.

 

I also think that the student athlete themselves bears a large amount of responsibility for their own academic and athletic success or failure. If a student fails to study, complete assignments, seek assistance when needed, etc... nobody but the student is ultimately responsible. Most if not all colleges have study groups and tutors specifically for student athletes or at least for students in general.

[FormerCawoodTrojan]

And as we know many of these kids come from deprived environments with no maternal or paternal guidance. Often times a college coach may be that first person.

 

I agree, but many regular students do as well and don't have all of the added benefits that the athletes already have. I would love for my child to play for a coach we can all look up to and model our lives after - I had the luxury of playing for one of those in middle school...in HS, not so much. That said, I didn't depend on him to be that person for me. I found it in other teachers or people in the community.

 

We agree on most of it, I guess I just get a little tired of us not holding the athletes accountable for their own actions.

[FormerCawoodTrojan]

Do any head coaches have contract incentives for graduation rates? Many have incentives for wins, championships, and their team's on the field/court performance. I think it is a bit naive to think that colleges hire coaches to make sure student athletes graduate. That is what the professors are for. Colleges pay coaches a lot more than they pay professors. Obviously there is a great many more professors than coaches, but a winning football or basketball program can generate a huge amount of revenue for the school and IMO that is the coaches job, to develop a successful program and win. In 2006 the average D1 head football coach's salary was $950k. The average salary for a Harvard professor was $135k. One of the lowest paid coaches in 2006 was at Arkansas State, he made $140k.

 

I also think that the student athlete themselves bears a large amount of responsibility for their own academic and athletic success or failure. If a student fails to study, complete assignments, seek assistance when needed, etc... nobody but the student is ultimately responsible. Most if not all colleges have study groups and tutors specifically for student athletes or at least for students in general.

 

I think if I remember correctly when the Herald Leader published contracts of Tubby and Rick they both had those incentives in there. I can't remember the exact numbers, but I believe they were lower than championships and Final Fours.

[bugatti]

I think if I remember correctly when the Herald Leader published contracts of Tubby and Rick they both had those incentives in there. I can't remember the exact numbers, but I believe they were lower than championships and Final Fours.

No doubt they were. Either that or the graduation incentives were not 100% graduation rates. If so you can guarantee everyone would be making grades.

[FormerCawoodTrojan]

No doubt they were. Either that or the graduation incentives were not 100% graduation rates. If so you can guarantee everyone would be making grades.

 

Interesting parallel can be made there...they make more money for winning so they feel the urge to cheat or at least "turn a blind eye"...would that be the same with graduation rates?