Unknown Participant wrote: ↑Sun Jun 30, 2024 9:13 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2024 10:19 am
kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Wed Jun 26, 2024 7:36 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:26 pm
gymman1031 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 6:05 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 9:13 pm
gymman1031 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 5:45 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 5:23 pm
gymman1031 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 3:35 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 9:47 am
I somewhat disagree as I'm not so sure which team has so many coaches that it's actually a problem.
Most of the top echelon in the MIAA "A" have 5-7, including volunteer assistants.
Some may have a couple more volunteers, from time to time.
I don't think they're less well-coached than teams with a total of 4. Indeed, what the higher numbers allow, if they're good, is the speciality positions to have true specialty expertise coached. Often some of these volunteers are relatively recent college players.
Organization on the sidelines is a matter of HC leadership and preparation of the staff. Each main assistant should have a very specific role.
What observers may sometimes see is one or more volunteers who have helped occasionally be down on the sideline as well; again the HC needs to prepare them for what they can do to help in their own area of expertise, particularly with players off the field. A ton of learning can happen with players off the field.
There may also be athletic trainers and other staff on the sidelines.
I think D1 is 5 actual coaches.
That's not because that's the optimal #, rather it's to try to have some parity between programs that have more difficulty affording more with those with relatively unlimited resources.
My own sense is that 'optimal' would be HC, D, O, G, FO and box. 6. And perhaps a young volunteer or two who bring recent college exposure to the HS kids as well as particular expertise.
The key is to be actually coaching, with defined roles.
Maybe it isn't always a problem. I just simply think having 7 to 10-men coaching staffs for high school lacrosse is overdoing it and not necessary. However, if those programs are successful, all the power to them.
But which actually have more than 7?
And do any of those struggle with organizing them?
MANY, MANY of the MIAA "A" Conference programs do. Yes, that is one of the best conferences in America. Not sure about organizing difficulties. I just think it isn't necessary.
Many, many?
Which ones in specific?...I'm not seeing who you mean.
I'm not disagreeing in principle, I'm just not so sure there's actually that many coaches.
Managers, trainers, etc, sure, but actual coaches I'm not seeing.
But you must have some specific programs in mind and must be more current than I am.
Long ago, I posted about how ridiculous it was when the Gilman football coaching staff had swelled to 18 listed staff, many on the former HC's personal payroll, but even with that it's not as if they weren't a very well coached team. But 18, come on...
McDonogh, St. Paul's, St. Mary's, and Boys' Latin all had between 7-10 coaches, for sure. I actually think BL may have had ten. And I don't think any of those programs consider their trainers as part of the staff.
Do any of those list 9-10 actual assistants on their websites? Or maybe on their programs?
I see 5 for BL :
https://www.stpaulsmd.org/boys/athletic ... eam-id/209
I see 6 for McD :
https://www.mcdonogh.org/athletics/team ... rosse/2703
I do see 7 for St. Paul's :
https://www.stpaulsmd.org/boys/athletic ... eam-id/209
And, I do see 8 for St. Mary's :
https://www.stmarysannapolis.org/team-d ... eam=150341
Calvert Hall is currently only listing 3, but I'm pretty sure there's more volunteers. Pretty sure Gilman is 5. Sometimes 6. Loyola doesn't seem to list their assistants, just the HC.
When Gilman had 18 football coaches, they actually listed them all on the programs. That seemed embarrassing overkill to me as a Gilman alum, but people had different perspectives on it, I know.
I believe most of those schools you listed have more assistants than listed on their websites. Most are volunteers or receive small stipends. Many are "part timers" who show up when their jobs and families allow- Certain days of the week, 1-2 days a week, only on gamedays, weekend only, etc.
Head coaches generally have to piecemeal a staff together to get the coverage they need to accomplish their program goals.
For some that might be 4 "full timers" and others it might be 2-3 full timers + 4 part-timers. Really depends.
right, that's my sense as well.
I asked my Gilman '12 son last night and he said they had 3 defense coaches, two offense and the HC. Two of D were volunteers with FT jobs, eg Damien Davis, Gilman, Princeton d-man.
In 2017, the public HS team I coached in FLA traveled to The Benjamin School to play a regional final game. (Jack Regenery is a Benjamin alum for context.) i was the DC, the head coach was useless and the OC, who won 2 NCs at NYIT as a GK and played in the MLL, and came to the game in his work clothes as a fence installer for his family's company, so boots and a dirty tshirt, was the OC (he was an awesome coach). I came out to warm up the GKs and Benjamin had at least 7 coaches, all in cool Benjamin swag, warming up the GKs, the fogos, etc. We lost a close one after being tied at the half, but the dichotomy between our respective staffs' appearances resonated with me.
Back on point, when I coached club in tryouts/pre season when it was all hands on deck, you could have 8-10 coaches for every 1-2 hour period. So a player could, and often did, get contrary coaching regarding what he did or didn't do, or should/should not do, in certain stituations. The guy that ran the club (NH Tomahawks) knew his stuff, so I always wondered why the coaches didn't have a preseason chalk talk to get on the same page.
I played against Peter Cordrey, Benjamin School's HC back in college. Excellent keeper. Looks like they have a good program.
8-10 coaches for a single club team sounds ridiculous.
If it was multiple teams with tryouts to determine which team to put a kid on, I could see it in the 'all hands on deck' scenario.
Rec tryouts were often a bit of a zoo.
My son played on a club team with 2 coaches, top assistants from two of the local MIAA HS.
Well organized practices, with some drills that pushed the boys faster, harder than their prior rec experiences and a great intro to higher level play.
But very few practices, mostly just playing games. Emphasis was on more freedom of decision making on the field, not micro management.
They played up a grade level and rarely lost over the following 4 years.
They occasionally had in a guest coach. Well run overall organization, but really it was the quality of the two coaches and their attitude that helped. That said, the team has packed with very good, well coached youngsters nearly all of whom went on to play strong college ball, numerous ACC, Big !0 and Ivy and top DIII all-conference, all-Americans, team captains etc, so a lot of it was really learning from one another.
yes, I did a bunch of those over the years, and yes, it's a bit of a zoo.