LaxPower Back-Up Stick

wlaxnut wrote: ↑Wed Mar 04, 2020 5:00 am I know it's old news but it's interesting that Maryland great Megan Whittle followed Spencer from Dartmouth to Stanford and now serves as the OC.

Delco Transplant wrote: ↑Mon Mar 09, 2020 5:12 pm Cofrin our at Columbia. Unusual move only a few games into the season

https://gocolumbialions.com/news/2020/3 ... coach.aspx

Dr. Tact wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:11 pm https://www.theeagleonline.com/article/ ... ve-players

Lax247 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:19 pm

Dr. Tact wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 4:11 pm https://www.theeagleonline.com/article/ ... ve-players

Wow

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:55 am Most likely in D!, but there are so many programs that need coaches at every level wouldn't be surprised that she has another coaching job in a few years. As I read the article my thought was that she what she intended to do - reduce roster size by cutting players who clearly were never going to play was certainly within her rights and every coaches rights - she just went about it in the worse possible way given her lack of experience and then when the retaliation came from the kids/parents the AD and others who supposedly supported her actions scattered.

Will be very interesting to see how her lawsuit (when she files it) plays out.

And by the way, AU was off to a 7-0 start and had 2 of the top scorers in D1 (yeah I know, against a weak schedule, but you still have to put the ball in the net). Dr. not sure if you saw the VA attacker play in HS, but she is a very nice player.

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:55 am And by the way, AU was off to a 7-0 start and had 2 of the top scorers in D1 (yeah I know, against a weak schedule, but you still have to put the ball in the net). Dr. not sure if you saw the VA attacker play in HS, but she is a very nice player.

laxfan22 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:01 am

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:55 am Most likely in D!, but there are so many programs that need coaches at every level wouldn't be surprised that she has another coaching job in a few years. As I read the article my thought was that she what she intended to do - reduce roster size by cutting players who clearly were never going to play was certainly within her rights and every coaches rights - she just went about it in the worse possible way given her lack of experience and then when the retaliation came from the kids/parents the AD and others who supposedly supported her actions scattered.

Will be very interesting to see how her lawsuit (when she files it) plays out.

And by the way, AU was off to a 7-0 start and had 2 of the top scorers in D1 (yeah I know, against a weak schedule, but you still have to put the ball in the net). Dr. not sure if you saw the VA attacker play in HS, but she is a very nice player.

It sounds like she wasn't just trying to reduce the roster size, she was focusing on girls that were getting scholarship money - certainly there were girls on the roster who were getting no scholarship money. I'm not sure it would be much better but she could have sought to take away the scholarship money and allowed them to be on the team, no? Seems pretty harsh to have girls in your program who are doing what they are supposed to do and just not be "good enough" and then basically cut them. How common is that?

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:21 am

laxfan22 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:01 am

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:55 am Most likely in D!, but there are so many programs that need coaches at every level wouldn't be surprised that she has another coaching job in a few years. As I read the article my thought was that she what she intended to do - reduce roster size by cutting players who clearly were never going to play was certainly within her rights and every coaches rights - she just went about it in the worse possible way given her lack of experience and then when the retaliation came from the kids/parents the AD and others who supposedly supported her actions scattered.

Will be very interesting to see how her lawsuit (when she files it) plays out.

And by the way, AU was off to a 7-0 start and had 2 of the top scorers in D1 (yeah I know, against a weak schedule, but you still have to put the ball in the net). Dr. not sure if you saw the VA attacker play in HS, but she is a very nice player.

It sounds like she wasn't just trying to reduce the roster size, she was focusing on girls that were getting scholarship money - certainly there were girls on the roster who were getting no scholarship money. I'm not sure it would be much better but she could have sought to take away the scholarship money and allowed them to be on the team, no? Seems pretty harsh to have girls in your program who are doing what they are supposed to do and just not be "good enough" and then basically cut them. How common is that?

Not to sound harsh - but new coach = new rules and yes, cutting roster spots does free up scholarship money which is within coaches rights. I would guess the majority of schools have these discussions, I know ours does. This coach wanted to improve the performance of a mid to low tier program and you do that by improving the caliber of recruits (may need to offer higher % of scholarhip), increasing # reps and quality of reps in practice, etc. Again, her intentions were ok, but she did it in the worse possible way.

Think about college football and all the cuts and transfers in those programs - those exact same conversations happen all the time. We can't treat men's & women's sports differently. Not condoning her methods & delivery, just that she had the right to cut spots on roster, which would free up scholarship $ and improve quality of play

Downhill Dodger wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2020 1:22 pm

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:21 am

laxfan22 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 11:01 am

8meterPA wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 10:55 am Most likely in D!, but there are so many programs that need coaches at every level wouldn't be surprised that she has another coaching job in a few years. As I read the article my thought was that she what she intended to do - reduce roster size by cutting players who clearly were never going to play was certainly within her rights and every coaches rights - she just went about it in the worse possible way given her lack of experience and then when the retaliation came from the kids/parents the AD and others who supposedly supported her actions scattered.

Will be very interesting to see how her lawsuit (when she files it) plays out.

And by the way, AU was off to a 7-0 start and had 2 of the top scorers in D1 (yeah I know, against a weak schedule, but you still have to put the ball in the net). Dr. not sure if you saw the VA attacker play in HS, but she is a very nice player.

It sounds like she wasn't just trying to reduce the roster size, she was focusing on girls that were getting scholarship money - certainly there were girls on the roster who were getting no scholarship money. I'm not sure it would be much better but she could have sought to take away the scholarship money and allowed them to be on the team, no? Seems pretty harsh to have girls in your program who are doing what they are supposed to do and just not be "good enough" and then basically cut them. How common is that?

Not to sound harsh - but new coach = new rules and yes, cutting roster spots does free up scholarship money which is within coaches rights. I would guess the majority of schools have these discussions, I know ours does. This coach wanted to improve the performance of a mid to low tier program and you do that by improving the caliber of recruits (may need to offer higher % of scholarhip), increasing # reps and quality of reps in practice, etc. Again, her intentions were ok, but she did it in the worse possible way.

Think about college football and all the cuts and transfers in those programs - those exact same conversations happen all the time. We can't treat men's & women's sports differently. Not condoning her methods & delivery, just that she had the right to cut spots on roster, which would free up scholarship $ and improve quality of play

8 meter from my understanding this article is just the tip of the iceberg to what went on. The coach was fired after a full university investigation that included multiple sources of complaints, not just the freshman girls affected. Athletics did not run the investigation and from what I have heard actually tried to cover things up. If the coach had a case she would sue the university, which she has not to date. From what I have heard is that there were multiple items of toxic and mentally abusive/ bullying behavior by this head coach y all levels of the team who played under her. The coach has a checked past with incidents at Mary Washington and Bucknell acording to players there at the time so this is not an isolated case. Shame on AU for not doing their diligence in the hiring process
The thing that baffles me even more is who a club like DEWLAX could hire her to work with young women as a “sports performance and player development” consultant knowing that she was removed for violations of university policy and accusations, obviously confirmed, of unacceptable behavior. That is outright negligent on their behalf

To put it in perspective one person who was close to the situation was asked “how does this compare to what went on at Louisville?” The answer was in their opinion “worse”

LaxPundit07 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:30 am That article and the issues discussed in the article left me thinking one of two things is happening:

1. We aren’t getting the whole story. A coach can’t be fired (and the athletic administration immune) if the coach carried out actions directly approved by their bosses. So clearly there must be more to this to justify the firing

OR

2. This is the whole story and American should be prepared to pay out this coach a big settlement. They won’t go to trial if the coach sues. Discovery process can be embarrassing for the university particularly if there is evidence they supported the coach and then fired her explicitly for the actions they supported.