Do losing coaches of struggling programs ever get fired?

[TorreyCA]

I was wondering about everyone's take on this. At what point does an athletic administration start to look at replacing a coaching staff/Head coach. Does athletic departments care about team success, especially if that entire program has aspirations of moving into a new power 5 conference and the lacrosse team is the only team that will compete in that conference in the next year? Or do they care that they don't have any headaches such as improper conduct or bullying by the staff and that as long as the athletic dept doesn't have a headache they don't care what happens on the field (though this is starting to change as the coach has encouraged/told the girls to drink/get drunk and to be sexually promiscuous after a recent loss).

The coach has only had 2-3 winning season since starting the program and hasn't had a winning season since 2018 or 19, and has gotten progressively worse after the conference they were in collapsed (hate to say this but since she married and started a family she began her downward slide). She had a key offensive coach and recruiter with a famous lacrosse name leave and take some recruits with her to her new school (the head coach sent out a pretty poorly worded text to the remaining commits chastising them). It seems that many current families are upset with the situation, and were not shy in sharing at a recent game that was highly promoted to the outside lacrosse community in the area.

[hmmm]

I was wondering about everyone's take on this. At what point does an athletic administration start to look at replacing a coaching staff/Head coach. Does athletic departments care about team success, especially if that entire program has aspirations of moving into a new power 5 conference and the lacrosse team is the only team that will compete in that conference in the next year? Or do they care that they don't have any headaches such as improper conduct or bullying by the staff and that as long as the athletic dept doesn't have a headache they don't care what happens on the field (though this is starting to change as the coach has encouraged/told the girls to drink/get drunk and to be sexually promiscuous after a recent loss).

The coach has only had 2-3 winning season since starting the program and hasn't had a winning season since 2018 or 19, and has gotten progressively worse after the conference they were in collapsed (hate to say this but since she married and started a family she began her downward slide). She had a key offensive coach and recruiter with a famous lacrosse name leave and take some recruits with her to her new school (the head coach sent out a pretty poorly worded text to the remaining commits chastising them). It seems that many current families are upset with the situation, and were not shy in sharing at a recent game that was highly promoted to the outside lacrosse community in the area.

It's pretty obvious who you are talking about so why not just say it? I believe moving to the Big-12 may help them recruit a little. Sadly, the answer to your question in many cases is that as long as there have been no real off field transgressions that have caused embarrassment to the university, school's can be very slow to make changes in a sport like wlax. I know a couple families who have had daughters play there recently and they had good experiences. Maybe they take the new start in the Big-12 as an opportunity to start fresh considering the struggles since 2019?

[laxfan9999]

It usually depends on the contract especially for a non-revenue sport like women's lacrosse. I think the coach you are referencing signed a 5 year contract extension in 2021 which takes her through 2026. Most schools aren't going to buyout that many years on a deal in a sport like lacrosse.

[TorreyCA]

I figured people that it was relevant to would figure who I was referencing. We have followed the program for several years, and also know some families involved with the program, my girls have attended some of their clinics and everyone seems nice enough. As such I was surprised to hear recent negativity, and so outwardly.

But we have never seen a girl improve when they played there. I can’t see how they will be able to recruit or draw any quality players for any reason other than the school is a nice place to go new conference or not. Any recruits who were at their last game were surely scared away. I know it has led to our family and other people we were there with to ask a lot of questions.

[hmmm]

I figured people that it was relevant to would figure who I was referencing. We have followed the program for several years, and also know some families involved with the program, my girls have attended some of their clinics and everyone seems nice enough. As such I was surprised to hear recent negativity, and so outwardly.

But we have never seen a girl improve when they played there. I can’t see how they will be able to recruit or draw any quality players for any reason other than the school is a nice place to go new conference or not. Any recruits who were at their last game were surely scared away. I know it has led to our family and other people we were there with to ask a lot of questions.

It's more appealing in the Big 12 for a couple reasons. The first being that previously there was no real path to even making the NCAA tournament playing outside a conference. Joining the Pac-12 was supposed to solve that and with the collapse of that conference the move to the Big-12 makes sense. SDSU was, in its current form, not good enough to get an at large bid. So, joining a conference with an AQ is the proper step to take. Of course, SDSU is still probably at the bottom of the Big-12 but it's a move in the right direction.

Throw in that lots of girls may be interested in spending 4 years in San Diego and playing in a conference with Florida, Colorado, ASU, Cincinnati it can definitely be an appealing option. Currently, SDSU is just a lacrosse outpost in a beautiful city. The move brings some legitimacy to the program. Same can be said for UC Davis which is a fantastic school academically but was behind the 8 ball on recruiting without a conference.

[LaxDadMax]

Something to remember is that most coaches outside the top 30 or so don't have contracts for more than a year and many (especially those on bottom half teams) don't have contracts at all.

(These coaches are employed at will like a majority of the folks on this message board are.)

Very often, coaches just aren't renewed and the program moves on.

To be fair, ADs are looking for these besides wins for non-revenue sports. But it is much easier for an AD to move on in a majority of cases.

[TorreyCA]

I figured people that it was relevant to would figure who I was referencing. We have followed the program for several years, and also know some families involved with the program, my girls have attended some of their clinics and everyone seems nice enough. As such I was surprised to hear recent negativity, and so outwardly.

But we have never seen a girl improve when they played there. I can’t see how they will be able to recruit or draw any quality players for any reason other than the school is a nice place to go new conference or not. Any recruits who were at their last game were surely scared away. I know it has led to our family and other people we were there with to ask a lot of questions.

It's more appealing in the Big 12 for a couple reasons. The first being that previously there was no real path to even making the NCAA tournament playing outside a conference. Joining the Pac-12 was supposed to solve that and with the collapse of that conference the move to the Big-12 makes sense. SDSU was, in its current form, not good enough to get an at large bid. So, joining a conference with an AQ is the proper step to take. Of course, SDSU is still probably at the bottom of the Big-12 but it's a move in the right direction.

Throw in that lots of girls may be interested in spending 4 years in San Diego and playing in a conference with Florida, Colorado, ASU, Cincinnati it can definitely be an appealing option. Currently, SDSU is just a lacrosse outpost in a beautiful city. The move brings some legitimacy to the program. Same can be said for UC Davis which is a fantastic school academically but was behind the 8 ball on recruiting without a conference.

Thank you for your insight. Much appreciated. I am still hung up on the coaching, can't see why anyone would want to be a part of that unless they don't have any other options. IMO coaching culture is so important, and it looks like this coach doesn't know how to win. This school could have so ,much potential especially with the popularity of the sport growing in SoCal. If they had a better coaching staff the thing would be a homerun. Fortunately our friends have other options.

[hmmm]

I figured people that it was relevant to would figure who I was referencing. We have followed the program for several years, and also know some families involved with the program, my girls have attended some of their clinics and everyone seems nice enough. As such I was surprised to hear recent negativity, and so outwardly.

But we have never seen a girl improve when they played there. I can’t see how they will be able to recruit or draw any quality players for any reason other than the school is a nice place to go new conference or not. Any recruits who were at their last game were surely scared away. I know it has led to our family and other people we were there with to ask a lot of questions.

It's more appealing in the Big 12 for a couple reasons. The first being that previously there was no real path to even making the NCAA tournament playing outside a conference. Joining the Pac-12 was supposed to solve that and with the collapse of that conference the move to the Big-12 makes sense. SDSU was, in its current form, not good enough to get an at large bid. So, joining a conference with an AQ is the proper step to take. Of course, SDSU is still probably at the bottom of the Big-12 but it's a move in the right direction.

Throw in that lots of girls may be interested in spending 4 years in San Diego and playing in a conference with Florida, Colorado, ASU, Cincinnati it can definitely be an appealing option. Currently, SDSU is just a lacrosse outpost in a beautiful city. The move brings some legitimacy to the program. Same can be said for UC Davis which is a fantastic school academically but was behind the 8 ball on recruiting without a conference.

Thank you for your insight. Much appreciated. I am still hung up on the coaching, can't see why anyone would want to be a part of that unless they don't have any other options. IMO coaching culture is so important, and it looks like this coach doesn't know how to win. This school could have so ,much potential especially with the popularity of the sport growing in SoCal. If they had a better coaching staff the thing would be a homerun. Fortunately our friends have other options.

If the team is truly being encouraged to drink and be promiscuous as part of overall team culture that needs to be brought to the attention of the AD and addressed. But, I assume this was more of an off the cuff remark after a loss to go out and blow off some steam and get drunk and get laid or something? While not something that a coach should probably be saying to a team, they are adults and college locker rooms are certainly not a PG rated environment. I've never really heard any bad things about the culture there, but at some point the AD will decide if it's time to move in a new direction because of the struggles on the field.

[25and32LaxDad]

I figured people that it was relevant to would figure who I was referencing. We have followed the program for several years, and also know some families involved with the program, my girls have attended some of their clinics and everyone seems nice enough. As such I was surprised to hear recent negativity, and so outwardly.

But we have never seen a girl improve when they played there. I can’t see how they will be able to recruit or draw any quality players for any reason other than the school is a nice place to go new conference or not. Any recruits who were at their last game were surely scared away. I know it has led to our family and other people we were there with to ask a lot of questions.

It's more appealing in the Big 12 for a couple reasons. The first being that previously there was no real path to even making the NCAA tournament playing outside a conference. Joining the Pac-12 was supposed to solve that and with the collapse of that conference the move to the Big-12 makes sense. SDSU was, in its current form, not good enough to get an at large bid. So, joining a conference with an AQ is the proper step to take. Of course, SDSU is still probably at the bottom of the Big-12 but it's a move in the right direction.

Throw in that lots of girls may be interested in spending 4 years in San Diego and playing in a conference with Florida, Colorado, ASU, Cincinnati it can definitely be an appealing option. Currently, SDSU is just a lacrosse outpost in a beautiful city. The move brings some legitimacy to the program. Same can be said for UC Davis which is a fantastic school academically but was behind the 8 ball on recruiting without a conference.

Thank you for your insight. Much appreciated. I am still hung up on the coaching, can't see why anyone would want to be a part of that unless they don't have any other options. IMO coaching culture is so important, and it looks like this coach doesn't know how to win. This school could have so ,much potential especially with the popularity of the sport growing in SoCal. If they had a better coaching staff the thing would be a homerun. Fortunately our friends have other options.

Only one socal club is really connected to SDSU and funnels girls to them. The rest of the clubs have enough connections to broadcast their players across the country. White and her crew are very nice coaches but what a rough season so far in terms of results.

As far as SDSU the school, the campus is not in the nicest of areas within San Diego county but it is about 12 miles from the coast which is a huge draw for any kid not local. The campus is large but compare it to any other large school with a lax program and it will probably lose on everything other than it is in Socal. My daughter likes the coaches but after visiting the campus multiple times, wrote it off because she didnt like anything about it (and we live in San Diego).

I was at the game on Sunday and was surprised SDSU hung with ASU for the first half. SDSU probably doesnt win more than 1 more game this year. I was also surprised how little green cards were handed out during that game.

[LaxDadMax]

I was wondering about everyone's take on this. At what point does an athletic administration start to look at replacing a coaching staff/Head coach. Does athletic departments care about team success, especially if that entire program has aspirations of moving into a new power 5 conference and the lacrosse team is the only team that will compete in that conference in the next year? Or do they care that they don't have any headaches such as improper conduct or bullying by the staff and that as long as the athletic dept doesn't have a headache they don't care what happens on the field (though this is starting to change as the coach has encouraged/told the girls to drink/get drunk and to be sexually promiscuous after a recent loss).

The coach has only had 2-3 winning season since starting the program and hasn't had a winning season since 2018 or 19, and has gotten progressively worse after the conference they were in collapsed (hate to say this but since she married and started a family she began her downward slide). She had a key offensive coach and recruiter with a famous lacrosse name leave and take some recruits with her to her new school (the head coach sent out a pretty poorly worded text to the remaining commits chastising them). It seems that many current families are upset with the situation, and were not shy in sharing at a recent game that was highly promoted to the outside lacrosse community in the area.

It's pretty obvious who you are talking about so why not just say it? I believe moving to the Big-12 may help them recruit a little. Sadly, the answer to your question in many cases is that as long as there have been no real off field transgressions that have caused embarrassment to the university, school's can be very slow to make changes in a sport like wlax. I know a couple families who have had daughters play there recently and they had good experiences. Maybe they take the new start in the Big-12 as an opportunity to start fresh considering the struggles since 2019?

Help me out... which program are you talking about?

[wlaxphan20]

I was wondering about everyone's take on this. At what point does an athletic administration start to look at replacing a coaching staff/Head coach. Does athletic departments care about team success, especially if that entire program has aspirations of moving into a new power 5 conference and the lacrosse team is the only team that will compete in that conference in the next year? Or do they care that they don't have any headaches such as improper conduct or bullying by the staff and that as long as the athletic dept doesn't have a headache they don't care what happens on the field (though this is starting to change as the coach has encouraged/told the girls to drink/get drunk and to be sexually promiscuous after a recent loss).

The coach has only had 2-3 winning season since starting the program and hasn't had a winning season since 2018 or 19, and has gotten progressively worse after the conference they were in collapsed (hate to say this but since she married and started a family she began her downward slide). She had a key offensive coach and recruiter with a famous lacrosse name leave and take some recruits with her to her new school (the head coach sent out a pretty poorly worded text to the remaining commits chastising them). It seems that many current families are upset with the situation, and were not shy in sharing at a recent game that was highly promoted to the outside lacrosse community in the area.

It's pretty obvious who you are talking about so why not just say it? I believe moving to the Big-12 may help them recruit a little. Sadly, the answer to your question in many cases is that as long as there have been no real off field transgressions that have caused embarrassment to the university, school's can be very slow to make changes in a sport like wlax. I know a couple families who have had daughters play there recently and they had good experiences. Maybe they take the new start in the Big-12 as an opportunity to start fresh considering the struggles since 2019?

Help me out... which program are you talking about?

Based on the description it has to be SDSU. They’re the only team going to the Big 12 that hasn’t had a winning season since 2019.

[25and32LaxDad]

"She had a key offensive coach and recruiter with a famous lacrosse name leave" Went to Brown..

[TorreyCA]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

[hmmm]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

Depending on the parents you sit behind at any D1 game you may hear similar things.

[watcherinthewoods]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

Depending on the parents you sit behind at any D1 game you may hear similar things.

I would argue that any coach who lacks the ability to make every player on their roster feel like they are valued, regardless of role, is a coach who is not doing their job. But what you describe happens all the time. It is bad leadership and bad coaching and all too common, IMO.

[hmmm]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

Depending on the parents you sit behind at any D1 game you may hear similar things.

I would argue that any coach who lacks the ability to make every player on their roster feel like they are valued, regardless of role, is a coach who is not doing their job. But what you describe happens all the time. It is bad leadership and bad coaching and all too common, IMO.

I would argue that even on teams with what most would consider great coaches, there will always be players on the roster that don't feel they are valued. But even more so, you'll find parents that don't feel their child is being valued. So hearing reports of parents saying things like this is not surprising at all and as I said, you'd probably hear in the stands in just about every D1 lax game depending on which parents you were sitting behind.

[LaxDadMax]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

I can speak as the parent of 20 and 23.

At both programs (one Big 10, one Patriot League), everyone participated in skill work (though starters got more reps).

In 7v7 play, which is a majority of practice as the season went on, there were generally 2 fields going one offense/one defense. Usually 9/10 girls getting reps on both sides of the ball and the rest watching/ playing scout team. (Some 2-way player would switch and get reps on both ends). One coach made sure everyone on the team was engaged and prepared during film sessions, the other not so much.

At the Patriot school, sometimes you would only run one field since numbers were lower and a few injuries could impact practice. This is why most coaches know they need at least 40 on a roster.

[hmmm]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

I can speak as the parent of 20 and 23.

At both programs (one Big 10, one Patriot League), everyone participated in skill work (though starters got more reps).

In 7v7 play, which is a majority of practice as the season went on, there were generally 2 fields going one offense/one defense. Usually 9/10 girls getting reps on both sides of the ball and the rest watching/ playing scout team. (Some 2-way player would switch and get reps on both ends). One coach made sure everyone on the team was engaged and prepared during film sessions, the other not so much.

At the Patriot school, sometimes you would only run one field since numbers were lower and a few injuries could impact practice. This is why most coaches know they need at least 40 on a roster.

I'm not disagreeing with you. But perception and reality are not usually the same when it comes to parents......

[LaxDadMax]

Well obviously SDSU. While at the Game at Snapdragon we got quite an earful listening to a few of the families we sat behind. We learned a lot being a fly on the wall. They were grumbling because the coaches don’t allow more than half the team to participate in anything more than just drills in practice, and only allow the 11-12 starters play the most of practice in a scrimmage while the rest of the team sits and watches, they also said she will play girls because they are graduate students and seniors over more deserving players (take that with a grain of salt, I am sure) she does this all season long they were saying. Is that how all Div 1 programs run?

I can speak as the parent of 20 and 23.

At both programs (one Big 10, one Patriot League), everyone participated in skill work (though starters got more reps).

In 7v7 play, which is a majority of practice as the season went on, there were generally 2 fields going one offense/one defense. Usually 9/10 girls getting reps on both sides of the ball and the rest watching/ playing scout team. (Some 2-way player would switch and get reps on both ends). One coach made sure everyone on the team was engaged and prepared during film sessions, the other not so much.

At the Patriot school, sometimes you would only run one field since numbers were lower and a few injuries could impact practice. This is why most coaches know they need at least 40 on a roster.

I'm not disagreeing with you. But perception and reality are not usually the same when it comes to parents......

Speaking specifically to the big 10 example. On my daughter's team, post-fall ball, generally 18 or 19 field players got first team reps on a team of 36-40 field players. And generally, 14 field players were in the rotation and 1 or 2 would play only on man-up/man-down.

So that leaves 25 kids likely potentially unhappy and feeling like they don't get a fair shake.

[ProudPapa]

AD’s at big schools have much bigger issues than women’s lacrosse. If the coach is winning more than 50% of their games, graduating their players at a high rate, and avoiding press that would hurt the schools image, they are basically bulletproof.

At small schools it is probably easier to catch the attention of the AD, as they don't have big $ football teams, tv contracts, and shoe company contracts monopolizing their time.