MBB: Colonial States Athletic Conference

[lefty2]

Pat,

The schedule is right.  My point was that our coach didn't determine the schedule.

Scott

[Coach C]

Scott,

Who schedlued the games if not the coach?  The AD?  Dave Martin was a pretty good coach in his day.  I am not sure he would have done that if there were any other way to make the schedule.  Sometimes if you want to play a particular team, you have to make some accomodations.

The wost schedulin move I have seen this year is where the guy  at Cabrini scheduled his team to play a game during finals knowing it was likely he would be missing some players.  Brilliant!

C

[lefty2]

The schedule was determined by King's - the host of the tournament.

My post was in reply to Coach K stating that Misericordia's coach appeared to have committed scheduling suicide.

The point was that Misericordia didn't set the game times.

[Pat Coleman]

Pat,

The schedule is right.  My point was that our coach didn't determine the schedule.

Scott

Gotcha -- but as you saw, your post was construed as saying our schedule was wrong. Word choice is important.

[r.w. mcnickels]

Scott,

Who schedlued the games if not the coach?  The AD?  Dave Martin was a pretty good coach in his day.  I am not sure he would have done that if there were any other way to make the schedule.  Sometimes if you want to play a particular team, you have to make some accomodations.

C

Do you think Dave Martin will move back into the coaching ranks someday?

[Coach C]

RW -

I know that Coach Martin has a young family the he correctly puts first in his life.  While he is certainly capable of coahing again, I am not sure you will see that hapen any time soon.

C

[Leo]

Is anyone covering the game tonight against Ursinus @ King's. Thank you.

[lefty2]

Ursins plays Wilkes tonight at King's.

[chizwiz]

GMC loses 44-66 to North Central today in Orlando.  Three starters on GMC held scoreless!

[Coach C]

Maybe not as gly as losing by 50 in your oprning game and giving up 250 points in two games, but pretty poor overall.  This league is near the bottom in the contry at this point.

ntil the schools get serious about the programs, results likt this will pile up.

C

[Coach K]

Coach C,

Unfortunately, after seeing the results compared to other leagues and non conference games, I almost have to agree with you. Early on in the season I thought the conference was making the jump, but now they are something like 17-38 overall nonleague.

[chairman]

A loss to a strong CCIW team is nothing to panic about, but a 22 point differential does make it seem like the Griffins were never in the game. It is interesting to take this current stream and compare it to earlier discussions about part-time coaches. I would argue that conferences with higher percentages of full time coaches are going to be at the top of the country, and it only follows that leagues with fewer full time coaches are going to struggle to compete on a national scale. I am not sure whether this would be a direct correlation to the ability of coaches to be around their athletes or if it is indicative of schools' commitment to athletic programs as part of the educational process.

It is a discussion worth having, and I am sure that many of the schools in the league are having it, but the part time status of men's basketball coaches is only the tip of the iceberg as most of the coaches in other sports are part time as well. Not sure there is an easy answer given the cost of hiring full time coaches. It would be interesting to survey the top 25 over the past ten years to see how many were coached by part timers. I don't have time to do it, but maybe someone has done this or something like this and could report.

[WolfPAC]

A loss to a strong CCIW team is nothing to panic about, but a 22 point differential does make it seem like the Griffins were never in the game. It is interesting to take this current stream and compare it to earlier discussions about part-time coaches. I would argue that conferences with higher percentages of full time coaches are going to be at the top of the country, and it only follows that leagues with fewer full time coaches are going to struggle to compete on a national scale. I am not sure whether this would be a direct correlation to the ability of coaches to be around their athletes or if it is indicative of schools' commitment to athletic programs as part of the educational process.

It is a discussion worth having, and I am sure that many of the schools in the league are having it, but the part time status of men's basketball coaches is only the tip of the iceberg as most of the coaches in other sports are part time as well. Not sure there is an easy answer given the cost of hiring full time coaches. It would be interesting to survey the top 25 over the past ten years to see how many were coached by part timers. I don't have time to do it, but maybe someone has done this or something like this and could report.

Sounds like a repeat of institutional neglect once again!  Dollars and cents! Not dollars and a sense of what it takes to win which will bring in the dollars and cents.

The PAC is heading down a dangerous road.  Dzik was a prime example of the administration of  an institution sticking to the mission of education only without regards to winning or recruiting.  Pathetic thing about it is the kids under Dzik learned more about life and became successful financially as well upon graduation. 

Would it make sense for some institutions to drop out of the PAC and go to NAIA or Dii in order to get dollars for a school who appreciates student athletes to a higher degree.

The level of play in the PAC is getting more difficult to watch even with the talent because the conference cannot get over the hump.  Without a full-time coach on campus it is not the same level of committment to the students.  Having a full-time person benefits the students who pay the dollars to come to the school.  Everyone wins! !

Sad to say.... those poor part timers who are coaches do care enough to volunteer their time to help their programs.  The colleges still are using them for smart business decisions in terms of dollars.  The colleges know how committed these sports minded people are and know they can get someone to coach full time with part-time pay because these individuals possess passion.

Again.. the institutions use and milk out of the passionate people what they can without regard for winning from their perspective.  This is a disturbing trend with some legendary coaches leaving with their credentials.  On top of it all, the colleges always have someone such as a player trying to establish his or her career step right in to learn for free using them up until a change a business decision occurs.  The institutions are benefitting from using the athletes credentials unlike non-PAC d3 schools.  The family atmosphere just is not there anymore often enough.

Ultimately, with a winning program, the alumni and the families of the athletes develop traditions with  more dollars and future students wanting to tour the schools.  Sad to say, the PAC is losing my interest quickly. No one probably cares though.

[chairman]

WolfPac--

Are you looking at coaches who use PAC jobs as stepping stones to better jobs, or players who use PAC playing experience to find an opportunity to play at a higher level. As near as I can tell there are very few PAC coaches who have advanced into better basketball jobs. It seems that they either move into administrative roles, (Martin, McCloskey, and Dzik [albeit under different circumstances] or leave coaching.)

As PAC schools are tuition driven institutions, they have to make the bottom line match up from year to year. That makes fully funding an athletic program with full time coaches a problem. I don't know what the answer is, but as soon as a school hires a full time men's coach, they will have to hire a full time women's coach as well. Add this to the fact that many of the schools in the PAC have rich traditions in other sports that are managed by people who coach in a part time role, and you are going to have to make those people full time as well. That adds up to a very big expense. On the surface it might look like just another $30,000 annually to pay the basketball coach, but it can quickly turn into an additional six figures annually.

Your statement that it makes long term sense to mentor student athletes in their development through athletics is completely accurate. Who is more likely to contribute financially to an institution, a student athlete who flourished in the classroom and on the court under the mentorship of a caring and available coach or a student-athlete who floundered without the guidance of a coach who could commit to his or her development? Further, one could extend the argument when looking at schools that produce coaches and teachers. I am sure that guys who played for Dzik and became high school coaches encouraged their players to look at Cabrini. At $33K per year, it doesn't take too many of those to grow both tuition dollars and development monies. It's derivative math, but it works.

I don't think that winning is the only rationale for full time coaches. It might in fact be the  weakest argument. On the other hand, it also seems likely that there is a correlation on the winning front.

[chairman]

To continue, I also think it is fairly impressive to see the time commitment put in by PAC coaches who are paid as part-time employees or who have other major institutional responsibilities and would love to see alums from the various schools and programs "pony-up" to make it possible for these programs to go to full time coaches. Merry Christmas to all.