2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only" - Page 5 - TennisForum.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 06:25 AM
Le Conte's Sparrow
 
fantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 11,255
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

maybe 'pathetic' was a strong word

but 2ndserve, I think Amal is better than Amal'gate'
fantic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 06:29 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 405
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
Yes those are all possibilities but trust me, if a girl is a good enough player the coach will find a way to help her overcome those things. These coaches get paid to win. They aren't going to bend over backwards to get a girl to sign and then bail out on her at the first sign of trouble.

We would really need to know someone closer to the story, but even without the facts, I would be willing to make a large wager that she was either not very dedicated to tennis, not quite good enough, or both.

As far as the thread talking about coaches, that would be an interesting topic and you should start it. It would be much more interesting than "21 year-old freshmen", "100% foreign", and some of the other pathetic threads on here.
"We would really need to know someone closer to the story, but even without the facts, I would be willing to make a large wager that she was either not very dedicated to tennis, not quite good enough, or both."

First you say you need to know someone that knows more and then you turn around and rip her! Pretty tacky!
johnnytennis is offline  
post #63 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 06:30 AM
Senior Member
 
2nd_serve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,248
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by fantic View Post
maybe 'pathetic' was a strong word

but 2ndserve, I think Amal is better than Amal'gate'
Thanks Fantic, I've warned that I sometimes make typos and misspell. So I fixed it now.
2nd_serve is offline  
post #64 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 11:23 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
It would be much more interesting than "21 year-old freshmen", "100% foreign", and some of the other pathetic threads on here.
The "17 & 21 year old freshmen" thread on average is one of the top 5 mostly viewed threads on our board.
NUMBERS DON'T LIE!


If you take "the no. of views" and divide by "the no. of replies + 1" (to include the original post) this gives you a good idea of the "average number of people viewing per post on a given thread.".

Roughly here are the top 6 mostly viewed threads.

6. 2012-13 verbals, high interest & transfers = 110 avg. views
- (just 1 ex. from thread series)

5. Coaching changes = 113 avg. views

4. 17 & 21 year old freshmen = 116 avg. views

3. 2012-13 recruiting - "speculation only" = 127 avg. views
- Everyone wants inside info. (just 1 ex. from thread series)

2. Who will get fired? = 153 avg. views
- Accurately predicts that someone unknown will lose their scholarship on a team.

1.
- Board's hidden gem.


The popularity of "Teams with 100% foreign players" thread is yet to be determined. There are only 2 teams included with much more to be added over the summer.


The bottom line is the 2 threads are clearly named. If you don't like them, stop whining and just don't read it.

Last edited by gouci; Jun 9th, 2011 at 11:29 AM.
gouci is offline  
post #65 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 11:28 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Independent Isle
Posts: 7,027
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by gouci View Post
The "17 & 21 year old freshmen" thread on average is one of the top 5 mostly viewed threads on our board.
NUMBERS DON'T LIE!


If you take "the no. of views" and divide by "the no. of replies + 1" (to include the original post) this gives you a good idea of the "average number of people viewing per post on a given thread.".

Roughly here are the top 6 mostly viewed threads.

6. 2012-13 verbals, high interest & transfers = 110 avg. views

5. Coaching changes = 113 avg. views

4. 17 & 21 year old freshmen = 116 avg. views

3. 2012-13 recruiting - "speculation only" = 127 avg. views
- Everyone wants inside info.

2. Who will get fired? = 153 avg. views
- Accurately predicts that someone unknown will lose their scholarship on a team.

1.
- Board's hidden gem.


The popularity of "Teams with 100% foreign players" thread is yet to be determined. There are only 2 teams included with much more to be added over the summer.


The bottom line is the 2 threads are clearly named. If you don't like them, stop whining and just don't read it.
Just because I do measurements for a living...don't you need to factor how long the thread has existed as well?
Tennisace is offline  
post #66 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 11:45 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Not really. The "Pac-10" thread for example was started in Dec. 2009 and it only averages 36 views per post. There's a big gap between the series of threads mostly viewed and everything else.

The majority of people who view this board are guests. The threads they like to view are not necessarily the same as the threads the regulars on this board like to post on.

A few times a year I'll check the avg. number of views out of curiosity and for those 5 listed and roughly they pretty much have stayed constant. Except the 2012-13 threads have heated up since that's what's in season for recruiting.
gouci is offline  
post #67 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 02:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 280
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Yes you're right Pathetic is too strong of a word. I should have said "threads with agendas", which is more accurate. I believe GOUCI starts these threads to highlight how great UCI is, what with their all-American team full of appropriately aged girls. It thinks that it can make its own candle burn brighter by blowing out the ones around it.

As far as the comment on the girl transferring from UVA, the part you consider "ripping" is my opinion. The disclaimer is because I have no idea if my opinion is accurate and I didn't want to insinuate that my opinion was based on anything other than speculation. Opinions are what these boards are about, or so I thought.
10sE is offline  
post #68 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 03:48 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
Yes you're right Pathetic is too strong of a word. I should have said "threads with agendas", which is more accurate. I believe GOUCI starts these threads to highlight how great UCI is, what with their all-American team full of appropriately aged girls. It thinks that it can make its own candle burn brighter by blowing out the ones around it.

As far as the comment on the girl transferring from UVA, the part you consider "ripping" is my opinion. The disclaimer is because I have no idea if my opinion is accurate and I didn't want to insinuate that my opinion was based on anything other than speculation. Opinions are what these boards are about, or so I thought.

Agenda is great word

As far as the UVA thing and coaches, it is so hard to analyze coaches depending on the situation they are in. The coach at UVA has delivered whereever he has been so I applaud him. Clearly there is high expectation but also very high skill level needed. Whether it is skill or culture, if the young lady is not playing or uncomfortable how can you fault either party.

Having said that, I think there are a variety of reasons for transfers:
a) Coach with high expectation... it is a well paying job for 18-23 year olds
b) Athlete who has achieved goal of getting scholarship but does not desire further pressure
c) Athlete not happy. This is big problem with these really early commits or where so many tennis kids want the big name school. But get there and realize the pressure or their ability just is not the level it takes. May be in line up but their not happy losing a lot.
d) Athlete struggling academically or prefers a better academic opportunity.
e) Athlete is # 7-8 and does not want to sit on the bench (in 95% of cases, I certainly hope so... in other team sports this is the # 1 reason for transfers). No athlete should be satisfied sitting; if they realize they just are not going to be able to break into line up then they should be seeking other options.
f) Program/coach with low expectation and the athlete wants better. Yes, there are a good number of tennis coaches who previously were those local teaching pros. Not much talent and it is an easy pay check.
g) And one reason that really p*sses me off: The int'l athlete that thinks this is a four year vacation and wants to experience several parts of the country. I know of at least one placement firm that sells kids on 'going here and then transfer someplace else so you can experience ...'. This one is just wrong.

I am sure there are more. Is there really a right or wrong... unless there is proven abuse.

That Wisconsin situation seems to encompass so tough coaching, some serious accusations but potentially one or more girls who have failed to meet expectations and are lashing out. Who knows.

Comparing transfers are like comparing coaches. Coaches have so many differenct environments that it's difficult to compare. The Stanford coach does not recruit, she chooses. UCLA, Duke, UNC, Florida have such different levels of resources, ability to attract kids regardless of their own ability and strong cultures where the athletes coming in know what is expected. How do you compare those to mid majors or even the partially funded/no scholarship programs. I guess you look at those that have improved their programs but there is not really an apples to apples comparison between Stanford and # 323.

Having said that, I do raise my own eyebrow when a pattern develops of many transfers out... or many transfers in.

I know of one Pac 10 program right now where I have heard (2nd hand) that multiple other Pac 10 coaches are fed up with one particular program who has an assistant that is constantly trying to get kids to transfer in... either directly or sending his players to do the work. That is wrong. Others have pointed out a couple of Texas schools that have a high pattern of incoming transfers also.

But I will add that it's not just one or two, but a pattern that would make me go hmmmmmmmmm?

Last edited by form; Jun 9th, 2011 at 04:04 PM.
form is offline  
post #69 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 9th, 2011, 05:46 PM
Le Conte's Sparrow
 
fantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 11,255
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post
Agenda is great word

As far as the UVA thing and coaches, it is so hard to analyze coaches depending on the situation they are in. The coach at UVA has delivered whereever he has been so I applaud him. Clearly there is high expectation but also very high skill level needed. Whether it is skill or culture, if the young lady is not playing or uncomfortable how can you fault either party.

Having said that, I think there are a variety of reasons for transfers:
a) Coach with high expectation... it is a well paying job for 18-23 year olds
b) Athlete who has achieved goal of getting scholarship but does not desire further pressure
c) Athlete not happy. This is big problem with these really early commits or where so many tennis kids want the big name school. But get there and realize the pressure or their ability just is not the level it takes. May be in line up but their not happy losing a lot.
d) Athlete struggling academically or prefers a better academic opportunity.
e) Athlete is # 7-8 and does not want to sit on the bench (in 95% of cases, I certainly hope so... in other team sports this is the # 1 reason for transfers). No athlete should be satisfied sitting; if they realize they just are not going to be able to break into line up then they should be seeking other options.
f) Program/coach with low expectation and the athlete wants better. Yes, there are a good number of tennis coaches who previously were those local teaching pros. Not much talent and it is an easy pay check.
g) And one reason that really p*sses me off: The int'l athlete that thinks this is a four year vacation and wants to experience several parts of the country. I know of at least one placement firm that sells kids on 'going here and then transfer someplace else so you can experience ...'. This one is just wrong.

I am sure there are more. Is there really a right or wrong... unless there is proven abuse.

That Wisconsin situation seems to encompass so tough coaching, some serious accusations but potentially one or more girls who have failed to meet expectations and are lashing out. Who knows.

Comparing transfers are like comparing coaches. Coaches have so many differenct environments that it's difficult to compare. The Stanford coach does not recruit, she chooses. UCLA, Duke, UNC, Florida have such different levels of resources, ability to attract kids regardless of their own ability and strong cultures where the athletes coming in know what is expected. How do you compare those to mid majors or even the partially funded/no scholarship programs. I guess you look at those that have improved their programs but there is not really an apples to apples comparison between Stanford and # 323.

Having said that, I do raise my own eyebrow when a pattern develops of many transfers out... or many transfers in.

I know of one Pac 10 program right now where I have heard (2nd hand) that multiple other Pac 10 coaches are fed up with one particular program who has an assistant that is constantly trying to get kids to transfer in... either directly or sending his players to do the work. That is wrong. Others have pointed out a couple of Texas schools that have a high pattern of incoming transfers also.

But I will add that it's not just one or two, but a pattern that would make me go hmmmmmmmmm?
Good post. And I SO agree with the bolded part (which I bolded )
I've been to some junior tourneys, and have NEVER seen STAN coaches. Ever. USC, UCLA, CAL, ASU, MICH, Purdue and etc., but not STAN. Athletes COME to Stanford, so Stanford doesn't need to scout
fantic is offline  
post #70 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 12:33 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 54
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post

Having said that, I think there are a variety of reasons for transfers:
a) Coach with high expectation... it is a well paying job for 18-23 year olds
b) Athlete who has achieved goal of getting scholarship but does not desire further pressure
c) Athlete not happy. This is big problem with these really early commits or where so many tennis kids want the big name school. But get there and realize the pressure or their ability just is not the level it takes. May be in line up but their not happy losing a lot.
d) Athlete struggling academically or prefers a better academic opportunity.
e) Athlete is # 7-8 and does not want to sit on the bench (in 95% of cases, I certainly hope so... in other team sports this is the # 1 reason for transfers). No athlete should be satisfied sitting; if they realize they just are not going to be able to break into line up then they should be seeking other options.
f) Program/coach with low expectation and the athlete wants better. Yes, there are a good number of tennis coaches who previously were those local teaching pros. Not much talent and it is an easy pay check.
g) And one reason that really p*sses me off: The int'l athlete that thinks this is a four year vacation and wants to experience several parts of the country. I know of at least one placement firm that sells kids on 'going here and then transfer someplace else so you can experience ...'. This one is just wrong.

I am sure there are more. Is there really a right or wrong... unless there is proven abuse.
Many of your reasons for transferring are based on the athlete coming up short in some way. I don't necessarily think that coaches are as little to blame as you portray. I think across the country you see a trend of a lot of #7 and #8 players transferring out of a program. Unfortunately, that may be from being forced out a lot of the time. Coaches who recruit a player, realize she isn't good enough to break into the line-up, see a better recruit than they can get, and then push her out the door. At that point, what good does it do to fight to keep your scholarship? Even if the school decided in your favor, then you are staying at a place you know you aren't wanted.

Would you have wanted to leave your college, your friends, maybe a boyfriend after a year or two to go be a new student at a school where all your peers already knows one another?
Tenniswish is offline  
post #71 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 12:45 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 280
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Tennis wish is right on.
10sE is offline  
post #72 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 01:09 AM
Senior Member
 
2nd_serve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,248
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenniswish View Post
Many of your reasons for transferring are based on the athlete coming up short in some way. I don't necessarily think that coaches are as little to blame as you portray. I think across the country you see a trend of a lot of #7 and #8 players transferring out of a program. Unfortunately, that may be from being forced out a lot of the time. Coaches who recruit a player, realize she isn't good enough to break into the line-up, see a better recruit than they can get, and then push her out the door. At that point, what good does it do to fight to keep your scholarship? Even if the school decided in your favor, then you are staying at a place you know you aren't wanted.

Would you have wanted to leave your college, your friends, maybe a boyfriend after a year or two to go be a new student at a school where all your peers already knows one another?
Its got to be a mix of reasons, but your position doesn't address why the tipping point is at #7. Your arguments that the coach sees a better player, and wants to force out an existing player would also apply to #5 and #6 players. But the cutoff you name is at the #7 players. #7 does not get to play, and if one doesn't play then one's game gets rusty, and one's conditioning suffers as well. Or maybe the Miami example shows that there is no dividing line for transfers at #7.

Last edited by 2nd_serve; Jun 10th, 2011 at 01:16 AM.
2nd_serve is offline  
post #73 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 01:27 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 54
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd_serve View Post
Its got to be a mix of reasons, but your position doesn't address why the tipping point is at #7. Your arguments that the coach sees a better player, and wants to force out an existing player would also apply to #5 and #6 players. But the cutoff you name is at the #7 players. #7 does not get to play, and if one doesn't play then one's game gets rusty, and one's conditioning suffers as well. Or maybe the Miami example shows that there is no dividing line for transfers at #7.
Pushing out a #7 or #8 has no risk. Pushing out a #5 or #6 can actually make your team worse.

Coaches don't push out their #5 and #6 for the same reason that they are pushing out their #7 and #8 - they aren't perfect at judging how good a player is going to be when she comes in. This is especially true recruiting internationally where coaches don't get to see players play over several years and in big events - a lot of international recruits are brought in sight unseen.

Players leaving that play in a top four or five position are not being forced out unless there is an academic or behavioral issue. Most likely, they are choosing to leave.
Tenniswish is offline  
post #74 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 10:47 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Tenniswish personally I agree with you about players being forced out a lot of the time. But let me play referee here and stop you and Form from coming to blows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenniswish View Post
Many of your reasons for transferring are based on the athlete coming up short in some way. I don't necessarily think that coaches are as little to blame as you portray. I think across the country you see a trend of a lot of #7 and #8 players transferring out of a program. Unfortunately, that may be from being forced out a lot of the time. Coaches who recruit a player, realize she isn't good enough to break into the line-up, see a better recruit than they can get, and then push her out the door. At that point, what good does it do to fight to keep your scholarship? Even if the school decided in your favor, then you are staying at a place you know you aren't wanted.
Tenniswish be very careful because you're entering dangerous territory.
Long Beach St. had 13 players leave its program over 7 years. Now in Form's mind, each time it was the player's fault/choice for leaving da Beach. Tenniswish if you even imply that head coach classy Jenny forced even 1 of those 13 players out then be prepared to feel the WRATH OF FORM!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenniswish View Post
Coaches don't push out their #5 and #6 for the same reason that they are pushing out their #7 and #8 - they aren't perfect at judging how good a player is going to be when she comes in. This is especially true recruiting internationally where coaches don't get to see players play over several years and in big events - a lot of international recruits are brought in sight unseen.
Tenniswish don't you know classy Jenny is the exception to this rule. She's perfect at judging how good a player is going to be just based on tracking results and watching recruiting video. Tenniswish if you imply that even 1 of those 13 players that exited Long Beach St. was a recruiting bust by classy Jenny then be prepared to feel the WRATH OF FORM!


Now Form admires Jenny's class greatly BUT if you get Form mad he becomes a hypocrite who will turn around and do the exact opposite of what classy Jenny would do publicly. Form will transform from Dr. Jekyll into a classless Mr. Hyde. Tenniswish you can make all the sense in the world, but if you blame classy Jenny for ANYTHING then be prepared to feel the WRATH OF FORM

Last edited by gouci; Jun 10th, 2011 at 11:07 AM.
gouci is offline  
post #75 of 90 (permalink) Old Jun 10th, 2011, 03:00 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 54
                     
Re: 2011-2012 recruiting - "speculation only"

Quote:
Originally Posted by gouci View Post

Tenniswish be very careful because you're entering dangerous territory.
Clearly there is a whole school rivalry thing going on that I want to publicly announce that I know little to nothing about nor do I want to get in the middle of it! I meant to insinuate nothing other than what I wrote about transfers from across the entire landscape of college tennis. You guys can feel free to continue to get after it - I'll just be like Switzerland or, if you need it, the Red Cross.
Tenniswish is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome