creekdipper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2014
- Messages
- 8,046
- Likes
- 22,037
Knowing that every situation is different, it still seems that comparing Karen Aston of Texas to Holly Warlick is instructive.
Aston took over at Texas 4 years ago...same time that Warlick "officially" became Lady Vol HC. Before that, she had some success at Charlotte, going to either NCAA or WNIT 3 out of 4 years followed by one mediocre year at North Texas. So she was somewhat of a risk to bring in to follow GG.
Look at her success compared to Holly. Sure, Holly has gone gone to two Elite 8's and won or shared SEC reg. season & tournament. But recruiting has taken a dive (unless you count picking up DD as a transfer) culminating with this year's recruiting debacle. And the quality of play has diminished, particularly on offense (which isn't saying a lot).
Meanwhile, Aston's teams have steadily improved over the same four years, going to Sweet Sixteen last year and this year currently sitting ranked #6 with a 20-1 record. And keep in mind that Texas has ONE NC...won back in 1986...and has gone to a total of two final fours and two Sweet Sixteens since then (before last year, most recent was 2003). So Aston didn't come into an ideal situation, either...certainly not as promising as Holly.
Here's Aston's record as HC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Aston#Head_Coaching_Record
Not gaudy numbers or win-loss percentages, but getting better all the time with a very bright future.
Looking at the situation back in 2012, I don't know that Aston would have seemed a better choice than Warlick; in fact, Warlick offered program continuity & years of championship experience (think of Chris Daley at UCONN). However, continuity can be a good thing or bad thing, and many observers have noted that UT's offensive strategies had been falling behind long before Holly took over.
One valuable lesson should be obvious: It's usually riskier to turn a program over to someone who has never had the full pressure of being a head coach than to someone who has never been HC at a major level. Aston coached under Conradt and Mulkey, so she got different perspectives. And she had a chance to learn how to run her own program and deal with the pressure, even if it wasn't on the big stage.
I don't want to bash Holly, but I don't think she was ready in 2012 and don't think she's ready now. This year has turned into Holly's Follies, and while one would like to write this year off as an anomaly and say, "Wait till next year," we've been doing that for the past 8 years...and this time "next year" looks less promising, not more.
Just thought it's interesting to see two programs going in opposite directions...with the one in the decline having all the recruiting advantages, history, and talented roster that the other coach didn't inherit.
A 2-2 record against Chattanooga ought to be evidence enough that Holly's teams aren't ready to play when the season begins and either lack the skills, strategies, or discipline to be considered a threat for a Final Four (much less a NC).
Aston took over at Texas 4 years ago...same time that Warlick "officially" became Lady Vol HC. Before that, she had some success at Charlotte, going to either NCAA or WNIT 3 out of 4 years followed by one mediocre year at North Texas. So she was somewhat of a risk to bring in to follow GG.
Look at her success compared to Holly. Sure, Holly has gone gone to two Elite 8's and won or shared SEC reg. season & tournament. But recruiting has taken a dive (unless you count picking up DD as a transfer) culminating with this year's recruiting debacle. And the quality of play has diminished, particularly on offense (which isn't saying a lot).
Meanwhile, Aston's teams have steadily improved over the same four years, going to Sweet Sixteen last year and this year currently sitting ranked #6 with a 20-1 record. And keep in mind that Texas has ONE NC...won back in 1986...and has gone to a total of two final fours and two Sweet Sixteens since then (before last year, most recent was 2003). So Aston didn't come into an ideal situation, either...certainly not as promising as Holly.
Here's Aston's record as HC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Aston#Head_Coaching_Record
Not gaudy numbers or win-loss percentages, but getting better all the time with a very bright future.
Looking at the situation back in 2012, I don't know that Aston would have seemed a better choice than Warlick; in fact, Warlick offered program continuity & years of championship experience (think of Chris Daley at UCONN). However, continuity can be a good thing or bad thing, and many observers have noted that UT's offensive strategies had been falling behind long before Holly took over.
One valuable lesson should be obvious: It's usually riskier to turn a program over to someone who has never had the full pressure of being a head coach than to someone who has never been HC at a major level. Aston coached under Conradt and Mulkey, so she got different perspectives. And she had a chance to learn how to run her own program and deal with the pressure, even if it wasn't on the big stage.
I don't want to bash Holly, but I don't think she was ready in 2012 and don't think she's ready now. This year has turned into Holly's Follies, and while one would like to write this year off as an anomaly and say, "Wait till next year," we've been doing that for the past 8 years...and this time "next year" looks less promising, not more.
Just thought it's interesting to see two programs going in opposite directions...with the one in the decline having all the recruiting advantages, history, and talented roster that the other coach didn't inherit.
A 2-2 record against Chattanooga ought to be evidence enough that Holly's teams aren't ready to play when the season begins and either lack the skills, strategies, or discipline to be considered a threat for a Final Four (much less a NC).
Last edited:
