serious question

#51

volnationnj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
1,641
Likes
1,609
#51
Thank you for your considerate response.
Here's my main problem with DP's posts. He/she obviously has access to the inner workings of the basketball program. But DP's posts are, to me, the type that would be generated by a basketball program's public relations department. No matter what happens, it's not the coaches fault (while they're still employed here) or the program's fault. It's always "she was gone anyway" or "she didn't get along with her teammates". It just seems to me that DP's posts are exactly what the Athletic Department wants us to believe. To me, it's a little too one sided.
 
Likes: Ladyvol777
#52

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#52
Westbrook had a "poor relationship with her teammates" .
So did Cooper. Hayes didn't fit in.
Doesn't the person/organization who recruited them have some responsibility for those players outcomes ?
I think the previous staff paid too much attention to basketball ability and not enough attention to who the people were that they were bringing into the program. Does that answer your question?
 
#53

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#53
Thank you for your considerate response.
Here's my main problem with DP's posts. He/she obviously has access to the inner workings of the basketball program. But DP's posts are, to me, the type that would be generated by a basketball program's public relations department. No matter what happens, it's not the coaches fault (while they're still employed here) or the program's fault. It's always "she was gone anyway" or "she didn't get along with her teammates". It just seems to me that DP's posts are exactly what the Athletic Department wants us to believe. To me, it's a little too one sided.
No, my posts are not always defensive of University or a “PR department“ I very much hope the teams at Tennessee succeed. However, I am a step removed from being a fan, so I look at the situations with a view at arms’ length.

To be honest, I think the majority of posters here are fans that ride the emotional highs and lows of wins and losses and their own feelings about the people involved in it. If you didn’t like Holly from the start, you were more likely to be critical of her throughout the process. If you loved her, you were less likely to speak out, and more likely to blame the players. Both things can be true, and both things can be false. But when you are emotionally invested, you think in absolutes, that only one thing can be true, and the world doesn’t work that way.

Holly was not a great head coach. The position, and the things necessary to do it successfully, did not suit her personality traits. It was a concern from the start and slowly came to fruition. When the team had success, or had something in common to rally around, they were successful. See her first two or three years when they were still dealing with the aftermath of Pat’s illness. A common rallying point gave them something to work through struggles. when that common bond was gone, she did not have the discipline necessary to rally the troops when they struggled. That’s a verifiable fact that anyone can see, regardless of your feelings on her.

However, it was ALSO true that her record after her first four years was better than all but 3 coaches in the country at that time. She won SEC Championships and made Elite 8s. Bad coaches are not capable of doing either of those things. So I did, and still do, take great issue with the people that said she was the worst ever or was incompetent or was Derek Dooley-level. You can believe it’s not good enough, but saying that something was the worst ever was simply not true. And I defended that point and will continue to do so. Her first three teams performed on par or above the results of Pat’s last three teams. Look at the stats and results, that’s an absolute fact.

In my opinion, she does know basketball, and is a good on court coach. But when the players you are coaching do not respect you enough to follow the game plan, or do not believe they will be disciplined if they do not, then it doesn’t matter how good your Xs and Os are, it’s not going to work.

At the same time, it is also true that there was a run of bad eggs that came into the program. Sometimes they are obvious in the recruiting process, sometimes they aren’t. If Holly has never brought in Diamond/Cooper, then she’s 100% still the head coach today. She knew what she was getting into, and that’s on her. I think she felt like she couldn’t control it, and she couldn’t. And it tore apart the program to the point that the Hayes family felt it could dictate things in the program. Westbrook felt she could openly defy the coaches in practice and games without consequences. That’s on the staff as well. But it’s ALSO a product of those kids having their own issues. Both things are true and blaming just one side is neither accurate or fair.

Holly also did not recruit leadership. Once Burdick and, to a lesser extent, Carter, were gone, there was no one on court that could take the bull by the horns. That’s on Holly as well, but it’s something that a lot of coaches in D1 are struggling with. The AAU mentality of playing 3 games a day, regardless of the outcome of other games is actively killing the development of leadership traits in young players.
 
Last edited:
#54

Benionsopinion

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
476
Likes
907
#54
Thank you,DP,for your insightful posts.Always enjoy your perspective on Lady Vol happenings. The back and forth from some regarding Holly and/or Kellie means nothing at this point. Why do we not just support our Lady Vols with words and action? This is not saying that criticism from fans is not warranted. However,it should be tempered with praise when the team does well.
 
#55
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
7,576
Likes
8,419
#55
...

.... If you didn’t like Holly from the start, you were more likely to be critical of her throughout the process. If you loved her, you were less likely to speak out, and more likely to blame the players. Both things can be true, and both things can be false. But when you are emotionally invested, you think in absolutes, that only one thing can be true, and the world doesn’t work that way.

In my opinion, she does know basketball, and is a good on court coach. But when the players you are coaching do not respect you enough to follow the game plan, or do not believe they will be disciplined if they do not, then it doesn’t matter how good your Xs and Os are, it’s not going to work.

For me it is/was/and always will be about coaching. It is with Kellie and it was with Holly.

Some may claim it is a grudge with me because Holly didn't let the two players who approached me have a chance to work out with me. But if those same "some" will remember I led the charge in Holly's 5th Year and everybody here thought I was crazy and flipping on my stance on her. . . I gave Holly as much support as I possibly could and the fifth year because that was the year or all of Pat Summitt's athletes were gone and all of Pat Summitt's staff was gone I think maybe Dean was still left. But that year her fifth year the program was completely and absolutely hers no residue of the former program. I supported her as hard as anybody ever supported anyone. I don't regret it. But when her spiral continued,, I had to accept the fact she was an assistant coach, for a program of this stature, anyway.

At the same time, it is also true that there was a run of bad eggs that came into the program. .... The AAU mentality of playing 3 games a day, regardless of the outcome of other games is actively killing the development of leadership traits in young players.
"...A bad egg in one skillet is bad egg in another skillet,,,it isn't the skillet or the egg if another cook can make an omelet out of it"

@DeerPark12 ,,,AAU never plays three games a day and they have to play two if the team can't make a friday slot, they have to play two on saturday...and unless it is a round-robin tournament,, you have to be in the top four to even get a third game,,,

Come on now DP, you're better than this
 
#56

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#56
Thank you,DP,for your insightful posts.Always enjoy your perspective on Lady Vol happenings. The back and forth from some regarding Holly and/or Kellie means nothing at this point. Why do we not just support our Lady Vols with words and action? This is not saying that criticism from fans is not warranted. However,it should be tempered with praise when the team does well.
Kellie will be judged after her third year, any comparison or back-and-forth until then is an exercise in futility. She has some good talent, she’s going to bring in some good talent, she needs to bring in more good talent. I believe this team will be better at the end of the year than it is now. I believe that a team still coached by Holly would have a similar record, but the wins over the bad opponents would not be as impressive. We saw them sleepwalk plenty of times against bad teams the last few years. Would a team struggling to find motivation and confidence survive the comeback that Notre Dame made up there? Would they have survived ETSU playing in front of a packed house? Her results in the past suggest they would not. I agree comparing what the record is to what it would have been is useless, but I believe that Kellie has gotten more out of them this year thus far than Holly would have.
 
#57

Chippo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
617
Likes
627
#57
If Holly was still the coach, the team would have lost every game. All players would have transferred and the University of Tennessee would have caught fire and sunk into a swamp. Also a plague of locust would have descended upon Knoxville and the children of all Lady Vol fans would have been eaten by rampaging trolls.

I am glad this question is finally settled. Let us all be very thankful that Kellie was hired.
Madtownvol you definitely have a way with
words. Enjoy your posts.
 
#58

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#58
"...A bad egg in one skillet is bad egg in another skillet,,,it isn't the skillet or the egg if another cook can make an omelet out of it"

@DeerPark12 ,,,AAU never plays three games a day and they have to play two if the team can't make a friday slot, they have to play two on saturday...and unless it is a round-robin tournament,, you have to be in the top four to even get a third game,,,

Come on now DP, you're better than this
I literally watched a team of 14-year-olds play three games in a day and six in a weekend twice this July. Don’t tell me what I didn’t watch with my own eyes.

As for the omelette example, what players that left Tennessee during Holly’s tenure have gone on to have more success at another school than they did when they were here? Dawn Staley wouldn’t give you a different story on Cooper. MTSU knew what it was getting into with the Hayes bunch.

For the record, Collins is not a bad egg, she was just looking for a fresh start when she had an opportunity closer to home. I’m not positive she would have been back if Holly had come back. Tennessee just wasn’t a fit for her.
 
#59
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
7,576
Likes
8,419
#59
I literally watched a team of 14-year-olds play three games in a day and six in a weekend twice this July. Don’t tell me what I didn’t watch with my own eyes.

As for the omelette example, what players that left Tennessee during Holly’s tenure have gone on to have more success at another school than they did when they were here? Dawn Staley wouldn’t give you a different story on Cooper. MTSU knew what it was getting into with the Hayes bunch.

For the record, Collins is not a bad egg, she was just looking for a fresh start when she had an opportunity closer to home. I’m not positive she would have been back if Holly had come back. Tennessee just wasn’t a fit for her.

Major tournaments have hundreds of teams at times and have to be herded onto and off the floor like cattle, I have been there,,,but that is the exception not the rule and you know it. I am talking about the 15-20 tournaments that teams play in before they can ever get to that setting.

How about the two mentioned in earlier posts,,," Coop is playing well right now and DD was a consideration for ROY....Hayes,,, another story

Agree, I never thought Collins was a bad egg either, just in the wrong basket
 
#60

Chippo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2019
Messages
617
Likes
627
#60
No, my posts are not always defensive of University or a “PR department“ I very much hope the teams at Tennessee succeed. However, I am a step removed from being a fan, so I look at the situations with a view at arms’ length.

To be honest, I think the majority of posters here are fans that ride the emotional highs and lows of wins and losses and their own feelings about the people involved in it. If you didn’t like Holly from the start, you were more likely to be critical of her throughout the process. If you loved her, you were less likely to speak out, and more likely to blame the players. Both things can be true, and both things can be false. But when you are emotionally invested, you think in absolutes, that only one thing can be true, and the world doesn’t work that way.

Holly was not a great head coach. The position, and the things necessary to do it successfully, did not suit her personality traits. It was a concern from the start and slowly came to fruition. When the team had success, or had something in common to rally around, they were successful. See her first two or three years when they were still dealing with the aftermath of Pat’s illness. A common rallying point gave them something to work through struggles. when that common bond was gone, she did not have the discipline necessary to rally the troops when they struggled. That’s a verifiable fact that anyone can see, regardless of your feelings on her.

However, it was ALSO true that her record after her first four years was better than all but 3 coaches in the country at that time. She won SEC Championships and made Elite 8s. Bad coaches are not capable of doing either of those things. So I did, and still do, take great issue with the people that said she was the worst ever or was incompetent or was Derek Dooley-level. You can believe it’s not good enough, but saying that something was the worst ever was simply not true. And I defended that point and will continue to do so. Her first three teams performed on par or above the results of Pat’s last three teams. Look at the stats and results, that’s an absolute fact.

In my opinion, she does know basketball, and is a good on court coach. But when the players you are coaching do not respect you enough to follow the game plan, or do not believe they will be disciplined if they do not, then it doesn’t matter how good your Xs and Os are, it’s not going to work.

At the same time, it is also true that there was a run of bad eggs that came into the program. Sometimes they are obvious in the recruiting process, sometimes they aren’t. If Holly has never brought in Diamond/Cooper, then she’s 100% still the head coach today. She knew what she was getting into, and that’s on her. I think she felt like she couldn’t control it, and she couldn’t. And it tore apart the program to the point that the Hayes family felt it could dictate things in the program. Westbrook felt she could openly defy the coaches in practice and games without consequences. That’s on the staff as well. But it’s ALSO a product of those kids having their own issues. Both things are true and blaming just one side is neither accurate or fair.

Holly also did not recruit leadership. Once Burdick and, to a lesser extent, Carter, were gone, there was no one on court that could take the bull by the horns. That’s on Holly as well, but it’s something that a lot of coaches in D1 are struggling with. The AAU mentality of playing 3 games a day, regardless of the outcome of other games is actively killing the development of leadership traits in young players.
Good post DP, however Holly had Pat's girls
the first 3 years. When they graduated things
went downhill the last 4 years. JMO but I think Holly should have been dismissed her 5th year instead of keeping her 2 more. Why
Fulmer extended her contract and fired her the same year is beyond me.
 
Likes: Ladyvol777
#61

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#61
Good post DP, however Holly had Pat's girls
the first 3 years. When they graduated things
went downhill the last 4 years. JMO but I think Holly should have been dismissed her 5th year instead of keeping her 2 more. Why
Fulmer extended her contract and fired her the same year is beyond me.
But see, that’s where I take issue. They weren’t “Pats girls.“ Holly was there on the road recruiting them, and was responsible for that entire roster. Acting like there was some sort of separation in players between the two eras is not really accurate. And as anyone that was around the program at the time would tell you, Holly was doing the majority of the heavy lifting as Pat dealt with some other health issues that weren’t necessarily made public. The difference was Pat was there on game day with the famous stare and everything that came with it. The real difference between the two was the one thing that Holly couldn’t duplicate because it had been her job for decades to be the counter to. She was the good cop, and was never able to change that. But it was the difference in the program winning championships and the program failing. And she failed, ultimately.
 
#62
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
7,576
Likes
8,419
#62
But see, that’s where I take issue. They weren’t “Pats girls.“ Holly was there on the road recruiting them, and was responsible for that entire roster. Acting like there was some sort of separation in players between the two eras is not really accurate. And as anyone that was around the program at the time would tell you, Holly was doing the majority of the heavy lifting as Pat dealt with some other health issues that weren’t necessarily made public. The difference was Pat was there on game day with the famous stare and everything that came with it. The real difference between the two was the one thing that Holly couldn’t duplicate because it had been her job for decades to be the counter to. She was the good cop, and was never able to change that. But it was the difference in the program winning championships and the program failing. And she failed, ultimately.

agreed
 
#63

volnationnj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
1,641
Likes
1,609
#63
No, my posts are not always defensive of University or a “PR department“ I very much hope the teams at Tennessee succeed. However, I am a step removed from being a fan, so I look at the situations with a view at arms’ length.

To be honest, I think the majority of posters here are fans that ride the emotional highs and lows of wins and losses and their own feelings about the people involved in it. If you didn’t like Holly from the start, you were more likely to be critical of her throughout the process. If you loved her, you were less likely to speak out, and more likely to blame the players. Both things can be true, and both things can be false. But when you are emotionally invested, you think in absolutes, that only one thing can be true, and the world doesn’t work that way.

Holly was not a great head coach. The position, and the things necessary to do it successfully, did not suit her personality traits. It was a concern from the start and slowly came to fruition. When the team had success, or had something in common to rally around, they were successful. See her first two or three years when they were still dealing with the aftermath of Pat’s illness. A common rallying point gave them something to work through struggles. when that common bond was gone, she did not have the discipline necessary to rally the troops when they struggled. That’s a verifiable fact that anyone can see, regardless of your feelings on her.

However, it was ALSO true that her record after her first four years was better than all but 3 coaches in the country at that time. She won SEC Championships and made Elite 8s. Bad coaches are not capable of doing either of those things. So I did, and still do, take great issue with the people that said she was the worst ever or was incompetent or was Derek Dooley-level. You can believe it’s not good enough, but saying that something was the worst ever was simply not true. And I defended that point and will continue to do so. Her first three teams performed on par or above the results of Pat’s last three teams. Look at the stats and results, that’s an absolute fact.

In my opinion, she does know basketball, and is a good on court coach. But when the players you are coaching do not respect you enough to follow the game plan, or do not believe they will be disciplined if they do not, then it doesn’t matter how good your Xs and Os are, it’s not going to work.

At the same time, it is also true that there was a run of bad eggs that came into the program. Sometimes they are obvious in the recruiting process, sometimes they aren’t. If Holly has never brought in Diamond/Cooper, then she’s 100% still the head coach today. She knew what she was getting into, and that’s on her. I think she felt like she couldn’t control it, and she couldn’t. And it tore apart the program to the point that the Hayes family felt it could dictate things in the program. Westbrook felt she could openly defy the coaches in practice and games without consequences. That’s on the staff as well. But it’s ALSO a product of those kids having their own issues. Both things are true and blaming just one side is neither accurate or fair.

Holly also did not recruit leadership. Once Burdick and, to a lesser extent, Carter, were gone, there was no one on court that could take the bull by the horns. That’s on Holly as well, but it’s something that a lot of coaches in D1 are struggling with. The AAU mentality of playing 3 games a day, regardless of the outcome of other games is actively killing the development of leadership traits in young players.
I appreciate your measured response. Maybe I was expecting too much from you.
If you knew there were "concerns" about Holly as a head coach from the beginning or that there were red flags about recruiting DeShields and Cooper, you never mentioned them at the time. That is where I may be expecting too much from you. But the result is the appearance of a one sided story, at least from where I'm sitting.
 
#64

Cees

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
Messages
132
Likes
242
#64
How about this: What would the best coach in the country (whoever that is) do with this same team at this point in the season? I am guessing about 11-3.
 
#66

DeerPark12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
5,752
Likes
5,344
#66
I appreciate your measured response. Maybe I was expecting too much from you.
If you knew there were "concerns" about Holly as a head coach from the beginning or that there were red flags about recruiting DeShields and Cooper, you never mentioned them at the time. That is where I may be expecting too much from you. But the result is the appearance of a one sided story, at least from where I'm sitting.
I believe I mentioned several times that Holly‘s background of being the “good cop “would have to change, and there will be issues if it didn’t.

If you couldn’t see the issues surrounding Diamond when she left North Carolina, I really don’t know what to say. There were a lot of people that were apprehensive about taking her, regardless of the talent. Holly saw it as a situation where if she did not get Diamond, a large segment of the Fanbase and the women’s basketball community would regard her as a failure for not being able to attract someone who left a school with the intention of coming to Tennessee.
 
#67

PG1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
819
Likes
869
#67
"...A bad egg in one skillet is bad egg in another skillet,,,it isn't the skillet or the egg if another cook can make an omelet out of it"

@DeerPark12 ,,,AAU never plays three games a day and they have to play two if the team can't make a friday slot, they have to play two on saturday...and unless it is a round-robin tournament,, you have to be in the top four to even get a third game,,,

Come on now DP, you're better than this
I have seen and participated in many sanctioned AAU events that there were 3 games in single Elim rounds in one day.
 
#68

teacherdean

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
2,722
Likes
4,107
#68
Our bench is almost a non factor except for Burrell. We really need Zay’s leadership on the floor. Somehow, someway we have to find at least two more scorers who can come off the bench and light things up. Hopefully, next year, KJH can find at least two more players with starting potential, through the portal or a grad transfer or maybe from a junior college. Right now, our bench is too weak to give everyone equal playing time.

I really do not think KJH and her staff are doing a bad job, I think it is more or less trying to get the players to play a different scheme they are not use to. Her team at Mo. State were like ants at a picnic, they were physical and in your face. There was very little difference between her starting five coming off the bench and her starters. They were also able to bust a zone with threes. The players she has now are not even closed to Mo. State players. KJH team started the year slow but caught fire in league play. I hope the same thing happens with the Lady Vols.
 
#69
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
7,576
Likes
8,419
#69
I have seen and participated in many sanctioned AAU events that there were 3 games in single Elim rounds in one day.
I haven't. Most tournaments we're on Friday Saturday and Sunday. You had to advance from your play on Friday and Saturday to play in Sunday's championships. The vast majority of my tournaments have been that way
 
#71

Darth_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,576
Likes
3,606
#71
But see, that’s where I take issue. They weren’t “Pats girls.“ Holly was there on the road recruiting them, and was responsible for that entire roster. Acting like there was some sort of separation in players between the two eras is not really accurate. And as anyone that was around the program at the time would tell you, Holly was doing the majority of the heavy lifting as Pat dealt with some other health issues that weren’t necessarily made public. The difference was Pat was there on game day with the famous stare and everything that came with it. The real difference between the two was the one thing that Holly couldn’t duplicate because it had been her job for decades to be the counter to. She was the good cop, and was never able to change that. But it was the difference in the program winning championships and the program failing. And she failed, ultimately.
I'm sure Holly did most of the legwork, but Pat still had the final say in constructing the roster (who to offer, who to take, etc) did she not? Just as when Holly inherited the team it was her roster, and obviously she took in some players you could argue Pat probably would have stayed away from...
 
Likes: Smallvol#1
#72

Darth_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,576
Likes
3,606
#72
How about this: What would the best coach in the country (whoever that is) do with this same team at this point in the season? I am guessing about 11-3.
If Geno was the coach they would be 13-1. The Texas and Kentucky games were very winnable with better preparation and game management. They still lose to Stanford, but it would have been a much more competitive game...
 
#73

PG1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
819
Likes
869
#73
I haven't. Most tournaments we're on Friday Saturday and Sunday. You had to advance from your play on Friday and Saturday to play in Sunday's championships. The vast majority of my tournaments have been that way
For instance 8 teams with 2 pools 4 teams each pool so 3 games either 1 Fri 2 Sat or 3 Sat then all 8 advance to single elim on Sunday seeded by record. This Champ team would play 3 games on Sunday. Done this many times.
 
#74
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
7,576
Likes
8,419
#74
For instance 8 teams with 2 pools 4 teams each pool so 3 games either 1 Fri 2 Sat or 3 Sat then all 8 advance to single elim on Sunday seeded by record. This Champ team would play 3 games on Sunday. Done this many times.
Each tournament can set up their format as they want to, within the rules and there are several ways to set it up...

Most of the tournaments I have been that weren't nationals or large tourneys are of that number (8 or 6 teams) but the standard format is
8 teams:
one game friday, one or two on saturday and the the semi''s and finals sunday
or
If they can't make the fridays....two on saturday and one on early sunday with with the semi and finals on later in the day on Sunday (this is the only scenario I have faced in a 8-team "non-national tournaments" with 3 games in one day}.

on tourneys with 6 teams:
two pools, each team plays the two other teams in their pool, or the 3 in the other pools........ (1 fri- 1 sat or 2 games on saturday) in the pool and the top two fight it out on Sunday
One fri, one sat...or two on sat with a single championship game on Sunday

In any tournament other than "Nationally ranking tournaments" ... Never have I seen 3 games of pool-play on any day...except for the early sunday (pool play) with two playoff games....And I was an AAU coach for over 18 years.
 
#75

Nute Gunray

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
752
Likes
924
#75
No, my posts are not always defensive of University or a “PR department“ I very much hope the teams at Tennessee succeed. However, I am a step removed from being a fan, so I look at the situations with a view at arms’ length.

To be honest, I think the majority of posters here are fans that ride the emotional highs and lows of wins and losses and their own feelings about the people involved in it. If you didn’t like Holly from the start, you were more likely to be critical of her throughout the process. If you loved her, you were less likely to speak out, and more likely to blame the players. Both things can be true, and both things can be false. But when you are emotionally invested, you think in absolutes, that only one thing can be true, and the world doesn’t work that way.

Holly was not a great head coach. The position, and the things necessary to do it successfully, did not suit her personality traits. It was a concern from the start and slowly came to fruition. When the team had success, or had something in common to rally around, they were successful. See her first two or three years when they were still dealing with the aftermath of Pat’s illness. A common rallying point gave them something to work through struggles. when that common bond was gone, she did not have the discipline necessary to rally the troops when they struggled. That’s a verifiable fact that anyone can see, regardless of your feelings on her.

However, it was ALSO true that her record after her first four years was better than all but 3 coaches in the country at that time. She won SEC Championships and made Elite 8s. Bad coaches are not capable of doing either of those things. So I did, and still do, take great issue with the people that said she was the worst ever or was incompetent or was Derek Dooley-level. You can believe it’s not good enough, but saying that something was the worst ever was simply not true. And I defended that point and will continue to do so. Her first three teams performed on par or above the results of Pat’s last three teams. Look at the stats and results, that’s an absolute fact.

In my opinion, she does know basketball, and is a good on court coach. But when the players you are coaching do not respect you enough to follow the game plan, or do not believe they will be disciplined if they do not, then it doesn’t matter how good your Xs and Os are, it’s not going to work.

At the same time, it is also true that there was a run of bad eggs that came into the program. Sometimes they are obvious in the recruiting process, sometimes they aren’t. If Holly has never brought in Diamond/Cooper, then she’s 100% still the head coach today. She knew what she was getting into, and that’s on her. I think she felt like she couldn’t control it, and she couldn’t. And it tore apart the program to the point that the Hayes family felt it could dictate things in the program. Westbrook felt she could openly defy the coaches in practice and games without consequences. That’s on the staff as well. But it’s ALSO a product of those kids having their own issues. Both things are true and blaming just one side is neither accurate or fair.

Holly also did not recruit leadership. Once Burdick and, to a lesser extent, Carter, were gone, there was no one on court that could take the bull by the horns. That’s on Holly as well, but it’s something that a lot of coaches in D1 are struggling with. The AAU mentality of playing 3 games a day, regardless of the outcome of other games is actively killing the development of leadership traits in young players.
Extraordinarily perceptive and brilliant analysis of Holly Warlick's head coaching tenure, DeerPark12.
 

VN Store




Sponsors
 

Top