Male Coaches and Female Basketball Teams Reviewed

[ifyousayso]

Here is an article that I am interested in hearing everyone's take on...

READ HERE (http://www.blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/Women_53/Should_Male_Head_Coaches_Be_With_Female_Basketball _3087.shtml)

[scoutnwhoops]

I think the author generalizes about what a female coached team and male coached team are.

Vivian Stringer's Rutger's team is one of the most aggressive and intimidating defenses I watched this year.

One the club circuit I find that one of the most disciplined half court teams that run their sets and don't miss their box outs is the Cal Swish Black, coached by Russ Davis. The Georgia Metros are coached by Kathy Richie-Walton and the last two years they had a fierce and aggressive defense that was all over the place.

A man teaching a girl to play more aggressive should not be perceived as making her play like a guy because there are plenty of women coaching that teach their players to be aggressive and assertive. There are plenty of male coaches out there that preach fundamentals over aggressive one-on-one play.

I just don't agree with the generalizations.

[BrooklynSaints]

[Quote There is not a single female head coach on any male basketball program in high school,

This issue might become null and void in about ten years because most high school and college administrators and athletic directors will not hire male basketball coaches to replace the existing male coaches that are retiring. /Quote]

The coach of Boys & Girls High in Brooklyn has been coached by a women for over 20 years. The school played for the city championship at Madison Square Garden but lost to Lincoln high school this year.

I'm not sure how he is led to the conclusion that men won't be hired to coach women in the future.

[acusefan4ever]

I'd be willing to listen to the argument but he doesn't really have any valid proof.

If you watched the final four Rutgers was clearly the most aggressive on the defensive end and they're coached by a woman.

Also the remark about a team thats good in the half court set and one that isn't is more about talent and being well coached....not the sex of their coach. The same goes for rebounding, its about being well coached not the sex of the coach. Look at teams like North Carolina and Maryland both were better in transition. Duke was another team that was very good on the defensive end.

I also like it when people who write articles do what this guy did. He said Geno intimidates female coaches...but failed to say what exactly he does to do that. How would a coach "intimidate" another coach. On average coaches probably talk a total of 3 minutes before/during/after a game.

Basically after reading this article I have come to the conclusion that even though Q signed the best class in school history he should be fired and a female coach should be hired in his place because we will be a better team. I know everyone will say I am overreacting but he clearly says in the article that even though our defense will be less aggressive, we will rebound better and our offense will be much better and obviously our turnovers will drop all because we have a female coach lol.

I think the whole article was just a pro-pokey chatman article. His entire closing is basically implying that schools look the other way when male coaches have relationships with players but they lost it when pokey did. I'd put this with the anti-male practice players articles.

[teammom4]

This had to be an underlying message type of article, because the point was non-existent!
So he is saying only 3 teams in the WNBA play fundamental ball!?! The women's game has been known as the more fundamental game period. I have heard commentators speak about seeing the fundamentals on the male's side in the pros moreso in the post-season, vs the females playing it all season long.
My daughter had a male coach for four years, now she's going to play for a woman, I sure hope she doesn't stop blocking shots with all that aggression!

[ladiesfirst]

No doubt a capable writer, but a little more focus would've helped. The general theme of the article struck me as, "Oh, and while I'm at it, here's a little about this."

But I expect he's right that administrators and ADs will hire more female coaches - a good thing.

As to female-coached teams being more fundamental? Doubtful.

[cluckhead]

I would love to see somebody take some actual data and try to compare the styles of male vs. female-coached teams, but this wasn't it. He seemed to be repeating stereotypes and making extremely broad generalizations.
The idea that Auriemma "intimidates" is an interesting one and probably flattering to Geno, but I can't imagine what he's actually talking about. If it's his mouthing off and whining about being discriminated against because he's male, I'll buy that. But I wouldn't describe those antics as "ugly" can't imagine any coach being intimidated by that--or by anything other than his teams' performance.
I think the writer has a number of interesting ideas and they would make a series of interesting articles, one subject at a time. But I'd like to see something to back up all of the "factual" statements he made, because they just sound like opinions and outright speculation to me.