Coaching in professional sports

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
#1
Do you think the standards for coaches in professional sports are set too high? It seems like they're given only two or three years to turn a bottom feeder into a championship contender, which is hardly enough time to bring in the right personnel and install new strategies and playbooks. Or if they have one great year, they're expected to exceed it the next or else they're gone. I think it's especially ridiculous in the NBA. Out of 30 teams, the only coaches that have been with their current team for more than 5 or 6 years are Jerry Sloan and Gregg Popovich.

Is it unfair? Why aren't the players to blame for under-performing? Why does it always fall on the coaches?

Your thoughts?
 

padd

Registered Member
#2
Well 1 reason (I'm sure there's many) for the fact that there is a constant change of coaches is to basicly just shake the players up.
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
#3
I believe the standards are way to high for the coaches. Yes they were hired to win a championship, but he's not the only playing.

I agree with Padd that a lot of players just get tired of a coach, so the General Manager of the team just fires him, to bring a new face. Sometimes that does work, because the players lost respect for the old coach and don't play at a 100%(which is stupid because there paid millions and millions of dollars to play at 100% everytime they play.) But other times not has much and the team still struggles.

Players should be accounted for the losing as well, and the general manager shouldn't fire the coach just because there struggling in my open. If he doesn't win for a couple of season, like three in a row, then yes there should be a coaching change.
 

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
#4
If he doesn't win for a couple of season, like three in a row, then yes there should be a coaching change.
When you say "doesn't win", what do you mean? Win a championship? Over a three year period, there can be at most three different champions. Are the other 27 coaches in the league failures?
 

bball4life

Alfred :: Gotham Hero
#5
When you say "doesn't win", what do you mean? Win a championship? Over a three year period, there can be at most three different champions. Are the other 27 coaches in the league failures?
i think he means if they dont win a decent amount of games.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
#6
The standards are far too high. Professional coaches have to deal with far more mitigating factors than amateur coaches. Pro athletes hold out for salary, don't show up for practice, and generally act self-important. Sometimes their attitude problems will sabotage a season and there isn't anything coaches can do.

Coaches should be given five years in most cases. It's especially weird to see the expectations for coaches of teams that were badly mismanaged. They need at LEAST three years just to untangle the organization.
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
#7
What I mean Echoes is this, if the coach as three losing seasons in row, which means he has more loses then wins in those three seasons, then I believe they should go in another direction and swith coaches. Especially if it's a team that has loads of talent, and a huge payroll, who are underachieving.
 

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
#8
I agree with you that if a team has three losing seasons in a row they probably need a new coach, unless of course the front office has done nothing to bring in better players, which is usually the case.
 

padd

Registered Member
#9
Well picture this, your team makes it to the super bowl 4 years straight and still has 0 superbowl trophys all time.. isn't it time for a coach change?