Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Why can't schools like Stanford, most Ivy's, Bucknell, Villanova, Richmond, Ohio State, Rutgers etc... Be more competitive? There are a lot of great schools that would be the right fit for a lot of kids yet they can't find a way to field a competitive team.

Is it coaching or is there simply not enough talent?


Comes down to coaching, not enough
quality head coaches. It takes a lot to run a program, a lot more than just x's and o's. Just look at how much SS has struggled with the learning curve. She can coach kids and make their skills and knowledge of the game better, but that is less than half of it. Its the fund raising, managing personnel, planning travel, etc. All can be overwhelming.


Obviously another hater attempting to set a narrative and promote an agenda. Go away troll.


Not sure its a troll, sounds pretty accurate to me. There is a real shortage of really good coaches out there both in college and club. Just because you played doesn't make you a good coach. Most of these teams win in spite of their coaches based on the skill and athleticism of their players. SB went from 3 wins to 14 overnight with Spalina and he wins everywhere he's been. Florida and others can't break through because they don't have a coach that can take exceptional players to the next level in tight situations. The sport doesn't pay very well so unless you get to the top quickly many potential good coaches aren't staying in the 24 hour rat race and endless relocation. The other things that stop teams from jumping up is the players. Once you get outside the top tier of nationally recruited women, the sport is very balanced with talent