For years, I've read about asst. coaches being hired based on their access to recruiting pipelines, particular regions, and sets of players. Rarely, would I also read about what great students or teachers of the game they might be and that seemed like an intelligent trade off. I'm guessing those two skill sets (actually collection of skill sets) don't always overlap.
In the NIL era where money explicitly talks, is it wise to value the recruiting skill set as highly? Are more assistant coaches being hired based on their ability to actually coach? Where do our assistants rank in this area?
For years, I've read about asst. coaches being hired based on their access to recruiting pipelines, particular regions, and sets of players. Rarely, would I also read about what great students or teachers of the game they might be and that seemed like an intelligent trade off. I'm guessing those two skill sets (actually collection of skill sets) don't always overlap.
In the NIL era where money explicitly talks, is it wise to value the recruiting skill set as highly? Are more assistant coaches being hired based on their ability to actually coach? Where do our assistants rank in this area?
Look up Brad Davison, Kirk Penney, Luke Murray, PJ Thompson, Tyler Underwood, Rob Summers, Sasha Stefanovic, Carlin Hartman. There's plenty of specialists on major programs and has been for awhile. Most of the above are or were offensive coordinators. IIRC Stefanovic handles guard development, Hartman is a big man specialist. There's also programs with analytic specialists. Nothing new ...
Also, just because the recruiting is no longer high school only, it doesn't mean the recruiters have lost their contacts.
As far as IU ... Clark is highly regarded as an all around coach, scout, recruiter and developer. The other two, meh.
I appreciate the references. I'll take a look.For years, I've read about asst. coaches being hired based on their access to recruiting pipelines, particular regions, and sets of players. Rarely, would I also read about what great students or teachers of the game they might be and that seemed like an intelligent trade off. I'm guessing those two skill sets (actually collection of skill sets) don't always overlap.
In the NIL era where money explicitly talks, is it wise to value the recruiting skill set as highly? Are more assistant coaches being hired based on their ability to actually coach? Where do our assistants rank in this area?
Look up Brad Davison, Kirk Penney, Luke Murray, PJ Thompson, Tyler Underwood, Rob Summers, Sasha Stefanovic, Carlin Hartman. There's plenty of specialists on major programs and has been for awhile. Most of the above are or were offensive coordinators. IIRC Stefanovic handles guard development, Hartman is a big man specialist. There's also programs with analytic specialists. Nothing new ...
Also, just because the recruiting is no longer high school only, it doesn't mean the recruiters have lost their contacts.
As far as IU ... Clark is highly regarded as an all around coach, scout, recruiter and developer. The other two, meh.
Are there metrics for judging assistant coach performance in basketball? How do you separate out their contributions from a head coach? Are there highly successful college basketball head coaches that run their program like Cignetti talks about--he's the CEO and gives a lot of leeway to his assistants to develop the gameplans, players, etc.?
Re recruiters, I guess I assumed money is the #1 factor by far now for recruits. It wouldn't surprise me if "fit" and personal relationship building with a recruiting coach would also factor in at some level, though.
I appreciate the references. I'll take a look.For years, I've read about asst. coaches being hired based on their access to recruiting pipelines, particular regions, and sets of players. Rarely, would I also read about what great students or teachers of the game they might be and that seemed like an intelligent trade off. I'm guessing those two skill sets (actually collection of skill sets) don't always overlap.
In the NIL era where money explicitly talks, is it wise to value the recruiting skill set as highly? Are more assistant coaches being hired based on their ability to actually coach? Where do our assistants rank in this area?
Look up Brad Davison, Kirk Penney, Luke Murray, PJ Thompson, Tyler Underwood, Rob Summers, Sasha Stefanovic, Carlin Hartman. There's plenty of specialists on major programs and has been for awhile. Most of the above are or were offensive coordinators. IIRC Stefanovic handles guard development, Hartman is a big man specialist. There's also programs with analytic specialists. Nothing new ...
Also, just because the recruiting is no longer high school only, it doesn't mean the recruiters have lost their contacts.
As far as IU ... Clark is highly regarded as an all around coach, scout, recruiter and developer. The other two, meh.
Are there metrics for judging assistant coach performance in basketball? How do you separate out their contributions from a head coach? Are there highly successful college basketball head coaches that run their program like Cignetti talks about--he's the CEO and gives a lot of leeway to his assistants to develop the gameplans, players, etc.?
Re recruiters, I guess I assumed money is the #1 factor by far now for recruits. It wouldn't surprise me if "fit" and personal relationship building with a recruiting coach would also factor in at some level, though.
No real metrics, mostly just opinions of other coaches, writers or talking heads.
Most of the offensive coordinators are the ones designing and teaching the sets/actions/options, and calling the plays in real time. So there is some delegating but it probably varies greatly team to team, coach to coach. Football is too big an animal to not delegate to others.