Define a good college coach

[silentkman]

I follow pro tennis the majority of the time. To the expert college watchers, since most kids attending D1 schools have private coaches. Does the college coach tinker with a players game a bit or is he or she just a manager? What consitutes a good college coach?

 

[andfor]

At the D1 level it's fairly common for each player to have their own private type lesson with the coach or asst. each week. Maybe more than one, guess that depends on the rules for hours practicing etc. I do know coaches that have helped players correct mechanics, make minor adjustments. I believe a good coach makes these types of decisions on a player by player basis.

In addition some programs will have access to a sports psych/mental strength coach.

Overall the highlevel sign of a good coach is seeing players improve and move up the team latter year over year.

 

[Sureshot]

I follow pro tennis the majority of the time. To the expert college watchers, since most kids attending D1 schools have private coaches. Does the college coach tinker with a players game a bit or is he or she just a manager? What consitutes a good college coach?

There are many hats a college coach has to wear. But if you are talking specifically about player development, there are a few like Ty Tucker (Ohio St) and Bruce Berque (Texas) who come to mind. They are good developers. I guess Billy Martin of UCLA too considering Giron, Cressy, Macdonald etc graduated to become successful pros under his tutelage.

 

[silentkman]

At the D1 level it's fairly common for each player to have their own private type lesson with the coach or asst. each week. Maybe more that one, guess that depends on the rules for hours practicing etc. I do know coaches that have helped players correct mechanics, make minor adjustments. I believe a good coach makes these types of decisions on a player by player basis.

In addition some programs will have access to a sports psych/mental strength coach.

Overall the highlevel sign of a good coach is seeing players improve and move up the team latter year over year.

Does the head coach have time to work with each player individually? How extensive is the film work etc? Are you saying that the college coach has become the primary for each player. What happens when they are out of school for the summer? do they go back to their private coach?

 

[dannythomas]

I can tell you what a good college coach is not. A coach that is constantly disrupting play in matches by walking on court after every point instructing their player how to play the next poInt. That shows a coach who doesn’t trust their player , only cares about winning college matches without any concern for player development. Unfortunately too many coaches do that.

 

[Gracelhink]

I agree with Danny’s assessment of over functioning or intrusive coach involvement in match play.
While most players want coaches who will develop their game, they don’t trust coaches who are not fully invested for player development,
Just my experience playing college tennis, …. Most players also want to win now, we get discouraged when we make errors and will accept in match coaching which inspires and encourages better performance.
if I was to assess what makes coaches trusted and effective during match play, i would pitch this as a starter.
1. “good coaches” are in tune with how individual players respond to their coaching, they kind of have an innate sense for how much to interact in matches, when they are wanted and when they exceed their welcome.
2. The best coaches will minimize corrections/critique of their players during matches. Film review is a better teacher.
3. the elite coaches maximize encouragement, focus players forward, and when prompted offer counsel on what they see of an opponents vulnerability.

 

[silentkman]

I can tell you what a good college coach is not. A coach that is constantly disrupting play in matches by walking on court after every point instructing their player how to play the next poInt. That shows a coach who doesn’t trust their player , only cares about winning college matches without any concern for player development. Unfortunately too many coaches do that.

exactly, I've never understood that. it's embarrassing to instuct the player afer every point.

 

[Clemson_tennis]

I can tell you what a good college coach is not. A coach that is constantly disrupting play in matches by walking on court after every point instructing their player how to play the next poInt. That shows a coach who doesn’t trust their player , only cares about winning college matches without any concern for player development. Unfortunately too many coaches do that.

This is extremely common in college tennis now unfortunately. I’ve noticed it tends to come more from the assistants than the head coach. I think it’s as much about them trying to prove they are coaching and working hard, doing their job. Also a way for them to get their nervous energy out.

But instead it usually transfers that nervous energy to the players.

 

[JLyon]

This is extremely common in college tennis now unfortunately. I’ve noticed it tends to come more from the assistants than the head coach. I think it’s as much about them trying to prove they are coaching and working hard, doing their job. Also a way for them to get their nervous energy out.

But instead it usually transfers that nervous energy to the players.

really depends on the player. I have seen it run the gambit, some players need that constant reinforcement, while others are more hands off. A good coaching staff recognizes the needs of the individual players

 

[dannythomas]

Are there really players who need coaching every point ? These players have come from junior tournaments where there is zero on court coaching. I really don’t think so. As Clemson pointed out these are really over zealous assistant coaches justifying their existence and in that case it is up to the players to say they don’t want it. Or the head coaches to scale it back. Either way I don’t accept the argument that there are players who need it. And it certainly does not help the players’ long term development. It is the coaches desparation to win by making decisions that the players should make themselves. Coaching and encouraging players during matches Is part of college tennis but in moderation it would be no less effective.

 

[mikej]

What consitutes a good college coach?

My criteria:
1) someone who pisses off bob
2) someone who ruins a once dominant program like Stanford
3) someone who does not ask women’s college athletes to meet them for drinks in the middle of the night to discuss their career

 

[JLyon]

Are there really players who need coaching every point ? These players have come from junior tournaments where there is zero on court coaching. I really don’t think so. As Clemson pointed out these are really over zealous assistant coaches justifying their existence and in that case it is up to the players to say they don’t want it. Or the head coaches to scale it back. Either way I don’t accept the argument that there are players who need it. And it certainly does not help the players’ long term development. It is the coaches desparation to win by making decisions that the players should make themselves. Coaching and encouraging players during matches Is part of college tennis but in moderation it would be no less effective.

I do not necessarily believe it is coaching everytime coach comes on court, some of it is just encouragement or to have the player settle down, so not always coaching in the sense some may think of.

 

[Gemini]

This is extremely common in college tennis now unfortunately. I’ve noticed it tends to come more from the assistants than the head coach. I think it’s as much about them trying to prove they are coaching and working hard, doing their job. Also a way for them to get their nervous energy out.

But instead it usually transfers that nervous energy to the players.

I saw this in a recent college women's doubles match. The assistant came out of what I'd say is 98% of the the points (win or lose) and by the hand gestures I could tell it was more than just encouragement. I could tell the players were flustered and it just annoyed me.

For me, a good coach dedicates time to work with each player to bring up their physical game. A good coach should also be motivational from a positive perspective. During matches negative talk and body language openly with players tends to deflate. That's part of the mental impact.

You have to remember that the majority of players are no more than being four years out of high school. Maturity isn't a strong suit for the overwhelming majority of college tennis players so their egos are still pretty fragile.

 

[dannythomas]

I saw this in a recent college women's doubles match. The assistant came out of what I'd say is 98% of the the points (win or lose) and by the hand gestures I could tell it was more than just encouragement. I could tell the players were flustered and it just annoyed me.

For me, a good coach dedicates time to work with each player to bring up their physical game. A good coach should also be motivational from a positive perspective. During matches negative talk and body language openly with players tends to deflate. That's part of the mental impact.

You have to remember that the majority of players are no more than being four years out of high school. Maturity isn't a strong suit for the overwhelming majority of college tennis players so their egos are still pretty fragile.

‘Yes they are not long out of high school. But the vast majority have been playing tournament tennis for years with no on court coaching. So suddenly they need point by point coaching ? Obviously they don’t and it is the coaches and assistant coaches so desperate to win at all costs that they think that will achieve their objectives. The irony is that in most cases it is counter productive in achieving those. Nobody wants to take away encouragement. It is part of the energy of college tennis. But the sooner actual coaching is restricted to change overs the better. And the good coaches ( which is after all the point of this thread ) will be all the better for it.

 

[andfor]

‘Yes they are not long out of high school. But the vast majority have been playing tournament tennis for years with no on court coaching. So suddenly they need point by point coaching ? Obviously they don’t and it is the coaches and assistant coaches so desperate to win at all costs that they think that will achieve their objectives. The irony is that in most cases it is counter productive in achieving those. Nobody wants to take away encouragement. It is part of the energy of college tennis. But the sooner actual coaching is restricted to change overs the better. And the good coaches ( which is after all the point of this thread ) will be all the better for it.

I'd be okay with coaching on changeovers only. But the coaches make the rules and the way they have it now likely eliminates coaching cheating the change over rule only, etc.

 

[Clemson_tennis]

Didn't it used to be limited and then a few years ago they just binned all restrictions?

 

[JLyon]

Didn't it used to be limited and then a few years ago they just binned all restrictions?

Basically a coach can coach anytime as long as it does not interfere with play, of course players can be subjected to Time Violations and also if coaching during a point in play can be considered "Coaches Interference Loss of Point"

 

[bobleenov1963]

My criteria:
1) someone who pisses off bob
2) someone who ruins a once dominant program like Stanford
3) someone who does not ask women’s college athletes to meet them for drinks in the middle of the night to discuss their career

A good coach is one that:
1) Winning NCAA championship in the month of May,
2) Raise the academic level of players under his guidance,
3) Good networking to get his players to get good paying jobs after graduation and/or when their time to play on the pro circuit is over,
4) Raise the University profile,

By that criteria, Andres Pedroso does a very good job and TT does not. UVA is a much well known university than my alma mater OSU

 

[silentkman]

A good coach is one that:
1) Winning NCAA championship in the month of May,
2) Raise the academic level of players under his guidance,
3) Good networking to get his players to get good paying jobs after graduation and/or when their time to play on the pro circuit is over,
4) Raise the University profile,

By that criteria, Andres Pedroso does a very good job and TT does not. UVA is a much well known university than my alma mater OSU

Honestly, the other answers were much better.

 

[silentkman]

I'd be okay with coaching on changeovers only. But the coaches make the rules and the way they have it now likely eliminates coaching cheating the change over rule only, etc.

In high school it was only on changeovers. Tennis is turning into football with instruction on every play. it's a horrible look for the sport. I would love to see a poll to see if the players actually like it.

 

[armchair]

This is extremely common in college tennis now unfortunately. I’ve noticed it tends to come more from the assistants than the head coach. I think it’s as much about them trying to prove they are coaching and working hard, doing their job. Also a way for them to get their nervous energy out.

But instead it usually transfers that nervous energy to the players.

I would think being selective about giving advice during a match would be preferable: A coach can spot certain things about tactics that can be worth passing along or a tip
about technique if the player is struggling, perhaps. But, yea, if I were a player and a coach was in my ear constantly it might be counter-productive. I suspect different players react to in-match coaching differently, and wise coaches will understand that.

 

[dannythomas]

Basically a coach can coach anytime as long as it does not interfere with play, of course players can be subjected to Time Violations and also if coaching during a point in play can be considered "Coaches Interference Loss of Point"

That of course hardly ever happens ….

 

[andfor]

In high school it was only only changeovers. Tennis is turning into football with instruction on every play. it's a horrible look for the sport. I would love to see a poll to see if the players actually like it.

Some players need tactical point guidance more than others. That's stating the obvious I know. For me the question is, does the coach giving the tactical instruction point by point know what he's doing, is he effective? HAHA. I too would like to see a poll.

 

[Sureshot]

The ITF is toying with the idea of coaching trials. And the ATP/WTA too? So the players who turn pro won’t feel like fish out of water. But excessive coaching is a turnoff to college tennis fans.