Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 9      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   Next   »
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,428
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
I'm the Eddie Feigner of softball forums 3leftturns. That's all you need to know. Ever seen an old man pitch by throwing balls behind his back from second base? I'm that guy when it comes to posting on fastpitch forums.
I don't care what you are feigning.... what the hell are you bringing me up for
Unregistered
Reply with quote  #32 
Laura Berg? You mean the "Mommie Dearest" of college softball? Yea I'm sure Tech would love that Jayrot.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,098
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Laura Berg? You mean the "Mommie Dearest" of college softball? Yea I'm sure Tech would love that Jayrot.


I don't care how you want to classify her.  I'll take a coach that can recruit players well enough to beat UW.  At this point, GT couldn't beat Ga Southern.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,428
Reply with quote  #34 
Sorry, I have a person I trust implicitly who vouches for her in glowing terms.

So, NOW you can talk about me, trog.

Unregistered
Reply with quote  #35 
The unfortunate part for any coach that took the job after Rittman was unceremoniously let go is that when you lose all your pitching (Stevens/Schreyer/Barnhill) it was/is virtually impossible to find a replacement that was not already committed or signed to another school that would be able to handle the academics. All the PAC 12 capable pitchers from the Junior/Senior classes were already taken. To find a PAC 12 capable uncommitted pitcher that can get ACCEPTED into Stanford was basically impossible. I believe her first pitcher that she was able to recruit in the younger classes (Freshman/Sophomore in HS) will be next year with Dwyer who is an excellent pitcher. My guess is the administration is giving her a chance to get some of her recruits into the school before they make any decision on replacing her. Replacing Rittman after the chaos that had taken place was a NO WIN situation. Even Jessica Allister didn't want to touch it. Things would more than likely be much different if Schreyer and Barnhill were their two main pitchers right now. The biggest issue with Stanford is the lack of pitching which is everything in this day and age.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,428
Reply with quote  #36 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
The unfortunate part for any coach that took the job after Rittman was unceremoniously let go is that when you lose all your pitching (Stevens/Schreyer/Barnhill)


And Carley Hoover
Unregistered
Reply with quote  #37 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns


And Carley Hoover


Shoot - how did I forget her too. HAHA.
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Sorry, I have a person I trust implicitly who vouches for her in glowing terms.

So, NOW you can talk about me, trog.




As in troglodyte?  I lol'd!  And I watched OSU and Udub this weekend on tv, and yeah, 3left, I think you are correct.  Berg will do just fine once a better funded program calls for her.
Jusayin

Registered:
Posts: 93
Reply with quote  #39 
A good coach is an "in spite of" person, instead of a "because of" person.  All I hear (read) on this board is how she can't win "because of" this or that, it's never that she wins "in spite of" these issues.  I look at someone like Walton when he took over Florida they were lousy, after he took over they were great.  LSU also got considerably better instantly after adding Coach BT.  Auburn got infinitely better by adding Clint.  Oregon got instantly better by adding Mike White.  Fresno State got instantly better by adding Coach Ford.  Cal Poly got instantly better by adding Coach Jenny Condon.  Fullerton got better by adding Coach Kelly Ford.  UC Riverside got better when they added Coach Linda Garza.  They all had considerable challenges to overcome, mostly that the teams were not good and they made them better.  But Stanford has gotten worse.

To those that are positive on Coach RH, what criteria are you using to gauge that she has been doing a good job?  They are worse in nearly every offensive and defensive category and most importantly Wins/Losses since she has taken over.  And, as of this year, are lightening their pre-conference SOS.  The rumblings in the stands and in the locker room suggest that the players are not having a great experience with her outside of wins and losses.

1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #40 
I highly doubt Barnhill seriously considered Stanford.  It was Florida and Rocha all the way.  And...once again, POST your handle, stop being an unregistered sissy.
ZTE

Registered:
Posts: 593
Reply with quote  #41 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough
I highly doubt Barnhill seriously considered Stanford.  It was Florida and Rocha all the way.  And...once again, POST your handle, stop being an unregistered bloody sissy.
OldWiseOne

Registered:
Posts: 320
Reply with quote  #42 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough
I highly doubt Barnhill seriously considered Stanford.  It was Florida and Rocha all the way.  And...once again, POST your handle, stop being an unregistered sissy.


Barnhill's #1 choice all along was Stanford. She is a crazy high academic kid and wanted a Stanford/northwestern type school. That's why she held out so long. If Rittman had offered she would have accepted but they took an early verbal from someone else. She obviously loved Rocha and Florida but all the trappings of the SEC athletics meant nothing to her. For her it was all about the academics.
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #43 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldWiseOne
Barnhill's #1 choice all along was Stanford. She is a crazy high academic kid and wanted a Stanford/northwestern type school. That's why she held out so long. If Rittman had offered she would have accepted but they took an early verbal from someone else. She obviously loved Rocha and Florida but all the trappings of the SEC athletics meant nothing to her. For her it was all about the academics.



The key word being Rittman, while his demise had been brewing for some time due to those a$$hole parents and played out right here...boooo to those people!!!!!!!!!!!  I don't think Barnhill wanted any of that mess, otherwise the Stanford education would have pulled her in REGARDLESS of who was coaching or what the situation was.
lovsofbal

Registered:
Posts: 1,503
Reply with quote  #44 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusayin
A good coach is an "in spite of" person, instead of a "because of" person.  All I hear (read) on this board is how she can't win "because of" this or that, it's never that she wins "in spite of" these issues.  I look at someone like Walton when he took over Florida they were lousy, after he took over they were great.  LSU also got considerably better instantly after adding Coach BT.  Auburn got infinitely better by adding Clint.  Oregon got instantly better by adding Mike White.  Fresno State got instantly better by adding Coach Ford.  Cal Poly got instantly better by adding Coach Jenny Condon.  Fullerton got better by adding Coach Kelly Ford.  UC Riverside got better when they added Coach Linda Garza.  They all had considerable challenges to overcome, mostly that the teams were not good and they made them better.  But Stanford has gotten worse.

To those that are positive on Coach RH, what criteria are you using to gauge that she has been doing a good job?  They are worse in nearly every offensive and defensive category and most importantly Wins/Losses since she has taken over.  And, as of this year, are lightening their pre-conference SOS.  The rumblings in the stands and in the locker room suggest that the players are not having a great experience with her outside of wins and losses.




After the dust settled, the cupboard was bare.
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 17,098
Reply with quote  #45 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough



The key word being Rittman, while his demise had been brewing for some time due to those a$$hole parents and played out right here...boooo to those people!!!!!!!!!!!  I don't think Barnhill wanted any of that mess, otherwise the Stanford education would have pulled her in REGARDLESS of who was coaching or what the situation was.


Thank God Myers doesn't have a Wells on his team.
lovsofbal

Registered:
Posts: 1,503
Reply with quote  #46 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrot


Thank God Myers doesn't have a Wells on his team.


+1
ZTE

Registered:
Posts: 593
Reply with quote  #47 
Stanford under Hanson 2W-55L in conference[nono]
ccdude

Registered:
Posts: 601
Reply with quote  #48 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusayin
A good coach is an "in spite of" person, instead of a "because of" person.  All I hear (read) on this board is how she can't win "because of" this or that, it's never that she wins "in spite of" these issues.  I look at someone like Walton when he took over Florida they were lousy, after he took over they were great.  LSU also got considerably better instantly after adding Coach BT.  Auburn got infinitely better by adding Clint.  Oregon got instantly better by adding Mike White.  Fresno State got instantly better by adding Coach Ford.  Cal Poly got instantly better by adding Coach Jenny Condon.  Fullerton got better by adding Coach Kelly Ford.  UC Riverside got better when they added Coach Linda Garza.  They all had considerable challenges to overcome, mostly that the teams were not good and they made them better.  But Stanford has gotten worse.

To those that are positive on Coach RH, what criteria are you using to gauge that she has been doing a good job?  They are worse in nearly every offensive and defensive category and most importantly Wins/Losses since she has taken over.  And, as of this year, are lightening their pre-conference SOS.  The rumblings in the stands and in the locker room suggest that the players are not having a great experience with her outside of wins and losses.



Not the right thread, but going to disagree about Poly and Jenny Condon

__________________
ccdude
lurker123

Registered:
Posts: 179
Reply with quote  #49 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusayin
A good coach is an "in spite of" person, instead of a "because of" person.  All I hear (read) on this board is how she can't win "because of" this or that, it's never that she wins "in spite of" these issues.  I look at someone like Walton when he took over Florida they were lousy, after he took over they were great.  LSU also got considerably better instantly after adding Coach BT.  Auburn got infinitely better by adding Clint.  Oregon got instantly better by adding Mike White.  Fresno State got instantly better by adding Coach Ford.  Cal Poly got instantly better by adding Coach Jenny Condon.  Fullerton got better by adding Coach Kelly Ford.  UC Riverside got better when they added Coach Linda Garza.  They all had considerable challenges to overcome, mostly that the teams were not good and they made them better.  But Stanford has gotten worse.

To those that are positive on Coach RH, what criteria are you using to gauge that she has been doing a good job?  They are worse in nearly every offensive and defensive category and most importantly Wins/Losses since she has taken over.  And, as of this year, are lightening their pre-conference SOS.  The rumblings in the stands and in the locker room suggest that the players are not having a great experience with her outside of wins and losses.



I agree with your "in spite of" statement wholeheartedly.

However I don't think this applies. A lot of the schools you mentioned were very desirable places to coach and/or don't have the academic standards that Stanford has to deal with and the ability to get transfers in - which isn't going to happen at Stanford.

All I can say is echo this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovsofbal
After the dust settled, the cupboard was bare.


You have to give her a chance to get her recruits in at such a high-academic university where 75% of the recruitable student-athletes are immediately off of her list due to grades.

This is only her third season and probably the first recruiting class she has gotten in that were legit. There are five kids hitting over .300. Pitching is terrible but we all know that it is the toughest piece of the puzzle.
MadDogsDad

Registered:
Posts: 2,178
Reply with quote  #50 
Can someone tell me who is talking about Hanson and who is talking about Berg? I think there is some intertangling going on.
__________________
And if I don't like what you say then...

your kid sucks.
Jusayin

Registered:
Posts: 93
Reply with quote  #51 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovsofbal



After the dust settled, the cupboard was bare.


Nope, the last year JR coached and the first year RH coached they were essentially the same team.  Except they lost A LOT more games, the Stanford archives seem to be conveniently down right now, otherwise I'd get specific.  
Jusayin

Registered:
Posts: 93
Reply with quote  #52 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZTE
Stanford under Hanson 2W-55L in conference[nono]


This is truly the only point that matters.  Bravo, ZTE, for bringing facts to a feelings fight.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 11,428
Reply with quote  #53 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDogsDad
Can someone tell me who is talking about Hanson and who is talking about Berg? I think there is some intertangling going on.
my responses are re: berg
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 252
Reply with quote  #54 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusayin


This is truly the only point that matters.  Bravo, ZTE, for bringing facts to a feelings fight.


Feelings fight?  You had idiot parents drive everyone away and are still attempting to do so here on this site by attacking Hanson.  You had players leave.  As someone stated, Rachel was the 10th candidate choice.  Who the hell do you think was going to take the job NO ONE WANTED?  Those are facts!

__________________
Those mountains in front of you will seem like little hills when you are beyond them and they are in the past!
Truscoop

Registered:
Posts: 3
Reply with quote  #55 
This is very interesting how many of you think you know what goes on inside the administration of a University. Or at least pass negative judgement on people and name call. Ugh. This is my first look at a chatting softball forum and I'm embarrassed for you.
Unregistered
Reply with quote  #56 
Oh, well boohoo Truscoop. Welcome to the big girl softball forums.
outofzone

Registered:
Posts: 982
Reply with quote  #57 
Mr just registered, it's an opinion forum. And I guess this will be your only post if it's that bad right?
1janiedough

Registered:
Posts: 2,537
Reply with quote  #58 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truscoop
This is very interesting how many of you think you know what goes on inside the administration of a University. Or at least pass negative judgement on people and name call. Ugh. This is my first look at a chatting softball forum and I'm embarrassed for you.



So you say you have the truscoop but none of us do, heh?  Methinks you might be one of those Stanford parents who ran Rittman off...otherwise why the heck is THIS thread your first post?
Unregistered
Reply with quote  #59 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jusayin


Nope, the last year JR coached and the first year RH coached they were essentially the same team.  Except they lost A LOT more games, the Stanford archives seem to be conveniently down right now, otherwise I'd get specific.  


Except Hoover was gone to LSU, Stevens was at OU and Schreyer was hurt most of Hanson's first year. That left Snyder and Kylie Sorenson, the SS, having to pitch. Your right. Same team[rolleyes].  One cannot blame Hanson for the last two years. The cupboard was bare in the most essential position...pitching!

I will admit I think Hanson was in over her head but nobody wanted to touch that program with a 10 foot pole.
AustinSoftball

Registered:
Posts: 115
Reply with quote  #60 
Some of the comments on the thread keep rearguing the Rittman situation.  He somehow managed to have much success at Stanford until his final two seasons when the team did not make the NCAA tourney.  The noise from some players was quite disturbing.  No matter who was at fault in that program at the time, university officials have a difficult time retaining the staff when those narratives emerge.  No one can dispute that the elite pitchers who are capable of pitching in this conference are committed years in advance.  Coach Hanson deserves a chance to show if she can recruit a team to compete in the conference.  Does anyone think a quick fire would produce a better coach or staff? It is hard to believe any head coach who has a winning program would want to go to a job with a leash of two or three years. The conversation here seems to imply better coaching talent is waiting for this position.  I doubt it.  This staff may not be able to produce a winning team, but if you do not give them a chance, you hurt the program's ability to recruit in the future.  
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.