Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Linda Lappe has resigned as WBB Head Coach

MtnBuff said:
RWAG is CU Women's BB's version of AZ and crew, an amazing amount of negativity comes out of that keyboard. As one who is known for long post I can't even come close.

Biggest mistake in watching the women play basketball is to try to compare it with the men's game. Yes the principles and rules of the game are basically the same but how the game is played makes it a completely different game. I'm not a big fan but I do enjoy watching it for the strategy elements. Much of the men's game is trying to create physical mismatches to exploit. The women't game to my eye is much more about creating open shots for players through passing and movement.

The athleticism of the women has advanced a great deal over the years so the game looks to be much faster than it was and the skill level looks to be higher but it hasn't lost that focus on team fundamentals.

I am a little frustrated that there aren't more women getting opportunities to coach top level women's basketball.

http://www.startribune.com/more-men-are-coaching-women-s-college-basketball-teams/254056561/

I think that the women deserve to have the best coach available regardless of gender and it is hard to argue with the success of coaches like Geno (can't spell the last name) at UConn. At the same time we have had title IX for over 25 years now. There have been thousands of highly intelligent, motivated, and capable women who love the game play at the various levels of women's basketball. I find it hard to believe that there aren't more of them who aren't qualified and deserving of a shot at becoming head coaches.
Click to expand...

Gee, maybe its because "sports" aren't affirmative action enterprises? What your resume says, is what you are. I don't read you clamoring about the lack of white players in the NBA.

And "choice" enters into it as well. You know what an assistant coach has to do to move up and that's work 80-weeks regularly and move around, a lot! Many women who choose to start families don't want work that much because it takes time away from their kids and to move around a lot disrupts a family the same way. They choose to do something else. Men have a different view of such work than women when it comes to family.
 
BeBe said:
Click to expand...


If she is it a completely underwhelming hire. Santa Clara lost in the first round of the NIT this year, didn't make it last year.

No head coaching experience at P5 schools, not an exciting background before the current job.

upload_2016-3-26_21-48-56.png

The record doesn't include this year but don't see much to say great coach.
 
MtnBuff said:
If she is it a completely underwhelming hire. Santa Clara lost in the first round of the NIT this year, didn't make it last year.

This fits cu....did you expect better?
No head coaching experience at P5 schools, not an exciting background before the current job.

View attachment 19104

The record doesn't include this year but don't see much to say great coach.
Click to expand...
 
The CU WBB HC job should attract better candidates than someone with only mid-major experience and a losing record as a HC. Add that the bulk of the HC experience being at a Big Sky outfit. Really?
 
BeBe said:
Click to expand...


I find this very disappointing. Why would we hire a coach with a losing record? Makes no sense to me or is all the money going to pay off Lappe? We will be no better off with this coach than if we kept Lappe.
 
Talked to someone who is pretty involved in women's basketball on the HS level and he loves Payne. Says she has tons of personality and can really recruit. "Is the real deal".
 
Looking at her W/L record without context is useless.

Did her teams improve in season and year over year? Trajectory seems positive.

Did she win with her recruits not just the ones she inherited? Seems like she did at S. Utah. Too early on the current job to know.

On my phone, so just took a cursory look, but those would be the first two tests to apply for me.
That would be ten times more relevant than being an assistant for Gino. And UCONN is my team.
 
Biggest positive on her record seems to be an ability to pull the big upset
 
No assistant job was at a major conference school. No head coaching job was at a major conference school. Losing record in 6 years. That doesn't look like we aimed high. If this is the pick, I hope it's demonstrated that she is a tireless recruiter with exemplary history of AAU relationships in the west. On paper it's a Mike Bohn resume.
 
aik said:
No assistant job was at a major conference school. No head coaching job was at a major conference school. Losing record in 6 years. That doesn't look like we aimed high. If this is the pick, I hope it's demonstrated that she is a tireless recruiter with exemplary history of AAU relationships in the west. On paper it's a Mike Bohn resume.
Click to expand...


All she's lacking is a stop at UNC, AFA, or a Front Range D2 school.

This is what I see. We can try to convince ourselves that everything will be fine but if she didn't stand out at the level's she was at what is she going to do in the PAC12.

She may turn out to be really good but @PAHIBuff has a point. Aren't we a good enough destination to attract a coach who has a little more in her background that would indicate prospects for winning at this level.
 
Would be a weird hire. Is there a culture in the AD to automatically go for an experienced head coach at a lower level? Sure seems like it.
 
Duff Man said:
Would be a weird hire. Is there a culture in the AD to automatically go for an experienced head coach at a lower level? Sure seems like it.
Click to expand...


Yes its called being cheap.

You can look at it 2 ways I guess:
A.) Disappointing hire that re-enforces previous tendencies.
B.) Saving our bullets for the revenue programs.

You could argue this was George's chance to set the tone for a change in the AD's MO with a different type of coaching hire than CU has historically makes and he missed the mark. Or you could say this is women's hoops it already loses a bunch of money, the resources are better spent on FB/the Men from a salary stand point taking a chance here on an affordable hire is much lower risk.

What you can't do is say this is a splash hire or spin it as different from the past few hires in our Big 3 sports.
 
Last edited:
absinthe said:
Yes its called being cheap.
Click to expand...

I'm ok with being cheap for non-revenue sports we're not winning titles in. Go with an up-and-comer who has been successful at a lower level and nails the interview. Exceptions would be XC and Ski, where CU should be paying at the top of the market given the elite status of the programs.
 
It's not the hire I would have liked obviously. But given where CU WBB is right now ... last in the PAC-12, a short roster of only 12 players and at least 3 of them not PAC-12 caliber players, very thin in the frontcourt where most of the PAC teams are strong, underwhelming incoming 2016 class, etc. .... IMO any established P5 level head coach isn't gong to have any interest in this job unless they are in love with the state of Colorado and see this as their only chance to get here. A head coach at a lower level D1 school who has had success re-building a program and is looking to move up to the P5 ranks may be the best CU can attract right now.
 
Buffnik said:
I'm ok with being cheap for non-revenue sports we're not winning titles in. Go with an up-and-comer who has been successful at a lower level and nails the interview.
Click to expand...

I am not okay with being cheap. Cheap doesn't get women's basketball fans a good coach nor will it take CU back to prominence.

This hire will make a decision not to renew my season tickets easy. I wasn't going to if Lappe was retained, but I want more than this.
 
buffgal said:
I am not okay with being cheap. Cheap doesn't get women's basketball fans a good coach nor will it take CU back to prominence.

This hire will make a decision not to renew my season tickets easy. I wasn't going to if Lappe was retained, but I want more than this.
Click to expand...

Your post goes to a good point. In addition to it being a disgrace to the university and the players for the AD to settle for mediocrity or worse in any sport WBB provides a reason to strive to be good.

Women's BB at CU may never be a money maker, I don't know how many women's programs in the country do make money but I'm sure the number is small. That doesn't mean though that WBB revenues don't matter.

When the CU women were good attendance, paid attendance, was significantly higher than it is now. Boulder has shown it will turn out and support a quality program. Add another 2,000 paying fans per game along with the refreshments and parking revenues and other ancillary revenues and you have a significant amount of money. If the WBB program is generating that money against their expenses those funds can be used for other non-revenue sports.

In effect having a quality product for any sport that generates seat revenues can impact the rest of the AD significantly. It shouldn't be discounted to save some pennies on hiring a new coach.
 
We should be expecting to be a program that's making the Dance frequently and experiencing our fair share of top 25-caliber seasons. Doesn't look like we're putting our best effort into doing that.
 
RE: WBB attendance. Just FYI for the 2014-5 season, the top 20 teams (in attendance, not necessarily ranking) had numbers from the low 12,000 to 4300. Teams 7 through 17 in attendance all had averages greater than 5,000 but less than 7,000. From NCAA website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top