SheetJobs wrote:
Rumor is, a few high turnover MVC schools will have a few more Assistant Jobs open over the next few months.
Help us out with the riddle. It appears the "high turnover schools" have made hires, so what next?
SheetJobs wrote:
Rumor is, a few high turnover MVC schools will have a few more Assistant Jobs open over the next few months.
Help us out with the riddle. It appears the "high turnover schools" have made hires, so what next?
Sliding Scale wrote:
Has to be Texas State or Baylor.
I know almost all of these coaches and I highly doubt it would be UTRGV, SFA or UNT. Hanson and Penberthy have worked in tough and under funded situations in their previous stops and have been professional; they would not alienate themselves within a coaching staff in the first months. Matt Layton has no coaching experience, but was exposed to and surrounded by good coaching and methods at Air Force. I think he'll do fine.
I just don't think Lamar is a) the kind of school anyone pay attention to or has a lot of pressure and b) has the resources to move on from a coach after just hiring them.
People pay attention to Baylor distance?
They may not know the future of the conference, but they know the future of the track and field program.
Sliding Scale wrote:
Has to be Texas State or Baylor.
I know almost all of these coaches and I highly doubt it would be UTRGV, SFA or UNT. Hanson and Penberthy have worked in tough and under funded situations in their previous stops and have been professional; they would not alienate themselves within a coaching staff in the first months. Matt Layton has no coaching experience, but was exposed to and surrounded by good coaching and methods at Air Force. I think he'll do fine.
I just don't think Lamar is a) the kind of school anyone pay attention to or has a lot of pressure and b) has the resources to move on from a coach after just hiring them.
Clearly written by Hanson or Penberthy. Gotta love when folks that are in hot water get on LetsRun to save face. Lol!
Question is what did you do? It’s always either an assistant trying to be the head coach and not doing what’s asked of them or an assistant that can’t stay out of trouble and putting the AD on high alert which leads to being fired so quickly.
VMI distance job has been offered and turned down twice. Tough place, doesn’t pay great. Some good talent and great facility though. Director job is a formality - it’ll be Zach.
Any word on Oklahoma throws?
thuhrowing wrote:
Any word on Oklahoma throws?
Mohamad Saatara. Heard it here first.
I dont buy it. He fought to get back to California. Has to be a negotiation move on his part.
All Mine wrote:
https://nmstatesports.com/news/2021/10/25/rath-tabbed-as-nm-states-head-cross-country-and-track-field-coach.aspx
How many coaches applied for this and either interviewed or weren't even interviewed, that had resumes and experience far superior to his?
Grimey45 wrote:
All Mine wrote:
https://nmstatesports.com/news/2021/10/25/rath-tabbed-as-nm-states-head-cross-country-and-track-field-coach.aspxHow many coaches applied for this and either interviewed or weren't even interviewed, that had resumes and experience far superior to his?
I don't know, but sometimes having a superior resume means nothing if you can't articulate how you'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC, and can continue to do so with in light of conference expansion. Rath has been there since they went from doormats to challenging for and winning conference titles. And he probably doesn't come with as big of an ego as some of those applying who have resumes "far superior".
Sounds like someone didn't get an interview/or didn't get selected and is a bit bitter.
gobluesasquatch wrote:
Grimey45 wrote:
How many coaches applied for this and either interviewed or weren't even interviewed, that had resumes and experience far superior to his?
I don't know, but sometimes having a superior resume means nothing if you can't articulate how you'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC, and can continue to do so with in light of conference expansion. Rath has been there since they went from doormats to challenging for and winning conference titles. And he probably doesn't come with as big of an ego as some of those applying who have resumes "far superior".
Sounds like someone didn't get an interview/or didn't get selected and is a bit bitter.
Not bitter. I understand how these things work. It's just silly though that they have to post a job that they were going to give Rath the whole time. Who you know is important. My resume and experience are at least 10x stronger than his. No interview. I didn't get an opportunity to "articulate how I'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC", and stating a fact that my qualifications are stronger than his is not a big ego, it's fact.
I'm assuming I'm not the only person who applied with far stronger qualifications. That means they weren't wanting to consider the best. It means they had hiring rules they had to follow. They aren't going to want to interview the best candidates (on paper) in this situation. That might complicate their pre-determined path. He is a fine hire. He meets the qualifications. He will most likely do a good job. It's just comical that they have to post the position when they aren't going to consider anyone else.
gobluesasquatch wrote:
Grimey45 wrote:
How many coaches applied for this and either interviewed or weren't even interviewed, that had resumes and experience far superior to his?
I don't know, but sometimes having a superior resume means nothing if you can't articulate how you'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC, and can continue to do so with in light of conference expansion. Rath has been there since they went from doormats to challenging for and winning conference titles. And he probably doesn't come with as big of an ego as some of those applying who have resumes "far superior".
Sounds like someone didn't get an interview/or didn't get selected and is a bit bitter.
Unfortunately you are correct. We see it all the time when unqualified assistants are hired.
Reading the article said they did a national search and the best one they picked was him?
Not that he isn't a good coach. He most likely is, but good assistant coach doesn't mean good head coach. Also its the WAC. The WAC today is terrible in track and field. Being competitive in that conference means just trying. Most of the Athletic Directors in the WAC could care less about the sport. Good luck to Rath.
DIII school in a good location. Not to far from Knoxville. XC team is average at best. No track facility to speak of....could be an interesting job for a young coach.
Any update on the Queen's position?
Grimey45 wrote:
gobluesasquatch wrote:
I don't know, but sometimes having a superior resume means nothing if you can't articulate how you'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC, and can continue to do so with in light of conference expansion. Rath has been there since they went from doormats to challenging for and winning conference titles. And he probably doesn't come with as big of an ego as some of those applying who have resumes "far superior".
Sounds like someone didn't get an interview/or didn't get selected and is a bit bitter.
Not bitter. I understand how these things work. It's just silly though that they have to post a job that they were going to give Rath the whole time. Who you know is important. My resume and experience are at least 10x stronger than his. No interview. I didn't get an opportunity to "articulate how I'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC", and stating a fact that my qualifications are stronger than his is not a big ego, it's fact.
I'm assuming I'm not the only person who applied with far stronger qualifications. That means they weren't wanting to consider the best. It means they had hiring rules they had to follow. They aren't going to want to interview the best candidates (on paper) in this situation. That might complicate their pre-determined path. He is a fine hire. He meets the qualifications. He will most likely do a good job. It's just comical that they have to post the position when they aren't going to consider anyone else.
I'll start off by saying that I sympathize. I know how it feels but from a different perspective. I agree with you but I've also seen the opposite scenerio where an assistant has been with a program for 6-10 years only to get passed up for a head coaching position because it's assumed that the applicant that looks good on paper would be a better fit. Don't get me wrong, an outside applicant might work out, but the person that's been a part of the program for an extended period of time should at least be genuinely CONSIDERED first. What happens from there is fair game, but I'd be super pissed if I was an assistant for an extended period of time only to get overlooked for someone who looked better on paper.
New Job wrote:
Any update on the Queen's position?
Krolick
This post was removed.
Grimey45 wrote:
gobluesasquatch wrote:
I don't know, but sometimes having a superior resume means nothing if you can't articulate how you'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC, and can continue to do so with in light of conference expansion. Rath has been there since they went from doormats to challenging for and winning conference titles. And he probably doesn't come with as big of an ego as some of those applying who have resumes "far superior".
Sounds like someone didn't get an interview/or didn't get selected and is a bit bitter.
Not bitter. I understand how these things work. It's just silly though that they have to post a job that they were going to give Rath the whole time. Who you know is important. My resume and experience are at least 10x stronger than his. No interview. I didn't get an opportunity to "articulate how I'd continue to build a program that has become competitive in the WAC", and stating a fact that my qualifications are stronger than his is not a big ego, it's fact.
I'm assuming I'm not the only person who applied with far stronger qualifications. That means they weren't wanting to consider the best. It means they had hiring rules they had to follow. They aren't going to want to interview the best candidates (on paper) in this situation. That might complicate their pre-determined path. He is a fine hire. He meets the qualifications. He will most likely do a good job. It's just comical that they have to post the position when they aren't going to consider anyone else.
To keep this relevant to the coaching openings, you posit that your resume is "at least 10x stronger than his". So just to help us all understand what a strong resume looks like, in your opinion, please tell me how your resume is 10x stronger. So many anonymous posters come on to this message board and claim they are better, or a hire sucks, or whatever, so please help us understand what a stronger resume looks like.
As for your assumption about hiring rules to follow, usually perfunctory postings last anywhere from 7 - 14 days, not more than a month. Why keep a job posted and open for that long? You wouldn't, and I cannot think of any state school that would be required to post for that long. If we followed your logic of you wouldn't interview the best candidates (on paper), you'd want to make the application window as small as possible to limit the potential super candidate from getting their application in, right?
Anyhow, I'd love to know what defines a 10x stronger resume, otherwise lets get back to job postings. What jobs are currently open - anyone want to reset the board?