Job openings especially for distance are about dried up. Hopefully we get some juicy details on what the next year holds. Who will be retiring or making moves to start the carousel all over again.
Job openings especially for distance are about dried up. Hopefully we get some juicy details on what the next year holds. Who will be retiring or making moves to start the carousel all over again.
Pittsburgh assistant
https://ncaamarket.ncaa.org/jobs/15650979/assistant-track-field-coach
gobluesasquatch wrote:
Grimey45 wrote:
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?
OK, not that it matters, but based on his press release I have nearly 30x more experience as a head coach, about half of that at the NCAA I level. I have 7x more team championships, 98% of which have been as the head coach and about 60% of which have been at the NCAA I level. About 45x the number of all-conference athletes. 30x more coach of the year honors. nearly 40x more NCAA I National Preliminary qualifiers and 6x more all-americans. Does that satisfy you as being around 10x more qualified? Now that I look at it, I think I'm more like 30x more qualified than he is.
If they were serious about getting the best candidate, they would have interviewed me. If they didn't like me after the interview, or felt I wasn't a good culture fit or something like that, so be it. I'm not saying they should have hired me. More factors go into hiring than accomplishments and experience. But I do think it is reasonable to say they should have interviewed me, if the position was really open and wasn't designated to Rath from the beginning. And if it was designated to Rath from the beginning and they had to jump through employment rules and post it and all that, then I think that is silly. They should change or eliminate the laws since the laws are not accomplishing what they are intended to accomplish.
Grimey45 wrote:
gobluesasquatch wrote:
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?
OK, not that it matters, but based on his press release I have nearly 30x more experience as a head coach, about half of that at the NCAA I level. I have 7x more team championships, 98% of which have been as the head coach and about 60% of which have been at the NCAA I level. About 45x the number of all-conference athletes. 30x more coach of the year honors. nearly 40x more NCAA I National Preliminary qualifiers and 6x more all-americans. Does that satisfy you as being around 10x more qualified? Now that I look at it, I think I'm more like 30x more qualified than he is.
If they were serious about getting the best candidate, they would have interviewed me. If they didn't like me after the interview, or felt I wasn't a good culture fit or something like that, so be it. I'm not saying they should have hired me. More factors go into hiring than accomplishments and experience. But I do think it is reasonable to say they should have interviewed me, if the position was really open and wasn't designated to Rath from the beginning. And if it was designated to Rath from the beginning and they had to jump through employment rules and post it and all that, then I think that is silly. They should change or eliminate the laws since the laws are not accomplishing what they are intended to accomplish.
Sounds like you have been in the game a long time. Have you considered maybe they want some one younger, more positive and energetic? Old and bitter isn't the best sell.
I agree. You sound like you've been coaching for quite a while. Also... If you have had that level of conference success, why are you looking to move to NMST? Feels like a lateral move at best... Not buying your story, mathematician.
All Mine wrote:
North Dakota distance
https://prd.hcm.ndus.edu/psc/recruit/EMPLOYEE/HRMS/c/HRS_HRAM_FL.HRS_CG_SEARCH_FL.GBL?Page=HRS_APP_JBPST_FL&Action=U&FOCUS=Applicant&JobOpeningId=2936986&SiteId=1&PostingSeq=1&
By the description, it looks like they already have a specific candidate in mind.
They definitely do already have a candidate in mind.
Grimey45 wrote:
gobluesasquatch wrote:
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?
OK, not that it matters, but based on his press release I have nearly 30x more experience as a head coach, about half of that at the NCAA I level. I have 7x more team championships, 98% of which have been as the head coach and about 60% of which have been at the NCAA I level. About 45x the number of all-conference athletes. 30x more coach of the year honors. nearly 40x more NCAA I National Preliminary qualifiers and 6x more all-americans. Does that satisfy you as being around 10x more qualified? Now that I look at it, I think I'm more like 30x more qualified than he is.
If they were serious about getting the best candidate, they would have interviewed me. If they didn't like me after the interview, or felt I wasn't a good culture fit or something like that, so be it. I'm not saying they should have hired me. More factors go into hiring than accomplishments and experience. But I do think it is reasonable to say they should have interviewed me, if the position was really open and wasn't designated to Rath from the beginning. And if it was designated to Rath from the beginning and they had to jump through employment rules and post it and all that, then I think that is silly. They should change or eliminate the laws since the laws are not accomplishing what they are intended to accomplish.
Look… I know for certain that they did an exhaustive search. Per the article, they reached out to over 100 coaches…many I know. However, you would be delusional to think that search committee members aren’t talking to their trusted friends in the business about applicants as they are narrowing down the pool before interviews start. Have you ever considered that somebody in the trusted advisors of the committee may not think as highly of you as you do? Or that they have some knowledge or experience with you that isn’t positive, and that was relayed to the committee? I have no idea who you are, or how you might have been overlooked or passed over, but there are a lot of reasons why qualified candidates get eliminated. These committees don’t only call your 5 best buddies that you listed in your resume.
look in the mirror wrote:
Have you ever considered that somebody in the trusted advisors of the committee may not think as highly of you as you do? Or that they have some knowledge or experience with you that isn’t positive, and that was relayed to the committee?These committees don’t only call your 5 best buddies that you listed in your resume.
Perhaps that's one of the problems in this sport. Where's the merit? What if a coach has a stellar resume of athlete development, but for some reason, pissed somebody off? Do they deserve to nopt get a job after some petty issue? I ask this because I know of a couple of situations like this. Just because somebody thinks something, doesn't make it gospel. Stellar history of results can lead to some hating going... and it does.
some are hated on wrote:
look in the mirror wrote:
Have you ever considered that somebody in the trusted advisors of the committee may not think as highly of you as you do? Or that they have some knowledge or experience with you that isn’t positive, and that was relayed to the committee?These committees don’t only call your 5 best buddies that you listed in your resume.
Perhaps that's one of the problems in this sport. Where's the merit? What if a coach has a stellar resume of athlete development, but for some reason, pissed somebody off? Do they deserve to nopt get a job after some petty issue? I ask this because I know of a couple of situations like this. Just because somebody thinks something, doesn't make it gospel. Stellar history of results can lead to some hating going... and it does.
To add, I have no knowledge of anything about the hiring of this particular job, or know anybody involved. I'm just making the point that petty perceptions exist, and they screw good people over. I've seen a GREAT young coach get destroyed because petty nonsense and insecurity of other coaches who have connections. If somebody has a history of producing, they're probably not as bad as some might make them out to be.
Oklahoma make any moves?
Alabama Huntsville looking for a Jumps Coach. Will also work with Multi's and possibly couple throwers. Pay is solid.
Okay when Johnson gets let go because of the body shaming and media debacle, who takes over at Oregon? Let’s speculate.
Could a person on the current staff stay on at the helm permanently or would they be too damaged? Ben Thomas may not have the persona to take on the role. Plus, he hasn’t been there long enough to really endear himself within the admin.
Maybe they go back to the powells, but did the article today (and the other dealings) limit their ability to return to Eugene?
Does vin return to right the ship? Or does the lackluster performance at Acc’s this weekend remove him from consideration?
Alberto has a usatf ban , but could he coach in the ncaa?
Pat Tyson has created something at Gonzaga….
What outsiders would be under consideration? Would think it would be an active power 5 head?
Dave Smith from Oklahoma? Or Leroy Burrell? Anybody else?
Jump-around wrote:
Alabama Huntsville looking for a Jumps Coach. Will also work with Multi's and possibly couple throwers. Pay is solid.
Define solid….
Why wouldn't they just promote from within?
tracktownpizzaz wrote:
Okay when Johnson gets let go because of the body shaming and media debacle, who takes over at Oregon? Let’s speculate.
Could a person on the current staff stay on at the helm permanently or would they be too damaged? Ben Thomas may not have the persona to take on the role. Plus, he hasn’t been there long enough to really endear himself within the admin.
Maybe they go back to the powells, but did the article today (and the other dealings) limit their ability to return to Eugene?
Does vin return to right the ship? Or does the lackluster performance at Acc’s this weekend remove him from consideration?
Alberto has a usatf ban , but could he coach in the ncaa?
Pat Tyson has created something at Gonzaga….
What outsiders would be under consideration? Would think it would be an active power 5 head?
Dave Smith from Oklahoma? Or Leroy Burrell? Anybody else?
Eric Peterson. An alum with head coaching experience.
LetsRun Chatter wrote:
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.
Always interesting to watch a new head coach interviewing new assistants while the assistant is at the same meet trying to network into a new job. Especially when it’s happening at XC conference. THATS SO WAC
What other alums are out there coaching? Blood… anybody else