Initially, this thread was entitled "UCLA track coach, Sean Brosnan, Fired for NCAA violations" but we changed it as Brosnan told us he was simply not renewed for next year.
No. This thread is about Brosnan. There is a different one about UCLA teack. You are in the wrong place. Brosnan got canned. He screwed up and now has no income. He is at the unemployment office standing in line. Odd to think about but certainly true.
In response to the guy above: The problem is not SB or his fans/detractors. The point is, a lack of loyalty and spine shown by the administration. No one is willing to stand up and battle for what is right. If the matter was so cut and dry, why not come out and make a statement on what transpired? Why the shady backroom double dealing? Why the lack of transparency? Lay it all out on the table...
Did the coach prior to Brosnan get screwed as well? Were you up in arms about the lack of a statement and transparency when he was let go?
Their results were essentially the same, so why is it such a travesty in Brosnan's case? He was let go because his employer didn't want him doing the job anymore. He isn't special and all of you fans don't deserve an explanation.
As a side note, are his former athletes defending him on social media? Is there outrage among the team? Haven't seen any.
Hmm while Newbury Park was being coached by SB these boards were inundated with posts about the team. Then he leaves for UCLA and the overall number of posts about the hs team drops and at the same time chatter about UCLA suddenly appears. No that sub was sh!tcanned there once again is a massive about of posts touting that SB is the greatest coach of all time. Wonder who is posting all these. Bet there is just 1 person
To be honest, what kind of shocks me about this is the moral outrage.
In the NCAA, you now can literally pay people to come to your school - and you have nothing to worry about as long as the boosters do it.
But if the coach calls up a stud and says, "Hey if you transfer, you'll get a full ride" then you get canned?
And If I was still coaching in the NCAA, I get it. I"d be irate if a kid was tampering with my guys, but don't kids know they could get a full ride if they are scoring at NCAAs and what not?
IT's just funny so many people are up in arms about this. The Tennesse coach can rise to the top thanks to having a team full of sprinters that get banned by WADA. No biggie.
You tell the 4:10 girl from UVA she's got a full ride if she wants it and you must immediatey go? I mean I get it. Harbaugh is getting a 4 game suspension for calling kids at the wrong time. Rules are rules but it's kind of wild.
And that's assuming he did do it, which he says he didn't do.
Tampering is a big deal in pro sports too--in the past it has cost teams in the NFL and NBA draft picks, major fines, and suspensions. Tampering still happens--everyone does it to some degree--but there's sort of an unwritten code of what's OK and what's not. I suspect the same is true in the NCAA, and it sounds like SB may have been operating well outside what's acceptable. You may be right, maybe it shouldn't be a big deal, but programs even at the highest levels get really pissed if you start trying to poach athletes under contract.
I just assumed that Brosnan had promised in his hiring interview that he could get all of the Youngs/Sahlmans to transfer/come to UCLA. He was obviously underqualified to be a college coach; the hire was on the level of if Virginia had hired Scott Raczko solely because of Webb and Richard Smith.
When he got none of them to come it failed two ways: he didn't fulfill the only reason he was hired and that five runners who Brosnan 'made' didn't want to have anything to do with him was another huge red flag.
Can you explain the logic of your argument?
You think UVA would have made a mistake if they hired Alan Webb's coach? Why? Recruiting, compliance, scholarship offers, etc is a big part of college coaching that's not part of HS coaching but it's not that hard to learn and schools like UCLA have director of Ops who do half of it for you anyway.
Raszko was an assistant at George Mason under John Crook before he Coached Webb. He also had quite a bit of success at South Lakes HS following Webb and currently coaches Keira D'Amato. A bit different situation.
Although...I do believe he was fired along with Cook, unceremoniously, for some sort of cheating scandal. So maybe more similar than I thought. Although Raszko is certainly more qualified than SB.
Brosnan did an amazing job just one year at UCLA. He’s a great coach. UCLA obviously has some issues going on in their department. administrators doing some wonky things has been the main problem since Larsen left years ago. When UCLA hired Brosnan they knew what they were getting. Or maybe Avery Anderson did. Brosnan is a very upfront, no holding back coach. If UCLA wanted a quiet average coach they could have easily done what they have done in the past and checked the box with one of those. I applaud Avery Anderson for hiring Brosnan. If this was a school that had a little more respect for Track & Field and cross country then things would have been different. Brosnan is not a sit down and say noting person. Im in North Carolina right now visiting family and even the local running scene here was talking about Brosnan. He’s an impact coach and it will be interesting to see where he lands in the future. I personally would like to see him stay in the NCAA, but I agree he might be more suited for a post collegiate situation.
The mistake SB made (same with Raszcko) was to presume that they could be a College coach. It doesn't work that way - it is how the system works. Once a HS coach, always a HS coach. it is part of the elitism hierarchy. Equally with a College coach (with a few exceptions), who shouldn't presume to be a Pro coach. Even though ALL are Pro's in the sense that they get paid to coach. It has little to do with professional acumen either as the "coaching certification" development is antiquated in the US. The strict demarcation between the three roles is part of the problem. It is why a guy like Gjert Ingebrigtsen can outcoach 99% of the coaches in the US, as he doesn't have such a limitation, even though he was never a runner himself. It is kind of pathetic really.
Brosnan did an amazing job just one year at UCLA. He’s a great coach. UCLA obviously has some issues going on in their department. administrators doing some wonky things has been the main problem since Larsen left years ago. When UCLA hired Brosnan they knew what they were getting. Or maybe Avery Anderson did. Brosnan is a very upfront, no holding back coach. If UCLA wanted a quiet average coach they could have easily done what they have done in the past and checked the box with one of those. I applaud Avery Anderson for hiring Brosnan. If this was a school that had a little more respect for Track & Field and cross country then things would have been different. Brosnan is not a sit down and say noting person. Im in North Carolina right now visiting family and even the local running scene here was talking about Brosnan. He’s an impact coach and it will be interesting to see where he lands in the future. I personally would like to see him stay in the NCAA, but I agree he might be more suited for a post collegiate situation.
A quick note regarding the hiring of high school coaches for college.
Obviously this is just generalities, but the widely known high school coaches fall into three types for me: the cult of personality coaches (Arcadia, York, Saratoga), the ones who had a generational talent at their school (Brosnan, Raczko (admittedly forgot about his coaching under cook (d'amato was after, talking about hiring in 2001) , Bruce Edwards, Judy Fellhauer), and the verifiably good coaches, repeated success with a small team (Pat Tyson, Bill Aris).
Depending on what you think matters for success in college coaching, if you think coaching is easy and recruiting is most important, hire a likable cult of personality coach; if you think coaching is important, hire a verifiably good coach. To me, hiring a coach who happened to have a superstar at their high school is a big gamble, especially at a big name D1 school.
Gregg Popovich coached at Pomona and ended up being one of the top NBA coaches of alltime. Before Arcadia, Jim O' Brien was a non-notable coach at Caltech, after he coached at Whittier. Brosnan is young and there are lots of SCIAC and other college coaching jobs in LA that aren't UCLA where he could prove his college coaching ability.
Here are some facts and some things I just heard. As a college coach I personally heard Vin Lananna constantly speak about Brosnan. It was almost creepy how obsessed Lananna was about Brosnan. That’s fact. I head Brosnan and Lananna got into it at USA’s. I heard from a coaching friend something happen in the lobby to the host hotel in Eugene. Apparently Brosnan and Lananna were talking and it elevated to something much more where Lananna got a little loud, then Brosnan fired back and got loud. Apparently Brosnan took Lananna’s wine and snapped it off the table and walked away and threw it in the trash as Brosnan left the hotel. The fact is Lananna and Brosnan had public beef and both of them have big egos.
The mistake SB made (same with Raszcko) was to presume that they could be a College coach. It doesn't work that way - it is how the system works. Once a HS coach, always a HS coach. it is part of the elitism hierarchy. Equally with a College coach (with a few exceptions), who shouldn't presume to be a Pro coach. Even though ALL are Pro's in the sense that they get paid to coach. It has little to do with professional acumen either as the "coaching certification" development is antiquated in the US. The strict demarcation between the three roles is part of the problem. It is why a guy like Gjert Ingebrigtsen can outcoach 99% of the coaches in the US, as he doesn't have such a limitation, even though he was never a runner himself. It is kind of pathetic really.
This is the Nick Saban conundrum. Arguably the greatest college football coach ever, but a failed NFL coach. Chip Kelly is another example closer to home. Coaching successfully at different levels requires different skill sets. Yes, some coaches can succeed at different levels, but it’s not a guarantee and more often then not, does not work. It’s not just the coaching in terms of workouts of course, but it’s understanding the attitudes and goals of the athletes and the institutions supporting/hiring the coach and successfully navigating the particular politics, rules, culture of each. Why is this surprising to people? Brosnan failed the first time out. Maybe he will learn and succeed the next time. However, if he thinks that institutions like UCLA or Nike are going to adapt to him, as opposed to the other way around, he’s going to be disappointed. A great coach/leader figures out the culture and adapts and then over a period of time of gentle sustained pressure moves it in his/her direction. If you think you can just charge in and do it your way right off, especially a person with such a limited track record and list of relevant accomplishments as Brosnan, you are going to be chewed up and spit out.
This post was edited 18 seconds after it was posted.
A quick note regarding the hiring of high school coaches for college.
Obviously this is just generalities, but the widely known high school coaches fall into three types for me: the cult of personality coaches (Arcadia, York, Saratoga), the ones who had a generational talent at their school (Brosnan, Raczko (admittedly forgot about his coaching under cook (d'amato was after, talking about hiring in 2001) , Bruce Edwards, Judy Fellhauer), and the verifiably good coaches, repeated success with a small team (Pat Tyson, Bill Aris).
Depending on what you think matters for success in college coaching, if you think coaching is easy and recruiting is most important, hire a likable cult of personality coach; if you think coaching is important, hire a verifiably good coach. To me, hiring a coach who happened to have a superstar at their high school is a big gamble, especially at a big name D1 school.
Gregg Popovich coached at Pomona and ended up being one of the top NBA coaches of alltime. Before Arcadia, Jim O' Brien was a non-notable coach at Caltech, after he coached at Whittier. Brosnan is young and there are lots of SCIAC and other college coaching jobs in LA that aren't UCLA where he could prove his college coaching ability.
What SCIAC job is currently open for him to even apply for? Or any coaching job in LA? There needs to be an opening for him to get hired, he definitely isn’t at the level for schools to create an opening specifically for him
Brosnan did an amazing job just one year at UCLA. He’s a great coach. UCLA obviously has some issues going on in their department. administrators doing some wonky things has been the main problem since Larsen left years ago. When UCLA hired Brosnan they knew what they were getting. Or maybe Avery Anderson did. Brosnan is a very upfront, no holding back coach. If UCLA wanted a quiet average coach they could have easily done what they have done in the past and checked the box with one of those. I applaud Avery Anderson for hiring Brosnan. If this was a school that had a little more respect for Track & Field and cross country then things would have been different. Brosnan is not a sit down and say noting person. Im in North Carolina right now visiting family and even the local running scene here was talking about Brosnan. He’s an impact coach and it will be interesting to see where he lands in the future. I personally would like to see him stay in the NCAA, but I agree he might be more suited for a post collegiate situation.
These posts are propaganda straight from Brosnan or his immediate family. Look at my previous post, #397 on page 20. More UCLA athletes got slower with Brosnan than ran personal bests.
His results were not "amazing" and nothing about his training is unique, new or revolutionary.
Failing as a college coach DOES NOT indicate any ability to have success coaching pro athletes.
I just assumed that Brosnan had promised in his hiring interview that he could get all of the Youngs/Sahlmans to transfer/come to UCLA. He was obviously underqualified to be a college coach; the hire was on the level of if Virginia had hired Scott Raczko solely because of Webb and Richard Smith.
When he got none of them to come it failed two ways: he didn't fulfill the only reason he was hired and that five runners who Brosnan 'made' didn't want to have anything to do with him was another huge red flag.
Can you explain the logic of your argument?
You think UVA would have made a mistake if they hired Alan Webb's coach? Why? Recruiting, compliance, scholarship offers, etc is a big part of college coaching that's not part of HS coaching but it's not that hard to learn and schools like UCLA have director of Ops who do half of it for you anyway.
Yep! Agreed.
The admin side of collegiate coaching is a pain in the A$$, but it's not rocket science. It's time consuming and a drain, that's why having an assistant and or Director of Ops is a huge help. Better yet, if you're head coach and assistant coach both can share some of the admin duties and are good coaches the program will benefit. The key is having a head coach without an ego and is willing to work with another coach.
In response to the guy above: The problem is not SB or his fans/detractors. The point is, a lack of loyalty and spine shown by the administration. No one is willing to stand up and battle for what is right. If the matter was so cut and dry, why not come out and make a statement on what transpired? Why the shady backroom double dealing? Why the lack of transparency? Lay it all out on the table...
Did the coach prior to Brosnan get screwed as well? Were you up in arms about the lack of a statement and transparency when he was let go?
Their results were essentially the same, so why is it such a travesty in Brosnan's case? He was let go because his employer didn't want him doing the job anymore. He isn't special and all of you fans don't deserve an explanation.
As a side note, are his former athletes defending him on social media? Is there outrage among the team? Haven't seen any.
There should have been a statement on why he (previous coach) was let go. A coach deserves this and it is basic decency. Brosnan was summarily dismissed after one year. Surely UCLA knew what they signed up for! They brought in a brash, confident coach who is not straitjacketed by tradition. He was/is probably not everyone's cup of tea, but I do not hear his athletes complain. The athletes got screwed and THIS is the real travesty.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Makes sense. Still, what did he do that was so egregious to not be renewed? You can't build a program in 1 year, I don't care who you are!
Something doesn't seem right.
What do you mean what did he do that was so egregious? Did it have to be egregious? He wasn’t worth the hassle. He just wasn’t as great at coaching and the results weren’t good enough to put up with BS, and he brings a lot of BS. What’s he doing getting into spats with old, established, successful coaches in his first year in the NCAA? He has no awareness of his place in life.
Did the coach prior to Brosnan get screwed as well? Were you up in arms about the lack of a statement and transparency when he was let go?
Their results were essentially the same, so why is it such a travesty in Brosnan's case? He was let go because his employer didn't want him doing the job anymore. He isn't special and all of you fans don't deserve an explanation.
As a side note, are his former athletes defending him on social media? Is there outrage among the team? Haven't seen any.
There should have been a statement on why he (previous coach) was let go. A coach deserves this and it is basic decency. Brosnan was summarily dismissed after one year. Surely UCLA knew what they signed up for! They brought in a brash, confident coach who is not straitjacketed by tradition. He was/is probably not everyone's cup of tea, but I do not hear his athletes complain. The athletes got screwed and THIS is the real travesty.
Such as victim. You may not hear the athletes complain, but they don't seem to be lining up to defend him. I'm sure UCLA gave him his "statement" to his face when they let him go. He's just not telling the truth. He knows why he was let go. The public doesn't need to be apprised of HR decisions the school makes.
You make it sound like he was some revolutionary coach. Another way to say, "brash, confident coach who is not straightjacketed by tradition is, "obnoxious, egotistical coach who doesn't follow the rules".
It is insane that somehow, all these defenders think he was wronged. Since his early days at NP, people have given him crap for the way he conducts himself. It shouldn't be surprised that is cost him at UCLA, especially when his results weren't spectacular.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.