2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion

Super Cool Old School Fool wrote:

Reaaalllyyy wrote:

If you have never recruited at William and Mary and or do not know the constraints they have with recruiting. You don't know what you are talking about with regards to what is going on there and whether or not what a good job really means at that school.

Your post makes no sense. Either you agree that he is doing a good job, which he is, or you don't based on what?

Are you saying that there are no "constraints" and he should be doing a much better job, because that's how your post reads.

Or are you saying that he is actually doing a much better or GREAT job because the "constraints" are so restrictive that what he has accomplished is phenomenal.

Are these "constraints" academic, yes, we are all aware of what numbers it takes to get into W&M, or are you talking about the limits that have been placed on how many men he can bring in due to the cuts they have made in recent years. I am aware.

Either way, I still contend he is doing a good job in a gutted program that is not really supported.

If you are contending a different point, please explain.

Reaaalllyyy wrote:

Super Cool Old School Fool wrote:

Your post makes no sense. Either you agree that he is doing a good job, which he is, or you don't based on what?

Are you saying that there are no "constraints" and he should be doing a much better job, because that's how your post reads.

Or are you saying that he is actually doing a much better or GREAT job because the "constraints" are so restrictive that what he has accomplished is phenomenal.

Are these "constraints" academic, yes, we are all aware of what numbers it takes to get into W&M, or are you talking about the limits that have been placed on how many men he can bring in due to the cuts they have made in recent years. I am aware.

Either way, I still contend he is doing a good job in a gutted program that is not really supported.

If you are contending a different point, please explain.

I am saying just what I said. If you don't know the constraints on the program even prior to them dropping the men's teams. Then you don't know what type of job he is doing. Hes doing just fine. You cannot compare UCLA to W&M ever.

Reaaalllyyy wrote:

Super Cool Old School Fool wrote:

Your post makes no sense. Either you agree that he is doing a good job, which he is, or you don't based on what?

Are you saying that there are no "constraints" and he should be doing a much better job, because that's how your post reads.

Or are you saying that he is actually doing a much better or GREAT job because the "constraints" are so restrictive that what he has accomplished is phenomenal.

Are these "constraints" academic, yes, we are all aware of what numbers it takes to get into W&M, or are you talking about the limits that have been placed on how many men he can bring in due to the cuts they have made in recent years. I am aware.

Either way, I still contend he is doing a good job in a gutted program that is not really supported.

If you are contending a different point, please explain.

I am saying just what I said. If you don't know the constraints on the program even prior to them dropping the men's teams. Then you don't know what type of job he is doing. Hes doing just fine. You cannot compare UCLA to W&M ever.