What SPORTS and COACHING myths annoy the heck out of you?

[battleknight24]

For me, the most annoying thing that people say about sports and coaching is that people automatically assume a good athlete will be a great coach. I always thought that to be a good coach you needed to be a good teacher and motivator.

What sports and coaching myths annoy you guys?


Peace,

[DrGonzoLives]

1. That Bobby Knight was a good coach

To my knowledge, John Wooden never had to throw chairs or choke players.

[underpants]

2. I am sick and tired of everyone trying to be Vince Lombardi

Okay look folks he was a great coach but compare the championships he won to Paul Brown and Bill Walsh. I am no fan of Walsh but both of those guys really re-invented the wheel. Oh Coryell and the Dallas Cowboys ORGANIZATION too (both the Tex Schramm era and the Jimmy Johnson era).

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. I don't think that's always the case.

Quite frankly, I haven't heard that about a ton of the premier athletes, and in fact, I've heard it said much more often about role-players or even bench warmers. It definitely depends on the player. For one, I don't think I've ever heard anyone of any value say that Michael Jordan would be a great coach, because quite frankly, he wouldn't. He doesn't have the temperament for it. Not to mention, he wasn't always thought of as a great team player (he had a ball hog tendency, not that many could possibly blame him). How Isaiah Thomas has gotten any management job still baffles me, except that he might have incriminating photos of some important people.

Avery Johnson, on the other hand, was never a star, but you could always tell he'd make a great coach. He was always a great team player, had a good mind for the game, and from what I gather, he was an amazing locker room presence as a player. He had marginal skills though. Still, he's looking like a pretty damn good coach now.

In baseball, star players are almost never thought of as coaches. Usually only catchers are considered coach material, simply because they are the only ones on the field with the responsibility for really managing the game, from calling out defensive positions, to pitch selection and to handling pitchers' emotions.

You could make similar assessments for other sports too.

[underpants]

4. Exactly it's like Bush and autistic basketball players

Just because W has screwed this job up doesn't mean he couldn't be trained up to be the student manager of a high school basketball team.

[jakefrep]

5. "Winning isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing"..

Whatever happened to playing games for enjoyment?

[Oeditpus Rex]

15. Professionally?

When there's millions of dollars on the line?

You can enjoy it in Little League and high school. By the time you're in college, it's big business.

[jakefrep]

16. I was thinking more in terms of...

...that mentality being brought in to youth/high school sports, and even college sports to a certain degree. It only introduces unnecessary pressure to the equation and creates burned-out kids. It seems as if kids are only playing for the college scholarship, not enjoyment, anymore.

[Oeditpus Rex]

17. Yup

I've heard of burned-out Little Leaguers. Somebody's puttin' waaaaaay too much pressure on 'em.

And I've seen a lot of the win-win-win thing in high schools.

But don't get me started on Little League. :grr:

[AngryAmish]

20. You are misquoting Vince Lombardi

As much as I hate Green Bay, the truth matters.

[WindRavenX]

6. one is that RBIs accurately messure the skill of a hitter

It's BS.

[KitchenWitch]

8. Hear, hear

a better measure is on base percentage.

[WindRavenX]

9. Well it depends

Slg% and OPS is a good idea how good a hitter is. OBP should be used over, say, "clutchness" and "speed" (both are vague, unquantifiable), to construct the most effective lineup.

Remember Tony Womack on the Yankees last year? He was a "speedy" guy who was always leading off. Too bad his OBP blows and he can't hit--his OPS+ was 47.

FWI, OPS+ is a calculate average of obp + slg%-- whereas 100 is league average and anything below is below average. 47 is horrible for OPS plus. By comparison, ARod had an OPS+ of 167 last year!

[KitchenWitch]

11. True enough!

but RBI should not even be considered, as that is a stat that relies on other runners on the bases.

[Oeditpus Rex]

14. Also on where a guy bats in the lineup

Because the spots after 5 tend to be filled with guys with lower OBPs. Plus, the farther down the lineup you bat, the fewer plate apperances you get. So if you're in the 7-8-9 spots, you get less opportunity to drive in runs because (a.) you come to bat less often, and (b.) it's less likely you'll come up with guys on base.

But as an old-time statistician, I reject OPS on the grounds that it merely combines two established stats. It's not unnecessary, it's just that I don't need it because I look at the full chart like I have since I was 9.

I could crunch baseball stats all day. It's one of my dream jobs.

[Bill McBlueState]

18. yeah...

What's with adding two fractions that have different denominators? You can't do that! OPS can be handy, but mathematicians frown at it disapprovingly.

[Magrittes Pipe]

33. OPS is not a real statistic, it is a tool.

It can be a very helpful tool to assist in determinating relative value of batters, but it's just a tool.

And, for that matter, if you want to use OPS as a real measuring stick, you need to make adjustments: park effects, league averages (both taken into account in OPS+); and the fact that for most hitters (depending, perhaps, on lineup slot), OBP is approximately 1.3x more important than SLG in determining the number of runs scored.

So, if you multiply OBP by 1.3 before adding it to SLG, then adjust for park and league context; the resulting adjusted OPS+ will enable you to gague pretty accurately the comparative value of batters.

[dr.strangelove]

34. SABER GEEK

Kidding, but I never was into the number crunching end of baseball. I like certain players and think certain players are better regardless of which numbers you use to support/attack them. I'm just a fan. I buy tickets and watch games. I don't care about who is the best hitting two bagger in the three hole against a left handed starter during a day game. I just like watching a good game with good players.

Even without the beer, the bleachers in YAnkee Stadium are a hell of a good place to watch baseball, and for $10 ($12 day of game), what a deal.

[Squatch]

7. I hated the one where our coach conducted jock strap inspections

for good luck.

[bbernardini]

10. The one where you can't say "Macbeth," or the other team will win.

Or something like that. :)

[mitchum]

12. "110%", "they played their hearts out", there's no "I" in "team"...

"my way or the highway" and all of those other half-witticisms

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

23. "As Mr. Sloan always says

there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "i" in meat pie. Meat is the anagram of team... I don't know what he's talking about."

[mitchum]

13. That they actually deserve those ridiculous salaries

C'mon, it's just a grown man directing other grown men in a a game. A fucking game. Like children play.

[Bill McBlueState]

21. I have no problem with player salaries

As long as 60,000 people are willing to pay at least $50 each to fill 16 NFL stadiums every week, someone's going to make a lot of money. It's good that the guys who do the work and take the hits get to see some of that.

[mitchum]

22. Hey, I'd be one of those yahoos paying at least $50 bucks a seat if...

they were playing without helmets and pads. AND if a coach with a losing season was burned alive in the middle of the stadium.
Let's see those "modern gladiators" REALLY put something on the line. Otherwise, they are just playing a game. Like children.

[Bill McBlueState]

25. yeah, bring back the gladiators!

There are already a lot of linemen dying in their 50's. Lose the helmets and pads, and they'd be dying on the field. Whatever does it for you, I guess!

Your idea about losing coaches has some merits... :evilgrin:

[Bill McBlueState]

19. that "intangibles" are more important than they are

Sports journalists love to make a huge deal out of team chemistry and motivation and all these fluffy things. Intangibles are important, but you know what's even more important?

Having good players.

I don't care how great a motivator Romeo Crennel is; this year the Steelers would have spanked the Browns nine times out of ten given the opportunity.

[Rabrrrrrr]

24. That sports are relevant or matter. That sports are worth more than arts.

That judging your self-worth based on your school's sports performance is sane, esp. if you already graduated.

That judging your city's self-worth, or another city's self-worth, based on their high school/college/professional sports teams is sane.

That spending school money on sports at the expense of the arts is moral or ethical.

That "school spirit" is relevant.

That a winning coach must ipso facto be a hero, worthy of worship.

That it's okay to expect a parent to make sure his/her kid makes all sports practices, even outside school time, and all games, and all extra banquets, fundraisers, and other sports events or else s/he's off the team, but that asking a kid to attend all his Confirmation classes, show up in school class, make it to all musical rehearsals and performances, do well on tests, and/or actually learn is somehow "inconvenient" and "asking too much" and "a burden".

And so on, in a similar vein.

[ghostsofgiants]

27. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

[Awsi Dooger]

26. Tons of them

"Hitting a pitched ball is the toughest thing to do in sports. Where else is 33% considered great?" Yeah, well it's 1 on 9. Take a few fielders out of the equation and suddenly the numbers soar and it's not so tough. I can make holding serve in tennis the toughest thing to do in sports if I manipulate the number of competitors.

"A short pass is the same as a running play." Classic ignorance. Running the ball is drive blocking and imposing physical superiority. A swing pass is a wimpy copout. The team that runs the ball more often wins 78-88% of the time in the NFL. It's never been lower or higher than those extremes in the 13 years I've charted the league. Try to pretend running isn't necessary, like the Eagles attempted last year, will lead to comical failure.

"College basketball is the greatest sport on the planet." Take away the 3 point shot and you might have a chance. Otherwise, it's pathetic scattergun nonsense far too often. Why should a longer shot be worth more points? Just imagine what football would look like if a play from 30+ yards out was worth 9 points. You would have ridiculous intentional losses to get behind the 30 yard line. That's what college basketball looks like right now, garbage retreat behind an arbitrary line. Sometimes I see 3 or 4 players going out of their way to check their toes and be behind the line. Moving without the ball or crashing the boards is a lost skill. I'm amazed the sport is revered and not condemned, especially when I compare the current state of the game to my tapes prior to the 3 point shot.

"Secretariat's Belmont was the most awesome performance in sports history!" Uh, he might as well have been running on a freeway. A mediocre horse broke a major track record in the race immediately preceding the Belmont. Eleven of Belmont Park's 14 main track records weer broken within two weeks either way of that race, completely unprecedented before or since. The closest is five. There were only 5 horses in the race. Once Sham broke down halfway thru the race, Secretariat was essentially running against nothing. The 31 length margin is hysterically overblown because it means no other horse broke 2:30 on a track that was like cement. A cow could have bested 2:30 on a track like that.

"Tiger Woods is a great putter; probably better than Jack Nicklaus." Not remotely close. I'm literally shocked Johnny Miller has expressed this opinion so often lately. Nicklaus was a far superior putter. The stats alone scream that truth. You virtually can't name a single big putt he ever missed on the 18th hole. He was a much purer putter than Tiger and more dangerous from mid to long distances. Tiger wills in the short putts and is an excellent par putter, but far too often he doesn't even threaten the hole from 10-20 feet. Tiger's short game is vastly superior to Nicklaus' and if Tiger could putt like Nicklaus in his prime, he would win 25+ majors.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

28. 1.That sports build character and leadership

(How many counter-examples can you name in 15 seconds?)

2. That we can't cut sports from schools, not even if tight budgets force us to maintain large class sizes, shorten the school year, or dump art and music, because otherwise kids will see no reason to go to school. Uhhhh...and just who is putting that message out in the media? School officials! Some great advertisement for your school system, isn't it? "Our schools are so boring and useless that the only reason anybody would want to go to them would be to play or cheer for sports."

[Rabrrrrrr]

29. Perfectly said!

Bravo!

Yeah, "leadership and character" - what a load of bullshit. If anything, it promotes and builds rote group-think and followship, not leadership.

Certainly doesn't build character, unless one's idea of character is obnoxiousness, drinking, drugs, steroids, win-at-all-costs, foul-language-as-motivator, looking down on people who aren't "of the team", knowing that you are in a protected class of people who don't have to worry about following the rules because your principal or franchise owner will look the other way if you are on a winning team, and on and on an on...

[slide to the left]

30. no pain, no gain.

Noooo, you are not supposed to hurt

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

31. that racing is not an athletic activity

worthy of being a sport...

... that teams/coaches who win frequently or that have success year in year out deserve to be hated simply because they 'win too much' and it's the trendy thing to do ...

[RedCloud]

32. White guys can't run...

Check out comrade Valery with the Olympics!:

http://www.multied.com/20th/1972Olympics.html