Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UCLA gets its man...

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • balzonia
    replied
    Originally posted by KevinM
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Yadda Yadda
    Or maybe the previous poster was interested in pointing out Maynard's recruiting history and wasn't posting to start to well-worn debate about the pros/cons of foreign recruiting.
    Ding-Ding-Ding... KevinM wins a prize! :lol:

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Yadda Yadda
    Or maybe the previous poster was interested in pointing out Maynard's recruiting history and wasn't posting to start to well-worn debate about the pros/cons of foreign recruiting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by balzonia
    The introduction of foreign athletes to Drake Stadium.
    This is a major philosophical shift for UCLA Track. Not bad, not good
    Some WOULD say that recruiting foreign athletes is a 'bad' thing. it costs more $$$ than in-state (or even just Ami) kids, and denies home-grown talent the chance to earn some scholarship money. There's more than enough talent in SoCal, even with USC to contend with. But . . . it requires more coaching to get them up-to-speed (pi) than oversea-ers who typically have already 'arrived'.
    My biggest beef with foreign talent is that MOST coaches say that they are recruiting them to 'broaden' the team's diversity or some such BS. If foreigners weren't allowed to score at conference or beyond, there would be mighty few here. If coaches would admit that they are just trying to score points at championships, so THEY look good, then I'd lighten up. But if you look at the media guides you always see, in the coach's bio, "Coached N conference champions," when a lot of the time the foreigners don't even PR here. :roll:

    Sorry, just a pet peeve, I guess - they're just doing what they feel they hafta do to get a raise or keep their jobs. I'm over it . . . :wink:

    Leave a comment:


  • Smoke
    replied
    There will be a change in the program. This hire will affect a lot more than coaching and recruiting, believe that.
    Maynard's hires will have an affect on the ebb and flow of the program also

    Leave a comment:


  • balzonia
    replied
    Originally posted by Muscleman
    not a bad hire..not a good hire. Won't change much at all..
    You will see at least one big change if you look at Maynard's history:
    The introduction of foreign athletes to Drake Stadium.
    This is a major philosophical shift for UCLA Track. Not bad, not good, as you say, but a big change. And it will make or break his tenure there.

    Might affect the guys across town, too... USC has had the lock on global recruiting to Los Angeles over the last 15 years but now there will be another option for those far away athletes interested in SoCal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Muscleman
    replied
    not a bad hire..not a good hire. Won't change much at all. they are not an attractive choice for sprinter or distance runners. Without Art, they get no big name throwers. Will still finish 6th or 7th in pac 10.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by dukehjsteve
    would anyone here in their right mind hire him to work for you ?!
    But maybe some would encourage UCLA to think about hiring him.

    Leave a comment:


  • imaginative
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by imaginative
    it is all to common that women construe every bad thing that happens to them as gender discrimination, sexual harassment, or similar, when what goes on has a different nature.
    Really?! That has not been my experience. Typically if there is a problem, and they do complain, it really is one of those things.
    Let us say that are real problems and people that are legitimate
    victims of those problems---and then there are those who
    interpret everything in the light of a particular problem that
    may or may not apply, basically assuming the worst of
    everyone.

    The latter need not be in even close to a majority, but when
    we do look at the loudest and most vociferous complaints
    about the worst treatments, they do tend to be in the majority.
    And: Interestingly, somehow, they are mistreated much more
    often than others in the same group---with the only common
    denominator being themselves...

    Strictly in my experience, your mileage may vary.

    (Note that this phenomenon is not limited to women, per se;
    although women and gender discrimination is the combination
    I have seen most often.)

    Leave a comment:


  • dukehjsteve
    replied
    Based on the little we know about Theriot's personality from his various postings, would anyone here in their right mind hire him to work for you ?!

    Leave a comment:


  • wamego relays champ
    replied
    Originally posted by richxx87
    And how does hysterical equate to being sexist? If I were a woman and said a man was being hysterical, would that be sexist? No, it would just mean I thought he was being hysterical.
    I'm no expert but I have heard before that the word "hysterical" may be derogatory towards women since the historic origins of the word applied only to women. The modern usage (as a synonym for frantic or frenzied) can be applied to either gender, but the etymological root may make it sexist when applied to a woman complaining of gender discrimination.


    http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hysterical


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by imaginative
    it is all to common that women construe every bad thing that happens to them as gender discrimination, sexual harassment, or similar, when what goes on has a different nature.
    Really?! That has not been my experience. Typically if there is a problem, and they do complain, it really is one of those things.

    Leave a comment:


  • westcoasttiger
    replied
    In regards to the former female assistant coach's accusations I recall the head coach prior to Maynard had a serious altercation with a female assistant coach that resulted in his dismissal. Would this perhaps be the same female assistant coach?

    Leave a comment:


  • imaginative
    replied
    Looking at the statements from Amy Christoffersen (while realizing that they
    are note given in complete context), I did not see anything that indicated
    gender discrimination.

    Further, while I (very obviously) cannot speak for the details about this case,
    it is all to common that women construe every bad thing that happens to them
    as gender discrimination, sexual harassment, or similar, when what goes on has
    a different nature. In this case, richxx87's statements about office politics
    may well hit the true nature. Dilbert should be made mandatory reading.

    Leave a comment:


  • richxx87
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    So is this good or bad news for Theriot? Is he a shoe in for the middle distance assistant?
    I don't know about Theriot, but it might be a good move for Chris Huffins (decathlete, former Berserkeley coach), if we are to believe a couple of LetsRun posters, who say he's going to be Maynard's asst. in Westwood.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    So is this good or bad news for Theriot? Is he a shoe in for the middle distance assistant?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X