(09-10-2026, 10:06 PM)SearchingForTheTruth Wrote: <snip>
Stanford is a lacrosse brand. The program was started in 1997. Was the first west coast team to make the NCAA tournament and has been to the tournament 14 times.
Stanford finished second in the ACC regular season and second in the ACC tournament. Stanford made it to the quarterfinals in the NCAA tournament.
When the current coach got here her staff had D1 experience. In the last several years she has been hiring D3, club and promoted the director of lacrosse operations to be an assistant.
Under Amy Bokker, the previous head coach, Stanford had no problems recruiting assistant coaches with D1 experience.
I don't think it is cost of living that keeps qualified coaches away.
SFFT, I'm assuming your point is that Coach Spencer's failure to recruit and retain quality assistant coaches should translate into poor results on the field? However, Stanford women's lax just completed its best season ever.
Since I'm a novice lacrosse fan, can you explain how Coach Spencer's shortcomings re: asst coaches are holding back the team? I have no idea what asst coaches do. I assume a lot, since the roster is well over 30 and there are 12 players on the field. But maybe in lacrosse the head coach has more responsibility across positions than, say, baseball or football?
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)