[cardfan1996]

Yes, this year has marked a change of tone to our WBB threads, with several members who rarely posted in the past now voicing strongly critical opinions of Vanderveer's coaching decisions.  I welcome more interest in WBB, certainly.

Here is my take on this: I know for a fact that Tara Vanderveer knows more about basketball than all the posters on this board combined, and I trust her judgment far more than I trust my own or that of my fellow posters.  However, that should not restrain me or anyone else from questioning her decisions or discussing shortcomings in strategy, tactics, personnel, etc.  That is in fact what fan boards routinely do--our enjoyment is based in part on testing our own amateur ideas out in public and seeing how they fly.

However, every time we do so, we also should ask ourselves "what are the reasons for why a 1000+ game winner has made the choices and decisions she made."  She must have constraints and knowledge that we do not have.  While Tara could be wrong about various things--she is never wrong for random reasons or for lack of attention to detail.  Her "meticulosity" is legendary.  There is a purpose to everything she does, even when she tries something that does not work.  I want to know what led  a great basketball mind to making the decisions she made--even the bad ones.  This is what I mean about criticizing from a standpoint of humility--the recognition that she knows much more than I do, or than you do, and made a choice that may not make sense to us on the face of it.  What is the explanation?  

I also believe that whenever we are discussing players--WBB or others--we ought to avoid overly rhetorical criticisms.  Pointing out a weakness in performance is one thing, but this can be done by stating facts and avoiding adjectives.  I may slip up sometimes, but that it is my goal--to focus on performance without attributing motives, desire, etc. that  are more speculative.  Who among us knows what is really going on inside the head of a player, regardless of how nonchalant she may look to your eye or mine?  I think those of you who have been parents of college athletes understand the distinction I am making.

No offense but I am not doing any of this “giving the coach the benefit of the doubt” business, and it has nothing to do with Tara. That is just not who I am. I question doctors all the time and I have not read one medical book. And it’s a good thing thing I ask a lot of questions and challenge things that don’t make sense (and I will leave it at that). 

For the first time ever I wrote the Stanford AD last Fall asking him why changes haven’t been made to the football and MBB coaches and why our “revenue sports” were allowed to deteriorate under his (the AD’s) tenure. I am sure David Shaw and the MBB coach know more about football and bball, respectively, than I do but that didn’t stop me.

Just so we are clear, my loyalty is to Stanford University only and not to any particular coach no matter how long his/her tenure. And that is where it will remain. David was a student athlete Stanford alum but I felt absolutely nothing on his dismissal because his teams stopped performing up to an acceptable standard.

But hey, I bet some fans are fans of Stanford WBB because of Tara so I get the perspective of “humility” for those fans. I’d be supporting Stanford WBB whether or not she was the coach.

[cardfan1996]

Yes, this year has marked a change of tone to our WBB threads, with several members who rarely posted in the past now voicing strongly critical opinions of Vanderveer's coaching decisions.  I welcome more interest in WBB, certainly.

Here is my take on this: I know for a fact that Tara Vanderveer knows more about basketball than all the posters on this board combined, and I trust her judgment far more than I trust my own or that of my fellow posters.  However, that should not restrain me or anyone else from questioning her decisions or discussing shortcomings in strategy, tactics, personnel, etc.  That is in fact what fan boards routinely do--our enjoyment is based in part on testing our own amateur ideas out in public and seeing how they fly.

However, every time we do so, we also should ask ourselves "what are the reasons for why a 1000+ game winner has made the choices and decisions she made."  She must have constraints and knowledge that we do not have.  While Tara could be wrong about various things--she is never wrong for random reasons or for lack of attention to detail.  Her "meticulosity" is legendary.  There is a purpose to everything she does, even when she tries something that does not work.  I want to know what led  a great basketball mind to making the decisions she made--even the bad ones.  This is what I mean about criticizing from a standpoint of humility--the recognition that she knows much more than I do, or than you do, and made a choice that may not make sense to us on the face of it.  What is the explanation?  

I also believe that whenever we are discussing players--WBB or others--we ought to avoid overly rhetorical criticisms.  Pointing out a weakness in performance is one thing, but this can be done by stating facts and avoiding adjectives.  I may slip up sometimes, but that it is my goal--to focus on performance without attributing motives, desire, etc. that  are more speculative.  Who among us knows what is really going on inside the head of a player, regardless of how nonchalant she may look to your eye or mine?  I think those of you who have been parents of college athletes understand the distinction I am making.

No offense but I am not doing any of this “giving the coach the benefit of the doubt” business, and it has nothing to do with Tara. That is just not who I am. I question doctors all the time and I have not read one medical book. And it’s a good thing thing I ask a lot of questions and challenge things that don’t make sense (and I will leave it at that). 

For the first time ever I wrote the Stanford AD last Fall asking him why changes haven’t been made to the football and MBB coaches and why our “revenue sports” were allowed to deteriorate under his (the AD’s) tenure. I am sure David Shaw and the MBB coach know more about football and bball, respectively, than I do but that didn’t stop me.

Just so we are clear, my loyalty is to Stanford University only and not to any particular coach no matter how long his/her tenure. And that is where it will remain. David was a student athlete Stanford alum but I felt absolutely nothing on his dismissal because his teams stopped performing up to an acceptable standard.

But hey, I bet some fans are fans of Stanford WBB because of Tara so I get the perspective of “humility” for those fans. I’d be supporting Stanford WBB whether or not she was the coach.