[76lsjumb]

While it may very well be true that Tara would not have been able to do a better job with this team than Kate has done, that begs the question. The real question, it seems to me, is whether there are other coaches that would have done a better job than EITHER Kate or Tara?

Add the condition that the coach is playing in a new conference without years of familiarity with coaches and teams ....

I’m responding to this since it is by far the shortest of the replies to my earlier comment, but I think the following addresses most of the points in those as well.

First, I very much hope that Kate turns things around next season and succeeds, and I also readily concede that there were a multitude of highly significant and unusual factors to deal with this season that (hopefully) won’t be quite so adversely impactful in the future. For that reason, I’m withholding judgment on Kate’s general coaching prowess. My comment was more intended to convey y sense that saying that Kate is likely doing as well as Tara would have done was not, at least to me, exculpatory for Kate, as much as an indictment of Tara… and an accurate one.

As for the notion that Kate was probably in the better position and has probably done a better job than others outside of Stanford, I would offer Kyle Smith as my counter. Facing many of the same hurdles as Kate, AND coming from outside of Stanford, I think he has done a much better job THIS season in building a team that appears to be improving, along with individual players who also appear to be improving individually. I don’t immediately see why that couldn’t be the case with the right coach on the women’s side as well.

---

While it may very well be true that Tara would not have been able to do a better job with this team than Kate has done, that begs the question. The real question, it seems to me, is whether there are other coaches that would have done a better job than EITHER Kate or Tara?

My opinion only....NO.  Not given the unique Stanford environment that is so unfriendly to transfers, that is catching up in NIL, that is switching to a new league that penalizes our team by making them spend much more time over the season on planes thatn 16/18th of the league....etc.  In fact, a coach from outside the Stanford environment would have been an even greater disaster, learning all the Stanford restrictions on the fly, etc....

If you seriously want to abandon the TVD legacy and start from scratch, then at least you need some lead time.  Also, ask yourself this...how many of next year's outstanding recruits would have come to Stanford if they did not think Kate Paye was continuing the TVD legacy of excellence?  If they thought that Kate had no connection to Tara?  I think that kind of wholesale change away from TVD and her coaching legacy is a recipe to reduce Stanford to the level (at best) of Gonzaga or Harvard.

I know you did not make the Holly Warlick analogy...but others have.  Kate Paye is not Holly Warlick.  Kate may wind up not being a successful coach....that remains to be seen, my optimism aside.  But Kate IS far, far brighter and accomplished than Holly Warlick ever was.  Sheer smarts may not be enough to make a good coach...but Kate is in fact light years ahead of a Holly Warlick in almost any measure of smarts.  So if Kate fails, it won't be for anything like the same reasons that Holly Warlick failed.

Actually, I did make the Holly Warlick analogy… and noted that, in Holly Warlick’s first season she won the SEC and took Tennessee to the Elite Eight, and she did so while having to replace all five starters from the previous season. Kate may very well be much smarter than Holly, but I’m guessing we won’t be going to the Elite Eight this season…

[76lsjumb]

While it may very well be true that Tara would not have been able to do a better job with this team than Kate has done, that begs the question. The real question, it seems to me, is whether there are other coaches that would have done a better job than EITHER Kate or Tara?

Add the condition that the coach is playing in a new conference without years of familiarity with coaches and teams ....

I’m responding to this since it is by far the shortest of the replies to my earlier comment, but I think the following addresses most of the points in those as well.

First, I very much hope that Kate turns things around next season and succeeds, and I also readily concede that there were a multitude of highly significant and unusual factors to deal with this season that (hopefully) won’t be quite so adversely impactful in the future. For that reason, I’m withholding judgment on Kate’s general coaching prowess. My comment was more intended to convey y sense that saying that Kate is likely doing as well as Tara would have done was not, at least to me, exculpatory for Kate, as much as an indictment of Tara… and an accurate one.

As for the notion that Kate was probably in the better position and has probably done a better job than others outside of Stanford, I would offer Kyle Smith as my counter. Facing many of the same hurdles as Kate, AND coming from outside of Stanford, I think he has done a much better job THIS season in building a team that appears to be improving, along with individual players who also appear to be improving individually. I don’t immediately see why that couldn’t be the case with the right coach on the women’s side as well.

---

While it may very well be true that Tara would not have been able to do a better job with this team than Kate has done, that begs the question. The real question, it seems to me, is whether there are other coaches that would have done a better job than EITHER Kate or Tara?

My opinion only....NO.  Not given the unique Stanford environment that is so unfriendly to transfers, that is catching up in NIL, that is switching to a new league that penalizes our team by making them spend much more time over the season on planes thatn 16/18th of the league....etc.  In fact, a coach from outside the Stanford environment would have been an even greater disaster, learning all the Stanford restrictions on the fly, etc....

If you seriously want to abandon the TVD legacy and start from scratch, then at least you need some lead time.  Also, ask yourself this...how many of next year's outstanding recruits would have come to Stanford if they did not think Kate Paye was continuing the TVD legacy of excellence?  If they thought that Kate had no connection to Tara?  I think that kind of wholesale change away from TVD and her coaching legacy is a recipe to reduce Stanford to the level (at best) of Gonzaga or Harvard.

I know you did not make the Holly Warlick analogy...but others have.  Kate Paye is not Holly Warlick.  Kate may wind up not being a successful coach....that remains to be seen, my optimism aside.  But Kate IS far, far brighter and accomplished than Holly Warlick ever was.  Sheer smarts may not be enough to make a good coach...but Kate is in fact light years ahead of a Holly Warlick in almost any measure of smarts.  So if Kate fails, it won't be for anything like the same reasons that Holly Warlick failed.

Actually, I did make the Holly Warlick analogy… and noted that, in Holly Warlick’s first season she won the SEC and took Tennessee to the Elite Eight, and she did so while having to replace all five starters from the previous season. Kate may very well be much smarter than Holly, but I’m guessing we won’t be going to the Elite Eight this season…