Who's In?

Interesting article in the Boston Globe recently, called When Men Coach Women. (Recently being a relative thing in this slow-moving blog: two weeks ago.) It was, unsurprisingly, inconclusive.

Which is perhaps just the point. I’ve had a lot of coaches myself, well, at least 21 (counting everyone from a 6th grade gymnastics coach on forward), with seven of those being women. I’ve had a few that were really exceptional, a couple of losers, and a range in between. I can’t say the sex of the coach had much to do with where they fit in that range.

However, the Globe story was written as though there were an issue. It talked mostly of college teams, and maybe in that scenario there’s some special dynamic? There was a quote I thought was really great, from the Dartmouth women’s ice hockey coach, Mark Hudak:

I firmly believe that men and women can coach men and women. Unfortunately, our society and culture has made it seem more appropriate for men to coach men, but I think it's because it's always been that way.

 

The Globe totally failed to follow up on this in the way I had hoped. What about the question of women coaching men?

One sees it so rarely past the junior high school level. Dear old Google comes up with very little: a couple of cases from the early 2000s about women being hired by the ABA or NBA development teams, largely as publicity stunts. A sexual discrimination lawsuit. I know of one case myself, where my friend Linda coaches men’s rowing at Harvard. The Globe even quoted her boss in its story, but didn’t mention this twist. Perhaps the editor killed such a reference as scope creep. That does happen. The quote from Harvard’s rowing chief was good though, and classic for the man known for not being loquacious:

Harvard men's heavyweight crew coach Harry Parker, who directed the U.S. eight to a bronze medal at the inaugural Olympic women's regatta in 1976, was asked about the difference. The women, he mused, were "slightly more punctual." 

 

Anyway, the article mentioned that 58 percent of NCAA coaches of women now were men, and implied that that was an increase, attributing it to the growth of women’s sports meaning higher paid positions for women’s team coaches, meaning men would then deign to do it. But the story didn’t offer figures from the past on collegiate teams. I’m curious…. I would have guessed there would have always been more men coaching at that level, and that what would be noteworthy would be an increase in women, at least at the head coach level. But I don’t have the stats. Or the wherewithal to dig them up. Alas.

So, in conclusion, what? I did say that Globe article was inconclusive, right? I’ll just say thanks to Lisa, Andy, Steve, and Elizabeth, some of the best coaches I’ve had.