Rich has put together a statistical analysis of College Volleyball Transfer situations and the results are sobering.
Percentage of Coaching Changes | |||
Years | DI | DII | DIII |
1 | 20 | 25 | 30 |
2 | 35 | 45 | 50 |
3 | 50 | 60 | 65 |
4 | 60 | 70 | 75 |
5 | 70 | 75 | 80 |
6 | 75 | 80 | 85 |
This can be interpreted as 20 percent of the DI head coaches will change jobs in the first year. 35 percent will change jobs after 2 years. In other words, if you sign up two years in advance of starting college, there is a 70% chance of ending with a different coach than you were recruited by. Obviously some schools change coaches more frequently than others so this is just the average. I don’t have stats on the assistant coaches but they change much more frequently.
This is why the standard advice is to make sure you would be happy with your college, even if the coach who recruited you were not there.
These stats illustrate the importance of selecting your school based upon everything else but the coach. In today's economic climate and the disconnect which NCAA DI athletic departments have shown with all things not football, it has created a situation in which there are even more collegiate coaching changes. More and more coaches are just walking away from college jobs because they are burnt out and tired of dealing with so much idiocracy.
Once again, Thank You to richkern.com for providing these important statistics, which illustrates how important it is to view the entire collegiate package, not just the coach, when choosing a PSA's future!
Hi Coach,
ReplyDeleteBack in those days when we were offer an opportunity at a college, we stayed and finished all four years. Why do You think PSA and their families supports transferring so much.
2 reasons: 1) Families are rushing their decisions to commit to colleges because of peer pressure, college coach pressure and being intimidated by the process, which results in not choosing the college/program that is the best fit, 2) College coaches have shifted their team mentality more towards cutting athletes who did not develop, and recruiting new players, as opposed to developing athletes and finding a role in which they can positively impact the program.
ReplyDeleteThese are broad and general reasons, but ones in which I feel capture the general change.