Female coaches

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I asked our directors about this too, and I was told that if they got 100 applications probably only two would be female, and then the question of qualifications would be considered. Also, I've seen plenty of young women get involved but quit (understandably) due to pregnancy and having their own kids, whereas that is less of an issue with men (not to say they never quit, but most of the male coaches I know do have children).

This is the same excuse given to every under represented group. If more women applied we would hire more women coaches. Then when more women apply the excuse becomes they aren't as qualified. Then when they are qualified it's we don't want them to quit after having kids (as if men coaches never quit for various reasons).

Something is definitely wrong with how clubs recruit and train coaches because women remain under represented even as the number of women playing soccer at high levels continues to increase. I don't have an easy solution to fix it but I'm pretty sure if we keep doing things the same way it will not change.

Directors who say only 2 of 100 applications are women are just being lazy or are happy with the status quo. The way they are seeking applications is the problem. They are fishing in a fresh water lake and wondering why there are no sharks. Must be the sharks' fault for not being there.

[Anonymous]

VYSA is trying to recruit more females too. They are even offering special all-women courses. I don't think directors are being lazy, I think the person who posted before about women being mothers plays a big role. I know a number of women who played at high collegiate levels and who happily coached their daughters and sons in rec but would rather not become travel coaches. Looking at our club, the only under-represented group besides women that stands out is Asian coaches (and I guess Native Americans, but the DMV is not really an area with a high population). White men? check. Black men? check. Hispanic men? check. Middle Eastern men? check. Women? a few, but not very many. The high schools don't seem to be any better at finding women to coach, and neither does ODP.
Another interesting question is, where are the females in leadership (I don't mean the administrators) in any of the leagues? DOCs, Technical Directors? LB at LMVS is the only one I can think of at a top position. I am not sure what LW's involvement at McLean is anymore. Maybe she is another one in a leadership role. Until we build up female coaches we won't see clubs with women in leadership positions, which could be interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a man’s world. It sucks.

Why does it suck? Because they do it better? I’m betting you believe men need tampons too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clubs do everything they can to hire female coaches. They are highly sought after and typically receive higher pay. Supply and demand.

Positive discrimination that does NOT help the female cause. If you can’t understand this you are part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I asked our directors about this too, and I was told that if they got 100 applications probably only two would be female, and then the question of qualifications would be considered. Also, I've seen plenty of young women get involved but quit (understandably) due to pregnancy and having their own kids, whereas that is less of an issue with men (not to say they never quit, but most of the male coaches I know do have children).

This is the same excuse given to every under represented group. If more women applied we would hire more women coaches. Then when more women apply the excuse becomes they aren't as qualified. Then when they are qualified it's we don't want them to quit after having kids (as if men coaches never quit for various reasons).

Something is definitely wrong with how clubs recruit and train coaches because women remain under represented even as the number of women playing soccer at high levels continues to increase. I don't have an easy solution to fix it but I'm pretty sure if we keep doing things the same way it will not change.

Directors who say only 2 of 100 applications are women are just being lazy or are happy with the status quo. The way they are seeking applications is the problem. They are fishing in a fresh water lake and wondering why there are no sharks. Must be the sharks' fault for not being there.

You are full of it. Stop trying to blame this on men. Every club tries very hard to hire women coaches and Valor just sent out an email because they want to show off that they managed to get three this year. It is literally true that almost none of the applicants are women. Valor had one woman as an assistant for my daughter's age group, not assigned to any team, the past couple years just to get her to the point where she could become a coach. They are desperate for female coaches. No one is holding women back from these opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I asked our directors about this too, and I was told that if they got 100 applications probably only two would be female, and then the question of qualifications would be considered. Also, I've seen plenty of young women get involved but quit (understandably) due to pregnancy and having their own kids, whereas that is less of an issue with men (not to say they never quit, but most of the male coaches I know do have children).

This is the same excuse given to every under represented group. If more women applied we would hire more women coaches. Then when more women apply the excuse becomes they aren't as qualified. Then when they are qualified it's we don't want them to quit after having kids (as if men coaches never quit for various reasons).

Something is definitely wrong with how clubs recruit and train coaches because women remain under represented even as the number of women playing soccer at high levels continues to increase. I don't have an easy solution to fix it but I'm pretty sure if we keep doing things the same way it will not change.

Directors who say only 2 of 100 applications are women are just being lazy or are happy with the status quo. The way they are seeking applications is the problem. They are fishing in a fresh water lake and wondering why there are no sharks. Must be the sharks' fault for not being there.

You are full of it. Stop trying to blame this on men. Every club tries very hard to hire women coaches and Valor just sent out an email because they want to show off that they managed to get three this year. It is literally true that almost none of the applicants are women. Valor had one woman as an assistant for my daughter's age group, not assigned to any team, the past couple years just to get her to the point where she could become a coach. They are desperate for female coaches. No one is holding women back from these opportunities.

PP has a point, though. Many of these jobs are filled via word of mouth rather than active recruiting and mentoring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I asked our directors about this too, and I was told that if they got 100 applications probably only two would be female, and then the question of qualifications would be considered. Also, I've seen plenty of young women get involved but quit (understandably) due to pregnancy and having their own kids, whereas that is less of an issue with men (not to say they never quit, but most of the male coaches I know do have children).

This is the same excuse given to every under represented group. If more women applied we would hire more women coaches. Then when more women apply the excuse becomes they aren't as qualified. Then when they are qualified it's we don't want them to quit after having kids (as if men coaches never quit for various reasons).

Something is definitely wrong with how clubs recruit and train coaches because women remain under represented even as the number of women playing soccer at high levels continues to increase. I don't have an easy solution to fix it but I'm pretty sure if we keep doing things the same way it will not change.

Directors who say only 2 of 100 applications are women are just being lazy or are happy with the status quo. The way they are seeking applications is the problem. They are fishing in a fresh water lake and wondering why there are no sharks. Must be the sharks' fault for not being there.

You are full of it. Stop trying to blame this on men. Every club tries very hard to hire women coaches and Valor just sent out an email because they want to show off that they managed to get three this year. It is literally true that almost none of the applicants are women. Valor had one woman as an assistant for my daughter's age group, not assigned to any team, the past couple years just to get her to the point where she could become a coach. They are desperate for female coaches. No one is holding women back from these opportunities.

PP has a point, though. Many of these jobs are filled via word of mouth rather than active recruiting and mentoring.

Every club has open coaching positions every single year. Anyone who has ever played, coached, or had a kid in soccer knows this. That excuse doesn't fly.

[Anonymous]

My oldest had 2 female coaches and they were ok. One was just nice to everyone. The other one won more but got involved with parent/team drama.

My youngest has a female coach now and she wins all the time, doesn't get involved with teams drama, and has all kinds of teams. Overall a very good coach.

My oldest also had a female DOC who got caught having one team lose so another could advance in a tournament. She was OK not really good or bad. She left and the club replaced her with a guy and all the teams started winning much more. Not sure what your measurement for success is but that's what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I asked our directors about this too, and I was told that if they got 100 applications probably only two would be female, and then the question of qualifications would be considered. Also, I've seen plenty of young women get involved but quit (understandably) due to pregnancy and having their own kids, whereas that is less of an issue with men (not to say they never quit, but most of the male coaches I know do have children).

This is the same excuse given to every under represented group. If more women applied we would hire more women coaches. Then when more women apply the excuse becomes they aren't as qualified. Then when they are qualified it's we don't want them to quit after having kids (as if men coaches never quit for various reasons).

Something is definitely wrong with how clubs recruit and train coaches because women remain under represented even as the number of women playing soccer at high levels continues to increase. I don't have an easy solution to fix it but I'm pretty sure if we keep doing things the same way it will not change.

Directors who say only 2 of 100 applications are women are just being lazy or are happy with the status quo. The way they are seeking applications is the problem. They are fishing in a fresh water lake and wondering why there are no sharks. Must be the sharks' fault for not being there.

You are full of it. Stop trying to blame this on men. Every club tries very hard to hire women coaches and Valor just sent out an email because they want to show off that they managed to get three this year. It is literally true that almost none of the applicants are women. Valor had one woman as an assistant for my daughter's age group, not assigned to any team, the past couple years just to get her to the point where she could become a coach. They are desperate for female coaches. No one is holding women back from these opportunities.

PP has a point, though. Many of these jobs are filled via word of mouth rather than active recruiting and mentoring.

Every club has open coaching positions every single year. Anyone who has ever played, coached, or had a kid in soccer knows this. That excuse doesn't fly.

It's not an excuse. But neither is saying a club can't hire female coaches, when there's no active effort to recruit them. Anyone who has ever hired in any industry knows this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clubs do everything they can to hire female coaches. They are highly sought after and typically receive higher pay. Supply and demand.

Positive discrimination that does NOT help the female cause. If you can’t understand this you are part of the problem.

There have been a number of articles over tha last few years on this topic. google for them. There are issues as to why women cannot do this long term.

[Anonymous]

Aren't coaches generally parents? Parents of kids that have aged out or currently playing? Guess what women in those groups, with kids that age are saddled with? All THEIR kids. No one's looking to spend their free time with more of them.

I saw a Mom post this week a request to let her know if her husband is recruited for PTA duties - because when Pops gets a gig, it impacts the whole house. I have done PTA for 6 years, no one asked if it would impact my spouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the pool of coaches are coming from the pool of former players, wouldn’t the discrepancy of male-to-female ratio be consistent?

I would think every club has more boys teams than girls teams. There are more pro men’s teams than women’s teams. Meaning, starting from the younger ages all the way to the pros, there are just much more males than females in this sport. Isn’t this the more likely scenario (than men’s network including only men, or hiring preference of men, or players unwilling to play for a female coach, or parents holding female coaches to a different standard, or whatever other conspiracy theories people bring up)?

+1
Clubs actually boast when they hire female coaches. There’s an incentive for it. The only answer for the shortage would be they are not applying for these positions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the pool of coaches are coming from the pool of former players, wouldn’t the discrepancy of male-to-female ratio be consistent?

I would think every club has more boys teams than girls teams. There are more pro men’s teams than women’s teams. Meaning, starting from the younger ages all the way to the pros, there are just much more males than females in this sport. Isn’t this the more likely scenario (than men’s network including only men, or hiring preference of men, or players unwilling to play for a female coach, or parents holding female coaches to a different standard, or whatever other conspiracy theories people bring up)?

It's not consistent ... It's from several differing factors.

https://www.womenssoccercoaching.com/coaching-advice/does-coaching-have-a-women-problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the pool of coaches are coming from the pool of former players, wouldn’t the discrepancy of male-to-female ratio be consistent?

I would think every club has more boys teams than girls teams. There are more pro men’s teams than women’s teams. Meaning, starting from the younger ages all the way to the pros, there are just much more males than females in this sport. Isn’t this the more likely scenario (than men’s network including only men, or hiring preference of men, or players unwilling to play for a female coach, or parents holding female coaches to a different standard, or whatever other conspiracy theories people bring up)?

+1
Clubs actually boast when they hire female coaches. There’s an incentive for it. The only answer for the shortage would be they are not applying for these positions.

That’s the ONLY answer. Really? It must be wonderful to live world where everything is so simple and you are an expert on everything. Are you involved with hiring soccer coaches? Are you a woman coach? Otherwise you know not of what you speak.

Maybe they don’t apply because they don’t feel welcome and it’s not worth the aggravation of dealing with people like you.

[Anonymous]

Maybe they don't apply because clubs "boast" about it and they then think they were just token hires.