News Scrapbook 1962-1964

WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN AN

Sandwiched somewhere amid those semi-academic situations was a rather brief apprenticeship in the business world and one rather disillusioning season as head coach of the professional San Francisco Saints of the now-defunct American Basketball League. For sake of clarity, even brevity (there's a happy switch), I'll tackle a broad montage of queries- the kind most often posed over a period of many college semesters-in question and answer form. I promise I won't spar or pull any punches. So here goes- and, reverend and esteemed administrator, please don't take written notes. QUESTION: In seeking a t,opnotch coach or direct,or for the ath- letic department, what particular qualities or qualifications should the Catholic administrator look for? ANSWER: First and foremost, loyalty. Besides seeking a knowl- edgeablemanofunquestioned integrity, the administrator should make certain the candidate he selects for the job has demon- strated strong lasting loyalty-loyalty to his previous schools, superiors, athletes, family, etc. Q: What are other vitally important requisites? A: I'd list them in this order: (1) Thorough knowledge and love of athletics and, in the case of coaches, the knack and patience to impart it as a teacher. Remember, a once great athlete and a learned, articulate theoretician aren't necessarily A-1 instruc- tors. The successful coach is the fellow who can get what he knows "across" to his pupils. (2) Practice what he preaches- The applicant you ultimately select should be temperate in his personal habits and fundamen- tally honest. He can't cheat on the principles he enunciates, and the training rules he advocates, to his athletes. (3) Cooperative attitude-Choose a man who will go along read- ily and wholeheartedly with the administration as to the im- portance of good grades, identical entrance standards for all, a well-balanced attitude as to the true value of competitive ath- letics in the collegiate program (eschewing in particular the po- tential win-at-any-cost adherents), pl::-ying strictly by the rule and NCAA code, etc. (4) Personality and appearance--This is a matter of serondar! importance compared to the others. Yet it is also basic. Th ' alin' man you hire must have a pleasing way of meeting and de g with people. Clearly it isn't in the school's interest, for example, to harbor somebody in the athletic department who arbitrarily ruffies alumni feathers. Q: Should the athletic director double up as coach? . . A: At a school like Notre Dame, no. Yet at the great maJor1ty of Catholic colleges and universities, obviously for reasons of economy essentially, yes. Q: Does this apply if the A.D. likewise is capable of coaching varsity football? A: I 'd say that particular combination would constitute too great a load for one man during the Fall semester-unless the program is strictly no-pressure, no-scholarship, play-for-fun football, the kind gradually coming back in several West Coast Catholic colleges, notably Santa Clara and San Francisco. If the football program is somewhat more ambitious, with good-sized guarantees for visiting teams from distant points, the A.D.-football mentor would need a capable aide to handle all the athletic department's detail work and follow-through during the torture period, September-December. Q: Is it essential to hire alumni? A: No. Yet, all other things being about equal, it's advisable! If a school doesn't think enough of its own to hire them, what rival institution will? Q: Is it imperative, in your opinion, to hire only Catholics? A: I'm the "devil's advocate" on this one. I'd say no. Of course, I'm speaking from the vantagepoint of the non-Catholic. Q: How can it be advantageous to have a non-Catholic on the staff? A: Let me draw the answer from my own personal experience. Not everybody knows it, but non-Catholics have been some of

-

by Phil Woolpert as told to Charles G. Johnson

THtET

"t"!lll~llii,;:----- Phil iVoolpert and Vt"rv llevrrpnd John P. Caddrn u11th lmmaculata Chap~l ,,. the backsround

OR

HEN I WAS A STUDENT at Loyola University of Los Angeles, back in the mid-1930's, I vividly recall hearing about a sage and pious "old pro" of Greek legend. Ne tor was his name. As I remember it, he was well into the twilight of life, a wise old warrior who ostensibly "knew ten thousand things." I sup- po!le that' somewhat better than par. Certainly, it is for most coaches and athletic directors. estor's principal pastime (and the way he nailed down that niche in the Loyola literature class) was lecturing and instruct- ing the younger generation Greek gladiators-boys about to go forth into battle. Now as something of a latter-day Nestor in the realm of Cath- olic college athletics on the We t Coast, occasionally I'm asked advice by priest-administrators of neighboring schools -on sub- je t!l pertaining strictly to sports, of course. Over a period of three decades I've served as an athlete of sorts; prep coach at St. Ignatius High School, San Francisco; a. si tant basketball coach at University of San Francisco, then head coach and athletic director there; and now, finally, combi- nation A.D.-basketball boss at the University of San Diego.

The Athletic Director

continued

lost considerable money making the moon-shot. The school finally gave up the football game entirely in 1951. Since I've come to San Diego University, there's•occasionally been talk of our becoming the" Kentucky of the West Coast." I presume that pipe dream has been predicated on the fact that I was born in Danville, Kentucky, and that I twice was lucky enough to coach teams which captured national championships. Of course, I've tried to eradicate such ideas because San Diego University and the University of Kentucky- the '' cradle" of championship basketball teams· obviously are worlds apart- not just geographically, but in the matter of tradition, enroll- ment, scholarships and you-name-it. Q: Should the athletic program at Notre Dame be largely imitated, ignored, simply admired-or what-by other Catholic colleges and universities? A: I'd say admired and largely ignored. Notre Dame made it big in football when the game was young and virile, almost literally growing up with the sport. The Fighting Irish "hit" be- fore college football was cut down by proselytizing scandals, and before the remarkable advance of pro football. Since World War II, the pro game has vastly improved its image and is now" big time." Notre Dame was blessed with remarkable leaders, even legends, such as Rockne, Gipp and Leahy- Leahy's performance chart surpassed even Rock's for victory percentage. Notre Dame isn't at all typical. So it isn't practical to use its successes and progress as a measuring rod for shaping athletic programs at other Catholic colleges and universities. Q: What advice would you, as Athletic Director, offer Catholic college coaches in general? A: If they'll forgive me for being too presumptuous, I'd suggest that they attempt to build successful teams by effective teaching and strong personal leadership. I'm opposed to the "driving school," particularly where the talent is limited. A coach should be reasonable and be content to do the best job he possibly can, with what he has. He ought to keep in mind constantly that he's primarily an educator, and that winning isn't everything in col- lege athletics. (But obviously he can't do so, if the administra- tors expect too much.) As for specific approaches and techniques, I'd remind the coach that it's important to be himself. He shouldn't ape some- body else who has just been hailed Coach-of-the-Year. Q: How would you compare the trials and headaches of the coach and Athletic Director? A: The problems and pressures of the director exist all year around, while the coach suffers more intensely over a shorter period . The average director does not have the same close con- tact with students that the coach enjoys. For the normally com- petent person, I'd say the pressures of both jobs basically are those imposed on the individual by himself. The saving grace in each job is the awareness that the goals to be achieved are worth the headaches encountered every day. Q: Should tenure be offered the Athletic Director? A: Any healthily administered institution should and must, in my opinion, offer tenure to its key personnel, plus the potential for earning salary advancements. After all, the Catholic college is in competition with state- operated institutions and other private schools ome highly endowed- and it must be prepared to present as loyal, dedicated and professional an administrative team as possible. The quali- fied, sincere and adequately paid Athletic Director, given the aforementioned vote of confidence and the tools with which to work, will certainly help mold young men of integrity and char- acter quite effectively- not only through his own dedication, example and resourcefulness but by selecting other athletic personnel equally dedicated to this ideal. Certain skills the Athletic Director must possess yes! But, the image he presents both to students and outsiders reflects his inner character. His resourcefulness must be unlimited, and his loyalty unquestioned. Isn't a man such as this on the college team deserving of ten- ure? END

for baseball) and are pretty well.molded as men. They aren't pliable and impressionable, so coaching then becomes ~trictly a win-and-entertain proposition. Q: Should football be expected t,o finance the college's entire ath- letic program? A: Definitely not! Many U.S. schools have been operating on this principle for a long time, but I'm convinced the notion is not only illogical and terribly unfair to the coaches and student- athletes, but dangerous to the college itself. Such an expectation can undermine the fundamental honesty and integrity of the in- stitution, running counter to what is being taught in the class- room. It often invites alumni interference, proselytizing evils, sub rosa gifts to athletes in violation of the amateur code, win- at-any-cost pressures, etc. Q: But if football doesn't support the sports program, what activi- ty will? A: A certain number of Catholic colleges, having de-empha- sized football or abandoned it altogether, look to basketball as the "angel" to pay all the bills. This is equally unrealistic. In basketball's case, it may even be impossible. After our San Francisco Dons won national championships in 1955 and 1956, we were swamped with offers for games with big schools. When we lined up a seven-game road trip East in 1956, stopping along the way to win New York's Holiday Festival Tournament in Madison Square Garden, our smallest guarantee for any individual game was $3,500. With our great All-Ameri- cans Bill Russell and K. C. Jones still on the club, which was in the process of setting an all-time collegiate record for consecu- tive wins of 60 (it still stands today), we had capacity crowds all season, wherever we played. That season we stayed unbeaten and again captured the NCAA Tournament and all the news- paper polls. Some sports writers called us the greatest college basketball team every assembled. So, did USF show a net profit that year for basketball? You bet we did--a dandy! But, believe it or not, the excess still fell some $3,000 short of financing the entire athletic program at USF! Q: Did USF have a red-ink football program t,o drain off most of the basketball bankroll? A: No, USF had abandoned its high-cost grid program several years before- back in 1951. Q: What, then, is your solution for making the athletic program self-supporting? A: If athletics has a proper role in the college, if it is an in- tegral component of higher education, why should it be self-sup- porting? Is the chemistry department self-supporting? How about the .drama and language departments? Why shouldn't a well-round- ed and health-giving athletic program, both intercollegiate and intermural, cost the college something? It disturbs me that so many college administrators acknowl- edge the contribution athletics make to student fitness, spirit and social life on the campus-often take pride in their teams- and yet insist that the sports department should "pay its own way." Q: What would be your advice on ways to avoid athletic over- emphasis? A: Don't demand a winner! Don't ask the Athletic Depart- ment to operate solely on gate receipts from football, basketball, baseball, etc. Don't impose such economic burdens and pres- sures on the Athletic Director, coaches and even the student- athletes. Otherwise, almost inevitably, you will wind up with the tail wagging the dog. Q: What are other possible pitfalls for the Catholic College to avoid? A: Keep sports in proper perspective. Don't attempt to grow up t oo quickly in intercollegiate competition. When I was a Loyola (L.A.) student, there was much wild talk of our becom- ing "the Notre Dame of the West." Over a long period Loyola