By all accounts Mark Wilson is a great guy but I just don’t think he or any captain for that matter, has much of an affect on the overall outcome of the Mosconi Cup.
Provided the information posted in Wikipedia is correct, up until 2006 there was only one year where we even had a non-playing captain. The other years we just had a team captain. So from 1994-2006 we went 10-2-1 overall. Now certainly some of those early years the matches had more of an exhibition feel to them and the European teams didn’t always have the best players on them but I was actually surprised when I went through the listings and saw how strong some of those earlier European teams were.
From 2007 on we have had a non-playing captain. In those years we have gone 1-7. Now you can say, “Well we just haven’t picked the right captain yet.” Or you say, “Those years the Europeans didn’t have a captain either so we didn’t need one.” Or you can just conclude that the captain doesn’t matter or even worse.
Before looking at the player/captain listing I already had a preconceived notion that the captain had very little to no affect on the outcome of the match. These numbers just gave me more reason to believe this and it makes me wonder if having a captain could actually be a deterrent for the U.S. team. When all the players are looking to someone else for leadership maybe that’s not such a good thing after all. Instead, maybe these players are better off coming together on their own – just like us amateurs do when we play in a team event. We don’t stand around and wait for someone who isn’t playing to encourage us and lead us in to battle. Instead we take that responsibility on ourselves.
I think the role that a captain should take could be defined several different ways. For Mark, I think part of this is being the coach and instructor for team U.S.A. Is that practical? Let’s be entirely honest here and not pretend like these U.S. professional players are actually spending time being coached and instructed by Mark. They clearly are not. These guys are all established professional players that aren’t really going to have their games influenced one iota by Mark.
Now for those of you that think I’m being hard on Mark, I’m really not. I just don’t think a non-playing coach or captain is all that beneficial in pool. However, there are things that Mark has done this year that are great and should be continued. Mark should continue to be the manager or promoter of the U.S. Mosconi Cup team. This is the area of captaining the team that I think he should focus on – not instructing and training. The idea of setting up venues here in the States for the players to come and compete at prior to the Mosconi Cup is a great idea and should be continued. He also helped weed out the bad behavior by the U.S. players this year. Those are both great contributions and he should be acknowledged for that.
My hope is that he embraces the role of manager/promoter this year and stops viewing himself as the coach of this team. This idea that he going to get the guys together and work them out with a radar gun and send them on their way is misguided I think.
Instead he should focus on fostering an environment that encourages competition among the U.S. players and rewards good play by inclusion on the team. He should also be more transparent in how he intends to select the players. If can do these two things I think he could have a more successful second year.
Or maybe he won’t. Does it even matter anyway?
Provided the information posted in Wikipedia is correct, up until 2006 there was only one year where we even had a non-playing captain. The other years we just had a team captain. So from 1994-2006 we went 10-2-1 overall. Now certainly some of those early years the matches had more of an exhibition feel to them and the European teams didn’t always have the best players on them but I was actually surprised when I went through the listings and saw how strong some of those earlier European teams were.
From 2007 on we have had a non-playing captain. In those years we have gone 1-7. Now you can say, “Well we just haven’t picked the right captain yet.” Or you say, “Those years the Europeans didn’t have a captain either so we didn’t need one.” Or you can just conclude that the captain doesn’t matter or even worse.
Before looking at the player/captain listing I already had a preconceived notion that the captain had very little to no affect on the outcome of the match. These numbers just gave me more reason to believe this and it makes me wonder if having a captain could actually be a deterrent for the U.S. team. When all the players are looking to someone else for leadership maybe that’s not such a good thing after all. Instead, maybe these players are better off coming together on their own – just like us amateurs do when we play in a team event. We don’t stand around and wait for someone who isn’t playing to encourage us and lead us in to battle. Instead we take that responsibility on ourselves.
I think the role that a captain should take could be defined several different ways. For Mark, I think part of this is being the coach and instructor for team U.S.A. Is that practical? Let’s be entirely honest here and not pretend like these U.S. professional players are actually spending time being coached and instructed by Mark. They clearly are not. These guys are all established professional players that aren’t really going to have their games influenced one iota by Mark.
Now for those of you that think I’m being hard on Mark, I’m really not. I just don’t think a non-playing coach or captain is all that beneficial in pool. However, there are things that Mark has done this year that are great and should be continued. Mark should continue to be the manager or promoter of the U.S. Mosconi Cup team. This is the area of captaining the team that I think he should focus on – not instructing and training. The idea of setting up venues here in the States for the players to come and compete at prior to the Mosconi Cup is a great idea and should be continued. He also helped weed out the bad behavior by the U.S. players this year. Those are both great contributions and he should be acknowledged for that.
My hope is that he embraces the role of manager/promoter this year and stops viewing himself as the coach of this team. This idea that he going to get the guys together and work them out with a radar gun and send them on their way is misguided I think.
Instead he should focus on fostering an environment that encourages competition among the U.S. players and rewards good play by inclusion on the team. He should also be more transparent in how he intends to select the players. If can do these two things I think he could have a more successful second year.
Or maybe he won’t. Does it even matter anyway?
