Two national titles, 13 regional crowns, 926 wins, and more entertaining stories that any coach on the planet. This week On Deck with Dobbins sits down with Hall of Fame Coach Scott Whitlock. With a .771 coaching win percentage Whitlock not only helped Kennesaw State transition through two different associations and two divisions, but also transition 51 All-Americans and other KSU Owls to success in life after they left the field.
Dobbins: You coached for nearly 30 years on the collegiate level. You built Kennesaw State into a National Powerhouse on the NAIA and DII levels, eventually transitioning them to the Division I. Since leaving collegiate coaching, what have you been up to?
Whitlock: When I retired from coaching in 2013, I joined Kennesaw State’s Athletic Administration. I served as a Senior Assistant Athletics Director for 7+ years. I fully retired from KSU at the end of 2020. Since retiring, I tried to stay busy. I have assisted in a few special projects at Kennesaw State, and I have been fortunate enough to have the pleasure of doing some broadcast work for collegiate softball.
Dobbins: I mentioned the transition KSU went through moving “up the ladder” to where they are now in DI. What are your thoughts on a lot of the teams in the last 10+ years that have made the transition from the lower divisions to DI? In a world of “Haves” and “Have Nots”, are moves like that ultimately still beneficial to programs as a whole?
Whitlock: That is a question can only be answered on a school-by-school basis. When an institution and its athletics department opts to “move up” and participate at the next level – they must do it with their eye wide open. If an institution is not 100% educated re: what really must be in place in order to compete against programs from larger conferences that are comprised of schools with bigger athletic budgets and have stronger revenue sources, the results could be disastrous. The “mid-majors” have always faced the task of trying to “keep up” and when you are an institution that is in its infancy as a D-I school, it’s even tougher. The glass ceiling that separates the Power Fives from the other conferences has always existed, and though the ceiling is glass the thickness of the pane is getting thicker and thicker. The “move up” is exciting and generates interest that might have not been there prior. But once everything the excitement settles down, the institution and its athletics department has to go about the reality of making it work, and that is a monumental task. The daily realities of “the move” are not simple. The demands of finances, facilities, staffing, etc. are extremely complex and they can be very taxing on every member of an athletic staff – as well as the student-athletes. So, to answer your question … If an institution can handle all that comes with “moving up” it can be great for the school, the students, and its fanbase. If an institution is not fully ready to do it, “moving up” can be crippling to the student-athlete experience and can create a very stressful working environment for all involved.
Dobbins: A lot is said about this generation of athlete. How have you seen today’s athletes and the competition level change over the years from the time you started coaching to what you see now? What do you see as the positives and negatives in that realm?
Whitlock: I cannot speak to the positives or negatives, but I can say this – having to coach the current “generation of player” is nothing new. Over my career I feel that I coached three distinctive generations of players. It is a coach’s (and staff’s) job to evolve so they can connect with the players. So, you cannot point at the current generation of players as being more difficult than the ones prior. They are just different. The current generation is smart and more expressive. As always, today’s athletes simply reflect the world’s thoughts, views, and priorities of the times in which we live. To be successful coaching in these times, one must be willing and able to adapt to today’s young people.
Dobbins: One of the Hot Topics among all coaches has been recruiting. It seems Division I has cut their recruiting opportunities more and more each year. The possible elimination of Fall Recruiting has been a major part of that since it was brought for discussion in San Antonio in December. What are your thoughts on this and where do you see recruiting going? Do you have an opinion as someone on the outside looking in on where it needs to go?
Whitlock: I offer no new solutions or great ideas. Recruiting has always had a bigger effect on the “balance and quality of life” of coaches than any other facet required in the profession. My opinion on the matter is this. If a given coach does not want to recruit on a given weekend or a certain time of year, they should stay home and not feel guilty about. It should be their choice. The feeling of “HAVING to go because if you don’t, you’ll lose ground to the competition” is not as valid an argument as it once was. Collegiate athletics now have eight graders committing to universities, there are showcases and camps everywhere. Videos, social media, and webcasts allow coaches to have a chance to see and communicate with prospects seemingly all the time. Whereas there is a need for certain boundaries for collegiate recruiting and recruiting seasons; I am against any coach (or bloc of coaches) telling another coach that “you cannot work this week/month because I don’t want to.” If you want/need time away, take it. Besides, anytime a piece of recruiting legislation is brought forward or passed, certain coaches will immediately start looking for a loophole or a “work around”.
Dobbins: Another aspect of recruiting has been the innovation of the Transfer Portal. Athletes moving programs on the collegiate level has become as easy as the club level these days. What is your opinion on the Transfer Portal and players “team jumping” on the collegiate level with such ease?
Whitlock: I am 100% for the rights and needs of student-athletes, but good intentions often pave the way to … And that is what the Transfer Portal is doing. We are not serving our young people by allowing them to learn the lessons involved with the concept of COMMITMENT. The portal sends the message that “if you do not get exactly what you want – all of the time, you can just pack up your toys and leave.” Fulfilling a commitment is part of being an adult and we should want our athletes/young people to learn that lesson. Coaches and schools must be held accountable for how student-athletes are treated, but young people should also be required to honor commitments. If a student-athlete, who has not been wronged, chooses to leave a school due to any whim or reason, then there should be some type of reasonable consequences. I don’t know what those “consequences” should be, but to allow players to quit and just walk away – for no ‘real’ reason and with no required accountability, just seems to be a lazy policy and should be an unacceptable solution to teach to our youngsters. I also feel that the portal makes it easy for one collegiate program to recruit players from another collegiate program. That feels a little unprofessional in my opinion.
Excellent questions and excellent introspection by Scott on the in depth answers. Really enjoyed reading this interview.