PBA firm on coaching exclusivity

MANILA, Philippines – The PBA is firm on its rule that no head coach may serve in a similar capacity in any other league. The exclusivity principle has no exception. That’s the word from PBA commissioner Chito Narvasa after consulting with the PBA Board of Governors on the matter recently.

Without being briefed on the rule, Narvasa previously commented that he wouldn’t pose any objection for a PBA head coach to serve as head coach in another league. He said it’s the coach’s look-out if he’s not able to deliver in the PBA or wherever else but he wouldn’t stand in the way of anyone trying to earn more for his family by landing another job. However, that was his personal opinion. When Narvasa found out later that the PBA has an existing rule on head coaching exclusivity, he backed off. There was no indication that for the next season, the rule would be relaxed.

For this reason, GlobalPort consultant Franz Pumaren couldn’t be named the Batang Pier head coach when he took over from Pido Jarencio this conference. Pumaren clearly called the shots for GlobalPort in the Governors Cup. TV coverage of the GlobalPort timeout huddles confirmed it. The problem was Pumaren is concurrently head coach of Adamson University in the UAAP senior men’s tournament. He actually took the Adamson job before GlobalPort.

The anomaly was when GlobalPort won four assignments in the Governors Cup, Pumaren wasn’t called to meet the media in the traditional post-game conference because he’s “just” a consultant. In the next conference, Narvasa said Pumaren may be called in along with whoever is designated as a titular head coach.

* * *

The hitch is GlobalPort nominal head coach Johnedel Cardel is also head coach of the Rizal Technological University varsity. If Cardel chooses to stay as head coach of RTU, it will mean giving up his position at GlobalPort or being demoted. Cardel has been RTU coach for years so why take away his chance of earning a living with both jobs?

Besides, what’s the point of the exclusivity rule when everyone knows it’s Pumaren who’s de facto head coach of GlobalPort? The charade is a farce and makes the PBA look unable to enforce its exclusivity rule. Why not just allow a PBA head coach the freedom to do as he pleases at the risk of jeopardizing his own career if he’s unable to juggle both jobs efficiently? There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s a free country after all.

On the UAAP’s side, there is no prohibition for head coaches to serve as head coaches in another league. In fact, the UAAP has no prohibition on foreign coaches – an example is Tai Bundit who coaches the Ateneo senior ladies volleyball squad. It’s the BCAP that will not allow foreign basketball head coaches. That’s the reason why Tab Baldwin is a consultant with Ateneo even if he’s the de facto head coach. Since it’s obvious that Baldwin is the Blue Eagles head coach, will the BCAP move in to stop the masquerade? Condoning this situation makes a mockery of what the BCAP stands for.

To settle this hypocrisy, perhaps there should be a rule that disallows team consultants from sitting on the bench. Mahindra’s Joe Lipa is a perfect example of a consultant who sits behind the bench but his influence is clearly evident in the way coach Chris Gavina calls the shots for the Enforcers. If the PBA and UAAP adopt the rule requiring team consultants to sit behind the bench, Pumaren and Baldwin will be forced to coach from a distance. For sure, they won’t like it. The best way to deal with this issue is to go laissez-faire, meaning no restrictions whatsoever in letting the coaches do as they want. The BCAP, however, may not agree.