Ok, I asked the question so I deem myself eligible to speak idealistically:
Via the political/social transformation to state sponsored athletics and, in this context only, the associated advantages of a socialist sporting regime.
All existing coaches will need to pass the new selection process.
The socialist sport regime will provide each state with a budget commensurate with the amount of existing programs in that state.
The socialized state sponsorship will upgrade and create more uniformity in the coaching pay scale regardless of the size of the institution. Each institution will be provided with a budget commensurate with the amount of athletes and size of existing facilities (each location maximized to its current potential)
Neither, the benevolent and objective body of the socialized sporting regime
A collective of the most successful and globally informed coaches and sport scientists will appoint a council known as ‘the organization’
The re-organized infrastructure of the new unified regime will enhance the proximity of the top coaches to the entry level ones and a circulation will commence that effectively filters coaches to various sport qualification levels based upon interest and demand.
History tells us that one can pull the most useful concepts of existing models and form an aggregate suitable for their purposes and interests. In this context only, I am drawn to the novel advantages that the communist regimes have demonstrated with respect to the unified and organized infrastructure of developmental sport training models and, again in this context only (sport training/coaching), the advantages of socialized systems.