Sport coaching education is increasingly expected to prepare coaches who can integrate evidence-based knowledge into athlete-centered practice. However, the evidence underpinning many coaching curricula has historically been derived from research conducted predominantly on male participants, raising concerns about the applicability of generalized coaching principles to female athletes. This conceptual paper argues that the longstanding theory–practice gap in sport coaching extends beyond challenges associated with translating research into practice and reflects a broader knowledge–population gap resulting from the underrepresentation of female athletes in sport and exercise science. Drawing upon contemporary literature from coaching science, exercise physiology, motor learning, injury prevention, and female athlete health, the paper critically examines how male-centered evidence has shaped foundational approaches to physical preparation, technical skill acquisition, tactical development, recovery, and athlete monitoring within coach education. Particular attention is given to the absence of sex-specific analyses, menstrual health considerations, endocrine variability, and individualized physiological responses within coaching curricula. The paper contends that the continued presentation of generalized training models as universally applicable may inadvertently contribute to suboptimal performance, increased injury risk, and inequitable athlete care for female athletes. Rather than advocating separate coaching paradigms, this paper proposes a sex-responsive framework for coaching education that emphasizes scientific rigor, critical evaluation of the evidence base, individualized athlete monitoring, and the integration of female-specific physiology into coach preparation. Advancing coaching education in this manner has the potential to improve both athlete performance and long-term health while fostering more equitable, evidence-informed coaching practice.