I think just about EVERYONE thought Boone Co. would have a miserable season, given their division and schedule, a brand new coach with a brand new scheme, his very talented son lost to injury, etc. It would be RIDICULOUS for him to be fired and that's why no one is calling for HIS job. I don't think the posts regarding getting Warner out are coming from the Raider parents, they seem content to wallow in the muck for the most part. It's outsiders who look at their facility (by far the best in Boone Co.), hear nothing but "Look at our youth, freshmen, JV - they are STUDS!" and then nothing comes from those STUDS at Varsity, and some who think 20 coaches on one sideline is just too flippin' many especially when they are parents!! Less parents coaching is what is needed at Ryle, NOT more parental involvement!

Agreed!!! II think parental involvement (outside of coaching) at Ryle is great. They have some tradiions that many other schools envy. From midnight madness, to father son camp outs to senior dads addressing seniors before their game on senior night etc.

 

The support is not lacking at Ryle and has never been in question. The overwhelming theory is that too many dads are assistants at the varsity level. Maybe Bryson just doesn't know how to tell them no, or maybe it's that he is too close to the situation to see what is going on. Maybe he is sheillded from what is being said outside the chalk lines, or maybe he doesn't realize the players that aren't playing because of what goes on in the coaching staff. IF a player never comes out how is he to knoww that they are actually a football player? Several good players just didn't even bother playng varsity at all because of what they saw happening at that level.

 

I don't think the problem is Warner at all, I think the problem is he has too many chiefs on the sidelines putting personal gains in front of the teams best interest. Just my opinion, but haven't seen anything to prove the folks in the know around the organization to be wrong on these concerns yet.

Ryle is a stale program, after Hempel graduated the program went stale. This is with the addition of the Union Raiders which has made no impact at all, at least on the field it seems. In recent years we see the frosh do well only for the varsity to be overwhelmed on Fridays.

 

It's been a long journey for Bryson, maybe he's running on empty himself. If he wants to continue the ride he has to fix what's going on, on the sidelines and take back the state of the program. The addition of Cooper has taken talent but there is still plenty at Ryle.

Agreed!!! II think parental involvement (outside of coaching) at Ryle is great. They have some tradiions that many other schools envy. From midnight madness, to father son camp outs to senior dads addressing seniors before their game on senior night etc.

 

The support is not lacking at Ryle and has never been in question. The overwhelming theory is that too many dads are assistants at the varsity level. Maybe Bryson just doesn't know how to tell them no, or maybe it's that he is too close to the situation to see what is going on. Maybe he is sheillded from what is being said outside the chalk lines, or maybe he doesn't realize the players that aren't playing because of what goes on in the coaching staff. IF a player never comes out how is he to knoww that they are actually a football player? Several good players just didn't even bother playng varsity at all because of what they saw happening at that level.

 

I don't think the problem is Warner at all, I think the problem is he has too many chiefs on the sidelines putting personal gains in front of the teams best interest. Just my opinion, but haven't seen anything to prove the folks in the know around the organization to be wrong on these concerns yet.

 

What are these personal gains your talking about?

What are these personal gains your talking about?

Playing sons in front of others to be quite blunt. That isn't anything I've seen because I don't know their assistant coaches and their sons, I am just going off of what I've been told numerous times over the last several years from players and parents close to the program.

Playing sons in front of others to be quite blunt. That isn't anything I've seen because I don't know their assistant coaches and their sons, I am just going off of what I've been told numerous times over the last several years from players and parents close to the program.

 

So are you one of those people who spread rumors. So, A Ryle player (who does not deserve to start) and a ryle parent (who thinks johnny is the next coming) tells you they are getting screwed and you write that on bluegrasspreps. You sir are not very bright.

So are you one of those people who spread rumors. So, A Ryle player (who does not deserve to start) and a ryle parent (who thinks johnny is the next coming) tells you they are getting screwed and you write that on bluegrasspreps. You sir are not very bright.

Nope, not at all. I simply pass on what I've been told as I've already stated.

To automatically assume little johnny shouldn't start and assume you arre right and that only the best players are playing makes you wonderr why over the last 2 seasons with all the so called talent they have that they could only manage a handful of wins....maybe little jonnny, or several johnny's should be playing but aren't...huh?

 

Either way there will always be more negatives than positives whenever you have half a dozen assistants on the sidelines coaching their sons on the team. Wether it's just perception or not, it can never be good for team morale period whether the sons are the better players or not. perception drives moral a lot of time and if players are complaining then it can never be a good thing.

Now since you are quick to assume, I can play that game too. So you are one of those coaches that put your son in front of the team for your own personal reasons. You sir are not very bright.

Edited November 9, 201312 yr by Hellbird

Nope, not at all. I simply pass on what I've been told as I've already stated.

 

Now since you are quick to assume, I can play that game too. So you are one of those coaches that put your son in front of the team for your own personal reasons. You sir are not very bright.

 

I assumed that you had talked to players/parents of players, but in fact you talked to parents not even involved in the program and we are supposed to believe you and your sources? Players who play on the team currently with dad coaches/volunteers at any level: Belk, Woolf, Lamping, Abshire, Ross, Brenier (GP), Rabe. Belk, Woolf, and Ross started the whole season as juniors and played as sophomores. Abshire played JV mostly until recently was promoted to varsity at WR. Where is the problem? Where is the unfair and preferential treatment you are referring to?

I assumed that you had talked to players/parents of players, but in fact you talked to parents not even involved in the program and we are supposed to believe you and your sources? Players who play on the team currently with dad coaches/volunteers at any level: Belk, Woolf, Lamping, Abshire, Ross, Brenier (GP), Rabe. Belk, Woolf, and Ross started the whole season as juniors and played as sophomores. Abshire played JV mostly until recently was promoted to varsity at WR. Where is the problem? Where is the unfair and preferential treatment you are referring to?

 

Does Brenier = Bernier? As in Jon's son? Jon is on Ryle's staff?

I assumed that you had talked to players/parents of players, but in fact you talked to parents not even involved in the program and we are supposed to believe you and your sources? Players who play on the team currently with dad coaches/volunteers at any level: Belk, Woolf, Lamping, Abshire, Ross, Brenier (GP), Rabe. Belk, Woolf, and Ross started the whole season as juniors and played as sophomores. Abshire played JV mostly until recently was promoted to varsity at WR. Where is the problem? Where is the unfair and preferential treatment you are referring to?

I've talked to parents with kids in the program, I've talked with PArents not with kids in the program, I've talked to Players inthe program, I've talked with Players who refusae to play on the team, I've talked to starters on the team for the last couple years too. It isn't one sided as you would like to makke it sound. It's information from all areas of the situation, not just one sided.

 

 

Just the fact that this topic is being discussed should let you know that maybe, just maybe even if it's just the perception, that it may be a problem. The fact you just listed 6 is all we need to know. It's one thing if these coaches have coached on the team for the past 10 years, it's quite a different story that they didn't start coaching for Ryle until their boys got there.....didn't say all of them, just a couple is bad enough. Be upset with what is being said all you want. You kind of just proved the point I made.

 

I'd be really intersted, just out of curiousity, how many coaches have stayed on after their kids graduated without a younger one in the systtem or coming up.

I assumed that you had talked to players/parents of players, but in fact you talked to parents not even involved in the program and we are supposed to believe you and your sources? Players who play on the team currently with dad coaches/volunteers at any level: Belk, Woolf, Lamping, Abshire, Ross, Brenier (GP), Rabe. Belk, Woolf, and Ross started the whole season as juniors and played as sophomores. Abshire played JV mostly until recently was promoted to varsity at WR. Where is the problem? Where is the unfair and preferential treatment you are referring to?

 

Uninformed or deliberately decieving? Semantics because Perron isn't OFFICIALLY on staff, although anyone watching can clearing see he is coaching. He has a stepson and a foster son on the team?

Intangibles:

 

Is the coach hurting the program?

Is the coaching and his actions causing kids to quit or not come out?

Is he teaching the lessons of life in addition to the game?

Is the fan base still supporting him?

Are the fans coming out?

What's the atmosphere like? Positive or negative?

 

No easy answers but W/L are not on it. CCH replaced a good basketball coach who was still winning games because they felt the vibe wasn't good and they needed a new leader. How do you quantify that?

 

If yes is the answer to any or all of questions 1,2 and 6, it would have a direct result on W's and L's.

 

For those of us that do not have insight into the program, it is all we have to go on. Something is amiss. These are the same athletes that have a lot of success at one level, yet 5 -17 as varsity players. If I'm a decision maker at Ryle I'm at least asking the question - Where's the disconnect?

If yes is the answer to any or all of questions 1' date='2 and 6, it would have a direct result on W's and L's. For those of us that do not have insight into the program, it is all we have to go on. Something is amiss. These are the same athletes that have a lot of success at one level, yet 5 -17 as varsity players. If I'm a decision maker at Ryle I'm at least asking the question - Where's the disconnect?[/quote']

 

Didn't Scott's senior class win as frosh? Should Wooley be fired? Champs at one level don't always translate to another level.

Didn't Scott's senior class win as frosh? Should Wooley be fired? Champs at one level don't always translate to another level.

 

Didn't they just have their best season ever?

You know what is funny about this whole thread. Someone very very close to the Ryle program gave me a pm and asked me to start this thread... What does that say??:eek:

Didn't they just have their best season ever?

 

Did they? What would Ryle of done with that schedule?