This is kind of an interesting debate and I have enjoyed reading some of the posts on here. THere are some really good arguments both for and against.

The only thing I have to say is if players want to rally behind an assistant coach that they feel confident in then they should at least be heard. The hiring council can put whatever weight they want to on it, but at least the players had an opportunity. Since they are the ones who have to go out there and play and work for the coach, it should stand to reason that they should at least be able to support an assistant who is interested.

 

However, if no assistant applies, then its kind of a moot point for them to do so since they probably have no idea what kind of coach the applicants are anyway (unless they know the coach from another team from playing them or something).

 

My personal problem with the way many councils hire is that too many times I have seen good coaches passed on because of the old practice of "its not what you know...its WHO you know". Principals far too often hire people they know from previous schools or friendships without really considering what is truly best for the program itself.

 

I have often found that the principal and AD who dont have strong commitments to the athletic programs are often looking for the coach who will be "yes men", if you will. Guys who will not cause problems or spend too much money. I dont know if there will ever be an ideal scenario that can be modeled by all schools, but a hiring committee should consist of the Principal, the AD, a teacher, an athletic booster (if any exist) and a member of the student council. Ultimately, the decision should be based soley on qualifications with a vote by the committee as a whole, not just left up to one person (usually the Principal) to make that choice. The more people involved, the better.

 

Parents should not be involved in the decision making because it often times results in that parent thinking about his/her child and not the team.

I feel that when players and parents are involved things that should be keep confidential are made public. Lets be brutally honest, a good bit of the job information about coaching hires and interviews on this site come from parent and player sources.

 

IMO, Keeping kids and parents out of this process helps to maintain the integrity of a hire and also can keep emotions from getting to high.

ABSOLUTELY NONE!!! That is why E. Jessamine is in the mess they are in now.

ABSOLUTELY NONE!!! That is why E. Jessamine is in the mess they are in now.

 

What is going on at east?

Well I been seeing that alot of people on here have been saying no that a player should not get to choose the coach. But this thread doesn't say should the players choose a coach, it just says should players have some sort of role in picking out the right coach. So I would have to disagree with ALL of you on this matter, except for MountainThunder because he seems to understand it!

 

I went to Ludlow and in 2003 when we was looking for a new coach to replace Bob Parrish after he resigned, our very own superintendent held a meeting for all the players to talk about the next coach. You got to keep in mind that this was when we still was in are 32 game losing streak. She asked us as a team what we thought it would take to turn the program around. She asked us what all we would want in the next coach, and the stuff we would like to see from them.

 

The superintendent and the people in charge at my school knew that ultimately it was the players who play the games and decide if we win or lose. So they did take in are ideas into consideration when the board and everyone made the decision and obviously it worked out REALLY GOOD because we ended up getting Coach Hensley. We all seen what he did for the program in not only ending the LONG 32 game losing streak but also getting us to the playoffs that year as well, and then going back to the playoffs the very next year to make it the first time in Ludlow history I believe a Ludlow team has gone to the playoffs back to back years.

 

Im not saying that the players should be the one who says the coach they should hire, because the committee should be the one who decides who is the coach, but they should take into account some of the players opinions since the players are the ones doing the playing. If you do that I believe it will help in getting the best coach for the team. So yes players should have some role in chosing a head coach. I think my example of what we did at Ludlow proves that too, because it obviously worked out REALLY WELL for us and turned the program back around!!!

 

I am with you on this one. The kids and parents should ABSOLUTELY not pick the coach. It is not their job. But their opinions should be heard and taken into consideration. But they should not make the call. On that, I am complete agreement. But regardless of who is hired, it is the responsibility of the players and parents to support the new coach and give him a fair chance to do the job the administrators hired him to do! :thumb:

I agree with Mountain Thunder that there should be input from players and maybe even some parents. But that input should be given before any interviews go on. The parents and players should not sit in on interviews or the meetings where the candidates are discussed. I like how Ludlow did it when they hired Hensley. Asked the team what they think they needed. If they said they wanted someone that emphasized weightlifting, then they may be more inclined to be asking those kind of questions.

I agree with Mountain Thunder that there should be input from players and maybe even some parents. But that input should be given before any interviews go on. The parents and players should not sit in on interviews or the meetings where the candidates are discussed. I like how Ludlow did it when they hired Hensley. Asked the team what they think they needed. If they said they wanted someone that emphasized weightlifting, then they may be more inclined to be asking those kind of questions.

 

I can respect that view, but I am not sure what good it would do. 99.99% of those asked are going to say someone that is "Good with the kids" "A good leader" "Top notch role model" "Someone who knows his football", etc... Well, duh? In other words, it would just be more of a formality and not really a necessary step that would stregthen the process.

 

The difference is those that are younger (referring to High School kids) may not be able to decipher among those characteristics as well as adults.

I can respect that view, but I am not sure what good it would do. 99.99% of those asked are going to say someone that is "Good with the kids" "A good leader" "Top notch role model" "Someone who knows his football", etc... Well, duh? In other words, it would just be more of a formality and not really a necessary step that would stregthen the process.

 

The difference is those that are younger (referring to High School kids) may not be able to decipher among those characteristics as well as adults.

 

I dont think anyone has said that players should decide if the coaches have those characteristics or not. Yes the people on the committee is the ones that should do that, I dont think anyone is arguing that.

 

But the players should have some say in it. As I said before on how we did it at Ludlow worked great. Before they even started the hiring process the superintendent with all of us and asked what we wanted in a coach and all of those things you said is not the only stuff we said. What we said we wanted was a coach that would not give up on us even if we didn't do well. A coach that is open and just wouldn't do what he wanted, he would do what was best for the team. Some coaches would make you run the system that they want even if its a system that wouldn't work with the players, and that is one of the reasons why we hadn't been doing good. There had been rumors I remember about maybe Owen Hauck coming to Ludlow and we said we wouldn't want a coach like that even though he had been a great coach before. With what we was going through we wanted a younger coach because we knew we needed a coach that we could relate to, and motivate us and make us want to plays for him. It worked out really well for us obviously because we ended getting Coach Hensley out of the process. Now none of us had ever even heard of Coach Hensley before then so obviously we were not the one who choose the coach but the committee did. But I think them asking what we wanted in a Coach helped because Coach Hensley ended up being everything we wanted and asked for in a coach and more!

 

So I think we all agree that the players should not be the ones who actually choose the coach. But I believe it is really important to have the players have a little bit of a role in the process. The superintendent like they did here at Ludlow or the committee should talk to the players and get there opinions about it. Now they shouldn't ask the players who they should hire but they should just get there opinion on what they want to have in there next coach!

I dont think anyone has said that players should decide if the coaches have those characteristics or not. Yes the people on the committee is the ones that should do that, I dont think anyone is arguing that.

 

But the players should have some say in it. As I said before on how we did it at Ludlow worked great. Before they even started the hiring process the superintendent with all of us and asked what we wanted in a coach and all of those things you said is not the only stuff we said. What we said we wanted was a coach that would not give up on us even if we didn't do well. A coach that is open and just wouldn't do what he wanted, he would do what was best for the team. Some coaches would make you run the system that they want even if its a system that wouldn't work with the players, and that is one of the reasons why we hadn't been doing good. There had been rumors I remember about maybe Owen Hauck coming to Ludlow and we said we wouldn't want a coach like that even though he had been a great coach before. With what we was going through we wanted a younger coach because we knew we needed a coach that we could relate to, and motivate us and make us want to plays for him. It worked out really well for us obviously because we ended getting Coach Hensley out of the process. Now none of us had ever even heard of Coach Hensley before then so obviously we were not the one who choose the coach but the committee did. But I think them asking what we wanted in a Coach helped because Coach Hensley ended up being everything we wanted and asked for in a coach and more!

 

So I think we all agree that the players should not be the ones who actually choose the coach. But I believe it is really important to have the players have a little bit of a role in the process. The superintendent like they did here at Ludlow or the committee should talk to the players and get there opinions about it. Now they shouldn't ask the players who they should hire but they should just get there opinion on what they want to have in there next coach!

\

 

Futurecoach, I have to say I've been impressed with your responses on here, not just as to content, but as to your correct grammar and sentence structure.

 

Players' input should be sought before the interview process begins by members of the screening committee, as should boosters, alumni, other coaches and parents. I think its really important to "know" what the problems were with the last coach and what those groups look to see in the new coach. While a lot of what the screening committee may hear will be already known to the committee, you never know if you'll learn something new. So why not take the time to ask? Also it gives all of those groups, who all are very important to the future success of the program, a feeling that the administration cares about their input. Some people seem to want to poo poo the involvement of parents and boosters and I think that's a mistake. If you look at just about any program that has been successful for a lengthy period of time, you will find committed boosters and parents supporting money, time and other support to the program. If they can be asked to make those contributions, then they can be asked for their input on the type of coach that is needed.

 

All groups need to understand that while their input as to the type of coach needed will be considered, they will have zero say in the actual coach selected or the interview process and they should be asked to give their support to the coach regardless if they agree with the person selected. Players must believe in their coach and when they hear their parents griping about the coach or fans second guessing the coach, it makes it just a little bit harder for the kids to do.

I think that more than the committee getting anything out of meeting with players, parents, boosters, etc., those people will feel a part of the program. This builds more pride in the program as a whole. To know that the committee picking the new coach cares about what they think goes a long way with a lot of people.

What is going on at east?

Went from having a lot of discipline under David Hensley to almost none under their current coach. Had a load of talent last year and went 3-7 after going 10-2 in 04. Two players were on the search committee and had a say in the hiring of their current coach.

Went from having a lot of discipline under David Hensley to almost none under their current coach. Had a load of talent last year and went 3-7 after going 10-2 in 04. Two players were on the search committee and had a say in the hiring of their current coach.

 

I do think that players should have a role in the coaching process like I have said, but I do not think that a player or players should be on the committee that actually chooses the coach though! I think what you said they did was completely wrong, and that is why they struggled probably!

\

 

Futurecoach, I have to say I've been impressed with your responses on here, not just as to content, but as to your correct grammar and sentence structure.

 

Players' input should be sought before the interview process begins by members of the screening committee, as should boosters, alumni, other coaches and parents. I think its really important to "know" what the problems were with the last coach and what those groups look to see in the new coach. While a lot of what the screening committee may hear will be already known to the committee, you never know if you'll learn something new. So why not take the time to ask? Also it gives all of those groups, who all are very important to the future success of the program, a feeling that the administration cares about their input. Some people seem to want to poo poo the involvement of parents and boosters and I think that's a mistake. If you look at just about any program that has been successful for a lengthy period of time, you will find committed boosters and parents supporting money, time and other support to the program. If they can be asked to make those contributions, then they can be asked for their input on the type of coach that is needed.

 

All groups need to understand that while their input as to the type of coach needed will be considered, they will have zero say in the actual coach selected or the interview process and they should be asked to give their support to the coach regardless if they agree with the person selected. Players must believe in their coach and when they hear their parents griping about the coach or fans second guessing the coach, it makes it just a little bit harder for the kids to do.

 

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

I do think that players should have a role in the coaching process like I have said, but I do not think that a player or players should be on the committee that actually chooses the coach though! I think what you said they did was completely wrong, and that is why they struggled probably!

You are right. They did have a say and look at what it got them. They struggled with talent and did not make the playoffs.

You are right. They did have a say and look at what it got them. They struggled with talent and did not make the playoffs.

 

Maybe I have misunderstood this post, but where have I said that the players should be on the search committee that hires the coach like they did?

 

I have said the players should not be involved when it comes to the interviewing and actually picking the who the exact coach should be! What I have said is that they SHOULD talk to the players before they begin any of the interviewing process and just see what they would like to see in there next coach. This was the committee can atleast take into account what the players opinions are on what kind of coach that they think would help them the best, and this could help the COMMITTEE make the best decision possible on the coach that would be the best for the team!!!