I can't see why W/L record wouldn't be a reason for firing a coach. I understand the concept that in High School coaches are asked to do more than just coach, but you take that job knowing what is expected right? If a school brings you in on moral character so be it, but if they bring you in to win games, then you need to win games. I think coaches deserve more time or lieniance do to the possibility of talent rising and falling due to graduation, transfers or whatever it might be. Obviously this is not college where a coach has the option to pick the players they want so it shouldn't be judge so. But in the end I believe if a coach is brought it to win, then that's what he should do to retain his job.

I'm sorry but this is just too over the top for me. With all due respect this might be among the most ludicrous concepts I've seen. Why do you repeatedly refer to the basic concepts of being a coach, of any sport by the way, as being a "guidance counselor." I'd say if you are NOT counseling your players THEN you should be fired. Wins DO NOT define how well a coach teaches the fundamentals and concepts of playing the game. THAT is a way to judge a coach. Wins and losses DO NOT define how well a coach demands discipline and commands respect. THAT is a way to judge a coach. Wins and losses MIGHT define the strength of a coach's scheduling. I'll agree THAT COULD be a way to judge a coach. Imagine the .500 coach who plays the best teams he can find being judged solely by how many wins he has. Imagine a coach who year after year has mediocre talent, low parental support and poor facilities but get 5 or 6 wins because he is a great teacher of the game. Does he get fired? By your definition just go out and schedule down and you'll at least buy yourself a few extra years at the helm. I love the ferocity in your intent, but the reality of your words just doesn't wash in this discussion In MY Humble Opinion.

 

I didn't say that a coach should SOLELY be judged on wins and losses. But IMO, it's absurd to say that it shouldn't be ANY factor in whether or not a coach keeps his job. That's just foolish.

 

If wins and losses truly don't matter, would you be okay with hiring someone with ZERO coaching experience? Or how about a coach that does have coaching experience, but his teams have never won a single game?

I do agree that coaches have a much bigger job than just winning games, ultimately that's what they're hired for. How many wins depends on the school and the administration

If he's got the talent to win 20% of his games and wins 40%. Keep him.

 

If he's got the talent to win 80% of his games and wins 40%. Move on down the road

I think you have to fire coaches based on performance. Now the coach should be able to retain their teaching job provided that they are meeting the requirements for that portion of their duties.

 

Bottom line is coaching high school athletics is a secondary position. Your base position is normally teaching and in some cases your outside employment. If you are unable to perform a portion of your duties (coach at a level seen as appropriate by the school district) you must be relieved of the duty. Sometimes these responsibilities come with decent pay checks and those checks expect results.

 

Entitlement is a HUGE problem in KY and America. Performance is and should be the deciding factor.

Coaches have been told to leave because of wins and losses for a long time. Coaches are almost always hired because of wins and losses.

 

That won't be changing anytime soon.

Came up in another thread. Guru, misguided as he is, disagrees with my stance.

 

I say W/L should NOT be why you fire a high school football coach. I say there are valid reasons to fire them but W/L is not on the list.

 

Coaches are limited as to talent they get to work with. Now you have less kids playing football and specializing elsewhere so it's even fewer talented kids you may have at your disposal. They don't get to go out and sign free agents or recruit kids. They're stuck with whom they get put on them.

 

Secondly, high school football is PART of the high school experience. It is not THE high school experience and firing simply for W/L tells the students that it's all that matters.

 

Lastly, most of these cats are teachers in the school system. You're not almost forcing them to uproot and go elsewhere - all because some 16 year old kid and his buddies weren't talented enough to win games.

 

Wrong message for high school.

 

Have at it.

 

W/L should be a reason just as any other reason. So you think if a coach took over after Dale Mueller and Highlands went 2-40 in their next 42 games the coach doesn't deserve to be fired? Especially if the talent continues to be there?

Know first hand of a coach, takes over a program with about 35/40 members on team.

 

Goes 0-11, 1-10, 6-5. In the third year, 6-5 season, they have over 60 on roster, and only 4 seniors.

 

Is told in January, by the principal and AD, that he MUST win a home playoff game the next year in order to keep his job.

Love this thread. I agree with Clizzy. W/L shouldn't be a reason to fire a high school coach. When coaches are hired and fired their W/L record is never publicly mentioned as a reason for the hiring of firing. I hate the act that we all know is false. I'd rather schools be open and honest about it than go through the charade of acting like W/L aren't the only reason they were hired and fired.

 

John Griggs was a great guy at Boyle. Good teacher. Good role model. He went something like 5-25. Should he have been let go?

Came up in another thread. Guru, misguided as he is, disagrees with my stance.

 

I say W/L should NOT be why you fire a high school football coach. I say there are valid reasons to fire them but W/L is not on the list.

 

Coaches are limited as to talent they get to work with. Now you have less kids playing football and specializing elsewhere so it's even fewer talented kids you may have at your disposal. They don't get to go out and sign free agents or recruit kids. They're stuck with whom they get put on them.

 

Secondly, high school football is PART of the high school experience. It is not THE high school experience and firing simply for W/L tells the students that it's all that matters.

 

Lastly, most of these cats are teachers in the school system. You're not almost forcing them to uproot and go elsewhere - all because some 16 year old kid and his buddies weren't talented enough to win games.

 

Wrong message for high school.

 

Have at it.

 

I agree with the concept wins and losses shouldn't be the only or top reason to fire in most cases.

 

I will say if a coach continues to under perform with the talent he does have it would be a reason to move on from said coach. All coaches aren't equal and there are plenty of bad coaches.

John Griggs was a great guy at Boyle. Good teacher. Good role model. He went something like 5-25. Should he have been let go?

 

Not enough info. I don't know who that is or his situation.

 

Did Boyle County say he was fired because his teams weren't any good or did they say something like "he's a great coach it just didn't work out."

 

That's my main beef. Too many times the W/L record is why coaches are fired but schools act like it isn't. High school coaches, football especially, are held to a different standard when it comes to job expectations. Granted no one is forcing them to coach but in that profession the rules are different but no one in administration wants to admit it or speak on it publicly. Very rarely will you see a teacher fired because of the work of a couple of parents or rogue "boosters" but coaches sure fall on that sword yearly.

This depends on a lot of factors, at an average public school in Kentucky my priorities would be (coaching responsibilities only):

 

1) Are an adequate # of students participating for the size of the school?

2) Are players learning and understanding the concept of teamwork?

3) Does the coach interact positively in the community?

4) Is the coach involved and developing youth programs?

5) Does the coach promote and hold athletes accountable for academics?

6) Is the team competitive to similar programs?

7) After 5 years is the team winning their share of games and being a competitive playoff team?

W/L should not be the only reason a coach is fired but it definitely should be in the determining factor.

 

If a kid wins a starting job but doesn't get it done, a coach will replace that kid in hopes of finding a kid that will succeed at that position(W/L) this is not done for any other reason then to make his team better (W/L) So to say W/L should not be a reason is crazy IMO.

 

If a kid being coached has to win at his position to keep a spot then a Coach should have to win to keep his job. Life is about winning the right way and if you continuesly lose, life is going to be very tough!

There are obvious reasons for coaches to be fired and I won't go into those as they usually pertain to off the field issues. In terms of the sport itself in high school coaches should be afforded at least four full years. This will allow the cycle of current players to age out and teach all members of the team rules, expectations and system. For me some teams will never have the Jimmies and the Joes to win. So how do we measure those? For me a team should be better at the end than at the beginning. If a coach demonstrates that their kids continually develop over the course of the season then they should be safe. There are some places you just cannot win consistently. I hope I don't offend anyone in Fulton County but it's impossible to win big there. I don't think both schools combined have over 175 kids. You could be the best coach in America and never win winore than 2 or 3 games. As long as you take care of the kids, instill them with values sports should teach And coach your kids up Nd maximize their abilities you should be allowed to stay for as long as you have the energy because those are what is truly important. Don't get me wrong W's are nice but not everything.

Are you kidding me? Wins and losses don't matter? Unreal. I bet you are a fan of participation trophies. Our society has moved backwards so much. Whatever happened to "competion"? Competing is a part of life.

 

My daughter is in 5th grade. Just learned that her school no longer has honor roll. They hate to leave people out that don't make the cut.

 

In life. Set standards high. If you can't meet or exceed expectations: next man up!

 

Come on guys. Think about it. It's not that difficult.