Winning Football Programs & The Cities They Represent

[billwilliams70]

There's been much talk in other threads about winning (and losing) football programs.

 

Trinity and Highlands are two dominating football teams with a history of winning State Championships (35 between them if I'm correct).

 

Fort Knox and Fort Campbell have had sporadic histories of winning and as of late, Fort Campbell has been doing more winning (not having lost a game to a 2A team in MANY years) while Fort Knox is on a 38 game losing streak.

 

There was an article posted here recently, regarding Fort Knox's current situation, that really got me thinking about what I'm about to say. One poster in the thread said some things (about winning/losing and the community reaction that follows) that really got me thinking about high school football on a military installation versus that of high school football in a city or "normal" community.

 

Fort Campbell is much like a little city, a little city nestled on the northwest/southeast border of TN and KY respectively. There's a grocery store, a department store, several convenience stores, multiple day cares and schools. There are churches and places of worship. There's a hospital, police department and a handful of fire departments. Fort Campbell has an Installation Management Command (commanded by a full-bird Colonel) that acts almost as a mayor of the city and an Installation Commander (Two-Star General) that could be similar to a governor. Fort Campbell is also home to the Fort Campbell Falcons, the current two-time defending 2A Champions of the Kentucky Commonwealth.

 

However, Fort Campbell is NOT Mojo Land (home of the Odessa Permian Panthers). I use them as a reference because football is HUGE in Texas, as I'm sure it is in other parts of Kentucky (especially northern Kentucky). According the book, that community is REALLY behind that team; but when they're losing.....the coach most likely can't show his face at the local grocery store. Fort Campbell is winning right now, but if the tide were turned and they were in the boat that Fort Knox, the city/community leadership wouldn't really be worried the way other cities/communities would be. Afterall, football is a sport and on the grand scheme of things at Fort Campbell (and Fort Knox for that matter) not very high on the totem pole of importance.

 

I walk the halls of the Division Headquarters here, and everyone asks me about "them Falcons". The highest enlisted man on this WHOLE post is always stoppin' me sayin', "those Falcons are killin' 'em Will, just killin' 'em." This is in part to the pride that I have in this team by giving them (to include the Commanding General) constant updates throughout last season's run at a second 2A title. I'm only saying this because if they were losing, there really wouldn't be much attention given to them, not as much as a "normal" city/community. I still would have given the updates though.

 

It's been said in other threads on the board that the military leadership at Fort Knox should really try and make some changes there. While that topic was addressed and the poster understood the "scheme of things" at Knox......I still think that people should be made aware of this.

 

Fort Campbell's military leadership, while aware of the current situation with the team, don't concern themselves with the hiring and firing of football coaches.....and I'm presuming that Fort Knox is the same way. So, where does the change really need to come from? Are the DoDEA (Department of Defense Education Activity) appointed officials at the installaion REALLY that concerned with the winning/losing football programs? Or, are they more concerned with the education aspect of the school?

 

What about your cities or communities? How involved is the civic leadership in the football programs at your high schools?

 

Maybe I'm just bored.....and I'm really rambling.

 

Later.

[rockmom]

There's been much talk in other threads about winning (and losing) football programs.

 

Trinity and Highlands are two dominating football teams with a history of winning State Championships (35 between them if I'm correct).

 

Fort Knox and Fort Campbell have had sporadic histories of winning and as of late, Fort Campbell has been doing more winning (not having lost a game to a 2A team in MANY years) while Fort Knox is on a 38 game losing streak.

 

There was an article posted here recently, regarding Fort Knox's current situation, that really got me thinking about what I'm about to say. One poster in the thread said some things (about winning/losing and the community reaction that follows) that really got me thinking about high school football on a military installation versus that of high school football in a city or "normal" community.

 

Fort Campbell is much like a little city, a little city nestled on the northwest/southeast border of TN and KY respectively. There's a grocery store, a department store, several convenience stores, multiple day cares and schools. There are churches and places of worship. There's a hospital, police department and a handful of fire departments. Fort Campbell has an Installation Management Command (commanded by a full-bird Colonel) that acts almost as a mayor of the city and an Installation Commander (Two-Star General) that could be similar to a governor. Fort Campbell is also home to the Fort Campbell Falcons, the current two-time defending 2A Champions of the Kentucky Commonwealth.

 

However, Fort Campbell is NOT Mojo Land (home of the Odessa Permian Panthers). I use them as a reference because football is HUGE in Texas, as I'm sure it is in other parts of Kentucky (especially northern Kentucky). Fort Campbell is winning right now, but if the tide were turned and they were in the boat that Fort Knox, the city/community leadership wouldn't really be worried the way other cities/communities would be. Afterall, football is a sport and on the grand scheme of things at Fort Campbell (and Fort Knox for that matter) not very high on the totem pole of importance.

 

I walk the halls of the Division Headquarters here, and everyone asks me about "them Falcons". The highest enlisted man on this WHOLE post is always stoppin' me sayin', "those Falcons are killin' 'em Will, just killin' 'em." This is in part to the pride that I have in this team by giving them (to include the Commanding General) constant updates throughout last season's run at a second 2A title. I'm only saying this because if they were losing, there really wouldn't be much attention given to them, not as much as a "normal" city/community. I still would have given the updates though.

 

It's been said in other threads on the board that the military leadership at Fort Knox should really try and make some changes there. While that topic was addressed and the poster understood the "scheme of things" at Knox......I still think that people should be made aware of this.

 

Fort Campbell's military leadership, while aware of the current situation with the team, don't concern themselves with the hiring and firing of football coaches.....and I'm presuming that Fort Knox is the same way. So, where does the change really need to come from? Are the DoDEA (Department of Defense Education Activity) appointed officials at the installaion REALLY that concerned with the winning/losing football programs? Or, are they more concerned with the education aspect of the school?

 

What about your cities or communities? How involved is the civic leadership in the football programs at your high schools?

 

Maybe I'm just bored.....and I'm really rambling.

 

Later.

 

From what I understood of the article you're referring to, it's not the military or personnel that's not supporting them. It's the non-military public that works on base, or near base. Knowing what I know of that area (and it's a LOT!), the situation described by the author of the article doesn't surprise me a bit. Saddens me, but doesn't surprise me.

[billwilliams70]

^That's true, it is the non-military public that isn't supportive of the Fort Knox Eagles, but there was a poster in that thread that alluded to it not being the community and that it's the school's administration.

 

It's my belief, that unlike football in "normal cities", concern over a winning program only goes as high as the school's administration on a military installation, not to the city/community leadership.

 

Wow! I could've said all that in one sentence. Sorry.

 

Later.

[jrjohnson]

From what I understood of the article you're referring to, it's not the military or personnel that's not supporting them. It's the non-military public that works on base, or near base. Knowing what I know of that area (and it's a LOT!), the situation described by the author of the article doesn't surprise me a bit. Saddens me, but doesn't surprise me.

 

In regards to the non-military public that work on or near a base, their children and other relatives normally are not part of the school system on post. They are more than likely supporting the schools in the civilian communities where their children and families/friends are playing ball.

 

One thing that also needs to be mentioned is that in a normal community you have alumni of the school that also support the programs, whereas in the military schools, those alumni are usually not around the post to support the school's programs.

[rockmom]

^That's true, it is the non-military public that isn't supportive of the Fort Knox Eagles, but there was a poster in that thread that alluded to it not being the community and that it's the school's administration.

 

It's my belief, that unlike football in "normal cities", concern over a winning program only goes as high as the school's administration on a military installation, not to the city/community leadership.

 

Wow! I could've said all that in one sentence. Sorry.

 

Later.

 

I get what you're saying now. :thumb: I agree 100%. I have no idea what it's like @ Fort Campbell, but Fort Knox has seen a ton of changes over the last decade. I think that as things change (yet again) and more soldiers are stationed @ FK, there will be an eventual turn around. Unlike other communities/cities/schools...Bases, IMO, have so many challenges to overcome. For instance, your stud player from Junior year may not return for Senior year, etc. It's tough. I agree it's not all in coaching. As to what was described in the article, the things they're saying to these kids are just wrong, and terrible sportsmanship/fansmanship (new word).

 

In regards to the non-military public that work on or near a base, their children and other relatives normally are not part of the school system on post. They are more than likely supporting the schools in the civilian communities where their children and families/friends are playing ball.

 

One thing that also needs to be mentioned is that in a normal community you have alumni of the school that also support the programs, whereas in the military schools, those alumni are usually not around the post to support the school's programs.

 

Yet another great point. :thumb: