ColonelMike,

 

I agree with most of what you said above. I think this could be a great situation for the right coach. Since I raised the issue of spring practice, I will clarify my comment. I'm not aware of anyone representing South Oldham making any comment about spring practice. My comment was simply meant to acknowledge that it will be difficult for the new head coach to do all that is necessary to have productive spring practices in time.

 

Depending on the post-season success of the basketball teams, the 3 week period for spring football practice will begin on either Mar. 8, 15 or 22. If a coach is hired this coming Monday (March 1) AND one of the basketball teams makes it to the sweet 16, the coach will have exactly 3 weeks to hire a staff, get to know the team, issue equipment, train the staff, etc., etc., etc. That is the best case scenario. If a coach isn't hired for another week, or neither of the basketball teams makes the sweet 16, there will be less preparation time.

 

I know that in some circumstances the KHSAA has granted exceptions to the normal schedule and allowed schools to hold spring practice later. I have no idea how often those requests are granted or on what grounds. Maybe someone with more info could provide that information.

There must be a cricumstance that would allow the spring practice date to be extended. Clay resigned with plenty of time to find a replacement, I doubt VERY seriously the KHSAA will consider it since South is responsible for dragging their feet. The response by the KHSAA will more than likely be that the assistants could have run spring football without a head coach in place. It's super unlikely they will get an extension.

Provided 1) a coach has been hired or 2) an assistant from last year is in the building, I would be shocked if South doesn't have some form of spring practice.

 

You can have a very effective spring practice without full pads and scrimmages.

There are no assistants in the building.

Regardless, SO has had PLENTY of time to make the right hire. KHSAA will not bend the rules, I assure you. I have been apart of it first hand, it ain't gonna happen. They better have someone run spring practice if they don't have a head coach hired, or they will miss out on it all together.

There are no assistants in the building.

 

Now that is evidence of support for football right there, no assistants in building, that will help you win.....................:thumb: And the survey says.....................:deadhorse:

That isn't entirely correct. I'm quite sure that this was the intent of some of the parents involved. But I know for a fact that some of the parents involved DIDN'T want the coaches to leave. These particular individuals were among the coaches' staunchest defenders. They honestly saw the survey as a potential fix to what they perceived as communications problems. I don't agree with their chosen solution, but at least - for these individuals - their heart was in the right place.

Like I said, I'm quite sure there were some disgruntled parents in the mix - I'm not naive, and when you struggle to get wins, there's always some. And it wasn't something I would have wanted to see happen at a school my son went to...not a very good idea at all.

 

But my point remains the same, regardless. The South bashing on this thread has gotten ridiculous, and has ceased to be grounded in any fact. No spring ball? Be serious. Not serious about sports? Well, everyone has an opinion on what's "serious", but their athletic successes are numerous and their facilities are superb.

 

And like I said: 1) I'm not a South alum, 2) I have no kid at the school, and 3) I don't even live in the South district. But I do think the school has been unfairly represented here because of a small handful of idiot parents.

 

Since you are in the know here, tell us what exactly was the communication problem between the coach and the parents? How would the survey fix it?

This would be a great time to give insight to exactly what the parent issues were with the coach. What exactly did they want to happen that the coaching staff didn't communicate with them?

Since you are in the know here, tell us what exactly was the communication problem between the coach and the parents? How would the survey fix it?

This would be a great time to give insight to exactly what the parent issues were with the coach. What exactly did they want to happen that the coaching staff didn't communicate with them?

 

Footballhd,

 

You seem to think I'm an insider at South. I am not.

 

If you happen to remember a previous post I made regarding this situation - in another thread - I said I am not "in the know." Although I cover all the Oldham schools, I make it a practice to avoid stuff like this. I have no place in it, and don't want to be involved with crap like this.

 

And if you've read my posts in this thread, you've seen that I think the survey was an amazingly dumb idea...I don't think it could have fixed it.

 

But it still strikes me as disingenuous for posters on this thread to bash the school about something most know less about than I do! Unless someone has an awful lot of details they're willing to share, this thread has become pointless "piling on".

The communication problem was the parents wanted things their way and the coaching staff wouldn't listen.

The communication problem was the parents wanted things their way and the coaching staff wouldn't listen.

 

Probably true.

 

I've seen the survey form but haven't seen the results of the survey. Would any one with access, care to share the actual results? If the results indicate just a few parents disapproved of coaching decisions and actions, it lends support to those claiming the survey was just a product of a few disgruntled parents whose dissatisfaction with the coaches was really generated by playing time issues. Then again, if the results indicate a large percentage of the parents disapproved of coaching decisions and actions, it undermines greatly that claim and it undermines the claim that SO isn't hungry for football success. Logic would follow that if a lot of the parents were so upset with the coaching that they would indicate their dissatisfaction in a survey (if that was the case which I don't know until I see the results), such would be an indicator that they obviously want more success than they were experiencing and that they were "hungry", would it not? Logic would also follow that if they didn't care about the success of the football program and weren't "hungry", they wouldn't be upset with the coaches because they just didn't care at all, would it not? Sure, some parents disgruntled with playing time might, but if a lot of the parents indicated dissatisfaction, it would have to be for reasons other than playing time. Heck, somebody's kids are getting to play, thus somebody has to be happy with playing time.

 

If the parents are hungry for success, but it's just a matter of them not understanding what needs to be done to be successful (better support for the kids playing; pushing and encouraging the kids to work harder, paying for personal trainers during the off season, etc), is that a failing of the parents or of the coaches for not making the parents understand what success requires from them or of both?

 

 

I'm sure some of the folks on here being critical of the parental involvement are friends of the former coaches or perhaps even former coaches themselves. Which on one hand gives them insight into what the situation was. Then again and on the other hand, it might just bias their perspective on the situation to the point they can not be objective. With no involvement at SO, I won't venture a guess which is the case.

 

The following is not directed to SO, but some general thougths:

 

What we have to recognize is that back in day when high school sports weren't taken near as seriously as they are now, parents didn't get near as wrapped up in it. If Johnny was on the team and having fun, that's all that mattered. But as high school sports (heck, sports on all levels in the US) have become much more important, kids' expectations of their participation and performance have changed. From what I observe, the kids work much, much harder than a lot of us did when we played. Parents see their kids working harder, sometimes giving up other sports to devote themselves to one sport. If the kids are going to work so hard and dedicate themselves to a sport and to win, their parents naturally want to see every thing that can possibly be done actually be done for their kids to win. If parents conclude that coaching is holding the team back, they are going to do something about it. Back in the day, if the team had a .500 record but Johnny had fun, the parents could not have given a hoot less. But today, because of the importance of sports and because of emphasis on winning and making the sacrifices needed to win, a lot of parents no longer have that cavalier attitude. Now that may be wrong (heck the extreme importance given to winning in sports may be wrong), but it is what it is and a smart coach recognizes that. Hey it would be nice and great if a coach didn't have to spend the time stroking parents and explaining why he does this and doesn't do that but rather could just make the decisions as the head coach with no one second guessing him, but those halcyon days are no more unfortunately. It's true that some coaches with a long track record of great success don't have to do that explaining and PR work, but a coach without that track record and at a program not currently experiencing great success better hone up on his parental inter-action skills; right, wrong or othersise.

Not all the parents at South are at fault. But for a long time a few parents not happy with the any coach they have had have always been very vocal and negative. This has been going on before Coach Holbrook was hired that's why no coach has stayed more than 3 or 4 years.

Colonel Mike are you not a South Oldham parent. Also you named a few successful sports at South but you were not able to mention Football

Not all the parents at South are at fault. But for a long time a few parents not happy with the any coach they have had have always been very vocal and negative. This has been going on before Coach Holbrook was hired that's why no coach has stayed more than 3 or 4 years.

 

If it's only a few vocal and negative parents that are causing coaches to leave, shouldn't the ire be directed towards the AD and the principal for letting the few dictate things and not parents in general? :confused: Why be upset with the fact a survey was done? If the results indicate that just a few parents are upset and vocal, why wouldn't the AD and principal make it clear that they stand squarely behind the coaches?

If it's only a few vocal and negative parents that are causing coaches to leave, shouldn't the ire be directed towards the AD and the principal for letting the few dictate things and not parents in general? :confused: Why be upset with the fact a survey was done? If the results indicate that just a few parents are upset and vocal, why wouldn't the AD and principal make it clear that they stand squarely behind the coaches?

 

Leatherneck, if a survey isn't a bad idea, since you have a copy of the survey everyone is talking about, why don't you go ahead and send it out to the parents at Highlands?

Leatherneck, if a survey isn't a bad idea, since you have a copy of the survey everyone is talking about, why don't you go ahead and send it out to the parents at Highlands?

 

I'm happy with the coaching at Highlands, actually I'm ecstatic with the coaching at Highlands. Why would I send out a survey? That makes zero sense.

 

If a vocal and negative parent at Highlands sent around a survey, I'm pretty confident that the results would come back very favorable for the coaching staff and that the AD and principal would support the coaches.

 

People are getting so wrapped up about a survey and are missing the big picture. It's like someone's feelings are hurt because a survey was done. If I was a coach and was convinced that it was only a few vocal and negative parents stirring up trouble, heck I might commission the survey myself to show that it's just a few upset people causing problems and that their views aren't shared by many others.

 

Again, if the AD and principal didn't support the coaches because of the opinions of a few vocal and negative parents, the problem is at that level. If the school allowed a few parents to run off good coaches, the problem is at that level. Every program has some disgruntled parents. It comes with coaching and is one of the reasons some thick skin is required. It's just a blooming survey. Would you feel better if the disgruntled parents called a parents meeting and that's where the feelings and opinions were expressed? Or the AD and/or principal took the time to meet one on one with each parent to get their input on the situation?