Four Years

Coach should be given enough time to graduate his first first senior class. So that would take at least 5 years.

 

I think there are a ton of factors that come into play but I agree, you have to give him at least four full classes before you decide.

I agree with most that 5 is reasonable but you've got to give him time to make changes to the program which could include changes to the schools feeder system, boosters etc. Those changes take time and can ultimately be the difference in a succesful program or one that just can't quite get over the hump.

If you're winning districts and going deep in the playoffs the first or second year after hiring a new coach, then a lot of things were already going right in the program prior to the coaching change.

 

In many programs, when they change coaches, the feeder system is in a shambles, the coaching staff is in disarray, the booster club is disorganized, there is little community or administrative support, the facilities may be greatly lacking, and - most importantly - there may not really be any "football players" on the roster.

 

In other words, a first or second year renaissance is in no way a reasonable expectation.

 

I think you have to remember that this is HS football; not college. There are more variables that are beyond any coach's control. Improvement has to measured based upon the environment the new coach enters, and sometimes improvement is not translated so much as wins and losses.

 

As a general rule, however, I think you need to give any new coach at least five years to show that he knows how to build a quality program.

I believe that this question depends a lot on the school, particularly with the resources, players coming out for the team, and the amount of students enrolled. However, with giving a number, I would assume between four and five years.

As far as questioning rather or not it can be done if it is not done in three years, I would say yes. I have seen many teams with major improvements that were at or near rock bottom, but just took more time due to resources and the amounts of students coming out for the teams. Resources and the amount of people coming out makes a huge difference.

I agree with those that suggest five years under most circumstances. However, in the interim, a school should look for internal signs of progress. Is the off season program operating smoothly and have the kids bought into the system and the dedication that is being sought? Are there discipline problems? Are the coach and his staff providing good roll models for the athletes to emulate? On the field, are they competing each week? Is the coach getting the maximum out of the talent he has on the field?

 

Success is relative but a school has a right to expect some wins, as long as they are providing the program with enough support to enable it to function. If, after five years, the best athletes in the school still shun football and the talent level on the field still is not enough to produce winning seasons and, at least, competitive playoff runs, the school needs to take a look at the cause. In 1A some schools are just too small to be competitive. I don't care if the ghost of Knute Rockne coaches a school with a male enrollment of 90, they are not going to beat Beechwood, year in, year out. If such a school intends to keep playing football, the administration must define success in terms of the benefit to the student athletes. There are still many life lessons to be taught and the experience of dedicating oneself to a team cause should not be overlooked in any program.

 

Agree !!!

My question is how do you measure "success?"