|
|
Post by eaglemountie on Mar 12, 2009 20:30:54 GMT -6
As some of you enter your new head coaching positions or current head coach positions, what are some actions/comments that you are looking for from your assistants that demonstrate loyalty?
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Mar 12, 2009 21:49:26 GMT -6
It's probably more of a question of "no actions of disloyalty."
I really don't have a litmus test for this. If guys are loyal, only time and their actions will tell. There are no hoops to jump through or no bar that sets a standard in my eyes.
When I look at my most current staff I know that I'm a lucky guy. Any problems are always aired out face to face and they end there without anybody feeling like they have to have the last word.
I've always hated the "Loyal" coach who would argue and say things like, "I disagree with you but I'll do it your way because you're the head coach." They don't really need to tell me that because that's the expectation.
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Mar 13, 2009 3:39:55 GMT -6
I agree, theres not really a test.
the best way to find out if you can keep them around is to simply talk to them. If you do not put your expectations up front, especially in writing (coaching contracts are a good idea) then you will probably regret it later.
The odds are that you and each assistant will disagree on SOMETHING at SOME TIME and that does not make an assistant 'disloyal" it simply offers you one more thing to think about and consider before making decisions.
acts of disloyalty would be:
yapping behind your back to players and parents "Im not the head coach but..."
passive agressive actions that hurt you/undermine you
laziness
unprofessional actions on the field or off (your staff is a reflection of you) * I might have to deal with something like this very soon*
loose lips. Coaches who are from a former staff might run off and share information that should have been kept confidential/private.
|
|
|
|
Post by jpdaley25 on Mar 13, 2009 6:34:37 GMT -6
Actions of loyalty would come in the form of support: Hard work, positive attitude, defending against criticism, shouldering your share of the blame if necessary, going the extra mile without being asked, coming through in the clutch, being okay with not always getting credit for what you do.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Mar 13, 2009 7:38:53 GMT -6
Touchdowng: I've always hated the "Loyal" coach who would argue and say things like, "I disagree with you but I'll do it your way because you're the head coach." They don't really need to tell me that because that's the expectation.
Coach, although the expectation is true.. when my HC and I argue.. I always try to put things back into perspective. I might not say those exact words because it sounds a little patronizing but it will be something to the effect yes, I know you are the head coach and we will do it your way.. I think it is good for the HC to hear that. He knows I'm strong willed and I have to tell you you he yields to me sometimes too..It is a two way street which I appreciate.. It is not always his way. The other thing that is eluded to up top is that if you disagree there can be absolutely no eveidence of it outside the office. I am fortunate to work for a guy that lays it on the table and doesn't hold grudges
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 13, 2009 8:28:40 GMT -6
develop a relationship and you will have all the loyalty you need.
You don't have to be buddies, but respect ought to be mutual.Is it 'loyal' to blindly accept everything presented? I think it is unrealistic to expect the demonstrations of loyalty in the office or in private. Some of that has to to with realistic expectations of leadership. The header doesn't have to be (or appear to be) invincible or infallible. "Loyalty" is probably best exemplified outside the coach's office, though. On the field = everything should appear united. This is best demonstrated by showing no weakness in the message. No " I don't know about this......" grumblings to the players. Perception can be reality...we should all be good actors and present the best possible staff image to our players at all times - if you ain't there, fake it 'till you make it. Loyalty has more to do with stewardship. Assistants serve the header. The header serves the assistants. In the community - Despite how your temporary emotions may misguide you, it is never okay to second-guess or present any discord to anyone outside the staff. Maybe if you bounce things off a mentor in a private conversation, but anything / everything presented to everyone else should give the impression that everything is fine (even when it is not). it is OKAY to not say anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by knighter on Mar 13, 2009 16:02:41 GMT -6
Great post Brophy.
|
|
zbessac
Sophomore Member
Posts: 149
|
Post by zbessac on Mar 13, 2009 17:04:48 GMT -6
My question is when do you begin to realize your loyalty to players? I have been offered "better" coaching jobs but feel that because I expect A LOT of my players ( nothing more than any other coach but ALOT in the players eyes) that I feel I need to stay loyal to them. I mean they come every day and give their best and stay loyal to me. Don't I need to stay loyal to them?  |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Mar 13, 2009 17:40:17 GMT -6
My question is when do you begin to realize your loyalty to players? I have been offered "better" coaching jobs but feel that because I expect A LOT of my players ( nothing more than any other coach but ALOT in the players eyes) that I feel I need to stay loyal to them. I mean they come every day and give their best and stay loyal to me. Don't I need to stay loyal to them? How would leaving for a better job be disloyal? The new school has kids, too. |
|
hawke
Sophomore Member
Posts: 209
|
Post by hawke on Mar 13, 2009 18:13:26 GMT -6
Loyalty comes down to mutual respect by the HC and the assistant(s). You will always have differences but the assistant must always remember that it is the HC that gets not only the credit for a win but also the blame for the loss. You can argue as to whose ideas are the correct ones but in the end the HC makes the decisions. As an assistant sacrifice tactics but never principles. If you do you will be nothing but a "yes" man and respect will be lost.
Hawke
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Mar 13, 2009 18:16:37 GMT -6
jgordon1 You are absolutely right. That phrase has more to do with the person who is using it than the phrase itself. The guy who used it on me was a real tool. Keep up the good work with your HC and thanks for making your point. I stand corrected.  |
|
|
|
Post by husky44 on Mar 13, 2009 20:20:09 GMT -6
Loyalty is earned by clear and respectful communication. If you allow the assistant coaches to share their feelings without getting upset and clamly explaining why you are doing it this way that is how respect is earned.
Loyalty is earned through the coach exhibiting a good work ethic and a clear direction for the program.
Loyalty is earned by being genuine and giving others credit when successes are seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 14, 2009 6:29:14 GMT -6
At what point does your loyalty to the head coach end? This is NOT going to be popular and I am going to get piled on here, I'm sure...but, the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of bad head coaches out there...guys who have no idea what they are doing, guys who treat kids like dog$hit, guys who are total egomaniacs. This past season, I worked for one of those guys. Handed in my resignation less than a week after the season ended. I was at the point where I absolutely HATED football and really didn't even want to coach again. I wrestled with the fact that I would be letting a lot of kids down by not coming back but, in the end, I recognized that, by staying on the staff, I was given tacit approval to how this guy handled the program. So, I resigned. About a week later, the AD calls me in and wants to know why I quit. He was surprised by it. So, I was honest. I laid bare all of the problems I observed during the season and ended by saying that I just could not work for a head coach with whom whose values and philosophy I was in such disagreement. About a week after that, two kids came into my classroom and wanted to know why I quit. They were very disappointed and also angry...someone ( :  had given the kids the idea that I had quit because I "didn't like them". So, I was honest with the kids, as well. I told them that it had nothing to do with them but that I just couldn't coach for a guy who did things that were in complete contrast to my values. I should add that the kids, even the GOOD kids, completely despise the head coach. So yeah...loyalty is important and all that, but, it has to be reciprocal. The head coach needs to recognize that he can't rule by decree and expect blanket loyalty from all involved, especially when you haven't won more than 3 games in the last 5 years or so and you refuse to change the ways you do things. As a head coach, you really shouldn't be too surprised when there is not a whole lot of loyalty among assistants and players. It is a simple contract...the assistants and players will provide loyalty to the head coach as long as the head coach provides positive leadership and guidance. When the head coach no longer provides that, he shouldn't expect loyalty. |
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Mar 14, 2009 9:52:39 GMT -6
19delta
You just hijacked a thread. You have a good topic and one we all can learn from but nonetheless this is a hijack.
Probably should have started a new one since this was specific to headcoaches as this is the insight that the originator was seeking.
With respect to eaglemountie can we please return to the topic he started?
|
|
|
|
Post by justryn2 on Mar 14, 2009 10:13:18 GMT -6
I think loyalty and respect go hand in hand, or at least they should. If you respect the people you're coaching with loyalty would just seem to be a natural extension of that respect. If there is no respect then any "actions of loyalty" are likely to be hollow and disingenuous.
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 14, 2009 11:04:00 GMT -6
At what point does your loyalty to the head coach end? Good, honest question. "Loyalty" is simply a symptom of something deeper. Loyalty in the context we all are using it, is about being honest and forthright in the effort to advance the program. To be 'disloyal' is to engage in utter hypocrisy, which is nothing more than deluding ourselves for our ego. When we speak out against the header to others, we are damaging/causing harm to the program. We may come away feeling satisfied that we could vent our frustration to someone, or that someone will regard us with more esteem (because "we see what is wrong"), but who wins? It only fractures that which we say we are speaking out to defend. We remove the foundation of confidence that a staff / program is based on (trust). Lose-lose When we serve the header, and in doing so, maybe challenge his comfort zone, we advance the program because either it provides an opportunity for the HC to galvanize our beliefs in what we are doing, or it provides an opportunity to find a better solution for the program. Win-Win. Regardless of the situation, it is what it is, and as much as we will be comforted by justifying it - bitching and griping to players is petty. It may be justified, it may be true (your statements), it may feel good, but it ultimately, is unnecessary and small-minded. Again, lets be realistic here - 'loyalty' is being true and honest in your relationship. Some times all relationships don't work - it is okay, make your peace and move on as adults.....being 'disloyal' there would be going behind the back and creating unnecessary friction. I think we all have a duty to serve our kids, but advancing your career has nothing to do with that, though. It is natural that we all form relationship bonds with our athletes.....feeling like you are 'disloyal' for looking at other positions is like expecting your players to feel guilty for graduating and going to college (how dare they leave City High!?!) |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Mar 14, 2009 11:48:20 GMT -6
At what point does your loyalty to the head coach end? Good, honest question. "Loyalty" is simply a symptom of something deeper. Loyalty in the context we all are using it, is about being honest and forthright in the effort to advance the program. To be 'disloyal' is to engage in utter hypocrisy, which is nothing more than deluding ourselves for our ego. When we speak out against the header to others, we are damaging/causing harm to the program. We may come away feeling satisfied that we could vent our frustration to someone, or that someone will regard us with more esteem (because "we see what is wrong"), but who wins? It only fractures that which we say we are speaking out to defend. We remove the foundation of confidence that a staff / program is based on (trust). Lose-lose When we serve the header, and in doing so, maybe challenge his comfort zone, we advance the program because either it provides an opportunity for the HC to galvanize our beliefs in what we are doing, or it provides an opportunity to find a better solution for the program. Win-Win. Regardless of the situation, it is what it is, and as much as we will be comforted by justifying it - bitching and griping to players is petty. It may be justified, it may be true (your statements), it may feel good, but it ultimately, is unnecessary and small-minded. Again, lets be realistic here - 'loyalty' is being true and honest in your relationship. Some times all relationships don't work - it is okay, make your peace and move on as adults.....being 'disloyal' there would be going behind the back and creating unnecessary friction. I think we all have a duty to serve our kids, but advancing your career has nothing to do with that, though. It is natural that we all form relationship bonds with our athletes.....feeling like you are 'disloyal' for looking at other positions is like expecting your players to feel guilty for graduating and going to college (how dare they leave City High!?!) Excellent point, Brophy. When it comes to being a part of a football program and the staff, your loyalty lay not only with the HC, but the players, the school, and community itself. You have to have basic loyalty to yourself too. By that, I mean that you should be loyal to the idea that you will do the best possible job that you can do. I think that this has to come first in any job situation; it doesn't matter if you are loyal to a HC, and to a program, if you aren't being loyal to your own sense of work ethic. |
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Mar 14, 2009 12:16:45 GMT -6
At what point does your loyalty to the head coach end? This is NOT going to be popular and I am going to get piled on here, I'm sure...but, the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of bad head coaches out there...guys who have no idea what they are doing, guys who treat kids like dog$hit, guys who are total egomaniacs. This past season, I worked for one of those guys. Handed in my resignation less than a week after the season ended. I was at the point where I absolutely HATED football and really didn't even want to coach again. I wrestled with the fact that I would be letting a lot of kids down by not coming back but, in the end, I recognized that, by staying on the staff, I was given tacit approval to how this guy handled the program. So, I resigned. About a week later, the AD calls me in and wants to know why I quit. He was surprised by it. So, I was honest. I laid bare all of the problems I observed during the season and ended by saying that I just could not work for a head coach with whom whose values and philosophy I was in such disagreement. About a week after that, two kids came into my classroom and wanted to know why I quit. They were very disappointed and also angry...someone ( : had given the kids the idea that I had quit because I "didn't like them". So, I was honest with the kids, as well. I told them that it had nothing to do with them but that I just couldn't coach for a guy who did things that were in complete contrast to my values. I should add that the kids, even the GOOD kids, completely despise the head coach. So yeah...loyalty is important and all that, but, it has to be reciprocal. The head coach needs to recognize that he can't rule by decree and expect blanket loyalty from all involved, especially when you haven't won more than 3 games in the last 5 years or so and you refuse to change the ways you do things. As a head coach, you really shouldn't be too surprised when there is not a whole lot of loyalty among assistants and players. It is a simple contract...the assistants and players will provide loyalty to the head coach as long as the head coach provides positive leadership and guidance. When the head coach no longer provides that, he shouldn't expect loyalty. delta- we may not agree very often but I think I agree with you here. 1) never work for someone you cant respect 2) never work with someone you cant respect 3) never work where you cant earn respect despite jumping through a million hoops. You certainly dont respect the header and you are bailing. I think thats actually a very good action to take. it would be "disloyal" TO PRETEND to support the head coach but to run your mouth to the AD and to those same kids. "Id do a better job, id have done this, and this and that...but Im not the head coach" is the kind of thing that gets coaches in the headers dog house. I think "loose lips" sink ships and guys who are disloyal display loose lips. Be careful with bashing a head coach to an "interested" AD or principal as those guys are the very guys who supported hiring the guy and they will ultimately back him over you (they might anyhow). as far as loyalty being a two way street, I couldnt agree more. I have some people here who dont like my selections for assistant coaches and too bad, they are my choices, they are good people who care about the kids. I defend and support my assistants and I hope they do the same for me. I do know that I twice worked for "coaches" who threw assistants under the bus placing blame for STINKING on someone else. Funny, one guy not only did it in football but also in basketball. He got fired from both jobs eventually (but it took time for the AD and Principal to realize they were wrong, all wrong about this clown). Loyalty really comes down to defending philosophies and values. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 14, 2009 14:26:20 GMT -6
When we speak out against the header to others, we are damaging/causing harm to the program. We may come away feeling satisfied that we could vent our frustration to someone, or that someone will regard us with more esteem (because "we see what is wrong"), but who wins? It only fractures that which we say we are speaking out to defend. We remove the foundation of confidence that a staff / program is based on (trust). Lose-lose When we serve the header, and in doing so, maybe challenge his comfort zone, we advance the program because either it provides an opportunity for the HC to galvanize our beliefs in what we are doing, or it provides an opportunity to find a better solution for the program. Win-Win. Regardless of the situation, it is what it is, and as much as we will be comforted by justifying it - bitching and griping to players is petty. It may be justified, it may be true (your statements), it may feel good, but it ultimately, is unnecessary and small-minded. Sorry man, but that is weak. Damaging/causing harm to the program???  That's a laugh! There IS no program! Like I said, I did not seek out opportunities to "bash" the head coach. The AD called me into his office and asked me why I quit. Are you telling me that I should have lied about what I saw transpire? And these kids...I see them EVERY day...I was the only coach on staff who was a teacher. Sorry, but I'm NOT going to let kids think things that aren't true just so some insecure egomaniac feels better about himself. I'm a head coach now. If I'm unfit to lead...if I'm doing things that are wrong and unethical, I deserve whatever I get. |
|
|
|
Post by touchdowng on Mar 14, 2009 15:07:12 GMT -6
delta - There's something in life and especially in coaching and that's called, TAKING THE HIGH ROAD.
I once had an AD ask me why I was moving along after 2 years as an assistant. I too, didn't get along greatly with the HC for philosophical reasons. I just told him that "it's just time to move on." Didn't really want to throw anybody under the bus because I didn't agree. Plus, it would have solved nothing. Most of the guys stayed and eventually that HC left coaching.
He never did anything ethically or morally wrong. If he did I would have confronted him and would have taken it to a higher place if that didn't solve the problem. We just differed in our approaches in working with kids. And it's okay to disagree. It wore on me, so I moved on.
I can still look that HC in the face because I knew I dealt with him fairly. We are not friends but we are respectful and the kids never knew that there was friction. It isn't their place.
|
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Mar 14, 2009 15:31:27 GMT -6
One thing, just my opinion on this- There is no taking a high road when kids are being treated poorly - not sure if delta is in that situation. I know I was there, kids were being lied to, manipulated, parents and coaches too, favorites being played, kids taken advantage of, mistreated, verbally abused etc. head coach with mood disorder blamed everyone else and I wasnt going to stand and watch it. Speak out, leave and let the admin sort it out. If they have eyes but cannot see the truth then they get what they deserve.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 14, 2009 19:06:52 GMT -6
I hear what you guys are saying...believe me, I do.
As far as "taking the high road" goes...been there, done that early in my career and got thrown under the bus for doing it. Now, I'm at the point in my career that I'm, not going to take the fall for some hack who treats kids like absolute garbage.
And, like I said...it goes BOTH ways. I am now a head coach (at a different school). If do the types of things that this guy did, I DESERVE to be run out of town on a rail. There are good coaches and bad coaches. The bad ones need to be exposed for what they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachmoore42 on Mar 15, 2009 10:18:25 GMT -6
Delta, you said what I have been thinking. My previous school was very similar to your situation. I am so glad to be out of there and be where I am now.
At some point you have to get out. Even though you are what is best for the kids, staying and keeping you mouth shut, like a good little soldier, just perpetuates the problems. At some point in that, it is no longer the best thing for the kids.
On the original question, I agree with touchdowng about "no actions of disloyalty." Best situation, have it out behind closed doors, figuring out what will help you win, then go out of the room like best friends.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 15, 2009 10:38:02 GMT -6
delta - There's something in life and especially in coaching and that's called, TAKING THE HIGH ROAD. I once had an AD ask me why I was moving along after 2 years as an assistant. I too, didn't get along greatly with the HC for philosophical reasons. I just told him that "it's just time to move on." Didn't really want to throw anybody under the bus because I didn't agree. Plus, it would have solved nothing. Most of the guys stayed and eventually that HC left coaching. He never did anything ethically or morally wrong. If he did I would have confronted him and would have taken it to a higher place if that didn't solve the problem. We just differed in our approaches in working with kids. And it's okay to disagree. It wore on me, so I moved on. I can still look that HC in the face because I knew I dealt with him fairly. We are not friends but we are respectful and the kids never knew that there was friction. It isn't their place. Your commitment as a high school coach must be to the KIDS first. I see nothing wrong with identifying the specific reasons fore departing. There should never be anything wrong with complete transparency, and failing to tell the truth is not necessarily "taking the high road" As far as the original post, I don't know how to answer that. I would guess that loyalty would be demonstrated by doing things to the best of your ability the first time told. Never addressing issues outside the locker room. That is about it. I think Brophy is right on in saying that speaking out against the program/showing dissension would be disloyal. However, I don't think he incorporate timing in his discussion. I believe the timing element is essential. I think what 19delta did was 100% acceptable. He was no longer a part of the program, HE was approached by (he didn't go looking for ) someone, and the person in question (A.D.) had a vested interest in the situation. This is astronomically different than sitting in the local Chili's bitching about how the stupid header isn't running the airraid to all who would listen. |
|
|
|
Post by eaglemountie on Mar 15, 2009 11:14:04 GMT -6
I appreciate the responses. It sounds like a lot of the same type problems amongst coaching staffs happen everywhere.
I hope the weight room is going well for all of you.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Mar 15, 2009 12:18:23 GMT -6
This is astronomically different than sitting in the local Chili's bitching about how the stupid header isn't running the airraid to all who would listen. CoachD - Exactly! The problems I had with this particular head coach were, in order: 1) Player management 2) Hypocrisy and poor leadership/role modeling 3) Practice organization and drill selection 4) Offense In regards to #3, I was concerned about the safety aspects of several full-speed tackling drills we did. In regards to #4, we were a "spread" team ( : but the head coach had no idea how to manage a spread offense (no quick game, no uncovered rules, no hot reads, no running game for the QB, etc, etc). So, I wasn't being an armchair coach...I had very specific problems with the way this guy handled his business. And, I brought these concerns up on numerous occasions only to be rebuffed with a very passive-aggressive "Well, that's the great thing about football...there are lots of ways to do things" and that ended any "discussion". Again, it is important to recognize that there are LOTS of guys out there who are head coaches who should not be in the position to influence kids. I'm not talking about guys who don't win a lot...there are LOTS of reasons for a program not winning. Instead, I'm talking about teams that chronically underachieve because the head coach doesn't know how to handle kids and has a huge ego that doesn't allow him to listen to anyone else that may have a opinion that is different. Guys like that don't deserve to be around kids. |
|
|
|
Post by coachmoore42 on Mar 15, 2009 12:40:47 GMT -6
Guys like that don't deserve to be around kids. Amen! |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 15, 2009 13:04:45 GMT -6
Sorry man, but that is weak. Damaging/causing harm to the program??? That's a laugh! There IS no program! FWIW - that response wasn't directed at you. I quoted your question, but only gave a basic definition to raise the level of discussion (not single you out). You didn't start the thread, so I wasn't trying to turn this discussion in on you or your situation (I think you already had your own personal thread about this last year), just attempting to get us beyond the shallow end of the discussion and get into the deeper events/actions that all of us will deal with. To narrow our scope to just your one situation wouldn't serve the lot of us in discussing 'loyalty', which is why I wasn't trying to single you out or provide editorial judgment. |
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 15, 2009 14:03:28 GMT -6
The problems I had with this particular head coach were, in order: 1) Player management 2) Hypocrisy and poor leadership/role modeling 3) Practice organization and drill selection 4) Offense In regards to #4, we were a "spread" team ( : but the head coach had no idea how to manage a spread offense (no quick game, no uncovered rules, no hot reads, no running game for the QB, etc, etc)...... So, I wasn't being an armchair coach...I had very specific problems with the way this guy handled his business.... You did what you did, and you're obviously not making any apologies for it - so it is all water under the bridge now......but was there a NEED for you to allow it to get this bad? You aired your grievance, he wasn't going to listen....so what can you do? Leave amiciably, Obey subserviently, or burn the house down. Unless kids are getting injured, and it is our responsibility to be mandatory reporters..... you either use your relationship with the leader or you LEAVE. A woman doesn't like her husband watching football on the weekends. She can talk to him, learn to live with it, or if she can't do either of those, she can always leave and find some other dude. There is no need for her to force her way on this guy, bad-mouth him to her/his friends and family in some sort of power-thrust, ego-trip. Again, this ALL boils down to relationships. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 15, 2009 16:32:18 GMT -6
The problems I had with this particular head coach were, in order: 1) Player management 2) Hypocrisy and poor leadership/role modeling 3) Practice organization and drill selection 4) Offense In regards to #4, we were a "spread" team ( : but the head coach had no idea how to manage a spread offense (no quick game, no uncovered rules, no hot reads, no running game for the QB, etc, etc)...... So, I wasn't being an armchair coach...I had very specific problems with the way this guy handled his business.... You did what you did, and you're obviously not making any apologies for it - so it is all water under the bridge now......but was there a NEED for you to allow it to get this bad? You aired your grievance, he wasn't going to listen....so what can you do? Leave amiciably, Obey subserviently, or burn the house down. Unless kids are getting injured, and it is our responsibility to be mandatory reporters..... you either use your relationship with the leader or you LEAVE. A woman doesn't like her husband watching football on the weekends. She can talk to him, learn to live with it, or if she can't do either of those, she can always leave and find some other dude. There is no need for her to force her way on this guy, bad-mouth him to her/his friends and family in some sort of power-thrust, ego-trip. Again, this ALL boils down to relationships. Define "injured". One could make a serious argument that those boys only have 4 years to play ball, and a moron at the helm could be negatively affecting those youngsters. Is the answer saying "Oh well, the administrators hired him, but they don't see whats going on... to bad for those kids" If your son was playing for one of those...wouldn't you want someone else looking out for your kid? The child comes first. |
|
had given the kids the idea that I had quit because I "didn't like them". So, I was honest with the kids, as well. I told them that it had nothing to do with them but that I just couldn't coach for a guy who did things that were in complete contrast to my values. I should add that the kids, even the GOOD kids, completely despise the head coach.
That's a laugh! There IS no program! 