Argument for HC being OC or DC

To me you're the head coach you've earned the right do to whatever you feel is in the best interest of your program.Whether that is coordinating the offense/defense or handing those roles over to people you trust.

I know at a lot of small schools in Oklahoma the hc is the OC primarily, sometimes the dc instead. It would make it easier to replace one instead of two. The hc being both? That would/could be tons of extra work and pressure. No reason to do that to yourself.

I understand that a HC can be a coordinator as well.  My question…is this situation reinforcement for head coaches to do both to avoid having to make these transitions?  The changes can be much more seamless at the college level in my opinion.  Obviously there is a learning curve for those positions on the staff that could come at the expense of wins.  Is that worth experiencing as a head coach to bring somebody along?  I mean I understand part of my responsibility as a header is coaching my assistants.  Coach the coaches.  However, I couldn't see losing any games because somebody had to learn the role through on the job training.  Ultimately, the scrutiny will fall on me as head coach.  Plus, if I've done it before, wouldn't it just make sense to have had the role to begin with or at least relinquish control upon the departure of any or all of my coordinators.  Basically, should HCs just be coordinators to begin with in an effort to avoid these major disruptions to the program or at least minimize them?

Coach, what's to say your coordinators leave? I was in a program that had the same OC/DC for the past 10 years. They don't aspire to move on. I know that kind of loyalty is rare, as we discussed yesterday, but it exists. 

I also don't think it is that hard to replace coordinators. Maybe in a rural area as you mentioned it is, but you can find any number of assistants in many programs who want the opportunity and do have the knowledge to move on. It is important, as mentioned, to make sure they understand that it is more than just showing up and calling plays.

With all due respect Coach, you're assuming they ever even came in the first place.  You're right they could stay for an extended period except if they never arrive to begin with.  Many coaches have difficult in finding even semi-reliable position group coaches.  Anybody that is more reliable beyond the few that I need at the varsity level, I have as my head JV coach/OC and JV DC.  I want to ensure that our program is vertically aligned and that our players are learning the schemes and techniques that they will running at the varsity level.  So for me, in my situation, from a reliability standpoint, that's the order of responsibility and reliability within my program.  I am the HC/OC.  I have a Varsity DC, JV HC/OC, JV DC, and 3 more position group coaches for all levels.  I have searched far and wide to find more competent and committed people but in a rural area it's tough.  I feel fortunate to have the coaches that I do.  I can't imagine being in either of the head coaching situations I've been in without being a coordinator on one side of the ball or the other.  I believe in a more urban area where there are more legitimate coaching candidates that it could be easier to find assistant coaches.  But maybe not, just depends on the state of the program and the degree of commitment that they are willing to give.

I  believe so.

Of course there are always exceptions to the rule.  The perennial powers in Divisions 6, 7, and 8 in Michigan like Ithaca, Ishpeming, Mendon, Constantine, Hudson, and Crystal-Falls Forest Park are certainly schools that have had outstanding coaching staffs assembled for years despite being in rural areas.  They also have a number of state championships between them.  Part of this discussion becomes the longevity of the coaches in place at those schools.  It took time for them to assemble their staffs and get them to a state championship caliber level.

Moving schools with staffs (like you were fortunate to) if it's possible, bridges the gap of assembling a staff.  Of course, when you move schools 30 minutes down the road, you have the ability to keep staff members from the previous stop.  This is why I believe that your situation is especially unique having moved from a larger rural community (over 800) to a much smaller community (under 300).  If you bring coaches with you, it becomes much different situation than what I'm describing.  That is an additional factor influencing the acquisition of a staff in a rural environment.

From 2007-2011, I was the head coach at a school that had an enrollment of 500 and decreased to 400 near the end of my tenure, Division 6 basically.  When I took my new job here in 2012, my wife and moved 245 miles away to a school that was just over 300 (Division 7) but with a much more successful history.  After I accepted the job, one of my first meetings was with the previous head coach who had retired.  He suggested a number of different names including members of his coaching staff who were interested in continuing to coach.  I pursued those individuals as well as a number of other possible candidates that I found out about through conversation with numerous people.

We're doing well, I have myself plus 7 at the high school and 2 at the middle school.  So we're in good shape.  Much better than what I was at the previous stop.  I think that has a lot to do with the storied tradition of the program here.  The school I left had four winning seasons since 1976 when I took over in 2007 and only 2 playoff appearances in school history.  That's 4 winning seasons in 30 years and two of those winning seasons were 5-4.  The most assistant coaches I ever had there was 5 at the high school level and 2 at the middle school.

So we're doing much better at the current stop in terms of staff and we'll continue to improve in that regard.  I do not delegate the fundraising, summer camp, equipment, or strength training components like you have.  I take care of those aspects so my assistants can focus on football.  I understand that you have to empower people and I have.  My varsity DC had never been a DC before I had started coaching with him in 2012.  My Head JV Coach had never been a coach at the high school level before I nabbed him up.  He had been a youth and middle school coach but that was the extent of his football experience.  So I am pleased about what's been done to develop and empower a staff.

I never stated that it was impossible to find coaches in rural areas.  It is, however, challenging especially early on when many jobs that my staff has are not in town and not closely aligned to a school schedule.  Only one other coach of mine is on the teaching staff and he actually just arrived this year.  Schedules and commutes are huge factors that affect non-teachers from coaching.

I understand where you are coming from.  I didn't mean that you wouldn't even consider making someone a coordinator based on the possibility of them leaving the program.  However, I agree with what you said about the HC assuming the responsibility until the person you plan to delegate it to is able to.  The question regarding John Maxwell is…can you cultivate leadership in others without necessarily COMPLETELY delegating responsibilities?  I believe that you can and that head coaches should.  I understand that head coaches DO NOT need justification for anything except that if they do not win, then they should expect to be evaluated thoroughly by the administration in particular.

I don't really understand the question, or the attempt to use the personnel situation at Notre Dame as a basis for anything a High School Coach would do.  High Schools don't generally lose coaches just a few days before a game (like colleges before bowl games).

I think it is fairly simple (in theory).  Whatever is best for the team/program.  If it is best for the HC to do it, along with the myriad of other job responsibilities he may have..then the HC does it.  If it is best for the HC to focus on other things because someone else is capable of doing the job (and thus allowing the HC to do other things), then someone else does it.

In practice--it is more difficult because of what appears to be a lack of "professional" coaches from what I read on this site. Lots of people who want to make coaching a hobby, but not many who want to make it a craft.   I do think the profession shares a little of the blame for this small pool of candidates, as I see thread after thread about trying to limit time at the office, time at the meeting..face to face time.    I see many comments talking about how "I the HC/OC watch film at my house via huddle over the weekend, and then GIVE the assts coachees the game plans/practice plans..." --- Well that might be the most time efficient on the short term, but I don't see how any of the other coaches are going to learn how to do the job of an coordinator like that.

But the general premise in the thread---should a HC automatically assume the rules of oc/dc or both simply because another coach might leave.... seems kind of short sighted.   What it DOES signal though, is that HC's should be involved enough in his own program to make sure that SOMEONE (be it him, or a position coach) can step in that role if something happens to the OC/DC.   Hell, what happens if YOU are the HC/OC..and you have a family/medical emergency and cant make it to the game?  Forfeit? 

It's true.  High schools don't generally lose coaches within days of a game.  However, they could during an off-season heading into the next season and sometimes unfortunately without much warning for what could be a variety of reasons.  For example, my next most capable OC who is my Head JV Coach/OC has asked to stay with the program but step down from that post.  He has a daughter still in high school that he only made it out to see her play volleyball three times during football season.  She's on JV so she plays before the varsity and he would still be at practice when she would be playing, or on the road to one of our JV games on the same night that she would play home or away.  Tough situation for him and his family.  He had two that came through before her that he was always at their games.

So he is going to come up to the varsity as an assistant which leaves me searching for a critical piece in the coaching staff, a Head JV Coach/OC.  Right now I am looking at having to probably split the role which is fine.  I have a player who played for me in our offense on the OL so he understands installing and fixing things.  I could be on the other end of the headset with him on game day for any additional assistance he would need.  The on-the-job training will be a great learning experience for him.  I also think I have the Head JV Coach responsibility taken care of as well.  This has been a stressful situation to navigate this change and I couldn't possible imagine going through it at the varsity level is basically what I've been trying to get at.

The "professional" aspect that you mentioned, hobby vs. craft, couldn't be anymore spot on Coach.  When I talked about committed and competent coaches I meant individuals who seek to make coaching football a craft.  Those are difficult to find and the more isolated you become in a small community, those numbers are typically even smaller.  Let's face it.  Whether or not the head coach is able to continue as head coach hinges on the success on the field.

As a head coach, I want my coaches not just in coordinating roles but all of my assistants and especially the coordinators, to hone football coaching as a craft.  I mean let's be real here, my job hinges on how well they do theirs.  So I don't want to have somebody who dabbles in coaching.  If I know I can perform that role, even with my head coaching responsibilities better than the next guy then that's what's best for the team that year and for our program.  

You're right as well that part of the problem of getting coaches is the commitment coaches have to make which is a product of the profession as a whole.  Some of the most competitive coaches are coaching football at all levels.  So when you're competing against somebody that wants to win, the extent to which they go in order to be successful has a way of deterring the "hobby seekers" away.  So, yes, I completely agree that the nature of the coaching field is partly to blame for not always being able to secure committed and competent coaches.

You also bring a great point about emergencies for the head coach.  That is certainly a possibility and it would create a situation where you would hand over the reins to the next most capable coordinator.  The understanding would be that extenuating circumstances have created a short term change.  If the emergency proved to be long term whether personal or family related which would result in additional missed time beyond the short term, then a decision must be made.

I would think at that point that not only your ability to coordinate a side of the ball but your ability as a head coach to lead a program has been compromised.  At that point, you may need to resign.  I have seen stories about these types of situations, really tragic type stuff, and coaches step down to allow someone else the opportunity to lead the program.

Great dialogue here as always d5085.  Thanks for chiming in.

Yes, we have a separate JV team that plays on Thursdays here in Michigan.  We have a JV coaching staff that has both an OC and DC.

I understand what you mean about minimizing the commitment in terms of preparation.  That time spent as a staff really helps to develop coaches and if we are constantly limiting that time, less development of assistant coaches will occur.

Grooming is a great term.  An active process toward the development of assistant coaches so they are prepared to take on greater responsibilities within the program.

Should it take the title of "co-coordinator" for a coach to perform that role?  I don't believe so.  If the head coach delegates responsibility to you and it includes those tasks then I believe you should perform those responsibilities to the best of your ability regardless of the presence of a title.  The problem I have with a "co-coordinator" title is that it gives the impression that the shared role is equal.  Which in the case, I'm describing, the role is NOT equally shared.

I am talking about an assistant coach who has a huge deficit in experience but makes up for it with a commitment to learn and put the effort in that's required to excel in a role.  Plus, the number of decisions that he'll potentially be making are limited.  Someone else, in this case, the head coach will be making the final decisions as he would most of the time.  To quote Lou Holtz, assistant coaches make suggestions…head coaches make decisions.  But that doesn't mean in any way that the assistant coach wouldn't impact what happens on the field.  When you are involved in the game planning and help institute the plan in any way, you are impacting the outcome of the game.

So those tasks you listed are things that an assistant coach could do to help assist the experienced coordinator (head coach) do his job more efficiently.  When the assistant coach is able to perform those roles and take a greater leadership role in the overall installation at the start of the season and coordination on a weekly basis throughout the season, then perhaps it's time he be named the coordinator.  Now he's ready.  Head coach relinquishes responsibility and the majority of decision-making to the now trustworthy and experienced coordinator (assistant coach).

Bottom line…there are a number of coaches on staffs throughout the country who draw up scout cards and relay information from the press box who do not hold the title "co-coordinator."