|
|
Post by coachandrewhvincent on May 30, 2023 8:52:10 GMT -6
This is going on in my state right now. What do you think about it. 7A Bryant (largest classification) just completed their 5th state championship in a row. Players that did not go through spring football in 2023 are being denied their 2022 state championship rings. This included the state finals MVP who made a choice to finish his career focusing on baseball (He is a University of Arkansas commit) The Coach, who is the best in the business in Arkansas, laid out the rules in the parent meeting pre-season and has followed the ruled for five years. This is the first time it's been an issue. Where do you land on this? www.mysaline.com/hornet-rings/ |
|
|
|
Post by raider92 on May 30, 2023 9:29:31 GMT -6
This only applies to players who could be back for 2023 but are choosing not to be, correct?
My first thought is that I'd probably give them their rings. They were on the team and contributed, they deserve it.
On the other hand, if that's been the rule for 5 years then he needs to stick to his guns.
Either way, if you're setting rules regarding state title rings then you're doing ok, talk about first world problems
|
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on May 30, 2023 9:32:18 GMT -6
This is going on in my state right now. What do you think about it. 7A Bryant (largest classification) just completed their 5th state championship in a row. Players that did not go through spring football in 2023 are being denied their 2022 state championship rings. This included the state finals MVP who made a choice to finish his career focusing on baseball (He is a University of Arkansas commit) The Coach, who is the best in the business in Arkansas, laid out the rules in the parent meeting pre-season and has followed the ruled for five years. This is the first time it's been an issue. Where do you land on this? www.mysaline.com/hornet-rings/Maybe just me, but seems petty to do this about *rings*. Who cares? I have been around teams that were pretty open handed about rings. The value of the championship is the effort, accomplishment and respect among peers and coaches. Are we really doing this so that Johnny gets a ring but Joey doesn't? (And guess what, if you ask Johnny if Joey, who was MVP of the game, deserves a ring, do you think he will say "no, he wasn't at spring practice," even if he was at fall camp and played the whole season?). If this rule was so important then why didn't it affect the MVP's playing time? |
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on May 30, 2023 9:37:53 GMT -6
So it's not because he missed the previous spring practice, but because he is missing the current spring practice, which is prep for next football season?
Either way seems incredibly dumb, but if he's essentially denying a kid who finished the prior season in good standing and helped the team win a championship then this is completely absurd in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitt1980 on May 30, 2023 9:40:30 GMT -6
I'm of the opinion that this is a hacky and classless rule.
If it's been the rule for 5 years, then they've been hacky and classless for 5 years.
I'm also of the opinion that being 'the best in the business' and being hacky and classless aren't mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2023 10:05:02 GMT -6
This only applies to players who could be back for 2023 but are choosing not to be, correct? My first thought is that I'd probably give them their rings. They were on the team and contributed, they deserve it. On the other hand, if that's been the rule for 5 years then he needs to stick to his guns. Either way, if you're setting rules regarding state title rings then you're doing ok, talk about first world problems Or, he could recognize its been a stupid rule for the past 5 years. I would disagree a bit on the "doing ok". Yes, the football success seems great, but in terms of the job he is supposed to be doing in my opinion, he is failing miserably. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on May 30, 2023 10:09:52 GMT -6
To put it plainly I think it's bullchit.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on May 30, 2023 10:16:27 GMT -6
This is going on in my state right now. What do you think about it. 7A Bryant (largest classification) just completed their 5th state championship in a row. Players that did not go through spring football in 2023 are being denied their 2022 state championship rings. This included the state finals MVP who made a choice to finish his career focusing on baseball (He is a University of Arkansas commit) The Coach, who is the best in the business in Arkansas, laid out the rules in the parent meeting pre-season and has followed the ruled for five years. This is the first time it's been an issue. Where do you land on this? www.mysaline.com/hornet-rings/Maybe just me, but seems petty to do this about *rings*. Who cares? I have been around teams that were pretty open handed about rings. The value of the championship is the effort, accomplishment and respect among peers and coaches. Are we really doing this so that Johnny gets a ring but Joey doesn't? (And guess what, if you ask Johnny if Joey, who was MVP of the game, deserves a ring, do you think he will say "no, he wasn't at spring practice," even if he was at fall camp and played the whole season?). If this rule was so important then why didn't it affect the MVP's playing time? I know it's not exactly apples to apples, but can we include HCs telling players who are planning to enter the transfer portal at the end of the season that they can't play in the bowl game? That seems kinda petty and "stick it to em"-ish to me...I mean, they could be entering the portal for a million reasons. If they gave you at least a season of full contribution/teamwork, why deny them playing in the bowl game? |
|
|
|
Post by raider92 on May 30, 2023 10:19:55 GMT -6
This only applies to players who could be back for 2023 but are choosing not to be, correct? My first thought is that I'd probably give them their rings. They were on the team and contributed, they deserve it. On the other hand, if that's been the rule for 5 years then he needs to stick to his guns. Either way, if you're setting rules regarding state title rings then you're doing ok, talk about first world problems Or, he could recognize its been a stupid rule for the past 5 years. I would disagree a bit on the "doing ok". Yes, the football success seems great, but in terms of the job he is supposed to be doing in my opinion, he is failing miserably. If your rule gets thrown out the window the first time it gets tested then you didnt have a rule, you had a suggestion. The guy obviously had some reason for making the rule at one point. Like I said I think it's a dumb rule too, but if everyone knows the rule then it is what it is and it's a dangerous precedent to throw rules out the minute they're challenged for the first time. My point was that if they're setting rules on state title rings they're winning state titles (multiple). Not a lot of idiots doing that. The lesson here for all of us is to never paint yourself into the corner having to enforce a stupid rule because once you're in that spot you're damned if you do and damned if you don't |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2023 10:37:16 GMT -6
Or, he could recognize its been a stupid rule for the past 5 years. I would disagree a bit on the "doing ok". Yes, the football success seems great, but in terms of the job he is supposed to be doing in my opinion, he is failing miserably. If your rule gets thrown out the window the first time it gets tested then you didnt have a rule, you had a suggestion. The guy obviously had some reason for making the rule at one point. Like I said I think it's a dumb rule too, but if everyone knows the rule then it is what it is and it's a dangerous precedent to throw rules out the minute they're challenged for the first time. My point was that if they're setting rules on state title rings they're winning state titles (multiple). Not a lot of idiots doing that. The lesson here for all of us is to never paint yourself into the corner having to enforce a stupid rule because once you're in that spot you're damned if you do and damned if you don't Agree to disagree. When something is wrong it is wrong. A bad or stupid rule is a bad or stupid rule- regardless of how long it has been in place or how many times it has been challenged. I do agree the lesson is to not make stupid rules. Problem is, the chances are slim that the guy making it thought or thinks it is stupid. He likely feels that creating that environment of total devotion to (his) program is what sets them apart. Lesson to the kids here- you want the ring, go through spring- take reps and roster spots..and then walk out the day before the official season begins. Would serve the coach right |
|
|
|
Post by bulldogsdc on May 30, 2023 10:39:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 30, 2023 10:46:27 GMT -6
Sometimes we HS coaches are our own worst enemies.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2023 10:55:06 GMT -6
Fairly certain that in his mind (and others who agreed with the rule) they will make the case that he completed spring ball, and fulfilled the requirements. Also, it is stated in the article that one of the assistant coaches announced in March that he would be leaving the team and coaching at a different school. He was present at the ring award ceremony and received a ring. |
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on May 30, 2023 11:02:04 GMT -6
That's not a rule I would even make.
|
|
|
|
Post by CS on May 30, 2023 11:08:48 GMT -6
Dumb rule. But if it’s a hill he wanted to die on then so be it
|
|
|
|
Post by raider92 on May 30, 2023 11:10:51 GMT -6
One of the best lessons I've learned as a HC is that black and white rules are ammo for overly litigious busy body parents. Keep rules vague and give yourself some wiggle room to respond to scenarios as they arise.
Imagine being a program with 5 straight state titles and you're spending your time in May/June worrying about this instead of working on your 6th straight title
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on May 30, 2023 11:19:16 GMT -6
Dumb rule. But if it’s hill he wanted to die on then so be it He isn't dying on it, though. He just changed hills. |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 30, 2023 11:30:59 GMT -6
To put it plainly I think it's bullchit. Can you tell me how you really feel? |
|
|
|
Post by olcoach53 on May 30, 2023 11:43:00 GMT -6
If a kid helped the team to get a ring, he deserves his ring.
The main kid isn't playing football because he is a D1 Baseball player and had a long list of injuries from football that could hinder his baseball scholarship. It isn't like he is quitting just to quit. Give the kid the ring that he helped the TEAM earn.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachandrewhvincent on May 30, 2023 11:56:07 GMT -6
Coach Buck James is leaving Bryant on a 53 game win streak, having won 5 consecutive state championships. The school had 0 championships prior to his tenure. He is moving just 1 hour or so down the road to 7A opponent Conway High School.
Bryant is 10 games shy of tying the Arkansas state record for consecutive regular season victories.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on May 30, 2023 12:11:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 30, 2023 12:38:36 GMT -6
Early in my HC career when I was young, dumb, and full of you know what I had a "rule" that to get your Varsity letter you had to attend the year-end banquet (school called it "finishing the season in good standing" at that time).
Had one young man - good kid, good player - miss the banquet to go hunting with his dad.
So no letter.
Few years later he was paralyzed for life in a car accident.
Maybe it wasn't a bad rule, but boy did I feel bad about it after that.
Never used it again.
|
|
mc140
Sophomore Member
Posts: 207
|
Post by mc140 on May 30, 2023 12:54:14 GMT -6
There is no logical sense to this rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on May 30, 2023 14:54:12 GMT -6
There is no logical sense to this rule. I think the logical sense to it, is that it somewhat forces kids into playing the next season (or at least starting next season's activities). With the thought being that once they start they will continue; hopefully improving player retention. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on May 30, 2023 15:15:49 GMT -6
There is no logical sense to this rule. I think the logical sense to it, is that it somewhat forces kids into playing the next season (or at least starting next season's activities). With the thought being that once they start they will continue; hopefully improving player retention. Well, since it didn't seem to work regarding the HC (he is jetting after the ring ceremony to a rival).... |
|
|
|
Post by CS on May 30, 2023 15:58:54 GMT -6
I think the logical sense to it, is that it somewhat forces kids into playing the next season (or at least starting next season's activities). With the thought being that once they start they will continue; hopefully improving player retention. Well, since it didn't seem to work regarding the HC (he is jetting after the ring ceremony to a rival).... It’s been a work in progress all off season. Him and the superintendent didn’t jive. In his defense she doesn’t jive with many. I still think it’s a dumb rule |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on May 30, 2023 16:03:52 GMT -6
I think the logical sense to it, is that it somewhat forces kids into playing the next season (or at least starting next season's activities). With the thought being that once they start they will continue; hopefully improving player retention. Well, since it didn't seem to work regarding the HC (he is jetting after the ring ceremony to a rival).... Oh don't get me wrong, I think its foolish. I am just explaining the logical thought process (to the post that asked about the logic). |
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on May 30, 2023 16:05:19 GMT -6
This coach is being a {censored} sucker. Those are my thoughts on it.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on May 30, 2023 17:53:56 GMT -6
There is no logical sense to this rule. I think the logical sense to it, is that it somewhat forces kids into playing the next season (or at least starting next season's activities). With the thought being that once they start they will continue; hopefully improving player retention. |
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 30, 2023 19:07:48 GMT -6
I do think this is a jerk rule.
I do understand the logic. He wants kids that stick with the program, period. The kids and parents knew the rules to begin with. They kid is just not getting a ring. I am assuming that the ring is free for the kid. I am assuming that the school or most likely booster's bought the ring. You certainly couldn't deny him the ring he paid for. Again, the kid is just not getting a ring. He is still a state champion and could probably still contact the ring company (or a ring company) and buy a ring just like it or get one that says whatever he wants on it.
I also think that they have won 4 state championships in a row.
|
|
