A CASE OF AN OVER-PROTECTIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT?
You have to read this story. A school district decided to cancel a team's football season because they feared for the safety of its players.
I'm on the fence with this. The coach agreed with the decision, but I wonder if he was more embarrassed by their lopsided losses, or truly in fear for his players' safety.
For story, click on thread
OSCODA, Mich. -- The Oscoda Area High School football team hasn't won a game, or even scored a point, in four games this season. Because of that, the school district has decided to cancel the remaining games.
Despite pleas from players and parents, the board recently upheld the school's earlier decision to end the season, saying players risked injury in trying to take on much stronger opponents.
"When you go to a game on Friday night and see a team physically dominated, those are the indisputable facts," coach Kyle Tobin said.
"Seniors, I feel for you. There's nothing I can say other than I'm sorry," board member Neal Sweet said. "But you're not quitters. You went out there and did your best."
Tobin said the team was not physically competitive, had too few players and faced a tough schedule in the North East Michigan Conference, The Bay City Times reported.
Senior quarterback Mike Gondek pleaded with the school board to reconsider the school's Sept. 19 decision to cancel the remaining games.
"All I ever wanted to do was play football," Gondek said. "My teammates never felt so unsafe that we didn't want to be out there."
Tobin, a first-year coach, defended his decision.
"I have 28 years of coaching experience in high school and college, and I know the difference between a team playing bad and a team that's unsafe," he said.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press
5 Comments
Leave a comment
About this blog
|
|
Melendez worked as a correspondent for the San Gabriel Valley Tribune for three years and later landed a job as a freelance writer at the Los Angeles Times before accepting an offer at The Orange County Register covering high schools. Melendez covered Major League Soccer at The Register for three years before being promoted to report on the Lakers, Angels and Dodgers for the Web. Melendez also worked for the Daytona Beach News-Journal, Fresno Bee, Oakland Tribune and The Boston Globe. E-mail opinions, suggestions and tips to miguel.melendez@sgvn.com. |
I heard an alum of that MI HS call in a radio talkshow the other day. The town has been depressed since the a nearby Military Base closed down and the school is half the size it once was.
The coach, who actually has won state championship at other schools, was forced to play a full schedule by the school board, instead of playing a schedule that would give some time to rebuild the program.
In my own experience, when my school started a basketball program, I was not going to schedule Muir, Mater Dei and the like, but actually had my team play JV teams and even a Frosh team along with other schools the size of my school.
I can hardly believe a coach would just give up, unless he felt that the safety of his players were in jeopardy. From what I understand, that school board is realizing its mistake by not listening to the coach's original reccommendation, so they pulled the plug.
"...like if members of the team were actually seriously injured."
Since no injury details were given, I assume there were none.
SHAME on the adults in this story for not providing a "safe environment" for their kids to succeed. We hear that term often... and regularly use it when describing the avoidance of urban plight, gang infestation, and the presence of sex offenders. I agree with the coaches on this thread, in that proper scheduling, training and conditioning should preclude ANY football season.
... and if we aren't going to let boys play football because of the chance of injury, we should cease the public funding of cheerleading and driver's ed. (oh yeah... we already did that.)
There IS such a thing as a coach afraid as hell for specific kids' safety. I've never seen it on a team-wide basis...so I can't say I agree with the call, either. But specific kids, on rare occasions when you're way ahead, are put in the game accompanied by a prayer in the coach's head...
There is nothing to be on the fence about, Fred. Are we so jaded as a society that a coach with 28 years experience and an elected school board would make this very agonizing decision if it were not in the best interest of the players?
Maybe the coach, school board and community need to look into scheduling different opponents,and absorbing the travel costs, or going to 8 man football.
I know it's heart breaking but..oh Hell let the boys play!!!
Some of these same boys will be carrying guns with sand all around them in a few months. What are you going to tell them then...It's UNSAFE!!
Sorry Fred...I must admit...I was on the fence too, until I thought about the players and only the players! It's THEIR call to compete and face down a bigger and stronger opponenet. Just ask David, what did he have ...ummm...a slingshot! If all the boys have is a "slingshot chance in hell" I say the odds may be biblical but the fight was already won went they showed up! Scoreboards have nothing to do with winning and losing! It's just a numerical history of a battle between competitors, Nothing more!
Play on!!!!The boys will NEVER forgive you, know that!
I saw this story on ESPN. As a former coach, I can see the concern about safety but I wish the article gave more detail about the team, like if members of the team were actually seriously injured. Small numbers makes it hard to be competative but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be able to play. If you teach kids the proper technique, and have them on a proper weight training program, safety should not be an issue. I don't know if I agree with the decision.