I have only been to George Mason one time, and from everything I observed, the soccer coach is top dog.
No $ For Post Season ?
- Thread starter Xcross
- Start date
I've met nearly all of the tenured soccer coaches in the state...none of them are the top dog...in any way...
I wish they were a bit more respected and Mason's certainly is, but that just doesn't happen around here
I agree with that. But even then Coach Spin has obstacles to fight through...every second teir sport coach does. And he would NEVER want/have the title (unofficial as it may be) of "Most important person" on campus.
I think the opposite could be said. The"wrong" football coach could be the most UNIMPORTANT person in the building. A football coach is often paid another supplement to be the school's weight coordinator. When this position is taken seriously they may indeed be very important. HOWEVER, when the FB coach and his staff neglects this stipend and also often tells FB players to ONLY PLAY FOOTBALL, they are not only the least important but the most undermining and detrimental person in the building.
A coach that does not allow players to play another sport should be fired,
Really guys? You got sucked into another of HR6's outlandish post!
Think about it. How can you even have an answer to a subjective statement like "the football coach is the most important person in the school"?
You could just as easily say it's the custodian that keeps the garbage from piling up and the bathrooms clean. (Try going a couple of weeks without these two little services being attended to!) Or the school resource officer that deals with dumb kid's antics all day and yet is ever vigilant against the potential for an extreme situation. How about the enivitable lady in the main office that is the one that keeps the train from jumping the tracks. Or my personal favorite, "the cafeteria manager".
Back to the title of the original post, if a locality or boosters club wants to reward a coach for playing extra weeks of football, that's a local decision. Who cares. Does anyone care what they do for the high school coach in East Busnia, USA? Why should we care what they do in Page County, or Fairfax, or at tiny Arcadia High School? Unless it's OUR school. If you want to reward your coach, have at it.
If you think that you need the incentive of playoff pay to encourage a coach to coach better, what you need is an incentive to get your head out of the sand. Years ago, one of my employees only half joked that if I paid him more, he would work harder. Suffice it to say he was seeking employment opportunities elsewhere soon thereafter.
Think about it. How can you even have an answer to a subjective statement like "the football coach is the most important person in the school"?
You could just as easily say it's the custodian that keeps the garbage from piling up and the bathrooms clean. (Try going a couple of weeks without these two little services being attended to!) Or the school resource officer that deals with dumb kid's antics all day and yet is ever vigilant against the potential for an extreme situation. How about the enivitable lady in the main office that is the one that keeps the train from jumping the tracks. Or my personal favorite, "the cafeteria manager".
Back to the title of the original post, if a locality or boosters club wants to reward a coach for playing extra weeks of football, that's a local decision. Who cares. Does anyone care what they do for the high school coach in East Busnia, USA? Why should we care what they do in Page County, or Fairfax, or at tiny Arcadia High School? Unless it's OUR school. If you want to reward your coach, have at it.
If you think that you need the incentive of playoff pay to encourage a coach to coach better, what you need is an incentive to get your head out of the sand. Years ago, one of my employees only half joked that if I paid him more, he would work harder. Suffice it to say he was seeking employment opportunities elsewhere soon thereafter.
Interesting discussion. I certainly understand what everyone is saying about who or who may be the most "important" person in the building. You could ague that all day, depends on the individual school. I think HR6 makes a good point, just the terminology is off a tad. He maybe should have worded it -
The Football coach is the most VISIBLE (well known) person outside of the school building, that is to say the face of the institution (especially if he is a successful one and long term or even if he is doing poorly).
If not the Football coach (if not a big football school), then maybe a basketball coach or even a longtime successful and supported band director is the most recognizable face in the community and beyond across their specific region or state. There are countless articles about sports teams, very few about individual teachers. All building staff and faculty are very important to that individual school and community, but not outside of it.
Now if we talk big time Universities, there is no doubt who the most important person is in regards to fundraising and bringing visibility to an educational institution (which is used to enhance academics). For example, how many Americans know who is the Head Football Coach of Alabama? Now, name the University President or one professor from Alabama off the top of your head. Look what Frank Beamer did for VT. The list goes on....
The Football coach is the most VISIBLE (well known) person outside of the school building, that is to say the face of the institution (especially if he is a successful one and long term or even if he is doing poorly).
If not the Football coach (if not a big football school), then maybe a basketball coach or even a longtime successful and supported band director is the most recognizable face in the community and beyond across their specific region or state. There are countless articles about sports teams, very few about individual teachers. All building staff and faculty are very important to that individual school and community, but not outside of it.
Now if we talk big time Universities, there is no doubt who the most important person is in regards to fundraising and bringing visibility to an educational institution (which is used to enhance academics). For example, how many Americans know who is the Head Football Coach of Alabama? Now, name the University President or one professor from Alabama off the top of your head. Look what Frank Beamer did for VT. The list goes on....
Easy to equate important to salary at the collegiate level. The coach makes more than the school president often times, so you can claim he is more important. Follow the money at the HS level & you'll see who the most "important" person is.
Surprised that the debate was allowed. Much good discussion about the issue so I just knew that the "locked" sign was going to appear at any time. I went back and reread the post of the EssexCav fan and deleted my correction because he did talk about the importance of other coaches in the building. Key word anymore- "in the building"..fewer and fewer of those guys and gals in the profession these days...
Last edited:
Good observation Pawfan. There are some coaches "not in the building". That is not good, but many schools have it, in many sports.
True statement. More and more in-house personnel aren't willing to give any more of their time than they already give. Probably fewer than half of the coaches on our staff work in any of our buildings (HS, MS, Elementary) at this end of the county. Don't think it's much different down at the Luray end either.
They do then some give up coaching after a couple of years and keep teaching position which leaves less room for new coaching hires in the teaching world. Small schools it hurts worse.
I agree with the premise that it's always best to have the coach in the building as a teacher. And truthfully, I don't know one school administrator (those doing the hiring) that thinks otherwise. Whenever a coaching position comes open at schools where I've worked, they will usually shoot out a notice to all teachers asking for anyone interested in that coaching vacancy. I have no advanced volleyball pedigree, but my AD offered me the varsity Volleyball head coaching position simply because she knew I was reliable & would put in the time to try to be successful. That can certainly backfire, with teachers coaching way outside of their element. You have to have a smart AD who can spot coaching talent & who cares about success in all sports & it doesn't always work that way. Too many times the AD is just happy to fill the coaching slot with whoever they can find.
THAT SAID, hiring coaches as priority #1 & teachers as priority #2 is a recipe for disaster. You have to make sure they are the best option to teach that subject. Many times, it just doesn't align.
No doubt this CAN be true, but it's all about subject area & sport. The best physics teacher won't be your best coach if they don't have any athletic background. The best lacrosse coach might not have an appropriate degree to teach anything during the day.
And quite honestly, great coaches spend an insane amount of time preparing for success in their sports. There's only 24 hours in a day. Those hours COULD be spent prepping lessons & offering after-school help in their subject. This is not a judgment, just reality of time in a day. My only point here is that normal circumstances can result in coaches spending time on their sport responsibilities when they could focus that time on improving as a teacher.
Please keep in mind my comments are as a current teacher & coach. I think I do A-level work on both ends, but I see coaches/teachers who clearly excel in one side of the job, but not both. Great teachers who are mediocre coaches at best. Great coaches who are below-average teachers. They exist at EVERY school.
I have seen several coaches who were excellent teachers and coaches. Some schools do not put much effort into hiring coaches. As long as position is filled, they are happy, even if team goes 0-18 or wins a state championship. When a school hires a coach, they should make every effort possible to get the best coach they can. Too many schools take easy way out, and team/school/community suffers.
I was just referring to coaches. All coaches if successful have to be able to teach their sport/technique to athletes. My belief is if you are a coach you can coach anything given you learn the sport. Some very successful coaches are lazy in the classroom by choice not because they can't teach their subject, they just don't want to!
Similar threads
