The Truth...

[TNMan11]

You're going to owe this family a HUGE apology when all the facts are on the table. This kid's decision not to play for this coach came during the 2010 season; this was way before any 2011 meetings or roster assignments. This decision was private for him and he remained silent and did not advertise his reasons. The factor of being benched for 2011was not even discussed nor an issue, no team meetings had occurred or rosters made. He remained silent and demanded not one thing. There was a called meeting, not by the student, on why he was not going to play the 2011 season. The reasons were given in written form and being benched was not one of them. Now for the jabs. If you remember the record in 2009 before he was called up was 5-4; the record after he finished was 9-5. The only loss MBA suffered during his tenure that season was to MUS in the championship game. The playoff games were hard fought by the whole team and included BGA, ENSWORTH, and BA. This set of games would make it hard for anyone to discount that his contribution. All the guys you mentioned were there during the 5-4 part of the season. Now for the next jab that DavidSchwetty seems to enjoy -- that he is not as good as the back up QB. I BEG to differ. Its rare that a 2 QB system works (UT for example). The stats that I could find shows the back up QB's rushing yards somewhere around negative 1.7 per carry and this kid's rushing yards were positive 4.7. Pass completion was essentially the same. Interceptions were three for both. Two of the starting QB's interceptions were Hail Mary's during the ENSWORTH game. Many of the stats racked up by the back up were done on teams with loosing records. I went to those games and to me there is NO question which one can read the field, pass, scramble, lead, and get the job done - it's the same one that stepped up when called in the 2009. If you polled the team you would get the same answer by a supermajority. He is a true and respected leader!

[KWoodroof]

You've certainly looked at the football end of the issue in a very thorough way, and you make some good points. Performance related matters are always debatable, but you make a compelling case.

 

My concern (although since the issue seems to be decided and closed, I guess it's more a complaint) is that it appears to be over. Finished, except for that awkward moment at the beginning of spring practice when two head coaches blow whistles. In some situations, the less said the better. Not this one. This whole sordid matter needs to be investigated in detail, and the MBA community (and probably anybody outside who has an interest) needs to be apprised of the details, whatever they are, however painful they may be (redacting only names of students).

 

There is a great deal of noise regarding the TSSAA's letter of commendation to MBA regarding their handling of the issue. Sadly, I have to agree. I don't think the penalties needed to be Draconian, but I think barring the football team from postseason play for a year or two would be reasonable. If we stick to what I suspect has become polite fiction, that high school football is supposed to be another learning experience, what is the lesson here? Justice exists in differing forms, and we make the punishment fit the criminal, not necessarily the crime? You can avoid consequences with a quick mea culpa followed by the sacrifice of the lowest ranking person in the debacle?

 

In my six years on the Hill, we produced one good team, 4 very middling teams, and one that would have lost to a good freshman team. The world didn't end, and the sun came up each morning (even after the 6th consecutive loss to Ryan). But we were always considered to be honorable in every way, always conducting all of our affairs with integrity. That's been damaged, if not destroyed, and that affects me. I'm a loyal MBA man and will be until I die. But I do think the Board of Trust owes us all an explanation of how our reputation became tainted so badly, and what steps are taken to make sure this never happens again.

[retiredtothebleachers]

You've certainly looked at the football end of the issue in a very thorough way, and you make some good points. Performance related matters are always debatable, but you make a compelling case.

 

My concern (although since the issue seems to be decided and closed, I guess it's more a complaint) is that it appears to be over. Finished, except for that awkward moment at the beginning of spring practice when two head coaches blow whistles. In some situations, the less said the better. Not this one. This whole sordid matter needs to be investigated in detail, and the MBA community (and probably anybody outside who has an interest) needs to be apprised of the details, whatever they are, however painful they may be (redacting only names of students).

 

There is a great deal of noise regarding the TSSAA's letter of commendation to MBA regarding their handling of the issue. Sadly, I have to agree. I don't think the penalties needed to be Draconian, but I think barring the football team from postseason play for a year or two would be reasonable. If we stick to what I suspect has become polite fiction, that high school football is supposed to be another learning experience, what is the lesson here? Justice exists in differing forms, and we make the punishment fit the criminal, not necessarily the crime? You can avoid consequences with a quick mea culpa followed by the sacrifice of the lowest ranking person in the debacle?

 

In my six years on the Hill, we produced one good team, 4 very middling teams, and one that would have lost to a good freshman team. The world didn't end, and the sun came up each morning (even after the 6th consecutive loss to Ryan). But we were always considered to be honorable in every way, always conducting all of our affairs with integrity. That's been damaged, if not destroyed, and that affects me. I'm a loyal MBA man and will be until I die. But I do think the Board of Trust owes us all an explanation of how our reputation became tainted so badly, and what steps are taken to make sure this never happens again.

 

This is a great post and indicative of the MBA of old. I am afraid this spirit is too far gone from the current MBA. This situation provided an opportunity to return to the better tradition of the past. Because of the way it has been all been handled, with TSSAA as an accomplice, the opportunity seems to have been missed and now MBA is seen and known as cheaters that will make token sacrifices in the effort to sweep the truth under the rug and out of the public eye as quickly as possible.

[sarahpalin]

This is a great post and indicative of the MBA of old. I am afraid this spirit is too far gone from the current MBA. This situation provided an opportunity to return to the better tradition of the past. Because of the way it has been all been handled, with TSSAA as an accomplice, the opportunity seems to have been missed and now MBA is seen and known as cheaters that will make token sacrifices in the effort to sweep the truth under the rug and out of the public eye as quickly as possible.

[/quote

What I was surprised at was the name calling, accusations,and the in house verbal jabs amongst the MBA family.......

[big red big blue]

This is a great post and indicative of the MBA of old. I am afraid this spirit is too far gone from the current MBA. This situation provided an opportunity to return to the better tradition of the past. Because of the way it has been all been handled, with TSSAA as an accomplice, the opportunity seems to have been missed and now MBA is seen and known as cheaters that will make token sacrifices in the effort to sweep the truth under the rug and out of the public eye as quickly as possible.

 

We were cheating during the Coach Owen era as well. I say that because, if what happened here constitues "cheating," cheating occurred when I was there. By that I mean, a student athlete in my class, on financial aid (father was a police officer) wanted to go on senior spring break but couldn't afford it. So he hatched a plan to solicit money from friends (mostly athletes on various teams) by doing work for their families. A lot of the families just gave him the money without actually making him do the work. Adjusted for inflation, I'm guessing he got a lot more than $1500. So, we've been a renegage program at least that long (20 years or so). So don't wax nostalgic about the "good ol' days" if this sort of thing upsets you so much.

[big red big blue]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/20/sports/baseball/20mets.html?_r=1&src=tptw

 

This former MBA student athlete is going to describe in his book how much the families in the MBA community helped him during his years there as well. My guess is all of the help he received falls outside the bounds of the financial aid he was awarded back then. So all of the coaches whom he played under--football (Owen), basketball (Bowers & Thoni), and baseball (Forehand) were cheaters, just like McGugin.

[bigredguard13]

You're going to owe this family a HUGE apology when all the facts are on the table. This kid's decision not to play for this coach came during the 2010 season; this was way before any 2011 meetings or roster assignments. This decision was private for him and he remained silent and did not advertise his reasons. The factor of being benched for 2011was not even discussed nor an issue, no team meetings had occurred or rosters made. He remained silent and demanded not one thing. There was a called meeting, not by the student, on why he was not going to play the 2011 season. The reasons were given in written form and being benched was not one of them. Now for the jabs. If you remember the record in 2009 before he was called up was 5-4; the record after he finished was 9-5. The only loss MBA suffered during his tenure that season was to MUS in the championship game. The playoff games were hard fought by the whole team and included BGA, ENSWORTH, and BA. This set of games would make it hard for anyone to discount that his contribution. All the guys you mentioned were there during the 5-4 part of the season. Now for the next jab that DavidSchwetty seems to enjoy -- that he is not as good as the back up QB. I BEG to differ. Its rare that a 2 QB system works (UT for example). The stats that I could find shows the back up QB's rushing yards somewhere around negative 1.7 per carry and this kid's rushing yards were positive 4.7. Pass completion was essentially the same. Interceptions were three for both. Two of the starting QB's interceptions were Hail Mary's during the ENSWORTH game. Many of the stats racked up by the back up were done on teams with loosing records. I went to those games and to me there is NO question which one can read the field, pass, scramble, lead, and get the job done - it's the same one that stepped up when called in the 2009. If you polled the team you would get the same answer by a supermajority. He is a true and respected leader!

 

Spoken like a truly proud father. Mr. Simonis, you are correct in that your son respected, but you are incorrect too. Anyone that saw the games knows that his skills should be used somewhere other than QB. we love arron but not as our qb.

 

If he quit because of the coach, I guess he will play now with a new coach?

[Chattcity]

We were cheating during the Coach Owen era as well. I say that because, if what happened here constitues "cheating," cheating occurred when I was there. By that I mean, a student athlete in my class, on financial aid (father was a police officer) wanted to go on senior spring break but couldn't afford it. So he hatched a plan to solicit money from friends (mostly athletes on various teams) by doing work for their families. A lot of the families just gave him the money without actually making him do the work. Adjusted for inflation, I'm guessing he got a lot more than $1500. So, we've been a renegage program at least that long (20 years or so). So don't wax nostalgic about the "good ol' days" if this sort of thing upsets you so much.

 

While I understand and agree, to a point, with your argument, it seems to me that the current situation is far different. Based upon the TSSA letter, it seems that the coach received an unmarked envelope with a cashier's check in it. He then passed the check on to the family. That seems significantly different from the "pass the hat' scenario you mention. One could argue that oassing the hat accomplishes the same result (and it does) but at least the school administration isn't involved in it.

 

That's what is so perplexing to me. If the family was having financial issues, and if friends wanted to help, why go through the coach?

Edited April 21, 2011 by Chattcity

[big red big blue]

While I understand and agree, to a point, with your argument, it seems to me that the current situation is far different. Based upon the TSSA letter, it seems that the coach received an unmarked envelope with a cashier's check in it. He then passed the check on to the family. That seems significantly different from the "pass the hat' scenario you mention. One could argue that oassing the hat accomplishes the same result (and it does) but at least the school administration isn't involved in it.

 

That's waht is so perplexing to me. If the family was having financial issues, and if friends wanted to help, why go through the coach?

 

Readers' Digest version (of the story I've been told, which may be wrong): It wasn't broadcast to everyone providing the help to whom the help was going. Just that "there is a family that needs our help." the guy who actually went to the bank, and got the check cut obviously knew, but he didn't know the family or the best way to get them the money, so he made a big mistake and gave it to the coach to pass along. And the coach made a big mistake in passing it along to the student. I agree with you, they should have hand delivered it to the student without getting the coach involved. Whether or not that makes it a firable offense, whatever the TSSAA says, is another matter.

[KWoodroof]

...but he didn't know the family or the best way to get them the money, so he made a big mistake and gave it to the coach to pass along. And the coach made a big mistake in passing it along to the student. I agree with you, they should have hand delivered it to the student without getting the coach involved. Whether or not that makes it a firable offense, whatever the TSSAA says, is another matter.

And if that's truly the case, then it's an altogether different matter, i.e., altruism and best intentions carried out badly. I do think McGugin's handling shows pretty iffy judgement. He may not read these boards, but he's from MBA and knows the recruiting allegations under which we live. I would think the best response to fiding a large cashier's check in one's "In box" is to find one's boss immediately, drag him off the toilet if necessary, and discuss it, and then find the headmaster.

 

My point, which I don't think I articulated very well, is that we need to know if this is a one-off, or have we been continuously violating the rules consistently over the years. And if it's the latter, then some fundamental decisions to be made, namely, should we stay in the TSSAA or leave, as we have a fundamental difference in values? MBA has left the TSSAA before when the rules put them in conflict with MBA's views. We could adopt something like the hockey programs at the elite northeast prep schools. They recruit, period. And they play amongst themselves for a New England championship. They also play public and parochial school, but if you put Kimble-Union on your schedule, you know what you're getting. Just a thought.

[itzme]

I think the time has come for the DII privates to leave the TSSAA. Clearly, MBA blatantly broke the rules here, but I do believe that they were trying to do the right thing by this kid. If doing the right thing for kids is against TSSAA rules, what is the upside of belonging to the organization? I see Childress' joke of a response to all this as an attempt to keep the DII schools, particularly MBA, happy and in his organization.

 

I am totally against blatant recruiting on a financial basis. I do believe that a new organization could set rules that make competition fair while not screwing over kids that can really be helped in all aspects of their lives by attending one of these schools.

 

TSSAA has watered down their "State Championships" to the point of meaninglessness. They have set rules trying to keep everyone in DI happy. They obviously make huge exceptions in enforcement when enough is at stake for them as an organization. Tell me, why stay in this organization? For the sake of students? I don't think so.

 

The public schools would be happy if we left. The DII schools could do a better job of setting up rules that work for all of us.

 

Let's go!

[Chattcity]

I think the time has come for the DII privates to leave the TSSAA. Clearly, MBA blatantly broke the rules here, but I do believe that they were trying to do the right thing by this kid. If doing the right thing for kids is against TSSAA rules, what is the upside of belonging to the organization? I see Childress' joke of a response to all this as an attempt to keep the DII schools, particularly MBA, happy and in his organization.

 

I am totally against blatant recruiting on a financial basis. I do believe that a new organization could set rules that make competition fair while not screwing over kids that can really be helped in all aspects of their lives by attending one of these schools.

 

TSSAA has watered down their "State Championships" to the point of meaninglessness. They have set rules trying to keep everyone in DI happy. They obviously make huge exceptions in enforcement when enough is at stake for them as an organization. Tell me, why stay in this organization? For the sake of students? I don't think so.

 

The public schools would be happy if we left. The DII schools could do a better job of setting up rules that work for all of us.

 

Let's go!

 

Very interesting comments. I have often thought that BA and perhaps Ensworth might be interested in moving to some sort of non-TSSAA program that incorporated other southeastern high schools that wanted to move beyond the state boundaries and compete in an ultra-competitive superconference. Up until this situation, I didn't see MBA as interested in going that route but maybe they are. I have absolutely nothing to do with the administration at Baylor or McCallie, but I wouldn't see either of them going in that direction. It was always my admittedly unfounded belief that Ralph Potter was in part interested in moving to BA because BA was more likely to be interested in a superconference than McCallie was. (Again, I admit that is complete and utter speculation on my part, supported by nothing). I don't think that was the main reason for his move but perhaps it was a consideration.

 

Perhaps Ensworth might not be interested--things have evolved at Ensworth that put them in a very strong position so perhaps that isn't something they are interested in--don't jump to conclusions you EHS supporters as that's not a knock at Ensworth. They are clearly doing well and may not want to change the status quo.

 

Anyway, my 2 cents worth.

Edited April 21, 2011 by Chattcity