He believes playing time is the real issue.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It most likely is. The Lewis-Palmer coach just faced the same thing weeks after taking his team to the State Championship. He is known to be strict but fair.
There is probably a lot more to the story. But just because the guy wins, the ends don't necessarily justify the means. Bob Knight and Joe Paterno won a lot, yet both were forced out by issues.
Been there and done that.
Hmmm...
Looking at the points in the plan, I would venture to assess there are specific incidents involving specific people. If those incidents are factual, I don't see this as unreasonable.
Sounds like the school board and some parents attempt at the wussifification of baseball.
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I would disagree on the "open meetings" violations. In cases of personnel discussion (ie: hiring, firing, discipline), those meetings can (and should) be private. Our BOE always goes into non-public sessions to deal with those matters (plus others, like student issues).
And of course the BOE has an agenda regarding this coach. The questions is why. So far any real facts are missing. Would be nice for the reporters to do their jobs and report on what happened. Sounds like something to do with the son.
Originally Posted by Golfman25:
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I would disagree on the "open meetings" violations. In cases of personnel discussion (ie: hiring, firing, discipline), those meetings can (and should) be private. Our BOE always goes into non-public sessions to deal with those matters (plus others, like student issues).
And of course the BOE has an agenda regarding this coach. The questions is why. So far any real facts are missing. Would be nice for the reporters to do their jobs and report on what happened. Sounds like something to do with the son.
Based on the reporting, it does appear that the BOE violated some Colorado law about open public meetings, but only if they don't eventually have an open meeting to cover the things in the emails.
Given that the papers apparently used some sort of open records request to get all the emails and complaints, it is strange that there's no substantial discussion of what is alleged to actually be the problem(s) with the coach(es). It does appear that being required to play summer ball with specific organizations is part of the issue, and that's a big no-no here in GA as well, not that it stops many schools from doing similar things implicitly (and in more sports than just baseball).
Originally Posted by jacjacatk:
Originally Posted by Golfman25:
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I would disagree on the "open meetings" violations. In cases of personnel discussion (ie: hiring, firing, discipline), those meetings can (and should) be private. Our BOE always goes into non-public sessions to deal with those matters (plus others, like student issues).
And of course the BOE has an agenda regarding this coach. The questions is why. So far any real facts are missing. Would be nice for the reporters to do their jobs and report on what happened. Sounds like something to do with the son.
Based on the reporting, it does appear that the BOE violated some Colorado law about open public meetings, but only if they don't eventually have an open meeting to cover the things in the emails.
Given that the papers apparently used some sort of open records request to get all the emails and complaints, it is strange that there's no substantial discussion of what is alleged to actually be the problem(s) with the coach(es). It does appear that being required to play summer ball with specific organizations is part of the issue, and that's a big no-no here in GA as well, not that it stops many schools from doing similar things implicitly (and in more sports than just baseball).
I'd just be really careful about relying on what the press "reports" on this. They have an "open meetings" bias - the are the press after all. Since the BOE is dealing with someone's employment, they are probably limiting their response to the records request. They have only provided possible "votes." Somewhere there is a story to be told about what happened. Haven't seen that yet.
1. Kirk Danley, coach Jim Danley's son, will not have contact with anyone associated with Reds baseball during the school year, including e-mails, texts and phone calls.
2. During the summer, Kirk Danley can't communicate with Eaton concerning spring baseball.
3. Kirk Danley is confined to the stands at all Eaton prep baseball games and is to have no contact or communication with players or coaches during games.
My first impression here is that coach needs to get his son in check. While some parents will take a one time thing and blow it out of proportion to benefit them but I got a feeling this guy is not just a one time thing.
4. Dalton Cox will return as an assistant coach for 2016 play.
I would like to know more here. Could be the guy personally picked by the parents to run the show because he "gets the kids" but there's something here.
5. A baseball handbook will be created and approved by the athletic director. It will include lines of communication; decisions for making the team; lettering criteria; and parental, player and coach responsibility. It is to be available by Dec. 1.
First impression is this guy doesn't like to communicate with parents and sometimes that's a good thing in this day and age there needs to be some sort of communication. I think forcing a handbook is going overboard though.
6. All statistics programs for the prep team will be managed by only board-recognized coaches.
This is an interesting one and makes me think this is upset parent driven. Sounds like he's using someone that has not been cleared by the BOE. Which typically isn't a big deal as long as they aren't interacting with kids.
7. No banners other than those signifying spring titles can be displayed on the outfield fence during spring play.
First impression is that probably some parent(s) want their kid(s) to play something else besides American Legion and coach is unofficially not letting them. This is kinda pointless if you ask me
8. Jim Danley must promote multisport athletes.
I totally agree with this one but the article says 17 of the 19 do play other sports so there is a lot more to this one than we are seeing.
9. Danley must complete the National Federation of State High Schools' online course "Creating a Safe and Respectful Environment" by Dec. 1.
Lot more to this one and probably driving by upset parents. These courses are mainly a joke and waste of time. You might get one or two things out of them but overall they are not worth it.
10. Members of the spring team will not be required to play summer or fall baseball to keep their positions.
Yup - they are wanting to play more travel ball to help their chances of playing baseball in college. Most states have some sort of rule that says anything in the summer is voluntary
11. College recruiting must go through the athletic director's office.
Parent driven but might be something here. Sounds like parents want more control as to what happens with their sons recruiting. Maybe it's nothing but my guess is they feel he's not helping players get to the next level
12. There will be no retribution to players as a result of this plan.
This is dumb and parents probably wanting all these demands and changes in culture but are afraid of being singled out. Well you can't upset the apple cart this much without some spilling out. I'm not saying retribution should happen but it sure seems like it's going to be pretty easy to go after him now for retribution. Who's definition of retribution are they going to use?
13. Danley and the athletic director will send a joint letter to families of baseball players outlining changes.
This is dumb as well and this is what will force him out. It's like saying "hey we are going to hang you but you need to supply the rope and tree"
There is A LOT more to this than what we are seeing or being reported. On outside looking in I would say that 80% of this is crazy parent syndrome where they are entitled but I don't think coach is completely innocent here either. He probably does need to get brought into the modern era of coaching. You can still be tough and have high standards without dominating a kids time. As HS coaches we don't own them in the summer and fall and there are typically rules that say this. Overall I think a guy is getting railroaded by parents but my gut feeling is he didn't help himself by not corralling his son more.
It's not crazy parent syndrome, but I can tell you it is splitting the town. The biggest problem is that the high school program and American Legion program have become too intertwined ( see http://www.eatonbaseball.com/ for what I mean). I know quite a bit about the program. In my mind, a few decades of violations were about to come to light and the board was trying to quietly confront the problem. Not so quiet now.
Originally Posted by coach2709:
1. Kirk Danley, coach Jim Danley's son, will not have contact with anyone associated with Reds baseball during the school year, including e-mails, texts and phone calls.
2. During the summer, Kirk Danley can't communicate with Eaton concerning spring baseball.
3. Kirk Danley is confined to the stands at all Eaton prep baseball games and is to have no contact or communication with players or coaches during games.
My first impression here is that coach needs to get his son in check. While some parents will take a one time thing and blow it out of proportion to benefit them but I got a feeling this guy is not just a one time thing.
Kirk has a heavy hand in the summer American Legion Program and has been accused of being the main guy coercing kids into playing AL.
4. Dalton Cox will return as an assistant coach for 2016 play.
I would like to know more here. Could be the guy personally picked by the parents to run the show because he "gets the kids" but there's something here.
No, that's not really it. I believe he was the guy about to bring a lot of the violations to the surface.
5. A baseball handbook will be created and approved by the athletic director. It will include lines of communication; decisions for making the team; lettering criteria; and parental, player and coach responsibility. It is to be available by Dec. 1.
First impression is this guy doesn't like to communicate with parents and sometimes that's a good thing in this day and age there needs to be some sort of communication. I think forcing a handbook is going overboard though.
He actually communicates well with the parents, but a lot of the problems with the summer program need to be addressed in a way that makes it clear that any violations are not unintentional. The major factor here has been the seemingly mandatory requirement that you play AL if you want to play high school varsity.
6. All statistics programs for the prep team will be managed by only board-recognized coaches.
This is an interesting one and makes me think this is upset parent driven. Sounds like he's using someone that has not been cleared by the BOE. Which typically isn't a big deal as long as they aren't interacting with kids.
This one is interesting. CHSAA makes reporting statistics for every game through Maxpreps mandatory. Eaton has not done so the past few years. CHSAA doesn't do a good job of enforcement on this, though.
7. No banners other than those signifying spring titles can be displayed on the outfield fence during spring play.
First impression is that probably some parent(s) want their kid(s) to play something else besides American Legion and coach is unofficially not letting them. This is kinda pointless if you ask me
The worry is that the American Legion program is so intertwined with the high school program that it's scary. I've been amazed with how long they've gotten away with this. The board wants the high school program to distance itself from the American Legion program because they are very close to being hit with sanctions and, by hanging AL championship banners in the middle of their HS state championship banners, they seem to simply be snubbing their nose at the state rules.
8. Jim Danley must promote multisport athletes.
I totally agree with this one but the article says 17 of the 19 do play other sports so there is a lot more to this one than we are seeing.
Yes, but there have been problems. He has off-season programs that are quietly made mandatory which discourages multisport participation. Also, that number is based off of the AL team this year and not the high school roster. Many of the AL roster are not yet on varsity.
9. Danley must complete the National Federation of State High Schools' online course "Creating a Safe and Respectful Environment" by Dec. 1.
Lot more to this one and probably driving by upset parents. These courses are mainly a joke and waste of time. You might get one or two things out of them but overall they are not worth it.
The board is simply trying its best to immunize itself if violations are found (and I imagine it's coming). They can at least say they took remedial steps. Danley is old school and, from what I know, his son is one of those "loud coaches."
10. Members of the spring team will not be required to play summer or fall baseball to keep their positions.
Yup - they are wanting to play more travel ball to help their chances of playing baseball in college. Most states have some sort of rule that says anything in the summer is voluntary
My understanding is that a lot of this surrounds a couple of players in particular. these two are highly recruited and wanted to spend the summer before their senior year playing on Denver area travel teams that get good college exposure. I have noticed that several of the Eaton players have shown up on fall rosters.
11. College recruiting must go through the athletic director's office.
Parent driven but might be something here. Sounds like parents want more control as to what happens with their sons recruiting. Maybe it's nothing but my guess is they feel he's not helping players get to the next level
There have been worries from some that this move might bring retribution on a few players in the form of the coaching staff speaking negatively when approached by recruiters. I think this is a legitimate concern.
12. There will be no retribution to players as a result of this plan.
This is dumb and parents probably wanting all these demands and changes in culture but are afraid of being singled out. Well you can't upset the apple cart this much without some spilling out. I'm not saying retribution should happen but it sure seems like it's going to be pretty easy to go after him now for retribution. Who's definition of retribution are they going to use?
As above, this is a legitimate concern.
13. Danley and the athletic director will send a joint letter to families of baseball players outlining changes.
This is dumb as well and this is what will force him out. It's like saying "hey we are going to hang you but you need to supply the rope and tree"
I don't see it this way. I think the b oard is trying to make it clear that they understand the problems and want it clear that they have been addressed.
There is A LOT more to this than what we are seeing or being reported. On outside looking in I would say that 80% of this is crazy parent syndrome where they are entitled but I don't think coach is completely innocent here either. He probably does need to get brought into the modern era of coaching. You can still be tough and have high standards without dominating a kids time. As HS coaches we don't own them in the summer and fall and there are typically rules that say this. Overall I think a guy is getting railroaded by parents but my gut feeling is he didn't help himself by not corralling his son more.
Originally Posted by roothog66:
It's not crazy parent syndrome, but I can tell you it is splitting the town. The biggest problem is that the high school program and American Legion program have become too intertwined ( see http://www.eatonbaseball.com/ for what I mean). I know quite a bit about the program. In my mind, a few decades of violations were about to come to light and the board was trying to quietly confront the problem. Not so quiet now.
Yea - I guess intertwined would cover that...
In our area, many high schools run pipeline type programs also - but at least they have the sense to not be so blatant about it.
Regardless of anything else, I think we should not fall into the trap of justifying a coach's behavior just because he is successful. Those are two separate matters.
I have no idea what led to this issue. The details are pretty scant in the articles. Although I get the impression is the school board is pretty spineless. If you are going to fire the guy, just do it. Don't go through a dog and pony show so you look good. Either fire the guy, or get out of his business.
Originally Posted by Rob T:
Originally Posted by roothog66:
It's not crazy parent syndrome, but I can tell you it is splitting the town. The biggest problem is that the high school program and American Legion program have become too intertwined ( see http://www.eatonbaseball.com/ for what I mean). I know quite a bit about the program. In my mind, a few decades of violations were about to come to light and the board was trying to quietly confront the problem. Not so quiet now.
Yea - I guess intertwined would cover that...
In our area, many high schools run pipeline type programs also - but at least they have the sense to not be so blatant about it.
Regardless of anything else, I think we should not fall into the trap of justifying a coach's behavior just because he is successful. Those are two separate matters.
I have no idea what led to this issue. The details are pretty scant in the articles. Although I get the impression is the school board is pretty spineless. If you are going to fire the guy, just do it. Don't go through a dog and pony show so you look good. Either fire the guy, or get out of his business.
There was a concerted effort by about a dozen families of both current and former players who sent letters to the board recently. I don't think the board has/had the votes to fire him (or not renew his contract). I think from the emails that the original idea was to have a split vote of 3-2 on renewal that would send a message. However, one of the board members has a senior that is a starter on varsity who will abstain. The problem is that I don't know if they even know themselves if they want to necessarily get rid of him or not. They have certainly gotten themselves into a pickle with their clever maneuvering.
Thanks for filling in some details roothog and that doesn't look too good for coach. But this should have been handled YEARS ago before it got to this point based on what you're saying. Sounds like it's going to get pretty ugly before it's over.
Its all about the kids thought, right?
Dumb ego driven people acting how dumb and ego driven people act.
Originally Posted by roothog66:
Originally Posted by coach2709:
1. Kirk Danley, coach Jim Danley's son, will not have contact with anyone associated with Reds baseball during the school year, including e-mails, texts and phone calls.
2. During the summer, Kirk Danley can't communicate with Eaton concerning spring baseball.
3. Kirk Danley is confined to the stands at all Eaton prep baseball games and is to have no contact or communication with players or coaches during games.
My first impression here is that coach needs to get his son in check. While some parents will take a one time thing and blow it out of proportion to benefit them but I got a feeling this guy is not just a one time thing.
Kirk has a heavy hand in the summer American Legion Program and has been accused of being the main guy coercing kids into playing AL.
4. Dalton Cox will return as an assistant coach for 2016 play.
I would like to know more here. Could be the guy personally picked by the parents to run the show because he "gets the kids" but there's something here.
No, that's not really it. I believe he was the guy about to bring a lot of the violations to the surface.
5. A baseball handbook will be created and approved by the athletic director. It will include lines of communication; decisions for making the team; lettering criteria; and parental, player and coach responsibility. It is to be available by Dec. 1.
First impression is this guy doesn't like to communicate with parents and sometimes that's a good thing in this day and age there needs to be some sort of communication. I think forcing a handbook is going overboard though.
He actually communicates well with the parents, but a lot of the problems with the summer program need to be addressed in a way that makes it clear that any violations are not unintentional. The major factor here has been the seemingly mandatory requirement that you play AL if you want to play high school varsity.
6. All statistics programs for the prep team will be managed by only board-recognized coaches.
This is an interesting one and makes me think this is upset parent driven. Sounds like he's using someone that has not been cleared by the BOE. Which typically isn't a big deal as long as they aren't interacting with kids.
This one is interesting. CHSAA makes reporting statistics for every game through Maxpreps mandatory. Eaton has not done so the past few years. CHSAA doesn't do a good job of enforcement on this, though.
7. No banners other than those signifying spring titles can be displayed on the outfield fence during spring play.
First impression is that probably some parent(s) want their kid(s) to play something else besides American Legion and coach is unofficially not letting them. This is kinda pointless if you ask me
The worry is that the American Legion program is so intertwined with the high school program that it's scary. I've been amazed with how long they've gotten away with this. The board wants the high school program to distance itself from the American Legion program because they are very close to being hit with sanctions and, by hanging AL championship banners in the middle of their HS state championship banners, they seem to simply be snubbing their nose at the state rules.
8. Jim Danley must promote multisport athletes.
I totally agree with this one but the article says 17 of the 19 do play other sports so there is a lot more to this one than we are seeing.
Yes, but there have been problems. He has off-season programs that are quietly made mandatory which discourages multisport participation. Also, that number is based off of the AL team this year and not the high school roster. Many of the AL roster are not yet on varsity.
9. Danley must complete the National Federation of State High Schools' online course "Creating a Safe and Respectful Environment" by Dec. 1.
Lot more to this one and probably driving by upset parents. These courses are mainly a joke and waste of time. You might get one or two things out of them but overall they are not worth it.
The board is simply trying its best to immunize itself if violations are found (and I imagine it's coming). They can at least say they took remedial steps. Danley is old school and, from what I know, his son is one of those "loud coaches."
10. Members of the spring team will not be required to play summer or fall baseball to keep their positions.
Yup - they are wanting to play more travel ball to help their chances of playing baseball in college. Most states have some sort of rule that says anything in the summer is voluntary
My understanding is that a lot of this surrounds a couple of players in particular. these two are highly recruited and wanted to spend the summer before their senior year playing on Denver area travel teams that get good college exposure. I have noticed that several of the Eaton players have shown up on fall rosters.
11. College recruiting must go through the athletic director's office.
Parent driven but might be something here. Sounds like parents want more control as to what happens with their sons recruiting. Maybe it's nothing but my guess is they feel he's not helping players get to the next level
There have been worries from some that this move might bring retribution on a few players in the form of the coaching staff speaking negatively when approached by recruiters. I think this is a legitimate concern.
12. There will be no retribution to players as a result of this plan.
This is dumb and parents probably wanting all these demands and changes in culture but are afraid of being singled out. Well you can't upset the apple cart this much without some spilling out. I'm not saying retribution should happen but it sure seems like it's going to be pretty easy to go after him now for retribution. Who's definition of retribution are they going to use?
As above, this is a legitimate concern.
13. Danley and the athletic director will send a joint letter to families of baseball players outlining changes.
This is dumb as well and this is what will force him out. It's like saying "hey we are going to hang you but you need to supply the rope and tree"
I don't see it this way. I think the b oard is trying to make it clear that they understand the problems and want it clear that they have been addressed.
There is A LOT more to this than what we are seeing or being reported. On outside looking in I would say that 80% of this is crazy parent syndrome where they are entitled but I don't think coach is completely innocent here either. He probably does need to get brought into the modern era of coaching. You can still be tough and have high standards without dominating a kids time. As HS coaches we don't own them in the summer and fall and there are typically rules that say this. Overall I think a guy is getting railroaded by parents but my gut feeling is he didn't help himself by not corralling his son more.
As I suspected, there is a lot of a back story here.
The summer baseball thing can be a problem. Schools in my area do it and our coach has decided to join them an promote an "affiliated" summer program. He openly said that it would not affect the varsity roster, but that is obviously a concern. My son struggled with what to do -- stay with an independent travel team or go with the affiliated team. It really sucked, because we just didn't know what the coach would do. Kid decided to stick with his independent team. So far, the coach has supported that decision. Even pulled him aside at fall workouts and talked to him about "his future." Some coaches can do it - keep it separate - and some just can't help themselves.
Originally Posted by coach2709:
Thanks for filling in some details roothog and that doesn't look too good for coach. But this should have been handled YEARS ago before it got to this point based on what you're saying. Sounds like it's going to get pretty ugly before it's over.
Yes, but he problem is he was winning, which covers a lot of sins. Sounds like what blew the top off now was the threat of investigation and sanctions by the HS association. Unfortunately, it's a movie we have seen dozens of times.
Our coach on the other hand is on the far other end of the spectrum. He says summer is for fishing and camping in the mountains. He doesn't care what you do in the summer and doesn't want to be involved at all. He's another old school guy.
As an outsider with no more information than I've read here and in the links, here it what it looks like:
Some of the items seem like reasonable management oversight (e.g., #5, publishing a handbook and #9, taking a continuing ed course), provided other coaches at the school are given the same requirements.
Some of them are personnel matters that should not be aired publicly.
Some of them are hopelessly vague, such as #8. What does it mean to "promote multi-sport athletes"? Does that mean encourage athletes in other sports to come out for baseball? Encourage baseball players to go out for other sports? Does it mean multi-sport athletes are supposed to get special consideration in roster decisions? How will the coach know if he's complying or not?
Some of them are guaranteed to become problems in the future, such as #10 not requiring players to play summer or fall ball. What happens when a kid "loses his position" because someone who did play summer and fall ball got better through the extra coaching and experience? (BTW, when did players acquire ownership interests in their positions from one season to the next?)
Some of them over-step legitimate oversight roles, such as #11, which requires college recruiting to go through the athletic director. This coach doubtlessly has relationships with many college coaches established over many years. It is not reasonable for the AD to insert himself in these relationships.
Some of them appear to be accumulated grievances that never should have been allowed to fester and could have been addressed easily when they first surfaced (e.g., posting non-scholastic banners on the school field).
As a long-time manager, this list looks like grossly clumsy and incompetent oversight from an AD or a board that has not done a consistent job of supervising the program and is now inserting itself in a heavy-handed manner without doing its basic work of untangling the various issues that need to be addressed in different manners and without giving the incumbent the respect of letting him be involved in plotting the way ahead.
Regardless of the legitimacy of the complaints, this list is an ineffective way to solve them. There are only two possible outcomes to this approach: driving off a legendary coach with bad feelings or keeping him around in a powerless role after publicly humiliating him. This looks like a boss trying to win a power struggle, not a manager trying to address a set of inter-related problems and help a valued employee be effective in the future.
Swampboy I agree with pretty much everything you said above.
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I had no earlier input on this matter because I wasn't entirely sure. However, looking at Colorado case law, it's clear to me that this isn't a violation of the "Colorado Sunshine law." In a 2012 Colorado Court of Appeals decision, the court found that emails exchanged between a regulatory agency's chairperson, commissioner, and a member of the council that discussed the council's position on a particular rule that would later be up for vote wasn't a "meeting" under the meaning of the statute. That makes sense if you think about it.
Originally Posted by Golfman25:
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I would disagree on the "open meetings" violations. In cases of personnel discussion (ie: hiring, firing, discipline), those meetings can (and should) be private. Our BOE always goes into non-public sessions to deal with those matters (plus others, like student issues).
And of course the BOE has an agenda regarding this coach. The questions is why. So far any real facts are missing. Would be nice for the reporters to do their jobs and report on what happened. Sounds like something to do with the son.
You would be right, Golf. Even if this could be called a "meeting" under Colorado law (and the case law is clear that it isn't), Personnel matters are excepted in the statute itself. Further, the Colorado Supreme Court has found that school boards are not covered under the statute.
Originally Posted by roothog66:
Originally Posted by Golfman25:
Originally Posted by CoachB25:
Apparently, after reading the one link that revealed the emails of school board members already stating their votes to each other in private there is a school board agenda against this coach. I am not a lawyer but, as the article pointed out, they have violated the law by going into detail in private emails on what they are going to do. Interesting to see where this leads.
I would disagree on the "open meetings" violations. In cases of personnel discussion (ie: hiring, firing, discipline), those meetings can (and should) be private. Our BOE always goes into non-public sessions to deal with those matters (plus others, like student issues).
And of course the BOE has an agenda regarding this coach. The questions is why. So far any real facts are missing. Would be nice for the reporters to do their jobs and report on what happened. Sounds like something to do with the son.
You would be right, Golf. Even if this could be called a "meeting" under Colorado law (and the case law is clear that it isn't), Personnel matters are excepted in the statute itself. Further, the Colorado Supreme Court has found that school boards are not covered under the statute.
Bottom line the press did a terrible job on this one.
All of this over a total of 11 letters from parents.
He is getting some local support.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
Originally Posted by a catcher's dad:
He is getting some local support.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
The meeting tonight was heated. While many former players offered support and one junior, the core of the team put it this way:
“We are not here to be sour grapes, we are not here to beg for more playing time — we all play, we’re all starters,” Burkart said. “We respect Jim as a person. That’s not why we’re here. But, when our futures and our baseball careers are in jeopardy, we need to take action.”
For the most part, the problem seems to be the son/assistant who apparently sent threatening texts telling kids they could only play baseball and threatening to not recommend them to college coaches if they didn't play on the summer team. Burkhart, a senior ss who is a major D1 prospect broke away and played for another team despite the threats.
The phrase I keep hearing from supporters that bothers me is "his record speaks for itself." I think they've created a culture up their that values winning over everything else. Unfortunately, it looks to be a matter where the coach has let his son put him in a bad spot.
Originally Posted by roothog66:
Originally Posted by a catcher's dad:
He is getting some local support.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
http://blogs.denverpost.com/pr...y-experincing/17560/
The meeting tonight was heated. While many former players offered support and one junior, the core of the team put it this way:
“We are not here to be sour grapes, we are not here to beg for more playing time — we all play, we’re all starters,” Burkart said. “We respect Jim as a person. That’s not why we’re here. But, when our futures and our baseball careers are in jeopardy, we need to take action.”
For the most part, the problem seems to be the son/assistant who apparently sent threatening texts telling kids they could only play baseball and threatening to not recommend them to college coaches if they didn't play on the summer team. Burkhart, a senior ss who is a major D1 prospect broke away and played for another team despite the threats.
The phrase I keep hearing from supporters that bothers me is "his record speaks for itself." I think they've created a culture up their that values winning over everything else. Unfortunately, it looks to be a matter where the coach has let his son put him in a bad spot.
If it is true that those texts were sent, the fact that the school board hasn't fired him is testament to them valuing winning over everything.
Threatening to hurt a player's chance to play in college just because he doesn't want to play for your summer team is an incredibly vindictive move. Obviously the coach cares more about his own legacy and resume, than the future success of his players. In my opinion that's completely backwards from how a high school coach should conduct himself.
I got the feeling watching last night's board meeting (via periscope) that Coach Danley has gotten caught up in protecting his son. Everything mentioned was the product of moves by Kirk, who runs the summer and fall programs and is an assistant. He's been there over a decade and it's looking like he's going to bring his dad down.
Originally Posted by roothog66:
I got the feeling watching last night's board meeting (via periscope) that Coach Danley has gotten caught up in protecting his son. Everything mentioned was the product of moves by Kirk, who runs the summer and fall programs and is an assistant. He's been there over a decade and it's looking like he's going to bring his dad down.
Based on this article is certainly appears that Danley's son might be the larger issue there...
http://www.greeleytribune.com/...s-from-both-sides-on
Interesting quote from Danley to the Greeley Tribune after the meeting:
"We’re going to listen to everybody, and where we need to make adjustments, we’re going to do it.”
Maybe this can be resolved. Maybe this is the first time it really hit him what his son was doing to his program?
Based on everything I've read on here from roothog and the various articles I would venture to say that in NC that everything the son has done would be a violation of the NCHSAA rules. I don't know what the rules are in CO but my guess is they are very similar. Summer stuff is optional and you cannot make it mandatory of anyone.
Dad needs to rein his son in a lot but the solution is simple if it's similar to what we do in NC - the board of education says that the son will no longer be a volunteer coach. In order for me to hire a person as a volunteer coach (someone not employed as a teacher or any other capacity in the system) I have to have them fill out a form, they must get finger printed and then the BOE approves them. The whole process takes about 3 - 4 weeks. The BOE can just say the son is no longer able to coach. Now if that stuff continues then you know it's coming from the head coach and you can deal with him.
The following is from one of the articles listed at the bottom of the screen ...
Many of the incidents described in the story accuse Kirk Danley of bullying players. Jim said he’s never witnessed such behavior from his son and summertime assistant coach.
“I have never seen a reaction or interaction between kids and Kirk that wasn’t positive in nature,” Jim said. “Surely if this had been an issue and a valid one, why would no one have brought this up until now? Kirk has been working with me for a decade or so, and I’ve never heard the first word about (bullying).”
im guessing the dad is going down for protecting his son. He was probably attempting to create a scenario where Danley's coach the team for seventy, eighty years. I'm guessing at the least the kid never coaches there again. the dad will probably walk in support and become a martyr. I would hate to be the next coach who doesn't win.
What I see is a legacy where the community and the team have become more important than the futures of the players. For most kids their plan works. For serious baseball prospects it's bullying to threaten their futures if they play outside the program. I believe what we have here is an older man who isn't going to change. He walked four miles to school, uphill both ways in three feet of snow. If it was good enough for him it's good enough for the kids. He's never heard of the word "change" or "adapt."
Originally Posted by RJM:
Jim said. “Surely if this had been an issue and a valid one, why would no one have brought this up until now? Kirk has been working with me for a decade or so, and I’ve never heard the first word about (bullying).”
Of course he hasn't. Everyone is afraid of rocking the boat with the Dad and jeopardizing their HS Varsity future. What 15-16 yr old is going to want to go out on that limb if they've played ball their entire life with the goal of playing HS Varsity or beyond. The upperclassmen are at the point where they'd rather weather their final year or two since they're "made" at that point.
Sounds like this guys son is a clown and this has been building for years. Finally coming to a head where parents are saying enough is enough. Sound like the coach has his own set of rose colored glasses when viewing his son. Ironic . . . .
Originally Posted by Nuke83:
Originally Posted by RJM:
Jim said. “Surely if this had been an issue and a valid one, why would no one have brought this up until now? Kirk has been working with me for a decade or so, and I’ve never heard the first word about (bullying).”
Of course he hasn't. Everyone is afraid of rocking the boat with the Dad and jeopardizing their HS Varsity future. What 15-16 yr old is going to want to go out on that limb if they've played ball their entire life with the goal of playing HS Varsity or beyond. The upperclassmen are at the point where they'd rather weather their final year or two since they're "made" at that point.
Sounds like this guys son is a clown and this has been building for years. Finally coming to a head where parents are saying enough is enough. Sound like the coach has his own set of rose colored glasses when viewing his son. Ironic . . . .
I imagine it's been the culture for a long while. Especially since no one out of Eaton has ventured away form their summer programs. However, I also wonder if it hasn't really picked up until the last year or so with the bullying and multisport discouragement because Kirk was trying to put his stamp on a program he was planning to take over soon.
Anything new on this? Haven't seen any news online about the School District has taken any vote or action. Anyone in the area heard anything? From the deafening silence I'd venture a guess that both sides are lawyered up pretty heavily and have self imposed gag orders going on.
All is quiet in Eaton. There has been no news for a couple of weeks. My assumption is that they are working on something both sides can agree on and that both sides have incentive to keep it as quiet as possible.