pistol43 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I mean that the "AD" job and the "head football" jobs are going to be separate. The AD is going to be in charge of the entire athletic department and the head football coach will run the football program. That is what you call Subtraction by Addition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachc45 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I mean that the "AD" job and the "head football" jobs are going to be separate. The AD is going to be in charge of the entire athletic department and the head football coach will run the football program. What you fail to recognize is that by separating the HC/AD you take money out of the HC job. At the 4A level most single school systems keep the jobs together so they can pay more. Most "good" coaches aren't going to take a job at whitehouse that pays less than their current job. Whitehouse isn't that good of a job!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I agree someone isn't going to leave their job to take less money. I'm just curious as to how all of you know how much the Whitehouse job is going to pay? Is that number made public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefRedCloud Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I agree someone isn't going to leave their job to take less money. I'm just curious as to how all of you know how much the Whitehouse job is going to pay? Is that number made public? Yes it will. Also you can look at Coach McFarlin's salary and use a little common sense and figure out it will significantly lower without the AD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
question Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Yes it will. Also you can look at Coach McFarlin's salary and use a little common sense and figure out it will significantly lower without the AD. And salary is not the only consideration...what about job security ? What asst. coach will uproot his family to come to a school that has just dismiised a fine gentleman coach with the winning record like this coach ? Look at the schools that have pulled a similar stunt and see what has happened to their academics as well as athletics ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
country Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Under the current Nac experiment (the soccer A.D.) the football program has won 4 lost 26 games. The previous four seasons were dramatically different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AthenianDem83 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 And salary is not the only consideration...what about job security ? What asst. coach will uproot his family to come to a school that has just dismiised a fine gentleman coach with the winning record like this coach ? Look at the schools that have pulled a similar stunt and see what has happened to their academics as well as athletics ? Whitehouse is going in the same direction that Athens did 14 years ago!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Whitehouse will be just fine. In fact, they will prosper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefRedCloud Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Whitehouse will be just fine. In fact, they will prosper. That is optimistic, but not necessarily true. The person hired will have greater impact on that than will Whitehouse. Will be harder to get a quality hire under those circumstances. Not impossible though. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigertough04 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Total control would be in control So if the AD is in control of the Athletic Program - the football coach would not be in "total" control. The football coach would have the - as long as we agree with the AD control. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanielLions23 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 There really bad year in and year out plus bad coaching.Even refs make fun of him. (Gotta best friend who is a ref.) Did he ref the Gilmer vs Henderson game? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flukeshot Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Didn't Troup run off their previous coach in rather dubious circumstances? And then they wound up with Dennis Alexander. Perfectly natural that folk want to see Whitehouse punished with a bad hire, but might want to wait and see who they do get before proclaiming that a series of 0-10 years are in the offing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
question Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Didn't Troup run off their previous coach in rather dubious circumstances? And then they wound up with Dennis Alexander. Perfectly natural that folk want to see Whitehouse punished with a bad hire, but might want to wait and see who they do get before proclaiming that a series of 0-10 years are in the offing. Your missing the point...why take the chance ? And as I recall the prior Troup teams had not had a record winning season so the "risks" do not compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StateChamps2014 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Didn't Troup run off their previous coach in rather dubious circumstances? And then they wound up with Dennis Alexander. Perfectly natural that folk want to see Whitehouse punished with a bad hire, but might want to wait and see who they do get before proclaiming that a series of 0-10 years are in the offing. Troup coach resigned due to a hostile environment made by a few people. The main person leading that brigade is gone too. It was unfortunate because he was a good coach but an even better man. Yes, we got lucky in getting Dennis Alexander but we also had the talent as does Whitehouse. I would hate to see "Whitehouse" punished and doing badly. It's unfair to the kids and the community who as a whole support the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pistol43 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 So if the AD is in control of the Athletic Program - the football coach would not be in "total" control. The football coach would have the - as long as we agree with the AD control. . $$$$$ Bingo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealTigers Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Willing to bet Surtain (ETBU former HC) will apply!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AthenianDem83 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Didn't Troup run off their previous coach in rather dubious circumstances? And then they wound up with Dennis Alexander. Perfectly natural that folk want to see Whitehouse punished with a bad hire, but might want to wait and see who they do get before proclaiming that a series of 0-10 years are in the offing. I will continue to support the new coach at Whitehouse, but I won't support the Whitehouse administration after being tight lipped about Coach McFarlin & not giving the tax payers of Whitehouse an upfront awnser!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foosball Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I will continue to support the new coach at Whitehouse, but I won't support the Whitehouse administration after being tight lipped about Coach McFarlin & not giving the tax payers of Whitehouse an upfront awnser!!! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 It is illegal for them to tell the public why they fired McFarlin. You can't go public with personnel matters in a school district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foosball Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 It is illegal for them to tell the public why they fired McFarlin. You can't go public with personnel matters in a school district. I know hey can't go public while under investigation, but once it's over it should become public record. As the state says, the citizens of Texas "do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Whether its ongoing or over they still can not legally discuss personnel matters. If your employer went public with why they fired you, you would sue them for every penny they have. Would you want your employer airing all of your dirty laundry to the media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foosball Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Whether its ongoing or over they still can not legally discuss personnel matters. If your employer went public with why they fired you, you would sue them for every penny they have. Would you want your employer airing all of your dirty laundry to the media? That's actually a misconception. I am an employer and you can discuss why a person was released. I'm not going to get in to the legalities on here about what and when you can and can't say something. You do have to be careful in certain situations. The problem is when someone cites "a different direction" as a reason that usually means they don't have one. Granted, Texas is an at-will state and you don't have to have a reason to fire someone but this board and superintendent are acting like they are covering something up. I, along with many don't believe there is anything to cover up, they just need to man up. People come on here and bash myself and others for asking a simple question. They act like they know everything but can back up nothing with facts so they resort to childish name calling and start degrading McFarlin's character, which is absurd. There are several rumors and alot of speculation as to "why" and time will tell if these are true. As for now we are going to move forward and support the new coach, staff, and kids and hopefully we can generate enough votes to go in a "new direction" with this board and super. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
question Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Whether its ongoing or over they still can not legally discuss personnel matters. If your employer went public with why they fired you, you would sue them for every penny they have. Would you want your employer airing all of your dirty laundry to the media? So now the coach has "dirty laundry"...drawers or socks ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OA5II Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 Whitehouse won't have any problems. According to the majority on this site; every coach brought up on this site is a good/great coach and an even better man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbrickwall04 Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 I think it's a downhill slide for whitehouse until they combine the ad/hc jobs again. IMHO, they won't be able to pay ne one enough $ to land a quality coach to trive like they have the past few years. Just look at Marshall, splitting the ad/hc job is just asking for a 2-8 or 1-9 season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now