Jump to content

Chapel Hill Program


Stankylegg
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, 68Hornet said:

If you have talent everywhere on the field and don't win, my experience is a lack of character by some key players.

I think the issue at hand is a decline in said talent in addition to disdain for how the current staff runs their day to day operations 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ETxFB299 said:

Sounds like Chapel Hill parents need to put that belt on their kids’ butts first and then see how it turns out at the school! 

I agree 100%. The only prob with that is the lack of parental structure nowadays. For some kids, the only accountability they have is school and sports. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My concerns aren’t just about winning football games. IMO to build a program you have to set a example to the underclassmen. They need to see that it don’t matter if your 3 rd string or college bound, discipline is a top priority no matter who you are. If they see kids acting out but still playing, they think it’s ok too. If they see a senior standout get benched for a game or two for disclipine, they will see it’s not tolerated so they are less likely to even go there. 

It’s not about how much talent we have or wins at this point imo. I think back to several years of watching Bullard. They were typically way undersized and didn’t have any standout talent. But they would fight with all they had until the last second, very disciplined, no stupid penalities, no pointing fingers, etc. I always had much respect for the coaching staff for how these kids played ball even without winning games. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DevelopQB said:

Is this a real possibility or is this just a few upset folks that are not happy?    

Pretty sure it is a squeaky wheel.  But like in politics and the PC environment it has caused rumors and talk.  It is a shame that a very few loud 'supporters' can cause so much damage for a athletic school system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/14/2018 at 4:10 PM, JugLine said:

Something has to change to stop this downward spiral. Kids that might have college potential aren’t being looked at because the stats are so poor or there is no productive film to see. There parents/family choose to make a change so there kid might get a better look. Griffin was a perfect example this year with the move to John Tyler which didn’t work out so he ended up having a monster season at brook hill and prob had a great time doing it. 

This statement backs up my point .

If a player is god enough the colleges will find them.   You mention stats in here.  You think college coaches base things on stats.

So a player moved to Brook Hill .   Had a monster season..... heck who wouldn’t have a monster season playing against that level of competition. 

I have sat in on a parent meeting before where the parent wants to know the chances of their son playing college football.  They want him to get a full scholarship.   Our HC who has won numerous state championships has told many of these parents his honest opinion .   

Just because a parent thinks their kid is college material doesn’t make it the coaches fault if the kid doesn’t get a scholarship 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2019 at 9:38 AM, DOB said:

Thank you ... well conceived expectations and observations ... from a coaching perspective, there are things that have been apparently been done recently I certainly can't wrap my head around - but to try to explain them would call for a judgement, which I hate to put in place without knowing all the reasons.

My concern for inquiring about future expectations was based mainly on the fact that in the last twenty years, there have been only six winning seasons and more or less dominated by a feast or famine scenario – Sitton won 28 over two seasons, but won only 23 in the next five – how and why did that happen? ... that's not a negative statement, just one based on available data …

Castles had a very respectable .543 winning percentage during his four-year tenure at CH … the rest of his continuing 17-year career he has been .683. Why the difference?

Point here is - asking if a sudden and immediate transactional alignment in the Win column possible? probable? I don't know - that's for the community to answer ... and realistically.

Transitioning into the District of Doom near the mid-point of the current decade certainly had an impact after years of competing in districts with Brownsboro, Bullard, Athens, Rusk, and the like earlier in the century – but I suspect that is only part of the story. That's not being critical of the latter list, it's just that I suspect they would not have had a very good showing in that group either.

It is obvious that making the right choice to begin with is achieving critical mass – and I don't think you can do that based on a resume and just one committee interview. The point here is that this trend of winning percentage may well effect what coach or coaches in the future will be interested applying for a job to try to build a stable program in a community with expectations that demand immediate, lofty, and substantial concrete results. What I'm interested in seeing the first year is putting kids on the field that compete – every play, against any opponent, in any weather or venue – that's something that can be built on. I want to see kids who have been coached – who have been put in the position and taught to make the right move at the right time to do their job. Kids that will respond to challenges – and respond with class. Things you may not see immediately in the win-loss column – but you can see it when you look directly into their eyes - those are the intangibles.

To have an impact on turning a program into a consistent winner, sometimes you have to build the intangibles first – if you do, the tangibles will usually follow. So what are the intangibles – they are most of those things that you mention: being a part of the community (a must in the old days, amazed at how many don't today), being a good role model, having a vested interest in the kids' personal well-being and development, and motivate their spirit to achieve through a solid work ethic. And you, the coach, have to be SINCERE – you don't do these things in order to win – you do these things to be successful – you do these things because they are the right things to do in kids lives. You can fool adults fairly easily – but you can't fool the kids – they always seem to know if you're being REAL. I have always observed that life is about timing and fit - together.

Thanks again for your response … and as for mine, it doesn't make it all correct – it just makes it mine … whatever happens, good luck in the future – the kids deserve the best effort in order to give the best effort.

 

 

 

Well said. I’m not expecting, nor is the community expecting to compete in a state championship every year like Carthage.  It would be nice to see that happen.  I believe that if the intangibles you talk of are built as a foundation for the program it will be evident to the parents and fans close to the program.  If this is taking place there is wiggle room in the win column at first, but the wins should follow suit soon.  When I say wins, I don’t mean 10-0 regular seasons.  I fully believe fans this year would have been happy to see a 4-6 season with contention to get in the playoffs.

CH has had 3 games (Crandall, Kilgore, & Palestine) this year that ended in losses where CH had a legitimate shot at winning.  The talent level was close to even, if not tilted towards CH.  I believe in those 3 games the intangibles you speak of are what decided the winner.

As far as the program over the last 20 years, there have been 5 different AD/HC.  I believe you can see how good a coach is pretty quick 1-2 years,  it you see how good his program is at year 3-5 and more towards year 5.

Turner made small improvements each year from 0-10 to 5-5 over 4 years and then moved on.

Norris made small improvements over 3 years from 2-8 to 6-5 and a playoff appearance, then resigned to move back closer to family. 

Castles completely changed the culture of the program and made improvements from 3-7 to 9-2 with his last 3 years making a 2nd round appearance. This was at a time when CH was playing Van, Brownsboro, Canton, Athens, Bullard, and Gilmer.  Keep in mind though that this was before Carthage was dominating things in a district of doom.  CH in 2006 played in a district where 4 kids ended up in the NFL, and had the likes of Jeremy Calhoun the 3A player of the year, and CH beat him and Van in the last week of the season in a win and go to the playoffs or lose and go to BBall situation.  CH had their first playoff win in a decade under Castles, but he resigned to move to a bigger program in Corsicana.

Sitton came in to a well oiled program that was budding out nicely, and had a tough first year.   Then back to back title game appearances.   The Championship year there were 4 games in a row where Ch was beat by all practice purposes, but the kids made spectacular plays and willed themselves to a victory (intangibles), otherwise CH loses in the second round to Waco La Vega.  This all tapered off.  Ask anyone watching the games week in and week out, and any former players.  Sitton wasn’t strong on discipline, he did not stress the little things (intangibles) like Castles did.   He was, however, an excellent defensive mind, but the offense was not competitive.  Right/wrong/indifferent had Sitton not made title game appearances, his tenure would have been shorter at CH I believe.

Sitton then resigns and CH has tons of trouble finding a new coach. I still wish I knew exactly why each coach pulled their name out.  Not the political answer, but their gut wrenching honest thoughts. 

Hooker comes in to the program and a lot of the community is frustrated from day one.   Some folks said give him the benefit of the doubt and let him have a fair chance.  Others said this was a bad hire and failure was eminent.  I am not just blowing smoke when I say Hooker was not present during offseason his first year. I know this from multiple athletes that I would question on how things were going. I would ask, “what are y’all up to in offseason, y’all working hard, is Hooker whipping y’all into shape, showing y’all how he does things.”   Multiple kids at different times said, “He’s not ever around” or “we’ve only seen Hooker twice.”  

To me you have to take this with a grain of salt.  Maybe Hooker has a real reason for how his offseason is running, let’s see how things shake out in the fall.  Season one comes and goes and CH is 3-7.  Not a wonderful season, but he’s a new coach with a new mindset and direction for the program, so let’s see how next offseason and season go.  Next offseason kids are saying the same things they were in his first offseason.  Next season those intangibles seem to have all but disappeared in a lot of the kids.  You see level of effort taper off once the opponent goes up on the scoreboard, you see pouting on the sideline, you see a starting QB throw interceptions in multiple games and not even make an attempt to tackle the returner, just walks off the field with his head down as the opponent takes it in for a TD.  You see kids fighting with each other on the sidelines, coaches fighting with each other sidelines.

All this is water under the bridge at this point, but we can learn from it.  Those intangibles you talk about are somewhat tangible, because they show up on the sidelines, when the score is majorly out of CH’s favor, when you see players away from the school, when you watch players and coaches interact.  I believe these intangibles won’t reflect on the win loss column immediately, but I believe they will have impact on subsequent years, and I believe CH should be in playoff contention most every year, if not every year, once a HC gets his feet wet and his program started.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bignasty said:

This statement backs up my point .

If a player is god enough the colleges will find them.   You mention stats in here.  You think college coaches base things on stats.

So a player moved to Brook Hill .   Had a monster season..... heck who wouldn’t have a monster season playing against that level of competition. 

I have sat in on a parent meeting before where the parent wants to know the chances of their son playing college football.  They want him to get a full scholarship.   Our HC who has won numerous state championships has told many of these parents his honest opinion .   

Just because a parent thinks their kid is college material doesn’t make it the coaches fault if the kid doesn’t get a scholarship 

 

My point is CH losing talent by transferring is a reflection on the team. Like it or not if a kid has potential but his team doesn’t help him exploit his potential, they do go under the radar. I don’t agree with the transfers for better looks as i think you show more heart and determination by staying and fighting for your team. You can have the best running back around but if he doesn’t have the offense to support him (blocking, schemes, etc) his numbers will be low  causing him less looks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stankylegg said:

Well said. I’m not expecting, nor is the community expecting to compete in a state championship every year like Carthage.  It would be nice to see that happen.  I believe that if the intangibles you talk of are built as a foundation for the program it will be evident to the parents and fans close to the program.  If this is taking place there is wiggle room in the win column at first, but the wins should follow suit soon.  When I say wins, I don’t mean 10-0 regular seasons.  I fully believe fans this year would have been happy to see a 4-6 season with contention to get in the playoffs.

CH has had 3 games (Crandall, Kilgore, & Palestine) this year that ended in losses where CH had a legitimate shot at winning.  The talent level was close to even, if not tilted towards CH.  I believe in those 3 games the intangibles you speak of are what decided the winner.

As far as the program over the last 20 years, there have been 5 different AD/HC.  I believe you can see how good a coach is pretty quick 1-2 years,  it you see how good his program is at year 3-5 and more towards year 5.

Turner made small improvements each year from 0-10 to 5-5 over 4 years and then moved on.

Norris made small improvements over 3 years from 2-8 to 6-5 and a playoff appearance, then resigned to move back closer to family. 

Castles completely changed the culture of the program and made improvements from 3-7 to 9-2 with his last 3 years making a 2nd round appearance. This was at a time when CH was playing Van, Brownsboro, Canton, Athens, Bullard, and Gilmer.  Keep in mind though that this was before Carthage was dominating things in a district of doom.  CH in 2006 played in a district where 4 kids ended up in the NFL, and had the likes of Jeremy Calhoun the 3A player of the year, and CH beat him and Van in the last week of the season in a win and go to the playoffs or lose and go to BBall situation.  CH had their first playoff win in a decade under Castles, but he resigned to move to a bigger program in Corsicana.

Sitton came in to a well oiled program that was budding out nicely, and had a tough first year.   Then back to back title game appearances.   The Championship year there were 4 games in a row where Ch was beat by all practice purposes, but the kids made spectacular plays and willed themselves to a victory (intangibles), otherwise CH loses in the second round to Waco La Vega.  This all tapered off.  Ask anyone watching the games week in and week out, and any former players.  Sitton wasn’t strong on discipline, he did not stress the little things (intangibles) like Castles did.   He was, however, an excellent defensive mind, but the offense was not competitive.  Right/wrong/indifferent had Sitton not made title game appearances, his tenure would have been shorter at CH I believe.

Sitton then resigns and CH has tons of trouble finding a new coach. I still wish I knew exactly why each coach pulled their name out.  Not the political answer, but their gut wrenching honest thoughts. 

Hooker comes in to the program and a lot of the community is frustrated from day one.   Some folks said give him the benefit of the doubt and let him have a fair chance.  Others said this was a bad hire and failure was eminent.  I am not just blowing smoke when I say Hooker was not present during offseason his first year. I know this from multiple athletes that I would question on how things were going. I would ask, “what are y’all up to in offseason, y’all working hard, is Hooker whipping y’all into shape, showing y’all how he does things.”   Multiple kids at different times said, “He’s not ever around” or “we’ve only seen Hooker twice.”  

To me you have to take this with a grain of salt.  Maybe Hooker has a real reason for how his offseason is running, let’s see how things shake out in the fall.  Season one comes and goes and CH is 3-7.  Not a wonderful season, but he’s a new coach with a new mindset and direction for the program, so let’s see how next offseason and season go.  Next offseason kids are saying the same things they were in his first offseason.  Next season those intangibles seem to have all but disappeared in a lot of the kids.  You see level of effort taper off once the opponent goes up on the scoreboard, you see pouting on the sideline, you see a starting QB throw interceptions in multiple games and not even make an attempt to tackle the returner, just walks off the field with his head down as the opponent takes it in for a TD.  You see kids fighting with each other on the sidelines, coaches fighting with each other sidelines.

All this is water under the bridge at this point, but we can learn from it.  Those intangibles you talk about are somewhat tangible, because they show up on the sidelines, when the score is majorly out of CH’s favor, when you see players away from the school, when you watch players and coaches interact.  I believe these intangibles won’t reflect on the win loss column immediately, but I believe they will have impact on subsequent years, and I believe CH should be in playoff contention most every year, if not every year, once a HC gets his feet wet and his program started.

well versed observations ... I don't know why the off-season is run like it appears to be ... but I can say this, often when a coach gets his first head coaching job they model what was modeled to them, especially if that takes place in program that is winning ... maybe someone will eventually express their concerns, and sit down with him or someone, and just say, "I was just wondering ... Why?"  Often, in smaller or tighter-knit communities (especially where the school IS the community), PERCEPTION can very quickly morph into REALITY - if not in actuality - then in the minds of those who are concerned.  This is specifically concerning where communication is lacking.  thanks again for your in depth thoughts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know coaching is a TOUGH job no doubt. Tons of pressure from the entire community and administration. High expectations for wins even if the talent isn’t there. I would not want the position.  

I remember watching a game and a starter came to the sideline after making a poor play and yelling “I don’t give a f_%#, we aren’t going to win anyways”. The kid went back in the next series. A large group of people in the stands heard it including the superintendent.  After the game, many were very upset by the kids actions and why they are allowed to act this way. It was embarrassing to the community. This type of stuff happened every week. So naturally the community is wondering...ok does the staff have any control over these kids, are there standards for these kids to meet. Hooker is a great man no doubt but i think people want to see him take a stand on poor behavior. It would have boasted him so well for him to approach the BS and handle it. Punish these kids with playing time. Make a statement to the players/community that this will not be tolerated. Parents wondering how can this be allowed when my child works hard and just wants to play while these other kids that play act terrible. (No I’m not a upset parent) but i am disappointed in the lack of control of the team. 

Again im not a coach but i do wonder how allowing this stuff would benefit my coaching abilities or the perception from the community  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2019 at 2:05 PM, Cougar12345 said:

Has always benefited from other head coaches for state championships. He was always an assistant. Not a head coach.

His head coaching record speaks for its self. Not very good.

Time to go in another direction. 

He put a full page add in the football program showcasing the teams he has coached on, the players he has coached, and all his accomplishments as a coach.  No doubt he’s been around and involved in some great things.  At the end of the day people want wins. Like I said before, I don’t think 10-0 is what the community expects from a guy, but 1-9 isn’t going to make people jump on your wagon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Stankylegg said:

He put a two page add in the football program showcasing the teams he has coached on, the players he has coached, and all his accomplishments as a coach.  No doubt he’s been around and involved in some great things.  At the end of the day people want wins. Like I said before, I don’t think 10-0 is what the community expects from a guy, but 1-9 isn’t going to make people jump on your wagon. 

Can you show us the ad?  We want to see what your talking about.   Wasn’t Brownsboro his first head job?  What players has he coached?   Just curious!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Stankylegg said:

He put a two page add in the football program showcasing the teams he has coached on, the players he has coached, and all his accomplishments as a coach.

Now that's one I've never heard of ... in my experience, that seems to be a little odd.  But maybe that's just me.

"Nothing is so common as the wish to be remarkable" - Shakespeare

And I'll credit this one to my Dad - when I got too big for my own athletic britches ... sure miss him.

whistle.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DevelopQB said:

Can you show us the ad?  We want to see what your talking about.   Wasn’t Brownsboro his first head job?  What players has he coached?   Just curious!

That's what I was wondering too.. think i read he won 2 state titles at LE. One as a coordinator and one as a position coach.  Still great, but the way this ad thing sounds, you would think he's been on staff at Aledo, Lake Travis, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dillonpanthers said:

That's what I was wondering too.. think i read he won 2 state titles at LE. One as a coordinator and one as a position coach.  Still great, but the way this ad thing sounds, you would think he's been on staff at Aledo, Lake Travis, etc. 

Sometimes the best assistant coach makes the worst head coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know where his job stands. As for my opinions on here, i have spoke to Hooker himself so I’m not even close to hiding behind a computer screen. It’s ok imo to have public opinions on here because smoaky has no impact on this matter when he entire community is taking about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jug line, you are a complete vagina coming on here and bashing the coach. In fact that’s probably why your boys don’t play. It’s genetic, they are vags like their daddy. Add to the fact that CH is horrible. Your kids are too bad to play on a horrible team. Lol, u r a tool and a bag.

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...