Navasota board surprisingly opts not to extend Fedora's contract

[Pepper Brooks]

Just now, oldschool2 said:

54-3 over the last 4 seasons.....and 109-30 in 10 years....

I don't see how any single person on this planet can coach.  If those numbers aren't enough to get a renewal then nothing is.  Those board members are fools...this has personal agenda written all over it.  5 admin recommendations and the Head Football Coach is only one that didn't go thru...?  Yeah...Navasota got the POPS (pissed off parent syndrome)

Well said! I guess little Johnny did not get enough playing time

[RattlerBlue]

 From what I've read on facebook, posted by a board member, they chose not to act on the motion considering Fedora still has one more year on his contract. Instead, they acted on more pressing issues and those whose contracts were ended this year.

There is no issue except the press misleading it's readers, myself included, stating, "Board No on Fedora Extension." The board has yet to vote on an extension for Fedora. This will probably happen at the next board meeting. And, from what I have gathered, Fedora will get an extension.

There is not a hidden agenda or any upset parents. The board members are upset as well. Something so innocent on their behalf has been blown out of proportion.

[dayton]

3 minutes ago, Rattler99 said:

 From what I've read on facebook, posted by a board member, they chose not to act on the motion considering Fedora still has one more year on his contract. Instead, they acted on more pressing issues and those whose contracts were ended this year.

There is no issue except the press misleading it's readers, myself included, stating, "Board No on Fedora Extension." The board has yet to vote on an extension for Fedora. This will probably happen at the next board meeting. And, from what I have gathered, Fedora will get an extension.

There is not a hidden agenda or any upset parents. The board members are upset as well. Something so innocent on their behalf has been blown out of proportion.

ahhh. thanks for filling us in. Media... smh

[Pepper Brooks]

3 minutes ago, Rattler99 said:

 From what I've read on facebook, posted by a board member, they chose not to act on the motion considering Fedora still has one more year on his contract. Instead, they acted on more pressing issues and those whose contracts were ended this year.

There is no issue except the press misleading it's readers, myself included, stating, "Board No on Fedora Extension." The board has yet to vote on an extension for Fedora. This will probably happen at the next board meeting. And, from what I have gathered, Fedora will get an extension.

There is not a hidden agenda or any upset parents. The board members are upset as well. Something so innocent on their behalf has been blown out of proportion.

Thanks for the update

[Raiders94]

You know that it is a shame that coaches have to deal with that kind of crap. You have little Johnny out there that's not cutting the mustard and his parents think he is the best thing sense sliced bread, and mom or dad is on the school board. Now they want the coach removed because little Johnny didn't start or play enough. I'm not on any school board, but I will say this, I told my son when he started school ball that he was on his own. If he don't cut the mustard then he rides the pine, end of story.

[Cougar14.2]

2 hours ago, LastCall said:

 

Are you serious?  It's not exactly easy either!  It's his ability to get the most out of the athletes, teach them the game, and have a better x's and o's mind than the guy on the other sideline.  The Fedora family has proven to do all of that.

 

"Its not extremely hard to coach athletes....."

 

For some it proves to be very hard..  Kenny Harrison and Toby Foreman say HI.  Look at Kirbyville before Jack Alvarez.  Did the athletes magically show up when he got the job?

I don't think you can go with the overall number of athletes on a team. You have to look at their athlete/talent level comparable to the classification. PAM was at best 5th talent-wise in 21-6A this past year and the results showed. I bet they look different in 5A next year when they're in the proper class. Same for Central, they're talented but if you would've moved them one district over to 21-5A they probably come in 4th athlete-wise. It would be pretty similar to Crosby with their athletes moving into the new district with Manvel, Texas City, Shadow Creek, Elkins and Marshall. I agree the good coaches can get more out of the good athletes they're given though.

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

4 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

54-3 over the last 4 seasons.....and 109-30 in 10 years....

I don't see how any single person on this planet can coach.  If those numbers aren't enough to get a renewal then nothing is.  Those board members are fools...this has personal agenda written all over it.  5 admin recommendations and the Head Football Coach is only one that didn't go thru...?  Yeah...Navasota got the POPS (pissed off parent syndrome)

So, by your comment, are we to assume that Win/Loss record is what educators/coaches' continued employment should be based upon?

[oldschool2]

14 hours ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

So, by your comment, are we to assume that Win/Loss record is what educators/coaches' continued employment should be based upon?

I didn't say that that's what their employment should be based on ONLY.  I personally think some of the best coaches in the state have never won a state title..or even come close to it.

But let's be honest....in what level of sports can you think of where coach's job performance isn't based on how many games they win?  That would be none.

[jumpmanfeva]

On 2/16/2016 at 3:06 PM, CardinalBacker said:

Now we know where McGallion is headed.  I mean, why would they settle for Fedora when you can have SILSBEE's coach?

I was attending NHS when McGallion was HC.  He was a very good guy.

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

1 hour ago, oldschool2 said:

I didn't say that that's what their employment should be based on ONLY.  I personally think some of the best coaches in the state have never won a state title..or even come close to it.

But let's be honest....in what level of sports can you think of where coach's job performance isn't based on how many games they win?  That would be none.

I'm not naive enough to think that winning is not one factor in their evaluation.  I would hope that it is not the most important factor.  It just always amazes me when a contract  does not get renewed, many folks are in disbelief because he/she won however many games.  Wouldn't a non-renewed contract for a coach that has an above average winning % be a clue that the decision has to do with something other than wins and losses?  Please tell me I'm not the only one who has ever had to fire one of my top performing employees because of something not related to performance measurables

 

[oldschool2]

17 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

I'm not naive enough to think that winning is not one factor in their evaluation.  I would hope that it is not the most important factor.  It just always amazes me when a contract  does not get renewed, many folks are in disbelief because he/she won however many games.  Wouldn't a non-renewed contract for a coach that has an above average winning % be a clue that the decision has to do with something other than wins and losses?  Please tell me I'm not the only one who has ever had to fire one of my top performing employees because of something not related to performance measurables

 

Firing someone is completely different.  If this coach would've been let go while in the middle of his contract, then yes I would've believed some kind of breach in contract had happened.  But when someone gets non renewed it's usually because the administration and/or school board is unhappy with the job performance.  And either wants to go a different direction or bring in someone that they feel can get the job done.  On the surface...it appears that there is no reason at all for the non renewal.  The sup made the recommendation, and according to the article was completely blind sided by the result and so was the coach.  That tells me a decision was made by enough board members that they want a new football coach.  Even if they decided to table the decision until the next meeting...why wait?  They got the recommendation...the coach produces results...what's the issue.

The athletic directors job is to ensure the success of all sports programs, handle budgets/stipends of all sports programs, and if they have head football tied to the job their job is also to produce results cocerning that sport.  I just don't get it.  They're pretty competitive in every sport...mishandling of funds could've resulted in being fired (like you talked about)...so what's the deal?  I hate to assume..  but it seems like personal agenda to me.

[AthleticSupporter - Jock]

8 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

Firing someone is completely different.  If this coach would've been let go while in the middle of his contract, then yes I would've believed some kind of breach in contract had happened.  But when someone gets non renewed it's usually because the administration and/or school board is unhappy with the job performance.  And either wants to go a different direction or bring in someone that they feel can get the job done.  On the surface...it appears that there is no reason at all for the non renewal.  The sup made the recommendation, and according to the article was completely blind sided by the result and so was the coach.  That tells me a decision was made by enough board members that they want a new football coach.  Even if they decided to table the decision until the next meeting...why wait?  They got the recommendation...the coach produces results...what's the issue.

The athletic directors job is to ensure the success of all sports programs, handle budgets/stipends of all sports programs, and if they have head football tied to the job their job is also to produce results cocerning that sport.  I just don't get it.  They're pretty competitive in every sport...mishandling of funds could've resulted in being fired (like you talked about)...so what's the deal?  I hate to assume..  but it seems like personal agenda to me.

I agree with most of what you said.  But I disagree about whether a coach/teacher/administrator would be "let go" in the middle of their contract.  If you've spent much time around the world of education then you know that many of our educators would not last 1 year in the private sector.  In the private sector, we fire people for way less than what goes on, or doesn't go on, in Academia. 

[oldschool2]

9 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

I agree with most of what you said.  But I disagree about whether a coach/teacher/administrator would be "let go" in the middle of their contract.  If you've spent much time around the world of education then you know that many of our educators would not last 1 year in the private sector.  In the private sector, we fire people for way less than what goes on, or doesn't go on, in Academia. 

There are certain things that can get an educator relieved of their duties immediately.  Most of them are criminal offenses...but I can assure you even educators can be put on administrative leave.  It happened to a coworker of my first wife for misappropriate handling of funds.

That's why I said if he would've been relieved of duties during contract I would know automatically that something had been done.  But I would like to see an explanation in this case. 

[One4All]

I was told, he threw his name in the Hat for other head coaching jobs, this year .Well before this contract renewal came up.....

[oldschool2]

5 minutes ago, One4All said:

I was told, he threw his name in the Hat for other head coaching jobs, this year .Well before this contract renewal came up.....

That isn't reason for non renewal.  Every single coach that has ever coached applies for other jobs.  Some want to see what will come of it...some use it as interview practice...some use it as leverage.  Nothing wrong with it.  If the Navasota school board wants a coach that refuses to explore other options then they might as well let a parent coach the team every single year.

[RETIREDFAN1]

10 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

 then they might as well let a parent coach the team every single year.

Don't give them any ideas........lol

[One4All]

27 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

That isn't reason for non renewal.  Every single coach that has ever coached applies for other jobs.  Some want to see what will come of it...some use it as interview practice...some use it as leverage.  Nothing wrong with it.  If the Navasota school board wants a coach that refuses to explore other options then they might as well let a parent coach the team every single year.

So cliche

[oldschool2]

16 minutes ago, One4All said:

So cliche

Which part?..

Do you honestly expect a coach to show 100% loyalty to a school district that only gives them a contracted job for 1 or 2 years at a time?  This right here is exactly why coaches explore options...because they know that any single year a board member can be the reason they have to search for a new job.  Might as well build up interview skills...my dad told me a long time ago.  "Son, get as much from them as you can while you can.  Because none of them care about you at all."  He wasn't necessarily talking about a school but I think that holds true with any job you have.  If they want a coach to retire at their school they should give contracts that don't run out.

[One4All]

59 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

That isn't reason for non renewal.  Every single coach that has ever coached applies for other jobs.  Some want to see what will come of it...some use it as interview practice...some use it as leverage.  Nothing wrong with it.  If the Navasota school board wants a coach that refuses to explore other options then they might as well let a parent coach the team every single year.

Coaches always so say get the bad end of the deal, they are the only ones who can leave or withdraw at any given moment..... it's always acceptable for coaches to leave & better his self off,,, it's frowned upon with anyone else.....  it's part of the territory

[oldschool2]

7 minutes ago, One4All said:

Coaches always so say get the bad end of the deal, they are the only ones who can leave or withdraw at any given moment..... it's always acceptable for coaches to leave & better his self off,,, it's frowned upon with anyone else.....  it's part of the territory

I never said I didn't know that it's part of the territory..  I know way too many people in education to not know that.  And no...coaches can't leave at any given moment..well..and not have some kind of negative consequence.  When they sign a contract there is a certain point in time where they have to honor that contract.  Just like there is a certain amount of time a school has to honor the contract that was given.  I guess it does work both ways...but this I can guarantee.  The reason a coach resigns from a school is almost always what's in the best interest for their career and/or family.  When a coach is non renewed the reason is usually based on the opinion of a group of board members that it could've and should've been done better.  I obviously don't know the exact statistics on that...but I'd be willing to bet a substantial amount of money that it's pretty one sided.

I will never take the side of a school district or board over that of a coach.  Unless the coach is in clear violation of their contract...I'll take their side.  Coaches are only limited to the amount of talent they have...parents and board members never want to hear that truth.

Unless I get a good reason for this non renewal...I will not be swayed.  And whether he may or may not have applied for other jobs is not a good reason.

[Uncle Pig]

Great thing about working in a bigger school...the school board has little or no say so in personnel decisions. The school board hires the supt, and he hires/fires/renews/non renews all other administrators. I really dont understand why boards have so much power in the smaller schools. I wonder what percent of board members in 1A-4A schools are lacking a college degree? Im going to go out on a limb and say its a very high percentage

[oldschool2]

17 minutes ago, Uncle Pig said:

Great thing about working in a bigger school...the school board has little or no say so in personnel decisions. The school board hires the supt, and he hires/fires/renews/non renews all other administrators. I really dont understand why boards have so much power in the smaller schools. I wonder what percent of board members in 1A-4A schools are lacking a college degree? Im going to go out on a limb and say its a very high percentage

I think that it's easy to spot a problem with smaller school school boards.  As an educator, you have to obtain a bachelor's degree and then pass a series of certification tests.  As an administrator, you have to do all that...and have a master's degree along with corresponding certification tests.  As a school board member...not only do you not have to meet any educational requirements whatsoever, you don't even really have to have a job.  Yeah they have to attend a training of some kind...however often.  But as long as you're there you've met the requirement.  They aren't tested over the content.

Teacher - Professional position with college degree and tested certification(s)
Principal/Athletic Director/Superintendent - Professional position with college degree(s) and tested certification(s)
School Board - may or may not have attended a college class.  Has to approve budget for entire campus.  Responsible for all hiring/firing decisions regardless of what is recommended.  
     Member 1-electricians helper
     Member 2-works for the city
     Member 3-unemployed
     Member 4-refinery
     Member 5-Farmer
     Member 6-unemployed
     Member 7-Barber
All 7 members probably were on the high school football team (and would've played college if the coach would've liked them), coach youth sports every single year in every single sport, and have kids in the school system.

Obviously..I know not every board is like this.  And I'm sure that are some school boards that do fantastic jobs.  But you know good and well that I just described a pretty good majority of small school school boards to an extent.

[Scatright]

22 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

I think that it's easy to spot a problem with smaller school school boards.  As an educator, you have to obtain a bachelor's degree and then pass a series of certification tests.  As an administrator, you have to do all that...and have a master's degree along with corresponding certification tests.  As a school board member...not only do you not have to meet any educational requirements whatsoever, you don't even really have to have a job.  Yeah they have to attend a training of some kind...however often.  But as long as you're there you've met the requirement.  They aren't tested over the content.

Teacher - Professional position with college degree and tested certification(s)
Principal/Athletic Director/Superintendent - Professional position with college degree(s) and tested certification(s)
School Board - may or may not have attended a college class.  Has to approve budget for entire campus.  Responsible for all hiring/firing decisions regardless of what is recommended.  
     Member 1-electricians helper
     Member 2-works for the city
     Member 3-unemployed
     Member 4-refinery
     Member 5-Farmer
     Member 6-unemployed
     Member 7-Barber
All 7 members probably were on the high school football team (and would've played college if the coach would've liked them), coach youth sports every single year in every single sport, and have kids in the school system.

Obviously..I know not every board is like this.  And I'm sure that are some school boards that do fantastic jobs.  But you know good and well that I just described a pretty good majority of small school school boards to an extent.

While I agree with your basic premise, I think it's a bit short sighted to say that those vocations listed represent uneducated people. Lots of those vocations represent many intelligent people that keep the world going around with their craft. I have spent some time around educators and some of them are absolute mouth breathers, administration included.

[purpleeagle]

I would love to see the professions of all you people who are running the school board down. Probably get a lot of truth stretching. There are other reasons for not renewing contracts. Probably things you are not aware of. Don't forget, the people elected these board members. I think you need to shift the blame on the people in that school  district. How many of these responders fall into the that category? One thing I have learned in law enforcement is that there are two sides to every story.

[oldschool2]

23 minutes ago, Scatright said:

While I agree with your basic premise, I think it's a bit short sighted to say that those vocations listed represent uneducated people. Lots of those vocations represent many intelligent people that keep the world going around with their craft. I have spent some time around educators and some of them are absolute mouth breathers, administration included.

It was just an example.  I'm not saying people in those professions are uneducated. No matter what I listed someone would've been offended I'm sure.  My point is that none of what I listed represents someone that has proper training for handling a budget in access of millions of dollars...in regards to how to spend it concerning education.  Nor does it represent a person that in any way knows (educationally) what may or may not be best for the students of that particular district.  That's all I'm saying.

And yes just like any profession on the planet...there are always those that don't do their job very well.  But the problem with smaller districts in particular...there is no competition for that person's spot.  Most likely..the school doesn't pay very well.  Which means you're going to get stuck with bad teachers, or teachers that are from there.  Personally I don't think teachers should be allowed to teach (their first year especially) in the school they graduated from.  I went to school with a guy who became a college professor.  The school we went to wouldn't hire alumni.  It is called educational inbreeding..they only hire professors that were educated somewhere else in order to bring in new ideas.  Sounds like a good idea to me..  But anyway..if you've met teachers and administrators that are "mouth breathers"..(I'm assuming I know what you mean).. then that's on the school for allowing incompetent people educate your children.  Only way to change it is raise teacher salaries and bring in some competition.