Bluegrassrivals

wow, thats awful. having 4 different head coaches in 4 years at a school like dunbar is rediculous. its going to be very tough, nearly impossible to find an experienced coach to take that job. and the players are the ones getting punished

Any link to an article? I'll update the Job Openings list if I can find some confirmation. Thanks.

Wow, I feel really bad for those kids

Dunbar High School has a record of 112-129.

Mike Meighan (11) 62-62
Mark Peach (2) 17-8
Fred Barnott (2) 14-10
David Hensley (3) 15-20
Jason Howell (2) 3-19
Bob Lawson (1) 1-10

Looks like Mark Peach had some good seasons. What happened there?

LWC Wrote:Looks like Mark Peach had some good seasons. What happened there?

became head coach at campbellsville university, currently, he is the head coach at anderson county

I hear there are a small group of parents that support the coach and a larger group that just complains about everything to the principal. She in turns comes down on the coaching staff. Buddy of mine said they made them stop the FCA program that the team had going. Same buddy teaches there says track and womens basketball coaches are resigning as well.

Neersfan Wrote:I hear there are a small group of parents that support the coach and a larger group that just complains about everything to the principal. She in turns comes down on the coaching staff. Buddy of mine said they made them stop the FCA program that the team had going. Same buddy teaches there says track and womens basketball coaches are resigning as well.

Sounds to me like they could use a new principal that will stand up support the coaches. Could be one of them that would just as soon drop the programs that cause a little headache. I wonder how many principals they have had over the 21 years.

Dunbar is an academic school first. The principal's job should not hinge on the performance of the football team or the turnover among its coaches. Obviously, you cannot build a football program by changing coaches every season, but as long as Dunbar students perform well academically, I doubt that the principal's job will be in any jeopardy.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:Dunbar is an academic school first. The principal's job should not hinge on the performance of the football team or the turnover among its coaches. Obviously, you cannot build a football program by changing coaches every season, but as long as Dunbar students perform well academically, I doubt that the principal's job will be in any jeopardy.

True...BUT, good academics and good athletic programs can go hand in hand. Student morale, school pride, etc. can all be enhanced by both outstanding academic performances and athletic performances. I have a cousin who played under Meighan, and to this day he is filled with Dunbar pride. Look at Pikeville, Lex Cath, etc., those programs excel in both areas and have tremendous fan followings because of the pride in the school in both arenas. Can't imagine WHY in the world they would drop the FCA program, that is a wonderful program. But Dunbar has been plagued with some bad coaching hires. Wasn't there a scandal not too long ago about the baseball coach (I think) who allegedly mishandled booster money? What happened to them? What was done to enhance the integrity of the athletic department afterwards? That school needs a strong principal AND a strong Athletic Director who are both committed to excellence in academics and athletics.

PHSForever Wrote:True...BUT, good academics and good athletic programs can go hand in hand. Student morale, school pride, etc. can all be enhanced by both outstanding academic performances and athletic performances. I have a cousin who played under Meighan, and to this day he is filled with Dunbar pride. Look at Pikeville, Lex Cath, etc., those programs excel in both areas and have tremendous fan followings because of the pride in the school in both arenas. Can't imagine WHY in the world they would drop the FCA program, that is a wonderful program. But Dunbar has been plagued with some bad coaching hires. Wasn't there a scandal not too long ago about the baseball coach (I think) who allegedly mishandled booster money? What happened to them? What was done to enhance the integrity of the athletic department afterwards? That school needs a strong principal AND a strong Athletic Director who are both committed to excellence in academics and athletics.

I don't disagree with anything you said and I am not familiar with the individuals involved. If Dunbar's principal has a strong commitment to academics, then its supporters should feel lucky. Not all high schools are as fortunate and a stable, successful football program is no substitute for a principal who is committed to academics. It is hard to understand why, with Dunbar's tax base, it cannot have both.

Hoot Gibson Wrote:Dunbar is an academic school first.

All grade schools, high schools, and post-secondary schools are SUPPOSED to be academic first. Ecspecially when tax dollars are helping fund the school.

And I agree, the principal's job should not hinge on the performance of the football team or the turnover among its coaches. And I don't think the principal is at question here. With that said, when you have coaches coming and going like that, it can really effect the students involved in the program.

I've been fortunate to play college football and coach high school football, and I've seen players grades drop after the season is over and/or after the head coach or most of the coaches leave, at both levels. Now most of the time, they only drop a letter grade, but that could be a trend that could start a Dunbar (knock on wood)

Hoot Gibson Wrote:I don't disagree with anything you said and I am not familiar with the individuals involved. If Dunbar's principal has a strong commitment to academics, then its supporters should feel lucky. Not all high schools are as fortunate and a stable, successful football program is no substitute for a principal who is committed to academics. It is hard to understand why, with Dunbar's tax base, it cannot have both.

You have got to be the principal. Dunbar has smart kids because they have smart parents. It dont have squat to do with the principal. She got out of the classroom because she couldn't or didn't want to teach. The community doesnt rally around the math team.

Eddy Creek Bay Wrote:You have got to be the principal. Dunbar has smart kids because they have smart parents. It dont have squat to do with the principal. She got out of the classroom because she couldn't or didn't want to teach. The community doesnt rally around the math team.

:thatsfunn

...Wow...That may be THE most inane statement I've read in a very long time. Seriously? Kids are smart because their parents are? No, it doesn't quite work that way. Kids are smart because they choose to be disciplined with their academics, work hard at it, and their parents are supporting academics in the home and ensuring that is the focus of school, not just athletics. I'm a father of two kids, both of whom have over 3.0 gpa's, and both excel in athletics, but understand if they don't make the grades, I will sit them down even if the coach won't. A strong principal can make a huge difference in a school

PHSForever Wrote::thatsfunn

...Wow...That may be THE most inane statement I've read in a very long time. Seriously? Kids are smart because their parents are? No, it doesn't quite work that way. Kids are smart because they choose to be disciplined with their academics, work hard at it, and their parents are supporting academics in the home and ensuring that is the focus of school, not just athletics. I'm a father of two kids, both of whom have over 3.0 gpa's, and both excel in athletics, but understand if they don't make the grades, I will sit them down even if the coach won't. A strong principal can make a huge difference in a school

Really? Maybe you should try not looking though at the world through rose colored glasses. The socioeconomic environments and the family(s) that he/she come from has a whole heck of a lot more to do with how they perform academically than most want to admit. Tell ya what, why don't you head up to Jefferson County and check out Iroquis HS, Shawnee and some others that the state is all over and show me how many of those kids come from 1) Homes where there parents are either still married or, if they aren't married, both parents play active roles in their lives 2) see how many of those parents have college degrees, let alone hold a steady job 3) See how many of the kids at those schools live under the poverty level and are on free/reduced lunch 4) See how many of those kids live in areas of high crime rates on a daily basis.

You talk about why kids are successful, and everyone of the reasons you gave are dead on; but, where do you think they learn those values? Do they at school? Sure, but most of those come from home. (once again, see the kids at Dunbar and their home lives, compared to some of those in Jefferson County)

You somewhat contradicted yourself, telling the expectations that you, as a parent, have for your kids. The kids at Dunbar, for the most part, come from homes just like your kids are fortunate to come from. The kids at the school in Jefferson County that I named don't have that luxury.

Also, I agree with Eddy Creek Bay about Principals (although, there are some out there that do make a huge difference in the schools academics), I've personally never met a principal that said, "I got into administration because I enjoyed being in the classroom all day."

You show me a top knotch academic school and Ill show you a community full of parents that have extremely high expectations (academic and athletic to go along with work ethic as a whole) placed upon their children from the time they are able to walk and talk.

PHSForever Wrote::thatsfunn

...Wow...That may be THE most inane statement I've read in a very long time. Seriously? Kids are smart because their parents are? No, it doesn't quite work that way. Kids are smart because they choose to be disciplined with their academics, work hard at it, and their parents are supporting academics in the home and ensuring that is the focus of school, not just athletics. I'm a father of two kids, both of whom have over 3.0 gpa's, and both excel in athletics, but understand if they don't make the grades, I will sit them down even if the coach won't. A strong principal can make a huge difference in a school

Go walk into the homes of the students that come from Manual, Highlands, Beechwood, Male, Elizabethtown, Bowling Green, Beechwood, etc. and see if your reasoning behind this doesn't change. It will change, whether or not you want to face the facts, is another story.

PHSForever Wrote::thatsfunn

...Wow...That may be THE most inane statement I've read in a very long time. Seriously? Kids are smart because their parents are? No, it doesn't quite work that way. Kids are smart because they choose to be disciplined with their academics, work hard at it, and their parents are supporting academics in the home and ensuring that is the focus of school, not just athletics. I'm a father of two kids, both of whom have over 3.0 gpa's, and both excel in athletics, but understand if they don't make the grades, I will sit them down even if the coach won't. A strong principal can make a huge difference in a school

Think about this, and heaven forbid this ever has to be a choice for any of us, but let's say your kids one day have to go live with one of two families, and you have to make the decision:

1) A family that lives in a middle-upper class neighborhood or home out in the county, with both adults holding 40+ hour work weeks in their careers (one or both having a college education degrees) or maybe the couple is divorced, yet both parents still play major roles in their lives along with the other attributes I mentioned above

-OR-

2) a family that lives in government housing, one parent only having a high school diploma (the other dropping out of school), neither read above a 3rd grade level and only one of them holds any kind of a steady job; part-time at that.

Which one do you want your kids by the rest of their lives? I know which one I want mine to be raised by and that's family #1 (did I probabaly just piss some people off, yep, sure did and don't care)? What say you?

So instead of taking a cell phone, computer, x-box, car away from your kid, you will make them miss sports. I am glad you were not my dad. I am sure practice is harder than not playing on the computer. Make your kids miss out on sports is not why they may do bad in school.

So when they miss due to you, do you expect the coach to JUST let them start again not knowing if you are going to just take them away again. Or are you going to complain about it.

Harry Doyle Wrote:Really? Maybe you should try not looking though at the world through rose colored glasses. The socioeconomic environments and the family(s) that he/she come from has a whole heck of a lot more to do with how they perform academically than most want to admit. Tell ya what, why don't you head up to Jefferson County and check out Iroquis HS, Shawnee and some others that the state is all over and show me how many of those kids come from 1) Homes where there parents are either still married or, if they aren't married, both parents play active roles in their lives 2) see how many of those parents have college degrees, let alone hold a steady job 3) See how many of the kids at those schools live under the poverty level and are on free/reduced lunch 4) See how many of those kids live in areas of high crime rates on a daily basis.

You talk about why kids are successful, and everyone of the reasons you gave are dead on; but, where do you think they learn those values? Do they at school? Sure, but most of those come from home. (once again, see the kids at Dunbar and their home lives, compared to some of those in Jefferson County)

You somewhat contradicted yourself, telling the expectations that you, as a parent, have for your kids. The kids at Dunbar, for the most part, come from homes just like your kids are fortunate to come from. The kids at the school in Jefferson County that I named don't have that luxury.

Also, I agree with Eddy Creek Bay about Principals (although, there are some out there that do make a huge difference in the schools academics), I've personally never met a principal that said, "I got into administration because I enjoyed being in the classroom all day."

You show me a top knotch academic school and Ill show you a community full of parents that have extremely high expectations (academic and athletic to go along with work ethic as a whole) placed upon their children from the time they are able to walk and talk.

While I'm not disagreeing with socioeconomic factors as impacts, you can NOT solely base "smart parents equals smart kids" as a theory for the success or lack thereof, of a school. I know PLENTY of smart people who come from disadvantaged environments, who have parents who are not so smart, and vice versa.

My whole point was based on that one remark. There are MANY factors that figure into the success of a child in educational settings. Saying that a school is full of smart kids only if they also have smart parents is insipid, no matter how you slice it.

Harry Doyle Wrote:Go walk into the homes of the students that come from Manual, Highlands, Beechwood, Male, Elizabethtown, Bowling Green, Beechwood, etc. and see if your reasoning behind this doesn't change. It will change, whether or not you want to face the facts, is another story.

I HAVE been in many of those homes. I HAVE seen students who, faced with the factors of economic disadvantages, lack of parental support in education, still find a way to raise above those negative influences. Likewise, I have been in homes in which the child has EVERY advantage known to man given to them by virtue of their economic/social standing, and yet they struggle to finish high school, and many times never go to college or finish college. Those homes you speak of in the neighborhoods of Louisville, Lexington, Bowling Green, et al? I've BEEN in them. I've ridden down the streets of West Louisville while searching for a missing child, talking to drug dealers on the corners who were just as interested in finding them as I was, but only because they needed a new mule. I've got nothing to prove to anyone here, I was simply pointing out, as I mention in another post, that basing Doyle's theory of success on kids having smart parents is ridiculous.

former Wrote:So instead of taking a cell phone, computer, x-box, car away from your kid, you will make them miss sports. I am glad you were not my dad. I am sure practice is harder than not playing on the computer. Make your kids miss out on sports is not why they may do bad in school.

So when they miss due to you, do you expect the coach to JUST let them start again not knowing if you are going to just take them away again. Or are you going to complain about it.

If sports is taking time away from the education, yes, I will make them miss. Each year, I explain to the coaches that I and my wife have high expectations, and that if they are making below a B in any class, that grade has to come up. The coaches FULLY support it, even to the point of requiring that the students (not just my kids) bring their homework with them on the road and he/she checks to make sure they are doing it during downtime. And the phone, Xbox, etc. is a given. Those go too, until grades get pulled up. I value the experiences, discipline, teamwork, and leadership that sports teaches my children, just like it taught me. But when you look at how many kids are actually going to make a living in sports, and do it objectively, you would have the same thoughts. I'm getting the impression that you don't have kids. My kids have never missed in sports for the very reason they know the consequences and the value we place on academics. But when they ARE on the field or court, they give 110%, same as education.

PHSForever Wrote:I HAVE been in many of those homes. I HAVE seen students who, faced with the factors of economic disadvantages, lack of parental support in education, still find a way to raise above those negative influences. Likewise, I have been in homes in which the child has EVERY advantage known to man given to them by virtue of their economic/social standing, and yet they struggle to finish high school, and many times never go to college or finish college. Those homes you speak of in the neighborhoods of Louisville, Lexington, Bowling Green, et al? I've BEEN in them. I've ridden down the streets of West Louisville while searching for a missing child, talking to drug dealers on the corners who were just as interested in finding them as I was, but only because they needed a new mule. I've got nothing to prove to anyone here, I was simply pointing out, as I mention in another post, that basing Doyle's theory of success on kids having smart parents is ridiculous.

I, nor Eddy Creek Bay ever said that it was the sole reason. Tell ya what, if you and I had the choice of going to 1 of 2 schools in hopes of building a successfull academic team, you take the kids that come from the disadvantaged homes by and large and Ill take the kids that come from the other (not saying I don't enjoy the kids from the rougher backgrounds, because I do. As a matter of fact, I take great pride and enjoyment of wanting the ones that nobody else wants, but reality is also reality).

You aren't the only one who has been in those streets, looking for and maybe even teaching those types of kids.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule(s), we all went to school with screw ups that came from both backgrounds, but BY IN LARGE, if I'm betting on who will become successfull individuals later in life, I'm taking the kids the kids from the schools I mentioned.

I choose not to live in 'Never Never Land'.

well if my kid made a C in AP Pre Calculus, I would let him play.

I agree with grades being important, but to take that away to me is the wrong message, but every parent has there own ways.

PHSForever Wrote:If sports is taking time away from the education, yes, I will make them miss. Each year, I explain to the coaches that I and my wife have high expectations, and that if they are making below a B in any class, that grade has to come up. The coaches FULLY support it, even to the point of requiring that the students (not just my kids) bring their homework with them on the road and he/she checks to make sure they are doing it during downtime. And the phone, Xbox, etc. is a given. Those go too, until grades get pulled up. I value the experiences, discipline, teamwork, and leadership that sports teaches my children, just like it taught me. But when you look at how many kids are actually going to make a living in sports, and do it objectively, you would have the same thoughts. I'm getting the impression that you don't have kids. My kids have never missed in sports for the very reason they know the consequences and the value we place on academics. But when they ARE on the field or court, they give 110%, same as education.

I don't think you are realizing that you are agreeing with exactly what Eddy and myself said. It's because of parents like you, by in large, that kids become successful.

Are there kids that are brought up just as your kids are, that become low lifes? Sure there is. Are there kids that come from low socioeconomic/educational levels at home? Sure there is.

There's also going to be the random flat chested woman win Playmate of the Year every now and then, also.

Harry Doyle Wrote:Think about this, and heaven forbid this ever has to be a choice for any of us, but let's say your kids one day have to go live with one of two families, and you have to make the decision:

1) A family that lives in a middle-upper class neighborhood or home out in the county, with both adults holding 40+ hour work weeks in their careers (one or both having a college education degrees) or maybe the couple is divorced, yet both parents still play major roles in their lives along with the other attributes I mentioned above

-OR-

2) a family that lives in government housing, one parent only having a high school diploma (the other dropping out of school), neither read above a 3rd grade level and only one of them holds any kind of a steady job; part-time at that.

Which one do you want your kids by the rest of their lives? I know which one I want mine to be raised by and that's family #1 (did I probabaly just piss some people off, yep, sure did and don't care)? What say you?

Of course, given the extreme differences presented by you, I'd want my kids raised in home #1. BUT, be advised that this still is getting away from the point that Doyle was trying to make in his comment, and that was that he/she thinks that is parents are smart, kids automatically are too. NOT true, just saying. Let's get back to the point of this thread, okay? I'm not going to address this point anymore, and if you or any other commenter can't get the point I am making, your loss.

former Wrote:well if my kid made a C in AP Pre Calculus, I would let him play.

I agree with grades being important, but to take that away to me is the wrong message, but every parent has there own ways.

I agree former. I'm a parent as well. If they make a "C", Ill be sure to let the coach handle it when they get done with practice and Ill also handle it once they get home for however long it takes to send home the message.

Personally, I think keeping them out of extra-curriculars altogether for making a "C" not only hurts the individual, but also the team.

Harry Doyle Wrote:I, nor Eddy Creek Bay ever said that it was the sole reason. Tell ya what, if you and I had the choice of going to 1 of 2 schools in hopes of building a successfull academic team, you take the kids that come from the disadvantaged homes by and large and Ill take the kids that come from the other (not saying I don't enjoy the kids from the rougher backgrounds, because I do. As a matter of fact, I take great pride and enjoyment of wanting the ones that nobody else wants, but reality is also reality).

You aren't the only one who has been in those streets, looking for and maybe even teaching those types of kids.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule(s), we all went to school with screw ups that came from both backgrounds, but BY IN LARGE, if I'm betting on who will become successfull individuals later in life, I'm taking the kids the kids from the schools I mentioned.

I choose not to live in 'Never Never Land'.

I apologize, after re-reading it, it was Eddy Bay Creek, not you, that made the statement:

"You have got to be the principal. Dunbar has smart kids because they have smart parents. It dont have squat to do with the principal. She got out of the classroom because she couldn't or didn't want to teach. The community doesnt rally around the math team."

Please see what I've bolded. THAT was the point I was addressing. No other factors were mentioned, just having smart parents, by this statement, is ensuring smart kids. I'm not in never never land.:biggrin:

PHSForever Wrote:Of course, given the extreme differences presented by you, I'd want my kids raised in home #1. BUT, be advised that this still is getting away from the point that Doyle was trying to make in his comment, and that was that he/she thinks that is parents are smart, kids automatically are too. NOT true, just saying. Let's get back to the point of this thread, okay? I'm not going to address this point anymore, and if you or any other commenter can't get the point I am making, your loss.

I didn't make the original comment, Eddy Creek did.

I believe all I did was add onto what Eddy meant altogether as a whole, as a shortened version of my response. How I replied is how I took his comment ,anyway? I do think, though, that intelligence has just as much to do with genetics as the color of eyes, stature of build, hair color, skin complextion, baldness, facial features, etc. does. Again, are there exceptions in a positive or negative turn? Sure. Always has been, always will.

Likewise, say hello to Peter Pan and Tinker Bell for me.

Harry Doyle Wrote:I don't think you are realizing that you are agreeing with exactly what Eddy and myself said. It's because of parents like you, by in large, that kids become successful.

Are there kids that are brought up just as your kids are, that become low lifes? Sure there is. Are there kids that come from low socioeconomic/educational levels at home? Sure there is.

There's also going to be the random flat chested woman win Playmate of the Year every now and then, also.

Sure, I do realize it. Then again, I'd probably make a C in AP pre-calculus. :biggrin: Let's move on, it became more of a debate than I wanted it to. We'll just agree to disagree. No big deal.