Con_Alma wrote:
It's not all about football. That's the point. It's about extending the educational experience through the efforts of trying to win football games.

You might "pick'em" apart but in the context of trying to win games the other program with that old school teacher is carrying out his duties in a manner that's consistent with the purpose of the extracurricular.

I don't know of many student/parents/alumni who would be happy losing but extending the educational experience. If you have a coach that is out of control that is one thing, but many coaches win a lot and teach the kids good life lessons as well. I don't need a coach to teach my sons to be satisfied with losing. To anyone in the stands it is all about football.

I would never hire coaches based on what "it is" to the people in the stands.

As soon as you make it "all about football" there's no reason to have taxpayer money funding it and have it affiliated with the pubic school system. Make it a club sport and get it out of the schools if it's all about football.

You are associating things with my comments that have nothing to do with them.

I too don't know many students/parents/alumni who would be happy losing but extending the educational experience. Why would you even bring that up? I though that was a given for all.

I don't need a coach to teach my sons to be satisfied with losing either. Why would you bring that up?

Con_Alma wrote: I don't need a coach to teach my sons to be satisfied with losing either. Why would you bring that up?

It's the black and white world view. If one dares to say that there are other important factors other than winning, these people will act like you said that attempting to win is unimportant. Not remotely the same statement, of course, but far easier to debate.

Wait, what? There's something more important than winning on Friday nigh in the fall? You must be joking.