Hayfield Football Coach Fired

[Anonymous]

Yeah why are some of these adults like this Apostle Karen lady hanging around a group of teen boys so much? Is she related to anyone on the team? How is she even allowed on the field at games or practices if she's not even a FCPS employee? And imagine if she was a he and he was hanging around a high school girls' soccer team like this? Inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting prior post as it explains what is specifically not allowed. Families can and do move in and out of communities all the time. Rule 27-9-2 is what is not allowed. By way of another example at a different school, found to violate this rule years ago because, among other things, was letting 8th grades dress in school uniforms and be on field during games, etc.

Anonymous wrote:As an interested third party in the Hayfield situation, I don’t think VHSL would be approaching this as “transfer violations”. As we are told by Hayfield insiders, the students have all been cleared. However, I believe the rule that seems like is broken is VHSL 27-9-1 for PROSELYTIZING, and specifically rule 27-9-2 #4 below. I have pasted the entire section if you don’t want to look it up yourselves. This would also be why there would be not forfeiture of games as there are no issues with the individuals, but that Hayfield has broken the letter and spirit of this rule and subject to disciplinary action as deemed appropriate.

27-9-1 PROSELYTIZING RULE-No member school or group of individuals representing the school shall subject a student from another school to undue influence by encouraging him/her to transfer from one school to another for League activities.

27-9-2 Interpretation: The appropriate District Committee shall decide what constitutes undue influence on the basis of the evidence presented in each case. Undue influence has generally been interpreted to mean an act by any person or group connected with the school or not connected with a school to persuade a student to enroll in a school outside the areas in which he/she resides or persuade his/her parents or guardian to move to the areas of another school. Some specific examples of undue influence are:
(1) Being asked to move by a member of the school faculty.
(2) Being asked to move by a booster organization or a member of such an organization.
(3) Being given tuition, free text books, allowance for transportation or consideration not afforded other students, athletic or nonathletic.
(4) Any other evidence that a transfer or enrollment was made because of athletic ability.

27-9-3 Penalty: Any school adjudged guilty of bringing such undue influence to bear upon a student through any individual connected with the school, either directly or indirectly, shall be subject to such disciplinary action as the appropriate District Committee or interDistrict Committee may impose.

In my opinion, this Hayfield season is the epitome of why this PROSELYTIZING rule exists, and again, in my opinion represents one of the major goals of the VHSL, which is 'fair play' between all high schools in Virginia. All high schools are not recruiting, and while some may do it on occasion with a kid or two every year, that is very hard to prove whether why one or two kids have transferred. When a high school, in the first year of a head coach coming to the school, gets ~20 kids from his former (state champion) high school, in addition to 2-3 other transfers from outside the county (private and public), with the majority transferring within a couple months of Hayfield announcing the new coach. If it looks, walks, and talks like a duck - it usually is (i.e if it looks, walks, and talk like recruiting, it usually is), and I am assuming VHSL has further evidence of this and why they are recommending the multi-year ban.

Well the problem is that the rule hasn’t been enforced. If you have coaches with teams ranked just as high as Hayfield doing this and those schools aren’t being penalized, it looks like Hayfield is being targeted.

Who else is doing this? Again, if you know and have specifics to your claim, it sounds like VHSL is listening. This might be the time to nail everybody. But so far all anyone gives as proof are a couple of names from decades past.

I mean everybody speeds. Not everyone gets caught. But most people would agree that when you’re going 95mph in a 45moh zone, you alhave broken the rules and should be disciplined!

Madison is guilty, Battlefield is guilty, Patriot is guilty, Stone Bridge is guilty, South County is even guilty of this.

If you know specifics, then go and report. You have to be able to prove it. Hayfield has admitted to it, so VHSL could pick it up. These other schools have not admitted it.

Admitted to what, if they admitted to something why is there an appeal. Make it make sense, if you can

You can transfer to another school all you want and follow all the eligibility rules. However, per the recruiting/proselytizing you cannot transfer only for athletic reasons. The families have admitted that they left their schools to play for Overton, not for any academic reason.

Why are they appealing? I’m assuming because they can and want to try to convince VHSL they didn’t do anything wrong. You know people always appeal when they get the option, right? Even when they know they are guilty,

So hypothetical I went to Dematha but live in Hayfield district, I most likely am going to Dematha because of their football (which they can recruit) I understand. A new coach comes back to Hayfield and I transfer back because now my child’s tuition is covered and as a parent I feel the new coach is better for my child than previous coach, it’s against a rule or something. Don’t I as a parent have the right to do what I see is in best interest of my child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please, tell us which other schools had 33+ transfers this year?

doesn’t matter how many transfers they had or what year they came. If a team had players that transferred in last year just to play football, they are just as much in violation of the rule.

can you name a single other school where that happened?

Soco
Fairfax
Westfields
Robinson

Where's the proof? Show us where they played this year, and last year.

You can go back to when they won states you can go back to when then had Oren Burks years also

[Anonymous]

The whole situation is sad and mostly being brought up by other coaches who don’t like the fact that Overton no longer in PWC and now in FFX Cty and beating their brains in. panini for example always has been always will be sore loser, know this first hand from when my kid was in school over 10 yrs ago. It’s ok when he beats ppl onside kicks when there already up and so forth but when it happens to him he crying like Devin Haney over the Ryan Garcia fight. He is just one of many area coaches that want to see Overton lose because honestly he’s a better coach and at the end of the day it’s still about ego

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting prior post as it explains what is specifically not allowed. Families can and do move in and out of communities all the time. Rule 27-9-2 is what is not allowed. By way of another example at a different school, found to violate this rule years ago because, among other things, was letting 8th grades dress in school uniforms and be on field during games, etc.

Anonymous wrote:As an interested third party in the Hayfield situation, I don’t think VHSL would be approaching this as “transfer violations”. As we are told by Hayfield insiders, the students have all been cleared. However, I believe the rule that seems like is broken is VHSL 27-9-1 for PROSELYTIZING, and specifically rule 27-9-2 #4 below. I have pasted the entire section if you don’t want to look it up yourselves. This would also be why there would be not forfeiture of games as there are no issues with the individuals, but that Hayfield has broken the letter and spirit of this rule and subject to disciplinary action as deemed appropriate.

27-9-1 PROSELYTIZING RULE-No member school or group of individuals representing the school shall subject a student from another school to undue influence by encouraging him/her to transfer from one school to another for League activities.

27-9-2 Interpretation: The appropriate District Committee shall decide what constitutes undue influence on the basis of the evidence presented in each case. Undue influence has generally been interpreted to mean an act by any person or group connected with the school or not connected with a school to persuade a student to enroll in a school outside the areas in which he/she resides or persuade his/her parents or guardian to move to the areas of another school. Some specific examples of undue influence are:
(1) Being asked to move by a member of the school faculty.
(2) Being asked to move by a booster organization or a member of such an organization.
(3) Being given tuition, free text books, allowance for transportation or consideration not afforded other students, athletic or nonathletic.
(4) Any other evidence that a transfer or enrollment was made because of athletic ability.

27-9-3 Penalty: Any school adjudged guilty of bringing such undue influence to bear upon a student through any individual connected with the school, either directly or indirectly, shall be subject to such disciplinary action as the appropriate District Committee or interDistrict Committee may impose.

In my opinion, this Hayfield season is the epitome of why this PROSELYTIZING rule exists, and again, in my opinion represents one of the major goals of the VHSL, which is 'fair play' between all high schools in Virginia. All high schools are not recruiting, and while some may do it on occasion with a kid or two every year, that is very hard to prove whether why one or two kids have transferred. When a high school, in the first year of a head coach coming to the school, gets ~20 kids from his former (state champion) high school, in addition to 2-3 other transfers from outside the county (private and public), with the majority transferring within a couple months of Hayfield announcing the new coach. If it looks, walks, and talks like a duck - it usually is (i.e if it looks, walks, and talk like recruiting, it usually is), and I am assuming VHSL has further evidence of this and why they are recommending the multi-year ban.

Well the problem is that the rule hasn’t been enforced. If you have coaches with teams ranked just as high as Hayfield doing this and those schools aren’t being penalized, it looks like Hayfield is being targeted.

Who else is doing this? Again, if you know and have specifics to your claim, it sounds like VHSL is listening. This might be the time to nail everybody. But so far all anyone gives as proof are a couple of names from decades past.

I mean everybody speeds. Not everyone gets caught. But most people would agree that when you’re going 95mph in a 45moh zone, you alhave broken the rules and should be disciplined!

Madison is guilty, Battlefield is guilty, Patriot is guilty, Stone Bridge is guilty, South County is even guilty of this.

If you know specifics, then go and report. You have to be able to prove it. Hayfield has admitted to it, so VHSL could pick it up. These other schools have not admitted it.

Admitted to what, if they admitted to something why is there an appeal. Make it make sense, if you can

You can transfer to another school all you want and follow all the eligibility rules. However, per the recruiting/proselytizing you cannot transfer only for athletic reasons. The families have admitted that they left their schools to play for Overton, not for any academic reason.

Why are they appealing? I’m assuming because they can and want to try to convince VHSL they didn’t do anything wrong. You know people always appeal when they get the option, right? Even when they know they are guilty,

So hypothetical I went to Dematha but live in Hayfield district, I most likely am going to Dematha because of their football (which they can recruit) I understand. A new coach comes back to Hayfield and I transfer back because now my child’s tuition is covered and as a parent I feel the new coach is better for my child than previous coach, it’s against a rule or something. Don’t I as a parent have the right to do what I see is in best interest of my child?

This one has been asked and answered, but so don’t have to go through 70 pages to find it:

Yes, parents move in and out of schools all the time. But schools can’t ask or otherwise persuade kids to attend for sports. The VHSL 27-9-1 rule looks to see if a school or group of individuals representing the school used undue influence to encourage a student at another school to transfer from one school to another for sports. So no one is saying families cannot move, but Hayfield had a ton of online postings and other evidence that was low hanging fruit for VHSL to decide they used undue influence to get enrollment because of athletic ability. And because there was SO much evidence of 27-9-1 violations (inadvertent still counts), the appeal would have been uphill for Hayfield to say it was all a misunderstanding by VHSL or to tell a compelling story in hopes to change current ban outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please, tell us which other schools had 33+ transfers this year?

doesn’t matter how many transfers they had or what year they came. If a team had players that transferred in last year just to play football, they are just as much in violation of the rule.

can you name a single other school where that happened?

Soco
Fairfax
Westfields
Robinson

Where's the proof? Show us where they played this year, and last year.

You can go back to when they won states you can go back to when then had Oren Burks years also

You go back, and show us rosters and proof. You are the one making the claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah why are some of these adults like this Apostle Karen lady hanging around a group of teen boys so much? Is she related to anyone on the team? How is she even allowed on the field at games or practices if she's not even a FCPS employee? And imagine if she was a he and he was hanging around a high school girls' soccer team like this? Inappropriate.

She does NOT have a player on the team. She's a groupie. She also posts photos of players on her instagram #creepy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah why are some of these adults like this Apostle Karen lady hanging around a group of teen boys so much? Is she related to anyone on the team? How is she even allowed on the field at games or practices if she's not even a FCPS employee? And imagine if she was a he and he was hanging around a high school girls' soccer team like this? Inappropriate.

She does NOT have a player on the team. She's a groupie. She also posts photos of players on her instagram #creepy.

Maybe they go to her sunday church service? Or her Sunday school?

[Anonymous]

Ummm still not appropriate to be so involved. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what poltics has to do with cheating in HS sports.

We can see what’s happening.

[Anonymous]

Decision not expected until Thurs (per inside nova). Also potential for further appeal to VHSL Exec Committee if/when VHSL decision is upheld.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Decision not expected until Thurs (per inside nova). Also potential for further appeal to VHSL Exec Committee if/when VHSL decision is upheld.

So 1st appeal results due Thurs and per article the 1st pairings to go out Sunday so presume 2nd appeal will happen before Sunday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah why are some of these adults like this Apostle Karen lady hanging around a group of teen boys so much? Is she related to anyone on the team? How is she even allowed on the field at games or practices if she's not even a FCPS employee? And imagine if she was a he and he was hanging around a high school girls' soccer team like this? Inappropriate.

She does NOT have a player on the team. She's a groupie. She also posts photos of players on her instagram #creepy.

Maybe they go to her sunday church service? Or her Sunday school?

The church she owns and pays herself a salary to work at? In Fredericksburg? An hour one way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what poltics has to do with cheating in HS sports.

We can see what’s happening.

I don't see any connection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Decision not expected until Thurs (per inside nova). Also potential for further appeal to VHSL Exec Committee if/when VHSL decision is upheld.

So 1st appeal results due Thurs and per article the 1st pairings to go out Sunday so presume 2nd appeal will happen before Sunday?

I think the delay is a bad sign for Hayfield.

If the appeal was successful, easy communication, and you're done - business as usual. If appeal denied, lots of communication first to Hayfield and internal stakeholders before letting the 'world' know, and have to explain what that means for playoffs, and plan for the 'second' appeal.