Hayfield Football Coach Fired

[Anonymous]

Here's the Post article which shows they knew they might not get another game:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/10/25/riverdale-baptist-football/

Hayfield, cleared by Fairfax County Public Schools of any wrongdoing with regard to its roster in August, could still be facing discipline from the Virginia High School League. In light of that, school officials — citing guidance from FCPS — declined to make players available after the game.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why you would change a tradition like that. What a slap in the face to the other seniors.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

And if a school appeals, the penalties can be EXPANDED.

[Anonymous]

It is so obvious that they broke the rule of students transferring in order to play football. I mean come on.

[Anonymous]

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.

That’s a reach. Parents did admit they wanted their kids to be coached by Overton, but they can move where they want to move.

Has to be more to it than that and if that’s the reason for the ban, that’s some bs.

[Anonymous]

Well, if he or any other coach had any kind of conversation with ANY of the 33+ transfer players involving them transferring to play football for Hayfield, then that's an easy case for VHSL. You can read the rule yourself, its very clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is so obvious that they broke the rule of students transferring in order to play football. I mean come on.

I read above poster to say VHSL focus will be on the coach and school and not the kids, but kids will of course still feel the sting if cannot go to playoffs for 2 years. Sounds like all the band, dance and other seniors already stung by being shut out of recognition night.

Prediction if school 2 year post season ban not appealed: Overton will shop himself to a new school outside of FCPS for next fall. Kids will follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is so obvious that they broke the rule of students transferring in order to play football. I mean come on.

Back in the 90’s, they investigated WT Woodson because Greg Williams’s dad rented an apartment for him to attend. This has been going on for ever. There are kids all over Fairfax County right now, going to particular High Schools to be part of an athletic program.

If they are disciplining Hayfield because of "students transferring in order to play football", there should be a lot more athletic programs becoming banned soon.

[Anonymous]

So basically, if all 30-odd transfers who ended up playing football at Hayfield each decided on their own whim to completely move their "bona fide" residence to the Hayfield zone....with absolutely zero communication with anyone at Hayfield or anyone on the coaching staff....then Hayfield is in the clear.

What are the odds that all 30+ transfers moved without any assurances from the coaches on playing football? What about the 4 private school kids who gave up scholarships? You think their parents didn't discuss their move with the coach?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, if he or any other coach had any kind of conversation with ANY of the 33+ transfer players involving them transferring to play football for Hayfield, then that's an easy case for VHSL. You can read the rule yourself, its very clear.

Agreed. Hard to prove when you have a guy or two every couple of years. But when you have 20-30+ transfers who have publicly stated they specifically moved to play football for the coach, I’m not sure how you can’t discipline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so obvious that they broke the rule of students transferring in order to play football. I mean come on.

Back in the 90’s, they investigated WT Woodson because Greg Williams’s dad rented an apartment for him to attend. This has been going on for ever. There are kids all over Fairfax County right now, going to particular High Schools to be part of an athletic program.

If they are disciplining Hayfield because of "students transferring in order to play football", there should be a lot more athletic programs becoming banned soon.

It was foolish of this coach to be so dumb and obvious about it- 33 transfers in one year is just asking for a spotlight.

If you have evidence that some other coach broke the rules, you should send that on the VHSL. MOST coaches are smart enough to stay within the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so obvious that they broke the rule of students transferring in order to play football. I mean come on.

I read above poster to say VHSL focus will be on the coach and school and not the kids, but kids will of course still feel the sting if cannot go to playoffs for 2 years. Sounds like all the band, dance and other seniors already stung by being shut out of recognition night.

Prediction if school 2 year post season ban not appealed: Overton will shop himself to a new school outside of FCPS for next fall. Kids will follow.

He’s not staying at Hayfield in the aftermath of a scandal. If this sticks, Overton is gone and so is the athletic director.

[Anonymous]

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.

If the 7-11 pickup site is true, that would tick off #3 above. The kid/parent online videos they first went up (and that parents then took down) saying they were going to Hayfield to play will not help for #4… based on what’s been being posted, could be a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, if he or any other coach had any kind of conversation with ANY of the 33+ transfer players involving them transferring to play football for Hayfield, then that's an easy case for VHSL. You can read the rule yourself, its very clear.

Agreed. Hard to prove when you have a guy or two every couple of years. But when you have 20-30+ transfers who have publicly stated they specifically moved to play football for the coach, I’m not sure how you can’t discipline.

I wonder where VHSL is getting their evidence. Its not like the parents are going to turn over their texts and emails from the Coaches. Maybe he has been trying to shop for players for next year.