I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
I happen to know another 2018 CB on Garfield's team, who goes to my school, TyeJohn Ward. TyeJohn and Tre'Shaun have been to every Husky game I have been to (3 last year)... both are studs and Husky locks as of now.
So you go to Garfield?
Sorry, should have made this clear. I do not go to Garfield. I go to a nerd school for nerds (lucky for me, I don't get shit from other kids, because I'm an athlete). TyeJohn also goes there. We do not have a football team, and so he plays on his local team- Garfield. He also knows Daejon Davis and Jalen Nowell, and is friends with Daejon, so he was able to tell me Daejon was going to UW if the other guy went to Oregon a few days before it happened.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do. They have nowhere near the organization either.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do.
Not saying it couldn't happen. Saying it won't. No time soon. Not even with proven great coaches like Stewart.
It's also a legacy of busing, which took kids from their neighborhoods on long bus rides, which sucked for athletics. And some want to bring it back in Seattle. Also, later bell times are fucking with sports that run into the dinner hour in the fall.
A good test will be of Mario Bailey who is HC at Franklin now. Let's see what he can do.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do.
Not saying it couldn't happen. Saying it won't. No time soon. Not even with proven great coaches like Stewart.
I'm not as well versed with Garfield football or Stewart as you. I know there are difficulties. Money plays a big part and parents rightfully send their kids to private schools.
It won't happen because the district, principals, and AD's don't really care.
Most the coaches only coach because they enjoy football and have some kind of playing background. They get a little extra money too. They don't want to put in the effort to win.
I've seen it a lot. It even happens at private schools. Why should they put in all that extra effort? It doesn't get them paid more, most have families, and they inherit shitty teams.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do.
Not saying it couldn't happen. Saying it won't. No time soon. Not even with proven great coaches like Stewart.
I'm not as well versed with Garfield football or Stewart as you. I know there are difficulties. Money plays a big part and parents rightfully send their kids to private schools.
It won't happen because the district, principals, and AD's don't really care.
Most the coaches only coach because they enjoy football and have some kind of playing background. They get a little extra money too. They don't want to put in the effort to win.
I've seen it a lot. It even happens at private schools. Why should they put in all that extra effort? It doesn't get them paid more, most have families, and they inherit shitty teams.
Let me just say FUCKING THIS to this comment. Some Roosevelt parents were advocating putting portables on the football field because the school is crammed, and you know, "Who needs sports? Right?" Fucking awful, horrible people. The fucking worst kinds of dull, boring, dreadful, humorless, joyless mother-fucking people ever. Goddamn, I am growing to hate this fucking city with a passion.
Ironically, Hale is now decent in Football and great in Basketball. And families are now clamoring to get in there, when only a few years back, many were bitching when they got sent to Hale and away from Roosevelt. Horrible cunts.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do.
Not saying it couldn't happen. Saying it won't. No time soon. Not even with proven great coaches like Stewart.
I'm not as well versed with Garfield football or Stewart as you. I know there are difficulties. Money plays a big part and parents rightfully send their kids to private schools.
It won't happen because the district, principals, and AD's don't really care.
Most the coaches only coach because they enjoy football and have some kind of playing background. They get a little extra money too. They don't want to put in the effort to win.
I've seen it a lot. It even happens at private schools. Why should they put in all that extra effort? It doesn't get them paid more, most have families, and they inherit shitty teams.
Let me just say FUCKING THIS to this comment. Some Roosevelt parents were advocating putting portables on the football field because the school is crammed, and you know, "Who needs sports? Right?" Fucking awful, horrible people. The fucking worst kinds of dull, boring, dreadful, humorless, joyless mother-fucking people ever. Goddamn, I am growing to hate this fucking city with a passion.
Ironically, Hale is now decent in Football and great in Basketball. And families are now clamoring to get in there, when only a few years back, many were bitching when they got sent to Hale and away from Roosevelt. Horrible cunts.
Roosevelt was already full of insufferable hipster do gooders in the mid 90s when I was at Franklin. I can't imagine how bad that place sucks 20 years later.
You talk about investing...one thing that might be good for Pete/UW would be to help develop the coaching/programs at these schools. You would have to be careful about catching the NCAA's eye, but if you could improve the programs/development there to the point you can get 1 or 2 more legit players each year...would be good.
The thing is, once put together a "high school coaches training program" it would be easy/cheap to maintain. Would probably help to get some $$$ donors to help a bit...can't imagine it would cost that much to freshen up their weight rooms/etc. and make sure the high school coaches had the right training on what kids should be doing/lifting at certain ages.
I want this kid horribly. He looks fantastic. Not even sure where you play him he's so good at so many things.
RB.
There aren't many good RBs on the WC next year we are likely to get. There are a lot of great WRs and Ss, so I would put him at RB.
I'd actually consider recruiting him as an athlete and letting the class start to figure out where he ends up.
I have a hard time believing that he's gotten great coaching at Garfield ... so he's got a great potential to be molded into an elite player at any position he ends up at.
Sometimes these boreds are so white. Seattle public schools biggest problem isn't coaching. It's small turnouts.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Coaching, funding, turn out.. The schools plucking those kids have better coaching. It's naive to think otherwise.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
Tacoma has only Bellarmine, Roady. And what kid is going to Franklin if he gets a free ride at Kennedy, Blanchet, O'Dea or Prep.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
I'm sure it's difficult, but you cultivate relationships with the youth programs and recruit. Go to junior highs and get involved with the kids. Give them some pointers, take an interest in their life, meet the parents.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do.
Not saying it couldn't happen. Saying it won't. No time soon. Not even with proven great coaches like Stewart.
I'm not as well versed with Garfield football or Stewart as you. I know there are difficulties. Money plays a big part and parents rightfully send their kids to private schools.
It won't happen because the district, principals, and AD's don't really care.
Most the coaches only coach because they enjoy football and have some kind of playing background. They get a little extra money too. They don't want to put in the effort to win.
I've seen it a lot. It even happens at private schools. Why should they put in all that extra effort? It doesn't get them paid more, most have families, and they inherit shitty teams.
Let me just say FUCKING THIS to this comment. Some Roosevelt parents were advocating putting portables on the football field because the school is crammed, and you know, "Who needs sports? Right?" Fucking awful, horrible people. The fucking worst kinds of dull, boring, dreadful, humorless, joyless mother-fucking people ever. Goddamn, I am growing to hate this fucking city with a passion.
Ironically, Hale is now decent in Football and great in Basketball. And families are now clamoring to get in there, when only a few years back, many were bitching when they got sent to Hale and away from Roosevelt. Horrible cunts.
Roosevelt was already full of insufferable hipster do gooders in the mid 90s when I was at Franklin. I can't imagine how bad that place sucks 20 years later.
I'm commenting on the parents. The students I know from there are alright.
Comments
Teen boy stocking is fine. Teen boy poasting is annoying as hell.
The little league football in the CD and Rainier Valley is still top notch, with heavily involved parents and coaches. You can see future bad-ass players at 10-12 years old. Many or most top performers get plucked by Coker's Man-on-Man mill O'Dea, or Eastside Catholic, Kennedy, Blanchet, AB Murphy, etc. Others will enroll at Bellevue, Newport, Quah, Edmonds-Woodway, or Meadowdale.
Garfield had Mark Stewart for a year, after owning WESCO at Meadowdale for a decade. He moved on, but the current coach is not bad. The hardest thing for Garfield, Franklin, and other Metro Schools is winning games outside of Metro with 25 to 30 players on their sideline, compared to 70 or 80 across the field. Watch an O'Dea practice sometime and you'll see where the in-City talent goes, even though a bunch of them right short buses.
Lincoln in Tacoma was very similar to the Seattle schools. Once they got a good coach, kids went to Lincoln instead of Lakes, Curtis, Wilson, Bellarmine, etc. That combined with good coaching made them a good program. It's not rocket science.
And if you're right, why couldn't Stewart win at Garfield after going 13-1 a couple times elsewhere? Answer: 85 players vs 25. There's only so many to go around. Metro is a Basketball league.
The GTA has Bellarmine, Lakes, Curtis, Mt Tahoma, Wilson, etc. All schools with some good players. Lincoln took players away that would have went to those schools. They also made kids practice, started off season training, and cared about the fucking kids.
No reason why Garfield can't do the same to the Seattle Public Schools. You sell the program, actively get kids to turn out. Despite the difficulties, it's the same as anywhere else. You make the program something that is cool and beneficial to be involved with.
There is a reason only 25-30 kids turn out. The coaching is dreck and I doubt they put anywhere near the effort the coaches at the premier high schools do. They have nowhere near the organization either.
It's also a legacy of busing, which took kids from their neighborhoods on long bus rides, which sucked for athletics. And some want to bring it back in Seattle. Also, later bell times are fucking with sports that run into the dinner hour in the fall.
A good test will be of Mario Bailey who is HC at Franklin now. Let's see what he can do.
It won't happen because the district, principals, and AD's don't really care.
Most the coaches only coach because they enjoy football and have some kind of playing background. They get a little extra money too. They don't want to put in the effort to win.
I've seen it a lot. It even happens at private schools. Why should they put in all that extra effort? It doesn't get them paid more, most have families, and they inherit shitty teams.
Ironically, Hale is now decent in Football and great in Basketball. And families are now clamoring to get in there, when only a few years back, many were bitching when they got sent to Hale and away from Roosevelt. Horrible cunts.
The thing is, once put together a "high school coaches training program" it would be easy/cheap to maintain. Would probably help to get some $$$ donors to help a bit...can't imagine it would cost that much to freshen up their weight rooms/etc. and make sure the high school coaches had the right training on what kids should be doing/lifting at certain ages.
He does look like a great athlete though. I'm a little concerned about the amount of feces in his throat. I saw a bit of taunting. Is he OKG?