Word has it that the last act of the board at Henderson was to remove Art Marcellus as coach of the Varsity team, to be replaced by Jon Bernard. What a shame. The guy loses just a handful of games in two seasons, wins a state title, and is out. Was he incompetant? Was he abusive of his players? Did his team underperform? If this was the decision of whether or not to keep him as coach for next year by an AD, this never takes place. All the more reason why statewide sanctioning, and thus the decision making of such issues should take place.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: whatthepuck,
Why do you say removed? How do you know he wanted the job...hasn't he been around for years? Clubs accept applications every year and then decide on a coach. Should be some great friendly rivalry between the 3 WC coaches. Congrats to Jon Bernard!
Little to soon, to start harping why Marcellus is not back at Henderson, heard yes he did put in for the team for next season. But sometimes a change is needed. He was a great coach won a state title, had undefeated teams. Heard Bernard is a very good coach, only one issue is when you have the President of Henderson who's son plays well everyone can read into that and have even seen it on the ice. Question is will Bernard have the so called hockey pucks to stand up to the President and his team of board members and run the team the way he wan't to. That is to be seen. Only five months away and we will see.
Marcellus was not as great of a coach as he seemed. He did not know how to run a practice or even respond in game situations. Sure he won a state title, but you need to consider the talent on the team and how well the team would have done with any coach. Art did apply for the job as did Jon Bernard and Bill Hammond. Jon respectively earned the job and is young, therefore will be able to relate well and get along well with the kids whom he is already firmilliar with. It will be quite a battle having all three WC coaches working at Ice Line. All three teams will be great contenders for the 08'-09' state champions!
Common, so talent alone won a state title? There are plenty of teams with boat loads of talent that never even make it to a state championship. Seems to me like another good hockey coach being run out because of politics.
Talent alone can win a state title and it did. These other teams you speak of may have had the talent but no desire because they viewed it as just "high school hockey" and that it was not a big deal. There were no politics. No one on the board knew Bernard until he approached them with his interest of being the head coach. I do not even think the board knew Art very well personally either, they just had their opinions based on what the kids said. If the kids do not like the coach, would you think they did not have a say and make them deal with it?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: hockey91,
It's going to be a long time before someone surpasses Art Marcellus's 4 year record with the 2 JVA and 2 Varsity teams that he coached. Good coaches by the way have the ability to make it look like they aren't doing anything when in fact they're using the talent, desire, and depth of players to get the best results.
Posts: 61 | Location: West Chester PA | Registered: 25 March 2007
When are you all going to understand this? Isn't it clear? If a team and coach wins, it's because the coach had a talented team and managed to stay out of their way. If a team and coach is not winning, it's the coach's fault - the talent level and skills of the players are insignificant. It's that simple.
Parents, ask yourself this...has your son ever played on a non-championship winning team where the coach did a great job? (it doesn't count if you were the coach) My guess is that your answer would be...No!
I agree with Coachk. Everyone gets along when things are going well; the coach not necissarily responsible for the wins. If a team is not winning, then everyone gets on each other about it and it is up to the coach to handle it and enforce discipline. If a coach can do that, this makes him a good coach. This past years Henderson team lost to East a couple times and the coach never got the team back together.
No I do understand that a team will blame a coach for a losing season and not the players but if they have a winning season the players will be credited and not the coach. What I am trying to do is add to that, saying that a good coach will turn a team around and get them headed in the right direction after a few losses even though they might not get credit for it in the eyes of players, coaches, and parents from other teams. My opinion is however, that Art did not do a good job in turning the team around in a positive way and should be blamed for the quick loss in flyers cup
Whatever that means? The Board's job is to support the majority of the paying membership based on their evaluations and feedback, not a handful of supporters.
Interesting point. Was it a majority opinion of the entire organization to replace Art. Was it a majority decision of the people that responded to a questionaire, or the majority of board members that made the decision? Unless the coach is an incompetant, which I understand he is not. Or the coach is abusive to the players, which I understand he was not. As long as his team performs well, he ought to be expected to keep his job. From what I understand, some players (and parents) simply did not like Art. If this is the message that parents are providing their children, that if you don't like someone (such as a teacher or coach), you can simply change them, then those kids are in for a rude awakening in the real world, where you have to TRY to get along with people. In the real world, if you don't like your boss, you could go find another job OR you can try to work with the guy to find a common ground by which both of you can get along. When I think back on all of the teachers I have ever had, it was one guy who I thought was the toughest, most difficut teacher that I ever had whom I realize taught me more about life than just the subject he was teaching, and I've come to appreciate the man more the older I get. My point is that if you had me make my decision on whether or not to have this Science teacher at the time that I was taking his class, I would have said no. Upon reflection of the man as I have gotten older, I would want my kids to have this guy. Unfortunately, in this time of immediate gratification and entitlement, real substance seems to be going by the wayside. But that is just my opinion.
