Program Integrity

[Homer]

I am not sure where to post this, since it refers to a boys program and a girls program. However, my players are girls.

After reading the Trib. the other day I feel compelled to start this little thread.

H-M head coach, Lechner, dismissed four players from his Varsity team. I have been told for drug use. (cannot confirm or deny, just what I was told) I believe they were all significant contributors to his teams success. Two were linemates of Zepeda, as he said so in the article.
Basically, I commend Coach Lechner for preserving the integrity of his programs' past and future, while possibly sacrificing the present season. The author of the article states that you can probably count on one hand, Hills remaining victories. Basically saying a repeat is out of the question.

On the flip side WBL girls coach Kwapick, when faced w/ a similar situation. (1 player as opposed to 4) Chose, I believe a 3week suspension for the player. (caught w/ drugs) I think he has compromised the integrity of the program. How does he deal w/ this , if it happens again in the near future. I don't feel he could justify dismissing the next offender. That wouldn't seem fair. However, if he only suspends a player, does he get his message across.

In my opinion, I prefer how Lechner, handled his situation. I would like to here what others feel about these and similar situations.

[joehockey]

I am not sure where to post this, since it refers to a boys program and a girls program. However, my players are girls.

After reading the Trib. the other day I feel compelled to start this little thread.

H-M head coach, Lechner, dismissed four players from his Varsity team. I have been told for drug use. (cannot confirm or deny, just what I was told) I believe they were all significant contributors to his teams success. Two were linemates of Zepeda, as he said so in the article.
Basically, I commend Coach Lechner for preserving the integrity of his programs' past and future, while possibly sacrificing the present season. The author of the article states that you can probably count on one hand, Hills remaining victories. Basically saying a repeat is out of the question.

On the flip side WBL girls coach Kwapick, when faced w/ a similar situation. (1 player as opposed to 4) Chose, I believe a 3week suspension for the player. (caught w/ drugs) I think he has compromised the integrity of the program. How does he deal w/ this , if it happens again in the near future. I don't feel he could justify dismissing the next offender. That wouldn't seem fair. However, if he only suspends a player, does he get his message across.

In my opinion, I prefer how Lechner, handled his situation. I would like to here what others feel about these and similar situations.

I believe both Hill and Cretin have a zero tolerance in sports "if you get a minor in season" you are off the team for the rest of the season - this is what was enforced - players & their parents sign a code of conduct to understand and accept these terms.

The four players are very good but there is a pretty good group of players on JV that will now get a shot a year earlier.

[puckfan11]

I believe both Hill and Cretin have a zero tolerance in sports "if you get a minor in season" you are off the team for the rest of the season - this is what was enforced - players & their parents sign a code of conduct to understand and accept these terms.

You are correct about the "zero tolerance" policy. However when my son went to CDH and they had an issue with athletes, I think some of the parents threatened lawsuit and the policy didn't seem to carry much weight.

[Joethehockeydad]

It's a tricky issue resulting in mixed feelings which ever way you go. I feel very bad for this years HM team, especially seniors, that weren't involved in the minor. Maybe they were on last years team and maybe not, but this years experience just took a dramatic turn. On the other hand, they likely learned a life lesson the hard way, but memorable way. My opinion is to follow more closely to what WBL did with a suspension. It will still affect the team and teach a lesson (though not as dramatically) but gives these "kids" a chance at redeeming themselves in front of their friends and teammates and hopefully learning just as much from the experience. I would be okay with an expulsion from the team if a second violation occurred since obviously that kid didn't learn the lesson and is going down the wrong track.

In my opinion, I prefer how Lechner, handled his situation. I would like to here what others feel about these and similar situations.

[hockeya1a]

I am not sure where to post this, since it refers to a boys program and a girls program. However, my players are girls.

After reading the Trib. the other day I feel compelled to start this little thread.

H-M head coach, Lechner, dismissed four players from his Varsity team. I have been told for drug use. (cannot confirm or deny, just what I was told) I believe they were all significant contributors to his teams success. Two were linemates of Zepeda, as he said so in the article.
Basically, I commend Coach Lechner for preserving the integrity of his programs' past and future, while possibly sacrificing the present season. The author of the article states that you can probably count on one hand, Hills remaining victories. Basically saying a repeat is out of the question.

On the flip side WBL girls coach Kwapick, when faced w/ a similar situation. (1 player as opposed to 4) Chose, I believe a 3week suspension for the player. (caught w/ drugs) I think he has compromised the integrity of the program. How does he deal w/ this , if it happens again in the near future. I don't feel he could justify dismissing the next offender. That wouldn't seem fair. However, if he only suspends a player, does he get his message across.

In my opinion, I prefer how Lechner, handled his situation. I would like to here what others feel about these and similar situations.

I believe both Hill and Cretin have a zero tolerance in sports "if you get a minor in season" you are off the team for the rest of the season - this is what was enforced - players & their parents sign a code of conduct to understand and accept these terms.

The four players are very good but there is a pretty good group of players on JV that will now get a shot a year earlier.

1st.
One thing that is not mentioned is, are they a first time offender or 2nd or 3rd I believe sometimes a first time is not as severe as a second.
2nd
Then there is also what consequences were laid out at the beginning of the year you cant tell them one thing and then do another.
3rd
Maybe it is not a final decision of the coach but the AD or School board.

[joehockey]

I think the High School has a standard 3 weeks or 3 games which ever is longer

1st.
One thing that is not mentioned is, are they a first time offender or 2nd or 3rd I believe sometimes a first time is not as severe as a second. - not sure there may have been one who had an issue before

2nd
Then there is also what consequences were laid out at the beginning of the year you cant tell them one thing and then do another. as an athlete you and the parent sign a form before tryouts start accepting the policy
3rd
Maybe it is not a final decision of the coach but the AD or School board. - Lechner is the coach & AD and there is not a school board at Hill Murray [/i]

[hockeya1a]

[quote="joehockey"]I think the High School has a standard 3 weeks or 3 games which ever is longer


That seams to be the norm for schools!

[MNHockeyFan]

All member schools must at a minimum impose the MSHSL penalties for first, second and third time offenders but schools may (at their discretion) set and impose harsher penalites than what the League calls for.

[allhoc11]

MSHSL states 1st offense = 2 weeks or 2 contests which ever is longer. 2nd offense is 6 weeks/6 contests which ever is longer.

Member schools have to abide by these rules.

I do think private schools get a little more freedom to put more strict rules in place.

[Homer]

Great start, interesting posts.

If it is drugs, does the student/athlete deserve a 3 strike rule? Drugs are illegal, most kids in H.S. have probably been through D.A.R.E..
I am almost positive it was the WBL players first offense w/ the hockey team, don't know about the H-M boys.
I can understand a 3 strike policy for tobacco maybe alcohol, but I feel drugs should cost the player a season. Then start anew the next year. I am not sure a 2-3 game suspension gets the point across.
I would like to see how others would like to see these situations handled, not what the MSHSL mandates.

[MNHockeyFan]

MSHSL states 1st offense = 2 weeks or 2 contests which ever is longer. 2nd offense is 6 weeks/6 contests which ever is longer.

Member schools have to abide by these rules.

I do think private schools get a little more freedom to put more strict rules in place.

Are you sure there is a difference in the way public/private schools are allowed to handle it? After all private schools are members of the MSHSL too - why should they be given more flexibility?

[hockeydad]

MSHSL states 1st offense = 2 weeks or 2 contests which ever is longer. 2nd offense is 6 weeks/6 contests which ever is longer.

Member schools have to abide by these rules.

I do think private schools get a little more freedom to put more strict rules in place.

I think second offense is four weeks/six contests, not 6 and 6.

regardless, these are mshsl guidelines. League members must have these penalties as a minimum, but all schools - public and private - are free to put longer suspensions in place. I coached in one school where it was four weeks for the first offense. Only had one kid in two years in two sports who was suspended (The kid was chewing tobacco on the bus on the way back from a scrimmage and was sitting right behind me).

I seem to remember reading that Rochester a few years ago had a policy where a student must sit out half a season in each sport in which they participated for a first offense. Don't know if that's correct, or if it was, if they still do it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[northwoods oldtimer]

Homer, I agree with you on this subject and commend Mr. Lechner for dismissing the kids involved. The penatly is indeed harsh but it just might get through to the kids involved and save them a world of hurt on into the future. The stiff lesson may very well lead these kids to do bigger and better things in their young lives and well on into their adult life. Hockey is indeed a life lesson in many ways. I hope the kids learn from a big mistake and make good choices in the outcome. My experience in life would lead me to believe the sting of such a stiff penalty will benfit the kids in the long run and they will have Mr. Lechner to thank.

[hockeyheaven]

I personally would like the penalty stiffer for these types of offenses. However, White Bear Lake’s current practice is to follow the recommendations set down by the MSHSL. The rules and subsequent penalties were communicated to the players prior to the start of the season. Coach Kwapick had no other real option other then to follow these established guidelines. As for Hill’s case, if indeed the players signed a code of conduct contract (or what ever) and they were clearly made aware of the consequences for violating the terms then Lechner was, like Kwapick, doing his job. I don’t think you commend or criticize these officials for the actions they have taken as long as they don’t deviate from the recognized policies

JoeHockey, obviously you’re a Hill-Murray insider. If these contracts were implemented and then enforced, does this only apply for the boys program? Didn’t you have a player from the girl’s team who merely sat out a three game suspension after a violation?

[joehockey]

.....JoeHockey, obviously you’re a Hill-Murray insider. If these contracts were implemented and then enforced, does this only apply for the boys program? Didn’t you have a player from the girl’s team who merely sat out a three game suspension after a violation?

You know the rules as well as I do from your past experience. I think the Code of Conduct Agreement covers players "during the sports season" and is in place for all sports at Hill - not sure when it started but has been in place for at least two years. I don't know the general school rule outside of sports or season. Issue was before/outside of the season. I don't know details but suspension was along with an injury and went first 4 weeks/3 games of season.

[jumpstart]

I believe Coach Kwapick handled the situation in an appropriate manner and did not jeopardize the "integrity of the program." He followed the MSHSL rules. I know nothing of the HM situation so will not comment.

I'm not sure I understand Homer's distinction between drugs and tobaccco/alcohol. In my opinion, They are all off-limits for student athletes.

While I agree that kids need to "learn a lesson," I also feel very strongly about giving second chances. I think if each of us honestly looked back at our lives, we could all come up with at least one stupid thing we have done.

Having said that, I do believe that the penalty for a second offense should be suspension from the team for the season.

[MNHockeyFan]

From the Pioneer Press:

Down four, Hill-Murray regroups:

http://www.twincities.com/prep/ci_11467120

It's a little peculiar that the article describes it as being the coach's decision as opposed to the school's policy or a code of conduct that would apply to all of its athletes.

[livin' in the 651]

I personally would like the penalty stiffer for these types of offenses. However, White Bear Lake’s current practice is to follow the recommendations set down by the MSHSL. The rules and subsequent penalties were communicated to the players prior to the start of the season. Coach Kwapick had no other real option other then to follow these established guidelines. As for Hill’s case, if indeed the players signed a code of conduct contract (or what ever) and they were clearly made aware of the consequences for violating the terms then Lechner was, like Kwapick, doing his job. I don’t think you commend or criticize these officials for the actions they have taken as long as they don’t deviate from the recognized policies

JoeHockey, obviously you’re a Hill-Murray insider. If these contracts were implemented and then enforced, does this only apply for the boys program? Didn’t you have a player from the girl’s team who merely sat out a three game suspension after a violation?

While MSHSL rules are being followed, the coach can still make a decision that goes beyond those rules. I know of instances where the player after completing their suspension had to "earn" their spot back by playing with the JV. While the player in question did that, she never regained the amount of playing time on varsity that she had prior to the suspension. So, Kwapick has different rules from Lechner, but can effectively do the same thing by not giving the girls playing time.

Kids make mistakes. We all know that and we hope that our kids make less and more innocent mistakes than others, but we know they will make them. The lesson that Lechner has taught his players is that they are a team and their actions not only have an impact on themselves, but their teammates. If my daughter was thrown off the team, I'm sure I would be upset, but I would also accept that as the consequence for her actions. This is a great lesson for all kids and I have discussed in depth with my daughter to help her understand how one act can change your season.

[Homer]

My distinction would be that drugs are an illegal substance. Tobacco/alcohol are only illegal for minors and those under 21. Also more readily available.

Could see jail time for possesion of narcotics. I don't believe many youth go to jail for tobacco or alcohol use.
Should there be a stiffer penalty for drugs vs tobacco/ alcohol?
My opinion, yes. Thats what I'm getting at here.
I've signed the MSHSL paperwork for my daughter before she could participate. As we all have, (those w/ H.S. athletes) They know its wrong, it is spelled out, and they do it any way.

[hockeyheaven]

.....JoeHockey, obviously you’re a Hill-Murray insider. If these contracts were implemented and then enforced, does this only apply for the boys program? Didn’t you have a player from the girl’s team who merely sat out a three game suspension after a violation?

JoeHockey wrote:

"You know the rules as well as I do from your past experience".

Huhh??? What past experiences are you talking about?
Also, my intention was not to pass judgment or criticism with my questions, I was simply trying to better understand the situation Hill currently finds itself in and why if any reason for the way they handled the two separate scenarios. It seemed from my (extremely limited) perspective that these incidents may have been similar. No offense was being projected I assure you.

As for as livin' in the 651 comment/opinion that Mr Kawpick could have done more. I respect your position very much. However, these are still children we are talking about and are prone to make mistakes. I believe the penalties where established to give these first time offenders an enlighten perspective of their transgression and then for a practical chance at redemption. After indicating this I do acknowledge that each case is different and each offense is different…and that separation from the established policies may be warranted at some point. However, since none of us really know all the particulars in each of these cases, IMO, we should try to have a little faith in the system and except that the right decisions were probably made.

[joehockey]

.....JoeHockey, obviously you’re a Hill-Murray insider. If these contracts were implemented and then enforced, does this only apply for the boys program? Didn’t you have a player from the girl’s team who merely sat out a three game suspension after a violation?

JoeHockey wrote:

"You know the rules as well as I do from your past experience".

Huhh??? What past experiences are you talking about?
Also, my intention was not to pass judgment or criticism with my questions, I was simply trying to better understand the situation Hill currently finds itself in and why if any reason for the way they handled the two separate scenarios. It seemed from my (extremely limited) perspective that these incidents may have been similar. No offense was being projected I assure you.

As for as livin' in the 651 comment/opinion that Mr Kawpick could have done more. I respect your position very much. However, these are still children we are talking about and are prone to make mistakes. I believe the penalties where established to give these first time offenders an enlighten perspective of their transgression and then for a practical chance at redemption. After indicating this I do acknowledge that each case is different and each offense is different…and that separation from the established policies may be warranted at some point. However, since none of us really know all the particulars in each of these cases, IMO, we should try to have a little faith in the system and except that the right decisions were probably made.

Sorry I thought you were someone who had a daughter previously at Hill and now at WB....no offense was intended....that wasn't a shot at you or her only thought you were familiar with the agreement.

[OntheEdge]

I think each situation is different. Unfortunately, whenever discretion is used in making decisions there is great scrutiny and pressure on the decision-maker from everyone. On the other hand no discretion at all (i.e. a zero tolerance policy) can result in unjust punishment on the kid. I think individual school guidelines and policies if they differ from MSHSL rules should be very detailed and allow for a limited amount of discretion.

As an aside, I've heard of situations in which students are caught with drugs/alcohol during the offseason and quickly sign up for another sport so that he or she can serve his or her suspension prior to participating in their primary sport. For example, a hockey player is caught with drugs in fall. He signs up for soccer (a sport he hasn't played) serves his suspension and then quits soccer. It is within the rules but I have a problem with this. I think parents and kids would be better off if their kid experience the consequences of their actions rather than playing games to get around the rules.

[goalzilla]

good topic of discussion, we will never agree on a definitive right or wrong. However, IMO the athlete is ultiimatley responsible for their actions. They know there are consequences for their actions and if you do the crime you do the time. Moral debate; it's little Susies first offense, they didnt mean it, etc. As a parent my daughter has a clear understanding that if she obviously breaks the rules she is going to face the music. She put herself in the position and she will have to deal with the outcome. I hope I have instilled those values and understandings in her. It doesnt mean I wont support her on an emotional level, but I'm not going to go out of my way to find a loop hole for her to circumvent the consequences handed down. Unfortuneately, our kids see too many public figures/athletes break the rules and see them manuver around the penelties and at times our kids begin to think that is the way it should be done. When our children decide to particpate in a sport and behavior contracts are involved I really feel in is my responsibility to go over the agreement with my child make sure they understand and will adhere to the agreement, If they dont understand; address the concerns and once they sign it those are the rules they must follow.

Off my soapbox now....I'm just pretty passionate about individual responsibilty.

[ghshockeyfan]

Congrats to HM for holding student-athletes to a code-of-conduct. Details are not needed, only knowledge of the fact that this code was violated and that those doing so faced appropriate consequences as defined in the code.

My suggestion is to leave the student-athletes' names out of the discussion though - as well as any rumor, guess, etc. of what their supposed code-of-conduct violations entailed. General discussion is fine (and very good I think) but we should be clear that what is being posted here is a general discussion about issues related to possible code-of-conduct violations and not claims of factual info. pertianing to the recent situation.

[nmnhockeydad]

My distinction would be that drugs are an illegal substance. Tobacco/alcohol are only illegal for minors and those under 21. Also more readily available.

Could see jail time for possesion of narcotics. I don't believe many youth go to jail for tobacco or alcohol use.
Should there be a stiffer penalty for drugs vs tobacco/ alcohol?
My opinion, yes. Thats what I'm getting at here.
I've signed the MSHSL paperwork for my daughter before she could participate. As we all have, (those w/ H.S. athletes) They know its wrong, it is spelled out, and they do it any way.

It is a slippery slope to start justifying what is worse. If it is a banned substance for an athlete to use than the penalty should be enforced whether it was drugs, alcohol, or tobacco.