SVSM Irish 2024

BleedPurple13 said:
Why?

Most coming from public would have to take a pay cut and lose STRS benefits if they wanted to be in the building at a private.

Many probably feel they are in a better position than what St V currently is.
Click to expand...
because here's the thing if he comes and turns it around he'll get way more money for himself and the program than he would than any public school would offer. our boosters are wayy better than barberton's and the support will be larger.
 
Football52. said:
because here's the thing if he comes and turns it around he'll get way more money for himself and the program than he would than any public school would offer. our boosters are wayy better than barberton's and the support will be larger.
Click to expand...
Maybe from a coaching stipend point of view but they most likely will not be able to match what he makes teaching at Barberton and if he does leave teaching at Barberton he will be out several years of STRS which will effect his retirement. He could be a HC and stay at Barberton but I don’t think that is a recipe for success.
 
BleedPurple13 said:
Maybe from a coaching stipend point of view but they most likely will not be able to match what he makes teaching at Barberton and if he does leave teaching at Barberton he will be out several years of STRS which will effect his retirement. He could be a HC and stay at Barberton but I don’t think that is a recipe for success.
Click to expand...
we know trust me Nickol didn't work...
 
clarkgriswold said:
Much less interference and whining.

SVSM has a great history and the head coach gig there is a nice job. However, that begs the question if it's such a desirable job how they ended up with the last two coaches.
Click to expand...
Other than being an alum, my knowledge of the inner workings of the football program became much more in depth when my son joined the team. His coach was Dan Boarman, and no one was going to tell him what to do or who to play! Wattley was a good choice, but I'm not sure he was quite ready. To me, he appeared to try to be Boarman 2.0 rather than to be himself. Keeping all the old staff in place was a no brainer given the success they had; but, from what I hear, there was more than a little "That's not how my dad did things"; which is natural, but problematic when the team was hearing different things from different people. I was surprised by the Bobby Nichol hire since I was expecting a more seasoned coach to step in. IMO this is when the outside pressure began to pick up steam. Perhaps a Larlham-type hire at that time would have kept the parents from gathering up torches and pitchforks to storm the castle, but who knows. Terry Cistone did a remarkable job in his two years, but it appears he told the administration he was only going to take the job for 2 years, so, in a way, it was a case of kicking the can down the road. And it does sound like the "Why isn't so-and-so playing QB" noise certainly wore thin on him. At this point, I AM surprised that the Irish don't seem to have a more concrete plan in place. Knowing Cistone was not a long-term answer, you'd think they would have had a lot of the due diligence done already, at least informally. Maybe they do and we don't know it, but it's not looking to me like that's the case. In any case, they need to hire someone with enough cache to silence some of the "constructive criticism" coming from the parent's club... I don't think the noise is as bad at this point as it might seem anyway, but it has the potential of becoming a real problem! So, is Larlham that guy? Who knows, I don't truly know enough about the man personally to speak intelligently on that subject (although that certainly won't prevent others from doing so!) I'm hoping they get it right.
 
Last edited:
Irish60 said:
Other than being an alum, my knowledge of the inner workings of the football program became much more in depth when my son joined the team. His coach was Dan Boarman, and no one was going to tell him what to do or who to play! Wattley was a good choice, but I'm not sure he was quite ready. To me, he appeared to try to be Boarman 2.0 rather than to be himself. Keeping all the old staff in place was a no brainer given the success they had; but, from what I hear, there was more than a little "That's not how my dad did things"; which is natural, but problematic when the team was hearing different things from different people. I was surprised by the Bobby Nichol hire since I was expecting a more seasoned coach to step in. IMO this is when the outside pressure began to pick up steam. Perhaps a Larlham-type hire at that time would have kept the parents from gathering up torches and pitchforks to storm the castle, but who knows. Terry Cistone did a remarkable job in his two years, but it appears he told the administration he was only going to take the job for 2 years, so, in a way, it was a case of kicking the can down the road. And it does sound like the "Why isn't so-and-so playing QB" noise certainly wore thin on him. At this point, I AM surprised that the Irish don't seem to have a more concrete plan in place. Knowing Cistone was not a long-term answer, you'd think they would have had a lot of the due diligence done already, at least informally. Maybe they do and we don't know it, but it's not looking to me like that's the case. In any case, they need to hire someone with enough cache to silence some of the "constructive criticism" coming from the parent's club... I don't think the noise is as bad at this point as it might seem anyway, but it has the potential of becoming a real problem! So, is Larlham that guy? Who knows, I don't truly know enough about the man personally to speak intelligently on that subject (although that certainly won't prevent others from doing so!) I'm hoping they get it right.
Click to expand...
My primary concern with Cistone's leadership this year came out of the team I saw at the start of the year versus the team I saw at the end of the year. Albeit they were young, but I would have thought it would get better as the year went on. Instead it went in the exact opposite direction.
 
If I was the parent on a current 9th or 10th grader and I would have been told that Coach Cistone was not really committed to more than a couple of seasons as H/C there would be no way in the world I would have sent my son to play there. Seems this whole thing was botched 2 years ago.
 
clarkgriswold said:
My primary concern with Cistone's leadership this year came out of the team I saw at the start of the year versus the team I saw at the end of the year. Albeit they were young, but I would have thought it would get better as the year went on. Instead it went in the exact opposite direction.
Click to expand...
I agree, and I'm wondering how much of that can be attributed to him having one foot out the door.
 
Irish60 said:
I agree, and I'm wondering how much of that can be attributed to him having one foot out the door.
Click to expand...
I am guessing a hell of a lot.

You simply cannot have a ton of energy ready to pour into a program and be preparing to walk away from that same program simultaneously.

I don't fault Cistone at all for wanting to retire, everyone deserves that opportunity. What I completely fault Cistone for (and in turn the administration) is the second he was looking forward to retiring - he should have manned up and stepped away. The real victims in the scenario are the players and students. They deserved better.

It takes more than two years to rebuild a program. So if Cistone told the administration "I will only do this for two years - then I am done" - why in the hell did they hire him in the first place? Pain in the short term is always better for the program long-term. Being an administrator means you are a steward of the program. Well, act like it....

Unless you don't care about the kids and what it takes to raise a program up and all you care about is the PR boost of a legacy hire.
 
Last edited:
the123kidz said:
If I was the parent on a current 9th or 10th grader and I would have been told that Coach Cistone was not really committed to more than a couple of seasons as H/C there would be no way in the world I would have sent my son to play there. Seems this whole thing was botched 2 years ago.
Click to expand...
Some of that may already be happening. I recall hearing there were only 21 kids on the freshmen team this year.
 
clarkgriswold said:
Some of that may already be happening. I recall hearing there were only 21 kids on the freshmen team this year.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why when a college coach is terminated, the vacancy is filled very quickly so an entire recruiting cycle is not lost.
 
The freshman team hasn’t been good since 2017 I know that because I played for the freshman team and I was able to dress varsity we beat Massillon St Ed’s that year
 
The decision will reveal just how much leverage Cistone has in the pick. He has hand-picked Larlham as his successor.
 
StarstoShine said:
They will be thorough and make the right choice
Click to expand...
I sure hope. Their recent history indicates otherwise.

As much as some would like them to go with an outside guy, the history of the program indicates that the best head coaches have had a connection to the program. Wentz, Cistone, Boardman, all inside SVSM guys. Guys like Nickol, Wakefield and Brophy, nope. As an outside guy, I thought Wiggins had some potential.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top