Tom Davis (NNHS '04), the second-year track coach at Westwood High School, was summarily dismissed from his position last Friday, after the WHS Athletic Director confronted a member of the track team for running without a shirt.
Wicked Local has the story here:
Davis Fired as WHS Track Coach
There is a thread on Letsrun with additional information:
Letsrun's Tom Davis Fired from Westwood High
Tom's attempts to engage the administration in a discussion to resolve the shirtless issue prior to the incident that led to his dismissal were unsuccessful. It's hard to understand the thought-process behind the actions taken by the school.
According to the WickedLocal article, Westwood athletes and their parents have requested a meeting with the administration but have so far been rebuffed.
While I would ask everyone to keep Tom in mind, as always, it will be the athletes who will be hurt most by this action.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
61 comments:
Thats one side of the story !
The other has it that right or wrong the boys were warned on 3 occasions about running shirtless on campus.
Pretty much everyone has had a boss tell you to do something you don't agree with. If it happens over and over guess what happens...
Tom was quoted as telling the AD "thats how I train my guys" which is pretty much equal to his runner quoted in the article talking about the hardship of running with a top. Heck even a coolmax tank top would've kept them out of trouble and how do they deal with wearing one on meet days ?
The AD is a hothead but plenty of blame to spread here
Running with a jersey on meet day is a lot different than training with a shirt on a regular basis. At a meet, runners are representing a team, not to mention that there are strict and explicit rules regarding attire in official competition. Running sucks enough as it is, putting yourself through extra discomfort because some people don't like seeing it is ridiculous. Tom made several attempts to meet with the AD to discuss the issue, which were turned down. The unwillingness of the AD to discuss the situation is absurd. If I were in Tom's shoes, and I was being ignored, I would do exactly as he did, and continue to ignore what seems like little more than a suggestion, keeping the best interests of my athletes in mind, as the AD should have done in the first place.
and a coolmax tank top? what are those things, like $30? i doubt those kids would have much problem running in them if you bought them all a week's worth of them.
keep up the good fight tom.
Seems as though all they needed to do was toss a crummy T shirt in the bushes once they left campus.
and I think any tank top would do but half price at Marshall's if you want a fancy coolmax one.
and Ankit if you did the same as in Tom's shoes ignoring your bosses orders multple times then you'd be unemployed too !
We are not allowed to run shirtless off campus either
Unemployed, perhaps. But I would sleep well knowing I stood up for a beyond basic right of my athletes. Anyways, if I'm getting pressured into enforcing horseshit policies like this, and it's that hard to setup a meeting with the boss to discuss them, employment under that d-bag doesn't sound like something I'd want to keep anyways.
Sorry for the language, Jon.
Give me a break- we all have bosses. When they tell you what to do you do it. Get over it and do it. AD's, principals, and superintendants are a coach's boss, and he is subordinate to them, whether he likes it or not.
Thinking you know more than everyone else doesn't mean it's so. Also, this shameless media campaign is embarrassing. Asking newspapers and former coaches to defend his position is a joke. Do what your told to do and you don't get fired.
We all have to do what we don't want to do sometimes. It's called living and working.
This is insane that runners are being forced to wear there shirts when theyre working out, the swim team's UNIFORM is a speedo! On hot days the track is even hotter so having that extra layer could potentially lead to over heating. This policy is ridiculous because track uniforms at the collegiate level consist of sports bras and spandex underwear for girls.
Anonymous wrote, "Asking newspapers and former coaches to defend his position is a joke."
For the record, Tom has not asked me to defend his position nor to mention it on my blog. It was entirely my decision.
I think it is clear from what I wrote that I did not "defend" Tom. He doesn't need me to defend him. What I wrote was that it's hard to understand the thought process of the administration, since, in my opinion, they took actions that are not in the best interests of the program and especially the athletes on the team.
Of COURSE there are situations in which subordinates need to follow rules imposed upon them with which they might disagree. I'm sure Tom knows this. I think this story is newsworthy because there appears to be a major disproportionate response by the school to the incidents that occurred.
No, you give me a break. They’re not wearing shirts. How is that harming anybody? It seems that the AD had nothing but saving his own ass in mind when implementing the no shirt policy. Like has been said multiple times before, both the coach and the AD’s responsibility is the interest of the athletes. If either one of them forgets that, it is not unreasonable for the other to take action to protect the kids. These kids are working very hard, they sweat, so they take off their shirts, just as those on any other track team across the country. Again, how does that hurt anybody? If those brave, anonymous, people who are complaining about this decide to attend a swim meet, will those kids have to wear shirts while the compete? What if they decide that they don’t like the fact that the runners wear shoes? Or drink water? You would expect coaches to oblige to these unreasonable whims as well?
And when did Tom claim or otherwise indicate that he knows more than anybody? It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that running hard and sweating in the heat is more comfortable without a shirt than with one. As you were clearly off about Tom asking former coaches to defend him, I must ask what knowledge do you have that Tom launched a “shameless media campaign?” What’s embarrassing is having to rely on baseless assumptions, rather than fact, to try to prove what is ultimately an irrelevant point (as whether or not Tom initiated the news report, it is a valid story that should be told). Please, try to make sure any subsequent posts are more informed than your previous one, before gratuitously besmirching Tom and insulting the integrity of this blog’s author.
Yes, in most cases a subordinate needs to follow their bosses policies. But you’re leaving out perhaps the most important part of the picture: the athletes. Say you worked on an assembly line building cars, and your boss orders you to forgo a critical safety inspection in the interest of churning out vehicles at a faster rate, would you forget your commitment to consumers (I hope not) and obey your boss? As soon as the AD makes himself the priority over the kids, he has lost the right to be obeyed. It takes a special kind of person to sit back and do nothing but blindly follow when they see policies being put into place that they know to be wrong, and I’m sure that the boys of the Westwood track team, as well as their parents, are glad that Tom is not one of them.
I'd like to see the Fogel (AD) run through a single training day for track and see if he can do it while keeping his shirt on.
Has anyone here ever met the guy, he's a pompous egomaniac and parents/students should ban together and put him in his place. I applaud the coach for making this a story and i hope he'll get a good job somewhere else.
It is true that the kids on the team are most hurt through the actions of their power tripping AD.I can imagine having someone develop you as a runner so much as Tom did and then have someone in the middle of your season take away his coaching title for such a foolish reason. To all those on the Westwood team please keep your heads up and don't forget all the work you guys have done with Tom at your guidance. All those miles and workouts you've put in are like putting money in the bank and trust yourselves and your training these next few weeks during the championships meets.
Tom did a remarkable job at Westwood and it is a shame to see someone so passionate about the sport lose his position. Seeing a small school run that fast in the 4 x 800 was remarkable and inspiring. I know that this will only be a speed bump in Tom's coaching career.
Sorry, meant to say "I can't* imagine having someone"
I think in this instance the intention of tom's actions were completely for the defense of his athletes, yet in the end it was not the correct path for defending them, assuming he had known as we now do that the AD had a short fuse and had warned tom 3 times. The showdown should have not been tom and the AD; instead it should have been the parent board with parents of the athletes advising the administration to change the rule on how to raise their child, which is how most rules are changed.
one thing that seems to be left out here is that the AD has a bosses too. The principal and superintendent gave this order for the AD to enforce.
Runners at my school were told by the superintendant last year that they had to keep their shirts on at practice. They put them on and didn't complain. They haven't since and they wear shirts every day. I guess what it comes down to is what's the bigger overreaction- the AD firing the coach or the coach believing that his kids simply HAVE to wear no shirts during practice, when there are plenty of athletes at other schools who do wear shirts?
The athletes will be hurt because Tom has them believing he is the straw that stirs the drink. Coaching is one thing, but there are some pretty talented kids over there. Hopefully, they rally behind their new coach and have just as successful a spring as they had a winter.
I have heard from someone closer to the issue that the boys were told by the superintendant (maybe through the AD) as early as a month ago to put their shirts on. In early April, the guys were taking their shirts off. I don't remember any 70 degree days in April. It seems like they just didn't feel like putting shirts on, as opposed to absolutely needing to run shirtless. I'm not debating the rule's purpose, but more the outrage on the part of the coach and kids for being told to put on a shirt.
This says a lot: "Davis said that Fogel came over in his golf cart and confronted the student."
That said, there is a good measure of wisdom in not poking the bear.
hey guys...it is too bad this happened, but there are going to be times when you have to swallow your pride a little and just follow orders....trust me i am total maniac and i get upset at a lot of decisions that are made by admin who are not involved in the day to day of my program...but sometimes you need to just stay quiet and do your thing. Coach Davis should still have his job, while the AD and Admin in my opinion are wrong...Coach Davis needed to handle the situation differently. sometimes the squeaky wheel doesn't always get what it wants...take it from a guy who's almost gotten let go a few times.
The ad, principal, and superintendent clearly overreacted in this situation. They have a right to be silly and require the runners to wear shirts. Tom complied with their request. One runner at the conclusion of his workout, while talking with Tom, took off his shirt. He could have interrupted his instruction and told the runner to put his shirt back on, but he didn't see that as necessary and in violation of the stupid rule of not having his team run shirtless. If they wanted to be that pickey about it, the ad could have reminded him that even 1 runner at the end of the workout should not be shirtless. Tom would have accepted that and I hope next year would have found a better place to coach, wher they are not still caught in the Puritan Age.
Some have said that this is so preposterous that there must have been some other issue they had with Tom for which this was a convenient vehicle to get rid of him. If that was so I have to believe they would and could have addressed that. This is just a throwback to the days of no long hair and dress codes, etc. I once worked at a school when the principal told a teacher to lower the him of her skirt and me to cut my hair. This is the same type of thinking; so strong that it caused this overreaction.
did tom dais ever punch a kid in the face. I think not. go ride your golf withiut a shirt on a realize hpw unreal it is not wear a shirt
Guys, the kids ran around in half shirts, basically only covering their shoulders, mocking the rule. Tom let this happen and openly mocked the admins in front of the team. He had this coming.
Rules are rules if you don't like them move on its a free country. To start a media war to dredge up dirt against the AD is classless.
We're still missing any indication that anything other than some reporters doing there jobs prompted this "shameless" "media war."
How did the reporters hear about the story? Either a kid or the coach had to have tipped them off to it. Something tells me the AD and/ or admin didn't do it.
What it comes down to seeems to be this- the NN people who know Tom well are going to come to his defense. Those who have come across Tom more recently and have had negative experiences are on the attack. Everybody's opinion on the topic one way or the other is going to be clouded by how they feel about Tom the person.
Trying to take that out of it, if a coach is told repeatedly by his AD or another superior to do something, he should do it.
If people just blindly did what their bosses told them to do, we'd still be in the dark ages. Change would never occur. We'd still have dress codes,and many other silly restictions in schools, not to mention slavery, racism, etc. in society. Coaches have to speak up and share their expertise to enlighten their superiors and bring about change. Tom is being sacrificed, but I'm guessing in the near future kids will run distance shirtles at WW because the pressure to do what's right(viewed in other communities) will be accepted. And Tom will have caused that change. He also will have an influence in creating a better attitude by the school administration in dealing with subordinates. The attention this case has brought on WW will prevent further mistreatment and overreaction by the AD and Principal, and supt..
Give me a break- get off your high horse. Tom is being sacrificed???? Is this for real? He is a martyr now? A 2nd year coach with a problem with authority is usually out of a job. Look at that Tarello guy from LS.... he was better than anyone else at coaching according to him- and he's where Tom is now, looking for work.
Old Blue Eyes- I think I remember you are Tom's former HS coach. So is Jon who runs this blog. Ankit is a former teammate. Keep defending this guy, that's what we all need.
The kids running around doing every interview he can. He keeps lying on them but thats ok if this story continues that will come out. Even that old toad Dick Sullivan came out and had to throw in his two cents. Did Fogel ever fire a Harry?
You are not addressing the issues at hand here. No matter your relationship with Tom, the following is true:
1. The AD and the coach's responsibility is the good of athletes
2. The AD implemented a policy, a policy that
a) enforcing did not help the athletes, and in fact, caused unnecessary discomfort
b) violating did not hurt anybody. No, distance runners are not really known for impressive upper body physiques. But are they really that hard to look at? If it makes the kids more comfortable, you really can't bare to catch a glance at them for a few seconds?
3. Tom remembered his responsibility to the kids, the AD remembered only himself.
Whether you know Tom or not, love him or hate him, the 3 points listed above are facts. Please correct me if I am wrong. Like Coach Blackburn said, if everybody just blindly followed orders, Rosa Parks' descendants would still be sitting in the back of the bus, India's economic growth would be feeding Britain instead of itself, and Europe's Jewish population would likely be significantly smaller than it is today. Now, is Tom leading a social revolution of international proportions? Is he in the running for this year's Nobel Peace Prize? Obviously not. But that doesn't mean nothing should be done about it.
Just so I'm clear...
It goes
1) Tom Davis
2) Ghandi
3) Rosa Parks
4) Elie Wiesel
I think the point of the post is actually very clear, if you choose to read the entirety of it.
http://westwood.patch.com/articles/letter-to-the-editor-resident-responds-to-firing-of-track-coach
It's a fact the AD is violent. The administration refuses to meet with him, even though he tried many times well before this situation escalated. His athletes were doing what was in their best interest to become better runners. Tom tells team that they need to wear shirts or else risk being kick off team. AD, a child abuser, aggressively approaches one of Tom's athletes. Tom intervenes. Tom gets assaulted. Community and kids become outraged, but administration refuses to meet with them or deal with situation. Administration stands behind a child abuser, fires Tom after he's assaulted and bans him from school property. What is going on behind the scene here??? It is clear a few of you have person problems with Tom, but it is a fact that he has an entire community of support behind him, so regardless of your personal problems, he seems to have done the right thing.
this is a joke
I love people like Blue Eyes and Ankit making statements when they weren't there for the incident or the season.
You like Tom, we get it.
The old coach was brought in this week and the vast majority of team cheered the move.
He cares about all of the team, not just his 5 guys.
btw of his "5 guys" 2 are hurt and one has mono
Workouts like 50 x 200m tend to do that to a teenager.
Whoever the last comment was posted by, really? I am on the team, and no one "cheered the move", but many are glad to have a coach again guiding them at practice. Those of us who want are still being coached by Tom, and that's most of us. And about the 50x200m, every single kid on the team absolutely loved the workout. Being that you're bashing Tom about this, I think this is Neal!!!
Doubt its Neal but if it was turnabout it is fair play right?
Doubt its Neal but if it was turnabout it is fair play right?
Whoever just posted that Tom is still coaching you privately, you might want to avoid broadcasting that if it's true. This would be an MIAA violation and the last thing this situation needs now is for Tom or the Westwood guys to get into even more trouble.
Can you really get in trouble for doing workouts not designed by your school coach? I only asking because there is a program in Mass where kids are privately coached, but they compete for their high school team. I believe it's called emerging elites or developing elites. Does anyone know specifics about this? I think if you are at your high school practice and do everything that is going on, but do extra on your own, that is how the emerging team is able to keep doing what they do.
A lot of people here seem to be lacking some pretty basic reading comprehension skills...
if your coach has no sack and allows the kids to do emerging elites workouts instead of their own then I don't think MIAA rules are broken.
sure doesn't seem too loyal and I'd imagine other athletes would get to thinking their coach was inept but no boken rules that I can see
Programs like emerging elites can only exist for runners on their HS teams (in MIAA schools) IF they are done in addition to the workouts given by the HS coach.
For instance, if a kid has 6 practices a week with his HS team, he may choose to attend 3 EE sessions and get extra work in. EE claims that it works with HS coaches of each kid (they don't) but most HS athletes don't really need more than what they get.
By that definition, EE does not violate the MIAA. However, Tom is giving his workouts to his guys through the new (throws?) coach. If that's how the coach wants to handle the situation, then so be it. Tom can't do anything without consulting with the new coach, but if he prefers to have Tom giving workouts than making them up on his own, it's his right to do so.
However, Tom's guys should know not to state that "he's still coaching us", because this threatens to get Tom into hot water in case he does get the chance to win back his job, or get a new one.
What was the issue about not wearing shirts in the first place?
Since when does a hard 200 workout give you mono? Last I checked you get it a different way...
http://highschoolsports.masslive.com/news/article/-3810341228231533529/shirts-happen-westwood-track-coach-fired/
That AD seems pretty dangerous to me. How is he allowed around kids?
I am a school administrator in the Southern US and I've been reading and watching this unfold. It seems that if you look deep into the situation, this is really a case of an insubordinate coach. No employee (in the public or private sector) should challenge his/her immediate supervisor publicly. I think had the coach not done that, he would probably still have his job and a really good case based on the inppropriate behavior of the AD. If you go to the Westwood School Athletics site and you read the policies for athletes, it states clearly that all students must wear a shirt at all times (under the section titled "attire"). We could dispute this and try to get the policy changed, but nevertheless it is a policy and it is the teacher's responsibility to uphold school policy and the wishes of his supervisor FIRST. Does this teacher have tenure? If so, he may have stronger representation (not a fan of unions myself, but it's a resource for him). If he isn't/wasn't tenured, the law generally upholds the county/school administrators decision to terminate. What would have been easier though, would have been to terminate him officially at the end of the year instead of making a stink. Finally, a professional would not manipulate and try to incite kids or families via tv releases, websites, etc. A professional, would encourage the students to go on about their business while the legal system works (for the record I will also say it seems like the coach is a nice enough guy, but is a little immature). Have a great day everyone!
Your analyses is clearly biased and self-serving. Spoken as an administrator defending administrators. It's not unprofessional or rude to defend yourself when wronged. There is risk involved--you may be misunderstood and others may not hire you as a result. But otherwise it's his right.
I think you said it right when you said others may not hire you as a result. Clearly he has a right to give his version but unfortunately for him I think other AD's are going to exercise their right to not hire him. Had he just gone quietly into the night he probably wouldn't have that problem.
I don't think anybody is doubting that he has the RIGHT to go to the media with this. However, he is putting future employment in jeopardy by continuing to do so. Before, he was the guy in the TVL who had the dispute with his AD over t-shirts, not a federal case, would have been easy to get another coaching job. Tom seems talented enough, certainly has some things to bring to the table as a coach, would have found a job in another conference.
After a day or two of articles and discussion boards, word started coming out that he ignored a policy that he was told to enforce. Mass. coaches (and AD's therefore) now know him as the guy who didn't follow orders.
Now, I'm afraid if the media campaign continues, he is going to have trouble getting any HS coaching job in the near future. I was on the board to hire an adminsitrator in my school last year and every resume had a section for "reason for leaving" under each job listed. As soon as we read something like "had conflict with previous principal" it went into a big pile. You're applying for a job that many people want, and in this job market, you're lucky to have one.
I'm afraid that Tom might find himself blackballed in the future by AD's who don't want to have a conflict with their track coach- a sport that, quite frankly, they want to think about as little as humanly possible!
http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/news/x859557472/Report-Athletic-director-struck-student#axzz1LrXCYgx5
Is this the same AD that just fired Tom? How is it possible that he is still working with kids if this is true? Why was this not a bigger deal in Massachusetts when it happened?
Anonymous wrote...."it states clearly that all students must wear a shirt at all times (under the section titled "attire")..."
I just searched their athletic department handbook and found nothing about "attire." Link?
OBE wrote....."Your analyses is clearly biased..."
A classic case of the pot calling the kettle black? :)
Of course I'm biased. I like Tom. But that doesn't mean I can't see the truth here, which is that he was mistreated.
I knew someone would come back with the safety issue. OF COURSE educators should be concerned about student safety. There is no mention in any of these articles that anyone was suffering from heat exhaustion etc., if so I am sure it would be plastered in the papers. Furthermore, the number one treatment for heat exhaustion is hydration not taking off a shirt. My son plays sports (we have the same policy here) and they drink water like crazy and even pour it on heads/necks. Get a drink of water! Keep your shirt on. This is ridiculous. I do not condone insubordination in any form. We are raising a generation of students who think they can buck school policies, whine, and go online or to the press if they have negative consequences to deal with. People need to take responsibility. This is nothing to do with shirts or what gender was/was not wearing them, and everything to do with a teacher who had a history (or so it seems from the press), of insubordinate behavior. Again, the coach should never have been insubordinate in public to his administration, he should have bit his tongue and waited. He could have gone to the admin privately, or gone to the district if he felt safety was an issue, or written a letter to have it in writing that he disagreed with the policy. There's just a way to handle things and a way not to.
How was Tom mistreated? He was running with his shirt off, his girlfriend was running in a sports bra. He was apparently trying to get this to happen from what I can tell. He's using the AD's past to try to draw a correlation to this story and make it seem like the AD must have been the one pushing this. People wanted Tom gone a year ago. The AD defended him and said give him a chance. I'm sure he wishes he wasn't such a nice guy to Tom these days.
Westwood athletic director has been officially fired and there is a school wide policy review being conducted by the mass school committee board. Will be interesting to see what comes to light when all is said and done. Maybe Tom was on to something big there and they canned him because he wasn't afraid to stand up for what is right. Or maybe Tom was in the wrong and fired for good reason. Answers should be coming soon if this is all true.
please post a link or source of your AD Fired news.
I'm on site and haven't seen or heard anything like that
http://www.wickedlocal.com/westwood/news/x1058156992/Fogel-on-leave-while-Westwood-School-Committee-investigates-coachs-firing#axzz1Ly9YQkEd
Not fired. Yet.
I imagine the other reasons for the firing will have to come out now
Looks like Tom may not be the only one to lose his job in this fiasco.
Why has everyone posted anonymously in this thread?
because they're talking about someone they know (Tom) and will probably not want to run into him and have him know it was them. doubt any of the negative things about tom would have came out without anonymity
I do not know Tom and obviously this issue has been blown out of proportion and when I was running track or playing football I always did what my coach (boss) told me to without any questions or hesitations, however, one time I questioned my coach in a semi-respectful manner in his coaching technique that I did not agree with. We had a discussion and in the end it was resolved, I know this obviously is not the best example, but what I'm getting to is that what Tom did was right, however, he just did it in the worst way possible, the AD is his boss and you have to respect him, even if you don't like. Basically both side could have handle it better and this whole fiasco had not need to happen unless it was Tom's plan all along to get the AD fired muahaha
http://westwood.patch.com/articles/firing-of-westwood-track-coach-was-justified-investigation-finds
so now they're both out of a job
Maybe they can start up business togther?
Post a Comment