ADVERTISEMENT

Eric Kasperowicz out at P-R

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gunga_Galunga said:
Of course they are wrong for not renewing him without a valid reason. It's incompetence. He's the best coach they've ever had and one of the best (if not the best) in the WPIAL.

The way they went about is even worse, just slimy. I don't support incompetence and reprehensible behavior. Apparently you have no problem with it.
Click to expand...
I tend to judge administrators at schools based on academics
Not on the sports it’s true
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
I tend to judge administrators at schools based on academics
Not on the sports it’s true
Click to expand...

Yet you made countless post on this thread (and other threads) how it is the family that controls academic performance, so a community of like minded people produce the best performing schools. Now you are saying it is the Administration.

Seems like you enjoy twisting facts to suit your agenda, and it is an agenda instead of a point of view.
 
Mikefln said:
Yet you made countless post on this thread (and other threads) how it is the family that controls academic performance, so a community of like minded people produce the best performing schools. Now you are saying it is the Administration.

Seems like you enjoy twisting facts to suit your agenda, and it is an agenda instead of a point of view.
Click to expand...
I’m not the one talking in hyperbole about the admin because of a football coach
I’m consistent with it’s the families driving performance at schools

i am also laughing at those screaming “it’s a great school !” But also vote the bums out -because a coach wasn’t renewed
 
USN_Panther said:
I fired a coach once. A full-time ice hockey coach (well getting paid full time money while pretty much working part-time). There was a no-cause bi-directional out-clause in the contract, with a notice period.

We decided to terminate the contract because financial projections showed we couldn't afford it and would bankrupt the club by continuing in that arrangement.

The club had a sweet deal going for a while where there was a verbal agreement that the rink would pay 40%, and the senior men's team would pay 20% of the cost. All thought that an increase in players would bring in the money to cover all of this. The rink expected the coach to coach the very beginners players in a program run by the rink. The coach delegated that to someone else (unpaid) who didn't always turn up, and that volunteer was being investigated for grooming young players and was a suspected (but not confirmed thank goodness--think we intervened in time) pedophile. Well, the rink couldn't afford to continue to pay, nor did they want to. They terminated the verbal agreement (that at that point several years after the agreement, one party involved had died, and the other couldn't remember the specifics other than the dollar figure!).

The senior men's team had a change in management, and wanted to go in a different direction for coaching. That and they never had the money to pay in the first place and owed for two past seasons.

And the player numbers that were supposed to increase to offset the cost were declining. There were bullying concerns and the board basically spent more than half of each meeting managing complaints either directed at the coach or generated by the coach. The coach wanted to know why we didn't raise more money to cover his cost, and I flat out told him it was because we spent all of our time dealing with his drama.

So the only agreement in writing was with the club having to pay the full freight of the cost, and with the outside funding not materialising, we had to let him go. I met with him to see if we could agree to reduce to part time pay per hour type of arrangement. That was when I was told he would be suing me and the club and had been advised that we were breaking employment law and would be held liable. I took that to mean there was no room to negotiate. The board agreed to terminate the agreement without cause and gave notice as required in the contract. There would have been plenty of "cause" to go around, but cause is contestable. No cause is not contestable. And we really didn't have the money.

This guy tried to salt the earth on the way out. He lied to many and he spoke freely, but the club could not rebut any of it due to the confidentiality clause in the contract. People were defending him against non-existent allegations as he was spreading this misinformation. The yearly financial reports were public information and posted on the web as per law. Hell, we posted our meeting minutes on our website. The financial concerns were clearly in there. Very few people can actually understand the difference between assets, receivables, and cash. We looked OK on paper, but had receivables that just weren't going to materialize. The national federation owed us $40k, and they didn't have the money at the time. The membership called a special meeting and in this meeting a certain member misrepresented the financial situation and accused the board and specifically the treasurer of embezzling the money. He wanted the club to sue the rink and the senior men's team for the money they did not have, and for terminating the verbal contract that nobody could even remember the specifics.

So I guess the short version and the point of this is that in such matters, one party tends to be free to control the information flow while the other party is required by contract or law to not comment on the situation. The PR board had their reasons. Appropriate or not, they elected to not renew the contract. EK made their letter public. PR cannot really say much. So EK controls the public narrative, but there may be information that we don't know.

When I look back at the coaching firing debacle I went through I realize that I was significantly hindered by not being able to get some control of that narrative. The board could not ever comment on the situation. We completely took the high ground and got ground into dust for doing so. In retrospect, another approach could have been to place some leaks out there that there was an ongoing investigation into a pedophile coach. That would have made things so much easier, but really would have caused long lasting damage to the coach and to the club. I actually liked that coach. My son is a better hockey player because of him.

But when things become unworkable, sometimes you take one for the team. The PR admins seem to be doing this. The full truth will probably not come out for a while. I doubt they didn't renew him solely based on winning big. Angry parent? Perhaps. It happens.

Funny thing is that as PR admins drop, EK might be the only one left standing.
Click to expand...
Interesting story, thanks for sharing.

A few things I'll say is that no parents were complaining and coach was basically dared by the district (twice) to share his letter. This after they said they would not comment, but decided to comment several time while still saying they weren't going to comment.

The only one left from the investigation committee is the guy being promoted to AD from assistant principal.
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
I’m not the one talking in hyperbole about the admin because of a football coach
I’m consistent with it’s the families driving performance at schools

i am also laughing at those screaming “it’s a great school !” But also vote the bums out -because a coach wasn’t renewed
Click to expand...

Obviously you don't want to acknowledge the witch hunt (the part everyone is mad at the admin fir) that I and others pointed out numerous times. So there is no point in discussing this anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: levance2
SoufOaklin4Life said:
It’s been acknowledged
It was also the aggrieved coach who made it public -not the school
Click to expand...
That's not entirely fair. High profile coach at a high profile district coming off of state title, that is going to draw media attention whether the coach initiated it or not. And it is going to draw public reaction whether the coach initiated it or not.
 
recruitsreadtheseboards said:
That's not entirely fair. High profile coach at a high profile district coming off of state title, that is going to draw media attention whether the coach initiated it or not. And it is going to draw public reaction whether the coach initiated it or not.
Click to expand...
Matters related to judging the admin and school board as related to the decisions and character attacks on them .

I’m pointing out the hypocrisy
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
Matters related to judging the admin and school board as related to the decisions and character attacks on them .

I’m pointing out the hypocrisy
Click to expand...
You are parsing things just to parse. I understood your overall point. If the school district is high performing, then the Super and Admin are doing their job.
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
Not parsing
We agree on how they should be judged

others seem to be dissatisfied with their performance -
While ironically accusing them of having agendas
Click to expand...
It's been explained to you several times. You don't want to get it, you don't agree, you fail to acknowledge, whatever. You can have your opinion on the matter. It's not the opinion of many much closer to the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: levance2
USN_Panther said:
I fired a coach once. A full-time ice hockey coach (well getting paid full time money while pretty much working part-time). There was a no-cause bi-directional out-clause in the contract, with a notice period.

We decided to terminate the contract because financial projections showed we couldn't afford it and would bankrupt the club by continuing in that arrangement.

The club had a sweet deal going for a while where there was a verbal agreement that the rink would pay 40%, and the senior men's team would pay 20% of the cost. All thought that an increase in players would bring in the money to cover all of this. The rink expected the coach to coach the very beginners players in a program run by the rink. The coach delegated that to someone else (unpaid) who didn't always turn up, and that volunteer was being investigated for grooming young players and was a suspected (but not confirmed thank goodness--think we intervened in time) pedophile. Well, the rink couldn't afford to continue to pay, nor did they want to. They terminated the verbal agreement (that at that point several years after the agreement, one party involved had died, and the other couldn't remember the specifics other than the dollar figure!).

The senior men's team had a change in management, and wanted to go in a different direction for coaching. That and they never had the money to pay in the first place and owed for two past seasons.

And the player numbers that were supposed to increase to offset the cost were declining. There were bullying concerns and the board basically spent more than half of each meeting managing complaints either directed at the coach or generated by the coach. The coach wanted to know why we didn't raise more money to cover his cost, and I flat out told him it was because we spent all of our time dealing with his drama.

So the only agreement in writing was with the club having to pay the full freight of the cost, and with the outside funding not materialising, we had to let him go. I met with him to see if we could agree to reduce to part time pay per hour type of arrangement. That was when I was told he would be suing me and the club and had been advised that we were breaking employment law and would be held liable. I took that to mean there was no room to negotiate. The board agreed to terminate the agreement without cause and gave notice as required in the contract. There would have been plenty of "cause" to go around, but cause is contestable. No cause is not contestable. And we really didn't have the money.

This guy tried to salt the earth on the way out. He lied to many and he spoke freely, but the club could not rebut any of it due to the confidentiality clause in the contract. People were defending him against non-existent allegations as he was spreading this misinformation. The yearly financial reports were public information and posted on the web as per law. Hell, we posted our meeting minutes on our website. The financial concerns were clearly in there. Very few people can actually understand the difference between assets, receivables, and cash. We looked OK on paper, but had receivables that just weren't going to materialize. The national federation owed us $40k, and they didn't have the money at the time. The membership called a special meeting and in this meeting a certain member misrepresented the financial situation and accused the board and specifically the treasurer of embezzling the money. He wanted the club to sue the rink and the senior men's team for the money they did not have, and for terminating the verbal contract that nobody could even remember the specifics.

So I guess the short version and the point of this is that in such matters, one party tends to be free to control the information flow while the other party is required by contract or law to not comment on the situation. The PR board had their reasons. Appropriate or not, they elected to not renew the contract. EK made their letter public. PR cannot really say much. So EK controls the public narrative, but there may be information that we don't know.

When I look back at the coaching firing debacle I went through I realize that I was significantly hindered by not being able to get some control of that narrative. The board could not ever comment on the situation. We completely took the high ground and got ground into dust for doing so. In retrospect, another approach could have been to place some leaks out there that there was an ongoing investigation into a pedophile coach. That would have made things so much easier, but really would have caused long lasting damage to the coach and to the club. I actually liked that coach. My son is a better hockey player because of him.

But when things become unworkable, sometimes you take one for the team. The PR admins seem to be doing this. The full truth will probably not come out for a while. I doubt they didn't renew him solely based on winning big. Angry parent? Perhaps. It happens.

Funny thing is that as PR admins drop, EK might be the only one left standing.
Click to expand...

This is easily the best explanation of how things go. I was in a similar but different situation where I terminated someone that worked for the club and the board had to sit and watch the guy tell everyone and anyone how unfairly and horribly he was treated when in reality, he had broken laws and caused a lot of problems. We were obligated to protect the club both financially and legally. There are still people that hate me over it.

I don't know what the real answer is at PR but I don't think I've ever seen so much commotion over a HS football coach in my life. Like I said earlier, they might lose a game or two (or more) next year just like the majority of HS football teams. The horror.
 
USN_Panther said:
I fired a coach once. A full-time ice hockey coach (well getting paid full time money while pretty much working part-time). There was a no-cause bi-directional out-clause in the contract, with a notice period.

We decided to terminate the contract because financial projections showed we couldn't afford it and would bankrupt the club by continuing in that arrangement.

The club had a sweet deal going for a while where there was a verbal agreement that the rink would pay 40%, and the senior men's team would pay 20% of the cost. All thought that an increase in players would bring in the money to cover all of this. The rink expected the coach to coach the very beginners players in a program run by the rink. The coach delegated that to someone else (unpaid) who didn't always turn up, and that volunteer was being investigated for grooming young players and was a suspected (but not confirmed thank goodness--think we intervened in time) pedophile. Well, the rink couldn't afford to continue to pay, nor did they want to. They terminated the verbal agreement (that at that point several years after the agreement, one party involved had died, and the other couldn't remember the specifics other than the dollar figure!).

The senior men's team had a change in management, and wanted to go in a different direction for coaching. That and they never had the money to pay in the first place and owed for two past seasons.

And the player numbers that were supposed to increase to offset the cost were declining. There were bullying concerns and the board basically spent more than half of each meeting managing complaints either directed at the coach or generated by the coach. The coach wanted to know why we didn't raise more money to cover his cost, and I flat out told him it was because we spent all of our time dealing with his drama.

So the only agreement in writing was with the club having to pay the full freight of the cost, and with the outside funding not materialising, we had to let him go. I met with him to see if we could agree to reduce to part time pay per hour type of arrangement. That was when I was told he would be suing me and the club and had been advised that we were breaking employment law and would be held liable. I took that to mean there was no room to negotiate. The board agreed to terminate the agreement without cause and gave notice as required in the contract. There would have been plenty of "cause" to go around, but cause is contestable. No cause is not contestable. And we really didn't have the money.

This guy tried to salt the earth on the way out. He lied to many and he spoke freely, but the club could not rebut any of it due to the confidentiality clause in the contract. People were defending him against non-existent allegations as he was spreading this misinformation. The yearly financial reports were public information and posted on the web as per law. Hell, we posted our meeting minutes on our website. The financial concerns were clearly in there. Very few people can actually understand the difference between assets, receivables, and cash. We looked OK on paper, but had receivables that just weren't going to materialize. The national federation owed us $40k, and they didn't have the money at the time. The membership called a special meeting and in this meeting a certain member misrepresented the financial situation and accused the board and specifically the treasurer of embezzling the money. He wanted the club to sue the rink and the senior men's team for the money they did not have, and for terminating the verbal contract that nobody could even remember the specifics.

So I guess the short version and the point of this is that in such matters, one party tends to be free to control the information flow while the other party is required by contract or law to not comment on the situation. The PR board had their reasons. Appropriate or not, they elected to not renew the contract. EK made their letter public. PR cannot really say much. So EK controls the public narrative, but there may be information that we don't know.

When I look back at the coaching firing debacle I went through I realize that I was significantly hindered by not being able to get some control of that narrative. The board could not ever comment on the situation. We completely took the high ground and got ground into dust for doing so. In retrospect, another approach could have been to place some leaks out there that there was an ongoing investigation into a pedophile coach. That would have made things so much easier, but really would have caused long lasting damage to the coach and to the club. I actually liked that coach. My son is a better hockey player because of him.

But when things become unworkable, sometimes you take one for the team. The PR admins seem to be doing this. The full truth will probably not come out for a while. I doubt they didn't renew him solely based on winning big. Angry parent? Perhaps. It happens.

Funny thing is that as PR admins drop, EK might be the only one left standing.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. We don't know the details of the PR situation, but I think people automatically jumping to the "witchunt' conclusion are clearly most interested in football success above all else. Very Penn State like.

Saying "I don't get paid enough to..." Is a clear sign that be thinks too highly of himself. If a teacher said something like that many would go nuts.
 
HailtoPitt said:
Excellent post. We don't know the details of the PR situation, but I think people automatically jumping to the "witchunt' conclusion are clearly most interested in football success above all else. Very Penn State like.
Click to expand...
Success with Horror
 
HailtoPitt said:
Excellent post. We don't know the details of the PR situation, but I think people automatically jumping to the "witchunt' conclusion are clearly most interested in football success above all else. Very Penn State like.

Saying "I don't get paid enough to..." Is a clear sign that be thinks too highly of himself. If a teacher said something like that many would go nuts.
Click to expand...
I wonder if he would behave differently if he coached at North Hills.
 
HailtoPitt said:
Excellent post. We don't know the details of the PR situation, but I think people automatically jumping to the "witchunt' conclusion are clearly most interested in football success above all else. Very Penn State like.

Saying "I don't get paid enough to..." Is a clear sign that be thinks too highly of himself. If a teacher said something like that many would go nuts.
Click to expand...

I stated I was done with this thread, but then you compared this to Penn St like.

I look at the fact that the proposed victim denied it and is planning to sue the district. That is my argument. If other facts come out later that shows more wrong doing, I'll state I'm wrong. Until then, the only evidence suggest a witch hunt.
 
Mikefln said:
I stated I was done with this thread, but then you compared this to Penn St like.

I look at the fact that the proposed victim denied it and is planning to sue the district. That is my argument. If other facts come out later that shows more wrong doing, I'll state I'm wrong. Until then, the only evidence suggest a witch hunt.
Click to expand...

I haven't been following, but where can I find this fact about the victim?
 
I tried to warn everyone to stay away from this story until the facts were presented properly as it was a PR issue......but all of you had to speculate and offer opinions with no facts. Sad.
 
jivecat said:
I tried to warn everyone to stay away from this story until the facts were presented properly as it was a PR issue......but all of you had to speculate and offer opinions with no facts. Sad.
Click to expand...
But....no "facts" have been produced and many investigations have not produced any real supporting evidence. Like someone said, "if there was serious dirt, someone by now would have come out to someone like a Madden or one of these media, because the media would LOVE this type of stuff." But there hasn't. This isn't like Penn State because Penn State had MOUNTAINS of evidence and testimony as to wrong doings and cover ups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UP_WarStreets21 and 9nationalchampionships
jivecat said:
I tried to warn everyone to stay away from this story until the facts were presented properly as it was a PR issue
Click to expand...

But when the district miss handles the thing what do you expect?

Coach's contract expired, tell coach we are opening the position, no explanation , just do it , hire the next coach with the five votes necessary and be done with it. No legal hassle, some whining by parents but after all it is a public school and many things, not just coaching changes cause this.
 
HailtoPitt said:
I haven't been following, but where can I find this fact about the victim?
Click to expand...

www.wtae.com

Pine-Richland School District takes on criticism from attorney

UPDATED: School district releases statement
www.wtae.com www.wtae.com

You can google the names for more info, there are multiple stories. The kid was dealing with stuff from other kids and it had nothing to do with football. Not going into details, but think about what high school kids typically get into it about. As I mentioned earlier, probably why K called out the principal in the meeting.

For anyone keeping score, 2 of the 3 people on the "investigation" committee are leaving. The 3rd (Miller's lackey he brought from NA) got a nice promotion to AD from assistant principal (he was a social studies teacher at NA). For reference, the old AD was an associate AD at Robert Morris for 10 year.

Another rumor floating is they are trying to get the NA DC to apply for the job, he's the new AD's buddy.

It's soap opera stuff.
 
Gunga_Galunga said:
www.wtae.com

Pine-Richland School District takes on criticism from attorney

UPDATED: School district releases statement
www.wtae.com www.wtae.com

You can google the names for more info, there are multiple stories. The kid was dealing with stuff from other kids and it had nothing to do with football. Not going into details, but think about what high school kids typically get into it about. As I mentioned earlier, probably why K called out the principal in the meeting.

For anyone keeping score, 2 of the 3 people on the "investigation" committee are leaving. The 3rd (Miller's lackey he brought from NA) got a nice promotion to AD from assistant principal (he was a social studies teacher at NA). For reference, the old AD was an associate AD at Robert Morris for 10 year.

Another rumor floating is they are trying to get the NA DC to apply for the job, he's the new AD's buddy.

It's soap opera stuff.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the school isn't going to release much info to protect the confidentiality of students. So it comes down to what is more believable. The soap opera stuff or the school withholding info to protect those involved.
 
Gunga_Galunga said:
www.wtae.com

Pine-Richland School District takes on criticism from attorney

UPDATED: School district releases statement
www.wtae.com www.wtae.com

You can google the names for more info, there are multiple stories. The kid was dealing with stuff from other kids and it had nothing to do with football. Not going into details, but think about what high school kids typically get into it about. As I mentioned earlier, probably why K called out the principal in the meeting.

For anyone keeping score, 2 of the 3 people on the "investigation" committee are leaving. The 3rd (Miller's lackey he brought from NA) got a nice promotion to AD from assistant principal (he was a social studies teacher at NA). For reference, the old AD was an associate AD at Robert Morris for 10 year.

Another rumor floating is they are trying to get the NA DC to apply for the job, he's the new AD's buddy.

It's soap opera stuff.
Click to expand...
It’s politics. Unfortunately that is not limited to public positions. This happens in private companies all the time.
 
HailtoPitt said:
Sounds like the school isn't going to release much info to protect the confidentiality of students. So it comes down to what is more believable. The soap opera stuff or the school withholding info to protect those involved.
Click to expand...

There's nothing to gain. The conspiracy crowd can turn anything into a minor infraction. Plus I'm certain the solicitor told everyone to just shut up.
 
It's over. He's wasting time and money. Someone will hire Kasperowicz somewhere but it won't be at Pine-Richland. Looking forward to seeing who their new coach will be though.
 
Word in the streets is the next HC at PR will only be there for 1 year and Kasper will return in 2022 in full force. That's if the 3 new board members are elected who've publicly stated they support Kasper.
 
The superintendent sent an email last week taking another round of shots at Kasper and why he wasn't renewed. Also accusing him and his supporters of intimidation that is becoming threatening. Said all of this is hampering their ability to hire a qualified football coach, but they will hire a new coach. Probably why he's going to suite.

There are 4 board seats out of 9 up or election. Unless they can flip one of the other 5 or someone resigns, they won't have the votes yet.
 
BFo8 said:
Please do not reply to this if you have information. This is a PR matter and people need to mind their own business.
Click to expand...
dd5uns1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585 and BFo8
steelcurtain55. said:
Word in the streets is the next HC at PR will only be there for 1 year and Kasper will return in 2022 in full force. That's if the 3 new board members are elected who've publicly stated they support Kasper.
Click to expand...
Except it was a unanimous decision to not renew his contract. If these three new board candidates are elected and are true to their word, then it would still be a 6-3 vote against Kasperowicz. Plus, what if P-R goes far in the states and has a successful season? Will the new coach be let go and then the school board will have to explain that? Unless a puppet coach is hired I don't see that happening.
 
Gunga_Galunga said:
Do you live here? Do you pay taxes here? Do your kids go to school here? Do you know anything about the administration or how people feel towards certain people in it?

Like I mentioned before, worry about Johnstown. You're another who is uninformed.
Click to expand...
Well, he has a habit of this. This topic is not immune.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

scoise

Next Step for Lowe

Replies
4
Views
1K
Center Court at the Pete
StephenGertz
StephenGertz
Chris Peak

Offensive touchdowns over the last 9 years

Replies
7
Views
627
Between Fifth And Forbes
New York Panther
N
D

The Man Who 'Made' Jurkovec ...

Replies
17
Views
1K
Football Board
pittmeister
pittmeister
HailToPitt725

Worst possible time for the program to flounder

Replies
137
Views
6K
Football Board
Sean Miller Fan
S
S

Question on 5A/6A Finals?

Replies
101
Views
3K
Football Board
Upg bobcat
U
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back