A - Coach Selection Details


Proposal

The RHHA Coach Selection Process should be based upon the standardized scoring of training, knowledge, and experience against an established set of coach qualification criteria. Coach candidates are evaluated relative to the qualification criteria and the best candidate is selected for the position.
Coaches are appointed for a 1-year term only. All coach candidates must re-apply each season.
Coach candidates must submit their application by the designated date, which is usually in December. Interviews will be held in January of each year. The applicants will be pre-screened based on the information in their application, and experience with Richmond Hill Hockey. All applicants will be interviewed by the OMHA who will present a short list of preferred candidates. The dates may be moved forward for “AAA” to allow for early selection and recruiting.
A short list of coaches will be selected in early Feb for each division, and tier. This short list will be approved by the RHHA Board of Directors. Coaches will be notified in Late January that they have been selected as one of a pool of coaches for a particular division. Final coach appointments will be made in March, after player evaluations, to ensure each coach is appointed to the appropriate tier for their child's skill and ability.
A coach selection committee for each Division will be created by the RHHA Board of Directors each winter, preferable December. Each Division selection committee will consist of the Division Director and 2 appointed members who may or may not be board members, preferable unbiased.( I could think of several individuals that would qualify).
Coaches are selected based on qualification criteria. Some qualification criteria are deemed mandatory and comprise the minimum qualifications for a coach at that level and division. Others contribute to the overall rating of the coach candidate. Applicants not meeting the minimum qualifications shall not be selected over one who meets or exceeds the stated qualifications unless their experience and ability vastly exceeds those of the more qualified applicant. The selected applicant not meeting the minimum qualifications must be willing to attend the required courses in order to get those qualifications prior to start of season.
It is important to players as they develop that they experience different coaching styles and approaches. Consequently where there is more than one acceptable applicant for a given team, no head coach will be allowed to coach players of the same birth year for more than two consecutive seasons. No board members will be allowed to coach divisions in which their child plays.
•
Selection criteria includes:
• Training - Coaching Certification Program (OMHA). All prospective head coaches must have the minimum designation, or have committed to obtaining the minimum designation before the start of the season.
• Experience - number of years as head coach and assistant coach. Preference will be given to coach candidates with more years of experience in the division/level that is being applied for. Following that, preference will be given to candidates with more years of experience in higher divisions and levels.
• Background - number of years of playing experience, the level and organization of the teams played for. Preference will be given to coach candidates that can demonstrate background qualifications with playing at a higher division and level and more years of playing.

• Evaluation - based on the results of the annual RHHA Coaching Evaluation.
• Coach / Child - It is preferable that a coach does not have a child participating on the team that he/she is coaching. Therefore, where there are 2 or more acceptable candidates for the position, the applicant who does not have a child participating on the team will be selected.
• References - For candidates that do not have RHHA Coaching experience, references must be provided that can verify their background and experience.
• Interview - based on past history with RHHA, an interview may not be required. Questions will be consistent within a Division (same questions asked of all applicants within a division). If needed, a final interview will be conducted in Feb/March before the board.
• Security and Reference checks - all references will be checked for applicants who have not coached in the RHHA previously. The coach selection committee will contact the appropriate person or bodies to solicit feedback. Candidates must submit and complete a York Regional Police Association security check by May 1.

Thoughts?

Although the majority of what you said is already in place. You make some excellant recommendations. Fabulous post-- thought and effort into this one. May not totally agree with all you said, but there are some great points for thought. Nice post pal. &&

It is for discussion purposes. Why don't you highlight the areas you have concerns about and make suggestions so we can debate the merits and improve.

**_Coaches are appointed for a 1-year term only. All coach candidates must re-apply each season.**_---From what I understand all coaches are appointed for one year and have to reapply.

_Coach / Child - It is preferable that a coach does not have a child participating on the team that he/she is coaching. Therefore, where there are 2 or more acceptable candidates for the position, the applicant who does not have a child participating on the team will be selected.**_---being hometown hockey, there might not be another applicant for the division. There are highly qualified coaches that have a child on their team.

**_A short list of coaches will be selected in early Feb for each division, and tier. This short list will be approved by the RHHA Board of Directors. Coaches will be notified in Late January that they have been selected as one of a pool of coaches for a particular division. Final coach appointments will be made in March, after player evaluations, to ensure each coach is appointed to the appropriate tier for their child's skill and ability.**_---Mid march late march is too late. In the AAA division, the kid may have already been approached, causind us to loose yet another kid to someplace else.

All other points made seem very feasible...if not already in place.

**_Coaches are appointed for a 1-year term only. All coach candidates must re-apply each season.**_---From what I understand all coaches are appointed for one year and have to reapply.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No - Although most coaches have to re apply after one year, generally speaking the coach is given two years. The parents should evaluate the coach and the skill level of the coaches child to ensure he belongs at that level. Can you name a coach who was terminated after one year? Not many.

_Coach / Child - It is preferable that a coach does not have a child participating on the team that he/she is coaching. Therefore, where there are 2 or more acceptable candidates for the position, the applicant who does not have a child participating on the team will be selected.**_---being hometown hockey, there might not be another applicant for the division. There are highly qualified coaches that have a child on their team.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>YES, we have qualified coaches but only a few who recogonize their sons limitations. If they still want to coach they will have to select a level where their son can play and be competitive or they will have to submit to an impartial review committee who can evaluate the child and make the decision to cut. I suspect this decision will be made for them. To suggest their is generally only one applicant for a team is not true at all, I can see that only in a situation where the current coach is doing a good job and most people do not feel it is necessary to make a change, therefore not many apply. All too often the coach select the level he wants to coach at for himself and his child is a secondary consideration. This is the route cause of parent frustration watching a team where the coaches kids are the weakest players and then to top it off by adding "A"s and "C's" to their jersey just adds more fuel to the fire.

**_A short list of coaches will be selected in early Feb for each division, and tier. This short list will be approved by the RHHA Board of Directors. Coaches will be notified in Late January that they have been selected as one of a pool of coaches for a particular division. Final coach appointments will be made in March, after player evaluations, to ensure each coach is appointed to the appropriate tier for their child's skill and ability.**_---Mid march late march is too late. In the AAA division, the kid may have already been approached, causind us to loose yet another kid to someplace else.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AAA is unique and exceptions will have to be made. I suspect that Richmond Hill is getting closer to loosing its "AAA" status. The 95 "AAA" could not even field enough players for tryouts last year. Something is very wrong.

The Coaches selection committee should have a mandate to pick the best coach available for each team and to oversee the team selection in order to make sure that all teams are picked with the overall goal to have the players most suited to "AA" hockey on the "AA" teams as with the "A" team. In all cases, selection of players should be based on the players ability, not where he/she has played in the past and not based on prior relationships with past coaching staffs or parents.

I do not want to see the coach limited to 2 years. I feel it takes more than one season to get a group really playing like a team. Switching coaches usually means complete upset , and many player changes. In a lot of cases the new coach is moving in with his own core of players from his former team. This might tell you that when people find a coach they like they would prefer to stick with / follow him. The 2 year limit may also serve to deter people from volunteering . You devote a lot of time and energy to the job but do not get to see it through. Do you feel Jerome Dupont should have been relieved from the position after 2 years ?. Do you also feel the 16 kids drafted to the OHL from his team would have been better served by experiencing different coaching styles every 2 years ?.

He also had a child playing on the team. Which brings me to my next point. Most people that volunteer started when their own kids began playing , it's natural . To rule out these candidates severely shortens the list. There are many good people out there who can coach fairly . Perhaps you could deal with that issue on the evaluations and let the parents / players communicate their feelings to the association about the individual situation instead of ruling out all parental coaches where possible. And what of other relationships ? ....would it be okay if the coach was dating a parent ? , could the coach be an uncle or godfather to a player ..... what if the coach works for one of the parents ? or they are in business together ?. To me these scenarios seem more influential than the coach/kid relationship.

I like your idea of involving the OMHA . I would also like to see the evaluations carry more weight. What about changing the tryout format. Adding an independent voice to the selection of players ?. Tryouts would cost a few dollars more and we throw in someone from NTR ( just an example ) to assist the coach. It may be okay at some level to let an outside panel completely choose the team.

I do not think you are reading this correctly. It says appointed for 1 year but must re-apply. This gives the association an out to remove a coach who is not capable, unruly, biased or divisive. If a team is not improving and losing players there is a problem and you need to make changes. I like the idea of having new coaches with different styles in cases where the team is not improving and change is necessary. It would be helpful to get the best coaches with the most experience at the Novice, Atom levels. Why let a bad coach ruin your kids hockey or development.

It also does not rule out coaches with kids on the team, it simply makes a recommendation that if there are two candidates with equal experience it should favour the coach that does not have a child on the team. Sounds good to me. At least we know the coach is not bias and will act in the best interest of the kids and the team not his son. Is this not what most parents complain about?

Jerome Dupont was obviously a very successful coach and I presume his son was also a decent player? If so, why would anyone have issues with improvement and success? If he re-applied, I would assume he would get the team back the next year.

I think this proposal has some very good points but to implement it across all division would be a major undertaking. I suggest they target the divisions that have the most issues and un-competitive performance. In the case of this forum, it appears to be the 94’s.

The tone of your first paragraph suggests to me that you are coaching for yourself not your child. If your child is not capable of playing at that level, you should re-evaluate your decision to coach.

I am a parent , and have never coached or even considered it. My child plays on a team suited to his level and he had a good year but our team struggled. I think I did read correctly. We were asked for opinions on the proposal and I addressed 2 issues that I am concerned about. I do not want the coach to be limited to 2 consecutive years with the same age group and I do not want preferrence given to an indvidual without kids as Panther suggested. That is why I mentioned JD , he is an example of someone who fairly coached for 8 years and had a kid playing on the team. You see ? , it can be done when the right individual is selected , but this proposal would count 2 strikes against a guy like him before the interviews start.

My son has played on a team with a coach-dad and there was never a thought about favourtism. The son was a very hard worker , respectful to all his team mates and never wore a C , and no he was not a goalie. If he made a mistake , it was pointed out and corrected like every other kid.We were also involved with a team where the opposite was true. I find that the kind of person who has accepted a position of trust and abuses his authority to further/favour his child is still a rat even without the kid around. He is not coaching for the right reasons . My point is, I want to find the best people for the job , and when the next Jerome Dupont comes along I want the association to hang on to him for as long as he wants to coach.

The evaluations could include questions about parent-coaches so the association can weed out the bad apples. Changes to the tryouts could also improve the chances of the best players making a team at their level and that team being competitve. Some kind of independant person , or panel that helps with the selection of players would be good. This might influence the what kind of people want to coach. A " rat " would likely be less interested coaching a team where he could not choose his own friends.

The objective should be to weed out bad apples. If you have a good coach you should keep them in place for as many years as possible as long as his child is not one of the weakest players. Parents know what is going on and they should reflect this in the year end survey. How many people actually fill out the survey. Even though they say it is confidential , is it really?

The problem with Richmond Hill hockey is that every coach that applies thinks they can do a better job then the last guy. Maybe they should emphasize the applicants track record as a coach. Has he coached before? How did he do? What were the parents comments? What do other coaches have to say?

to suggest that a person's playing experience has anything to do with his/her ability to coach is extermely flawed. Examples are too numerous to mention to illustrate this point. There are many people who have played no hockey that are great teachers of the game. The fact remains that everyone thinks that RH has a poor selection process in place, when in very many cases they are limited to a poor set of applicants to select from. Also all coaches think they are great and will always believe that they deserve the job.

606 post. Thank you thank you thank you. About time. Ive been saying that exact thing for many a posts. &&

To judge a coach based on parents opinion is a complete farse. If RH followed this policy the Jesus Christ of coaching Jerome Dupont would have been run out of town after his first Novice year with his club. Ask anyone that was around when Jerome was coaching Novice, and they will tell you that the parents were very hesitant in bring their children back to RH for Minor Atom and the Association took flak for holding on to him. Funny how a few years later the parents were worshiping coach Dupont and forgot that it was the associaiton that kept him in town, not the parents !!!! Parents should have no say when it comes to coaching.

If all you can cite is your love affair with Jerome Dupont you must be one of those crack pot coaches that most parents want out of Richmond Hill. I'll even bet your son is one of the under achievers on the team.

Richmond Hill Hockey is a joke, they don't pick the best coaches they pick the loadest coaches who talk a good story and have every excuse you can imagine.

Get rid of the Prez and get some new blood.

Hey 8 58 post. I would like to meet you. And then shake your hand for leaving richmond hill. &&

nobody mentioned playing ability for coaches. re-read the posts' and get a clue. it is not an issue.

actually the first post does mention playing experience as a criteria

Background clearly includes playing experience does it not !!!!




Selection criteria includes:
• Training - Coaching Certification Program (OMHA). All prospective head coaches must have the minimum designation, or have committed to obtaining the minimum designation before the start of the season.
• Experience - number of years as head coach and assistant coach. Preference will be given to coach candidates with more years of experience in the division/level that is being applied for. Following that, preference will be given to candidates with more years of experience in higher divisions and levels.
• Background - number of years of playing experience, the level and organization of the teams played for. Preference will be given to coach candidates that can demonstrate background qualifications with playing at a higher division and level and more years of playing

Experience does not = playing ability. You can play several years in house league and enjoy yourself without having much ability.But I do not think it should matter if you only played in your teens , as long as you know and love the game and the kids.

Read the orinal thread topic and add this.

1) Improve the coach selection process - Candidates will be ranked by the OMHA. In addition, an independent coach selection committee should be convened that is independent of the board and they too will interview the candidates. They will submit their recommendations to the executive. In situations where there is controversy, they can and should be able to make random calls to the parents of the teams where the candidate has coached to determine if there are any issues or if there son would play for that coach.

2) The coach evaluation form should be completed and submitted in January and a couple of new questions should be asked such as 1) would your son play for this coach again 2) Where does the coaches son rank in terms of skill level, top 5 , middle 5 or bottom 5. If the coach’s son ranks in the bottom 5 that coach will be subject to review by the independent committee.

3) Re constitutes the board and create a process that is transparent and allows for the flow of new faces and ideas. Panther’s recommendation for the board is excellent and will no doubt lead to good governance.
I particualry like teh secret ballot process as this is the only form of democracy that works.

When will we know who is coaching AA to A/E

Someone send this link to the RHHA.

Guess you have not figured out who Panther is !

What is Panther? Who is Panther?

Forget about panther - who is on the coach selection committee? Someone must know.

Panther was RS, ask him, he should know who makes up the committee

RS is not panther.

K.M is the panther

well it's either one of the two, because eversince they got on top of the board, Panther disappeared. So can one of you guys now tell us who is on the coach selection committee???

This is cut right out of the RHHA constitution


a) Coaches Selection Committee
The Coaches Selection Committee shall consist of the Representative Vice President, the
Director of Technical Development along with three (3) Members of the Association to be
recommended by the President and approved by the Board. No applicant for a head
coaching position shall be a member of the Coaches Selection Committee. Where the
Representative Vice President is an applicant for a head coaching position, he shall be
replaced by the 1st Vice-President.

Is BF and DR not on the committee??? Are they not both HEAD coaches???

Wake up BOYS!!!!

I was under the impression that all OMHA centres were to have coach mentors. No where on the RH website does it list who is the coach mentor.

Do we have one and would that person not be part of the coach selection committee?

It would be helpful to get the best coaches with the most experience at the Novice, Atom ages. Why let a bad coach ruin a kids hockey or development.