Arcadia HS - Coach O'Brien

Look, It just a high school sport. I am disappointed in all of you for saying "no your coach is horrible. No your is" All I'm seeing here is that you guys are pointing finger at each other. For once can any of you guys get along!! This need to stop!!! You seriously can't believe everything that people say, so LET JUST STOP THIS!!

This is so far from the truth that I can't believe you can even tell the difference between your hand and your butt. It's ridiculous how things like this actually get posted and some people ACTUALLY believe it. You are completely wrong about this.

Texas HS football is.

blue book wrote:

That would be be an athletically motivated transfer, which is illegal. Even if his family moves, it would likely be considered an "athletically motivated valid change of residence"

The CIF ostensibly said it was easing the transfer restrictions, but instead they pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. Rocha could have transferred before the new rules and not sat out (since he was a freshman). The new rules took that away, and gave only lip service back in return. The CIF knew what they were doing. They can call anyone's transfer "athletically motivated" and the athlete must still sit out a year. Nice to see that finally exposed. What a joke!!!

He could run the open level for a year (like O'Brien's army this past year). Then transfer anywhere he wants without sitting out. He's accustomed to traveling on the weekends, so he can make the college circuit and then run against national high school competition at the end of the year. Or transfer now, run college and HS Nationals next year, and then come back to a HS for his junior year.

There are alternatives to the Arcadia tragic meltdown.

I am 110% right, and I'm sure the truth lies in the fact O'Brien is no longer XC Coach!!!!! The recent Pasadena Star news quotes O'Brien as not understanding how they hired Landis over him. Do you think he went into that relationship just a little ticked off? Though Landis did nothing to deserve it. All you can do is whine about why he is not XC coach and try and get people to believe a great injustice has occured. Keep trying, it won't change a thing.

CTIX wrote:

I am 110% right, and I'm sure the truth lies in the fact O'Brien is no longer XC Coach!!!!! The recent Pasadena Star news quotes O'Brien as not understanding how they hired Landis over him. Do you think he went into that relationship just a little ticked off? Though Landis did nothing to deserve it. All you can do is whine about why he is not XC coach and try and get people to believe a great injustice has occured. Keep trying, it won't change a thing.

lady, you need to get laid or something. enough with the histrionics already. as i said in my previous post, the irony and hypocrisy in all of you peoples posts are outstanding. you all must be doing this on purpose right? fit for a novela

CIF Scam wrote:

The CIF ostensibly said it was easing the transfer restrictions, but instead they pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. Rocha could have transferred before the new rules and not sat out (since he was a freshman). The new rules took that away, and gave only lip service back in return. The CIF knew what they were doing. They can call anyone's transfer "athletically motivated" and the athlete must still sit out a year. Nice to see that finally exposed. What a joke!!!

This is not true.

Under the current rules, he can transfer with a change of address and be eligible immediately.

He can transfer without a change of address, but will need to sit out the first month of both track and XC seasons.

The CIF does not rule any transfer "athletically motivated" without a complaint from the school the athlete is transferring from.

So, in this case, Arcadia would have to file a complaint, and there would have to be actual evidence of athletic motivation. In two recent cases here in SoCal, the athlete's Dad sent an email to the coaches saying, essentially "You guys are horrible coaches and my kid is going to transfer to school x where they'll appreciate him."

De La Rosa and Rocha should both leave. If they play their cards right they could both get into a prestigious university that isn't necessarily great at running, but has a high-powered alumni network that could transform their post-collegiate lives. Some might call it an "athletically motivated" transfer, but any savvy professional in the business world would see that it's more of a "financially motivated" transfer.

The CIF does not rule any transfer "athletically motivated" without a complaint from the school the athlete is transferring from.

So, in this case, Arcadia would have to file a complaint, and there would have to be actual evidence of athletic motivation.

Sadly, it is true. The rule was set up to give the coaches control. Catrina McAllister moved to south Orange County and they called it athletically motivated. The CIF pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. The "athletically motivated" exception was a catch all to punish kids for transferring.

He would wind up sitting out a year, but maybe it's worth it. But it's all just an exercise in what ifs. He already expressed support for Coach Schultz, so it doesn't matter.

Weird rules. In my state you must attend the school designated by your address unless you apply and get into some special academic program or something.

Nobody can just change schools because they feel like it. Unless they go to a private school of course.

CIF Scam Redux wrote:

Sadly, it is true. The rule was set up to give the coaches control. Catrina McAllister moved to south Orange County and they called it athletically motivated. The CIF pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. The "athletically motivated" exception was a catch all to punish kids for transferring.

He would wind up sitting out a year, but maybe it's worth it. But it's all just an exercise in what ifs. He already expressed support for Coach Schultz, so it doesn't matter.

The rules have changed since McAllister was ruled ineligible.

There were over 13,000 transfers approved last year in California, and only a tiny fraction were ruled to be "athletically motivated".

A football player in my area just transferred from a strong program at a small school to a strong program at a larger school. The school he is leaving will not file a protest, so the transfer will not be treated as "athletically motivated", even though it obviously is.

With the football player, as with anyone at Arcadia, in the Southern Section of California, Varsity athletes can be immediately eligible with a valid change of address and eligible after one month of the season without moving.

The rules have changed since McAllister was ruled ineligible.

So what you're saying is, Schultz objected to MCallister two years ago for an athletically motivated transfer, but he wouldn't do it again with Rocha. Makes perfect sense.

Rules changed. It's the CIF's version of the shell game.

Pretty questionable for a coach to file a protest that it's an "athletically motivated" transfer. As if they're privy to everything in that kid's family's life. You have to give them the benefit of the doubt, and who would want the poison of a kid on a team who doesn't want to actually be there?

Poison > Warrant wrote:

Pretty questionable for a coach to file a protest that it's an "athletically motivated" transfer.

What if Rocha went to Schultz and discussed whether transferring to join Tamagno or Ogden would be best for his long-term development. Schultz is an educator at heart. Why wouldn't he do what's best for his student? Does Rocha have anything to lose?

What's the best, logical outcome to this situation? O'Brien was fired from coaching for unknown reasons. My guess is that he has/had a personality conflict with the administration and chose the wrong battle to fight. So he's out of a job. With all of this pandering what is the logical outcome? I don't see him getting his job back. Most importantly, what's best for the kids in the program? (getting his job back is not an option)

It is common to hide under the offerings of "AP classes" as a transfer reason though it was clearly athletically motivated. Hard to prove otherwise.

New Coach Feraco has already committed to lead the Boys and Girls XC teams with O'Briens guidance. Summer program is under O'Briens tutelage, XC season led by Feraco and the track season will again be a choice of either Shultz or O'Brien's Army. Not really excited that the School will again be short of distance runners for track because the blind loyalty is with O'Brien. People think the issue is with Shultz, they are blind to the facts that O'Brien has done wrong in much more ways over the years. If O'Brien were truthful to his followers he would admit to all the years of wrongdoing. But he won't he will just play the victim to his followers. You followers of O'Brien want answers, start with O'Brien and ask him to provide them, he knows why.

Justice wrote:

New Coach Feraco has already committed to lead the Boys and Girls XC teams with O'Briens guidance. Summer program is under O'Briens tutelage, XC season led by Feraco and the track season will again be a choice of either Shultz or O'Brien's Army.

Is this a joke? It's starting to sounds like Arcadia is some sort of hippie-commune-cult from the 60's or 70's. They fired O'Brien, but he's guiding the XC program, running the summer program, and competing for kids to run in his pet project "army" instead of for the school's track team?

As an educator who is also a coach at the same school, O'Brien is obligated to act in the best interest of the kids. I feel that he is exposing himself to gross misconduct and most likely defiance. If an administrator (his boss) tells him to cease extra-curricular interactions with these athletes, O'Brien is obligated to do so or face losing his teaching job. I have never met this man but feel that he is making some very bad decisions and is helping a large group of youngsters do the same.