School Board Member Nancy Peterson Resigned on Thursday Night
After several weeks of controversy, Nancy Peterson apparently had enough. Speaking during public comment, she walked up to the mic, and proclaimed that her daughter was a victim in this entire episode. But she said, as a school board member, she could not defend her daughter.
Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.
Kudos to Nancy for making a quick end to one aspect of this sad chain of events. I hope this step helps heal the wounds both her family and the district have sustained.
A lot of damage has been done. Now the DJUSD Board needs to make sure interference by parents, whoever they may be, is reigned in for programs where auditions or tryouts are prerequisites.
This is a good thing, but so much damage has already been done. Her complaint against the coach is still pending, the coach’s contract still hasn’t been renewed, and the appeal is still pending. And the administration still has a lot to answer for.
Actually, this is sad. We don’t know what transpired, or the role played by the administration. Now we are less likely to find out, and even less likely to get the reforms the district needs.
Very good news as a first step. If Nancy takes the higher ground, lays low, maybe she can help the community heal. But because this has gone on so long, I still wonder whether she or her husband will be out for a pound of flesh. I’ve never before in my life heard of a two-time Coach of the Year put through the ringer, three times, over something so pedestrian.
Now we have to hope for the best for Coach Crawford. I hope the community and team turn out at the next Board meeting.
Maybe this development will be the first of many positive steps.
New material for me in the ‘breaking news’ article at the Davis Enterprise. It included these past criticism from Nancy Peterson “…raising concerns about inadequate supervision of players and mishandling of funds, among other issues.”
Can anyone shed light on these claims? Ms. Leigh Whitmire Choate has stated that Nancy Peterson was nitpicking minor issues (my wording) in her attempts at gaining control. I was going to ask her for 2 or 3 examples to get some idea of what they both had to deal with.
I can’t imagine how there is “inadequate supervision” when they’ve won multiple league titles under Coach Crawford and her two assistants; and it’s hard to imagine a boatload of discretionary money at the coaches finger tips in high school volleyball.
I’ve seen accusations of mishandling of funds before in another district where administration retaliated against teachers after a strike. All the accusations were overturned by the courts because it couldn’t be shown that the teachers profited personally. One accusation was against a music teacher who didn’t have good records on a soda machine and another against a wrestling coach who held the cash from a crab feed over the weekend. Both teachers left the district where I worked at the time and got settlements through the courts.
I can’t imagine that there is enough money involved in a volleyball program that a coach would profit personally. If Julie Crawford is anything like most of the teachers I have known she has probably spent more money out of her own pocket on supplies or on food for kids that were broke and hungry. Perhaps she has even sprung for a pair of shoes or something the school didn’t cover for her players at one time or another. Let us stop persecuting this fine young coach and let her go on with her career. Remember both teaching and coaching at the high school level are not jobs that people seek to get rich. They are jobs of passion, service and sometimes sacrifice.
Mrs. Peterson reminds us that we as a community must evolve our conflict resolution process. We will get angry with one another, the pathway to deeper connection and community. My guess is that Mrs. Peterson has learned that war is not the answer. Now will others learn that…
Mrs. Peterson, you wanted to protect your daughter and the opposite occurred. You know your daughter is a victim. I am a mother too. I understand the desire to protect and when taken too far the harm done. You have taught me that love for one cannot be turned into a weapon against another. Your emotions caused an interpersonal collision and debris spread in many directions. Psychological war is not the answer. It is a revolving cycle of harm. Trauma has occurred and I want to be part of the relief. Mrs. Peterson, warrioress that you are, you were hurt too and I am so sorry for your injuries. When I say that, I am not forgetting the injuries to Coach Crawford, Peterson’s daughter, her husband or our community. You all hurt and you all are important. I want you and all the gifts you bring to stay in my community. Diane
What does she mean by saying that as a Board member she cannot protect her daughter? From what?
Does she now plan to continue her campaign against the coaches of the volleyball program as a private citizen?
I don’t think that her resigning from the Board ends this. Remember that she was harassing the program long before she was elected to the Board. I think that she feels that she needed to resign so that the issue could be returned to a more confidential setting, out of the public eye.
She added a new allegation last night: that “countless families” are in “fear” of speaking up about perceived “wrongs”.
Again, we have the caveat that there may be some Bobby Knight moment in that $22,000, 72-page report. But I think many have concluded that the odds of that are slim.
Coach Crawford (and former Coach Leigh Whitmire Choate) knew they were being watched at every turn; hence, most likely, the 4-person selection committee. Time will tell … maybe removed from her official position, some new documents will magically appear from Dr. Peterson … I hope not, but it would not surprise me.
“She added a new allegation last night: that “countless families” are in “fear” of speaking up about perceived “wrongs”.”
Interestingly enough it cuts both ways. Throughout this process I know of many families and administrators that were afraid to come forward and criticize her.
Sadly I feel all of the peterson comments in the last 24 hours sound petty hypocritical to me and lack any kind of responsibility at all, I don’t say that to be mean in any way but it simply is the truth in what I have experienced and witnessed for so many years with regard to Nancy’s behavior.
Nancy doesn’t do anything that isn’t self serving so I am sure that this is far from over. IMO this potentially just got more toxic.
I also agree with David, there are still many families and administrators that have been afraid to come forward and it is so sad to me to read those words.
I am sure that this is far from over. IMO this potentially just got more toxic.
As I watched the video, those were my precise feelings.
Leigh, as a former coach you may be able to answer a question I asked earlier. Specifically, I can’t help but wonder what harm would have been done if Coach Crawford had simply chosen to retain rather than cut the final players. The typical college football roster contains well over 100 players that fit into a total of 22 starting positions, as well as 3, maybe 4, special teams players. That is more than four full two-way lineups. Does the Davis VB team even keep 2 full lineups? Any insight you can share will be appreciated.
I can only answer for myself as a coach and will not answer specifically to this most recent situation as I don’t want to discuss players specifically.
Typically it is ideal to have 12 players on a team so that you can scrimmage in practice and having an even number is nice for partner drills. It can happen that there are sometimes more than 12 or less than 12 but it is something that I always have tried to stay away from (typically in the playoffs it is nice to be able to bring up younger players from the jv team so that they can have the experience). 12 players is typically 2 full lineups.
In my experience, if I have carried more than 12 or less than 12 players I end up kicking myself for it later as it makes for a very difficult season for everyone. It starts to become difficult to manage the team and it is not the best case scenario but it can be done, however there needs to be a really good reason.
It is very difficult to have more the 12 players as it is hard to make sure that you can find ways so that some players can potentially have even the smallest bit of playing time if the opportunity arrises during a match. As a coach I really wanted to make sure that if I put a player in, they were going to be going in to a situation where they would be successful and if I added a player to my team they were going to see the court.
The more players, the harder this is to do and playing time becomes even more limited, which in turn can cause lots of dissension on the team and sometimes issues arise with angry parents and an angry player. This is often a very difficult situation for the players to be in and for the coach. No matter how much a player thinks that they can handle being on the bench all season, it does wear thin and the players that can truly handle that are few and far between. It is often a situation that can set a team, player, season, family , and coach up for failure.
It can also be difficult to have more than 12 on a team because with often limited practice times and gym space (and with the reality that practices are not beneficial if they are longer than 2 or 2.5 hours), it is really difficult with a large team to give everyone even an opportunity to practice in game like situations at practice. It really just waters down the entire experience.
Another important factor is that on a team you want to have a nice range of positions. There are setters, outside hitters, right side hitters, liberos, defensive specialists, and middle hitters. These positions are not typically that interchangeable. There needs to be a mix of all of these and not an overbalance in any one position. It would be like having a baseball team of 15 guys and 10 of them being pitchers. It just doesn’t work, it is player position specific.
I won’t even get into work ethic, attitude, team dynamic as that would be my entire masters project “athletics with integrity”. I would never take a player on my team, especially a 13th or 14th player that was going to cause dissension on my team. Attitude in my opinion can rank higher than athletic ability in my book.
It is not really beneficial to keep a player on your team that you really don’t envision seeing even minimal court time, especially as a senior. For a junior it might be more reasonable as the largest growing/maturity time athletically for high school players usually happens during the summer of their junior year. It is evident when they come back as seniors for tryouts if this growth as a player has occurred or not.
Ultimately a coach chooses their team with the goal in mind of creating a fine tuned machine that will work hard together to be the best team that they can be, both athletically and as a group of people. It is a decision that is made in the best interest of all the players on the team. Being on a team is not only about the sport they play, it is about life lessons.
Hope this helps, I did not see your question before now or I would have answered already.
~leigh
I can’t help but think that a partial solution to this issues could have been to open up a second varsity team (Varsity B, or whatever you want to call it), led by a second coach. If the district has $22K to spend on a complaint investigation, then it could surely have funded an extra stipend. Possibly up to twelve more students playing.
I hope this conflict doesn’t hurt the future student interest in volleyball. My kids haven’t participated in varsity level school sports, but I appreciate that it’s a very meaningful school experience for many other students. Seems like expanding participation in school athletics should be a good thing, in general.
While that sounds like a good option there really is not a way to do that. There isn’t enough gym time, another qualified coach would have to be found (that is not always easy), and that also really changes the dynamic of the program. It might also be really hard to find enough qualified girls to make two full varsity teams. It goes back to the days of when everyone makes the teams and waters down the competitiveness of the entire program.
But, lets just say there was a second varsity team. Money aside, who would they play? It is already difficult enough to find teams to play the dhs frosh teams as lots of districts have done away with frosh sports as they can not afford to run those teams. That means more difficulty scheduling matches as that second team could not play in the regular league and more officials (there is a limited number already) for any matches that might be played. There would not be enough gym space or time available in those gyms to schedule extra matches and run extra practices. Lastly it would require more travel to leave the more immediate sacramento area to find teams to play.
A varsity team has 27 contacts/matches per season Also, that would be adding another “varsity squad” to all other sports at DHS (all 27 of them: the number last time I checked) and that would be a scheduling nightmare not to mention the financial and non financial resources it would take to make it happen. Typically the gyms at DHS are booked back to back with DHS teams and then the North Gym is taken over by the city at a certain time daily.
While I think it is a nice thought, there are lots of other places for kids to find place to belong instead of making new teams just to allow everyone to make team. It also also really isn’t very realistic to life, sometimes not everyone makes the team and while that is difficult, it is something that can be used as a growing experience. Failure is the best teacher.
Thanks for answering. I can appreciate what you’re saying.
I got the idea about a second varsity team (maybe the second best set of players) from watching Jesuit H.S.’ rugby program. Somehow they made it all work, but I appreciate that it maybe a more involved proposition than I imagine. They are a private school, after all.
Wdf..I am not sure but does Jesuit have a JV rugby team? When I played, the “B” side was much like a JV team. Also, I am not sure if Rugby is sanctioned? Or more like a club where seniors can play “B” side? I really don’t know.
Leigh, thank you for the thorough, illuminating and understandable answer. It was timely too. A response within an hour and a half needs no apology for tardiness, especially when the answer is as helpful as yours is.
Thanks.
Matt
A beautiful, complete, telling answer in so many ways.
Ms. Leigh Choate, could you give us two or three simple examples of the kinds of complaints that NP would have, to give us some concrete idea of what you were dealing with? Were they CIF rule violations, or was it ‘we should be wearing longer socks in the winter’? And if an example that was escalated to superiors, that would be great. And if they leave out players, that fine … i.e., the least offensive but still illustrative.
To me, which is a total guess… the words that come to mind are micromanaging and meddling.
Micromanaging and meddling are the perfect words. I would also add the program and Julie were under a strong microscope ( I have said this a few times before)
There were never any CIF rule violations. That is in all coaches yearly evaluations, there is a portion that talks about meeting CIF standards and Julie has met that standard every season.
The following were just a few of the complaints I witnessed as I was present for the 2012 season as a parent and as a mentor to Julie: All of which Nancy didn’t address with Julie directly but just went above her head to the AD, the principal, and/or the superintendent.
1. There was a team spirit t shirt that had “go big blue” across the lower back of the shirt. Nancy argued that it was against dress code policy (it is a dress code violation at the junior high schools but not at DHS).
2. My parents hosted the traditional pancake breakfast (something we have done for years as a fun team get together in the morning before school starts once the team makes it to the playoffs the morning after the team wins league). Julie cleared the breakfast with the AD and all the girls were to be responsible for getting there on their own as it was before school and treated just like any other practice (players are responsible for getting themselves to and from practice). It has been my understanding that any activity that is during non school hours, that there are not transportation rules. They met at my parents house at 6 am and I will add my parents live about a half of a mile from campus. Most girls drove themselves.
Nancy emailed Julie before the breakfast to ask if she needed drivers and Julie respectfully said no that it was covered. Nancy then took this above Julie’s head and claimed she was not following transportation rules.
3. Julie hosted a free clinic for a young girl for her birthday. She wanted a volleyball themed party after being inspired after attending one of Julie’s volleyball camps. It was claimed that Julie was holding a social event without allowing proper facility use procedure even though it was during one of Julie’s regularly scheduled practices. See link below for the letter from the girls parents in the paper. The clinic was not mandatory for the DHS girls (once their official practice was over) and it was also offered as a community service opportunity for those players that participated.
4. Fundraising issue/mishandling funds: Nancy questioned where the fundraising earnings were going (especially since she had direct access to the Blue and White Foundation VB account and its balance). There was quite a bit of money in the account (as I had explained before, Nancy had called out the exact balance during the start of season parent meeting for all parents and players to hear questioning why she had so much money in her account). Nancy claimed that Julie was not being transparent enough with what she was doing with vb monies. All the while Julie had been raising money to purchase a new net system for the North Gym (something that it didn’t already have in place and that volleyball has had to borrow from the city to run our tournaments every year). Julie has since purchased the new equipment for the school. Net systems run around $10,000.
5. Nancy has not been quiet about the fact that she was angry at Julie for taking her team in a limo (that Julie paid for out of her own pocket) to a ropes team building course in Sonoma. The activity and transportation were cleared in advance. Nancy said she was misusing funds by taking the team there. On that particular day, the school vans were not available for the team to use and it was important that the team ride together as it was a team building event, Julie decided to splurge on the team at her own personal expense so that they could have a fabulous and memorable day (all players went and had a great time).
All parents are welcome to not agree with all coaches decision or actions, but do these seem like valid complaints in where a coach would lose their job? To me it just seems personal.
IMO everything that Julie tried to do to build the program to be stronger, Nancy seemed to find a way to manipulate or twist it so that anything positive was looked at as if it was a negative. I also feel like red flag buzz words were used to gain strength and were not really correct titles for the complaints. Just key words to get the attention of some administrators at the district level.
Oh boy. I hope the circumspect and level-headed Mr. Greenwald digests these telling stories. Micromanaging and meddling were the words that came to my mind; I will now add jealousy (birthday party and the limo ride).
No, these issues raised by Nancy Peterson are personal, but really go beyond that to this untrained eye into a whole different realm. Given the past 3 complaints, the ongoing drama, and the micromanaging of minutia which turns out to be repeatedly false (see above examples), I really wonder if there is some obsessive or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder on display.
To the old and new media I would suggest that the next time they have an opportunity, they should quiz Mr. and Mrs. Peterson about such “items”. (I don’t want to misuse the word complaint because these are just plain … SILLY!) Was the limo ride a problem for you? Where do you think Coach Crawford spent $10,000 in vb donations: on a vacation in Tahiti, or on a new (standard) volleyball net system?
This kind of behavior falls so far outside the norm of rational behavior, I think the school district needs to come up with a way to deal with such extreme, out-of-bounds behavior. It smacks of nit picky, bureaucratic bullying.
I really hope that players and parents come out to support Davis volleyball and their coaches on Thursday night. I think the family that wrote the recent Op-Ed in the Enterprise were very helpful, and the more independent voices who confirm the nonsense that these coaches have been put through, the better.
Leigh and TBD, reading through your two comments above, it appears that you are arguing that the actions in 2012 by nancy Peterson justify the cutting of her daughter from the team in 2013. Am I hearing you correctly?
Matt, I am not saying that at all. Those above complaints from Nancy have nothing to do with her daughter as a player or with her daughter not making the team.
Making a team is a privilege and not a right, kids cannot be cut from something that they are not already on, they just don’t make it. Athletes are not guaranteed a spot on a team year to year, they have to try out every single year.
I agree with what you say in your first paragraph Leigh, the two things do in fact have nothing to do with each other … until and unless some action brings them together.
I’m a bit more challenged with your second paragraph. Here’s why. When I played high school and college sports, a great deal was made of the term “returning letermen” and/or “returning starters” by (a) the athletic department, (b) the fans, and (c) the media. Right now in the NFL the discussions are all about what players are returning to a team, and what players are in a position to move from one team to another, and how college players are going to transition into the next season. I’ve never been exposed to the concept that you and TBD appear to be putting forward here that a team is wholly and completely disbanded at the end of an individual season, and starts from scratch at the beginning of the next preseason. That approach appears to disregard the fact that players practice together in the offseason, and tone their bodies by lifting weights, etc. individually and together in the offseason, and go to sports “camps” individually and together, and a myriad of other offseason activities (AAU, American Legion, Sonny Hill League, etc.). Teams weren’t disbanded when the last whistle blew. They simply moved into the next chapter of their evolution.
New players arrived and the “seasoned veterans” (the former Juniors, now Seniors) took those new players under their wing and ensured that their transition onto the team was as smooth as possible.
Does that mean that all players make the team? Of course not. That is why there are JV and Freshman and Weight Limit squads in various sports.
Of course there are several schools of thought about what the role of sports is. Vince Lombardi is famous for saying it is all about winning. Others argue that whether you win or lose is inconsequential when compared to how you play the game. Others still believe sports is all about building character. It is clear from the comments that have been shared by many over the recent weeks that Davis does not have a clear consensus about what the role of sports is in Davis.
I respect what you are saying Matt, but volleyball is a bit different as in the offseason the team doesn’t stay together at all. Most girls that play club go their separate ways to various teams/clubs if they participate in club at all. There are so many levels of club vb and so many options around the greater sacramento area and also in the opposite direction (vacaville, fairfield, napa) it is very typical for girls to not even play in the same club or on the same team as any of their high school teammates. Club volleyball is also something that not all volleyball players do, some don’t want to play year round so they can rest or focus on other things (school or another sport) and club can be a huge time and financial commitment for the player and their family. You do not have to play club vb to make the DHS team. It is also one of the few sports that doesn’t have its own travel team in the off season.
I do know that there are opportunities for the DHS volleyball team to train together in the off-season but that is strictly voluntary and it doesn’t mean that you make the team just because you train together. There are girls that participate that don’t make the team and there are girls that don’t participate at all that do make the team, it is just something that is provided as an opportunity or an option for girls to work out instead of doing it on their own.
Individual players change from year to year and it is no longer just assumed that if you make the team on year you are on it the next. That is made clear every year at the start of vb tryouts.
But lets just say we did stick with the idea that all athletes make teams year after year without being challenged to perform or held accountable for effort, attitude, behavior, leadership….. What happens when there is a new player (someone that is new to town and good, a younger better player, or just someone that decides one day to try out that is qualified)? How do you choose then? Do you just keep everyone? Where are the boundaries, what is the criteria? The numbers would be outrageous and then all of a sudden a respected high quality program just is taking everyone and it really isn’t a privilege to play on that team anymore at all.
Only 9th graders can play on a frosh team, only 9th and 10th graders can play on a JV team, and the only team that can have all four grades is the varsity. Typically those younger teams are feeding into the varsity team so that it can be the highest quality all the way around. 11th and 12 grades cannot participate on a JV team.
What happens if the “seasoned veterans” are not pulling their weight or are not leading by example. Are they supposed to be carried on a team and just wait it out while there is someone young and more willing to take on a leadership role just because they were on the team the year before?
If athletes were just going to make it year after year and they know that because they had played the previous year, don’t you think it might create a sense of entitlement or mediocracy amongst the team and individually among the athletes ? Might athletes not even prepare or stop making effort at all during tryouts? Would they even show up for tryouts at all? I have seen it happen, all of a sudden family vacations are scheduled during tryouts because athletes and parents think that making the team is a sure thing (believe me there is a ton of disappointment when you stick to the rule that if you miss tryouts you are not on the team, period). It changes the entire mindset of the program and the athletes that are competing in that program to be satisfied with status quo. Where is the challenge or the competitiveness in that? Where is the sense of pride in making a team or even being on a team if you know that you didn’t have to work and perform to get there. What are we teaching our athletes. It is healthy to have other people pushing you so that you can be the best that you can be, even if that means that you are competing for the same spot, job, or role.
Again, this is just my opinion, but honestly that is not a team that I would want to be on or coach nor would I want my children to play on, I really just expect more out of my athletes than that and hope that they would expect more out of themselves.
Vince Lombardi also says, “there is nobody big enough to think he’s got the team made or can do what he wants. (Trains and planes are going into and coming out of Green Bay every day, and he’ll be on one of them)”.
Thank you for the thorough answer Leigh. I must say that I’m surprised that the State mandates that JV teams can not have 11th Graders. That seems to penalize any student-athlete who takes up a sport in the 11th Grade, or moves to town and enters DHS in the 11th Grade. I wonder why the State issued that mandate?
Your description of the offseason isn’t far from what I expected. Offseason activities in high school have always been voluntary, and there typically is no shortage of “three sport athletes” who have to juggle the scheduling challenges. We had a kid who would run back and forth between the baseball diamond and the track in order to get in his high jump tries when the baseball team was taking its turn at bat. He had to pass many a height along the way when he was swinging at the plate at the same time as he was being called to jump.
With respect to “seasoned veterans” not pulling their weight, our coaches’ solution to that was to have them ride the pine. Gathering splinters in their butts at the end of the bench more often than not created a character building catharsis … with one of two results. Either the player shaped up and brought their level of play and commitment to its previous higher levels, or the player cut themselves. So yes, my answer to you is that they should be carried on the squad at the end of the bench. Ultimately the coach is going to play the highest performing players in any game situation, so having an extra player may be an inconvenience, but I can’t see it as a problem.
Regarding “If athletes were just going to make it year after year …” I think you have swung the pendulum a bit too far with that argument. Human beings are by nature competitive. If an athlete is so “entitled” and “mediocre” that they take their sport for granted, then my suspicion is that they will in time end up cutting themselves from the squad, especially if their public persona is one that resides at the end of the bench.
Whenever confronted by a situation like the one you describe, my grandmother was quick to point out her rule of thumb that “Cream Rahses.” The young and more willing take on a leadership role simply as a biproduct of the survival of the fittest.
I have to admit, we never had tryouts at my school, so what you describe is a bit outside my ken. Every student had to be on a sports team. Those that didn’t make the interscholastic teams had to play on the intramural squads. The initial part of each season was a bit like the NFL’s Training Camp and Preseason period. The players got out there and went at one another, and my grandmother’s rule of thumb invariably took care of the rest.
Matt, no, you are are combining separate issues. You are not reading it correctly.
1. Did a former reserve player make the new team in *tryouts*?
2. Are the Peterson’s actions rational in their relation to Davis HS volleyball? Or is there a history of half-truths, distortions, false innuendo, hyperbole, logical fallacies, and basically just false information and a lack of common sense, decorum, and manners.
Logical fallacy: “A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought, and they’re often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people.”
1. This sounds like a definition issue that doesn’t have anything to do with the matter. The coach decided not to have the player on the team. She wasn’t “cut” from a team that had been finally established. So, she wasn’t cut from the team, but was cut during the tryout process, right?
2. Assuming that all of this happened exactly as you describe, should Coach Crawford have taken the action she did in #1 in order to get even with Nancy Peterson for her awful behavior?
That’s the issue facing the school board, right? If you aren’t suggesting that retaliation would be justified, there’s no reason to keep pointing out how the family lacked common sense, decorum and manners, is there?
TBD, this is the second time you have thrown out a high-level concept (logical fallacy … baby and bath water) without clearly delineating how that concept applies to the specific situation at hand. You have done that for a reason. What logical fallacy do you think is germane in this situation?
You will note that the post of mine that you responded to was in the form of a question. It didn’t presume an answer. It shared a perception. Coach Choate in her answer very clearly and successfully kept the two issues separate. On the other hand, after strongly stating that the two issues were separate, you proceeded to conflate them with your two numbered comments.
As I noted in my response above to Coach Choate, the concept of discontinuity and hiatus are contrary to my sports experience.
Kudos to Nancy for making a quick end to one aspect of this sad chain of events. I hope this step helps heal the wounds both her family and the district have sustained.
A lot of damage has been done. Now the DJUSD Board needs to make sure interference by parents, whoever they may be, is reigned in for programs where auditions or tryouts are prerequisites.
Not to pick on spelling, but “reigned” might be part of the problem, as apposed to “reined”.
This is a good thing, but so much damage has already been done. Her complaint against the coach is still pending, the coach’s contract still hasn’t been renewed, and the appeal is still pending. And the administration still has a lot to answer for.
Pax.. paix… shalom… salaam… peace.
Let’s move on with a minimum of further drama.
Just like that ….. Too bad there is so much hurt here.
I thank her for her service.
Actually, this is sad. We don’t know what transpired, or the role played by the administration. Now we are less likely to find out, and even less likely to get the reforms the district needs.
Very good news as a first step. If Nancy takes the higher ground, lays low, maybe she can help the community heal. But because this has gone on so long, I still wonder whether she or her husband will be out for a pound of flesh. I’ve never before in my life heard of a two-time Coach of the Year put through the ringer, three times, over something so pedestrian.
Now we have to hope for the best for Coach Crawford. I hope the community and team turn out at the next Board meeting.
Maybe this development will be the first of many positive steps.
New material for me in the ‘breaking news’ article at the Davis Enterprise. It included these past criticism from Nancy Peterson “…raising concerns about inadequate supervision of players and mishandling of funds, among other issues.”
Can anyone shed light on these claims? Ms. Leigh Whitmire Choate has stated that Nancy Peterson was nitpicking minor issues (my wording) in her attempts at gaining control. I was going to ask her for 2 or 3 examples to get some idea of what they both had to deal with.
I can’t imagine how there is “inadequate supervision” when they’ve won multiple league titles under Coach Crawford and her two assistants; and it’s hard to imagine a boatload of discretionary money at the coaches finger tips in high school volleyball.
I’ve seen accusations of mishandling of funds before in another district where administration retaliated against teachers after a strike. All the accusations were overturned by the courts because it couldn’t be shown that the teachers profited personally. One accusation was against a music teacher who didn’t have good records on a soda machine and another against a wrestling coach who held the cash from a crab feed over the weekend. Both teachers left the district where I worked at the time and got settlements through the courts.
I can’t imagine that there is enough money involved in a volleyball program that a coach would profit personally. If Julie Crawford is anything like most of the teachers I have known she has probably spent more money out of her own pocket on supplies or on food for kids that were broke and hungry. Perhaps she has even sprung for a pair of shoes or something the school didn’t cover for her players at one time or another. Let us stop persecuting this fine young coach and let her go on with her career. Remember both teaching and coaching at the high school level are not jobs that people seek to get rich. They are jobs of passion, service and sometimes sacrifice.
Gina? Sheila? Susan? There is room at the podium for you…
I see that the Blue Troll is out tonight.
wdf1 wrote:
> I see that the Blue Troll is out tonight.
At least he his honest that he is a troll…
Sour grapes?
Mrs. Peterson reminds us that we as a community must evolve our conflict resolution process. We will get angry with one another, the pathway to deeper connection and community. My guess is that Mrs. Peterson has learned that war is not the answer. Now will others learn that…
Mrs. Peterson, you wanted to protect your daughter and the opposite occurred. You know your daughter is a victim. I am a mother too. I understand the desire to protect and when taken too far the harm done. You have taught me that love for one cannot be turned into a weapon against another. Your emotions caused an interpersonal collision and debris spread in many directions. Psychological war is not the answer. It is a revolving cycle of harm. Trauma has occurred and I want to be part of the relief. Mrs. Peterson, warrioress that you are, you were hurt too and I am so sorry for your injuries. When I say that, I am not forgetting the injuries to Coach Crawford, Peterson’s daughter, her husband or our community. You all hurt and you all are important. I want you and all the gifts you bring to stay in my community. Diane
What does she mean by saying that as a Board member she cannot protect her daughter? From what?
Does she now plan to continue her campaign against the coaches of the volleyball program as a private citizen?
I don’t think that her resigning from the Board ends this. Remember that she was harassing the program long before she was elected to the Board. I think that she feels that she needed to resign so that the issue could be returned to a more confidential setting, out of the public eye.
I am afraid you are right, Ryan. Sad, but true.
Ryan, when I read her statement my reaction was the same as yours. I’m afraid this is far from over.
She added a new allegation last night: that “countless families” are in “fear” of speaking up about perceived “wrongs”.
Again, we have the caveat that there may be some Bobby Knight moment in that $22,000, 72-page report. But I think many have concluded that the odds of that are slim.
Coach Crawford (and former Coach Leigh Whitmire Choate) knew they were being watched at every turn; hence, most likely, the 4-person selection committee. Time will tell … maybe removed from her official position, some new documents will magically appear from Dr. Peterson … I hope not, but it would not surprise me.
She sure comes off like an egomaniac.
“She added a new allegation last night: that “countless families” are in “fear” of speaking up about perceived “wrongs”.”
Interestingly enough it cuts both ways. Throughout this process I know of many families and administrators that were afraid to come forward and criticize her.
Sadly I feel all of the peterson comments in the last 24 hours sound petty hypocritical to me and lack any kind of responsibility at all, I don’t say that to be mean in any way but it simply is the truth in what I have experienced and witnessed for so many years with regard to Nancy’s behavior.
Nancy doesn’t do anything that isn’t self serving so I am sure that this is far from over. IMO this potentially just got more toxic.
I also agree with David, there are still many families and administrators that have been afraid to come forward and it is so sad to me to read those words.
As I watched the video, those were my precise feelings.
Leigh, as a former coach you may be able to answer a question I asked earlier. Specifically, I can’t help but wonder what harm would have been done if Coach Crawford had simply chosen to retain rather than cut the final players. The typical college football roster contains well over 100 players that fit into a total of 22 starting positions, as well as 3, maybe 4, special teams players. That is more than four full two-way lineups. Does the Davis VB team even keep 2 full lineups? Any insight you can share will be appreciated.
I can only answer for myself as a coach and will not answer specifically to this most recent situation as I don’t want to discuss players specifically.
Typically it is ideal to have 12 players on a team so that you can scrimmage in practice and having an even number is nice for partner drills. It can happen that there are sometimes more than 12 or less than 12 but it is something that I always have tried to stay away from (typically in the playoffs it is nice to be able to bring up younger players from the jv team so that they can have the experience). 12 players is typically 2 full lineups.
In my experience, if I have carried more than 12 or less than 12 players I end up kicking myself for it later as it makes for a very difficult season for everyone. It starts to become difficult to manage the team and it is not the best case scenario but it can be done, however there needs to be a really good reason.
It is very difficult to have more the 12 players as it is hard to make sure that you can find ways so that some players can potentially have even the smallest bit of playing time if the opportunity arrises during a match. As a coach I really wanted to make sure that if I put a player in, they were going to be going in to a situation where they would be successful and if I added a player to my team they were going to see the court.
The more players, the harder this is to do and playing time becomes even more limited, which in turn can cause lots of dissension on the team and sometimes issues arise with angry parents and an angry player. This is often a very difficult situation for the players to be in and for the coach. No matter how much a player thinks that they can handle being on the bench all season, it does wear thin and the players that can truly handle that are few and far between. It is often a situation that can set a team, player, season, family , and coach up for failure.
It can also be difficult to have more than 12 on a team because with often limited practice times and gym space (and with the reality that practices are not beneficial if they are longer than 2 or 2.5 hours), it is really difficult with a large team to give everyone even an opportunity to practice in game like situations at practice. It really just waters down the entire experience.
Another important factor is that on a team you want to have a nice range of positions. There are setters, outside hitters, right side hitters, liberos, defensive specialists, and middle hitters. These positions are not typically that interchangeable. There needs to be a mix of all of these and not an overbalance in any one position. It would be like having a baseball team of 15 guys and 10 of them being pitchers. It just doesn’t work, it is player position specific.
I won’t even get into work ethic, attitude, team dynamic as that would be my entire masters project “athletics with integrity”. I would never take a player on my team, especially a 13th or 14th player that was going to cause dissension on my team. Attitude in my opinion can rank higher than athletic ability in my book.
It is not really beneficial to keep a player on your team that you really don’t envision seeing even minimal court time, especially as a senior. For a junior it might be more reasonable as the largest growing/maturity time athletically for high school players usually happens during the summer of their junior year. It is evident when they come back as seniors for tryouts if this growth as a player has occurred or not.
Ultimately a coach chooses their team with the goal in mind of creating a fine tuned machine that will work hard together to be the best team that they can be, both athletically and as a group of people. It is a decision that is made in the best interest of all the players on the team. Being on a team is not only about the sport they play, it is about life lessons.
Hope this helps, I did not see your question before now or I would have answered already.
~leigh
I can’t help but think that a partial solution to this issues could have been to open up a second varsity team (Varsity B, or whatever you want to call it), led by a second coach. If the district has $22K to spend on a complaint investigation, then it could surely have funded an extra stipend. Possibly up to twelve more students playing.
I hope this conflict doesn’t hurt the future student interest in volleyball. My kids haven’t participated in varsity level school sports, but I appreciate that it’s a very meaningful school experience for many other students. Seems like expanding participation in school athletics should be a good thing, in general.
While that sounds like a good option there really is not a way to do that. There isn’t enough gym time, another qualified coach would have to be found (that is not always easy), and that also really changes the dynamic of the program. It might also be really hard to find enough qualified girls to make two full varsity teams. It goes back to the days of when everyone makes the teams and waters down the competitiveness of the entire program.
But, lets just say there was a second varsity team. Money aside, who would they play? It is already difficult enough to find teams to play the dhs frosh teams as lots of districts have done away with frosh sports as they can not afford to run those teams. That means more difficulty scheduling matches as that second team could not play in the regular league and more officials (there is a limited number already) for any matches that might be played. There would not be enough gym space or time available in those gyms to schedule extra matches and run extra practices. Lastly it would require more travel to leave the more immediate sacramento area to find teams to play.
A varsity team has 27 contacts/matches per season Also, that would be adding another “varsity squad” to all other sports at DHS (all 27 of them: the number last time I checked) and that would be a scheduling nightmare not to mention the financial and non financial resources it would take to make it happen. Typically the gyms at DHS are booked back to back with DHS teams and then the North Gym is taken over by the city at a certain time daily.
While I think it is a nice thought, there are lots of other places for kids to find place to belong instead of making new teams just to allow everyone to make team. It also also really isn’t very realistic to life, sometimes not everyone makes the team and while that is difficult, it is something that can be used as a growing experience. Failure is the best teacher.
Thanks for answering. I can appreciate what you’re saying.
I got the idea about a second varsity team (maybe the second best set of players) from watching Jesuit H.S.’ rugby program. Somehow they made it all work, but I appreciate that it maybe a more involved proposition than I imagine. They are a private school, after all.
Wdf..I am not sure but does Jesuit have a JV rugby team? When I played, the “B” side was much like a JV team. Also, I am not sure if Rugby is sanctioned? Or more like a club where seniors can play “B” side? I really don’t know.
Leigh, thank you for the thorough, illuminating and understandable answer. It was timely too. A response within an hour and a half needs no apology for tardiness, especially when the answer is as helpful as yours is.
Thanks.
Matt
A beautiful, complete, telling answer in so many ways.
Ms. Leigh Choate, could you give us two or three simple examples of the kinds of complaints that NP would have, to give us some concrete idea of what you were dealing with? Were they CIF rule violations, or was it ‘we should be wearing longer socks in the winter’? And if an example that was escalated to superiors, that would be great. And if they leave out players, that fine … i.e., the least offensive but still illustrative.
To me, which is a total guess… the words that come to mind are micromanaging and meddling.
Micromanaging and meddling are the perfect words. I would also add the program and Julie were under a strong microscope ( I have said this a few times before)
There were never any CIF rule violations. That is in all coaches yearly evaluations, there is a portion that talks about meeting CIF standards and Julie has met that standard every season.
The following were just a few of the complaints I witnessed as I was present for the 2012 season as a parent and as a mentor to Julie: All of which Nancy didn’t address with Julie directly but just went above her head to the AD, the principal, and/or the superintendent.
1. There was a team spirit t shirt that had “go big blue” across the lower back of the shirt. Nancy argued that it was against dress code policy (it is a dress code violation at the junior high schools but not at DHS).
2. My parents hosted the traditional pancake breakfast (something we have done for years as a fun team get together in the morning before school starts once the team makes it to the playoffs the morning after the team wins league). Julie cleared the breakfast with the AD and all the girls were to be responsible for getting there on their own as it was before school and treated just like any other practice (players are responsible for getting themselves to and from practice). It has been my understanding that any activity that is during non school hours, that there are not transportation rules. They met at my parents house at 6 am and I will add my parents live about a half of a mile from campus. Most girls drove themselves.
Nancy emailed Julie before the breakfast to ask if she needed drivers and Julie respectfully said no that it was covered. Nancy then took this above Julie’s head and claimed she was not following transportation rules.
3. Julie hosted a free clinic for a young girl for her birthday. She wanted a volleyball themed party after being inspired after attending one of Julie’s volleyball camps. It was claimed that Julie was holding a social event without allowing proper facility use procedure even though it was during one of Julie’s regularly scheduled practices. See link below for the letter from the girls parents in the paper. The clinic was not mandatory for the DHS girls (once their official practice was over) and it was also offered as a community service opportunity for those players that participated.
http://www.davisenterprise.com/forum/letters/a-fun-inspiring-birthday-party/
4. Fundraising issue/mishandling funds: Nancy questioned where the fundraising earnings were going (especially since she had direct access to the Blue and White Foundation VB account and its balance). There was quite a bit of money in the account (as I had explained before, Nancy had called out the exact balance during the start of season parent meeting for all parents and players to hear questioning why she had so much money in her account). Nancy claimed that Julie was not being transparent enough with what she was doing with vb monies. All the while Julie had been raising money to purchase a new net system for the North Gym (something that it didn’t already have in place and that volleyball has had to borrow from the city to run our tournaments every year). Julie has since purchased the new equipment for the school. Net systems run around $10,000.
5. Nancy has not been quiet about the fact that she was angry at Julie for taking her team in a limo (that Julie paid for out of her own pocket) to a ropes team building course in Sonoma. The activity and transportation were cleared in advance. Nancy said she was misusing funds by taking the team there. On that particular day, the school vans were not available for the team to use and it was important that the team ride together as it was a team building event, Julie decided to splurge on the team at her own personal expense so that they could have a fabulous and memorable day (all players went and had a great time).
All parents are welcome to not agree with all coaches decision or actions, but do these seem like valid complaints in where a coach would lose their job? To me it just seems personal.
IMO everything that Julie tried to do to build the program to be stronger, Nancy seemed to find a way to manipulate or twist it so that anything positive was looked at as if it was a negative. I also feel like red flag buzz words were used to gain strength and were not really correct titles for the complaints. Just key words to get the attention of some administrators at the district level.
Oh boy. I hope the circumspect and level-headed Mr. Greenwald digests these telling stories. Micromanaging and meddling were the words that came to my mind; I will now add jealousy (birthday party and the limo ride).
No, these issues raised by Nancy Peterson are personal, but really go beyond that to this untrained eye into a whole different realm. Given the past 3 complaints, the ongoing drama, and the micromanaging of minutia which turns out to be repeatedly false (see above examples), I really wonder if there is some obsessive or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder on display.
To the old and new media I would suggest that the next time they have an opportunity, they should quiz Mr. and Mrs. Peterson about such “items”. (I don’t want to misuse the word complaint because these are just plain … SILLY!) Was the limo ride a problem for you? Where do you think Coach Crawford spent $10,000 in vb donations: on a vacation in Tahiti, or on a new (standard) volleyball net system?
This kind of behavior falls so far outside the norm of rational behavior, I think the school district needs to come up with a way to deal with such extreme, out-of-bounds behavior. It smacks of nit picky, bureaucratic bullying.
I really hope that players and parents come out to support Davis volleyball and their coaches on Thursday night. I think the family that wrote the recent Op-Ed in the Enterprise were very helpful, and the more independent voices who confirm the nonsense that these coaches have been put through, the better.
Leigh and TBD, reading through your two comments above, it appears that you are arguing that the actions in 2012 by nancy Peterson justify the cutting of her daughter from the team in 2013. Am I hearing you correctly?
Matt, I am not saying that at all. Those above complaints from Nancy have nothing to do with her daughter as a player or with her daughter not making the team.
Making a team is a privilege and not a right, kids cannot be cut from something that they are not already on, they just don’t make it. Athletes are not guaranteed a spot on a team year to year, they have to try out every single year.
I agree with what you say in your first paragraph Leigh, the two things do in fact have nothing to do with each other … until and unless some action brings them together.
I’m a bit more challenged with your second paragraph. Here’s why. When I played high school and college sports, a great deal was made of the term “returning letermen” and/or “returning starters” by (a) the athletic department, (b) the fans, and (c) the media. Right now in the NFL the discussions are all about what players are returning to a team, and what players are in a position to move from one team to another, and how college players are going to transition into the next season. I’ve never been exposed to the concept that you and TBD appear to be putting forward here that a team is wholly and completely disbanded at the end of an individual season, and starts from scratch at the beginning of the next preseason. That approach appears to disregard the fact that players practice together in the offseason, and tone their bodies by lifting weights, etc. individually and together in the offseason, and go to sports “camps” individually and together, and a myriad of other offseason activities (AAU, American Legion, Sonny Hill League, etc.). Teams weren’t disbanded when the last whistle blew. They simply moved into the next chapter of their evolution.
New players arrived and the “seasoned veterans” (the former Juniors, now Seniors) took those new players under their wing and ensured that their transition onto the team was as smooth as possible.
Does that mean that all players make the team? Of course not. That is why there are JV and Freshman and Weight Limit squads in various sports.
Of course there are several schools of thought about what the role of sports is. Vince Lombardi is famous for saying it is all about winning. Others argue that whether you win or lose is inconsequential when compared to how you play the game. Others still believe sports is all about building character. It is clear from the comments that have been shared by many over the recent weeks that Davis does not have a clear consensus about what the role of sports is in Davis.
I respect what you are saying Matt, but volleyball is a bit different as in the offseason the team doesn’t stay together at all. Most girls that play club go their separate ways to various teams/clubs if they participate in club at all. There are so many levels of club vb and so many options around the greater sacramento area and also in the opposite direction (vacaville, fairfield, napa) it is very typical for girls to not even play in the same club or on the same team as any of their high school teammates. Club volleyball is also something that not all volleyball players do, some don’t want to play year round so they can rest or focus on other things (school or another sport) and club can be a huge time and financial commitment for the player and their family. You do not have to play club vb to make the DHS team. It is also one of the few sports that doesn’t have its own travel team in the off season.
I do know that there are opportunities for the DHS volleyball team to train together in the off-season but that is strictly voluntary and it doesn’t mean that you make the team just because you train together. There are girls that participate that don’t make the team and there are girls that don’t participate at all that do make the team, it is just something that is provided as an opportunity or an option for girls to work out instead of doing it on their own.
Individual players change from year to year and it is no longer just assumed that if you make the team on year you are on it the next. That is made clear every year at the start of vb tryouts.
But lets just say we did stick with the idea that all athletes make teams year after year without being challenged to perform or held accountable for effort, attitude, behavior, leadership….. What happens when there is a new player (someone that is new to town and good, a younger better player, or just someone that decides one day to try out that is qualified)? How do you choose then? Do you just keep everyone? Where are the boundaries, what is the criteria? The numbers would be outrageous and then all of a sudden a respected high quality program just is taking everyone and it really isn’t a privilege to play on that team anymore at all.
Only 9th graders can play on a frosh team, only 9th and 10th graders can play on a JV team, and the only team that can have all four grades is the varsity. Typically those younger teams are feeding into the varsity team so that it can be the highest quality all the way around. 11th and 12 grades cannot participate on a JV team.
What happens if the “seasoned veterans” are not pulling their weight or are not leading by example. Are they supposed to be carried on a team and just wait it out while there is someone young and more willing to take on a leadership role just because they were on the team the year before?
If athletes were just going to make it year after year and they know that because they had played the previous year, don’t you think it might create a sense of entitlement or mediocracy amongst the team and individually among the athletes ? Might athletes not even prepare or stop making effort at all during tryouts? Would they even show up for tryouts at all? I have seen it happen, all of a sudden family vacations are scheduled during tryouts because athletes and parents think that making the team is a sure thing (believe me there is a ton of disappointment when you stick to the rule that if you miss tryouts you are not on the team, period). It changes the entire mindset of the program and the athletes that are competing in that program to be satisfied with status quo. Where is the challenge or the competitiveness in that? Where is the sense of pride in making a team or even being on a team if you know that you didn’t have to work and perform to get there. What are we teaching our athletes. It is healthy to have other people pushing you so that you can be the best that you can be, even if that means that you are competing for the same spot, job, or role.
Again, this is just my opinion, but honestly that is not a team that I would want to be on or coach nor would I want my children to play on, I really just expect more out of my athletes than that and hope that they would expect more out of themselves.
Vince Lombardi also says, “there is nobody big enough to think he’s got the team made or can do what he wants. (Trains and planes are going into and coming out of Green Bay every day, and he’ll be on one of them)”.
Thank you for the thorough answer Leigh. I must say that I’m surprised that the State mandates that JV teams can not have 11th Graders. That seems to penalize any student-athlete who takes up a sport in the 11th Grade, or moves to town and enters DHS in the 11th Grade. I wonder why the State issued that mandate?
Your description of the offseason isn’t far from what I expected. Offseason activities in high school have always been voluntary, and there typically is no shortage of “three sport athletes” who have to juggle the scheduling challenges. We had a kid who would run back and forth between the baseball diamond and the track in order to get in his high jump tries when the baseball team was taking its turn at bat. He had to pass many a height along the way when he was swinging at the plate at the same time as he was being called to jump.
With respect to “seasoned veterans” not pulling their weight, our coaches’ solution to that was to have them ride the pine. Gathering splinters in their butts at the end of the bench more often than not created a character building catharsis … with one of two results. Either the player shaped up and brought their level of play and commitment to its previous higher levels, or the player cut themselves. So yes, my answer to you is that they should be carried on the squad at the end of the bench. Ultimately the coach is going to play the highest performing players in any game situation, so having an extra player may be an inconvenience, but I can’t see it as a problem.
Regarding “If athletes were just going to make it year after year …” I think you have swung the pendulum a bit too far with that argument. Human beings are by nature competitive. If an athlete is so “entitled” and “mediocre” that they take their sport for granted, then my suspicion is that they will in time end up cutting themselves from the squad, especially if their public persona is one that resides at the end of the bench.
Whenever confronted by a situation like the one you describe, my grandmother was quick to point out her rule of thumb that “Cream Rahses.” The young and more willing take on a leadership role simply as a biproduct of the survival of the fittest.
I have to admit, we never had tryouts at my school, so what you describe is a bit outside my ken. Every student had to be on a sports team. Those that didn’t make the interscholastic teams had to play on the intramural squads. The initial part of each season was a bit like the NFL’s Training Camp and Preseason period. The players got out there and went at one another, and my grandmother’s rule of thumb invariably took care of the rest.
Matt, no, you are are combining separate issues. You are not reading it correctly.
1. Did a former reserve player make the new team in *tryouts*?
2. Are the Peterson’s actions rational in their relation to Davis HS volleyball? Or is there a history of half-truths, distortions, false innuendo, hyperbole, logical fallacies, and basically just false information and a lack of common sense, decorum, and manners.
Logical fallacy: “A logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning. Logical fallacies are like tricks or illusions of thought, and they’re often very sneakily used by politicians and the media to fool people.”
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Maybe I’ll misreading your comments, but:
1. This sounds like a definition issue that doesn’t have anything to do with the matter. The coach decided not to have the player on the team. She wasn’t “cut” from a team that had been finally established. So, she wasn’t cut from the team, but was cut during the tryout process, right?
2. Assuming that all of this happened exactly as you describe, should Coach Crawford have taken the action she did in #1 in order to get even with Nancy Peterson for her awful behavior?
That’s the issue facing the school board, right? If you aren’t suggesting that retaliation would be justified, there’s no reason to keep pointing out how the family lacked common sense, decorum and manners, is there?
TBD, this is the second time you have thrown out a high-level concept (logical fallacy … baby and bath water) without clearly delineating how that concept applies to the specific situation at hand. You have done that for a reason. What logical fallacy do you think is germane in this situation?
You will note that the post of mine that you responded to was in the form of a question. It didn’t presume an answer. It shared a perception. Coach Choate in her answer very clearly and successfully kept the two issues separate. On the other hand, after strongly stating that the two issues were separate, you proceeded to conflate them with your two numbered comments.
As I noted in my response above to Coach Choate, the concept of discontinuity and hiatus are contrary to my sports experience.