Garfield Sanctioned until 2012 for Athletic Rule Violations

(Update: there is a school meeting on this issue tonight at 6 p.m. at the Garfield Commons.)

From the Seattle Times:

As part of KingCo Conference sanctions imposed Monday, Garfield will not be eligible for the football postseason this year and in 2011. In addition, the school forfeited its 24-22 win over Sammamish.

All of the school's teams are on probation until Sept. 1, 2012, but will be eligible for the postseason.

Why? Students who were academically ineligible played in a game on Sept. 10th (which Garfield won). Both the head coach and the defensive coordinator resigned (according to the article both believed they would have been fired had they not done so). The coaches claim they tried to have a system in place for athletes to get grades/homework checked but "miscommunication" led to the ineligible players being on the field.

What does Ted Howard, principal at Garfield have to say?

When asked about the severity of the punishment, Garfield principal Ted Howard said, "It may seem harsh, but I can't really elaborate on some of the other things that were going on behind the scenes. For it to get to that extreme, there were definitely some other things going on."

There was some really hard thought taken into consideration, knowing how much Anthony Allen means to Garfield and the alumni here," Howard said. "He's a phenomenal coach ... I hired him. It was something that wasn't taken lightly."

Here are the self-imposed sanctions from SPS (this from the Times sports blog):

• Received resignations from the head and assistant head football coaches.
• Conducted a preliminary investigation of management of Garfield’s Athletic Program and placed the athletic director on administrative leave pending further investigation.
• Installed current SPS athletic program liaison Greg Brashear as interim Athletic Director of Garfield. Mr. Brashear will lead a thorough audit of all Garfield teams.
• Considering a redesign of athletics district-wide to insure compliance, coherence and consistency in interpretations of league rules and hiring of coaches.
• Self-imposing discipline for Garfield Football Team that includes one year of probation for GHS varsity football, no playoffs eligibility for the current and 2011-12 football seasons and forfeiture of any games in which ineligible players participated.

The KingCo Conference will impose the following additional sanction:

• An additional year of probation for the entire Garfield High School athletic program, starting from May 10, 2010 through September 1, 2012. (This probation was originally scheduled to end on September 1, 2011.)

I feel very sad for all the other teams at Garfield that will now be heavily scrutinized as well as be on probation. Most of the comments for both stories seem to feel there is more to this than just a couple of ineligible players. I sincerely hope not but it does seem like quite a lot of self-imposed sanctions almost as if the district knew if it didn't come down hard, the state athletic commission would. (Garfield is really taking it on the chin and the state audit report on the capital building program with Garfield as the poster child for all that is wrong in the program isn't even out yet.)

And, once again, the district needs to do an overhaul of its policies. How does it get this bad that the district doesn't have the consistency to make sure every school is on the same page?

The coaches had a telling comment:

"It's unfortunate, because of how much progress we've made with these guys just to believe in themselves, and then now they're just left out to dry, to fend for themselves."

No, they're not. They still have a fine school with good teachers and the same access to academic help as any other student. Another coach is in place. Life goes on.