That is a complicated question

(Following is an editorial review of some of the issues surrounding the latest episode of off-court conduct effecting events on the floor. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect that of Oregonprepsports.net, but do reflect the input from a variety of experienced, concerned individuals.)

The Lincoln High School boys’ basketball coach was picked up Saturday, March 21, and charged with DUII. He happens to be David Adelman, who happens to be the son of Rick Adelman, former Chemeketa and Portland Trailblazer coach, and the current coach of the Houston Rockets.

Since then, the matter has been the subject of numerous blog posts and articles, and the subject of considerable debate, including by the Oregonprepsports.net staff. Opinions vary, reflecting the complexity of issues such as this, and the numerous effects both events of this nature and the responses result in.

The only things we all agree on is that this is a serious matter, requiring attention, and that we would all rather be reporting on a last second, game winning shot, instead of examinging legal and ethical issues again.

To recap, Adelman has a prior DUII, on 6/17/2005, in Washington county. He went thru diversion, and the charge was dismissed, but because he has now had a second episode, IF CONVICTED (it is worth noting that Adelman has been charged, but has not been to court yet), he will be re-charged with the first episode.

Lincoln High School Principal Peyton Chapman has decided and announced that Adelman will not be suspended at this time. All concerned will reassess before next season. Her rationale is that he is reportedly a great coach, one the players support, and he has done a good job. Given that, the players have too much invested in the season at this point, and Ms. Chapman has stated that she feels he is the best person available to continue to lead the program.

Lincoln is 15-9, 7-5 in the 6A PIL, was already assured of finishing second at the time of the event, and had already qualified for the state playoffs with one game left. They won Tuesday 55-42 over Franklin, a team slightly above .500, with Adelman coaching, before dropping their season finale, 61-58 at Wilson.

The Cardinals open the 6A playoffs tomorrow, hosting McKay. A win will send Lincoln to Tualitin, where another win would advance them on to Mac Court. Both games will be a stiff challenge, but if the Cardinals do reach Eugene, it will not be a landmark upset.

Adelman is in his third season at Lincoln . Last year, they were 4-20, 3-9. The year before, 17-8, 10-2, had a first round bye at state, and lost in the second round.

Everyone can draw their own conclusions about Adelman's effectiveness, as well as the stakes currently on the table for the school in the shadows of Portland's west hills.

This situation raises all kinds of worthwhile questions.

Would we, as a journalistic entity, be talking about this if it weren’t Adelman? I think we still would, unless the lack of celebrity of another coach might mean we never even heard about it. This is a real possibility in a very busy world, where the attention any given event receives is as much a product of the profile of the parties involved as the significance of the matter.

Should he be suspended, or fired? If so, when? Many have called for a prompt suspension, some for his termination. One of the main reasons for considering such punishments is to deliver the message to the players that such serious actions are not without consequences. That is a good argument for suspension, not termination. Out of sight of today's youth generally means out of mind. A new coach means life goes on. If Adelman stays around, but experences a very visible absence, players will be reminded multiple times of the matter.

There are a few things to consider when contemplating the next steps to take. For one thing, as noted above, Adelman hasn’t had his day in court yet. In a politically correct world, there is often pressure for a rush to judgement. What happens, and who pays the bill for damages, if the charges don't stand up?

On the other hand, what happens if there should be another episode in the meantime?

The public embarrassment of the story, not to mention possible legal penalties, even if they are served during the off season, will be a costly price paid for a very long time.

Also, being an extra-duty contract, this position is not exactly an at-will position, but is also not subject to exactly the same contract and legal situation as the science teacher would be. Most college coaching contracts would have language addressing this, but I’m betting most high school ones probably don’t. So drawing parallels to other episodes can be legally perilous.

One thought is that the time may have come for contract language to better address these kinds of situations. Individual districts will often lack the financial resources, especially in the current economically difficult times, to afford the legal assistance to craft language that is both understandable, and will hold up when tested. Perhaps this is an opportunity for the development of "model language", sponsored by groups such as the OSAA (a valid use of endowment funds?) and the Oregon Athletic Directors' Association?

Does not suspending Adelman at this point send the message “If you are really good, or really well known, it doesn’t matter as much if you mess up”? We know your station in life does in fact matter in situations like this, whether it should or not.

Should coaches, who are neither juveniles or athletes, be held to the same conduct policy players typically must agree to, about being around alcohol, involvement with legal issues, and etc.? Drinking is legal for adults, so should drinking be ok for coaches on their own time, as long as they don’t drive, or otherwise get into trouble as a result? Or should people in such high profile and high levels of influence on student athletes be held to a higher standard than other citizens? Would different communities answer that question differently?

I think they would, because they already have. Conduct policies and the consequences for violations already vary from district to district. And sometimes producing complaints when the same event has different outcomes depending on which district it happened in.

Another question is to what extent should other members of the team be punished by being disadvantaged when a coach or player does make a mistake, given that removing a good coach or player really does negatively impact the prospects of the rest of the team. Some times to the extent of affecting scholarship and college opportunities.

Many argue that the principles involved outweigh all other considerations, or should. That can be hard to swallow if you are not guilty of anything, but get to share the responsibility. An example of the sometimes sobering counterpoint is setting in the Clackamas County jail. Howard Avery, a long time private youth hoops coach and advisor, who has also had occaisional forays into coaching in the public sector, has a history of sexual situations with underage girls, and is now facing futrher charges, stemming from an investigation by the Lake Oswego police.

Should there even be absolute policies in cases like this? Personally, I think not, because there can be so many circumstances to consider. Is it an isolated incident? If not, how long is long enough to not consider aincient history as an indicator of things yet to come?

A blanket policy is an easy out, saving the responsible administrator from needing to gather and consider all the facts, and evaluate all the consequences of any decision, and then make the best decision for the circumstances at hand. I would rather see an informed, thoughtful response. We all know that doesn’t always actually happen either, though.

That's the situation Principal Chapman faced. One where she was called upon to make a decision, not just implement a policy. Many disagree with her decision. I do think she deserves credit for one thing. Whether someone agrees with the decision or not, at least she explained her reasons for the conclusions she came to. Everyone knows what happened, and why she made the decision she did.

This is in stark contrast to some other events this year, where activity in violation of team rules, possibly also in violation of laws in some cases, and the subsequent suspensions, were handled internally, as “team matters”, with minimal public visibility.

And therefore, minimal oversight or accountability as well. How much do you handle inside the team? When, and to what extent, do you go public? If it stays internal, where is the oversight that ensures it is handled satisfactorily?

All worthwhile questions because, like it or not, there are consequences well beyond the team.

Perhaps the real lesson is that we all need to remain involved with the program we choose to follow. To be aware of what is going on before it makes front page news. And to be a good team member, one who has the courage to intervene and help another team member, before something goes wrong.

CC

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it