Warrenton High School has handed the reigns to its athletic programs over to new leadership. With a transition in personnel comes the potential for change beyond titles and faces. But it would be naive to believe that hiring a new activities director will suddenly elevate the school’s extracurricular programs to a formidable level. It would be remiss to assume replacing a department head will cause some sort of seismic shift in the struggling state of the majority of Warrenton’s athletic teams. Truth is, the culprit behind the school’s inability to consistently compete in the GAC or even in general reaches past the incompetency of a coach or the administration. I will confess that when I moved here I was spoiled from having covered schools that packed the stands on a nightly basis and consistently competed for district or state titles. The first time I walked into a Warrenton home basketball game I was in disbelief. A facility that surpasses the quality level of many of the schools I had previously covered was more empty than occupied. It’s not something I was used to, accustomed to many of my games in the past brimming to capacity, resulting in fans being turned away at the door. Arriving an hour early to secure a prime seat wasn’t an option — it was a necessity. Weak attendance is just one of the characteristics about sports here to which I’ve never been able to adjust. Losing is another. As challenging as it is for me to muster enough creativity to write about a week full of defeats, I would imagine it’s far more discouraging for the athletes themselves. Then again, there are times when I wonder if they even understand what it’s like to win on a consistent basis. Have the student-athletes in Warrenton become complacent with losing? If so, what or who is to blame? Will the perception of Warrenton being a doormat for most opponents end any time soon? I threw these questions out on social media, and many of you fired back with your concerns about the state of the athletic programs. I want to address the most reverberated complaints or resolutions. The irony in the situation is that it’s somewhat of a revolving door. I commonly hear coaches lament about a lack of participation by the student body. Then, there are talented potential student-athletes who blame their unwillingness to participate on allegedly biased or incompetent coaches. Teams continue to struggle, and the fans subsequently have little interest in attending the events. A glaring concern within the community stems back to the alarming coaching turnover rate. Since I arrived five years ago, there have been nine coaching changes. Boys basketball, football, softball and volleyball have each seen three different head coaches over that time frame. Seven of the school’s sports still have the same coaches in place. I have noticed the most successful programs are traditionally the individual sports, where each athlete is ultimately accountable for his or her own fate and does not have to rely on teammates. Golf and wrestling have each won district titles in the past three years and routinely send athletes to state. As do track and cross country. But only two district titles have been won in team sports, football and softball. And while it would be glorious to ride the 2010 playoff wave for the rest of our lives, it would be more satisfying to experience that triumph again — perhaps on an annual basis. So, are we looking at a lack of effort or willingness to work cooperatively on the athletes’ behalf? Or are quality coaches slipping down the road the moment they have reached the pinnacle at Warrenton? Does the fact the past two coaches to take teams to the playoffs didn’t return the following year indicate the district isn’t in a position to compete with opposing schools for the most premier candidates? I’m aware that several coaches left on their own will, pursuing more lucrative or prosperous career opportunities. A handful of changes came as a result of prodding from parents who were directly concerned with the state of the programs. Many of you seem to wish the school would focus more effort on finding qualified coaching candidates rather than teachers who are willing to accept an extra responsibility. On the past few occasions the school has found itself searching for promising coaching candidates with very little enticement to offer them in terms of a teaching position. Is this community, much like Wright City, possibly a victim of geographic circumstance? Perhaps the potential for more accomplished coaches to apply or stay and for a deeper pool of teenage talent would exist if Warrenton were 20 minutes east on I-70. I think many coaching candidates also consider Warrenton as a career stepping stone but not a place to prolong their career or retire. With so many larger, more successful programs minutes down the road, the urge to leave seems inevitable. On the other hand, is the school doing enough to encourage WHS graduates to return and coach in the district if their pride drives them back to their hometown? We’ve seen progress in that regard with the hiring of Bobby Spoonster as AD and even the choice of an alum as superintendent. Some of you express that the school should provide more opportunities for coaches to attend clinics and polish their knowledge of the game. Others say coaches should take a more interactive role in motivating the athletes or instilling a winning attitude. While a coach or mentor can encourage work ethic or discipline for the lack of it, an athlete has to assert themselves and show a willingness to commit during the offseason. That has been a struggle in Warrenton, because the general drive to work harder comes from having reaped the rewards of our diligence. If there are no positive results, why continue striving? Concerning the offseason, a few others mentioned the lack of competitive options for younger athletes. For instance, in baseball and softball, the city of Warrenton has seen its share of changes in recent years, swaying from league to league. It was voiced that area youth participate in a forgiving recreational leagues during their childhood only to be thrust into a merciless GAC grinder in high school. Many had theorized that the transition to the GAC was an ill-advised move that could never be overcome. But even with the recent conference realignment shuffling smaller schools onto the Warriors’ schedule, the win-loss ratio has still not seen satisfactory change. Perhaps more rigorous early training is the answer. But I would venture to say the Warrenton Little League Football program holds itself to premier standards. Yet, despite dominating competition at a younger age, our athletes have been unable to convert the same level of success to the varsity ranks. So, where is the gap in translation? I think in general I’m gathering that there is a struggle to work cooperatively, which would supply reasoning for why the individual sports thrive more than their team-oriented counterparts. A lot of fingers are being pointed with very little resolve. I wish I had some sort of genius solution, but I don’t. I’ve seen effective, traditionally successful athletic programs at work before. Typically, the most common thread is the ability to work cooperatively at all levels. The administration has to provide adequate resources and support for its coaches. The parents have to allow the coaches enough freedom to operate a disciplined, sometimes rigorous routine if it’s producing results. And the student-athletes have to be willing to commit themselves, at times in spite of disagreeing with coaches tactics or philosophies. There seems to be an imbalance at Warrenton that hinders the cycle from being broken. Unfortunately, until that changes, the losing mentality will likely continue rearing its ugly head.