ADVERTISEMENT

Serra Padres

Where Are They Now

Sports Fanatic
Sep 6, 2011
659
42
28
59
Alamo
Sorry if this has been covered here on the Football side of things - but I was wondering if the Serra vs. CCS gizmo has had anymore action?
 
As far as it stands now the decision by then CCS Commish Nancy Lazenby Blaser stands with Serra omitted from any post season CCS playoffs for the next 2 seasons. This possibly could change however the longer the decision is in place and was upheld by the majority of public school members of the CCS the less likely the CCS will likely be to surprise everyone by rescinding all or part of the substancial punishment levied.

There are no winners in this situation period. The fiasco is the end result of a bad idea to begin with of a loser's bracket in the Open Division which was unprecedented at the high school level in football. The commissioner retires leaving behind a negative legacy of her "less than diplomatic" skills in handling such problematic situations - which Nancy had a history of [taking personal offense & being heavy handed in handing out punishments].
The only positive is that Nancy petitioned for a 3-year penalty phase against Serra football while it was modified to 2 years. Should Serra turn out to be one of the top teams in CCS this coming season it will only make the decision appear more short-sighted and its only effect will be to have "watered down" the CCS playoff teams. So we'll have to see if the new commissioner has 2nd thoughts as some time passes and possibly modifies the Serra punishment in order to benefit the CCS as a whole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: colhenrylives
The matter may (emphasize may) be taken out of the hands of CCS if a court of law agrees to consider the case. If that happens, all bets are off. Due to precedent, Serra might have a reasonable shot at getting its penalty reduced to one year. But getting a judge to decide to hear the case is certainly not a sure thing.
 
The matter may (emphasize may) be taken out of the hands of CCS if a court of law agrees to consider the case. If that happens, all bets are off. Due to precedent, Serra might have a reasonable shot at getting its penalty reduced to one year. But getting a judge to decide to hear the case is certainly not a sure thing.

Are there no former Serra alumni that is a judge?
 
These cases can be taken to civil court. The cause of action against the CCS would be the safety of the players involved. As we know there is a new safety conscious environment around the state. It is one thing for a kid to get hurt playing in a preseason game. That game had meaning as it counted as a game of record for a teams wins and losses. A preseason game also counts for who makes the playoffs and maybe even who goes to a regional game beyond the normal playoffs.

This "trial run" of loser consolation games counted for nothing. The CCS was risking these kids health by making them play in a full contact game that essentially meant nothing. We already know that there were in fact injuries to some of these kids during these consolation games. These kids and their families do have a very compelling case against the CCS. Serra's position for not continuing was a safety issue and concern for the health of their kids. Serra can also sue the CCS in a civil action for placing their kids unnecessarily in harms way and that any penalties should be voided in addition to any loss of revenue expected over the next two years if the penalties are not voided. There are actually a number of causes of action and remedies that can be sought. I have only touched upon player safety.
 
I think if Nancy stayed longer and had her way, there would have been a Double Elimination format introduced the following year...

bracket8doublethumb2%20copy.jpg
 
If Serra's argument ever comes before a judge, CCS precedent regarding suspensions would become relevant. A two-year ban from post-season competition is far from typical.
 
TedSmithers - Hmmm, a Double Elimination Bracket with a complete set of consolation aka "loser games" ending with the winner of the loser bracker playing in the Championship game. Wouldn't that kinda make the first rounds of the playoffs meaningless in a sense?

One item that no one has touched upon. The Freeman Rankings, Maxpreps and as far as I could find any poll or ranking took the consolation games into consideration OR counted the game or player stats as meaningfull. In other words most credible sources considered them as "practice games" or scrimmages in effect - as if they NEVER took place.

Here's a lose-lose scenario under Commish Nancy's Serra post season ban. Serra & Milpitas both win their leagues & Milpitas rolls through the CCS Open winning it. Serra has a tougher overall schedule and could end up ranked higher than Milpitas, but either way lets figure they could be ranked #1 & #2 in CCS either way at the finish. Fans would not get to see the 2 top teams play, MIlpitas would likely not be considered the true CCS Champ by many & in fact based upon strength of leagues and schedules could be ranked behind Serra. So in effect Serra gets punished & Milpitas cheated out of the chance to prove they are the #1 CCS team. Contrary to a well thought out resolution to the situation we instead have: a severe lack of foresight by Nancy Lazenby Blaser that compounds the absurdity of a loser's bracket in the first place, trying to correct one huge mistake with a 2nd error in judgement - ie: in the end both losing teams Serra & Milpitas will be punished.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TedSmithers
Your logic is sound. But the reality, more than likely, is that the Serra appeal will be denied and the ban confirmed by the public-school dominated CCS ruling body. It's not just Nancy L.B. who will be complicit in this mess. And, to be honest, Serra certainly bears a lot of responsibility too.
 
Yes agree with your sentiments entirely colhenry, but not sure if there was much alternative to the final Serra decision, though last minute which may have indicated a lengthy discussion between admin before finally pulling the plug on the game. If Serra entered that game with just 5 starters and using a freshman QB it would not have been much of a game or entertaining for the MIlpitas crowd or anyone else [so would they have felt cheated as well?]. Had Serra kneeled down & only used a few basic run plays along with kickiffs & punts out of bounds no one would have been happy. My point being if Serra or any other school forced to play a game under similar conditions made "adjustments" to protect the players resulting in a non-competitive and boring game would there have also have been penalties levied against the school? Most likely Nancy still would have been upset and levied some kind of punishment, though likely there would have been more sympathy towards a public school.

I guess my biggest disappointment is the public school dominated CCS ruling body you alluded to. I did not expect them to be sympathetic towards a WCAL school and they collectively backed Nancy enthusuastically. Santa Clara Ahtletic League commissioner Tony Nunes questioned coach Walsh's truthfulness as he & a group of other public school board members pushed for even harsher punishment of Serra [a true lack of class & sportsmanship by Nunes & the group he represented].

I do find it interesting that 3rd party sports media overwhelmingly believe the consolation idea was flawed from the start and that Serra is being unjustly punished because of the failed idea.
Mercury News sports reporter Scott Herhod places the blame soley on the consolation bracket idea and believes Serra's punishment should be drastically reduced. Herhod stated "Consolation games are meaningless events designed to bring in extra revenue".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: aztecpadre
Just for fun and also since there is nothing else to spin up these boards this time of year I will go against the grain here. Not that I agree with the changes that were made last year. I still think the idea of a consolidation bracket was foolish, but the whole idea that Serra was "forced" into playing a game with just 5 starters just seems a bit suspect. Doesn't anybody find it interesting that five out of the six teams involved in consolation bracket didn't have any problems fielding a team? Sounds like Coach Nunes definitely did, and questioned Coach Walsh accordingly.

Possibly the appropriate question and one that doesn't seem to be discussed is why didn't Serra take the opportunity to teach the lesson that things don't always go your way and in those times you have to do your best and honor your commitments. It appears five other schools (both public and private) were able to see that a bigger lesson was at play.

Oh, and I don't think anyone can honestly say Scott Herhold is a sports writer. In fact anyone who reads the Merc knows he is the furthest thing from a sports writer. His track record with the very few pieces he writes on local sports is questionable at best. If you remember he was the guy that threw Coach Allen from Gunderson under the bus and was eviscerated by the readers of the SJ Mercury News for his poorly researched opinion piece on the player mutiny back in 2012.

I'll leave it with a question. Doesn't anyone think this looks at least a little like a school that packed up its marbles and went home when things didn't go their way?
 
Its unfortunate that Serra is being put on a 2 year probation for going against what everybody thinks was a terrible idea in the first place. Even then the consolation games were voted for and approved. The entire CCS is to blame for allowing this to happen in the first place. I'd rather see a Frosh or JV playoff than a Varsity consolation game. Where were all the winter sports coaches when this was going down? If I was a Basketball or wrestling coach and didn't have access to my 2 sport players because they were playing a loser bracket game that meant nothing I'd raise hell. If I was the football coach who lost those same players to those sports what's the point of playing the game if your players have moved onto their next sport and season. The consolation games need to be immediately revoked if it hadn't already and Serra reinstated to the CCS playoffs. The CCS needs to know when to fold a band hand.
 
Everyone will have a slightly different take on this unfortunate situation such as 2wcats who makes his/her own points. As for the 5 starters/players Serra was left with for the game there was nothing suspect about it - you simply had to go back a week earlier to the Palma-Serra game to see that almost no starters were suited up and a Frosh was playing QB. Serra teaches many lessons as a Catholic Parochial WCAL school and anyone who folllowed the events read besides the Serra administration the team went to mass and as a team supported coach Walsh's decision and accepted whatever consequences followed [and issued a statement to that fact - admirable for high school kids]. Let's discount Scott Herhod of the Merc altogether & his article/take on the situation. My point in several posts was simply I could not find a sportswriter or radio sportscaster who thought the CCS punishment handed down was appropriate and supported the decision.
In the end the decision is not about simply "things not going Serra's way". It is more whether a decision should effect high school players for 2 years, many of whom were not on last season's team, whether severe punishment is in order when no one outside the CCS recognized the "consolation games" as legitimate games & whether Nancy and the majority public school board members had the authority to ignore their own bylaws in handing down Serra's punishment [bylaws state 1-year suspension for a forfeit of a game not 2, while Nancy and Nunes & his group were in favor of 3 years].
 
Let's really call it like it is on the CCS consolation games and decision...It's purely a $$$ play.
Where is the consideration and concern for the players' health and transition to the Winter sports teams for players who participate in those sports? Unfortunately, I the last minute timing of the announcement of the forfeit and the "outside" feedback and news (i.e. KNBR/Serra Alum Bob Fitzgerald mention on the radio and DLS' Bob Ladoceur's comments threw the CCS and Commish under the bus did not sit well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TedSmithers
Hmmm, looking at the Tom Brady 4 game suspension being upheld has a few similarities to the Serra football situation.

Here is the likely scenario for Tom Brady & the New England Patriot's that is going to take place. Action will be filed in civil court & the legal argument will be made that the NFL commissioner has no legal authority to levy punishment against a player and team when there is no actual hard evidence to support the punishment, simply supposition. During the time the legal proceedings are starting to take place the plaintiff [Tom & N.E.] will request an injuntion to permit Tom Brady to continue playing until the matter is resolved. It is highly likely the injunction will be granted & Tom Brady will indeed play in the 4 games he has been suspended from [are you listening Serra admin?].

As for the Serra Padres 2 year suspension from post season CCS play. There are 2 basic arguments & they are both good ones from a legal standpoint. The CCS by-laws call for a 1-year suspension from post season play for forfeiting a game & not the 2 years soon to be former commish Nancy dreamed up. Secondly & a more important argument is that the consolation bracket games were such a bad idea that they were abolished after a single season attempt when it became apparent the games were treated more as scrimmages. No sports reporting site or newspaper considered the games as legitimate, the scores & wins/losses were not recorded on record & no player stats were recorded for the record as well, which in itself kind of tells everyone - the games really never happened.
 
There is one problem, among several, with Serra's (and Coach Walsh's) logic in all of this: If safety is so important, why did they agree to play the first pointless consolation game vs. Palma? The argument that it was really a controlled scrimmage doesn't hold up well. Kids can get hurt (even badly hurt) in such a contest. But Serra went through with it anyway. A one-year post-season suspension would seem to be appropriate. We'll have to wait to see what happens as this case proceeds.
 
The answer to your question is simple colhenry. Serra & Palma's head coaches agreed to specific rules as a controlled scrimmage such as kick-offs/punts out of bounds, etc. [you can look up the game on video on the internet & it did not resemble a legitimate season game]. The game was played under threat from Nancy about possilbe sanctions/punishment and she was furious that any pre-arranged rules were discussed by the 2 coaches. The Milpitas game posed an entirely different situation in that Milpitas would not agree to treat the game as a scrimmage, but as an actual game and was suiting up all its starters in going for a school record 11th win. In that sense suiting up freshmen and soph's for Serra did pose a much greater possiblity of injury [ie: 14-15 year olds from Serra going against 17-18 year olds from Milpitas]. Milpitas was the largest team physically in the CCS and it would not have been a competitive or entertaining game to watch.
 
Kids can easily get hurt in something like the Serra-Palma "game." There was plenty of contact. A concussion or two would not have been out of the question. Serra's argument re safety loses much, if not all, of its legitimacy because of that exhibition. Unless it was flag football, the logic simply escapes me no matter how hard Serra apologists continue to make their case. In fact, to be really consistent, Serra should have bailed on the playoffs entirely right from the get-go. Still, two years of banishment seem harsh and out of the ordinary in the CCS big picture. A one-year penalty seems sufficient. And one more thing: No one on this board knows the WCAL football scene better than The Rambling Individual. Respect for him or her is unending. So none of this is personal in even the slightest way, shape or form.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jordan24
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT