At the end of the 2008 football season, Head Coach Kevin Kiesel expected 14 juniors to return for 2009. Before the last game of the 2009 season on Nov. 14, just four seniors remained of the class of 2010. Markas Brunson, Michael Cooper, Richie Paul and Jon McKinney were celebrated before the annual Senior Day game against Emory and Henry on Nov. 14. The question before the game wasn’t if the 3-6 Quakers had the talent to beat the 6-3 Wasps, but, if the team had enough players.
The Quakers were riding a two-game winning streak coming into the game, but the win against Catholic on Nov. 7 came at the expense of Brunson, an experienced defensive-lineman who broke his leg. Shortly into Nov 14th’s game, junior quarterback Billy Watkins separated his shoulder. Because the team’s second-string quarterback, Luke Vandall, got injured earlier in the season, Kiesel had to replace Watkins with a junior wide receiver, Justin Parker. Despite rushing for 105 yards, Parker threw for only five yards in three quarters of play, and the Quakers lost 17-3.
The loss on senior day continued a trend in 2009, the Quakers were outnumbered and out-experienced.
According to the game’s box score, the Quakers only played 37 players, while the Wasps played 53. The Quakers played only three seniors, while the Wasps played 21 of their 25 seniors. In total, the Wasps have 155 players on their roster, 71 more players than the Quakers have. Retention rates have been low for Quaker football in the last few years, which has caught the attention of many students and faculty on campus. There is confusion as to what the rates are, and what they mean. Depending on where the rates come from, there may be varying figures.
In the 2006 ODAC Football Media Guide, there were 40 first-year players on Guilford’s roster. The guide came out in August, before the season started, but by the end of the 2009 season, three of those 40 players were left on the team – a retention rate of 7.5 percent. Of the 37 who quit the team from 2006 to 2009, 16 stayed at Guilford to continue their education – a 40 percent retention rate. Admission’s retention rates will be different – they don’t include players who quit before Oct. 1. According to admissions, there were 30 first-years on the 2006 roster, which means that 10 percent of those freshmen stayed on the team through four years, and 53 percent still attend Guilford. From admission’s figures, the retention rates of football players of the entry class of 2006 staying at Guilford was three points higher than Guilford’s entire 2006 entry class (50 percent). This is a higher rate than what many people thought.
“The only reason we have sports is enrollment,” said Vice President of Enrollment Services Randy Doss. Doss explained how at division three athletic programs, such as Guilford’s, a team’s operating costs are higher than most teams’ operating revenue. The only way Guilford makes money from sports is enrollment. So, in a way, the competitiveness of a team isn’t as financially beneficial to the school as the retaining of the players – as long as the players don’t leave the school.
The entry class of 2007 had 79 freshmen (51 according to admissions), 58 of which have left Guilford. Of those 79 freshmen, 10 were on the roster at the end of the 2009 season, and 21 have stayed at Guilford. The retention rate of players remaining on the team is 13 percent (20 percent by admission’s standards), and the rate at which 2009’s juniors are staying at Guilford is 27 percent (41 percent).
The question is should football coaches, and all coaches at Guilford be held to a higher standard for retaining players. From the opinions of players, ex-players, alumni and coaches, low retention rates can occur from many reasons. In relation to the football team, some of these reasons include communication barriers between players and coaches, coaches and players’ attitudes, player-coach relationships, distrust of the coaches and their system, and disagreements with the coaching staff.
An opinion among many players who have recently quit is that the coaches are to blame.
“The coaches let so many talented players just walk away, and somehow they wont take no responsibility for it,” said senior, and ex-football player Billy Dennis.
Dennis played three years of quarterback under Kiesel, but before his senior year, Dennis was one of 10 players who quit the team. Dennis ditched the game that he played for 18 years because of disagreements with the coaching staff.
“It took everything I had to stop playing, but it came to a point where it wasn’t fun anymore,” said Dennis. Dennis was recruited to play at Guilford during the “Vogelbach Era,” when all-conference quarterback Josh Vogelbach accumulated 13,605 total offensive yards at Guilford – one of his many NCAA records. Vogelbach was placed in front of Dennis for the three years that Dennis was on the team.
After Vogelbach graduated in 2008, Dennis had hopes of starting in 2009. But the decision by Kiesel to start both Watkins and Vandall over Dennis last spring came at a surprise to Dennis.
“The coaches portrayed themselves to be honest and loyal people and would repeatedly say that the best players would be put on the field. This was not what I found to be the truth,” said Dennis. According to Dennis, Kiesel told Dennis that no matter how well he would play, that he was always going to be the third string quarterback.
Kiesel remembers the meeting with Dennis last spring.
“We watched Billy for three to four years, so we knew his capabilities and we just said ‘Listen, this is what’s going to happen.’ We said ‘Hey, we would love for you to be on the team, be a leader, but your role would be the third guy.'” Zach Thayer, an ex-three-year offensive-lineman, had a similar experience as Dennis – he didn’t feel that he was given a fair chance to play. Before deciding to quit before his senior year, Thayer questioned the decision to stay on the team.