College coaches worry about your grades, can you qualify, will they have to babysit you academically, and can you play. It doesn't matter if you to to Oak Hill or Rose Hill.

 

Yes they do, that's a given on their academics.

Hickory, if a kid getting the opportunity to play 4 years of high school sports is a privilege (and I realize that's technically true but I disagree with the premise that it's a privilege), then isn't an adult getting the opportunity to coach athletics a privilege also? Show me something somewhere that says an adult has a legal right to be a coach and I'll be really, really surprised.

 

If anything, the fact that a coach is an adult getting paid to coach (admittedly pennies on the hour) causes me to want to hold the coach to a higher standard than some teen age kid playing a sport for his or her love of the game, while getting paid nothing. Just think of the example that a coach provides when he tells his players that he's switching schools and coaching jobs because the move is in his and his family's best interest. Kids aren't stupid. The message received is quite simple: if coach can look out for himself, so can I.

 

Maybe you are right: it is apples to oranges with the result being that coaches should be required to sit out a year after changing coaching jobs, but student athletes not being required to sit out a year.

I'm not sure that I follow the coach changing jobs to a high school student changing schools comparison.

 

 

I don't ever remember a situation where a coach decided he wanted to leave his current position and handpick the school he wants to coach. I think the job would have to be open. He would have to apply and then earn the postition. The coach at Holy Cross can't just become the coach at Holmes.

 

In today's environment though, even though there is a rule against it, a varsity athlete at Holy Cross can become a varsity athlete at Holmes.

 

If the problem is the transfer rule and its lack of enforcement, it needs to be eliminated. There are bad rules and laws everywhere in our society. Doesn't mean we have the right to ignore them as if they didn't exist. Rather than have some kids play by the rules and some not, how about the schools petition the KHSAA for a change.

 

If its broke, fix it.

Hickory, if a kid getting the opportunity to play 4 years of high school sports is a privilege (and I realize that's technically true but I disagree with the premise that it's a privilege), then isn't an adult getting the opportunity to coach athletics a privilege also? Show me something somewhere that says an adult has a legal right to be a coach and I'll be really, really surprised.

 

If anything, the fact that a coach is an adult getting paid to coach (admittedly pennies on the hour) causes me to want to hold the coach to a higher standard than some teen age kid playing a sport for his or her love of the game, while getting paid nothing. Just think of the example that a coach provides when he tells his players that he's switching schools and coaching jobs because the move is in his and his family's best interest. Kids aren't stupid. The message received is quite simple: if coach can look out for himself, so can I.

 

Maybe you are right: it is apples to oranges with the result being that coaches should be required to sit out a year after changing coaching jobs, but student athletes not being required to sit out a year.

 

We will agree to disagree but coaches have families and players don't.