I know the reason why Moss transferred. Talk to his best friend's dad on a regular basis...And honestly they should've been ruled eligible if what happened really happened.

 

I have an idea of why Markel is going back to Holmes and while SOME of it may be for athletic reasons, there are other factors as well that I won't get in to because It's none of my business or anyone else's.

 

Let's be honest...which kids don't transfer with athletics playing some role? It's the nature of the beast. Some of the same things are being said about the Moeves boys in the other thread.

 

Am I pro Holmes at times? Yea. But check my posts in that thread and you'll see I'm pretty fair with my judgement. And If you knew what I did on the side to help out kids NOT AT HOLMES, you'd realize I'm far less biased than you realize. LB13 can vouch for that.

 

Walter has gone out of his way to get a few NewCath hoopsters to workout with Sherwin Anderson once a week. :thumb:

 

Hell I didn't think of this, maybe Walter is trying to (insert "R" word) these Breds players to Holmes? :lol2:

That's not personal stuff. Personal stuff would be if I said WHY they got kicked out.

 

THIS!

Walter has gone out of his way to get a few NewCath hoopsters to workout with Sherwin Anderson once a week. :thumb:

 

Hell I didn't think of this, maybe Walter is trying to (insert "R" word) these Breds players to Holmes? :lol2:

 

I guess I'm trying to recruit multiple kids there then...consider me Holmes unofficial recruiting rep. :ohbrother:

 

You know...since I'm so biased towards Holmes and anything I say about them is because I'm a homer.

 

Bottom line is this people.... If Markel were transferring to the school you support or follow the most, would you still have the same position?

 

Like it or not, athletics almost always play some role in moves like this. It happens everywhere. If the KHSAA rules the kid eligible move on and get over it.

 

I personally think the KHSAA should do away with the rule. If a kid has the opportunity to better their situation, they should be allowed to, regardless of the reason.

As a Holy Cross fan, I look at this situation like this...it is what it is...so be it. With all the tuition and other financial support programs that HC has, I doubt the primary reason is about that. That said, if the system can be "played" successfully, the family has the right to do what it feels is best for the future of the kids. In this case, it is all about success on the basketball court and positioning one's self for the next level. Maybe Holmes will be a "younger" version of what UK will be next season. Personally (this is me talking), I can't see how one could walk away from the quality, private school education environment of a place like Holy Cross (or any of the other private schools in NKY) once they have experienced it. Everyone has a different view on what is most important. I'm sure Holy Cross will be able to put 5 guys on the court next year and they will probably over-achieve like they normally do.

Does anyone see any irony in this situation? I keep thinking about Burt Pouncy.

Okay, we may have covered every angle of the McClendon transfer by now. A while back one BGP veteran claimed that another top-shelf player was likely to transfer to Holmes with the goal of playing next year. Without violating any confidences, does anyone have an update on that situation?

Here is my take. Kel will be eligible to play, like it or not it's more than likely going to happen but while most, and maybe rightly so, make Holmes the favorite to win the 9th next year I am going to say that they won't. Here me out on my reasoning. Yes they have the best player in the region, and yes they have a Big Man in Chames, but really, you are not going to tell me that Kel is going to make up the difference of losing Quan, BJ, and the rebounding machine of Englemon. Think about it, it took a great shot for them to even make it to the finals of the region over Cooper and it was proven they are beatable, teams find a way to get it done. They lost a lot in those 3 Srs. and you cannot tell me they will get back to Rupp that easily. CovCath and NCC will be just as good next season, or possibly better, and don't count out others in the area as again I feel there will be a couple more who can beat anyone on a given night.

 

Interesting thread which makes this site so popular...

The state doesn't have the time to fight everyone in Court.

 

They don't seem to have the time to challenge anyone that transfers.

Observations from my time on the Board of Control: very, very often there are circumstances surrounding transfers that, due to state laws involving privacy, do not become public. This has the unfortunate result of the "public" not knowing all the factors behind why a kid was determined to be eligible or ineligible. I saw undenied situations of violence, discrimination, genuine and severe financial hardship, learning disabilities better handled at the receiving school, big academic problems at the sending school, etc involved in transfers when I was on the BOC. Things that in my opinion far outweighed the impact a kid would have on wins and losses at the new school or at his/her former school, and thus caused me to vote in favor of eligibility. For the record, I have zero idea if any of those type of circumstances are involved here and quite frankly I don't want to know. It's none of my business.

 

Back in the day when I joined the BOC, the KHSAA had a very strong and definite bias against transfers and would ignore facts and circumstances indicating that the transfer was bona fide. I could load up Rob's server with example after example of the KHSAA making the wrong decision due to biases and personal baggage of the BOC members. Which resulted in the General Assembly stepping in and reining in what I considered a rogue, "Star Chamber" mentality at the KHSAA. I'm quite proud of the role I played in getting the General Assembly's attention. The mentality at the time was "we are the KHSAA and we'll do whatever we want". They found out the hard way, with ample pre-warnings, that they were wrong.

 

Shortly before I left the BOC, the mentality of the KHSAA was changing. Some of it had to do with the General Assembly's "input"; some of it had to do with a general change in philosophy at the KHSAA. No longer was there a bias against transfers but rather there was a belief that high school sports go by quickly for teenagers and if a transfer showed evidence complying with the transfer rule, the kid would be determined to be eligible absent strong evidence either indicating athletic intent or that the evidence the student provided was false. I totally agreed and still agree with the new approach.

 

The fact that a kid will be joining a really good team is not strong evidence of athletic intent. Not in a court of law and not in a state agency regulatory process (the KHSAA is the State's appointed agent to administer high school athletics and the KHSAA must comply with the laws impacting state agencies). At best, a kid transferring from a weak team to a strong team may be some very weak circumstantial evidence, but it by itself, is not sufficient evidence to determine ineligibility. It may be someone's hunch as to what is behind the transfer, but fortunately "hunches", "guesses' and "what I feel in my gut" are no longer used to determine eligibility determinations. Yes, while I was on the BOC, a transfer with solid evidence of a bona fide change of residence was denied eligibility because one very vocal and dominant BOC member stated that he was opposed to eligibility and the hearing officer's recommendation of eligibility for no other reason than "I just have a gut feeling". That was a shameful moment in the KHSAA's history.

 

 

At least to me anyway, most of adults following high school athletics get too wrapped up on winning and losing. I understand why it happens. It's natural. They have a son or daughter, or a nephew or niece, or a grandson or granddaughter playing and they want that relative to play on a state championship team. They are huge supporters of the local team and they want their community school to win a state championship. When a transfer is approved that could adversely impact the chances of that state championship happening, they get all riled up. Again, I understand why it happens. But as I've observed over and over again, when I joined the Ft. Thomas City Council or was appointed to the KHSAA, the Airport Board, the Tri-Ed Board or currently the Sanitation District Board, once you get "inside" the perspective is quite different that what it appeared to be when you were on the outside.

 

This may sound heretical coming from a Highlands football guy, but I do not come close to judging a particular Highlands football team's success on whether they won a state championship. State championships mean little to me. Oh, don't get me wrong, when it happens I'm happy. But I work hard not to lose focus on the real purpose of high school athletics. I'm quite certain that my time on the BOC, having had the opportunity to see and work with "adults" who gave lip service to the values of participation but made decisions based on winning and losing, opened my eyes and allowed me to gain a much better perspective on high school athletics.

Boom.

LN - good stuff. I've always said the "athletic intent" aspect was a problem. Too vague. How do you know? So I'm glad the KHSAA has shifted away from the bias you mentioned.

 

I think many who have an issue with the KHSAA's logic have it because of the , granted, appearance of not adhering to their own written rules. You raise a truth that we sometimes ignore or are not aware of in that sometimes the ruling is due to private matters. You have a kid who played varsity tennis have to sit out a year just to play basketball yet you have a kid who doesn't change residences immediately eligible for the same sport. Could there be private circumstances? Absolutely. I guess many of us are just a bit wary of the KHSAA's rulings when it comes to perceived consistency.

I'm 100% with Leatherneck! Many of us like the idea of a daughter or son (or niece or nephew) being on a strong team, but hopefully our main focus is the kid's growth as a player and person. When players and programs embrace the transfer-turnstile mentality in order to dominate a region, the kids who stick around and play it by the book get the short end of the stick -- even though the team "improves" on paper.

LN's post should be referred to repeatedly when the question of transfers come up. He has the current KHSAA transfer approach clearly laid out there. Bottom line - if I may be presumptious enough to summarize:

 

1. Only those directly involved in the transfer (family, KHSAA) really know the circumstances leading to the transfer.

 

2. Unless it is absolutely clear that the transfer is purely for athletics or in blatant violation of the rules, the current inclination is to allow the transfer.

LN's post should be referred to repeatedly when the question of transfers come up. He has the current KHSAA transfer approach clearly laid out there. Bottom line - if I may be presumptious enough to summarize:

 

1. Only those directly involved in the transfer (family, KHSAA) really know the circumstances leading to the transfer.

 

2. Unless it is absolutely clear that the transfer is purely for athletics or in blatant violation of the rules, the current inclination is to allow the transfer.

 

Barring #1 then I do not agree with #2. If there are no special circumstances then the one-year sit is in place unless they meet one of the stated waivers. Pretty simple.

Barring #1 then I do not agree with #2. If there are no special circumstances then the one-year sit is in place unless they meet one of the stated waivers. Pretty simple.

 

Which would be blatant violation of one of the rules.