What does a kid transferring for a science program or the marching band have to do with the Kentucky High School Athletic Association rules on eligibility.

 

Your reaching.

What does a kid transferring for a science program or the marching band have to do with the Kentucky High School Athletic Association rules on eligibility.

 

Your reaching.

 

All are students with specific talents transferring schools to have a better chance of doing what they want to do during and/or getting what they need for their secondary education.

All are students with specific talents transferring schools to have a better chance of doing what they want to do during and/or getting what they need for their secondary education.

 

 

Again, what does that have to do with the issue of athletic eligibility.

 

 

 

If you are saying they are transferring to play basketball because that is their talent that will take them to the next level, that is a direct violation of the KHSAA rules.

Again, what does that have to do with the issue of athletic eligibility.

 

 

 

If you are saying they are transferring to play basketball because that is their talent that will take them to the next level, that is a direct violation of the KHSAA rules.

Let's don't fool ourselves here. A large portion of transfers of basketball players are for athletic reasons, even the ones that do all the right things to become eligible. It may not look that way and the KHSAA passes them right on through the eligibility process, but moves are many times made for basketball purposes. We've all seen plenty of cases like that. Parents deliberately move from one county or school district to another because they think their talented son has more basketball future with a program that plays a challenging schedule and plays attractive out of state holiday tournaments. Patents either make the move on their own or subtly let the school of their desire know they are thinking about moving. And if said talented son is talented enough to suit the school then sometimes places of employment magically pop up for mom and dad. It happens more than people think.

To hammer away at these Cordia kids when there is a long history of sly maneuvering going on all over the state by schools of all sizes to get transfers eligible is a little unfair.

I think the problem here is that the KHSAA has created a law they can't adequately enforce. Who is being hurt by the current process? In my opinion, it's the kids. Maybe they should allow a 1 time transfer eligibility without question or rule everyone ineligible on the same basis or something else that's clear and definable? One thing for certain, the current rule and enforcement is not working to the benefit of everyone, just a few who know how to circumvent the rule.

Let's don't fool ourselves here. A large portion of transfers of basketball players are for athletic reasons, even the ones that do all the right things to become eligible. It may not look that way and the KHSAA passes them right on through the eligibility process, but moves are many times made for basketball purposes. We've all seen plenty of cases like that. Parents deliberately move from one county or school district to another because they think their talented son has more basketball future with a program that plays a challenging schedule and plays attractive out of state holiday tournaments. Patents either make the move on their own or subtly let the school of their desire know they are thinking about moving. And if said talented son is talented enough to suit the school then sometimes places of employment magically pop up for mom and dad. It happens more than people think.

To hammer away at these Cordia kids when there is a long history of sly maneuvering going on all over the state by schools of all sizes to get transfers eligible is a little unfair.

 

Sure it's fair. What they have been doing the past couple of years, they are almost BEGGING to be investigated/looked at, regardless if so and so has done this and so and so has done that for years. And you can't point to others bad behavior to justify another's, doesn't work that way.

Sure it's fair. What they have been doing the past couple of years, they are almost BEGGING to be investigated/looked at, regardless if so and so has done this and so and so has done that for years. And you can't point to others bad behavior to justify another's, doesn't work that way.

 

I think what the poster is going for is that it wouldn't be 'fair' because the rules would be arbitrarily enforced. To me at least, there's a sense of unfairness if the "rules" only apply to some but not others.

Again, what does that have to do with the issue of athletic eligibility.

 

 

 

If you are saying they are transferring to play basketball because that is their talent that will take them to the next level, that is a direct violation of the KHSAA rules.

 

I feel you are missing my point entirely.

 

“What it has to do with athletic eligibility” is that, to me, we are saying that it’s okay for kids who are gifted musically, artistically, or academically to transfer and make the most of their talents. Those kids can knock down doors that might not otherwise be available to them to get a scholarship (you know, a free education). But, because a kid is gifted athletically, it’s looked at differently and different rules apply. As you’ve pointed out yourself, no one puts restrictions on the band member that wants to go to Lafayette to get a college scholarship for marching band or the kid who wants to go to Brown to help their chances of getting scholarship money that will help them pursue a career in graphic design.

 

What the athlete, band member, and artist share in common is that they are all high school students who have a talent and want to maximize their chances to receive the best quality higher education that they can. Even if a kid is a “one and done” like John Wall, then the best finishing school is going to the University of Kentucky to learn to be a pro and maximize his earnings potential. Even though the University of Kentucky might not be a similar academic institution to Oxford or Yale, it’s a pretty safe bet that it’s going to prepare the one and done for their career more so than the schools whose academic reputations are far superior.

 

 

On many levels, I think the ‘why’ as it pertains to “why different rules apply to athletes when they don’t apply to other students, (or even band members or artists) might be too complicated for me to even try to explain (simply because it’s not something I’m even sure it’s something I could adequately do), but I have at least an intuition as to some things that I think factor into that analysis. That’s another point and another post for a later time, and it’s something that I feel is tangential to this debate, but if you want to discuss it, I’d be fine with that.

 

 

 

That aside, another point I’ve been trying to make, and maybe I’ve not done a sufficient job of being clear about it, is that the policy behind the athletic association’s rules that you keep speaking of can be taken a couple of ways.

 

One view is that the policy behind the rule is flawed and that although “a rule is a rule”, the rule as it is written now should be modified to maximize the utility of the system as a whole. Again, this is a policy argument. I don’t think it’s fair that students who have athletic talent are subject to a different set of transfer rules than any other students. It seems silly to say that the kid whose gifted in science and has a parent enroll him at Paul Laurence Dunbar in a move that would otherwise make him ineligible under KHSAA rules wouldn’t be allowed to take science classes there.

 

Another view could be that, following the Mitchell case, for better or worse, the landscape of Kentucky High School Athletics have changed in such a way that local courts can grant injunctions and those decisions are more or less binding on the KHSAA. If you are a Highlands fan, it’s ironic you talk about “the rules” when the alteration to the rules that led to the system we have today were your own team’s doing. Wouldn’t you agree that, if someone who is a neutral observer were looking at the situation and sees Person A supporting Mitchell getting his eligibility, but not doing the same for the Cordia kids who were granted an injunction, that you could at least see how they would think this is inconsistent?

 

Finally, just to be clear, I’m not saying that these kids are transferring just to play basketball, as I think it’s much bigger than that. I think that transferring in order to enhance their opportunity to earn a college scholarship is an educational pursuit. You keep pointing to the most broadly worded portions of the rulebook to try to make a point, but I think I could make a good argument that you could use that same selection to deny almost any transfer their eligibility if you are using it in the same overly broad fashion as you.

I will back up Jokers feelings on this. I see where he is coming from, why separate athletics specifically when somebody who wants to be in a better art class or play in a better band isn't penalized. I understand the point, it has validity, but to me it's a little more complicated than that.

I will back up Jokers feelings on this. I see where he is coming from, why separate athletics specifically when somebody who wants to be in a better art class or play in a better band isn't penalized. I understand the point, it has validity, but to me it's a little more complicated than that.

 

Agreed on the complicated part. That's kind of the tangent I was getting into in the third paragraph. In short, I think some of the main reasons I see are the amount of money and vested interests in athletics, the popularity and athlete worshipping culture we live in, and the emphasis that many in our society place on athletics instead of academics.

Sure it's fair. What they have been doing the past couple of years, they are almost BEGGING to be investigated/looked at, regardless if so and so has done this and so and so has done that for years. And you can't point to others bad behavior to justify another's, doesn't work that way.

 

That's part of the problem though. Others seem to get by with their transfers with little or no notice, or complaints, while others are singled out and hounded. So, we'll just turn a blind eye toward the "others bad behavior" but grind the heel into little Cordia because they have more than the usual amount of transfers and they are from out of state. I suppose if Cordia just had 1 or 2 transfers and they were from neighboring counties there wouldn't be much of an issue. I haven't heard much about the other schools in the area's transfers.

That's part of the problem though. Others seem to get by with their transfers with little or no notice, or complaints, while others are singled out and hounded. So, we'll just turn a blind eye toward the "others bad behavior" but grind the heel into little Cordia because they have more than the usual amount of transfers and they are from out of state. I suppose if Cordia just had 1 or 2 transfers and they were from neighboring counties there wouldn't be much of an issue. I haven't heard much about Perry Central's or Hazard's transfers. Is that because they're not from out of state?

 

Again you can't rub it in everybody face, parade all those guys around and NOT expect to be noticed, no matter WHO are. It just happens to be little ol' Cordia this time...but to me the who doesn't matter. And do I think it's right that other transfers have been ignored in the past at other schools? No I don't, they should have been looked into as well. Unfortunately what has happened has happened and for better or worse can't be undone. What's now is now, and the now is Cordia. But hey, if something possibly against the rules is going on somewhere else too, then by all means I hope the KHSAA looks into it

Now that the ruling has come down, thought I would unearth this thread.

 

Some good reading if you got the time. Now that the KHSAA has released their findings it is interesting to read the opinions posted back last fall versus how things have turned out.

BigVMan23, here's a case where I feel it wasn't really fair to the kid to be ruled ineligible. The Robbins kid mentioned in this article was a 4.0 student with no type of disciplinary record. The first link below is a Lexington Herald Leader article that gives some background on the situation. He had to go through the court system to try and get his eligibility. He was ultimately denied. A recap of the case is listed in the second link below.

 

I know it isn't left up to me (and with good reason), but on the face of it, I don't think it would have been a big deal to have let him play at Boyle County. It obviously meant a lot to him, otherwise I doubt he and his family would have went through the time, effort, and expense of filing suit.

 

I just think that the more rules and stipulations that we add, the greater the chances of a kid like this being denied, while at the same time, you can look at a number of other cases and think, "they were eligible, but that kid wasn't???".

 

 

 

Boyle couple sues KHSAA to allow son to play senior season of basketball | High school basketball | Kentucky.com

 

ROBBINS v. KENTUCKY HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION | Leagle.com

 

 

I remember this story. I never knew they sued. Everyone felt bad for Jared. Damn shame he wasn't allowed to play.

I remember this story. I never knew they sued. Everyone felt bad for Jared. Damn shame he wasn't allowed to play.

 

 

I'm hearing that the Robbins family might not be the only ones to take things to court.