How can a school turn away kids that live in their district? Plus' date=' if McPeek ruled out ever school that complained about fair view"....[/quote']

I don't know in what district the McPeeks reside. Ashland is a good school. I am not bashing them just questioning their reasoning for allowing the transfer. Just thinking out loud. I'm not trying to offend Ashland or their BGP fans.

I don't know in what district the McPeeks reside. Ashland is a good school. I am not bashing them just questioning their reasoning for allowing the transfer. Just thinking out loud. I'm not trying to offend Ashland or their BGP fans.

 

I'm not offended and I understand. My point is if a kid does live in your district you have to take them it's not hypocritical.

I would love to hear Dickie Martin's take on all this. I'm sure it would be hypocritical as usual.

 

I'm sure he would agree with you

I don't know in what district the McPeeks reside. Ashland is a good school. I am not bashing them just questioning their reasoning for allowing the transfer. Just thinking out loud. I'm not trying to offend Ashland or their BGP fans.

 

Schools are in the business of providing opportunities for kids. Public schools don't get to pick which kids to let in or keep out. What would you think of a school who refused a kid because of something his father did? Do you have any idea how many children of violent felons are in our schools. Should they be excluded because of the sins of their fathers?

Should we exclude kids who have parents who cheat when rules are established. Adultery, tax evasion, leaving work early on Friday. Are these reasons to exclude the children of offenders?

How many of the Rose Hill transfers to Ashland started out at Ashland? I know that fact always gets left out of the story about the kids leaving RH and coming to Ashland. Not all of the transfers came to Ashland a few went to Russell, Boyd County, Scott County.

How can a school turn away kids that live in their district? Plus, if McPeek ruled out ever school that complained about fair view"....

O.K., I'll finish it. IF McPeek ruled out every school that complained about Fairview.......He would have to go outside our tri state area (EKY, WVA, OH.) and probably further. Fair view, yep, that is kind of ironic, uh ?

 

I would love to hear Dickie Martin's take on all this. I'm sure it would be hypocritical as usual.

 

Probably but that's just how he rolls. :lol2:

There has been a lot of public emberassment for this player maybe it qualifies as an adademic hardship.

O.K., I'll finish it. IF McPeek ruled out every school that complained about Fairview.......He would have to go outside our tri state area (EKY, WVA, OH.) and probably further. Fair view, yep, that is kind of ironic, uh ?

 

 

 

Probably but that's just how he rolls. :lol2:

 

Agree on both parts

The most intersting scenario for BGPers would have been if he transferred to Raceland.

Would have never happened, sidelinedoc would have blocked it because in his words, "I don't like it, not one bit." Now I know I am using this out of context a little but what the heck. I am curious if sidelinedoc thinks that if Ashland reported Fairview for a rules infraction that it was the right thing to do? Then I am curious as to what role he thinks Ashland played if any in convincing the McPeek family to transfer there? If he answers yes to the first question and none to the second question then he feels they acted accordingly and not without integrity. At this point the child is ineligible and if he stays there is no guarantee he will be ruled eligible and it is the opinion of sidelinedoc that he wont even be at Ashland next year anyway. So to put his hand on his hip and say I don't like it one bit? I dont get it.

How many of the Rose Hill transfers to Ashland started out at Ashland? I know that fact always gets left out of the story about the kids leaving RH and coming to Ashland. Not all of the transfers came to Ashland a few went to Russell, Boyd County, Scott County.

 

They answer would probably surprise you.

Would have never happened' date=' sidelinedoc would have blocked it because in his words, "I don't like it, not one bit." Now I know I am using this out of context a little but what the heck. I am curious if sidelinedoc thinks that if Ashland reported Fairview for a rules infraction that it was the right thing to do? Then I am curious as to what role he thinks Ashland played if any in convincing the McPeek family to transfer there? If he answers yes to the first question and none to the second question then he feels they acted accordingly and not without integrity. At this point the child is ineligible and if he stays there is no guarantee he will be ruled eligible and it is the opinion of sidelinedoc that he wont even be at Ashland next year anyway. So to put his hand on his hip and say I don't like it one bit? I dont get it.[/quote']

I think I have tried to explain myself and say that I was only putting a thought out there. I really don't care where he attends school or plays ball. Cody is a very nice kid. I just don't like all that was going on in Westwood. I am shocked that he is enrolled at Ashland but as said my another poster, it is where he lives. No, I don't think Raceland would accept any of the kids that have or may leave Fairview. For one, our classes are near capacity. No, I don't think Ashland had any plans to coerce him or any other player to the school. I have said it at least twice that my comments were not meant to be malicious, and I was inadvertently typing my thoughts. The main thing I was bringing up is that it was odd that the school responsible for reporting the infraction is where Garry enrolled his son. You have to admit that is a little ironic. That does not mean anything was done illegally or wrongly, it just means it seems odd. That's all I was trying to say.

The most intersting scenario for BGPers would have been if he transferred to Raceland.

I doubt that would ever happen.

 

But, many would be surprised at the number of athletes that Raceland has turned away that live out of district. Turned away a lot more then they have allowed in. First and foremost, every time, the student/athletes grades are looked at. If they don't help the school academically, they are told to keep looking. Second, every time, the conduct records are looked at, if they have had any behavior issues, they are told to keep looking. Then, and only then, are they allowed to enroll.

 

And, if they are "In District" and have a behavior problem, they are told they are no longer welcome there. And, before anyone asks, it has happened.

I say let him play. He shouldn't be punished any further for things out of his control. They should make a special bylaw allwoing kids ot transfer immediately when things like what happened at Fairview take place.

During the course of its internal investigation, Fairview Independent Schools determined that a student-athlete was allowed to enroll at Fairview High School and participate on the football team without a full examination of his past enrollment history, resulting in a violation of both Bylaw 4, Section 2 (during 2012-2013) and Bylaw 3 (during 2013-2014). This lack of an effective control procedure resulted in the student participating not for a brief, short period of time, but for more than a year, across two competitive seasons, and allowed the student the possible opportunity for an otherwise prohibited privilege of participating in five competitive seasons in the same sport following eighth-grade promotion

 

This was taken directly from the KHSAA release, has it ever been reported that Ashland reported the infraction or is it just "common Knowledge"