Hell, you belong to one. Ask theoldguy.

 

 

I'm trying to be in as many as I possibly can. Membership has its perks.

I'm trying to be in as many as I possibly can. Membership has its perks.

 

So, uhhhh, how do I sign up?

Why do I care? Because for some reason I tend to like level playing fields or at least as fair as possible. It may not bother you and that is fine, but it bothers me and we both have our opinions.

 

What is a 'level playing field' though? Or how do you make it "as fair as possible"? I think those are tough calls that none of us really have the answer to.

So, uhhhh, how do I sign up?

 

 

I'll let you know.:sssh:

So, uhhhh, how do I sign up?

It's like becoming a moderator, if you ask your never getting in :lol2:

What is a 'level playing field' though? Or how do you make it "as fair as possible"? I think those are tough calls that none of us really have the answer to.

IT will never be 100% fair or level etc. But having rules such as a transfer who played varsity sports the year before his transfer can not play varsity sports at his new school unless the transfer was job transfer or moving etc. YEa I know that many go by that now and when they transfer they some will make up reasons such as hardship etc. to be exempt. but at least there are guidelines to go by.

Transfers from out of state that have nothing to do with job transfer for parents etc. but simply transferring to play sports they should be ineligible for a year if they played varsity the year before tat their previous high school.

 

Yes I know people can pick it apart, but it was off the top of my head just so you get the jist of what I mean by fair etc.

I know of a case that happened in the last few years where an entire family relocated to a new job and new house, as soon as child's HS eligibility was over, the house and job were gone and they were back in their hometown.

 

There is a lot more crap that happens at "Power Programs" than what ever is being alleged here.

What is a 'level playing field' though? Or how do you make it "as fair as possible"? I think those are tough calls that none of us really have the answer to.

 

I think that is a great point -- if we equate "level playing field" with "fair" then many of us will produce different definitions of what it is. At the same time, I would suggest that most of us know "unfair" when we see it. Those of us who express concern over the current transfer situation(s) probably do so because of the following scenarios:

1. For any number of reasons, School A develops reputation as athletic powerhouse. School A then attracts transfers who don't like being the only strong players in small or underdeveloped programs. Less-than-level playing field ensues, and it becomes self-perpetuating as each year brings its own group of regional (or international) kids and parents who like the idea of winning year after year. Schools B, C, and D can't promise that type of winning, hence they get few if any high-end transfer athletes, hence the gap persists or widens. As one college coach recently told me about a particular high school: "Not everyone starts out playing at [school A] but sooner or later everyone sure ends up playing at [school A]."

2. Player A sees the writing on the wall as his current coach plans to move or as a bunch of senior athletes graduate with a "talent gap" looming over the next few years. Player B works his way up the ranks at his local school and all evidence suggests that if B works his posterior off this summer, then he'll finally start in the fall. Player B does work said posterior off, only to watch helplessly as A swoops in towards the end of summer workouts.

3. School C has a big enough local talent pool to stay competitive in sports, but the athletic program doesn't always emphasize academics enough for Player C or his family; some of the players and their families are comfortable with that situation, which makes Player C's family even less happy. Now, Player C is a decent player who doesn't necessarily want to win more games or get more clock; he just wants to play ball at a school with different educational resources and/or attitudes. If he transfers to another school for that reason, he may well be told that he can't play ball for a year -- and after all, according to some folks' logic, if he's moving on the basis of academics rather than athletics, shouldn't he be okay with having to sit out a year?

There aren't any easy answers, but "let everyone play wherever they wish whenever they wish" isn't a coherent philosophy, and the current inconsistencies in enforcement make things confusing. I'm sure BGP contributors have other examples as well as some rebuttals, and that's what makes this a great place to hang out!

What is a 'level playing field' though? Or how do you make it "as fair as possible"? I think those are tough calls that none of us really have the answer to.

 

First of all one would have to recognize that a school with less than 10% of the states average enrollment will always be on an unleveled playing field. And that is the issue at hand a school with a populations of 300+- K-12th grade cannot be expected to compete with the school that has a population of 300+- 9-12th grade. I say the national High School AA needs to address that issue.

 

Proposal : All school with less than 10% population should have an open enrollment with automatic eligibility......... Now I sure those from the larger school who year after year destroy these local kids who really want to play drive and athletic self esteem what about there college dreams and hopes.... but oh it's for them to transfer out to play just don't have anyone come in........ Do you really want a leveled playing field or is that only with the current rules....... that's not fair at all!!!!