And being called cheaters (or worse) is what leads people not to like public schools.

 

The way I look at TA's statement, it is simply stating that if you attack us, you should expect a massive counterstrike with everything we have. Why would anyone expect anything different? Are we not allowed to protect our children? Oh, I forgot... they’re not our children anymore. They belong to the nearby public school where Sears and Company have their best interest in hand.

Your posts are great...it's almost as if I know you.

And being called cheaters (or worse) is what leads people not to like public schools.

 

The way I look at TA's statement, it is simply stating that if you attack us, you should expect a massive counterstrike with everything we have. Why would anyone expect anything different? Are we not allowed to protect our children? Oh, I forgot... they’re not our children anymore. They belong to the nearby public school where Sears and Company have their best interest in hand.

 

 

:thumb:

I read here a lot, but rarely post. My .02 on this subject are very simple. The KHSAA is very lazy when it comes to investigation and enforcement of eligibility rules. The remedy they are seeking here is a catch all that requires very little policing on the part of the KHSAA.

 

Rather than the 1+1 rule, here is what I suggest:

 

Should a member institution, public or private, be found gaining an illegal advantage in a sport, the offending institution will lose their athletic programs for one season. Students not involved in the violations may transfer without penalty. Student athletes that are a part of the violation will serve a one year ban.

This would actually require the KHSAA to get off it's collective butt and backcheck schools and athletes, but that is their job.

There is no punishment for an institution in the remedy the KHSAA has proposed, it only penalizes the student athlete who may not have any control over circumstances that may force a change of institution.

I read here a lot, but rarely post. My .02 on this subject are very simple. The KHSAA is very lazy when it comes to investigation and enforcement of eligibility rules. The remedy they are seeking here is a catch all that requires very little policing on the part of the KHSAA.

 

Rather than the 1+1 rule, here is what I suggest:

 

Should a member institution, public or private, be found gaining an illegal advantage in a sport, the offending institution will lose their athletic programs for one season. Students not involved in the violations may transfer without penalty. Student athletes that are a part of the violation will serve a one year ban.

This would actually require the KHSAA to get off it's collective butt and backcheck schools and athletes, but that is their job.

There is no punishment for an institution in the remedy the KHSAA has proposed, it only penalizes the student athlete who may not have any control over circumstances that may force a change of institution.

 

 

I agree with this :thumb:

I read here a lot, but rarely post. My .02 on this subject are very simple. The KHSAA is very lazy when it comes to investigation and enforcement of eligibility rules. The remedy they are seeking here is a catch all that requires very little policing on the part of the KHSAA.

 

Rather than the 1+1 rule, here is what I suggest:

 

Should a member institution, public or private, be found gaining an illegal advantage in a sport, the offending institution will lose their athletic programs for one season. Students not involved in the violations may transfer without penalty. Student athletes that are a part of the violation will serve a one year ban.

This would actually require the KHSAA to get off it's collective butt and backcheck schools and athletes, but that is their job.

There is no punishment for an institution in the remedy the KHSAA has proposed, it only penalizes the student athlete who may not have any control over circumstances that may force a change of institution.

 

As I read the news accounts, the KHSAA office hasn't proposed anything like you are complaining about. The member schools ARE the KHSAA, and that entity answers to the Kentucky Board of Education. The "collective butt" to which you refer is the 282 schools being willing to sign their name to complaints, hold fellow members accountable, and quit participating in the "fellowship of the miserable" approach by not wanting to "turn someone in". The KHSAA was founded as a regulatory agency to manage championships, not an enforcement agency. However, from what I read, that appears to be shifting to a broader based organization with expanded enforcement staff, and an emphasis on compliance. That is what both the public and private schools seem to be demanding.

But it will not work if the member schools themselves refuse to hold each other accountable for adherence.

And being called cheaters (or worse) is what leads people not to like public schools.

 

The way I look at TA's statement, it is simply stating that if you attack us, you should expect a massive counterstrike with everything we have. Why would anyone expect anything different? Are we not allowed to protect our children? Oh, I forgot... they’re not our children anymore. They belong to the nearby public school where Sears and Company have their best interest in hand.

I agree you should. And you should expect us to protect our children in the public schools when we think that there are circumstances that are unfair to them.

 

Over 190 schools feel that the cirumstances are unfair for the public school children. Of course, the view by too many on here is that those 190 are WRONG and the half dozen or dozen on here is right.

 

There is a reason why over 190 voted for this proposal and contrary to the conspiracy stories on here, it is because those that are to protect the public school KIDS, as you want to protect yours, sees things as unfair.

As I read the news accounts, the KHSAA office hasn't proposed anything like you are complaining about. The member schools ARE the KHSAA, and that entity answers to the Kentucky Board of Education. The "collective butt" to which you refer is the 282 schools being willing to sign their name to complaints, hold fellow members accountable, and quit participating in the "fellowship of the miserable" approach by not wanting to "turn someone in". The KHSAA was founded as a regulatory agency to manage championships, not an enforcement agency. However, from what I read, that appears to be shifting to a broader based organization with expanded enforcement staff, and an emphasis on compliance. That is what both the public and private schools seem to be demanding.

But it will not work if the member schools themselves refuse to hold each other accountable for adherence.

And going with our sue mentality of this world. If we don't like something, sue, don't work hard to try and change people's mentalities and convince them to see our argument, our society just sues or threatens a lawsuit.

 

One area that I think the public schools do need to be patted on the back is that this has been an issue for them for about the last 5-6 years. They worked and proposed other issues that were defeated or did not work. They kept working at what they proposed until that found a proposal that the majority was able to accept.

 

They did not sue when their first proposals were defeated a few years back. They kept working on the issue.

 

What do I hear from privates? We are going to sue.

 

You talk about messages sending to your children. What message is that? You don't like what is going on, don't work to try and change people's perceptions and mindsets, just SUE!

And going with our sue mentality of this world. If we don't like something, sue, don't work hard to try and change people's mentalities and convince them to see our argument, our society just sues or threatens a lawsuit.

 

One area that I think the public schools do need to be patted on the back is that this has been an issue for them for about the last 5-6 years. They worked and proposed other issues that were defeated or did not work. They kept working at what they proposed until that found a proposal that the majority was able to accept.

 

They did not sue when their first proposals were defeated a few years back. They kept working on the issue.

 

What do I hear from privates? We are going to sue.

 

You talk about messages sending to your children. What message is that? You don't like what is going on, don't work to try and change people's perceptions and mindsets, just SUE!

 

 

 

I don't disagree with you on this LBBC....we live in a society of all types of frivolous lawsuits. However, I also believe that Prop 20 is setting a bad example itself. God help this kids when they get into the real world of jobs and life. What will they do when something doesn't go their way? I mean this in all sincerity.

I don't disagree with you on this LBBC....we live in a society of all types of frivolous lawsuits. However, I also believe that Prop 20 is setting a bad example itself. God help this kids when they get into the real world of jobs and life. What will they do when something doesn't go their way? I mean this in all sincerity.

I understand and agree. Prop 20 is not the solution that I would choose, if I got to make the solutions. I like it better than the compromises. Taking 2 years out of a kids life or making them make a choice of a HS after the 6th grade is RIDICULOUS and I think MUCH, MUCH worse than Prop 20.

 

I also think the present system is not working.

 

NCAA has 3 divisions and schools get to choose what level they wish to compete in. UALBANY did this. Last night, during the game, they talked about them being in NAIA in the 80's. 1994, they moved DIII and have worked their way up the divisions until they went DI in 2000. At least, that is the way I understood their story from the broadcast last night.

 

I like that. Let the schools decide what level and WHO they want to compete with.

 

That is reality. My little part of the world, I can choose to start a grocery store here and just compete against the ONE grocery store in our county or I can choose to start it in NKY and compete against Kroger's. I can choose to start a restaurant here and compete against the TOTAL of 5 restaurants in our county of 13,000 or go south to Lexington and compete against their hundreds of choices.

 

Again, I think part of the issue here is not understanding that the urban and rural areas are different. I understand and support what you are saying but it is not all cutthroat in the rural areas with competition for jobs/businesses as it is in the urban areas.

I don't disagree with you on this LBBC....we live in a society of all types of frivolous lawsuits. However, I also believe that Prop 20 is setting a bad example itself. God help this kids when they get into the real world of jobs and life. What will they do when something doesn't go their way? I mean this in all sincerity.

As far as public schools, these are the students I get. :jump:

I agree you should. And you should expect us to protect our children in the public schools when we think that there are circumstances that are unfair to them.

 

Over 190 schools feel that the cirumstances are unfair for the public school children. Of course, the view by too many on here is that those 190 are WRONG and the half dozen or dozen on here is right.

 

There is a reason why over 190 voted for this proposal and contrary to the conspiracy stories on here, it is because those that are to protect the public school KIDS, as you want to protect yours, sees things as unfair.

 

What exactly are the private schools doing to Kentucky children that they need protection from? Again, another "cheaters (or worse)" type of comment.

NCAA has 3 divisions and schools get to choose what level they wish to compete in. UALBANY did this. Last night, during the game, they talked about them being in NAIA in the 80's. 1994, they moved DIII and have worked their way up the divisions until they went DI in 2000. At least, that is the way I understood their story from the broadcast last night.

 

I like that. Let the schools decide what level and WHO they want to compete with.

 

 

Then make all divisions completely voluntary across the board instead of pushing it down the throat of some members.

 

Let those that think they can never compete with others have their own little corner of the KHSAA and let those that want to be the best do that.

As I read the news accounts, the KHSAA office hasn't proposed anything like you are complaining about. The member schools ARE the KHSAA, and that entity answers to the Kentucky Board of Education. The "collective butt" to which you refer is the 282 schools being willing to sign their name to complaints, hold fellow members accountable, and quit participating in the "fellowship of the miserable" approach by not wanting to "turn someone in". The KHSAA was founded as a regulatory agency to manage championships, not an enforcement agency. However, from what I read, that appears to be shifting to a broader based organization with expanded enforcement staff, and an emphasis on compliance. That is what both the public and private schools seem to be demanding.

But it will not work if the member schools themselves refuse to hold each other accountable for adherence.

 

An agency founded to "manage championships" was the premise of the KHSAA........in 1917. When district re-alignements and consolidations began in the late 60's and early 70's, the KHSAA was in the compliance business too. Kids began jumping district lines to attend a better school, or play for a better school. The issue about the compliance arm of the KHSAA being lazy is nothing new. You seem to act surprised....

The funny thing about Prop 20 is it allows the KHSAA to be even more lazy on compliance. It's a catch all. If I had any faith it would be applied in every instance, I wouldn't care. However, that is not the case IMO. Too many times Kentucky politics become involved.

There are already rules on the book on this issue. Enforce them. Bylaw 10 is very clear what constitutes recruiting, it just doesn't recommend a good remedy for non-compliance. Punish those that provide the inducements/advantages out there, put their Athletic Departments (and jobs) in jeopardy. Have some intestinal fortitude to remove a program from competition for a year. It's much more effective than a $30,000 fine to school that can afford to pay it.

Meanwhile in the NCAA tourney.... schools with smaller enrollments and fewer resources are not whining / trying to change rules.... they are working hard and beating "big boy" teams....... hmmmmm imagine that.

I understand and agree. Prop 20 is not the solution that I would choose, if I got to make the solutions. I like it better than the compromises. Taking 2 years out of a kids life or making them make a choice of a HS after the 6th grade is RIDICULOUS and I think MUCH, MUCH worse than Prop 20.

 

I also think the present system is not working.

 

NCAA has 3 divisions and schools get to choose what level they wish to compete in. UALBANY did this. Last night, during the game, they talked about them being in NAIA in the 80's. 1994, they moved DIII and have worked their way up the divisions until they went DI in 2000. At least, that is the way I understood their story from the broadcast last night.

 

I like that. Let the schools decide what level and WHO they want to compete with.

 

That is reality. My little part of the world, I can choose to start a grocery store here and just compete against the ONE grocery store in our county or I can choose to start it in NKY and compete against Kroger's. I can choose to start a restaurant here and compete against the TOTAL of 5 restaurants in our county of 13,000 or go south to Lexington and compete against their hundreds of choices.

 

Again, I think part of the issue here is not understanding that the urban and rural areas are different. I understand and support what you are saying but it is not all cutthroat in the rural areas with competition for jobs/businesses as it is in the urban areas.

I like your little analogy. Prop 20 is telling the people of your little county that they are not allowed to drive to the big city and shop at Kroger they have to shop at your little grocery. It also says that the family that lives next door to Kroger but usually shops at Sam's Club that they can't shop at Kroger. Thanks for the analogy. It works.