I'll try it this way

There it is.

 

I have to agree. Those are cute, just like FB, Frances and myself.

Let the coaches come to his house, write him letters, talk to him on the phone, take him out to eat, all that good stuff.

 

How come these coaches that you speak of never called my house or any kid I know? I am really angry...my kid was a very good student and athlete...he got no calls :irked:

Noone on here has discussed yet that ultimately this issue will go to the state Dept. of Education again, and that we have just appointed 4 (6?) brand new members to the Board. They are being interrogated/confirmed as we speak. These folks may have completely different thoughts about the issue, and may very well blow it out of the water.

I hope that the Board of Education will bring some sense to this. If not, it will be necessary to get the legislature and courts involved. I really thought that the suggestions of the private schools would be considered. They were reasonable but not extreme. I think that just how bizarre these proposals are is shown by a hypothetical case. Student "A" attends St Mary middle school, but plays no sports in middle school. Student "A" decides that he or she wants to attend "rural county high" for high school and go out for the cross country team. Student "A" would be unable to play any sport freshman year and no varsity sophmore year. Player "B" attends rural county middle school and is a three sport star. Player "B" attends rural county high in freshman year and stars on the freshman and JV teams in three sports. Sophmore year, player "B" transfers to "big city high" and can start for the varsity that year. Seems fair to me.

I hope that the Board of Education will bring some sense to this. If not, it will be necessary to get the legislature and courts involved. I really thought that the suggestions of the private schools would be considered. They were reasonable but not extreme. I think that just how bizarre these proposals are is shown by a hypothetical case. Student "A" attends St Mary middle school, but plays no sports in middle school. Student "A" decides that he or she wants to attend "rural county high" for high school and go out for the cross country team. Student "A" would be unable to play any sport freshman year and no varsity sophmore year. Player "B" attends rural county middle school and is a three sport star. Player "B" attends rural county high in freshman year and stars on the freshman and JV teams in three sports. Sophmore year, player "B" transfers to "big city high" and can start for the varsity that year. Seems fair to me.

 

What the new Board needs to bring to this situation is LEADERSHIP. The current Board and the KHSAA have been cowards, IMHO. They keep kicking it back to one another because they just don't want to make a hard decision. The new Board needs to lead. Comm'r Wilhoit has been up there for many years and is always saying how he is the longest running Comm'r in Ky. history. That's not something I'd be bragging about when we're ranked as low nationally as we are, have failed in so many areas, and can't step up to the plate on a high school athletics issue that has been visted and revisited many times in many places elsewhere in this country. Time for new blood . . .

Wilhoit's long tenure as education commissioner might be compared to an extended case of diarrhea. Both may be of record length but both are damaging.

BTW....15 out of the 16 teams in the boys Sweet 16 are public schools.

The publics must be cheating or the privates just aren't working very hard in basketball :fire: :lol:

It would just be easier to have seperate championships. But I for one like the ideas public school athletes that have moved to another public school have been required to sit out a year for a while now.

It would just be easier to have seperate championships. But I for one like the ideas public school athletes that have moved to another public school have been required to sit out a year for a while now.

 

ANY student who changes schools without having a change of residence has been required to sit out a year for a while now, not just the publics.

Were students that didn't play varsity sports required to sit out one year as well? I thought that 1 year sit was only for students that had played varsity sports at the first school.

Were students that didn't play varsity sports required to sit out one year as well? I thought that 1 year sit was only for students that had played varsity sports at the first school.

 

Currently, only those students appearing in a varsity game have to sit one year after transferring without a change of address.

Equus Grevyi and rock86 are both right. I mistakenly said any student, but as they pointed out, that is not quite the case. Thanks for the additional clarification, I need all the help I can get sometimes.

 

My real point was that the rule of sitting out one year is equally applied to both private and public athletes and not just one sided as the previous poster suggested.

Under the proposal, private schools with more than 300 students could draw their student-athletes from "affiliated schools" -- those with the same governing body, such as the Archdiocese of Louisville.

 

Is this simply speculation or is it fact?

Assuming the same governing body is the Archdiocese of Louisville, does this mean that an 8th grader attending St. James in E'town could not play basketball at E'town High School (a few blocks away) until two years later, but could drive 50 miles to Louisville's ST. X or Trinity every day and be eligible to play immediately? Or, what about an 8th grader in a parish school in Glasgow? As a freshman, he or she would not play at Glasgow or Barren County for the same two-year period, but could travel daily to St. X or Trinity in Louisville and start immediately on a team?

Assuming the same governing body is the Archdiocese of Louisville, does this mean that an 8th grader attending St. James in E'town could not play basketball at E'town High School (a few blocks away) until two years later, but could drive 50 miles to Louisville's ST. X or Trinity every day and be eligible to play immediately? Or, what about an 8th grader in a parish school in Glasgow? As a freshman, he or she would not play at Glasgow or Barren County for the same two-year period, but could travel daily to St. X or Trinity in Louisville and start immediately on a team?

 

 

As I understand it, that is correct.

As I understand it, that is correct.

I thought the private schools compromised where they could go from private to public but not the other way. In the examples given, I thought they were allowed but could not attend.....Glasgow Public HS and then attend St. X or Trinity?:confused:

I thought the private schools compromised where they could go from private to public but not the other way. In the examples given, I thought they were allowed but could not attend.....Glasgow Public HS and then attend St. X or Trinity?:confused:

 

 

But that's not the proposal that was endorsed by the KHSAA board. They kept it at penalties both ways despite the private schools attempt to not hurt the kids leaving private schools for public schools for any reason.