Once again, I thought this was about the kids. If a middle schooler can prove they can compete at the high school level what is the problem. Interesting that we are all for football teams "playing up in class" because of competitive issues yet we don't want the middle school athletes "playing up" for the same reasons. If Rachel Sanford can win the 3-a cross country championship as a fifth grader, more power to her. If Emma Talley can finish in the top three at the state golf meet, more power to her. It's not like the middle schoolers are bumping high schoolers from the roster spots. They are helping schools keep programs alive and gaining athletic experience as a result. I see nothing wrong with it. Again, this is about the kids being able to compete in athletics isn't it?

The only problem I have with the cross country example is that it has medical research behind it that indicates that it is physically damaging for someone that young to have that much pounding on their joints.

Apples and gorillas.

 

Employees are paid to perform a job by employers. Students are not paid by the school to play sports.

 

The best do not always compete for State Championships. Since you now favor 6th graders competeing for State Championships, would you also favor 19 and 20 year old students still enrolled in high school to compete as well. How about Johnny or Susie with 2 D's and 4 F's? After all sports may be their only chance to success in life. Can they play too so we aren't discriminating?

Let me understand you stance correctly, so that I do not assume it wrong.

 

It is apples to apples that we should not seperate the schools because in life competition is part of it and life's not fair.

 

It is apples to oranges that we can't let the 8-13 year old crowd take a spot of a 17 year old because, competition is not part of life individually because they don't get paid and that would be unfair.

The same can be said for football.

 

Let's say the KHSAA makes cross country a 'contact' sport and says middle schoolers can't compete at the high school level. But a middle school team can be formed to compete against other middle schoolers. What's the difference in running three miles in a high school event and running two in a middle school event? They are still going to train the same way a high schooler would.

The same can be said for football.

 

Let's say the KHSAA makes cross country a 'contact' sport and says middle schoolers can't compete at the high school level. But a middle school team can be formed to compete against other middle schoolers. What's the difference in running three miles in a high school event and running two in a middle school event? They are still going to train the same way a high schooler would.

I believe the distance is the key. There are other levels for younger runners and the distance, from my limited understanding, is the key. The races are much shorter than HS races.

 

Football and soccer are also contact sports in which MSers cannot play at the varsity level. I have no problem with that because a 12 year old is NOT physically ready to compete in a contact sport with an 18 year old.

 

Golf, tennis, etc, are a different story though.

I agree with the contact sports such as football and soccer.

I agree with the contact sports such as football and soccer.

:thumb: To me, that is pretty much a no-brainer.

 

Any sport where there is a medical, physicall issue, I have no problem with it. And if research shows that swinging a club causes long term back problems for those playing so much golf at an early age, I would have no problem saying no to golfers, too.

Let me understand you stance correctly, so that I do not assume it wrong.

 

It is apples to apples that we should not seperate the schools because in life competition is part of it and life's not fair.

 

It is apples to oranges that we can't let the 8-13 year old crowd take a spot of a 17 year old because, competition is not part of life individually because they don't get paid and that would be unfair.

 

Bingo!

 

We should not separate high schools because the high schools all have high school students enrolled in them that wish to participate in sports.

 

8-13 year olds are not in high school and should not be taking the place of the 14 to 18 year old students who are in high school and wish to represent their high school in athletics. Just as 19 to 22 year old people no longer in the high school, just like home schooled students, and just like students enrolled in another high school, should not be on a high school team that they do not attend.

 

BTW, LBBC on a side note this is also have public/private implications. Just watch the fur fly whenever a Private school student paying $$$ amount of tuition is cut from a team so that a student not attending that school and paying $$$ can play.:scared:

Bingo!

 

We should not separate high schools because the high schools all have high school students enrolled in them that wish to participate in sports.

 

8-13 year olds are not in high school and should not be taking the place of the 14 to 18 year old students who are in high school and wish to represent their high school in athletics. Just as 19 to 22 year old people no longer in the high school, just like home schooled students, and just like students enrolled in another high school, should not be on a high school team that they do not attend.

 

BTW, LBBC on a side note this is also have public/private implications. Just watch the fur fly whenever a Private school student paying $$$ amount of tuition is cut from a team so that a student not attending that school and paying $$$ can play.:scared:

For the last point, the student would be REQUIRED to attend the school "assigned" school district. Not sure how to handle open enrollment schools or private schools that share MS/Elementary???:confused:

 

First part seems awful hypocritical. Want to limit competition in the situations that I think it is fine to limit the competition but rail on a proposal that would limit competition.

I am not sure of the exact history and maybe someone on here can help out but I believe the KRS statue that protects the opportunity for MSers/Elementary play varsity resulted from either a lawsuit in which the KHSAA lost or a threatened lawsuit that the KHSAA would not win, so the legislature made the law to prevent that.

 

Very similar to what the legislature promised with Prop 20.

Let me clarify something.

 

After much thought (about 10 minutes) I have little or no problem with a MS student participationg in a state high school championship in sports that award individual championships (golf, cross country, wrestling, etc.) as long as they participate as individuals and not as part of a high school team and as long as that MS players perfomance does not count towards any teams championship. That way the prodigy can still compete against the highest level of competition.

 

I still have major problems with MS students participating as part of high school teams.

 

1. MS Students do not have the same academic load that HS students have. If a MS student athlete is academically able to do HS work then skip the grade and let them enroll as a HS student and then allow them to play sports. If not then they stay in MS and play at that level.
   
2. Regardless of any rules in place to prevent it, when a MS student participates on a HS team they take a spot that another HS student could have. You may not cut HS players to make room for the MS player but most team sports have a roster limit for district, regional and state championships. You may carry them on your squad through the regular season but then will not be allowed to let them dress once post season starts. To be completely honest I'd rather be cut then be told that after the whole season of practicing I would not be allowed to dress for post-season games. And even if you keep your varsity roster at the limit for post-season there is still a HS kid that could fill that roster spot that is now playing JV.
   

 

I guess the bottom line is that we will never fully agree on this issue.

Let me clarify something.

 

After much thought (about 10 minutes) I have little or no problem with a MS student participationg in a state high school championship in sports that award individual championships (golf, cross country, wrestling, etc.) as long as they participate as individuals and not as part of a high school team and as long as that MS players perfomance does not count towards any teams championship. That way the prodigy can still compete against the highest level of competition.

 

I still have major problems with MS students participating as part of high school teams.

 

1. MS Students do not have the same academic load that HS students have. If a MS student athlete is academically able to do HS work then skip the grade and let them enroll as a HS student and then allow them to play sports. If not then they stay in MS and play at that level.
   
2. Regardless of any rules in place to prevent it, when a MS student participates on a HS team they take a spot that another HS student could have. You may not cut HS players to make room for the MS player but most team sports have a roster limit for district, regional and state championships. You may carry them on your squad through the regular season but then will not be allowed to let them dress once post season starts. To be completely honest I'd rather be cut then be told that after the whole season of practicing I would not be allowed to dress for post-season games. And even if you keep your varsity roster at the limit for post-season there is still a HS kid that could fill that roster spot that is now playing JV.
   

 

I guess the bottom line is that we will never fully agree on this issue.

And understand and can appreciate what you have said here.

 

I do have a question. What if the MSer is the difference between the HSers getting a chance to experience postseason play. For example, Mason County won Regional and were able to participate in the state tournament, something they would not have been able to do without the MSers to complete the team.

 

It can be extremely difficult for schools and NOT ONLY small schools to field teams. This year, Montgomery County entered the year as back-to-back regional champions. They only had one female golfer and could not field a team.

For the last point, the student would be REQUIRED to attend the school "assigned" school district. Not sure how to handle open enrollment schools or private schools that share MS/Elementary???:confused:

 

First part seems awful hypocritical. Want to limit competition in the situations that I think it is fine to limit the competition but rail on a proposal that would limit competition.

 

LBBC,

 

Thanks for opening up another problem with MS'ers that I didn't even think of. So can Dixie (open enrollment in Kenton Co.) go get 3 MS students that have no idea what high school they will attend (Scott, Simon Kenton, Dixie, Holy Cross, Notre Dame) in order to field a Girls Golf team? Hey no problems there.... hold on..... just let me put this lid back on Pandora's box.

 

And remember I am not for limiting high school competition at all. I wish that every high school could offer every KHSAA high school sport, that all schools would have the opportunity to field teams, and that those teams would be filled with high school students.

LBBC,

 

Thanks for opening up another problem with MS'ers that I didn't even think of. So can Dixie (open enrollment in Kenton Co.) go get 3 MS students that have no idea what high school they will attend (Scott, Simon Kenton, Dixie, Holy Cross, Notre Dame) in order to field a Girls Golf team? Hey no problems there.... hold on..... just let me put this lid back on Pandora's box.

 

And remember I am not for limiting high school competition at all. I wish that every high school could offer every KHSAA high school sport, that all schools would have the opportunity to field teams, and that those teams would be filled with high school students.

I agree that the first situation is a mess. What to do there? I have no clue.

 

As I alluded to in another post, I wonder if a rule prohibiting it would survive a legal challenge and of course it would take a move by the state legislature to enact this.

And understand and can appreciate what you have said here.

 

I do have a question. What if the MSer is the difference between the HSers getting a chance to experience postseason play. For example, Mason County won Regional and were able to participate in the state tournament, something they would not have been able to do without the MSers to complete the team.

 

It can be extremely difficult for schools and NOT ONLY small schools to field teams. This year, Montgomery County entered the year as back-to-back regional champions. They only had one female golfer and could not field a team.

 

Then as harsh as it sounds the school should not compete (as a team). If the players are good enough to qualify as individuals then they compete that way. I guess my main point is where do you draw the line. What if my son is an outrageously talented 8th grade soccer player yet the high school that he will go to does not have a soccer program because there has never been enough interest to start one? Should that school be required to field a team to accomodate my son? In the example that you sited if there are not enough female golfers at a high school to field a full team then they shouldn't field a team BUT if there are a few interested in playing as individuals then by all means they should be allowed to do that AND I would even go so far as to say that their coach should still be paid as if he/she were coaching a full team. That way the kids that are interested in competing will still have the chance to do so.

Then as harsh as it sounds the school should not compete (as a team). If the players are good enough to qualify as individuals then they compete that way. I guess my main point is where do you draw the line. What if my son is an outrageously talented 8th grade soccer player yet the high school that he will go to does not have a soccer program because there has never been enough interest to start one? Should that school be required to field a team to accomodate my son? In the example that you sited if there are not enough female golfers at a high school to field a full team then they shouldn't field a team BUT if there are a few interested in playing as individuals then by all means they should be allowed to do that AND I would even go so far as to say that their coach should still be paid as if he/she were coaching a full team. That way the kids that are interested in competing will still have the chance to do so.

I disagree but what you say is fair.:thumb:

 

Have you noticed that originally these P/P debates started out so emotional and alot of those posters have moved on and the remaining ones like us have matured and moved past the emotion to have some good discussions in this thread?:thumb: