Wrong.........bought a house in Campbell Co. out by NKU.

 

The Original DLG dated the older Moeves, and she would not have driven to Walton to see him. :lol2:

 

Sounds like Brossart district to me. :banana:

Not at all, I wish Martin all the best and like I said she left ND because of the coach.

 

You sure it wasn't for academics?

It sounds like they run a lot of things by you so they must be looking for something from you, hope you didn't give them the secret to stopping HHS last season. LOL JK

 

Because I didn't post it doesn't mean I didn't feel for them and if she was that big of an impact at Ryle she would have had her own post and I would have let you know but she didn't so that tells you the impact wasn't as much as it is for Martin, but I am sure you don't agree.

 

By the end of the season, there aren't many surprises on how to stop teams. It usually comes down to, do you have the tools to stop them or not. OR who has the least amount of weaknesses. It's kinda my point. Last year, HHS didn't have a ton of weaknesses. They had their share, but not as many as others. And some of their strengths helped to overcome their weaknesses. This year, they have a lot to find out and a lot to improve on before teams won't be able to expose weaknesses. Their strengths may not be strong enough to overcome weaknesses. Like I said, a lot of questions before I would consider them an contender.

 

Last year, the gameplan was to Bully the birds. Get physical. Don't let Adler shoot and keep Barth and Coffey out or the lane. This year, I can promise you the physicality game plan will have a reverse effect. This team will be very physical and strong. But probably not as much finesse that the past couple teams had. They will not be soft! The finesse will come in the next couple years and when you combine the finesse with the physical attributes, that's going to make for a nice mix. I can't wait!

By the end of the season, there aren't many surprises on how to stop teams. It usually comes down to, do you have the tools to stop them or not. OR who has the least amount of weaknesses. It's kinda my point. Last year, HHS didn't have a ton of weaknesses. They had their share, but not as many as others. And some of their strengths helped to overcome their weaknesses. This year, they have a lot to find out and a lot to improve on before teams won't be able to expose weaknesses. Their strengths may not be strong enough to overcome weaknesses. Like I said, a lot of questions before I would consider them an contender.

 

IMO there is no clear cut favorite so it should be a fun year.

Not at all, I wish Martin all the best and like I said she left ND because of the coach.

 

It was more than the coach. I promise. I can fill you in when I see you. Not playing that out on here.

It was more than the coach. I promise. I can fill you in when I see you. Not playing that out on here.

/

 

But you have to admit if he was still there she wouldn't have left?

I agree with one thing here, I wouldnt move to Fort Thomas either, what a dump.

/

 

But you have to admit if he was still there she wouldn't have left?

 

Honestly, I can't answer that for sure. My guess...if the coach was still there she would most likely be there. But I know this other thing was a huge reason for the leave as well. Would it have been enough to move if the coaching debacle didn't happen with ND...that's a question for them.

Honestly, I can't answer that for sure. My guess...if the coach was still there she would most likely be there. But I know this other thing was a huge reason for the leave as well. Would it have been enough to move if the coaching debacle didn't happen with ND...that's a question for them.

 

Fare enough.

Whoever said this is a great topic is correct. I have learned a ton of things that I (and I think many others) have made assumptions about in the past. (just wish it would have been more generic in the header because HHS has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

Whoever said this is a great topic is correct. I have learned a ton of things that I (and I think many others) have made assumptions about in the past. (just wish it would have been more generic in the header because HHS has nothing to do with what we are discussing)

 

Awe but you and I both know not even close to the same impact on BGP readers if it's a generic title.

 

Just sayin!

Awe but you and I both know not even close to the same impact on BGP readers if it's a generic title.

 

Just sayin!

 

Very true!

Here is my takeaway from all of this .. The general rule, where the analysis begins, that a player is ineligible for a year when changing schools, has a specific exception carved out so that a player may be immediately eligible if there has been a "bona fide" change in residence. While I believe it was the intent of the drafters of the bylaw that the "bona fide" change in residence was intended to mean relocation to the locale/district/proximate of the new school, it does not say that (query if that was NOT their intent why require a change of address at all?). The KHSAA has adopted a number of measures to prevent kids from changing schools on a whim, and I believe that's what they were trying to do with bylaw 6, and they wanted to carve out an exception so that kids were not penalized when their parents had to move. So we are left with a bylaw with a loophole big enough to drive a truck through ... If a family moves from a second floor apartment to the first floor apartment, and they "REALLY" change floors, they have satisfied the "bona fide" change of address requirement and the player will be immediately to play for any school, whether it is down the street or 50 miles away. Personally, I think it violates the spirit of the law but not the letter of it, but I also find it to be something of an unresolved issue because I don't see that anyone has ever challenged such a "change of address" eligibility before the KHSAA, and there apparently has never been a formal finding by the KHSAA to rely upon.

 

Here is the hypothetical that is the problem and should motivate the KHSAA to either amend or discard bylaw 6. Player family lives at address A, and plays varsity basketball at school A. He doesn't like the coach, moves next door to address B and enrolls at School C 30 minutes away as a tuition student where he is immediately eligible as a result of the "bona fide" change of address. He plays varsity basketball at school C, decides he doesn't like that coach either, and wants to change schools again. He MOVES BACK to address A, which his family still owns (another "bona fide" change of address), and is immediately eligible wherever he wants to go, and he lives at the same place he started. Bylaw 6 is rendered meaningless and should be abandoned if this is the interpretation, IMO.

 

Two final comments. I am truly fine with Jenna Martin transferring to Highlands out of the 34th District ... Best of luck to her and the Bluebirds. And I acknowledge that a lot of meritorious arguments exist and have been presented that she may be immediately eligible under Bylaw 6, but it isn't my decision or that of anyone else here. I do wish the KHSAA would clarify, amend or repeal Bylaw 6, though, so that so much productivity wasn't wasted on threads like this .....

Here is my takeaway from all of this .. The general rule, where the analysis begins, that a player is ineligible for a year when changing schools, has a specific exception carved out so that a player may be immediately eligible if there has been a "bona fide" change in residence. While I believe it was the intent of the drafters of the bylaw that the "bona fide" change in residence was intended to mean relocation to the locale/district/proximate of the new school, it does not say that (query if that was NOT their intent why require a change of address at all?). The KHSAA has adopted a number of measures to prevent kids from changing schools on a whim, and I believe that's what they were trying to do with bylaw 6, and they wanted to carve out an exception so that kids were not penalized when their parents had to move. So we are left with a bylaw with a loophole big enough to drive a truck through ... If a family moves from a second floor apartment to the first floor apartment, and they "REALLY" change floors, they have satisfied the "bona fide" change of address requirement and the player will be immediately to play for any school, whether it is down the street or 50 miles away. Personally, I think it violates the spirit of the law but not the letter of it, but I also find it to be something of an unresolved issue because I don't see that anyone has ever challenged such a "change of address" eligibility before the KHSAA, and there apparently has never been a formal finding by the KHSAA to rely upon.

 

Here is the hypothetical that is the problem and should motivate the KHSAA to either amend or discard bylaw 6. Player family lives at address A, and plays varsity basketball at school A. He doesn't like the coach, moves next door to address B and enrolls at School C 30 minutes away as a tuition student where he is immediately eligible as a result of the "bona fide" change of address. He plays varsity basketball at school C, decides he doesn't like that coach either, and wants to change schools again. He MOVES BACK to address A, which his family still owns (another "bona fide" change of address), and is immediately eligible wherever he wants to go, and he lives at the same place he started. Bylaw 6 is rendered meaningless and should be abandoned if this is the interpretation, IMO.

 

Two final comments. I am truly fine with Jenna Martin transferring to Highlands out of the 34th District ... Best of luck to her and the Bluebirds. And I acknowledge that a lot of meritorious arguments exist and have been presented that she may be immediately eligible under Bylaw 6, but it isn't my decision or that of anyone else here. I do wish the KHSAA would clarify, amend or repeal Bylaw 6, though, so that so much productivity wasn't wasted on threads like this .....

 

 

All true statements. And I agree.

 

However, two things. This scenario isn't unprecedented. It happens all the time. Not saying that it's right or wrong. My point being, with so many previous examples of it, it would be hard for them to change a decision on it now without rule changes or addendums. People would appeal and threaten to sue! I'm sure they look at extreme cases around examples that you describe. Moving within the same apt or even the same city would throw all kinds of red flags. But when you cross districts, there isn't much to do with the way the rule is written.

 

Secondly, the KHSSA is in the business of making sure kids CAN play sports. Not trying to hold kids out. I'm sure they aren't silly enough to think someone wouldn't figure out this huge loophole. My feeling is they know it's there, but it's better to have the loophole in there than to close the loophole and punish the kids that are in a scenario that needs the exception to be there. Again, they want kids on the courts and fields! That's their goal. If a kid finds a loophole, then so be it. My feeling is, if they are going to fail on one side or the other, they would prefer to fail on the side that has the most kids eligible and happy to be playing high school sports.

 

There are a lot of things they could clean up if they really wanted to throw hard core rules at us and a lot of kids would have to sit out or play unhappy.

Jumping in here wondering if there aren't other reasons a player can be instantly eligible without changing addresses.

 

Wasn't there a really good baseball player at one school who had some problems and transferred to another school and was eligible to play right away? Not digging up the past and not saying this is anyway a similar situation. Just wondering if a move is really the only way to be eligible right away or if extenuating circumstances could come in to play