Obviously, none of them were meaningless because they were won against all competition. No one insisted that little old Rose Hill, with less than 70 in the high school, needed crutches to compete. It appears that many feel that the crutches are needed by the publics.

Dont want it? I would call your attention to the original separation vote. You need to get into more counties and talk to the MAJORITY. You will hear the original vote mirrored.

 

Again I am not for separation.

YOu will hear that vote mirrored by many coaches who want yet another excuse why they aren' winning. When all aspects are reviewed, you won't find that vote mirrored, even from many of its original proponents. Its not about sports folks, its about funding for schools and public schools losing the 3 to 4 thousand dollars in funding per student that chooses not to attend. In many many areas, it is much more about losing students to other public schools than losing them to private schools.

I cover most of Eastern Kentucky and I have found that most everyone is for separation. Stronger enforcement is also needed but most everyone I speak with is for total separation.

 

I was told to get out of Jefferson County and ask about separation. I did, and I reported what I heard from the people and a great number of kids that play sports. Maybe you spend too much time talking to folks within the school system and coaches. Just a guess.

YOu will hear that vote mirrored by many coaches who want yet another excuse why they aren' winning. When all aspects are reviewed, you won't find that vote mirrored, even from many of its original proponents. Its not about sports folks, its about funding for schools and public schools losing the 3 to 4 thousand dollars in funding per student that chooses not to attend. In many many areas, it is much more about losing students to other public schools than losing them to private schools.

Funny in the conversations that I have had with coaches about this issue in the past 8-9 years, funding has NEVER came up. And the rants have not been aimed at solely private schools, but the publics schools that "recruit" under the counter (parents, teammates on AAU teams, etc) and pool talent that smaller school systems have spent years developing at the MS level. Even to the point that they have moved up from the MS level and played V.

Funny in the conversations that I have had with coaches about this issue in the past 8-9 years, funding has NEVER came up. And the rants have not been aimed at solely private schools, but the publics schools that "recruit" under the counter (parents, teammates on AAU teams, etc) and pool talent that smaller school systems have spent years developing at the MS level. Even to the point that they have moved up from the MS level and played V.

 

Thats alot of what I hear. I have coached a few AAU games myself and dont think that these things are not happening. Thats what the majority of the people dislike, the under the counter recruiting. Right now we have a running back on the football team that is a "much" wanted talent. A neighboring county has a 6' 2" fifth grader that they just lost to a adjoining county. Notice I never said anything about a private school. The rules in place need to be enforced, thus that means the KHSAA is going to have to do something besides talk about it.

Proposal 8 would have provided for enforcement of the rules. Unfortunately, the publics didn't want it.

What does it tell you All Tell? It tells me there is going to be problems till a separation occurs. Also for the record , I am against a different class for Public and Private school. That where I think you guys have me pegged wrong. I am just stating what I hear the most people say. That they want the privates to just accept the votes and not think they are above the majority, which is what you are saying. If you cannot accept the votes and then cry " Ill get a lawyer" what does that look like to the publics?

 

I am glad to read you are against the split.

 

As for what you hear most people say in re the privates accepting the vote and split off, the biggest problem I see with that line of thinking is that the schools actually have this mentality that the KHSAA is "their" association and that the KHSAA BOC should do what a majority of the schools vote to do. Sort of the same mentality of public administrators that kids living in a school's district are "my kids", as if the school owns them. Sorry folks, the only persons those kids belong to are their parents.

 

If I can get one message across to the schools (both public and private) is that the KHSAA is not their association. It is the State Board of Education's association put in place to regulate and govern high school athletics. Public schools like private schools are invited to join. But majority or not, the public schools do not run the KHSAA. If you doubt that, simply look at the Constitution procedures for amending the Constitution. Delegates can vote unanimously for a change, the BOC can vote unanimously to recommend the change, and the State Board can simply vote against it. The State Board has the final say. Its their association.

 

The sooner the public schools can get off their high horse and quit complaining about their majority delegate votes not being approved by the BOC and open their eyes to the fact that the KHSAA is not "their" association and to the fact that kids do not belong to them just because they reside in their district, things will get better.

 

 

Finally, if any public school does not like the current system, they are free to not renew their membership and start their own athletic association.

Thats alot of what I hear. I have coached a few AAU games myself and dont think that these things are not happening. Thats what the majority of the people dislike, the under the counter recruiting. Right now we have a running back on the football team that is a "much" wanted talent. A neighboring county has a 6' 2" fifth grader that they just lost to a adjoining county. Notice I never said anything about a private school. The rules in place need to be enforced, thus that means the KHSAA is going to have to do something besides talk about it.

 

 

But back to my oft posted position on this issue: why would a parent ever think about moving his or her child to another school if the parent was satisfied with their current school's athletic programs? In almost every case I know of, a transfer of any type only happened when the parents/kids were very dissatisfied with their current school's committment to athletics (and in most case, but admittely not all, with good basis for such dissatisfaction). If athletics are important enough to warrant proposals like Proposal 2 (which totally infringe on parental rights) why aren't they important enough for schools to make the proper committment to their athletic programs? Perfect example is Scott High School in N. Ky. Nice school, very successful in some programs. When Highlands frosh played Scott's frosh in football, I sat next to some Scott parents. We blistered them in the game. Small wonder. The Scott frosh football team hardly met at all the entire summer ( I think the parent may have said not at all, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, and go with hardly at all). Highlands on the other hand had their freshman football team working out as a unit the entire summer. Why wouldn't the Scott frosh coach meet with the team dring the summer and have them work out? If its because he thought none of the frosh players would show up/or quit if they had to be there during the summer or he just did not want to put in the time himself, then that once again points to the work ethic/committment to the football program (or more accurately the lack thereof) as being the reason for their struggles and the motivation of some parents wanting their kids to go to Dixie, CovCath, Beechwood or Highlands. Heck if I lived in the Scott district and my son was serious about football, I'd have my son transferred out of their in a heartbeat to another school whose coach and players were committed to winning. And yes there are a lot of schools that have not only great athletics, but great academics, so don't try to label me as some parent who thinks my son is the next Carson Palmer and places athletics in front of academics. You want to keep kids from transferring from your school because of athletics? Improve your program so they don't want to do it. And it can be done. I truly believe that if schools like Newport, Bellevue and Campbell County keep improving their programs, fewer and fewer kids will leave those programs to go to Highlands and NCC. Keep kids at your school the good old fashioned way: earn it. Don't keep them there with handcuffs and shackles.

 

And I do totally agree with Kissinger's point about money factoring into this issue. It might not be the coaches' motivation for change, but it is definitely one of the Superintendents' motivations. Sears at last year's annual meeting of the Delegates spoke passionately about the increase in number of private schools and the effect such would have on the public school enrollments (i.e. the money).

All this won't matter, the BOE won't approve it.

Proposal 8 would have provided for enforcement of the rules. Unfortunately, the publics didn't want it.

Not really.

 

Let's say that my daughter plays on an AAU team and during the game I am sitting in the stands and I began a conversation with Lindsay's parents. And Lindsay is a top 8th grader in our region. And we begin a friendship and I talk about how good our school is, academically, and how good our basketball team is and ALL we need is that 6'2" center to be the top ranked team in the region. And Lindsay just happens to be 6'1" as an 8th grader already playing on her HS's varsity team and averaging 10 ppg. O yeah, her HS team is a very small school with only 60 students and will not have any real chance to compete for a regional title.

 

Is this illegal recruiting? How would this be enforced by Prop 8 any differently than what is done now? To me, THIS IS THE RECRUITING DONE. How do you enforce this? Is it even illegal or immoral? I am not sure there is anything wrong with it but it is, in my opinion, how school's begin to pool talent. Through the players themselves recruiting their teammates off of AAU teams.

 

I was told once by the parent of a very good female soccer goalie who played on a very good club team that her teammates consistently told her, you come to our school and we win the state title. I would fully expect kids to do that.

 

Is this Prop 8 commissioner going to be listening into parent's conversations at Frisch's after their daughter's AAU games?

 

To me, this is the recruiting that is done and not necessarily do we see a lot of out in the community recruiting by the coaching staff.

But wouldn't it be helpful to have an increased staff to followup and review the circumstances of "Lindsay's" transfer? An increased staff to review these types of transfers and more accurately determine if anything inappropriate had occurred.

 

The more these transfers are reviewed and the more eligibilty that is jeopardized we would hopefully see this become more of a deterent.

Here's one example of where this ruling is harmful to the child:

 

An exceptionally bright (or an exceptionally challenged) student plans on attending a Catholic high school. He is currently in a Catholic grade school. However, the grade school is unable to handle him academically unlike the local public school who has programs for children such as him. With this ruling, the parents are going to do what's best for the child and put him in the academic program in the public school. However, by doing so, they are also condemning the child to one year of ineligibility.

 

Fair? Obviously not.

A question that I don't have an answer for.

 

I child goes to parochial school in Hardin County through the 8th grade. There is no Catholic High School there. As I read this proposal the only way this person would be eligible for athletics as a freshamn would be to go to a Catholic High School in Louisville or Bardstown. Is this correct?

But wouldn't it be helpful to have an increased staff to followup and review the circumstances of "Lindsay's" transfer? An increased staff to review these types of transfers and more accurately determine if anything inappropriate had occurred.

 

The more these transfers are reviewed and the more eligibilty that is jeopardized we would hopefully see this become more of a deterent.

You are going to expect a staff member to review every conversation between parents on an AAU team. My point is that I don't think the above situation is enforceable as recruiting at all. And THAT is where the majority of recruiting is going on.

 

Would you expect AAU teammates to never discuss what would happen if they played the regular HS season together? I don't think that is realistic or enforceable to not do but it is where the recruiting goes on.

You know, when I sit down and really think about it. Whats the problem with recruiting? If you have a better "mouse-trap" why not brag about it. If a kid and their parents think it is better for them, why can't they choose wherever they want to go? Does it hurt the kid? No. Does it hurt the actual mission of the schools? Not really, unless your school is Oak Hill. I think its a case that the adults want to succeed at kid's games. Pretty sad really.