I have typed up 4 responses and deleted them all - keep coming back to one word MESSY.

2 hours ago, HedgeHog8 said:

Pause for a moment and realize that, for public schools, most funding comes from the state level and is dictated by Average Daily Attendance (ADA).

Next, understand that, in this state, the AVERAGE district uses about 86% of it's ENTIRE budget on salary alone. This leaves very little for other spending, which includes athletics.

Please follow my logic for a moment. Students transfer in, ADA goes up, money goes up, more ability to invest in athletics. Students transfer out, ADA goes down, money goes down, less ability to invest in athletics.

Understand that most public schools can't miraculously materialize enough funds to compete with those that already are pumping money into athletics. And if students are allowed to transfer, it will widen the gap to create some amazing sports programs and then the rest of us.

You may be happy about that, but I am not sold. I believe students have a right to free public education and all the trimmings that come with it, including athletics. If the gap widens too much, you may start to see less and less schools have the ability to pump money into their athletics after the athletes transfer away.

 

It would take A LOT of transfers to drastically change an athletic budget. 

2 hours ago, Unrivaled97 said:

I agree, I'm for choice as well, but those kids and families already made their choice when they enrolled originally.  Again, I think the KHSAA needs to allow some more exceptions on their list like possibly financial hardship (tough to continue to pay tuition to a private school when a parent loses their job), etc. and not just limit it to mostly change of address, but to just allow a free transfer for any reason is not ok.  It will become a feeding frenzy and I agree with TP94, the gap will most certainly widen between the elite and the rest...as if it wasn't big enough already.  You'll have HS coaches attending the 1 day college prospect camps now to find their next transfers for their program.

So about the choice when they enrolled originally. What if the law stated you got one job choice out of high school and had to keep it forever regardless of future opportunities? You would say that’s absurd. If I have a better opportunity then I should be able to take it. Why should academics and sports be any different? 

In the case of football, this would lead to smaller/struggling programs dropping football all together. If the better players flow out of the struggling programs, those left behind will often choose not to play. Football is already a tough sport. When you are not winning, it goes to an entirely different level.

Because football is so expensive, this may be on the horizon for many, already.

All things being considered, if football is only played at some schools, that may not be the end of the world.

The bigger issue that I am curious about, what happens to the schools that lose enrollment and struggle to even function. Does a county school get shut down?  If that happens, does that mean those students must travel to another school, or have to take their classes online?

With the costs of teacher pay, benefits, and retirement.... are there already avenues being explored where schools will need fewer staff members to function?

I really don't have all the answers and I know that. But, if the gap continues to widen between the haves and have nots, it is going to spill in to more than just who wins a football game.

2 hours ago, HedgeHog8 said:

Pause for a moment and realize that, for public schools, most funding comes from the state level and is dictated by Average Daily Attendance (ADA).

Next, understand that, in this state, the AVERAGE district uses about 86% of it's ENTIRE budget on salary alone. This leaves very little for other spending, which includes athletics.

Please follow my logic for a moment. Students transfer in, ADA goes up, money goes up, more ability to invest in athletics. Students transfer out, ADA goes down, money goes down, less ability to invest in athletics.

Understand that most public schools can't miraculously materialize enough funds to compete with those that already are pumping money into athletics. And if students are allowed to transfer, it will widen the gap to create some amazing sports programs and then the rest of us.

You may be happy about that, but I am not sold. I believe students have a right to free public education and all the trimmings that come with it, including athletics. If the gap widens too much, you may start to see less and less schools have the ability to pump money into their athletics after the athletes transfer away.

I've had a pretty busy day at work today so I haven't had a ton of time to really think through the whole thing completely, but a few thoughts and questions I've had:

- How many public school districts around the state allow for out-of-district tuition students? If a public school doesn't allow for out-of-district tuition students to attend, then they aren't going to have kids transferring in without their family moving into the actual school district.

- This obviously is going to be a bigger deal within more densely populated areas with schools that are geographically situated closer together...especially NKY (Kenton/Campbell/Boone), Louisville (Oldham/Jefferson/Bullitt/Shelby) and Lexington (Fayette/Clark/Scott/Jessamine/Woodford).

- JCPS assigns kids to schools. They don't allow transferring within schools via tuition, do they? FCPS  has geographic districts...do they currently allow students to attend different schools within the school district by paying tuition?

- This proposed rule change seems like it would benefit private schools the most, right?

- If the KHSAA is allowing one "free" transfer, then are they going to take a harder stance about denying eligibility to kids who transfer more than once without having a bonafide change of address?

Parity will be gone, discipline will be gone, and handlers and bag men will become common place. Go to Florida look at their football, and see if it’s a good product. I see the lure to this and see the reasons some think it is good…. But this is not what highschool sports should be. 

2 hours ago, FLYGUY said:

Parity will be gone, discipline will be gone, and handlers and bag men will become common place. Go to Florida look at their football, and see if it’s a good product. I see the lure to this and see the reasons some think it is good…. But this is not what highschool sports should be. 

Football isn’t good in Florida? First I’ve heard of it… 

4 hours ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

I've had a pretty busy day at work today so I haven't had a ton of time to really think through the whole thing completely, but a few thoughts and questions I've had:

- How many public school districts around the state allow for out-of-district tuition students? If a public school doesn't allow for out-of-district tuition students to attend, then they aren't going to have kids transferring in without their family moving into the actual school district.

- This obviously is going to be a bigger deal within more densely populated areas with schools that are geographically situated closer together...especially NKY (Kenton/Campbell/Boone), Louisville (Oldham/Jefferson/Bullitt/Shelby) and Lexington (Fayette/Clark/Scott/Jessamine/Woodford).

- JCPS assigns kids to schools. They don't allow transferring within schools via tuition, do they? FCPS  has geographic districts...do they currently allow students to attend different schools within the school district by paying tuition?

- This proposed rule change seems like it would benefit private schools the most, right?

- If the KHSAA is allowing one "free" transfer, then are they going to take a harder stance about denying eligibility to kids who transfer more than once without having a bonafide change of address?

Each FCPS school has at least 1 magnet program that allows you to attend an out-of-district school.  Some of those programs are easier to get into than others.

11 hours ago, HedgeHog8 said:

Pause for a moment and realize that, for public schools, most funding comes from the state level and is dictated by Average Daily Attendance (ADA).

Next, understand that, in this state, the AVERAGE district uses about 86% of it's ENTIRE budget on salary alone. This leaves very little for other spending, which includes athletics.

Please follow my logic for a moment. Students transfer in, ADA goes up, money goes up, more ability to invest in athletics. Students transfer out, ADA goes down, money goes down, less ability to invest in athletics.

Understand that most public schools can't miraculously materialize enough funds to compete with those that already are pumping money into athletics. And if students are allowed to transfer, it will widen the gap to create some amazing sports programs and then the rest of us.

You may be happy about that, but I am not sold. I believe students have a right to free public education and all the trimmings that come with it, including athletics. If the gap widens too much, you may start to see less and less schools have the ability to pump money into their athletics after the athletes transfer away.

 

I understand those concerns. But I also understand there’s not room for everybody at these elite programs. And not every athlete is good enough to play or to travel to said elite programs. And again, if a school doesn’t have the resources or ability to satisfy a kids needs, be it academically, athletically, socially or whatever, why should we force that kid to continue to go there? Telling the kid to stick it out or to make the best of it isn’t doing any service to that student. 

8 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

Football isn’t good in Florida? First I’ve heard of it… 

I said see if it’s a good product, kids play football at one school leave for baseball, then on fall head off for another for  football again. Revolving door. Do a little research, lots of athletes in Florida, but overall it if messes.  

1 hour ago, FLYGUY said:

I said see if it’s a good product, kids play football at one school leave for baseball, then on fall head off for another for  football again. Revolving door. Do a little research, lots of athletes in Florida, but overall it if messes.  

Saying the football “product” isn’t good would mean football in Florida isn’t good… That’s obviously not the case. 

18 hours ago, rjs4470 said:

Kids have been transferring for academic reasons for years, and I’d say there are more kids transferring for academic reasons than sports. It’s also no surprise that many of the best athletic schools are also very strong academically. Coaches leave for better situations all the time. Adults change jobs for better opportunities every day. But it’s only when we talk about sports that we feel like kids should ride out a bad situation or work harder to overcome. If anything this will get schools to get serious about getting better and putting effort and thought into all of their programs. If the school doesn’t care about or invest in the football program why shouldn’t the kid explore other options? If schools want to keep kids, then they need to start doing better for them.

I always hate comparing kids to adults argument because they are not adults. Coaches and Players should not be compared. It is a completely different point of life. What coaches do is separate from the conversation about kids transferring. 

But if a comparison is to be made, then we must look and realize that IF coaches want to get to better situations (jobs) in their life then they must make the best and work hard through the situation that they are currently in!  You work hard at the program that you are in SO THAT you can improve your spot in life and move to a greater position... This is the same thing that we get with college recruiting. You work your tail off to shine in a worse program to then stand out to college opportunities. 

Also if a head coach sees that a different coach is constantly jumping around to different programs at the high school level and that the coach can never commit to a program longer than a year or two, then no one will hire them (unless desperate) because there would be red flags about their character and who they are as a person... College coaches do this all of the time, that is the nature of coaching college football, but High school coaches do not because the high school football culture is completely different than the college football culture. 

We as adults cannot keep solving all of our kids problems without ever teaching them to work solve them on their own. That is not an accurate representation of what life will be like once they get out of school.

Also, I don't see it making schools work to improve their football program to retain kids. Administrators who don't support sports truly don't see the importance of them as it relates to academics. I doubt most of those who don't understand the value of football would be phased at all to lose football or to have their football team struggle. 

My county doesn’t have football. Never has.  
So I will speak in terms of basketball. What I see with this possible new rule is a big enhancement to the programs in the populated sections of Kentucky. Many student/athletes play summer AAU ball and build up friendships and closeness.  During this time some of these teams may decide to simply join up with one another at a chosen school, with the encouragement of their AAU coaches. A coach working the system could build a powerhouse program similar to an Oak Hill Academy. Places such as northern Kentucky, Fayette County and surrounding counties, Jefferson County and surrounding counties, Warren County, etc, could literally put together amazingly talented teams. 
Schools that are small enrollment and have the rare occasional college talent type player would have a difficult time keeping them from either leaving on their own decision or being coaxed to transfer by unscrupulous coaches and staffs from nearby schools. And as I have mentioned, switching schools by transfer is already fairly common throughout the state with the current rules. With the floodgates open with a 1 time transfer rule it would be the Wild West. 

And I’m not leaving the rural areas out of the Robin Hood scenario either. It could also be a madhouse transfer frenzy in my part of the state, too. Eastern Kentucky has quite a lot of the transfer situation going on already with the rules the way they are at present, and has for many years. 

52 minutes ago, TheDeuce said:

Saying the football “product” isn’t good would mean football in Florida isn’t good… That’s obviously not the case. 

Oh man you got me I guess you can define product  how you see fit... Anyways, I do not think we want a free for all like you  have in some other states.. To me that is not a good product, and ends in more negatives then positives. To me and most the people I discuss sports with it is not in  the spirit of highschool sports. 

19 minutes ago, FLYGUY said:

To me and most the people I discuss sports with it is not in  the spirit of highschool sports. 

High school sports should be about what is best for the student-athletes, not the adults who watch high school sports. Not letting them transfer is not in their best interests, IMO.