How about a new twist. What about junior high schools that do not offer a specific sport. For instance a small private school does not offer junior high football so all their players play for a public school team in junior high while attending the private school. Now this same private school does offer high school football. So when these players are in 9th grade playing for this private school do they have to sit out a year? or not? They did not play in the appropriate feeder program, because it was not offered and their is not a private school team so they have to play for a public school.

 

Just playing devils advocate. But this is possible in Eastern Kentucky.

Great question. Will that mean that you will see MS programs start being cut out as official middle school programs and rather "select" programs at that level?

One of the things that is getting lost in this debate is that we are actually addressing two different arms of the KHSAA. The HS's are the ones that are the driving force behind these proposals while the enforcing comes from the KHSAA headquarters.

 

I believe most posters and people see this as the same group. But it is not.

 

Prop 20 came from the public HS's and NOT the KHSAA HQ's that enforce the rules and do the investigation. And those that are trying to determine the eligibility of players are NOT the ones who came up with Prop 20 and Prop 2.

 

You raise a very interesting question with the "make a case" comment. Should the KHSAA be in the business of investigating like police would have to in making a case? Let me phrase that better, is that where the KHSAA should be sending their time and resources ($$$) in having a team of private investigators?

 

What does that say about the way our HS athletics system is setup if the governing body has to become like police investigators? Does it say the system is NOT WORKING?

I answer an unequivacable YES to this. You can't penalize someone for wrong doing without proving that it has occurred. You like other are proposing changes based on biased perceptions rather then proven misdeeds. That's completely and totally wrong no matter how much you try to justify it.

 

What it says about the system is like everything else there are those that will test their limits. Until the KHSAA CONSISTANTLY enforces the rules that are on the books then nothing will change.

Great question. Will that mean that you will see MS programs start being cut out as official middle school programs and rather "select" programs at that level?

 

You have another valid question, what if a middle school athlete plays for a select team? Which are becoming more and more popular, how does that affect eligibility? Does AAU or other traveling programs affect eligibility?

 

I don't see how Prop 2 can be accurately enforced without the KHSAA completely overseeing junior high sports.

 

And I think the KHSAA has to have an investigative team to enforce all violations, with out such a policing agency then schools will violate rules, and there will always be presumption of violations. With an investigative team, of some sort, there will be less violation as well and less speculations of violation.

 

I still think recruiting and school changes will just happen in sixth grade instead of eighth grade.

BTW, if supposed recruiting goes on at the Middle school level, who handles the complaints? Is it the local school board?

 

The more I think about it, maybe this is the reason for Prop 2. If the KHSAA does not control junior high sports then they will make recruiting legal if recruiting happens in 6th grade. You can't complain to the KHSAA for violations in junior high school or elementary school and local school boards can not control students leaving their school.

Then maybe, just maybe Bullitt County should do something to address WHY parents are willing to pay the money and provide the transportation to send their children to private schools in Jefferson County. As I recall there is quite a bit of discontent with the present (and soon to be "retired") leadership of the Bullitt County Schools.

 

The problems with current leadership just came to light (at least to the majority of the public) and would not be the reason parents chose to send their sons to a private school in Jefferson County. The reason, I believe, is that parents come to believe that their son is "extra" special because someone representing a Catholic high school tell them the high school wants them to come play for them (as was proven concerning Holy Cross). As I stated earlier, there are a lot of good reasons for parents wanting their kid to attend a private school if they do so without being lured there. It just happens to be illegal for these persons to pursue kids in this way. The smaller Jefferson County parochial schools have long viewed Bullitt County as a good place to help find kids to increase their enrollment and bring in a few good football players each year.

 

The KHSAA handbook specifically states the reason for the recruitment bylaw is to prevent young kids from being treated like seniors being recruited by colleges. This is what has gone on. If the KHSAA was more aggressive in their investigations we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They are not, thus the majority of delegates, right or wrong, brought up other proposals to force their hand.

 

Most times, the only way to prove allegations is when the kids that were improperly contacted didn't choose to attend the school that made the contact. Even then, those kids and their parents must be willing to "get involved" and testify against the offending school. Schools, private or public, that choose to break the rules know that it has been highly unlikely that they will ever suffer any real consequences for their behavior. Thus, the risk has been worth it.

I am also assuming that the "small school" provision means, in effect, that nothing has changed in Bullitt County, since both small parochial Jefferson County schools are within 30 miles of Bullitt County????

As a nine year resident of Bullitt county the problems/quality of the public schools is not new news to me. If parents feel like it is in the best interest of their child to spend their own money to send them to a different school for what ever reason I think they are well within their rights to do so.

 

Contrary to the thinking of many of our fellow posters the experience and life long benefit of a catholic school education is the reason for making this major financial committment by almost all of these parents .

 

I for one wish our public school administrators would be as half as concerned about the academics and the preparation for life of the students intrusted to their care as they are about wins and losses of games.

I have already agreed to the benefits of choosing a private school. The ONLY problem I have is when those who choose to do so happen to be above-average athletes that have been persuaded by persons associated with the private school.

 

On the other hand, hard-working students with supportive parents can and do perform quite well in most public schools during and after high school.

I am also assuming that the "small school" provision means, in effect, that nothing has changed in Bullitt County, since both small parochial Jefferson County schools are within 30 miles of Bullitt County????

 

To which ones do you refer? All of them are within 30 miles of most of Bullitt County, but I was under the impression that Trinity, St. Xavier, Holy Cross and Desales all had more than 300 enrollment. The other private, football-playing schools would be, let's see, Christian Academy, Kentucky Country Day, who else am I missing?

 

Much of Bullitt County is within 30 miles of Bethlehem, in Bardstown, which has less than 300 enrollment.

I have already agreed to the benefits of choosing a private school. The ONLY problem I have is when those who choose to do so happen to be above-average athletes that have been persuaded by persons associated with the private school.

 

On the other hand, hard-working students with supportive parents can and do perform quite well in most public schools during and after high school.

Which would have been addressed had the powers that be agreed to the proposal for an independent investagative arm of KHSAA BUT they shot that down. You keep bringing up Holy Cross, well Holy Cross was punished weren't they, what more do you want? Should they have been sanctioned as soon as allegations were made? Are allegations alone enough to merit sanctions of does there have to be proof? I honestly don't know what more people like you want. The system worked and a school that was breaking the rules was punished. You have complained about how long the process took, well maybe, just maybe if the public schools were TRUELY interested in enforcement then they would have OKed the proposal for a better investagative branch, but they shot that down resoundingly. As I have said many times this whole situation is NOT about enforcement of rules it is about trying to hamstring the private schools any way the public side can.

Which would have been addressed had the powers that be agreed to the proposal for an independent investagative arm of KHSAA BUT they shot that down. You keep bringing up Holy Cross, well Holy Cross was punished weren't they, what more do you want? Should they have been sanctioned as soon as allegations were made? Are allegations alone enough to merit sanctions of does there have to be proof? I honestly don't know what more people like you want. The system worked and a school that was breaking the rules was punished. You have complained about how long the process took, well maybe, just maybe if the public schools were TRUELY interested in enforcement then they would have OKed the proposal for a better investagative branch, but they shot that down resoundingly. As I have said many times this whole situation is NOT about enforcement of rules it is about trying to hamstring the private schools any way the public side can.

I think the bolded is a question that leads to a discussion on what the independent investigative arm of KHSAA would have done? Can they have power to subpoena? Without it as the investigation by Congress into MLB and steroids has found out, it is a fancy dressing and that is it.

 

Unless you have someone willing to go ON RECORD to say they were recruited, how is anyone ever going to prove it? And do people know what recruiting is?

 

As I have said, is it wrong and illegal recruiting for our children to be playing on the same AAU team and you tell me about how great the coach is at the private school you attend, all the great things at your school, and how it is a shame for our children to be split when the HS season starts. THAT IS WHERE I THINK THE RECRUITING IS OCCURRING.

 

I am not sure that is wrong. I think that is a natural conversation between parents who know each other. But is that not illegal recruiting as by the extension of your child playing for that school, you are a representative of that school? I think it is and from my knowledge of players moving around, that occurs alot.

 

I think it is EXTREMELY easy to say that need to investigate and enforce better. BUT in actuality, it is an extremely hard thing to do.

 

What would be your actions to the above situation?

 

As I have said, is it wrong and illegal recruiting for our children to be playing on the same AAU team and you tell me about how great the coach is at the private school you attend, all the great things at your school, and how it is a shame for our children to be split when the HS season starts. THAT IS WHERE I THINK THE RECRUITING IS OCCURRING.

 

I am not sure that is wrong. I think that is a natural conversation between parents who know each other. But is that not illegal recruiting as by the extension of your child playing for that school, you are a representative of that school? I think it is and from my knowledge of players moving around, that occurs alot.

 

I think it is EXTREMELY easy to say that need to investigate and enforce better. BUT in actuality, it is an extremely hard thing to do.

 

What would be your actions to the above situation?

I not only don't think that the type of recruiting you describe is legal, I think it is good. I will tell you right now that I will tell anyone I meet that I don't think there is a better place on this earth for a young man to spend his high schools days than Trinity High School. If you don't feel the same way about your school, why would you send your kids there? Is that recruiting? I sure hope so because that is why I do it. Why would we want or need the KHSAA to try to stop parent to parent recruiting? I think that the recruiting efforts of the school should not treat athletes any differently than non-athletes are treated. If they do, that is illegal recruiting and should be punished. Beyond that, recruit away. The competition will improve everyone.

I not only don't think that the type of recruiting you describe is legal, I think it is good. I will tell you right now that I will tell anyone I meet that I don't think there is a better place on this earth for a young man to spend his high schools days than Trinity High School. If you don't feel the same way about your school, why would you send your kids there? Is that recruiting? I sure hope so because that is why I do it. Why would we want or need the KHSAA to try to stop parent to parent recruiting? I think that the recruiting efforts of the school should not treat athletes any differently than non-athletes are treated. If they do, that is illegal recruiting and should be punished. Beyond that, recruit away. The competition will improve everyone.

So we agree that this natural and not wrong. Yet, I believe it is the #1 and main recruiting angle that goes on.

 

So how can the KHSAA be slammed for not enforcing recruiting when this is the way (at least from all the discussions I have been involved in) that the recruiting has gone on? Parent-to-parent or player-to-player. NOT coach-player.

 

I think it is EXTREMELY rare for a player to get a mailer and call the school up. I think it is more personal than that.

 

Now are their AAU coaches out there that allegiance is to single schools and they recruit for their AAU teams when the players are in the 4th and 5th grade and some steering is going on along the way, probably happens a lot. But HOW IN THE WORLD is the KHSAA supposed to monitor that?

 

Whether they have an investigative arm or not, I see this as a losing battle for the KHSAA.

 

Let me tell you that just this week, I was talking to a player not in my district about how good they have been playing. But as a coach at the school I teach I really wanted to but never said, "I would love to see you wearing our school colors."

 

Now remove me as a coach at my school and it is just my daughter playing and I probably make that comment.

I think this is a bad rule. One, I wouldn't have been able to play in games my freshman year...even though my brother went to Trinity before me, etc...

 

I think that this rule has many, many troubles to get approved Timm Shaughnessey will fight it every step of the way.

LBBC,

The KHSAA doesn't need subpoena power. The KHSAA is made up of members. If one of the members won't comply with an investigation they can be kicked out. I think most would choose to comply.