Well, honestly, it's a discussion we've had time and time again, and is only tangently relative to the discussion at hand.

 

I do want to ask.....

 

What is the percentage of students the public schools feel they lose to private schools?

 

What is the percentage of MS students playing HS sports?

 

If there are issues with having enough staff to investigate violations, why wouldn't it be prudent to add staff?

Well, honestly, it's a discussion we've had time and time again, and is only tangently relative to the discussion at hand.

 

I do want to ask.....

 

What is the percentage of students the public schools feel they lose to private schools?

 

What is the percentage of MS students playing HS sports?

 

If there are issues with having enough staff to investigate violations, why wouldn't it be prudent to add staff?

On your questions, no clue and no clue.

 

I would guess for rural schools especially, the percentage in your last question would be higher than you would expect.

 

At my school MSers played this past season on the, girls and boys soccer teams (JV level only), cross country (MSer went to state), boys and girls basketball, baseball, softball, track, boys and girls golf. I would guess that it was 40-50 kids, probably ending up around 10% of the athletes who played HS level. That means freshmen, JV or V.

On your questions, no clue and no clue.

 

I would guess for rural schools especially, the percentage in your last question would be higher than you would expect.

 

At my school MSers played this past season on the, girls and boys soccer teams (JV level only), cross country (MSer went to state), boys and girls basketball, baseball, softball, track, boys and girls golf. I would guess that it was 40-50 kids, probably ending up around 10% of the athletes who played HS level. That means freshmen, JV or V.

 

So...10% at your school?

 

I wonder what the state statistics are...

 

It seems to me that a huge change is about to affect a very few kids in the overall scheme of things. I question the necessity, when rules are already in place to stop illegal activity.

So...10% at your school?

 

I wonder what the state statistics are...

 

It seems to me that a huge change is about to affect a very few kids in the overall scheme of things. I question the necessity, when rules are already in place to stop illegal activity.

What rules are in place to handle a transfer of a student from one district to another between their 8th and 9th grade years?

 

10% is a guesstamation of mine. But as far as rural schools it would be a higher percentage at a smaller school. I would guess a Deming, an Augusta would easily approach 50%. Harrison County girls basketball used to run about 50% middle school students. Not sure on the other sports.

 

Sports like football would also ruin the curve where MS students moving up doesn't happen, like it does is all the other sports.

 

I think one of the changes that you might see occur out of this is that the KHSAA will change from member schools to member school districts. It seems that the KHSAA or whomever is looking at the issue from a DISTRICT standpoint and not a school standpoint.

 

The KHSAA would make guidelines for each district and the athletics that occur from K to 12th grade while each school district would be responsible for within their school district as long as it does not throw balance out of whack from a state standpoint or violate the state guidelines. Something along that line.

 

I at least expect someone to take an overseer role in MS athletics.

I would agree that BOC should be appointed and not current AD's.

 

The issue of enforcing rules on recruiting and Prop 2 are more difficult.

 

Let me give a situation the way I understand it happened (w/o any names of kids or schools) recently for illustration. A student-athlete in 8th grade public school who plays basketball and his parents decide to attend a parochial high school in Jefferson County. The high school coach that would have had this kid coming in from his feeder school was disappointed but understood his parents wishes. Now the problem occurs, this kids parents (who have already decided that their kid IS attending the parochial high school) now begin to encourage the parents of their sons friends (who also play basketball) to check out the parochial school as well and think about attending. The 3 families attend a basketball game at the high school this past winter. It just so happens that a rather famous local college football coach stops by and says hello and that he hopes these families decide to join the "--------" family. All 3 kids are supposed to enroll in this particular private school this fall.

 

Was this illegal recruiting? YES. The parents, once they decided their son would enroll, became (probably unknowingly) agents of the school if I'm not mistaken and therefore can not attempt to persuade others to attend. A high profile parent meeting and welcoming the group at a basketball game was obviously recruiting. QUESTION? Who is going to turn this in? If turned in, who is going to relate the facts of the events? The parents whose kids are now in the school????

 

If I were the coach of the offended school, I would turn it in and pester the powers that be at KHSAA until at least an investigation was begun. Would anything come of it? Very doubtful, since their is no "hard" evidence that anything improper took place and the ones with the facts have it in their best interest to keep quiet. Did illegal recruiting or contact happen, no doubt it did.

 

This type of illustration is probably the biggest type of problem that occurs and adding all the investigators in the world WON'T solve it. Prop 2, however, would make situations like this a lot less likely. Just one man's opinion.

Are all the students paying the full tuition? It would look a lot more like recruiting if the students were given a break on tuition. If the parents are paying the tuition, it would be harder to prove recruiting.

In my opinion Proposal 2 does the following:

 

Moves the perceived problem of recruiting from the 8th grade level to the 5th grade level.

 

Sooner, more probably than later, there will be allegations of recruiting at the elementary school level. There will be no real investigations into the allegations. The perceptions will stand as fact as they do now.

 

What has really changed?

Am I missing something here?

 

Shouldn't the KHSAA investigative committee be made up of independent members with no connections, political or otherwise, to the KHSAA and BOE.

 

Would this be exercising too much common sense?

We all love highschool sports for its pure and simple ameturism. Recruiting at the middle school and highschool level threatens this unique quality that separates highschool sports from collegiate and professional competition. The KHSAA has too many rules and regulations now as they miserably demonstrate their eneptness in dealing with basic violations. If the KHSAA Board members were in charge of a Fortune 500 company, I would advise all to sell the stock immediately! They need to run their responsiblities as if they were in charge of a company. Their decisions need to be CONSISTENT and TIMELY. Their decisions need to be FAIR to the shareowners. (That's us, the schools, students and fans!)

We all love highschool sports for its pure and simple ameturism. Recruiting at the middle school and highschool level threatens this unique quality that separates highschool sports from collegiate and professional competition. The KHSAA has too many rules and regulations now as they miserably demonstrate their eneptness in dealing with basic violations. If the KHSAA Board members were in charge of a Fortune 500 company, I would advise all to sell the stock immediately! They need to run their responsiblities as if they were in charge of a company. Their decisions need to be CONSISTENT and TIMELY. Their decisions need to be FAIR to the shareowners. (That's us, the schools, students and fans!)

 

So, would you advocate adding staff to able to investigate allegations of violations more expeditiously?

 

Or, are you an advocate of changing the age in which a child/family must make a decision about his/her high school choice?

I would be all for adding staff but they also need a "spinal cord" transplant.

I would agree that BOC should be appointed and not current AD's.

 

The issue of enforcing rules on recruiting and Prop 2 are more difficult.

 

Let me give a situation the way I understand it happened (w/o any names of kids or schools) recently for illustration. A student-athlete in 8th grade public school who plays basketball and his parents decide to attend a parochial high school in Jefferson County. The high school coach that would have had this kid coming in from his feeder school was disappointed but understood his parents wishes. Now the problem occurs, this kids parents (who have already decided that their kid IS attending the parochial high school) now begin to encourage the parents of their sons friends (who also play basketball) to check out the parochial school as well and think about attending. The 3 families attend a basketball game at the high school this past winter. It just so happens that a rather famous local college football coach stops by and says hello and that he hopes these families decide to join the "--------" family. All 3 kids are supposed to enroll in this particular private school this fall.

 

.

 

 

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

So, would you advocate adding staff to able to investigate allegations of violations more expeditiously?

 

Or, are you an advocate of changing the age in which a child/family must make a decision about his/her high school choice?

 

 

First, I agree with L-Neck that punishment should be swift, severe and final. Not only for the head coach but to the AD and to the school they represent.

 

As stated, the rules are in place, love 'em or hate 'em - the Board now needs to react in a swift and consistent manner on the enforcement of the rules. IF the Board can not perform their responsibilities in the enforcement of their rules and regualtions, then they need to be replaced.

 

For the record, I am an advocate that the child or parent(s) should pick their school of choice prior to the start of the 9th grade. Exception: Parent documented work relocation or Parnet or guardian of child death. Period. Thanks for asking...

You know, as I read through this thread I get discouraged. Taking the the exchange that occured at some unnamed school at face value and assuming that the facts are exactly as presented, why wouldn't everyone that likes their school and is proud of their school do exactly the same thing. If the facts are exactly as presented, we have parents and prospective students, none of whom work for the school or have been asked to speak on behalf of the school, speaking to other parents and prospective students about the virtues of the school. We have a parent inviting someone to join the family. If that ever becomes illegal, lock me up. I'll take it one step farther. If you don't do that on behalf of your school, why not? Don't you want these prospective students? Don't you care enough to make them feel welcome?

The other thing is that propsal 2 is not in any way about the relative merits of one school over another. I hope that everyone feels that the school selection they made, public or private, was absolutely the best choice for their family. I'd like to keep those choices in the hands of the family and not force the family to start making choices years ahead of the time when all the facts are available to them.

If it did indeed happen the way I described, the problem becomes the fact that these kids that play basketball happen to attend a basketball game at the school and a high-profile parent happens to speak to these kids and their parents that he would not be able to identify w/o being told why they were there. The fact is that kids that are identified as being prospective athletes must be treated very carefully to avoid the perception of recruiting. If they were not athletic participants at the middle school age there would not be a problem. Once again, everyone should promote their school. When you go above and beyond for kids that have an athletic background you raise the perception of illegal contact or recruiting. And, once again, I realize it happens on both sides. In fact, a study done by the Courier-Journal on recruiting several years ago showed that public schools report other public schools more than they report private schools. IF the KHSAA got serious about it and grew a set, a lot of the problems would undoubtedly cease.