Who decides if an advantage is unfair?

 

If I'm a basketball coach and the average height at my school is 7 feet is that an unfair advantage?

 

This is the public's biggest weakness IMO. Unfair has such a "wimpy" connotation. It’s not fair (cross arms and pout lips).

Who decides if an advantage is unfair?

 

If I'm a basketball coach and the average height at my school is 7 feet is that an unfair advantage?

If you are recruiting those students from multiple counties and providing financial aid for those coming from outside your community to offset the tuition, while your competition cannot offer financial assistance for the tuition costs for students outside of their community, then the answer is yes.

And I love the assumption that since public schools aren't winning what they consider "their share" of championships that something must be wrong with the system.

This is so true.....It's always tougher to look in the mirror at that person that stares back at you every morning and ask, "What have I done to make my sports program at School XYZ a better sports program". Public or Private makes no difference here. Do they have a good AD? Does that AD and his staff always stay on top of every athletic issue? Do they hire the best Head Coach? Does that head coach hire the best assistant coaches?

 

The system isn't broke folks. The correction starts at your home school. Fix the problems in your own camp first and the kids will come. Look at Coach Redman at Male, Coach Nichols at Manual, they are obviously doing something right.

I have a feeling that Mr. Sears thinks this got personal at around 11:17 this morning...:lol:

 

What I mean is we will not tolerate anything derogatory about Mr. Sears family. However, Sears is taking a lot of big shots at various individuals and organizations and the kitchen is going to get real hot.

If all the public schools played only other public schools, would any of the public schools (which normally play 2 0r 3 private schools a year) have any financial diffuculty in buying uniforms etc. say 3 - 5 years down the road???

What I mean is we will not tolerate anything derogatory about Mr. Sears family. However, Sears is taking a lot of big shots at various individuals and organizations and the kitchen is going to get real hot.

 

:thumb:

If you are recruiting those students from multiple counties and providing financial aid for those coming from outside your community to offset the tuition, while your competition cannot offer financial assistance for the tuition costs for students outside of their community, then the answer is yes.

 

IMHO, here is what I see as the flaw in this argument. This is not an attack just my opinion.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any Private School that gives 100% financial aid to any student, unless 100% of their student body gets 100% financial aid. Every family/student has to pay SOMETHING to attend that private school, plus pay whatever their school taxes are for the public school system in the county in which they live.

 

Every family/student who attends a Public School has to pay NOTHING to attend that public school, except for paying whatever the school taxes there are for the public school system in the county in which they live.

 

Every family who chooses to send their child to a private school makes a conscious financial decision to send their child to that private school. They pay twice for that decision. (Tuition plus Taxes) If that parent/family is willing to pay the price why should they be limited on where they can choose to send their child? If it’s half way across town, or half way across the state, then they're paying yet a third time, for transportation. Because most private schools don’t offer bus service anymore. The State stopped paying for that service as well, many many years ago.

 

Now, if someone can convince our State Legislators to give School Vouchers or Tax Credits to those of us who make this conscious financial decision to send our kids to Private Schools, so we don't have to pay the school taxes and only have pay tuition, then there MIGHT be a legitimate argument. But, until then every family who makes the decision to send their kids to a Private School, pays taxes just like everyone else does. And until then, every family who makes the decision to send their kids to a Private School deserves the right to have a say so in where they can an can not send their children for their education.

 

Again JMHO, but this argument just doesn’t hold much water with me.

All A tournament, private schools have won all of the girls All A regional basketball tournaments in NKY except one. I believe Walton won one in the early 90's and is no longer part of Region 9.

 

Do the All-A public schools in NKY start Girls basketball in the First grade as many as the Private schools in NKY do? Do they field multiple teams at each grade level from 3rd through 8th grade for each grade school with no financial assitance? Do they run leagues? Do they have multiple students playing on AAU teams in addition to their school teams all the way thru grade school? When they get to high school and form a Frosh team do they have 20, 30, 40 girls trying out for the team? If the answer is No, there's your reason.

 

(Same could be said for volleyball and now many public schools are now forming multiple grade school teams and have many girls are playing Club volleyball and are quite competitive.)

IMHO, here is what I see as the flaw in this argument. This is not an attack just my opinion.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any Private School that gives 100% financial aid to any student, unless 100% of their student body gets 100% financial aid. Every family/student has to pay SOMETHING to attend that private school, plus pay whatever their school taxes are for the public school system in the county in which they live.

 

Every family/student who attends a Public School has to pay NOTHING to attend that public school, except for paying whatever the school taxes there are for the public school system in the county in which they live.

 

Every family who chooses to send their child to a private school makes a conscious financial decision to send their child to that private school. They pay twice for that decision. (Tuition plus Taxes) If that parent/family is willing to pay the price why should they be limited on where they can choose to send their child? If it’s half way across town, or half way across the state, then they're paying yet a third time, for transportation. Because most private schools don’t offer bus service anymore. The State stopped paying for that service as well, many many years ago.

 

Now, if someone can convince our State Legislators to give School Vouchers or Tax Credits to those of us who make this conscious financial decision to send our kids to Private Schools, so we don't have to pay the school taxes and only have pay tuition, then there MIGHT be a legitimate argument. But, until then every family who makes the decision to send their kids to a Private School, pays taxes just like everyone else does. And until then, every family who makes the decision to send their kids to a Private School deserves the right to have a say so in where they can an can not send their children for their education.

 

Again JMHO, but this argument just doesn’t hold much water with me.

 

I agree--all special education students should be given vouchers to attend private schools where they can get good educations.:devil:

So Silver Grove needs to just work harder to compete against Highlands, Scott County, St. X, Lex Catholic and the like?

Being that you have St. X and Highlands in this list...you must be thinking f-ball...Silver Grove doesn't have football...otherwise, why don't you go back and see how well the public schools do in basketball. Why mention a public school in your question, when the root of this debate is public -vs- private?

 

Why do you always feel the need to side with the public, and sometimes use an argument like the above, that can not possibly hold water, in that it contradicts the nature of the thread, as a whole?

And as I have stated many times in the past 190 some schools voted for Prop 20. Not all of those schools have an assumption of competing for state championships. Must be some other reason for them to support Prop 20 but know they it will not mean they are winning a state title.

So let's look at what you call the majority....did any private school vote for the split? How about the latter?

Surely you don't believe the only reason to participate in interscholastic athletics is to win a championship?

No...but to play a game, or sport, the defining characteristic is to TRY TO WIN...and you should try to win EVERY GAME.....if not, do not play...there is no sugar coating there.

I don't believe that we have a chance to win state when Sacred Heart has five golfers, GIRLS remind you, that shoot in the 70's..

So is it Sacred Heart's fault that their parents could give these girls lessons? Do you thinkthe SHA went and actively recruited these girls? Come on man, get over the fact that when you play an elitest sport, the privates win. That has een the case everywhere in the country, forever.

Strive for improvement. Yes, certain teams have the mentality of winning the state as their ultimate goal, but not all schools or teams. Remember a school can opt out of competing for a state title and remain a member in good standing with the KHSAA. The membership chooses to compete for a state title in each sport.

Mr. Sears is the one who is making "winning a state title" the point of contention. If this was truly his point, then why not strive for classes in all sports (except basketball....wouldn't want to damage the cash cow)?

This discussion will continue from now on.....:thumb:

This is the best post of the night...and is an antithesis to ladiesbballcoach's hypothesis....interesting for sure.

One thing is for sure, if Sears is making the point of contention winning a state title he had no business moving Somerset up in football.