Then why don't you change the name to the Midwest High School Athletic Association that happens to be located in Kentucky that makes it possible to allow total convenience to its participates without any consideration or care for the programs except as it applys to that specific person's benefit only. Last I checked and heard the name was KENTUCKY HSAA. Seems not to much to ask it represents the same.

 

From Ft. Thomas to Alexandria is not the same from Ohio to Kentucky, vise versa. Most states must have it wrong using your reasoning. Of course, would be curious to where to draw the line should a SCHOOL located in Ohio play in KY Conferences and state tournaments? Using your reasoning, why not?

 

Come on SS, that's kind of silly. Its the KHSAA because only Ky high schools participate in the KHSAA sanctioned events. Is the kid going to a Ky high school is all that should matter. Are you afraid that the Ohio kids are better athletes than the Ky kids? I'm sure not. Furthermore, why such a sweeping rule when probably less than a half of one percent of all athletes are from out of state? Just another use of a howitzer to shoot a mouse; just another feel good rule that will have a de minimus affect on things. Frankly I look at it with state pride when an out of state student chooses to attend a Ky school as it means our academic and/or athletic programs are stronger than those of the border states (which probably explains why we get so few Ohio kids to attend Ky schools).

I don't fully understand the bashing of the CJ in this case. I didn't see the original headline but its perfectly clear that the powers in Indiana allege that both T and X are or have been recruiting. Why would they be sending a letter to T if they didn't think T was guilty?

 

Secondly, the CJ is reporting the ACCUSATION being made and not that its true. That's hardly new in the world of news. They report the accusation of WMDs, they report the accusation of steroids, they report the accusations of voter fraud. What's the difference here?

 

I guess we could all stick our heads in the sand and act like the guy isn't referring , in this case, to Deuce Finch but what good would that do?

 

He got a response from X's AD who gave the answer we would expect? Could he have gotten the same reponse from T's AD? Sure. The fact that he didn't hardly puts it in the "bad journalism" bucket.

81..thats right ONCE. Do you know something that I don't know, or you being silly again. Or how about a link or some proof.

 

81...who do you pull for so I can research their history?

 

Alabama has only caught the attention of the NCAA once? Albert Means was the first time the NCAA was curious about Bama boosters? That's news to me.

Indiana kids 'targeted for recruitment'

Indiana kids 'targeted for recruitment'

 

Is anyone breaking the rules? Is there an investigation? Have charges been brought? Is the KHSAA doing anything?

 

These questions continue to go unanswered by the powers that be. As long as they are not addressed publicly by the KHSAA and are not investigated by them, the rumors, innuendos, false statements, and hearsay will continue and grow more and more. The KHSAA needs to do something, make a statement, begin an investigation, anything other than sitting on its hands. It is obvious that the leadership of the KHSAA over the past few years has been poor at best.

Indiana kids 'targeted for recruitment'

 

Well, you can't misread his views on the matter. That is pretty blunt and straightforward.

I do not understand why an athletic director in Indiana would get so upset that a family in Indiana would decide that it is best if their child would attend a school in the state of Kentucky.

 

Can someone please explain this to me?

 

I do not care the reason the family decides this. It is their decision. No on else's. If anything a person in professional education should be happy that the family felt that they have found what they believe is the best option for their child's education. After all isn't this what it is all about, the kids education.

I do not understand why an athletic director in Indiana would get so upset that a family in Indiana would decide that it is best if their child would attend a school in the state of Kentucky.

 

Can someone please explain this to me?

 

I do not care the reason the family decides this. It is their decision. No on else's. If anything a person in professional education should be happy that the family felt that they have found what they believe is the best option for their child's education. After all isn't this what it is all about, the kids education.

Here is why. The top talent playing across the river means lesser competition on the Indiana side. Lesser competition leads to more talent not playing in there stadiums, less interest in there games and lesser fans in seats.

 

I'm on the side that says schools don't own kids.

 

But I think the athletic director is doing EXACTLY what he should be doing to protect his school. He has a job to do and if he has reason to believe that the private schools are recruiting his students he should do what he can to stop it.

 

In my honest opinion, everyone in Louisville has blood on there hands with the recruiting issues. St X and Trinity get the most accusations because they are the biggest programs and they have the tuition variable that adds to the discussion. I think the reason Southern Indiana is making the noise is because thier hands are clean. In Louisville, I don't think any program can point a finger without ten being pointed right back at them. Whether some are more in line with the rules than others, all in my opinion, are breaking the spirit of the rules, i.e. no recruiting kids for athletic reasons. If they ain't cheatin' they ain't tryin'.

RRR are the rules being broken or not? I have yet to see the KHSAA step into this perceived (justly or unjustly) recruitment going on and do something. They are doing nothing thus hurting the group they are suppose to protect and monitor. Their inaction either exonerating or vilifying the accused, in my opinion, is dereliction of duty. It is one of the major reasons for all this separation and divisiveness we have now. If they would only take some action to investigate these accusations and take appropriate action it would be better for all.

Did the CJ run a retraction for Trinity?

 

Yes they did, although I would bet that many people missed it. It was on page A2 of Tuesday's paper, up on top under "Clarifications". It said that Trinity should not have been mentioned in the story. I'd have missed it too if for some reason it hadn't caught my eye when I was skimming the headlines.

 

I don't understand why it wasn't printed in the sports section. It's a sports related retraction, oops, I mean "clarification". It should've definitely been printed in sports, and if they wanted to put it on page A2 also that would be fine. But the way they did it was like they tried to tuck it away where the least amount of people would see it. It's like they knew they had to do something, so they printed it where they did and then they could say "well, what's all the commotion about, you know we printed a clarification".

Well, you can't misread his views on the matter. That is pretty blunt and straightforward.

 

He is bluntly making the same straightforward mistake many others seem to be making...he leaps from an allegation to the presumption of fact: "This recruiting is happening..."

 

Somewhere there is a step where allegations are verified or refuted by the gathering of facts.

 

Easier to just skip this step, though, I suppose.

Who are the "blue chip" targeted kids? I caught a fish last week that weighed 8lbs. down at Cumberland. I didn't get it in the boat but I caught it. Really. No I really did.

RRR are the rules being broken or not? I have yet to see the KHSAA step into this perceived (justly or unjustly) recruitment going on and do something. They are doing nothing thus hurting the group they are suppose to protect and monitor. Their inaction either exonerating or vilifying the accused, in my opinion, is dereliction of duty. It is one of the major reasons for all this separation and divisiveness we have now. If they would only take some action to investigate these accusations and take appropriate action it would be better for all.

My personal opinion is, "Let Them Recruit", of course I wouldn't want to allow any sort of reimbursement for playing.

 

If a athlete in a weak school district can enhance his chances of getting pub and college scholarships by attending Male, St X, or Trinity, he should do that.

 

The KHSAA's inaction allows some of the best athletes to be in their best situations. So, Yes it is a dereliction of duty, but the consequences aren't necessarily bad. I would personally prefer the rule changed as opposed to KHSAA acting upon the rule on the books.

It said that Trinity should not have been mentioned in the story. I'd have missed it too if for some reason it hadn't caught my eye when I was skimming the headlines.

 

".

 

 

Unless T is not getting the same letter that X is getting, I don't see how they cannot be mentioned in the story.

 

Was that incorrect? Is it only X that is going to receive the letter?

Yes they did, although I would bet that many people missed it. It was on page A2 of Tuesday's paper, up on top under "Clarifications". It said that Trinity should not have been mentioned in the story. I'd have missed it too if for some reason it hadn't caught my eye when I was skimming the headlines.

 

I don't understand why it wasn't printed in the sports section. It's a sports related retraction, oops, I mean "clarification". It should've definitely been printed in sports, and if they wanted to put it on page A2 also that would be fine. But the way they did it was like they tried to tuck it away where the least amount of people would see it. It's like they knew they had to do something, so they printed it where they did and then they could say "well, what's all the commotion about, you know we printed a clarification".

 

Thanks. I missed it. Just about everyone I've spoken to about the article thought it was a cheap shot to have Trinity in the headline. Obviously, the CJ agreed.