Has an audit been performed recently by the KHSAA with regard to Beechwood meeting all of their Tittle IX requirements? Has a survey been conducted with the student body at Beechwood suggesting that a certain percentage of students want to see soccer added as an extra-curricular activity at the school? Does Beechwood offer the same number of girl sports as they do boys sports?

I grew up in an era before soccer was very popular and few if any schools played soccer in the area I grew up in. Can't say I enjoy the game over even understand whats going on except they seem to be running around trying to kick the ball into a huge net.

With that said I sort of wonder who really doesn't want the soccer? The kids or a very vocal group parents who are afraid of a little change.

Before both sides continue to go at it over this topic why don't the good people at Beechwood sit down and meet with the student body. Kids can be very good with giving input when asked. Often times we forget to ask the ones that will be most effected. Change isn't easy but sometimes necessary.

 

 

The school has been found to be in compliance with title IX.

 

The student body has been polled repeatedly. Trust me, this has been researched to death by both sides of the issue.

The school has been found to be in compliance with title IX.

 

The student body has been polled repeatedly. Trust me, this has been researched to death by both sides of the issue.

 

:thumb:Glad to hear they are in compliance but I would still be interested in the student body results. I don't think you need a majority to say you have an interest in any sport. If you have 20 to 40 kids that have expressed an interest then I think it is something that still needs to be considered. I would have to believe the percentage of kids who probably want soccer has to be higher then the percentage of kids at Beechwood who want golf but yet I do believe they field teams in that sport.

From what I understand the Football/Volleyball faction is a pretty powerful group (vocally and financially) at Beechwood. They have always gotten their way and I just hope it isn't at the expense the kids.

Hope everything works out but if I'm a betting man as much as I'm not a soccer fan I would be willing to bet that soccer will be played at Beechwood in the the next 5 years or so..

 

BWF, you seem to be very passionate about this issue at Beechwood and that is to your credit but it also appears very obvious as to what side of the issue you happen to be on..

There does, however, seem to be a cmopetitive difference between Beechwood's volleyball program and that of Bellevue and Dayton. I think the point that BWF is trying ot make is that they don't want to sacrifice their first rate volleyball program in order to field a soccer program.

 

I acknowledge Gunner's points on small schools with competitive programs in both girls soccer and volleyball. However, NCC, Holy Cross, St Henry and Brossart all have a strong parochial feeder system to support their volleyball that Beechwood doesn't have. They are all also Conference Division II teams where Beechwood is Division I (or III, I forget which one is small school).

 

I might rather look at Dayton, Bellevue, Ludlow and Newport and see how their small schools support both volleyball and soccer.

 

If soccer brings in a number of students that would have gone to Notre Dame then that would certainly help. I would think that all of that was taken into account by the school board that voted not to start the program.

 

I certainly understand BWF's interest in maintaining the quality of the volleyball team, although I'm not sure that alone is reason enough to not offer girl's soccer?? As previously stated many similar sized schools have managed to field multiple competitive teams in the same season.

 

Why is "a strong parochial feeder system" any different than a good middle school program, along with numerous club, select, etc. opportunities. That would seem to be a matter of commitment--They seem to be able to find some pretty good football players while battling that same "strong parochial feeder system"??

 

Regarding BW's NKAC D-III status vs. Brossart, NCC, St. Henry and Holy Cross's D-II status; that was a decision made by Beechwood years ago to stay D-III. Several of the above were also D-III in size, but committed to moving up to D-II in search of better competition in multiple sports. It shows in their programs' success over the years!! I guarantee BW doesn't measure their success in baseball or football against their D-III brethren??

By "Parochial Feeder Programs" I was referring to the school based volleyball programs that begin in the 3rd or 4th grade and go through the 8th grade. Then when the freshman show up at NCC, St. Henry and Holy Cross they have players consolidating from 4 or 5 different schools that have all been playing for 6 years or so. That leads to much greater depth of talent than a school that has one team that makes it way throught the grade school program (which usually begins in the 7th grade) and then on to high school.

 

I good middle school program still only develops about 10-12 players at a time, where the "feeder system" is developing 4 - 5 times that many players, and at an earlier age.

 

Beechwood's volleyball program has been very successful for the last couple of years despite the lack of depth. They have relied on underclassmen and very strong coaching to compete with some of the top teams throughout the state. Taking just a couple of players out of their program would make a significant difference.

Is HS sports supposed to be about putting sports programs on the field that are going to be winners or giving kids an opportunity to participate in a sport and if things go well, win championships?

 

If the kids want to play, what is the problem with giving them the opportunity to play. Again, isn't HS athletics supposed to be about giving these kids opportunities to learn those things that sports teaches?

 

I would assume with title IX issues that works both ways, you add girls' soccer, you are going to add boys' soccer.

 

When football was added to our school, there was a concern on what would happen with soccer. For a brief time, football got some players. But then the soccer players returned and in reality, soccer has gotten better. Now whether that is long turn or a cycle of good soccer players, has yet to be determined.

By "Parochial Feeder Programs" I was referring to the school based volleyball programs that begin in the 3rd or 4th grade and go through the 8th grade. Then when the freshman show up at NCC, St. Henry and Holy Cross they have players consolidating from 4 or 5 different schools that have all been playing for 6 years or so. That leads to much greater depth of talent than a school that has one team that makes it way throught the grade school program (which usually begins in the 7th grade) and then on to high school.

 

I good middle school program still only develops about 10-12 players at a time, where the "feeder system" is developing 4 - 5 times that many players, and at an earlier age.

 

Beechwood's volleyball program has been very successful for the last couple of years despite the lack of depth. They have relied on underclassmen and very strong coaching to compete with some of the top teams throughout the state. Taking just a couple of players out of their program would make a significant difference.

 

Why couldn't an elementary school develop teams for everyone who wishes to play (which is what those parochial feeders are doing)? No one says they need to wait until middle school to start fielding teams??

 

I understand your saying the feeder systems develop more kids, but that is due to committment on their part and nothing else. It's not like a NCC or St. Henry is getting 4-5 times the kids Beechwood is getting, although they are both a little bigger than BW? Covington Latin managed to field a very competitive (13-6) girl's team last year, despite being a fraction the size of BW and not exactly being a hotbed of athletic activity??

Is HS sports supposed to be about putting sports programs on the field that are going to be winners or giving kids an opportunity to participate in a sport and if things go well, win championships?

 

If the kids want to play, what is the problem with giving them the opportunity to play. Again, isn't HS athletics supposed to be about giving these kids opportunities to learn those things that sports teaches?

 

I would assume with title IX issues that works both ways, you add girls' soccer, you are going to add boys' soccer.

 

When football was added to our school, there was a concern on what would happen with soccer. For a brief time, football got some players. But then the soccer players returned and in reality, soccer has gotten better. Now whether that is long turn or a cycle of good soccer players, has yet to be determined.

 

You just hit the real reason for the opposition to girl's soccer I'd guess, although Boy's wrestling is probably an option as well, and would fit better at a football school?

You just hit the real reason for the opposition to girl's soccer I'd guess, although Boy's wrestling is probably an option as well, and would fit better at a football school?

 

I don't believe Boy's wrestling is a match for girls' soccer since they are offered in different seasons.

Simply being able to FIELD a team and play with any success are far apart. I am not slamming Bellevue and Dayton's soccer. I have no knowledge of their records. I'm just saying that simply because you can scrape up 40 kids for a JV and Varsity team doesn't mean that they will have success. And, it doesn't mean that some of those 40 kids weren't previously involved in another activity and their leaving wouldn't leave a void. It just doesn't appear that there are truely enough NON-PARTICIPATING girls in the fall to keep everything at the current level.

Beechwood considers grades 7-12 as high school. 7th and 8th graders are prohibited to participate on varsity soccer and football teams. (KHSAA rules)

That's about 80 girls, roughly, right there.

 

There is just alot more to this than simply stating that "The girls want it". Way more.

 

I'm not buying the argument that they are resisting girl's soccer because Beechwood is concerned with only fielding competitive teams either?? Girl's basketball is 5-73 the last three years?

I don't believe Boy's wrestling is a match for girls' soccer since they are offered in different seasons.

 

Sorry--I thought Title 9 was just concerned with an equal number of sports being offered for boys & girls, not equality #'s offered in individual seasons as well?

Why couldn't an elementary school develop teams for everyone who wishes to play (which is what those parochial feeders are doing)? No one says they need to wait until middle school to start fielding teams??

 

I believe that there is something in the way that Beechwood is registered at the state level as being an "academic" school, (I'm talking Elementary here) that keeps BW from being ABLE to sponsor and start competitive sports at the elementary level. I might be totally wrong, but that is what I've been hearing for years. Something about a charter, or something?

Am I making this up? Anybody know anything about this out there????

It's been a complaint for years, because the parochials start volleyball and basketball at about 3rd grade. We have the city rec league that provides basketball, but I don't think there are any volleyball opportunities besides club ball at this age level.

Sorry--I thought Title 9 was just concerned with an equal number of sports being offered for boys & girls, not equality #'s offered in individual seasons as well?

 

Yes. The season is a factor in the equality in the eyes of Title IX.

Yes. The season is a factor in the equality in the eyes of Title IX.

 

So per Title IX, BW would have to offer a boy's sport (same season) to offset girl's soccer? The only boy's options other than soccer would be golf (which they already have) or cross-country (don't know if they have)?

So per Title IX, BW would have to offer a boy's sport (same season) to offset girl's soccer? The only boy's options other than soccer would be golf (which they already have) or cross-country (don't know if they have)?

 

If the girls' team has 30 participants and they offer cross country with 10, not sure that is comparable.

 

ALSO, not sure how the multipliers in Title IX concerning football would affect the offering of girls' soccer. It is not a 1 to 1 with football.

So per Title IX, BW would have to offer a boy's sport (same season) to offset girl's soccer? The only boy's options other than soccer would be golf (which they already have) or cross-country (don't know if they have)?

 

No. Not necessarily. I THINK (better than assuming, I suppose!) that football numbers would keep us in compliance. I don't think we'd have to add a boy's sport.