Fastbreak, I have purposely stayed out of recruiting discussion on BGP, but this does hit close to home and I have chimed in on this discussion. But, what we are talking about is having the same rules for everyone.

 

To draw some comparison. College athletics allows players to receive financial assistance. But, not to receive pocket money. The rule are the same for every level of college sports. D1 schools are allowed a certain number of scholarships, every school. That is why college sports are so competitive, they all have the same number of scholarships and they all actively recruit players.

 

In the NFL, it is a little different, as far as the amount of money available, but salary caps were put in place to reduce the ability of one franchise to dominate over the franchises in the smaller markets.

 

It is basicly the same here, people just wants the same rules for everyone. Some schools will always have an advantage, but if that is because of reputation, or word of mouth, so be it. But, to seek out an athlete and provide monetary gain is improper.

Let me state that I agree 100% with the "no recruiting" rules. If there is clear cut evidence that recruiting is going on, drop the hammer... public, private... no difference.

 

Where we seem to be on different pages is the area of "monetary gain" as you put it. If every public school in the state is offering "free books and tuition" how is it considered "monetary gain" if a private school makes the same opportunity available? Where is the gain?

"the KHSAA found no evidence that what LCA did was for recruiting purposes."

I believe the article stated that 16 out of 18 students that received money were athletes.

 

Only one word to describe this Recruiting

:thumb:

 

Now does everyone see why public school coaches get so dang mad.

 

Public school coaches should back of private schools and start attacking the KHSAA for their lack of commitment.

How is it possible that private schools are "better"? They have no state funding, fewer tax breaks and other government incentives.

 

Either private schools are superior to public schools, and we need to open them up to more families with vouchers, or people need to get over the fact that some schools just do things better than others.

 

Why should a parent of a talented child be forced into sending that child to school with a bunch of sweathogs that don't care what kind of grades they get or what kind of work they'll do when they grow up?

 

 

They do receive federal funding.

"the KHSAA found no evidence that what LCA did was for recruiting purposes."

 

So why are 16 of the 18 athletes?

"the KHSAA found no evidence that what LCA did was for recruiting purposes."

 

That is because the KHSAA is blind.

 

16 of 18 are athletes. Why else did they pay for them to attend?

Rev. Willis Polk of Imani Baptist stated that "the purpose of providing financial assistance is to help create diversity at LCA and provide a Christian education to minority students."

Let me state that I agree 100% with the "no recruiting" rules. If there is clear cut evidence that recruiting is going on, drop the hammer... public, private... no difference.

 

Where we seem to be on different pages is the area of "monetary gain" as you put it. If every public school in the state is offering "free books and tuition" how is it considered "monetary gain" if a private school makes the same opportunity available? Where is the gain?

 

I don't think we are that far off from each other.

 

"Monetary gain", and correct me if I am wrong, the article stated that at least one student/athlete received over $10,000, and several people have stated that tuition at LCA is $7,000 give or take. I see that as monetary gain.

 

I don't see going to a school for free as monetary gain, if you go to school "A" and it cost you the same as going to school "B" or "C", then that is not monetary gain, but if you make $3,000 for going to school "A" and make nothing going to school "B" or "C", that is wrong.

 

Monetary gain is recruiting pure and simple. Contacting a student/athlete, and asking them to come to your school is recruiting. If the student/athlete or the parents of the student/athlete contact the school and inquire about attending that school, that is not recruiting.

Legend, I appreciate what you say in your post. If you want to send your child to a private school for a better education, well and good. However, when you look at the investigation into inappropriate financial aid, I believe it stated in 16 of the 18 instances the money went to students who were involved in athletics, thus the reason for KHSAA to become involved.

 

It is no different in public school. Many people want to send their children to schools that provide a better education. Unfortunately, we have boundaries we cannot cross and our children are not allowed to attend the school of their choice. Instead, they must go where the boundary lines dictate, or they are forced to move into the school district in which the school is located that provides the better education. I don't know about you, but for most people it is extremely difficult to relocate at the drop of a hat and the children ultimately suffer.

 

I simply feel it should be the same for everyone. If the public school are to compete with the private ones, then the KHSAA should lessen their control and open the gates so children can go to school where the education is the best, as is the athletics. You can't fence in one school and let the other one run wild. Make things fair for all and then these situations would work out on their own!

In the herald leader this morning LCA officials alluded to the fact that there are new KHSAA guidelines going in place next year that would make what they did legal. Anyone know what they are talking about?

"the KHSAA found no evidence that what LCA did was for recruiting purposes."

 

I don't think that is totally correct or they would not have found that LCA violated By Law 10, which is the recruiting by-law, as stated in the HL article. From what I've learned, while the Commissioner found no overt recruiting occurred by the LCA staff, the fact that a large percentage of the students receiving the financial aid in question were athletes must have been circumstantial evidence indicating recruiting. Otherwise there would have not been any conclusion that LCA violated the recruiting by-law.

I don't think that is totally correct or they would not have found that LCA violated By Law 10, which is the recruiting by-law, as stated in the HL article. From what I've learned, while the Commissioner found no overt recruiting occurred by the LCA staff, the fact that a large percentage of the students receiving the financial aid in question were athletes must have been circumstantial evidence indicating recruiting. Otherwise there would have not been any conclusion that LCA violated the recruiting by-law.

 

I have long thought that the recruiting going on today has zero to do with the coaches.

In the herald leader this morning LCA officials alluded to the fact that there are new KHSAA guidelines going in place next year that would make what they did legal. Anyone know what they are talking about?

 

I believe they were implying that the rules were now vague concerning financial aid, whereas the new guidelines were more clear cut and would be easier to adhere to.

I have long thought that the recruiting going on today has zero to do with the coaches.

 

Agreed. And before we condemn all the private schools for what LCA did or permitted to happen, I'm told that most private schools like NewCath and St X do not allow churches and groups that are friends of the private schools to do what LCA permitted to happen in this instance. Rather they insist that all funds be turned into the school and the school then runs the funds through the KHSAA approved financial aid process. Most private schools are very aware of the concerns of the public schools about financial aid and recruiting and go to great lengths to prevent this type of situation from occurring. They know they are under the microscope, so to speak, and do not want to give any additional fodder to the anti private folks. Unfortunately, LCA did not exercise such discretion and concern. I have a good feeling they will now. . But I think people should not look at this LCA situation and unfairly judge every private school. I know it is tempting to do so, but fairness should temper that temptation.

I simply feel it should be the same for everyone. If the public school are to compete with the private ones, then the KHSAA should lessen their control and open the gates so children can go to school where the education is the best, as is the athletics. You can't fence in one school and let the other one run wild. Make things fair for all and then these situations would work out on their own!

 

The KHSAA does not mandate the boundaries, those are put in place by the individual school districts. Jefferson County has open enrollment that allows students to attend schools anywhere in the county. Although I would like to see statewide reciprocal agreements to allow students to cross county lines if the parents want them to.

 

I do agree with you though, I would like to see everyone have the same chance to attend any school they like. I personally do not understand how you can justify not allowing parents to choose what they feel is the best thing for their children without forcing them to move.