I dont see how Mr Eutons comments automatically make his son ineligible. If I were forced to relocate for employment reasons and had a choice of several school systems in which to enroll my children you better believe that I am going to " tour the facilities" first too. If my children excel in science or maybe music I am going to factor into my decision the schools programs/facilities. What parent that gives a hoot about their child wouldnt? Just because this child excels sports and his father made truthful and sensible comments should not make a difference.

The KHSAA is doing their job, stop complaining.

They will play, just wait and see!

 

Seriously, Mr. Euton just told the truth. He was looking for a new job and wanted his son to go to school somewhere that would be best for his future. It could have been a number of schools he picked, but just because he said then his kid had to pay the price?

 

I can't see the Euton kid being ineligible because of that. Now I have always thought the Jackson kid might be different.

They will play, just wait and see!

 

Seriously, Mr. Euton just told the truth. He was looking for a new job and wanted his son to go to school somewhere that would be best for his future. It could have been a number of schools he picked, but just because he said then his kid had to pay the price?

 

I can't see the Euton kid being ineligible because of that. Now I have always thought the Jackson kid might be different.

The "rule book" says no to transfers for "athletic reasons".

 

The KHSAA has been under the spotlight for quite a while. I sense the tipping point is VERY near. The issue is finally barking at the feet of the beast, and it's going to get interesting real soon...

Even if they are eventually allowed to play, everything SC does will be "tainted".

Fishtie hit the nail on the head.

The "rule book" says no to transfers for "athletic reasons".

 

The KHSAA has been under the spotlight for quite a while. I sense the tipping point is VERY near. The issue is finally barking at the feet of the beast, and it's going to get interesting real soon...

 

I agree with you 100%.:thumb:

This has to go down in the Hall of Fame of clerical errors. What ever happened to proof reading?

 

Perhaps there is no Rule 13 at the Association.

LMB: For someone who was pretty upset about Mike Mitchell playing against Bell a few years ago, you seem pretty understanding about Scott County and their actions.

Lol, that is very true. Guess when we are the ones facing the rulings our opinions change....

Interesting points ... :lol:

As mentioned, Euton has a legit beef basd on being forced to move.

The pickle is how he got to Scott County.

I think Scott County is not involved so to speak...I dont think they recruited him.

Take a look at Jeffersontown in Jefferson County, theynhave several transfers who are going bther only for basketball and all the KHSAA did was sit the coach down for three games. Not a bad tradeoff for a D1 player????

The KHSAA needs to take a serious look at the "open enrollment" policy in counties such as Jefferson. According to some people I talked to at the state tournament from the regions in that area, the recruiting of middle school athletes with promising potential by some high school coaches or boosters is tremendous in many sports. And in many cases, recruitment doesn't have to occur.....kids and parents like to play for a winner, so they recruit the school! That's a big athletic advantage imo.

The KHSAA needs to take a serious look at the "open enrollment" policy in counties such as Jefferson. According to some people I talked to at the state tournament from the regions in that area, the recruiting of middle school athletes with promising potential by some high school coaches or boosters is tremendous in many sports. And in many cases, recruitment doesn't have to occur.....kids and parents like to play for a winner, so they recruit the school! That's a big athletic advantage imo.

Case BL-6-2 on page three of Bylaw 6 offers ten reasons that attempt to answer “Why is there a transfer rule?” Number six reads as follows:

 

“6) these rules keep the focus of educators and students on the fact that students attend schools to receive an education first, and participate in athletics second;”

 

If a classroom education is of paramount importance, why does an "athletic advantage" matter?

 

Shouldn't our schools be attracting and retaining kids based upon their ability to deliver excellence in math, science, language skills, etc.?

Case BL-6-2 on page three of Bylaw 6 offers ten reasons that attempt to answer “Why is there a transfer rule?” Number six reads as follows:

 

“6) these rules keep the focus of educators and students on the fact that students attend schools to receive an education first, and participate in athletics second;”

 

If a classroom education is of paramount importance, why does an "athletic advantage" matter?

 

Shouldn't our schools be attracting and retaining kids based upon their ability to deliver excellence in math, science, language skills, etc.?

Thats fine and dandy if a kid is gifted in those areas not all kids are good in the arts but could be good athletes. Isn't our job to keep these kids in school and get as much education as possible.

Case BL-6-2 on page three of Bylaw 6 offers ten reasons that attempt to answer “Why is there a transfer rule?” Number six reads as follows:

 

“6) these rules keep the focus of educators and students on the fact that students attend schools to receive an education first, and participate in athletics second;”

 

If a classroom education is of paramount importance, why does an "athletic advantage" matter?

 

Shouldn't our schools be attracting and retaining kids based upon their ability to deliver excellence in math, science, language skills, etc.?

I realize the intent, but imo too many people take advantage of this, moving their kids around for the best athletic opportunity, with education being the second reason for the decision as to where they attend school after completeing middle school.

Are you kidding? The KHSAA should be there to do what is best for students. I believe in this situaion the boys shoul be allowed to play. That is what is best for them. If there is proof of recruiting, now that is an issue. But if a family wants to move to a different part of a state for their well-being you should be able to do that without being punished. But here is the thing, the Eutons had to move becase of the job situation. So because the father was honest his kid can't play. Its not like its the only or main reason for them to move.

 

But what if the recruiting to a better opportunity is in the best interest of the kids???

 

If you are going to throw out the best interest of the kids argument, than you have to consider that recruiting could lead to a kid being in what is the best interest of them.

 

I have no problem with them being ineligible.

 

Schools are for ACADEMIC PURPOSES. That should be the ONLY mandate in choosing a school. At least, publically.

 

Adults have made schools what they are not supposed to be.