So would you rather the KHSAA just allow all transfers, no matter what the supposed cause is?

T'ain't what I said Gooch.

 

I think the KHSAA has its hands full and resources maxed out just policing the schools that signed up to play by their rules. The schools all have representatives assigned to the KHSAA. Those school representatives have a voice in the policy and decisions that go on at the KHSAA... a small voice maybe, but at least they have a voice and a vote, which is much more than any parent has in dealing with the KHSAA. I honestly don’t see why any parent in this situation should be subject to the same KHSAA enforcement its member schools are.

 

The rules needs to be simplified to eliminate the broad subjectivity that is unavoidable as they are currently written. The whole clause of athletic purposes, "in whole or part" is absurd and entirely unenforceable in any consistent and fair manner. I’m not dogging the current commissioner; I am dogging the poorly crafted rules that place a commissioner on a balance beam of opinion and subjectivity. There’s no reason whatsoever the rules should be so loosely crafted.

 

I can understand why we don’t want kids ping-ponging from one school to another without an actual move into another school district, but any family so concerned for their child’s welfare they are willing to pick up roots and move should absolutely be eligible if it can be proven that a “bona fide change of address” occurred. The KHSAA should be perfectly capable of discovering the facts involved in a legitimate physical move. They have no business attempting to read minds and discern the intentions of parents.

 

The last time I checked, our schools and related agencies are our employees. They were put in place to serve the educational needs of our children. We pay their salaries. (At least those of us who work, own property and pay taxes do.) When did things turn inside out?

 

Those against “athletic” moves sound so high-minded until it is pointed out that the foundation for their objections are also “in whole or part” motivated by athletics.

 

It’s time to end the hypocrisy.

And if it was my child, I wouldn't have handled the situation in the same way the Eutons have, particularly Clay Euton's dealings with the media.

Perhaps you have more experience with the media than most normal parents do. I would assume that anyone aware of this situation with a child transferring schools will avoid comment to the media for some time to come.

 

I still assert that if the rules were better written. This would not have been a problem in the first place.

Perhaps you have more experience with the media than most normal parents do. I would assume that anyone aware of this situation with a child transferring schools will avoid comment to the media for some time to come.

All Clay Euton had to say was "I'm moving to Lexington for a new job and we will soon decide where we want to live." Instead, he elected to extol the virtues of the Scott County basketball program, making it clear that athletic considerations played a big part in the decision to relocate there.

I still assert that if the rules were better written. This would not have been a problem in the first place.

Nevertheless, a rule is a rule, and the KHSAA apparently feels it's worth enforcing.

All Clay Euton had to say was "I'm moving to Lexington for a new job and we will soon decide where we want to live." Instead, he elected to extol the virtues of the Scott County basketball program, making it clear that athletic considerations played a big part in the decision to relocate there.

No question. I'm certain this will benefit many more that follow in his footsteps.

 

The fact that most everyone, including you, seem to think this move is entirely kosher with the exception of dad's apparent faux pas with the media is what makes this situation so absurd.

 

You're basically endorsing the punishment of a terrific kid, who's done absolutely nothing wrong on his own to deserve a one year penalty, on the basis of a few careless (alleged) comments by his dad.

 

Am I the only one who sees the inequity of this?

 

We should be cheering, encouraging and enabling kids willing to work their butts off to attain excellence in any field, whether athletic, academic, arts or other. Instead, we insist upon punishing the innocent because we cannot uncover the guilty to punish them.

 

Nevertheless, a rule is a rule, and the KHSAA apparently feels it's worth enforcing.

If the KHSAA could truly enforce the rules that apply to actual member schools in regard to recruiting, this horribly crafted rule would be entirely unnecessary. I'm not convinced it is necessary as is.

 

Parents should be free to reside and enroll their kids in any school district they choose... without fear of retribution on their children by a virtually autonomous state agency. :thumb:

:thumb:

No question. I'm certain this will benefit many more that follow in his footsteps.

 

The fact that most everyone, including you, seem to think this move is entirely kosher with the exception of dad's apparent faux pas with the media is what makes this situation so absurd.

 

You're basically endorsing the punishment of a terrific kid, who's done absolutely nothing wrong on his own to deserve a one year penalty, on the basis of a few careless (alleged) comments by his dad.

 

Am I the only one who sees the inequity of this?

 

We should be cheering, encouraging and enabling kids willing to work their butts off to attain excellence in any field, whether athletic, academic, arts or other. Instead, we insist upon punishing the innocent because we cannot uncover the guilty to punish them.

 

If the KHSAA could truly enforce the rules that apply to actual member schools in regard to recruiting, this horribly crafted rule would be entirely unnecessary. I'm not convinced it is necessary as is.

 

Parents should be free to reside and enroll their kids in any school district they choose... without fear of retribution on their children by a virtually autonomous state agency. :thumb:

 

 

:thumb: I believe you are dead on with this entire post. It comes down to punishing an innocent kid IMO.

Lets hope not...If they are ruled eligible then the floodgates will open.

:thumb:

Flood gates open wide , cause your in for a big flood.:thumb:

Since the 18 member Board of Control is administrators from other KHSAA schools, I am not too sure about Euton/Jackson's chances. A lot of the other KHSAA schools are very wary of Scott County, Lexington Catholic, and others. So unfortunately, it may not be good for Euton/Jackson. Guess they will have to get 10 schools who don't care about Scott County dominating for the next 2 years!

 

From the people I have talked to, the KHSAA ex-judge rulings are most times in favor of eligibility. The BOC will listen to all the evidence and have the final say.

 

If the BOC rules them eligible, then the KHSAA schools better come up with some new rules, because the flood gates will be wide open for anything.

It's obvious that Euton and Jackson going to Scott County is for basketball. That's a no brainer and an idiot could see that. Who can blame them. Both kids could have went to any school but Scott County and Georgetown was a prime location. Clay Euton lost his job and could have moved to another state. He chose to work in Lexington. Georgetown is 10 minutes away and a nicer place to live. Yes he could have moved to Lexington and enrolled his boy at one of the schools but why not send them to the better basketball school? Chad Jackson's transfer is also probably basketball related but the biggest part of this is more personal as in family related. Scott County is a better place to play ball.

 

Euton can improve his game and hopefully get himself prepared to where he could be a pretty decent contributer at UK if he stays committed. Jackson can play at a bigger school and get noticed by many schools. Recruiters are gonna look at Scott County moreso than Rose Hill, Franklin County, etc.

 

Let em move, it was all legit, and the KHSAA should quit worryin. If the parents are upset with the transfers taking their kids playing time, tell them to buy a hoop and have them practice more to win their spot back.

Great avatar Hank... :thumb:

I've been told Mr. Euton is NOT employed at Toyotta, but with an Engineering firm in Lexington. And, he did lose his job in the Ashland area. ALso was told from a reliable source that the news media totally misreprested what Mr. Euton said. Also, if kids can chose a school for academic reasons, i.e. performing arts, science and techonolgy, etc, etc,, in order to increase their chances of receiving a college scholarship, then what is the difference in doing so with Athletics as well. Parents want to do what they feel is best for the future of their child. I have mixed feelings about these types of situations, I can see both sides of these situations. Also, Scott Co is not the only county where these situations are occuring. In my opinion, if they are NOT ruled eligible, then the KHSAA will have to rule EVERY athlete who transferred or moved since the last season as ineligible. If they are not ruled eligible, then I think it is basketball in the state of KY that suffers. We need to keep as many quality players in KY as possible. If they are not allowed to play, it only decreases the quality of competition in KY, which is not good for basketball as a whole.

I've been told Mr. Euton is NOT employed at Toyotta, but with an Engineering firm in Lexington. And, he did lose his job in the Ashland area. ALso was told from a reliable source that the news media totally misreprested what Mr. Euton said. Also, if kids can chose a school for academic reasons, i.e. performing arts, science and techonolgy, etc, etc,, in order to increase their chances of receiving a college scholarship, then what is the difference in doing so with Athletics as well. Parents want to do what they feel is best for the future of their child. I have mixed feelings about these types of situations, I can see both sides of these situations. Also, Scott Co is not the only county where these situations are occuring. In my opinion, if they are NOT ruled eligible, then the KHSAA will have to rule EVERY athlete who transferred or moved since the last season as ineligible. If they are not ruled eligible, then I think it is basketball in the state of KY that suffers. We need to keep as many quality players in KY as possible. If they are not allowed to play, it only decreases the quality of competition in KY, which is not good for basketball as a whole.

Madluc, you've not been keeping up. His employment has been hashed out in the thread for 3 pages now, and in no less than 4 threads prior. :thumb:

Okay, this one is tired. Feel free to start a new one, or two, or three.