02Ram54 Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 How many kids do Male and Manual pull from outside of Jefferson County? There was only one in my year (OK, two, but one was cheating :sssh: ) she was from Henry County. Played no sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldbird Posted September 20, 2005 Author Share Posted September 20, 2005 There was only one in my year (OK, two, but one was cheating :sssh: ) she was from Henry County. Played no sports. That is why Male and Manuel are the bigger winners if proposal #1 passes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Ram54 Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 That is why Male and Manuel are the bigger winners if proposal #1 passes. I know you did that on purpose... are you trying to cause ram95 to spaz out? :lol: My point is 20 miles doesn't really affect anything. Does Trinity and X have any players that live more than 20 miles away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pigskin Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I think a nice compromise to the problems people have raised with this proposal would be to have it modified to say that if you have attended the school district of the high school from at least the 4th grade onward that you can participate in high school sports without having to sit out the year, even if you live outside the 20 mile redius of the private school or the designated territory of the public schools. Using Guru for example, as long as he starts Guru Jr. in the Beechwood system in the 4th grade and keeps him there, then in won't matter that they don't live within the territory or if he wants to send him to NCC because he has been brainwashed by all them Bred fanatics on here, as long as he started Jr. in a parochial school that is a designated feeder of NCC by the 4th grade, then it should not matter if he is living outside the 20 mile rule when he hits high school. Whatya think? This modification is fair to the kids that don't live within the 20 mile rule but have attended the school district for some time and obviously are not attending the school as a result of being recruited, but eliminates the public schools concerns that the private schools are recruiting good athletes or have access to good athletes from a very wide terrritory. I think we call this the "Piggy Compromise of 05". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity alum Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I know you did that on purpose... are you trying to cause ram95 to spaz out? :lol: My point is 20 miles doesn't really affect anything. Does Trinity and X have any players that live more than 20 miles away? I don't know and I don't care. If even one student is singled out and told that the educational programs available to other students are not available to that student, it is wrong. I don't care if the number is 20 miles or 200 miles. What is missing from all of these proposals is any attempt to treat public schools and private schools exactly the same. If someone has a proposal that will do THAT, then that should be considered as a compromise. Short of that, NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickymitts Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I don't know and I don't care. If even one student is singled out and told that the educational programs available to other students are not available to that student, it is wrong. I don't care if the number is 20 miles or 200 miles. What is missing from all of these proposals is any attempt to treat public schools and private schools exactly the same. If someone has a proposal that will do THAT, then that should be considered as a compromise. Short of that, NO! Again, they are not saying that. They are saying you can't play sports. There's a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leatherneck Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I don't know and I don't care. If even one student is singled out and told that the educational programs available to other students are not available to that student, it is wrong. I don't care if the number is 20 miles or 200 miles. What is missing from all of these proposals is any attempt to treat public schools and private schools exactly the same. If someone has a proposal that will do THAT, then that should be considered as a compromise. Short of that, NO! I won't say much about this subject other than if the private schools take this type of hard and fast position, then proposal 20 is a sure thing in my mind. Period. And while the private schools may like to think that they have enough legislative clout to prevent this proposal from becoming the law, I'd be real concerned about that. There are a large number of public schools in Lville supporting proposal 20 (particularly if there is no compromise) that could offset the pressure the T and X alumni put on the area legislators. There are a large number of western Ky. public schools supporting proposal 20 and we know where old Jody Richards hails from. The public schools in Lex are particularly lathered up. If it comes down to nothing but politics I think there are a whole lot more public schools superintendents wielding large amounts of influence and public school alumni voters out there. If the privates don't accept compromise like the ones suggested, I think they will be forcing the hand of some public school superintendents that don't necessarily want to support proposal 20 but will feel they have to because of the rigidity of the privates position. Now is not the time to fight them on the beaches and in the city. This is Cuba embargo/nuclear war time and both sides need to think compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity alum Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 Again, they are not saying that. They are saying you can't play sports. There's a difference. NO! If sports are not part of the educational process they should be eliminated from schools. In fact, I believe that sports can be a very valuable part of the education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickymitts Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 NO! If sports are not part of the educational process they should be eliminated from schools. In fact, I believe that sports can be a very valuable part of the education. I find it funny how things have changed. It would be nice if someone would just come out and say that it's all about athletics. I'd at least buy it from that person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity alum Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I won't say much about this subject other than if the private schools take this type of hard and fast position, then proposal 20 is a sure thing in my mind. Period. And while the private schools may like to think that they have enough legislative clout to prevent this proposal from becoming the law, I'd be real concerned about that. There are a large number of public schools in Lville supporting proposal 20 (particularly if there is no compromise) that could offset the pressure the T and X alumni put on the area legislators. There are a large number of western Ky. public schools supporting proposal 20 and we know where old Jody Richards hails from. The public schools in Lex are particularly lathered up. If it comes down to nothing but politics I think there are a whole lot more public schools superintendents wielding large amounts of influence and public school alumni voters out there. If the privates don't accept compromise like the ones suggested, I think they will be forcing the hand of some public school superintendents that don't necessarily want to support proposal 20 but will feel they have to because of the rigidity of the privates position. Now is not the time to fight them on the beaches and in the city. This is Cuba embargo/nuclear war time and both sides need to think compromise. I am open to compromise and solutions as long as they treat private school kids the same way that public school kids are treated. As an example, Prop 1 says private schools have a 20 mile radius. Why only privates? Shouldn't it apply to all schools? If we agree that it affects very few kids, why have the rule at all? Is it only to make the publics feel better? I think that the thing that has to be fought at every turn is the notion that it is okay to treat private school kids differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickymitts Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 I am open to compromise and solutions as long as they treat private school kids the same way that public school kids are treated. As an example, Prop 1 says private schools have a 20 mile radius. Why only privates? Shouldn't it apply to all schools? If we agree that it affects very few kids, why have the rule at all? Is it only to make the publics feel better? I think that the thing that has to be fought at every turn is the notion that it is okay to treat private school kids differently. They were discussing this in another thread. That rule actually hinders publics more than privates since they can only draw kids from within their districts. Which most are probably not 20 miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinity alum Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 They were discussing this in another thread. That rule actually hinders publics more than privates since they can only draw kids from within their districts. Which most are probably not 20 miles. You are missing the point. I am against ANY proposals that say it is okay to treat our kids differently from anyone elses. It isn't about who would be "hurt" the most. If they want to pass a rule that says no kid can play high school sports if they live more than 20 miles from the school, I'd think it was a bad idea, but at least it could be discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickymitts Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 You are missing the point. I am against ANY proposals that say it is okay to treat our kids differently from anyone elses. It isn't about who would be "hurt" the most. If they want to pass a rule that says no kid can play high school sports if they live more than 20 miles from the school, I'd think it was a bad idea, but at least it could be discussed. No, I'm not. You're specifically complaining about treating private schools differently, which is fine. However, what you're complaining about doesn't hinder the private schools as much as the publics. I'm just suggesting you focus your arguments and lawsuits on Prop. 20 but if you want to waste energy on a Prop. that won't really effect you, feel free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolwrestler Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 You are missing the point. I am against ANY proposals that say it is okay to treat our kids differently from anyone elses. It isn't about who would be "hurt" the most. If they want to pass a rule that says no kid can play high school sports if they live more than 20 miles from the school, I'd think it was a bad idea, but at least it could be discussed. NO public school has a 20 mile radius zone. The districts are already set and not one school is even close to a 20 mile district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cshs81 Posted September 20, 2005 Share Posted September 20, 2005 NO public school has a 20 mile radius zone. The districts are already set and not one school is even close to a 20 mile district. None? Whitley County sure looks pretty big to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts