Who cares why he wants to attend Boyle. This truly isn't what the young man or his family thinks is best for him. This is about wins & losses. If the young man was in the band and he wanted to change schools because he thought he could learn to be a better flute player know one would care.

I don’t like the transfer rule. Kids should have a right to go where they want. Sometimes people always think the grass is greener. I know Coach Harp will have his team ready no matter who is on the roster.

No matter what the rules are we will always have people that will not follow the rules.

Who cares why he wants to attend Boyle. This truly isn't what the young man or his family thinks is best for him. This is about wins & losses. If the young man was in the band and he wanted to change schools because he thought he could learn to be a better flute player know one would care.

I don’t like the transfer rule. Kids should have a right to go where they want. Sometimes people always think the grass is greener. I know Coach Harp will have his team ready no matter who is on the roster.

No matter what the rules are we will always have people that will not follow the rules.

 

100% A++ Spot On!:clap::thumb:

Who cares why he wants to attend Boyle. This truly isn't what the young man or his family thinks is best for him. This is about wins & losses. If the young man was in the band and he wanted to change schools because he thought he could learn to be a better flute player know one would care.

I don’t like the transfer rule. Kids should have a right to go where they want. Sometimes people always think the grass is greener. I know Coach Harp will have his team ready no matter who is on the roster.

No matter what the rules are we will always have people that will not follow the rules.

 

When I officiate a game I don't ask kids where they last attended school. If a transfer fouls, I flag it. If he scores I punch it up. Simple. Let 'em play.

When I officiate a game I don't ask kids where they last attended school. If a transfer fouls, I flag it. If he scores I punch it up. Simple. Let 'em play.

 

What if one kid decides he don't want to play by the rules? He sits out!!!!

 

Agree or disagree there are rules that are currently present, this case is decided by the rules just as a foul or whatever.... Don't like the rules get a commitee get em changed.

I don't think some people realize what a mess our athletic programs would be in if transfer rules were not in place. There would be wide spread recruiting amongst communities to play at better programs and high school football doesn't need recruiting to be a part of the game.

 

Like someone said earlier, the Dunn's knew the rules and ignored them, no one is blaming them, rather they are blaming the enforcers of the rules.

I don't think some people realize what a mess our athletic programs would be in if transfer rules were not in place. There would be wide spread recruiting amongst communities to play at better programs and high school football doesn't need recruiting to be a part of the game.

 

Like someone said earlier, the Dunn's knew the rules and ignored them, no one is blaming them, rather they are blaming the enforcers of the rules.

 

Or maybe they thought they were following the rules and tragically were told by a body that is not in their community that they were not. :thumb:

Or maybe they thought they were following the rules and tragically were told by a body that is not in their community that they were not. :thumb:

 

That may be the case, but you are either following the rules or you aren't.

If any chance my son wouldn't get a chance to play and I was transferring, you better believe I would be calling the KHSAA myself.

I don't think some people realize what a mess our athletic programs would be in if transfer rules were not in place. There would be wide spread recruiting amongst communities to play at better programs and high school football doesn't need recruiting to be a part of the game.

Like someone said earlier, the Dunn's knew the rules and ignored them, no one is blaming them, rather they are blaming the enforcers of the rules.

 

There is recruiting going on and you know it. It is simply hidden. Not all schools do it and winning certainly recruits, but to say it would be a shambles-I disagree-I offer it would look not much different than today with the same teams winning year after year.

Edited May 7, 201016 yr by History
spelling

I don't think some people realize what a mess our athletic programs would be in if transfer rules were not in place. There would be wide spread recruiting amongst communities to play at better programs and high school football doesn't need recruiting to be a part of the game.

 

Like someone said earlier, the Dunn's knew the rules and ignored them, no one is blaming them, rather they are blaming the enforcers of the rules.

 

This is my opinion too, it would commercialize high school sports, kids would be exploited and not much parity would be developed.

There is recruiting going on and you know it. It is simply hidden. Not all schools do it and winning certainly recruits, but to say it would be a shambles-I disagree-I offer it would look not much different than today with the same teams winning year after year.

 

No way I believe that, those schools would be traveling farther, offering money etc.... They would just find a way to break and bend the rules more than they do now. instead of winning 40 to 0 it would get worse. Smaller programs would be even worse off, and middle of the road teams that make a nice run every now and then would drop off.

There is recruiting going on and you know it. It is simply hidden. Not all schools do it and winning certainly recruits, but to say it would be a shambles-I disagree-I offer it would look not much different than today with the same teams winning year after year.

 

I agree with some of that, the first part. Most recruiting is hidden and consist mainly of just border/boundary counties; and yes winning does recruit itself, however, allowing coaches to fully eqip themselves with an arsenal of recruiting propaganda would destroy athletics.

No way I believe that, those schools would be traveling farther, offering money etc.... They would just find a way to break and bend the rules more than they do now. instead of winning 40 to 0 it would get worse. Smaller programs would be even worse off, and middle of the road teams that make a nice run every now and then would drop off.[/QUOTE]

 

Don't take my response the wrong way, but can you offer a few schools that would qualify under the bolded in your comment?

Edited May 7, 201016 yr by History
error in message

I don't think some people realize what a mess our athletic programs would be in if transfer rules were not in place. There would be wide spread recruiting amongst communities to play at better programs and high school football doesn't need recruiting to be a part of the game.

 

Like someone said earlier, the Dunn's knew the rules and ignored them, no one is blaming them, rather they are blaming the enforcers of the rules.

 

I disagree. Surely the transfer rules were written as a way to control recruiting. But let's play what if.

 

What if a family wants their son to play football at some other school? They need to move. If they are willing to go to that extent to get the boy into a new school, shouldn't they be allowed?

 

Not many people will move to a new school district, as a percent of th whole, so Johnny can play for Coach X. Some will. So what?

 

Besides, under current rules, there has not been a single complaint for recruiting to the KHSAA since 'no recruiting' rules were enacted. (Should be verified, but I heard that once from a reliable source.)

 

Also, there is recruiting in college, and still plenty of schools have football teams, enough to compete on multiple levels with hundreds of other teams. Everyone cannot play on the same team. You can only play 11 at any time.

 

Besides, there is no parity in KY football anyway, so how much worse could it get?

Edited May 7, 201016 yr by Hey-Ref
added comment.

No way I believe that, those schools would be traveling farther, offering money etc.... They would just find a way to break and bend the rules more than they do now. instead of winning 40 to 0 it would get worse. Smaller programs would be even worse off, and middle of the road teams that make a nice run every now and then would drop off.[/QUOTE]

 

Don't take my response the wrong way, but can you offer a few schools that would qualify under the bolded in your comment?

 

Well name any team in the 2nd third or 4th or even 5th round that had not been there the year before. I agree the State Titles rest in very few cities, but the road is more open now than it would be with your idea.

I disagree. Surely the transfer rules were written as a way to control recruiting. But let's play what if.

 

What if a family wants their son to play football at some other school? They need to move. If they are willing to go to that extent to get the boy into a new school, shouldn't they be allowed?

 

Not many people will move to a new school district, as a percent of th whole, so Johnny can play for Coach X. Some will. So what?

 

Besides, under current rules, there has not been a single complaint for recruiting to the KHSAA since 'no recruiting' rules were enacted. (Should be verified, but I heard that once from a reliable source.)

 

Also, there is recruiting in college, and still plenty of schools have football teams, enough to compete on multiple levels with hundreds of other teams. Everyone cannot play on the same team. You can only play 11 at any time.

 

Besides, there is no parity in KY football anyway, so how much worse could it get?

 

He only has to move if he has already played varsity football for the first school and can not qualify for any of the other waivers. The players who want to change schools that are most adversely affected by the current rule are high school juniors.