Here is a question to people who don't think any recruiting is going on at private or public schools. If this was true, then why is there always such a big deal made out of it? Most people who do think it is going on, must have a reason for thinking that usually. As something that is usually said on here a lot. Where there is smoke, there is usually fire. Yeah maybe it might not be as bad as some make it out to be, but it definitely is going on.

 

There were also WMD's in Iraq and witches in Salem. And let's not forget that Duke lacrosse team.

 

 

There are all kinds of false accusations made about all kinds of things, big or small. I'm not saying there has never been any recruiting done by any high schools in Kentucky. I'm not fool enough to make that claim. However, I will say that I think the majority of recruiting accusations are false, and are based on sour grapes and/or a misunderstanding of what "recruiting" is.

 

My father was a Cov Cath grad, and although I grew up in the Beechwood school district, he encouraged me to attend Cov Cath. Was he recruiting me for Cov Cath? No. I played baseball all through grade school in a knothole league and I was a fairly talented player. One of my good friends' families was a Beechwood family, and his older brother had played 4 years of Beechwood baseball. Their father encouraged me to attend Beechwood instead of Cov Cath. Was he recruiting me? No.

 

As I've said to a handful of people via private message - I'm sure there are parents, siblings, aunts & uncles, cousins and even neighbors who have tried to talk 7th and 8th graders into attending their alma maters on countless occasions. This is not recruiting. Recruiting (to paraphrase) involves an agent of the school actively trying to encourage and/or incentivize a student to attend their school.

I do find the tuition discussion puzzling and irrelevant. If someone chooses to send their children to a tuition school, it is their choice. I don't understand why public school supporters make an issue of tuition nor do I understand private school supporters making pointing it out. It really is irrelevant in most discussions here.

There were also WMD's in Iraq and witches in Salem. And let's not forget that Duke lacrosse team.

 

 

There are all kinds of false accusations made about all kinds of things, big or small. I'm not saying there has never been any recruiting done by any high schools in Kentucky. I'm not fool enough to make that claim. However, I will say that I think the majority of recruiting accusations are false, and are based on sour grapes and/or a misunderstanding of what "recruiting" is.

My father was a Cov Cath grad, and although I grew up in the Beechwood school district, he encouraged me to attend Cov Cath. Was he recruiting me for Cov Cath? No. I played baseball all through grade school in a knothole league and I was a fairly talented player. One of my good friends' families was a Beechwood family, and his older brother had played 4 years of Beechwood baseball. Their father encouraged me to attend Beechwood instead of Cov Cath. Was he recruiting me? No.

 

As I've said to a handful of people via private message - I'm sure there are parents, siblings, aunts & uncles, cousins and even neighbors who have tried to talk 7th and 8th graders into attending their alma maters on countless occasions. This is not recruiting. Recruiting (to paraphrase) involves an agent of the school actively trying to encourage and/or incentivize a student to attend their school.

 

I will say that at least half of the recruiting things people say are true. I do agree sometimes it is just sour grapes probably as you say, however I think there are also a lot of things that true too. I mentioned this in another post about how I do think it got reported. Don't you think its funny that after it got reported, my player stopped really hearing anything from them? Could have been coincidence yes, but I think he can even admit that is very unlikely. Maybe the people talking to them were not employed by the school, however the word must have got to them somehow that it got reported. So that means someone from the school probably knew what they were doing, and had them stop. So in my mind even though it might not have been someone who actually worked for the school, it was still recruiting. Especially since obviously someone in the school knew it was going on and got them to stop. I believe when a school member knows of someone trying to get a person to go to that school, and the information gets passed back and forth through the people, then that is recruiting in my eyes. A practice like that should be be at the High School level. This is happening everywhere, and is whats wrong with high schools sports. There is just no reason for it.

They probably wanted him gone because he was an NCC alumuni

 

He was actually very well liked within the community, until he became head coach. Then people started to turn on him, when things might not have went the best. It was very unfair IMO, because I believe he is a great coach and we will see that here soon in the next few years. From what I hear, he was a pretty darn good player when he was at NCC too. :thumb:

Where privates and how privates get kids to come to their school is completely different. Lexington Catholic, according to the archidiocese of Lexington, can accept students from numerous counties (something like 30 or more counties). That is absurd. Privates in Louisville, the same thing. For the purpose of athletic competition, this is not the same as public schools. Period. No restrictions, no policy to follow, nothing. Just go. Doesn't matter how or why.

 

That's like the SEC telling Kentucky they can only recruit in Kentucky, but they still have to play all the other SEC schools who are allowed to recruit the entire country. Why don't they do that? Answer. Equal playing field

 

Why do all Division 1 schools have a limit of 85 scholarships in football? Why do they have scholarship limits in all sports? Answer. Equality. For the purpose of ATHLETICS, everyone is operating under the same policy.

 

Why do professional sports have salary caps? Answer. Equality. Equal playing field. ATHLETIC equality. Everyone operating under the same regulations.

 

Why do 39 of our 50 states have complete or partial seperation of their public and private schools? Do I need to give you the answer?

 

Does anyone seriously think the public and private schools in Kentucky are the same animal?

That is interesting & something I have never heard before. Which schools have a reciprocal agreement?

 

I've never heard of this, but my best guess would be NCC & Brossart.

 

That would be correct, however, as we were looking at schools during my son's 8th grade year, we were told that he could attend ANY diocesean high school with no surcharge.....which is ok as far as I'm concerned, but obviously creates issues for the direct feed high school.

My point is thus:

 

If parents are allowed the option of sending their child to any public school they wish,then what inequities are there between public and private? Eliminate the concept of school ownership of children and allow complete autonomy to parents.

 

They then would not, as you say, be different animals.

 

I still do not think they are entirely different animals as it is anyway.

 

 

In some ways, these discussions bring into question the whole "school voucher" system. I choose to send my son to a public school which is out of our district. For that, I pay tuition, which quite honestly is priced almost exactly as if I were to send him to the parochial high school we "feed". We looked at high schools like one would look at colleges, assessed all the variables, and then made a decision. I will say this, it's not easy on the kids, regardless of the reasons for the choices, however, we believed, after assessing all the factors, that paying out of district tuition to a public school, was better than 1) our in-district public school and 2) the parochial school options available. Not an indictment on either public or private schools, I support all these schools, but best ALL AROUND, academically, socially, athletically for my son. (BTW: No recruiting took place in the process :banana:)

In some ways, these discussions bring into question the whole "school voucher" system. I choose to send my son to a public school which is out of our district. For that, I pay tuition, which quite honestly is priced almost exactly as if I were to send him to the parochial high school we "feed". We looked at high schools like one would look at colleges, assessed all the variables, and then made a decision. I will say this, it's not easy on the kids, regardless of the reasons for the choices, however, we believed, after assessing all the factors, that paying out of district tuition to a public school, was better than 1) our in-district public school and 2) the parochial school options available. Not an indictment on either public or private schools, I support all these schools, but best ALL AROUND, academically, socially, athletically for my son. (BTW: No recruiting took place in the process :banana:)

 

I am yet to hear a good reason why we haven't instituted the voucher system.

I am yet to hear a good reason why we haven't instituted the voucher system.

 

I haven't heard a good reason why we should.

The issue on feeder schools is apples and oranges when discussing the public/private debate. For example, in Lexington, public school feeder middle schools are clearly defined and set. The private schools in Lexington who, under the archdiocese, is defined by what? 25 counties? I think even more than that. In Louisville, the private schools have no boundries, defined feeder schools, or limitations whatsoever. So, for example, if a young man wants to come say, across county lines or state lines, or from one end of Jefferson Co., all he and his family have to do is go. If that same young man wants to attend a public school, the family either has to buy and sell a home, pay fees, apply, etc. etc. It is a clear example of policy not being the same. Two sets of policies/rules/regulations. Yet the same schools competing for the same championships.

 

As has been discussed ad nauseum in other thread the bolded is simply not true.

I didn't say all coaches are as good as each other. However there are plenty of good coaches who might not have as successful programs, who would be just as good of a coach as someone who has the players. Three examples just off the top of my head from the NKY area would be Coach Eckstein of Bellevue, Coach Hornsby of Ludlow, and Coach Borchers of Cooper. If you take Coach Eckstein and say put him at Beechwood, he would be just as successful as any other Beechwood coach has been because he is a very good coach. If you put say Rash at Bellevue, he would probably only have the same small success that Eckstein has there. The samething could be said about Coach Hornsby, I am sure the CovCath faithful on here will even say that he is a really good coach. However at Ludlow the fact is, he won't get as many good players to have really great teams. That doesn't mean he is not a good coach though.

 

I think the best example to what you said will be Coach Borchers. He is someone who I believe is a very good coach. Even though he is a very good coach, he still had a lot of people in Ludlow who was wanting him gone when he was the coach (Even though I did not agree with them). People only look at success at determing if your a good coach or not, however as I said you could be the best coach in the world but if you don't have the players then it won't translate to great success. I think we will see in a year or two how good of a coach Borchers really is. He has a lot of talent coming up, especially in the freshman class he had last year. So once he has the talent, then I think everyone will see that he is a really good coach. Yet while he was at Ludlow, people wouldn't have thought that, and that was just because he didn't have the players.

 

My point is, I just hate when people say people go to other schools because of better football programs. Some of these other programs, have coaches who would be just as good, they just need the players though. Instead of having one or two or more players come into their schools who could be the missing pieces, these guys usually lose those guys and could stop them from achieving more. This is why we always see the same programs every year be at top. Its much easier to stay on top, when you do get some help.

 

If you agree that all coaches are not as good as one another, how can you believe that a not very good coach coaching at a school, say Beechwood, would have just as much success as a very good coach would at Beechwood? Seems illogical to me.

 

For the record, I'm not saying Eckstein isn't a good coach. Not close. He's a fine coach.

 

The importance of quality coaching staffs can't be overstated. I totally disagree that you could take any coaching staff and move them to Highlands and the new coaching staff would have just as much success as the current coaching staff does.

I haven't heard a good reason why we should.

 

Touché.

 

I will say...I think it would at appease some of the masses. If public school students receive a voucher and are allowed to go to use that voucher towards the tuition at the public school of their choice, it would at least subdue the "I have to go to my district school" argument.

If you agree that all coaches are not as good as one another, how can you believe that a not very good coach coaching at a school, say Beechwood, would have just as much success as a very good coach would at Beechwood? Seems illogical to me.

 

For the record, I'm not saying Eckstein isn't a good coach. Not close. He's a fine coach.

 

The importance of quality coaching staffs can't be overstated. I totally disagree that you could take any coaching staff and move them to Highlands and the new coaching staff would have just as much success as the current coaching staff does.

 

Once again where did I say you can take any coaching staff? Trust me I know that not all coaches are good, or would do as good. I never said you could just take any coach. For a team to have sustained success they need good players and good coaching. Trust I know more than most people, it doesn't matter how good your team is, if you don't have the coaching. You would not be as good as you can be.

 

My point was about there are some people on here, who always say like the reason why these same teams always win is because they have good program is just not true. My point is that some of these schools that are not as known as having a top notch program who is always in contention, do have coaches to that are just as good as some of these other schools. They just don't have the talent. I know not every school has good coaches, but there are a lot who do. So when people say its because of the program and coaches they have for why they do good, is just not true. Some of the examples I given you, are guys you seriously could switch with other coaches and it would be the same thing.

Touché.

 

I will say...I think it would at appease some of the masses. If public school students receive a voucher and are allowed to go to use that voucher towards the tuition at the public school of their choice, it would at least subdue the "I have to go to my district school" argument.

 

The thing is you can go to any school you want right now, right? There are students who live in Villa Hills and Erlanger going to Lloyd, St. Henry, Villa Madonna, Notre Dame, Cov Cath, Dixie, Highlands, Beechwood and Holy Cross...maybe even others I haven't mentioned. Half of those are public and half of those are private.

As has been discussed ad nauseum in other thread the bolded is simply not true.

 

 

You are wrong. It is true. They just can't show up at the front door like they could at any private school in the state.