I'm confused. Academically, Trinity, X, Assumption, Sacred Heart and numerous others rank right up there with the best. They have low student:teacher ratio, they have updated their classroom facilities. Trinity and Assumption have added classroom space, are on the leading edge in technologically enhanced classrooms, and Trinity reportedly has the largest number of labs in the state. How would splitting them in half enhance their facilities or academics?

I think you confused my post with Post #7. I was replying post 16. They said if there were enrollment caps then the school would take good athlete instead of the student that was there for academics.

 

 

I am not saying they are not the best academically. You are correct they do have an advantage over public schools because they have a lower student to teacher ratio. The simple fact is not everyone can afford to send their children to private schools. On the other hand I do not think I am doing my children a disservice by sending them to a public school either. My boys have very high grades and I will not accept anything less. Just like anything else you get out of it what you put in it.

 

I was replying post 16. They said if there were enrollment caps then the school would take good athlete instead of the student that was there for academics.

 

I could care less about public or private. I was merely stating a fact that if the private schools are as concerned about academics as I think they are they WILL NOT take the athlete over the student that is just there to learn.

I think you confused my post with Post #7. I was replying post 16. They said if there were enrollment caps then the school would take good athlete instead of the student that was there for academics.

 

 

I am not saying they are not the best academically. You are correct they do have an advantage over public schools because they have a lower student to teacher ratio. The simple fact is not everyone can afford to send their children to private schools. On the other hand I do not think I am doing my children a disservice by sending them to a public school either. My boys have very high grades and I will not accept anything less. Just like anything else you get out of it what you put in it.

 

I was replying post 16. They said if there were enrollment caps then the school would take good athlete instead of the student that was there for academics.

 

I could care less about public or private. I was merely stating a fact that if the private schools are as concerned about academics as I think they are they WILL NOT take the athlete over the student that is just there to learn.

 

 

Oh...I apologize then. I was TOTALLY misunderstanding your post! I thought you were saying that because of the size of the schools (Trinity ~1300), that they would receive a better academic education if split into a smaller school.

 

I wasn't jabbing at public schools at all. We in Jefferson County, public and private, know which school is the BEST academically....and it starts with an M, ends with an L, and apparantly no one named Manuel has anything at all to do with it :lol:

Oh...I apologize then. I was TOTALLY misunderstanding your post! I thought you were saying that because of the size of the schools (Trinity ~1300), that they would receive a better academic education if split into a smaller school.

 

I wasn't jabbing at public schools at all. We in Jefferson County, public and private, know which school is the BEST academically....and it starts with an M, ends with an L, and apparantly no one named Manuel has anything at all to do with it :lol:

 

 

Not a problem........

I am sure the public\private debate will go on forever.........

Nothing we can do about it. We just do the best we can with the hand that is dealth to us.

 

Good luck in the play-offs I look forward to a rematch in round three, I would love to see your new staduim. :thumb:

Ohhhh....that ain't happenin'....that would undermine the whole mission of the school, and the ability and NEED for the school to grow. The ONLY sport that this affects (enrollment) is football. No way. Nu-uh...Enrollment caps would have a huge affect on too many other factors, not the least of which is academic growth.

I don't think football is the only affected sport ... St. Xavier and Trinity are also dominant in golf and tennis, maybe others. I was told that St. Xavier had 90 kids come out for the golf team ... I dare say there is some talent there that could be spread out among more than one school, possibly several more.

 

Additional Catholic schools could level the playing field, so to speak, by spreading out the talent and also give more kids the chance to become major contributors on the varsity level while still benefitting from the academic environment of a well-run private school.

 

It wouldn't be easy. It would require the new schools to be allocated a portion of the resources that are currently devoted to the two giants in town. But it could be done, if the commitment was there.

 

I'm not saying it will happen, only that it should happen. Even if the KHSAA took a step in that direction, I'm sure there would be a legal challenge.

Compromise: (applied only to private schools that are AA or larger) -

 

Attendance "radius" is the same as the local school district.

Louisville - public schools have open enrollment and can draw from entire county. Private schools would have the same radius.

 

Lexington (arbitrary #s here)

Average "radius" for Dunbar, Lafayette, Tates Creek, Bryan Station and Henry Clay is 12 miles (again, arbitrary). Lex. Cath then has a radius of 12 miles - exceptions can occur for feeder schools outside of that 12 miles (like Good Shepherd in Frankfort) but those students (in the feeder outside of the 12 miles) may not participate at the High School at any level until they have graduated from 8th grade.

 

All non-public middle schools within that radius could be considered feeder schools for this proposal.

 

Students who attend a non-public middle school for both the 7th and 8th grade are not subject to eligibility rules in regards to Freshmen.

 

Students who attend a public middle school in 8th grade are ineligible at all levels of play for their first year if they enroll in a non-public high school.

What about a kid in say Bullitt County that attends a parochial school for 8 years and wants to attend a Catholic all-boys high school. There are none in Bullitt County. Would you say that if that kid wants to play sports as a freshman he HAS to go to a public school?

 

Would students who attend private schools through the 8th grade and then decide to go to public schools be subject to the same ineligibility? If not, why not?

 

Compromise means both sides make concessions. What are the public schools going to be giving up in this "compromise"? This idea sure seems like the private schools would be doing all of the giving.

What about a kid in say Bullitt County that attends a parochial school for 8 years and wants to attend a Catholic all-boys high school. There are none in Bullitt County. Would you say that if that kid wants to play sports as a freshman he HAS to go to a public school?

 

Would students who attend private schools through the 8th grade and then decide to go to public schools be subject to the same ineligibility? If not, why not?

 

Compromise means both sides make concessions. What are the public schools going to be giving up in this "compromise"? This idea sure seems like the private schools would be doing all of the giving.

 

Please read my post again - students who attend a non-public school(whether parochial or not) during the 7th and 8th grade are not subject to eligibility rules.

 

This is certainly a compromise to kicking the privates out of the post season. It is also a compromise to saying kids had to go to 6th, 7th, and 8th grade in a particular feeder school - they just have to have attended a non-public school to be eligible as freshmen

 

Here is the scenario that drives publics crazy - true one too.

 

Player A spends all of his young life playing basketball with players B, C, D, and E. This includes playing in a public middle school. Player A (for all intents and purposes has never even seen the inside of a catholic church or catholic school). When it comes time to go to H.S. player A decides to attend Catholic high school 35 miles away to play on an all-star basketball team that has kids from all over. 4 years later players B, C, D, and E finish a senior season setting records for school wins and having a big time - first round of the region they draw the 35 mi. away Catholic H.S. and its all-star basketball team that includes player A who lives 100 yards from their public h.s. They are beaten and walk across the floor to shake hands with long-time friend who was just 'burning' to get that good catholic education.

 

Some see that as okay - those kids saw it as unfair. And while the Catholic H.S. never recruited, the parents of the kids on the basketball team certainly did and they were not extolling the benefits of a catholic education - they talked about the basketball program and the great facilities.

 

Public schools are required to education any and all who live within their attendance boundaries. To say that you MUST go to school but you cannot play is a tough sell.

What about a kid in say Bullitt County that attends a parochial school for 8 years and wants to attend a Catholic all-boys high school. There are none in Bullitt County. Would you say that if that kid wants to play sports as a freshman he HAS to go to a public school?

 

Would students who attend private schools through the 8th grade and then decide to go to public schools be subject to the same ineligibility? If not, why not?

 

Compromise means both sides make concessions. What are the public schools going to be giving up in this "compromise"? This idea sure seems like the private schools would be doing all of the giving.

 

 

 

The public schools' part of the compromise is that they don't kick you out.

 

Westsider's idea is the best one I've heard yet, but I can't see St. X or Trinity giving up part of their empire.

Private School supporters "AUX BARRICADES!!"

I suggest these steps as a starting point for discussion. I don't expect the public school superintendents to agree. Their long term goal is to ELIMINATE private schools.

 

1. Participation in high school athletics will be determined based on first enrollment at a KHSAA member school or participation on an athletic team at a KHSAA member school in the case of a middle school player that has played high school sports. The exceptions listed in the current bylaws will continue to apply. Agreement by the principal of both the sending and receiving school will cause the one year period of ineligibility to be waived. Justification - A great deal of the hard feelings I see are based on transfers. This change would make transfers sit out one year, with the exception of the fairly narrow criteria that are listed in the current bylaws. Agreement by the principals would at least allow for the possibility that a transfer that was in the best interests of the kid could be granted without a great deal of red tape. I'm an optimist. I hope that most principals would do the right thing.

 

2. Coaches and athletic directors are prohibited from any contact with prospective students except in the school building and under situations that have been initiated by the prospective student. Justification - There is a general perception that contact between members of the athletic staff and prospective students is thinly veiled athletic recruiting. This proposal would eliminate that contact. The type of general contact between schools and prospective students that is allowed under current rules could contunue, but the athletic staff could not participate.

 

3. Students at all KHSAA member schools that live beyond a twenty mile radius of the school would be prohibited from athletic competition for a period of one year following enrollment. Exceptions will be made when the student is part of an established feeder system. Justification: The public superintendents seem to put a great deal of importance on limiting the geographic extent of the student body at private schools. If there is to be a geographic limit it should apply to all schools, not just private schools. Since there are no religious schools in most Kentucky Counties it is unreasonable to prohibit students from attending the school of their choice, regardless of where they kive, if there is an established pattern of education choice.

The public schools' part of the compromise is that they don't kick you out.

 

Westsider's idea is the best one I've heard yet, but I can't see St. X or Trinity giving up part of their empire.

 

 

And I don't see any compromise in "not kicking us out". That's an ultimatum, not a compromise.

:

 

After all is academics not why we send our kids to school in the first place..... athletics should always come second IMO.

Freudian slip?

Please tell me you don't think all the kids at the sports powerhouses really went there for academics! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

What about a kid in say Bullitt County that attends a parochial school for 8 years and wants to attend a Catholic all-boys high school. There are none in Bullitt County. Would you say that if that kid wants to play sports as a freshman he HAS to go to a public school?

 

Would students who attend private schools through the 8th grade and then decide to go to public schools be subject to the same ineligibility? If not, why not?

 

Compromise means both sides make concessions. What are the public schools going to be giving up in this "compromise"? This idea sure seems like the private schools would be doing all of the giving.

 

Why not build a private high school in Oldham, Bullitt, or where ever the need may come from. Why not reach out vs. coming to? How large will these current schools in Louisville become? 3,000? 5,000? NorKY has private high schools all over the map. Maybe that is the very reason why this is not a hot issue in NorKY.

Why not build a private high school in Oldham, Bullitt, or where ever the need may come from. Why not reach out vs. coming to? How large will these current schools in Louisville become? 3,000? 5,000? NorKY has private high schools all over the map. Maybe that is the very reason why this is not a hot issue in NorKY.

One of the biggest reasons that this isn't an issue in Northern Kentucky is that in the 1980s, the Diocese of Covington (then named differently) decided that it didn't need its schools cannibalizing off of each other, so they themselves, the schools in the diocese, recognized the problem and defined feeder patterns.

One of the biggest reasons that this isn't an issue in Northern Kentucky is that in the 1980s, the Diocese of Covington (then named differently) decided that it didn't need its schools cannibalizing off of each other, so they themselves, the schools in the diocese, recognized the problem and defined feeder patterns.

 

Sounds like a good solution to several of these issues.