Trinity alum

Stories like this are part of the problem. I wish people would bother to find the facts before they start on this stuff. When people state what they are concerned about with regard to private schools, most of it just isn't true.

Then perphaps before they vote to exclude the private schools from the Ky championships they should learn what they are talking about. Trinity is about 20 percent non Catholic. The football team percentage is much lower. The percentage of non Catholics among STARTERS on the football team is also much lower and about the same as the team as a whole. This big influx of non Catholic elite athletes into the Catholic schools is a myth, it just doesn't happen.

I don't think so. Trinity was playing MUCH better in November than they played in September. X peaked in September. I won't claim that I predicted the Trinity win, but I did think it would be a close game. To answer the question of the thread, Trinity 18 x 7 in 1966.

Let's face one harsh reality. In any of the sports that are classified by size there won't be a post season to speak of. There are only two 4A football schools, two 3A track schools, two 3A cross country schools and two 3A football schools. Not having the playoffs would have cost Trinity $80,000 to $100,000 (my estimate) this past season. That is the reality of the situation. The effects of Prop 20 are so negative for the private schools that the private schools would be forced to fight in the courts and in the legislature. I believe that it is a matter of long term survival.

I don't tlike the idea of middle school students playing on high school teams, but I don't object to it. I do believe that if kids play for a high school team they should be subject to the same transfer rules. I also believe that the transfer rules should apply to all levels of competition.

Almost anything is better than a simple split of public and private. The split kicks some private school kids out because their communities have worked hard to give them the best. It kicks other private schools kids out because they are private school kids. It is wrong.

I don't think anyone wants to. I'm a Seahawk fan now. I hope he has a great game and a big win.

Not many and it was ugly when they did.

I love it. Wish I'd have thought of it. If he is like most Dad's that daughter will control him completely. Maybe it made sense to name her after the last ones to control him. :lol:

That game is one reason I will always believe that Dennis Lampley was and is the best.

This is a great article. Almost makes up for that tripe he wrote in September. That 94 title game remains one of my favorites of all time.

Green with white GOOD! Green with yellow BAD!

No, I was just making the point that the schools are incompetition with each other so neither is likely to let the other do anything to get an advantage without trying to match it.

Why is there any need to spin the story on a kid that won't be playing. Let's face it, any time a family decides that a private school is the best choice for them, some people try to turn it into something wrong. They never offer specifics. They never offer anything except an assertion about what they "know". They never offer to give what they "know" to anyone in authority. Perphaps they have been spun so much they are dizzy and don't know what they know.

The simple fact is that Bracken County doesn't compete against Trinity or x. If you want size classes for all sports it is fine with me. There are a lot of other factors that go into level competition. Prop 20 doesn't address them. DeSales, in Louisville, doesn't have near the resources of Trinity or x, yet Prop 20 would put them out as it would Portland Christian School. Male has as good or better resources available, yet prop 20 would leave them in. It is a bad idea. Hurting private schools may not be your aim, but I firmly believe that it is the aim of many of the school administrators. Some communities put a great deal of resources into all aspects of their schools, including athletics. Some communities don't. The solution is not to ban the ones that put in the resources. There is a rule of behavior that says that when you punish an activity, you get less of it. If you penalize schools for putting resources into their schools, you will get schools that put in fewer resources. I'll give you an example. For as long as I can remember, St X has played football on someone else's field. Trinity has built a great new stadium and guess what, now X will build one. If X had taken a Prop 20 attitude they would have demanded that Trinity be made ineligible for the playoffs since the new facility gave them an unfair advantage.

From the first thread, posted by Dalen5: "That is where you ALL are wrong. I KNOW the situation VERY well and know the circumstances as to why he left the first time and why and HOW he happened to make it back this time. I also KNOW ALL of how he ended up at Trinity in the first place." It would seem that perphaps you don't know as much as you thought. This is an example of why NO ONE should presume to know why individual families make the decisions that they do.

The part that really kills people like Sexton and Sears, as well as many other supporters of Prop 20 is that a lot of people spend money for an alternative to their schools. For people like Sexton and Sears, Prop 20 isn't even about athletics. It is about anything they can do to weaken alternative education.

Since I don't know the kid, I won't presume to gurantee (sic) anything about why he wants to attend Trinity. I say good for him. I think Trinity is a great choice for EVERY young man. Welcome back. When I was a student I had a classmate that left for a semester and came back. He didn't play sports.

I'll have to just disagree with you. I enjoyed watching those kids play over the past four years, but I wouldn't think it would have made that much difference. Trinity doesn't have a lot of superstar athletes (especially this year, x had the stars ). Most years Trinity wins with a lot of pretty good high school players that are able to achieve a lot in the system.

In the final game, it was Blaine Donnell on offense and defense and Steve Orndorff on offense. Donnell started on offense because Donald Barnett was nursing an injury. For most of the season it was two because Barnett started on offense instead of Donnell. I believe that Barnett is an Indiana Catholic school kid. (I Know he is Catholic and I think he attended Catholic schools). At most it was three. The other kids you mentioned didn't start. Check the KHSAA list of starters on their web site. As far as lawsuits, Kentucky is different from most states in that the KHSAA is an agency of the state department of education. That makes any action by the KHSAA a state government action which sets the standard much higher than it would if it were a non government organisation.

The kids from our parish go to high school at Trinity, St X, Sacred Heart, Assumption, Mercy, Presentation, Ballard, Waggener, Male, Manual and Eastern. There may be more that I am not aware of. Which one is our parish school a feeder to? That is the problem as I see it. A very large percentage of our parish kids would not able to play sports for two years of high school if this goes through. It isn't a good solution to anything. As I have pointed out many times, there are a lot more kids from our parish that leave for a public high school than there are kids that leave the local public middle school and go to a private high school. It also won't do much to change the results on the field. This past season at Trinity, of the twenty four starting positions, two were filled by kids that didn't go to a Catholic grade school. That percentage is lower than the percentage for the school as a whole (8 percent versus 20 percent).

The students from our parish school attend high school at Trinity, St X, Assumption, Sacred Heart, Mercy, Presentation, Ballard, Manual, Male and Eastern (that I know of, there may be more). Under this proposal, does that mean they would need to attend Trinity or Sacred Heart if they wish to play sports? That is nuts!!!

I think that you are right. I don't like what I am hearing. Why don't they just leave families alone to make their own educational choices.

Hold on a minute. There is a slur there that I can not allow to go unchallenged. The spirit of the KHSAA is to develop student athletes to their full potential usng sports as one mechanism. There is nothing that the private schools do that is in conflict with that. A constant thread that runs through many of your comments is that the private schools do more than some other schools or communities are willing to do and that somehow that is unfair. I reject that premise. It is not my problem if your school system or community won't take the steps to fix its problems. I refuse to accept that out of fairness, my school should break its system until it has the same problems that yours has. Get it through your head. We are, as a whole, not breaking the letter or the spirit of the rules. In the rare case when a rule is broken, (i.e. the recent LexCath case) punishment should be swift and severe.

I think that the proposals, as I understand them, may have the unintended consequence of moving recruiting to the fifth grade. I have heard reports that one well known coach in Jefferson County advises young folks about middle school selection so that they can get into his high school. Does the KHSAA regulate middle school activities? Are we going to declare open season on middle school kids in Jefferson County?