HIGHLANDS GUY

Anything that requires effort on my part, I tend to value more. I think requiring effort on the part of kids and parents is more positive than negative.

Today on Cincinnati.com there is an article that Lakota schools (a Cincy suburb) stop providing transporation to 6,400 kids who live within 1 mile radius of the school. Next year the district expands the cuts to a two (2) mile radius, which will impact 9,000. My question would be, why were they providing transporation to kids who lived that close in the first place? If you make public education too easy it really devalues the whole benefit. We make it way too easy.

Soooooooooooo? Spill the beans Old Guy.

An oversimplification, but classification wouldn't just be based upon enrollment. Additionally the schools boundary (where they pull kids from) and tradition (how successful have they been historically), will also play a role.

Could a mod correct my misspelling so that I look smarter than I really am? Thank you.

This was released by the OHSAA today: OHSAA Board of Directors Tackles Competitive Balance Concerns’ Referendum Issue is First Step in Possible Changes on How Schools are Placed Into Tournament Divisions COLUMBUS, Ohio – Acting on a recommendation from the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) Competitive Balance Committee, the OHSAA Board of Directors today unanimously placed a new bylaw up for vote of the OHSAA membership that would be the first step toward possible changes on how schools are assigned to tournament divisions. The proposed new bylaw, which will be voted upon by OHSAA member schools during the annual referendum voting process in May, states that “each school shall be placed into tournament divisions based on its sport-by-sport athletic count.” Schools would not be separated into tournaments for public schools and non-public schools, nor would a “multiplier” be applied to non-public schools to increase their enrollment, which a few other states utilize. Rather, the enrollment numbers for all schools (both public and non-public) would be entered into a three-part formula to establish their “athletic count.” The proposed bylaw goes on to say that the formula for determining “athletic counts” and to which sports the athletic counts shall be applied will be determined every other year by the Board of Directors and will be listed in the OHSAA’s General Sports Regulations. If approved, implementation of the new formula would begin no later than the 2013-14 school year. In addition, a standing committee would be formed to monitor the effectiveness of the athletic count formula and to recommend to the Board of Directors any changes in the weight to be given to any one or more of the factors in the formula. At the present time, all schools are placed into tournament divisions based strictly on enrollment figures that the schools submit to the Ohio Department of Education. The proposed three-part formula to establish athletic counts would require the OHSAA to also include a school boundary factor (how students are obtained – non-public schools with no boundaries; non-public schools with limited boundaries; public schools with statewide open enrollment; public schools with adjacent open enrollment, and public schools with no open enrollment), a socioeconomic factor (the number of free lunch participants) and a tradition factor (state championship game appearances, state tournament appearances and regional finals appearances). The school boundary and tradition factors could increase a school’s enrollment while the socioeconomic factor could decrease a school’s enrollment. The tradition factor is the only one of the three that would be implemented on a sport-by-sport basis. Once all three factors are applied to the enrollment count, each school will have a sport-by-sport “athletic count” for purposes of tournament division assignments. “The issue of competitive balance has been discussed for years not only in Ohio but also in other states,” said OHSAA Commissioner Daniel B. Ross, Ph. D. “Ohio is unique in that our public schools have the option to approve open enrollment policies, but, at the same time, there’s no question that most non-public schools in the state have no geographical boundaries in which they can secure students and the result has been a disproportionate number of championships won by those schools. “The meetings we have conducted with the Competitive Balance Committee have been both productive and professional, and I believe the proposal from the group is fair and equitable and we will see some leveling of the playing field. “Competitive balance is a complex issue,” Ross continued. “The formula recommended by the committee is not as complex as it sounds, nor is it as complex as any of the viable alternatives and the unintended consequences of those alternatives.” The Board’s current plan is to propose that athletic counts only be utilized in the sports of football, soccer and volleyball in the fall; basketball in the winter, and baseball and softball in the spring. Consideration will be given to add other sports in the future. The OHSAA Competitive Balance Committee was formed in January 2010 in response to concerns raised by a group of school administrators in northeast Ohio who conducted a study that showed that 43 percent (146 of 340) of the state championships in selected team sports between 1999 and 2010 have been won by non-public schools, even though non-public schools make up only 17 percent of the total membership of the OHSAA. The OHSAA Competitive Balance Committee met numerous times throughout 2010 in an attempt to identify competitive balance factors and to propose changes that would bring the competitive inequities into balance. The Committee was comprised of 29 school administrators and coaches from across the state from public and non-public schools both large and small along with members of the OHSAA Board of Directors and administrative staff and representatives from both the state superintendents and state principals associations. In the near future, the OHSAA will place on its website examples of how the athletic count formula could look when applied. Very intereresting.

"Is" he or "was" he?

Who is Cov. Cath's defensive cord?

As an outsider, it sounds like to me that the NKYFL is fighting a losing fight at the 7th and 8th grade level as it appears more kids want to play for their middle school teams than the NKYFL. The best strategy might be to focus on 6th grade and younger kids. Where would a 5th and 6th grade Cov. Cath team play?

True. There may have been a window where it was OK, but the window was very brief.

Personally I think districts should be seeded, however, I think the bigger issue is that it should be uniform for all districts. Right now some seed and some don't, which is wrong.

Don't kid yourself a fat guy with his shirt untucked looks every bit as fat as a fat guy with his shirt tucked in, it is just the one with it untucked looks fat and sloppy. If you are overweight I think you look a lot less sloppy and overall more put together if you establish a waist line and maintain it with a belt. Not that I would know.

Must we really resort to name calling to defend the one of the worst come backs in BGP history? I totally understand your argument, however, I just find the Alzheimer's come back a very poor attempt to save face, but if it works for you then have at it. I did find it very entertaining and funny.

Maybe the worst come back in the history of BGP. Very funny.

Very true. However, that player would not have been able to actually "play" high school soccer except for one year.

There was HS soccer team that had 2 division one keepers that were one year apart. The parents of the younger player decided to send that player to another school where the keeper started, thrived and earned a scholarship. I think it would be hard to argue that the parents didn't make the correct decision. I am not sure what valuable "lesson about life" would have been served by keeping the player in the former siuation. It is easy to think these questions are pretty black and white and throw out cliche responses, but honestly there is lots of gray. I think this team vs. individual debate has little to do with the topic at hand, but it is one I find interesting.

No great shock.

What should the parent do in that situation?

I guess it would be easier to describe in regards to basketball. If a team had a "big man" say 6-5, who for the teams sake would be best served by playing in the post with their back to the basket, but it was clear the player woulld be a 2 or 3 (or maybe even a 1) at the next level, you would hope that the coach would want to give that kid a chance to display their backcourt skills. I realize that with AAU evaluation this point is a moot and I am talking out of both sides of my mouth a bit. I would just hope that "winning" isn't the sole motivation and "big picture" and "longer term objectives", even if it is for a single player, would also come into play.

I will guess that I will be in the minority and say that I don't think that is a no-brainer question, although I don't know if I would use the words "showcase individuals".

I have no evidence, but my gut would tell me that teams that are either brand new or fairly new to deep runs in the playoffs would benefit from this new(er) experience. Teams like ACS and maybe even Lone Oak might fall into this category. Where teams that go to state year after year tend to get......dare I say....spoiled.

Lexington Catholic Louisville Central

I agreee that Menefee exhibited class, but in order to do this he had to fight human nature.

If six is good then seven is better and eight is great and if it is good for football then it is good for every other sport. At this point all I would really like to know is why six (6) and why just football?

Chicken nuggets and oil changes - would coaches ever make a decision not in their own self interest?