Bluegrassrivals

It should be:

I don't know which to vote for but there should be no rule. Because as I've stated before, not all the good players will want to go to one school. You can see this through college athletics. The best two quarterbacks don't go to the same school. Everyone wants a chance to get noticed and they can't do that sitting on the bench. Let the kids go wherever they want to.

Well, they shouldn't be allowed to switch at any time. We would have kids tansfering just to get on a team that's season is going well. It would also be difficult for the state to keep up with all the transfers. There should be the one year without penalty rule.

i think if you transfer you should set the whole year no matter why.

PC_You_Know Wrote:I don't know which to vote for but there should be no rule. Because as I've stated before, not all the good players will want to go to one school. You can see this through college athletics. The best two quarterbacks don't go to the same school. Everyone wants a chance to get noticed and they can't do that sitting on the bench. Let the kids go wherever they want to.

Herein lies the problem--this mentality of letting the kids decide. When did we get to the point where we let a bunch of teenagers tell us where they were going to school and we did it??? I simply don't understand--when I was growing up a hundred years ago (not really), my parents made the decisions and they weren't based on athletics. Go figure!!!

Here is what I think, I think the government has their nose in to much of our business. I should be able to send my kids to whatever school I want to for whatever reason. If I can afford the tuituion and taxes to send my kids to a certain school, that should be my right as an American. If this was what was in place, of couse there would be some guidelines to follow but I think the State/Government over step their bounds at times. Thats just me.

I think that if a school actively participates in recruiting players to switch schools, then there should be obvious penalties. If parents want to move to a particular school due to academic, athletic, whatever reasons, then so be it, as long as the school did not put their nose into it.

I think parents should have the right to enroll their children into whatever school they desire, no matter if they do so once, or 1000 times. However, I think they need to MOVE into the district.

BlueBells Wrote:Here is what I think, I think the government has their nose in to much of our business. I should be able to send my kids to whatever school I want to for whatever reason. If I can afford the tuituion and taxes to send my kids to a certain school, that should be my right as an American. If this was what was in place, of couse there would be some guidelines to follow but I think the State/Government over step their bounds at times. Thats just me.

You can send your children anywhere u want. However if it is deemed it was done for athletic gain they must sit out a year. The member schools make these rules, not the KHSAA, they only enforce them.

UK Rules, Rallo, you guys better be glad the rule isn't sit a year no matter what because UK wouldn't have some of the athletes they do because they never would had been discovered. UK has a big background of military families, who move frequently. Most recently, Micah Johnson, moved many times, only played in KY for 2 years, and if your rule was in place he wouldn't have been noticed. You all should think of how these things could play out before you go shouting and running the the KHSAA with your complaints.

It is my understanding that if your child's school is not making the rating on the CATS test and there is a school in the area that is, then you can make your district transport your child to the school that has a better rating. If that is so, and I have recieved letters from the state saying that our school is not up to state rating and " ABC" school is, do i want my child transferd?, if i want my child to be transfered then i can, even to another county, then why would he/she not be allowed to play sports there? When a parent moves their child just to try and get them in a winning sport school, IMO they are not interested in what is best for their children's education or future. Jumping from school to school just because one might be better in sports and your kid may get more attention from a college scout, what is that teaching our kids today? If a kid is good enough he/she will get the attention they deserve and succeed in life, sports etc., how many kids are told by parents, you are great, you are #1, don't worry about making friends, the little things in life, go for the gold. I have told my children after each event, you did the best that you could do, we won/lost, that's all we can ask for, you are #,. Do your best in the game of sports and life and you will get your rewards. Get back to real life people....not everyone has a Michael Jordon/Payton Manning in the family. If a poll was taken on " Do you want your child to be #1 in the world because of their sports action?" I would vote YES. But come down to earth people. Let's teach our kids the values in life. LIVE, LEARN, LOVE. WOW where did our values go?

I think that anyone who wants to transfer to different school should have the freedom to do so without any reprimands. Why, because people should have the choice if they want. This should not be about a certain person making a school "look good" because of their atheletic abilities. It should be about a student having the opportunity to excel in academics, atheletics, etc.... And to ukrules, parents don't just let a child make there own decisions on these things, but they do give them a choice, not for any reason other than keeping their child happy. As a parent, you do things for you children that you would'nt normally do, and imo, good parenting is letting your children have a say so in what goes on in their lives. You are trying to raise your kids to be responsible adults. And before anyone goes off about this, I'm just saying that some parents take in consideration what their teenagers want. Its not a life or death decision. Your children need to be happy in the teenage years, it makes them who they are as adults.

One transfer in 4 years of High School.

There needs to be something. This transfer stuff is carzy.

Well, I think that you should get one transfer in your 4 years or sit out for one year with no exceptions.

I have sit quietly on this long enough. In my opinion, the KHSAA and the NCAA are both the closest thing to a communism and socialist approach i have ever seen and their hypocrisy oozes from their pores. If I as a parent at my childs request, want to move my child to another school JUST so he can play ball and have a better chance at recieving a college scholarship, then I should be able to do it. I completely agree that education is the #1 priority, but the argument against transfering for athletic reasons based on academic priority doesn't hold up. Every school in this state has the same core content they HAVE to teach. It is regulated they must. And in every school if you don't have satisfactory grades, you can't play. Look at the argument in another way, what if the current school has a weak Math Program and you want to move your child to another school. Well it just so happens your kid also loves sports but isn't very good. Should he still be penalized even though he is moving for academic reason? Where is the justic in that? Also, what kind of message does it send kids, when the coaches are able to pick and choose where they want to go? Are they doing it for "Academic" reasons? They should be under the same stipulations. I still say that one of these cases will see the supreme court of the United States of America in the near future and it will become abundantly clear that the KHSAA has been basically trying to regulate freedom and they have been in the wrong.

MCDADDY Wrote:I have sit quietly on this long enough. In my opinion, the KHSAA and the NCAA are both the closest thing to a communism and socialist approach i have ever seen and their hypocrisy oozes from their pores. If I as a parent at my childs request, want to move my child to another school JUST so he can play ball and have a better chance at recieving a college scholarship, then I should be able to do it. I completely agree that education is the #1 priority, but the argument against transfering for athletic reasons based on academic priority doesn't hold up. Every school in this state has the same core content they HAVE to teach. It is regulated they must. And in every school if you don't have satisfactory grades, you can't play. Look at the argument in another way, what if the current school has a weak Math Program and you want to move your child to another school. Well it just so happens your kid also loves sports but isn't very good. Should he still be penalized even though he is moving for academic reason? Where is the justic in that? Also, what kind of message does it send kids, when the coaches are able to pick and choose where they want to go? Are they doing it for "Academic" reasons? They should be under the same stipulations. I still say that one of these cases will see the supreme court of the United States of America in the near future and it will become abundantly clear that the KHSAA has been basically trying to regulate freedom and they have been in the wrong.

After you vote for Ron Paul or Barr from Georgia, consider that traffic laws allow for freedom to drive; without them, chaos... just as KHSAA guidelines allow for competitive fairness. A parent may well want their kid to sit in a classroom with one teacher, as individual instruction has proven the most effective; however, the needs of the overall system cannot allow it. This is not communism. It is living in a community.

thecavemaster Wrote:After you vote for Ron Paul or Barr from Georgia, consider that traffic laws allow for freedom to drive; without them, chaos... just as KHSAA guidelines allow for competitive fairness. A parent may well want their kid to sit in a classroom with one teacher, as individual instruction has proven the most effective; however, the needs of the overall system cannot allow it. This is not communism. It is living in a community.

I love your quote there about competitive fairness! Very well, therefore when a student transfers to another school for academic reasons he or she must sit out for 1 year before they can take the CATS test!! Principals and teachers and school districts are judged based on performance of their students, therfore the same restrictions should follow them. The principal at one school shouldn't be punished because the parents of their top student have a friend that is a principal at another school and they want their child to go there because their CATS scores are traditionally higher. I mean, that is a merely competitive fairness!!

Same rules should follow coaches then. If a coach leaves a school, then they should have to sit out one year before they can coach at the school they went to. Therefore we have competitive fairness!

Your trivial attempt at reasoning by using traffic laws is silly. Traffic laws uphold physical safety and those are things that need to be regulated when it involves physical safety. What the KHSAA is doing has nothing to do with the STUDENTS best interest.

MCDADDY Wrote:I love your quote there about competitive fairness! Very well, therefore when a student transfers to another school for academic reasons he or she must sit out for 1 year before they can take the CATS test!! Principals and teachers and school districts are judged based on performance of their students, therfore the same restrictions should follow them. The principal at one school shouldn't be punished because the parents of their top student have a friend that is a principal at another school and they want their child to go there because their CATS scores are traditionally higher. I mean, that is a merely competitive fairness!!

Same rules should follow coaches then. If a coach leaves a school, then they should have to sit out one year before they can coach at the school they went to. Therefore we have competitive fairness!

Your trivial attempt at reasoning by using traffic laws is silly. Traffic laws uphold physical safety and those are things that need to be regulated when it involves physical safety. What the KHSAA is doing has nothing to do with the STUDENTS best interest.

Traffic laws allow the community of drivers to fairly negotiate various intersections etc. You distorted the analogy in a feeble attempt to refute it. When the number of students seeking to transfer in order to get a shot at the state academic tournament becomes problematic, we can debate that. Until then, it's blather. Euton and Jackson et al. just won the AAU state tournament in Lexington. I stand by the competitive fairness statement as a principle allowing the community of high school athletes to negotiate their various seasons fairly.

thecavemaster Wrote:Traffic laws allow the community of drivers to fairly negotiate various intersections etc. You distorted the analogy in a feeble attempt to refute it. When the number of students seeking to transfer in order to get a shot at the state academic tournament becomes problematic, we can debate that. Until then, it's blather. Euton and Jackson et al. just won the AAU state tournament in Lexington. I stand by the competitive fairness statement as a principle allowing the community of high school athletes to negotiate their various seasons fairly.

I applaud your distinguished use of enunciation throughout your lecture, however your advanced dialogue does not hide the fact you are contradicting yourself repeatedly throughout your diatribe of babble! The only person distorting anything is you. If waiting until something became problematic is your view of sensible policy, then you have more problems than your failed debate regarding this topic.

Anyway, you stand by your "competitive fairness" principle and I will stand by my "competitive fairness" principle that if transfering is in the best interest of the student athlete, than there should be no restrictions. (Much like every where else in the United States).

MCDADDY Wrote:I applaud your distinguished use of enunciation throughout your lecture, however your advanced dialogue does not hide the fact you are contradicting yourself repeatedly throughout your diatribe of babble! The only person distorting anything is you. If waiting until something became problematic is your view of sensible policy, then you have more problems than your failed debate regarding this topic.

Anyway, you stand by your "competitive fairness" principle and I will stand by my "competitive fairness" principle that if transfering is in the best interest of the student athlete, than there should be no restrictions. (Much like every where else in the United States).

Why is it that good grammar and decent diction are problematic? Please point out the contradictions, rather than railing aimlessly. The point is that I don't know any students who have transferred so as to make the state academic team. The point is that Euton and Jackson et al. left Rose HIll to avoid Elliot County in the 16th. The point is your laissez faire approach reaks of an individualism destructive of the integrity of the game. And, your posts are as long, or longer than mine, Diatribic Babbler.

thecavemaster Wrote:Why is it that good grammar and decent diction are problematic? Please point out the contradictions, rather than railing aimlessly. The point is that I don't know any students who have transferred so as to make the state academic team. The point is that Euton and Jackson et al. left Rose HIll to avoid Elliot County in the 16th. The point is your laissez faire approach reaks of an individualism destructive of the integrity of the game. And, your posts are as long, or longer than mine, Diatribic Babbler.

Cavemaster, I wave the white flag Oh Great King of the Thesaurus!! But allow me to answer your questions and comment on your assertions. The contradiction is that you make an argument based on competitive fairness regarding athletics and the transfer rule, but when applied to academics, coaching, or otherwise, you look the other way. When schools are judged at the end of the year, their "SCORES", are judged based on a scale as to where it should be. Therefore they are "COMPETING" with expectations the state and nation has set up for them. Now, if John Q principal loses little Johnny "36 ACT, Distinguished Portfolio/Math/Social Studies" to another school because his dad is friends with the head of the Math department at the other school and his son has asked to go, shouldn't John Q principal have some sort of statute in place to protect him using the idea of "competitive fairness"? (please don't get mad at the run-on sentence Grammar King!) Or better yet, what about the band student that transfers to one of the top Marching Band schools in the state so he/she can be a part of a championship? Should he/she be forced to set out a year? PURE HYPOCRISY!!

My point is simply this Prince of Diction, you can't enforce "competitive fariness" without enforcing it across the board. Now, I think it would be rediculous to enforce it on academic team members, band students, coaches, principals, superintendents, etc. but you can't enforce it on athletics without doing it across the board because it is the EXACT SAME THING!!

In reference to your traffic laws analogy, I still contend that is weak because traffic laws are enforced for public safety. KHSAA does not enforce their "laws" based on public safety. No educated person can argue either one of those statements. Therefore, the only person that was "distorting" the analogy was you Oh Great Vocabularic One!

There should be strict restrictions on transfers.

MCDADDY Wrote:Cavemaster, I wave the white flag Oh Great King of the Thesaurus!! But allow me to answer your questions and comment on your assertions. The contradiction is that you make an argument based on competitive fairness regarding athletics and the transfer rule, but when applied to academics, coaching, or otherwise, you look the other way. When schools are judged at the end of the year, their "SCORES", are judged based on a scale as to where it should be. Therefore they are "COMPETING" with expectations the state and nation has set up for them. Now, if John Q principal loses little Johnny "36 ACT, Distinguished Portfolio/Math/Social Studies" to another school because his dad is friends with the head of the Math department at the other school and his son has asked to go, shouldn't John Q principal have some sort of statute in place to protect him using the idea of "competitive fairness"? (please don't get mad at the run-on sentence Grammar King!) Or better yet, what about the band student that transfers to one of the top Marching Band schools in the state so he/she can be a part of a championship? Should he/she be forced to set out a year? PURE HYPOCRISY!!

My point is simply this Prince of Diction, you can't enforce "competitive fariness" without enforcing it across the board. Now, I think it would be rediculous to enforce it on academic team members, band students, coaches, principals, superintendents, etc. but you can't enforce it on athletics without doing it across the board because it is the EXACT SAME THING!!

In reference to your traffic laws analogy, I still contend that is weak because traffic laws are enforced for public safety. KHSAA does not enforce their "laws" based on public safety. No educated person can argue either one of those statements. Therefore, the only person that was "distorting" the analogy was you Oh Great Vocabularic One!

I'm trying to remember when 20,000 people went to Rupp Arena to watch two bands tip it off at half court or 25,000 people showed up to honor little Johnny and his 36 ACT score at mid field of Papa Johns stadium.

MCDADDY Wrote:Cavemaster, I wave the white flag Oh Great King of the Thesaurus!! But allow me to answer your questions and comment on your assertions. The contradiction is that you make an argument based on competitive fairness regarding athletics and the transfer rule, but when applied to academics, coaching, or otherwise, you look the other way. When schools are judged at the end of the year, their "SCORES", are judged based on a scale as to where it should be. Therefore they are "COMPETING" with expectations the state and nation has set up for them. Now, if John Q principal loses little Johnny "36 ACT, Distinguished Portfolio/Math/Social Studies" to another school because his dad is friends with the head of the Math department at the other school and his son has asked to go, shouldn't John Q principal have some sort of statute in place to protect him using the idea of "competitive fairness"? (please don't get mad at the run-on sentence Grammar King!) Or better yet, what about the band student that transfers to one of the top Marching Band schools in the state so he/she can be a part of a championship? Should he/she be forced to set out a year? PURE HYPOCRISY!!

My point is simply this Prince of Diction, you can't enforce "competitive fariness" without enforcing it across the board. Now, I think it would be rediculous to enforce it on academic team members, band students, coaches, principals, superintendents, etc. but you can't enforce it on athletics without doing it across the board because it is the EXACT SAME THING!!

In reference to your traffic laws analogy, I still contend that is weak because traffic laws are enforced for public safety. KHSAA does not enforce their "laws" based on public safety. No educated person can argue either one of those statements. Therefore, the only person that was "distorting" the analogy was you Oh Great Vocabularic One!

Thank you for your short post. Your equation of requests for band transfers and athletic transfers speaks for itself. The analogy was not distorted: rules are necessary to function in community; in the community of athletics, I am glad there are rules "red lighting" transfers. You disagree. As for vocabulary and diction and grammar, hammer away.

Benchwarmer Wrote:I'm trying to remember when 20,000 people went to Rupp Arena to watch two bands tip it off at half court or 25,000 people showed up to honor little Johnny and his 36 ACT score at mid field of Papa Johns stadium.

Game, Set, Match. Thank you BW, couldn't have said it better myself. However, I would like to add, the financial windfall from marching band competition's and academic team debates are substantial. So maybe in the future the KHSAA will indeed look into these matters.

Whatever works for them

Benchwarmer Wrote:I'm trying to remember when 20,000 people went to Rupp Arena to watch two bands tip it off at half court or 25,000 people showed up to honor little Johnny and his 36 ACT score at mid field of Papa Johns stadium.

Oh, so we are going to judge fairness by how many people come and watch.... Well in that case, sports such as tennis, track and field, and girls softball shouldn't be held to the same rules as football and basketball since they have small if any crowds. That is some REAL justification there.

letthebighogroot Wrote:Game, Set, Match. Thank you BW, couldn't have said it better myself. However, I would like to add, the financial windfall from marching band competition's and academic team debates are substantial. So maybe in the future the KHSAA will indeed look into these matters.

My reply to you is the same as what I replied to Benchwarmer. If we are going to judge based on how much "income" is brought in, then we need to go back and change Title 9.