[i82much]

Uhhhh, maybe I'm a little out of the loop here??  Are the Ashland out of district kids admitting to the KHSAA that they were all "recruited"? If the answer is no then this whole line of reasoning is ridiculous. Are we going to go to every public school system in the state and tell the out of district transfers they have to go back to their home district or it will be assumed they were recruited?? Or does this random logic only apply to Ashland? Since we have a phone call where a never enrolled student is recruited it's therefore guilt by association and all are deemed to have been recruited....Guarantee some genius responds that...somebody said... I heard... we just know...or just listen to the call....Ridiculous! In fact it's getting so ridiculous most people on here have stopped reading these threads...which is exactly what I need to do.

Again, you Ashland homers are completely out of touch with reality.  I’m glad the kids will have options AND like everyone else outside of Ashland homers we are glad that the recruiting advantage is getting neutralized by making recruits ineligible at Ashland and the post season ban is implemented.  This allows punishment for the school and admin while continuing to let the kids carry on.

Homer? Anyway…..My post wasn’t about options. Kids should have the options to go to school wherever they want. My post began with a question. Has the KHSAA ruled that all the out of district kids were recruited? If not then why are the transfers at Ashland any different than all the other transfers throughout America? If the KHSAA has determined they were recruited then that’s a different story….I’m guessing you’re making an assumption but I may be wrong? So I’ll end with the same question I began my original post with; Are the Ashland out of district kids admitting to the KHSAA that they were all recruited?

Yes, you are a homer.  The tape is enough to understand the depth of recruiting and recruit benefits not to mention the other 30 pages of infractions.  The coach is fired so the administration and program can continue to benefit from the residual recruits (not traditional transfers)?  We all know it’s not that easy or simple.   The admin and program should feel pain from this to ensure adequate oversight in the future.  Also, you are setting a precedence for other schools to know all they have to do is fire a coach and keep plugging along business as usual so there is virtually no deterrent for other programs or admin to assure everything is being done the right way (oversight) with integrity.

Soc, we don't know if the "depth" of recruiting involved any players on the current roster.  I'm trying to ask a legitimate question.  Has the KHSAA collected enough evidence to conclude that Mays recruited players on the roster? I'm not asking anyone's opinion from either side. Have they ruled on this? I'm guessing they haven't which is why I implied a double standard in my original post. If they have concluded that players on the roster were directly recruited by Mays then your babblings have merit and I stand corrected.  Also, it's precedent, not precedence. Probably a Freudian slip revealing the level of legal expertise you have blessed us with during your incessant bloviating. When presented with the evidence the KHSAA had collected Ashland fired the coach. That's the precedent they set. Let me explain it to you:  Recruit = Fired