The sky is falling.
The End Is Near
I disagree with your fatalist view of high school baseball.
I come from a Big City, not a Smallville. In one square mile there may be three high schools, public, private, parochial. High school sports including baseball have and will survive and flourish in spite of the soothsayers. As long as there are kids to PLAY THE GAME, it will be played.
You are apparently an opponent of free choice. Your views are that of an advocate of Totalitarianism. You want every aspect of every other person's life ruled and regulated to suit your opinions. I'm sure you are just as vehement against any limitations on your liberties. Seems contradictory.
If there is actually a need for revision and limitation of civil liberties in high school sports, please state your specific suggestions in a new thread. The claim that high school baseball is facing oblivion due to the rampant exercise of civil liberties is totaly un American. The same logic that you are attempting to propound would state that children should only be allowed to enter local colleges if they intend to participate in extra-curricular activities. It is specious at best in modern day America.
Freedom of choice, competition between entities has always been proven to strengthen the breed. Lack of choice has always proven to promote mediocrity. Why do coaches move so much? They don't move,just to move.
You want to keep better players, then run a better program. That's how it should be.
You want to keep better players, then run a better program. That's how it should be.
Don't know what happened to my rebuttal post (must have got lost in cyber space). I absolutely maintain the position that a student should be allowed to attend the school that suits his or her best interests, not the interests of the intstitution, the other students, the administrators, coaches, or any other authority. If that statement is ludicrous then Brown vs. The Board of Education is ludicrous. Of course you'll have to argue that one with the Supreme Court justices. In fact, if I don't like the colors on the wall, that may well be a good enough reason to transfer. The persons generally opposed to freedom of movement among students are those who are opposed to a perfectly competitive enviroment. Opposition to a perfectly competitive enviroment punishes those who maintain pristine facilities, hire quality coaches, teachers, administrators, and create an enviroment of learning as well as athletic excellence. In case you haven't noticed, that's how you win in every area of life.
Okay. Take it easy. How dare I invoke Brown vs. Board to make my argument. Brown vs. Board struck down segregation laws that restricted black students from attending white schools. An 1896 Supreme Court ruling upheld segregation as long as "facilities were equal" Justice Marshall argued that the segregation in and of itself created inequality which made students feel inferior and hampered them educationally. So what do we have here? Restricted movement, based on a particular characteristic, hampering an individual's opportunity for success. That's how I tie it together. Forget even trying to argue that facilities are equal--that's a loser.
Brown doesn't apply to white students. They were never subject to segregation.
How about the Bakke case?
Seems like reverse discrimination since a formerly segregated student class would have little trouble bypassing the scutiny that would be acceptable on a student from a class never subject to segregation.
Was that PC or what?
How about the Bakke case?
Seems like reverse discrimination since a formerly segregated student class would have little trouble bypassing the scutiny that would be acceptable on a student from a class never subject to segregation.
Was that PC or what?
Willie
Why are you into the race bit ???
Seems nearly every post you make gets into it?
You and RR9PIC) make a great pair-- always being persecuted
Why are you into the race bit ???
Seems nearly every post you make gets into it?
You and RR9PIC) make a great pair-- always being persecuted
TR,
Willie was referring to a case here in FL, Brown vs. the Board of Education, and I do believe that bgjd brought it up first.
Your comment was uncalled for.
Willie was referring to a case here in FL, Brown vs. the Board of Education, and I do believe that bgjd brought it up first.
Your comment was uncalled for.
I agree with TigerPawMom. Willie was offering a rebuttal statement and a good one at that. Trhit, you sound bitter about something and off track on this thread.
quote:Restricted movement, based on a particular characteristic, hampering an individual's opportunity for success.
This should help get it back on track.
quote:Restricted movement, based on a particular characteristic, hampering an individual's opportunity for success.
Belive me, I would love to say that you are correct and that citing Brown would bring to an end this punishment of transfer students for whatever reason.
Usually a characteristic is something that is outside of the individual's choosing. (***, Race, Skin Color, National Origin, Age)
Willie
Maybe "set of circumstances" would be a better fit. We've heard the argument before--nobody cries foul when a gifted music or art student chooses another school to better his/her chance of success. Nobody is keeping score when somebody plays the violin. You could then argue that athletes are not receiving "equal treatment" under existing rules, considering the move could enhance the athlete's future opportunities. I think your first post was an extraordinary illustration of the problems that exist in high-school sports, and anyone who has participated realizes that the problems go with the territory. Unfortunately, when the powers that be look to solve a problem, they do so with only their interests at heart, passing restrictive rules, and then try to veil it under "altruism". Fidel Castro uses pretty much the same speil to keep his athletes in Cuba (for the good of the state). Self interest is an inate human instinct and it is pursued not only individually, but by collective groups of individuals. At times, not always, these collective groups pursue their interests by disguising them in feel good ideals like "fairness". It's BS and should be treated that way. The only way to put them in check is a healthy and positive discourse (pluralism) that will lead us to a higher ground.
Maybe "set of circumstances" would be a better fit. We've heard the argument before--nobody cries foul when a gifted music or art student chooses another school to better his/her chance of success. Nobody is keeping score when somebody plays the violin. You could then argue that athletes are not receiving "equal treatment" under existing rules, considering the move could enhance the athlete's future opportunities. I think your first post was an extraordinary illustration of the problems that exist in high-school sports, and anyone who has participated realizes that the problems go with the territory. Unfortunately, when the powers that be look to solve a problem, they do so with only their interests at heart, passing restrictive rules, and then try to veil it under "altruism". Fidel Castro uses pretty much the same speil to keep his athletes in Cuba (for the good of the state). Self interest is an inate human instinct and it is pursued not only individually, but by collective groups of individuals. At times, not always, these collective groups pursue their interests by disguising them in feel good ideals like "fairness". It's BS and should be treated that way. The only way to put them in check is a healthy and positive discourse (pluralism) that will lead us to a higher ground.
quote:Self interest is an inate human instinct and it is pursued not only individually, but by collective groups of individuals. At times, not always, these collective groups pursue their interests by disguising them in feel good ideals like "fairness".
Very eloquent and very much to the point.
What collective group of individuals' self interest is served by punishing the weaker party, the transfer athlete?
It may be thought to be the other players but they are only on the team four years at most.
It may be thought to be the parents but they similarly are only involved with the team for four years at most unless they have another child in the program.
What group of individuals are involved with the team for more than four years? They are the problem. Like scorned lovers they seek revenge for the scorn of being abandoned.
When they act collectively in stating that a problem exists due to transfer athletes, they are not being honest in their reasons. They never seem to mind if that transfe4r student is now in their program. Only the scorned self appointed diety iis hurt. When the scorned self appointed dieties comisserate, they seek rules to gain their revenge.
After gaining the original revenge of penalizing athletes who transfer for athletic reasons, they have figured out ways to get around that revenge. They cry that 'recruiting' is wrong and will end civilization as we know it. They then for some reason decide that the recruited should be punished instead of the recruiter.
Now after hearing the logic of the music student, they seek to have any transfer student penalized. They have enacted rules and then countermanded them in their self interest. Realizing the futility of their past actions, they now want a blanket penalty for all transfer students so that they cannot escape their revenge at being scorned.
Pathetic isn't it.
what's so hard to understand?
your "rights" are spelled out in the constitution & bill of rights - and I musta missed the hs sports ammendment
your State offers you the opportunity to get a hs eduaction (no rights here!)
if you want to attend a school other than the one to which you are asigned, simply choose another after 8th grade before starting hs- even pay tuition if necessary
if that doesn't work out, just request a transfer under your district's (academic) guidelines & those of the State HS Athletic Assn
btw, would it be totalitatian to limit posts to 100 words?? just wondering -
your "rights" are spelled out in the constitution & bill of rights - and I musta missed the hs sports ammendment
your State offers you the opportunity to get a hs eduaction (no rights here!)
if you want to attend a school other than the one to which you are asigned, simply choose another after 8th grade before starting hs- even pay tuition if necessary
if that doesn't work out, just request a transfer under your district's (academic) guidelines & those of the State HS Athletic Assn
btw, would it be totalitatian to limit posts to 100 words?? just wondering -
I do not buy the argument that restricting high school sports related transfers will harm these players' ability to be drafter/recruited. These are the same kids that are attending showcases and playing AAU ball. That is where most of the scouting is done. After being seen there, the scouts and college coaches will visit any high school to see a kid play.
While I have always believed that intelligent people can disagree about almost anything (including this issue), I honestly believe that most of the parents and coaches making these arguments are doing so to justify their selfish actions.
While I have always believed that intelligent people can disagree about almost anything (including this issue), I honestly believe that most of the parents and coaches making these arguments are doing so to justify their selfish actions.
quote:I honestly believe that most of the parents and coaches making these arguments are doing so to justify their selfish actions.
Right on the money. But the premise is that selfish actions are wrong. If I'm not looking out for my own best interest, or that of my child's, who is? This assumes that those in authority are not selfish and will work selflessly for the greater good. I don't buy that stuff when it comes to competitive sports. On the field, in the heat of battle--well that's another story. There's no greater inspiration than the player who gives it up for the team--because it's real.
There are constitutional rights and there are state rights. There are also laws and acts.
Florida state law mandates compulsory education until the age of 16. A high school education is then provided by the state to meet the statute.
If there are extra curricular activities the statute states,
1002.20(17)(b) Extracurricular Activities In accordance with the provisions of s. 1006.15:
(a) Eligibility.--Students who meet specified academic and conduct requirements are eligible to participate in extracurricular activities.
(b) Home education students -Home education students who meet specified academic and conduct requirements are eligible to participate in extracurricular activities at the public school to which the student would be assigned or could choose to attend according to district school board policies, or may develop an agreement to participate at a private school.
Restriction of students from participation who are within the staute is therefore illegal.
We are not addressing being drafted or recruited. We are addressing restrictions on transfer students who are otherwise eligible within the statute to participate in extra curricular activities.
Unlawful restriction is in and of itself harm.
Rules and contract provisions in violation of existing statute are unenforceable.
Florida state law mandates compulsory education until the age of 16. A high school education is then provided by the state to meet the statute.
If there are extra curricular activities the statute states,
1002.20(17)(b) Extracurricular Activities In accordance with the provisions of s. 1006.15:
(a) Eligibility.--Students who meet specified academic and conduct requirements are eligible to participate in extracurricular activities.
(b) Home education students -Home education students who meet specified academic and conduct requirements are eligible to participate in extracurricular activities at the public school to which the student would be assigned or could choose to attend according to district school board policies, or may develop an agreement to participate at a private school.
Restriction of students from participation who are within the staute is therefore illegal.
We are not addressing being drafted or recruited. We are addressing restrictions on transfer students who are otherwise eligible within the statute to participate in extra curricular activities.
Unlawful restriction is in and of itself harm.
Rules and contract provisions in violation of existing statute are unenforceable.
quote:Restriction of students from participation who are within the staute is therefore illegal
sure, I can agree with that - - -
Willie, my man, you must be a lawyer....
quote:would be assigned or could choose to attend according to district school board policies, or may develop an agreement to participate at a private school.
I will speculate that the FHSAA rules would not overide state law. Any input?
In May 1997, the Florida Legislature recognized in statute the FHSAA as the governing body for interscholastic athletics in Florida.
They do not have the power to supercede state law. State courts would have to strike down such regulation as the transfer penalty.
In order for the FHSAA to be able to enforce penalties on transfer students, they should have to show how a transfer student has violated the rules of conduct.
NCLB promotes transfers in pursuit of better education. This fact may just make the transfer penalty an issue for the federal courts.
They do not have the power to supercede state law. State courts would have to strike down such regulation as the transfer penalty.
In order for the FHSAA to be able to enforce penalties on transfer students, they should have to show how a transfer student has violated the rules of conduct.
NCLB promotes transfers in pursuit of better education. This fact may just make the transfer penalty an issue for the federal courts.
It is inevitable that a coach, administrator, or school district will successfully penalize a transfering student who will in turn sue for damages. All it takes is one college coach to say "yeah, we were interested in him, but he didn't play his senior year, so we backed off." As evidence, the athlete will have a handful of recruiting letters from a stellar junior year, and a phone record of contacts from coaches. But no athletic sholarship. The school that the student wanted to transfer to had at least 4 of it's players sign with major colleges while the school he was transferring from is being disbanded because it is has been an "F" school for three consecutive years. It has also gone through 5 different coaches during the last 5 years and has won a total of 8 games during that period. Case closed. Taxpayers foot the bill.
Amen, Amen.
Ace- I never picked up the gauntlet on your "draft argument" challenge because, respectfully, it is truly apples and oranges. Nothing is more antithetical to the espoused American way of life than a draft of ANY kind. Put another way, if "drafting" is acceptable to you and you believe it to be fair (after all our little leagues etc. have a draft) then lets employ it across the board.
Hypothetically, I am the coach of a team in the Panhadle and I need a tall hard throwing right-hander so I draft Chas Spottswoode. Baseball after all is only a privilege, not a right, so if Mr. Spottswoode wants to play he will have to move with, or without, his family from Key West to this hypothetical town.
Why not apply the same logic to colleges? The NCAA is trying its hardest to cut off the alleged advantages of the "southern" schools by limiting schedules etc. Apparently it doesn't matter to them that kids choose to leave their homes and move hundreds or thousands of miles away because they just love playing and warm weather gives them more opportunity. So, instead, we will have the college that finished last in whatever rating system the NCAA devises have the first pick in the draft. Justin Upton you have been drafted, number 1, by the Mercyhurst College of Optometry in Petranga, North Dakota. If you want to play college baseball ( which is a privilege, not a right) you must sign with them or sit out a year.
One last comment viz. "drafting." There was no MLB draft until 1965 when the owners figured out that their best chance of beating the Yankees (and more importantly keeping initial costs down- eg Ron Swoboda) was to try out this creation of the football leagues. Prior to the "draft" the Yankees and other monied teams got more of the players that they wanted than the "poorer" teams. (And, how many players did the Yankees buy from Kansas City over the years?) In many ways it was very much like present day college recruiting; they came to your home, they were nice to you, your parents, siblings, girlfriend, etc., and sold their "organization." Once you signed, you were bound.
I believe that the only reason drafts are allowed to exist legally is the CBA's the various leagues have in place. (It is arguable baseball's "limited" anti-trust exemption might aid them here but the other leagues have no such excuse). But for the CBA's, at the very least the darft would be an anti-trust violation.
By the way, wasn't that Key West standing victorious at the end of the 3A chmpionship this year? Not Pace, not Gulliver, but home-grown talent from Key West. Even in the old days the Yanks didn't always win, and that made victory all the sweeter. I know I was rooting for you.
Hypothetically, I am the coach of a team in the Panhadle and I need a tall hard throwing right-hander so I draft Chas Spottswoode. Baseball after all is only a privilege, not a right, so if Mr. Spottswoode wants to play he will have to move with, or without, his family from Key West to this hypothetical town.
Why not apply the same logic to colleges? The NCAA is trying its hardest to cut off the alleged advantages of the "southern" schools by limiting schedules etc. Apparently it doesn't matter to them that kids choose to leave their homes and move hundreds or thousands of miles away because they just love playing and warm weather gives them more opportunity. So, instead, we will have the college that finished last in whatever rating system the NCAA devises have the first pick in the draft. Justin Upton you have been drafted, number 1, by the Mercyhurst College of Optometry in Petranga, North Dakota. If you want to play college baseball ( which is a privilege, not a right) you must sign with them or sit out a year.
One last comment viz. "drafting." There was no MLB draft until 1965 when the owners figured out that their best chance of beating the Yankees (and more importantly keeping initial costs down- eg Ron Swoboda) was to try out this creation of the football leagues. Prior to the "draft" the Yankees and other monied teams got more of the players that they wanted than the "poorer" teams. (And, how many players did the Yankees buy from Kansas City over the years?) In many ways it was very much like present day college recruiting; they came to your home, they were nice to you, your parents, siblings, girlfriend, etc., and sold their "organization." Once you signed, you were bound.
I believe that the only reason drafts are allowed to exist legally is the CBA's the various leagues have in place. (It is arguable baseball's "limited" anti-trust exemption might aid them here but the other leagues have no such excuse). But for the CBA's, at the very least the darft would be an anti-trust violation.
By the way, wasn't that Key West standing victorious at the end of the 3A chmpionship this year? Not Pace, not Gulliver, but home-grown talent from Key West. Even in the old days the Yanks didn't always win, and that made victory all the sweeter. I know I was rooting for you.
The entire draft analogy is meaningless. The draft is a job offer. You move to the job or you turn it down. You have that choice.
Applying the same standard to amatuer sport is ridiculous. There is no remuneration in high school sport in the public schools. In private or parochial schools, there may be some financial inducement but not always.
The base issue is that 'Fairness' is determined by the coach. It is not based on loyalty or some other moral ethic. The coach decides and thats it.
If a high school student wishes to transfer for any reason academic or personal, who are they hurting?
If a coach recruits, what is the penalty to the coach?
The small town mentality argument does not apply in a more populated area where school choice is possible. In a small town, the next school may be many miles away making transportation difficult.
The 'damage to the program' argument is a fallacy. If a program was that good, each team would have depth in case a player was unable to play. If the coach was responsible for a player's ability, then it would stand to reason that that player's ability would diminish in another program.
Punishing a player or student for transferring is just sour grapes by the scorned coach.
Applying the same standard to amatuer sport is ridiculous. There is no remuneration in high school sport in the public schools. In private or parochial schools, there may be some financial inducement but not always.
The base issue is that 'Fairness' is determined by the coach. It is not based on loyalty or some other moral ethic. The coach decides and thats it.
If a high school student wishes to transfer for any reason academic or personal, who are they hurting?
If a coach recruits, what is the penalty to the coach?
The small town mentality argument does not apply in a more populated area where school choice is possible. In a small town, the next school may be many miles away making transportation difficult.
The 'damage to the program' argument is a fallacy. If a program was that good, each team would have depth in case a player was unable to play. If the coach was responsible for a player's ability, then it would stand to reason that that player's ability would diminish in another program.
Punishing a player or student for transferring is just sour grapes by the scorned coach.
Pre-Free Agency, the wealth of a club meant nothing. Each club had the same opportunity to establish scouting programs. If scouts from the Devil Rays and Yankees were to approach a person in that era, most players would want to be with the club with the better organization. Remember, players did not move freely between clubs, they were traded or sold outright. The players did not benefit financially as the result of the trade.
The draft was a ploy by the owners to reduce the number of minor league or farm clubs. Colleges were to take the place of 'A' ball and hopefully 'AA' ball. Owners would have enjoyed eliminating all farm clubs, but it never worked out as it does in the NFL.
Remember, baseball teams prospered, moved and folded previous to free agency.
The draft was a ploy by the owners to reduce the number of minor league or farm clubs. Colleges were to take the place of 'A' ball and hopefully 'AA' ball. Owners would have enjoyed eliminating all farm clubs, but it never worked out as it does in the NFL.
Remember, baseball teams prospered, moved and folded previous to free agency.
fabeets,
You make some excellent points. Some of your hypotheticals (drafting a Key West player to the panhandle) are quite a stretch, however.
There, of course, is the crux of the matter for both sides. There are extremes to both sides of this argument and it is those extremists that create the dilema. If people behaved rationally and fairly on their own, there would be no need for rules.
Most rational people would not (I would think) move their child each year to a different baseball program (high-school). But some do and it results in an uneven playing field. Is it fair to legislate against all transfers due to the abuse by some? Probably not.
As with many problematic areas of life (with much greater significance than this), I don't have all the answers. I only wish that people would conduct themselves by some internal, innate sense of right and wrong. I know it exists.
I have always enjoyed ammatuer baseball, from T-ball on up. I am overcome by its pastoral beauty and its competitive purity (kids playing because they love it...not because they are being paid). I feel it is one of the last bastions of Americana and I feel we are losing it.
Am I wrong to be concerned? Maybe I am. I have already said that I don't have the answers. I do think, however, that the MLB draft was the solution for professional baseball. I don't think that laws and rules are un-American.
And, yes, Key West won their 11th State championship this year. It has been awfully tough, however, getting back to the final four. We are in a region made up almost entirely of private Dade County schools who unashamedly "cherry pick" the best players from the larger public schools in the area.
I suppose I do feel fortunate, however, to be able to have had both my sons play ball in such a unique community. I will close with a short story.
Back when my older son was on the high-school team, a school from Boca Raton was playing us in Key West. After the game, one of the visiting players approached our coach saying, "Coach, I know your starting catcher is a senior and will be gone. I would really like to come down and play for you next year." (This player was an all-star type and went on to play at a major D-1 program.) Our coach responded, "Son, I've had a Key West kid working hard all his life to play catcher here. You are a fine player and I really appreciate your interest, but the position is already filled."
You make some excellent points. Some of your hypotheticals (drafting a Key West player to the panhandle) are quite a stretch, however.
There, of course, is the crux of the matter for both sides. There are extremes to both sides of this argument and it is those extremists that create the dilema. If people behaved rationally and fairly on their own, there would be no need for rules.
Most rational people would not (I would think) move their child each year to a different baseball program (high-school). But some do and it results in an uneven playing field. Is it fair to legislate against all transfers due to the abuse by some? Probably not.
As with many problematic areas of life (with much greater significance than this), I don't have all the answers. I only wish that people would conduct themselves by some internal, innate sense of right and wrong. I know it exists.
I have always enjoyed ammatuer baseball, from T-ball on up. I am overcome by its pastoral beauty and its competitive purity (kids playing because they love it...not because they are being paid). I feel it is one of the last bastions of Americana and I feel we are losing it.
Am I wrong to be concerned? Maybe I am. I have already said that I don't have the answers. I do think, however, that the MLB draft was the solution for professional baseball. I don't think that laws and rules are un-American.
And, yes, Key West won their 11th State championship this year. It has been awfully tough, however, getting back to the final four. We are in a region made up almost entirely of private Dade County schools who unashamedly "cherry pick" the best players from the larger public schools in the area.
I suppose I do feel fortunate, however, to be able to have had both my sons play ball in such a unique community. I will close with a short story.
Back when my older son was on the high-school team, a school from Boca Raton was playing us in Key West. After the game, one of the visiting players approached our coach saying, "Coach, I know your starting catcher is a senior and will be gone. I would really like to come down and play for you next year." (This player was an all-star type and went on to play at a major D-1 program.) Our coach responded, "Son, I've had a Key West kid working hard all his life to play catcher here. You are a fine player and I really appreciate your interest, but the position is already filled."
quote:"Son, I've had a Key West kid working hard all his life to play catcher here. You are a fine player and I really appreciate your interest, but the position is already filled."
That is your answer in the nut shell. It isn't the players transferring. It is the coaches who 'seem' not to mind accepting an offer like the one you mentioned. That is the nature of developing a program. A coach grooms the underclassman to become the starter.
But even in the case of the best program, the coach still has the option to start the talented underclassman over the senior who has been working hard for that spot.
Here is an example of what in my mind is a good baseball transfer. Don Mattingly is the first baseman in your area high school. You try out, make the team but realize that you will never beat out Mattingly. You stay on the team for two years riding the bench and never playing. In your third year, you transfer to a program decimated by graduation. You are not guaranteed a starting spot but you have a better chance. That is pretty much the situation of JT Snow. He was behind Mattingly and the Yankees could have held on to him for the duration of his contract. There are no contracts in high school ball.
quote:I do think, however, that the MLB draft was the solution for professional baseball. I don't think that laws and rules are un-American.
The draft is an attempt by the owners to protect themselves from themselves by taking away the right to bargain from the players. Then add to that the fact that they use their anti-trust exemption to collude to keep salaries down (again, protecting the owners from them selves) by having slot money. I understand the need to keep costs down, so make the owners police themselves. Don't punish the player. jmo Much like the FHSAA trying to take away the students right to play after transferring in order to protect the public schools from private schools. Also, to stop recruiting since they cannot enforce their own rules that are broken by recruiting coaches. They are punishing the students because they cannot have teeth in their own rules. The rules are there, they just don't enforce them. Again, Why punish the students for the crimes of the recruiting coaches.
quote:Originally posted by Bighit15:
Again, Why punish the students for the crimes of the recruiting coaches.
I suppose the situation is similar to drug dealers and drug users. While the real villians are the dealers, I suppose it is easier to catch the users. And if you can stop the "use", then you've solved the problem.
I'm not saying this is necessarily the best approach, I am just throwing out a possible reason for it.
Very bad analogy.
Equating transfers to criminal activity is awful.
The 'rule' is about recruiting. Kids do not recruit. Coaches recruit.
All I have heard about is kids transferring.
Why has no one claimed that coaches are recruiting? Could it be that kids are easier to attack? Kids are easier to punish for something where they have no wrong doing.
Could it be that if people accuse a coach of recruiting the burden of proof would fall on the accuser? Why is this not the same for the students?
Could it be that the accuser may be subject to civil penalties if the coach pursues the issue?
People who claim to have the children's interest at heart and then do this are hypocrites. They have no place in high school sports.
Equating transfers to criminal activity is awful.
The 'rule' is about recruiting. Kids do not recruit. Coaches recruit.
All I have heard about is kids transferring.
Why has no one claimed that coaches are recruiting? Could it be that kids are easier to attack? Kids are easier to punish for something where they have no wrong doing.
Could it be that if people accuse a coach of recruiting the burden of proof would fall on the accuser? Why is this not the same for the students?
Could it be that the accuser may be subject to civil penalties if the coach pursues the issue?
People who claim to have the children's interest at heart and then do this are hypocrites. They have no place in high school sports.
quote:Originally posted by Bighit15:
Again, Why punish the students for the crimes of the recruiting coaches.
I suppose the situation is similar to drug dealers and drug users. While the real villians are the dealers, I suppose it is easier to catch the users. And if you can stop the "use", then you've solved the problem.
I'm not saying this is necessarily the best approach, I am just throwing out a possible reason for it.
I agree with WillieBobo.
You have a predisposed dislike of the present system, so you will use any analogy to prove your point. Matching drug dealing and use to transferring and recruiting is absurd. Nobody is arguing that the drug laws are bad. You have some strange connections that you are making.
I respect your point of view. I just have a problem with the judgement that it equates with criminal behaviour because you do not agree with others point of view.
quote:Originally posted by Bighit15:
I respect your point of view. I just have a problem with the judgement that it equates with criminal behaviour because you do not agree with others point of view.
I NEVER equated the two activites (recruiting/transfering and drug dealing/using). Perhaps I didn't make my myself as clear as I could have. I was suggesting that PERHAPS those attempting to police those activities were using similar strategies.
Also, I do not believe the strategy is a very good one.
Key West is a unique circumstance. Being an island with only one high school and a limited population, I can understand your view from your perspective. But again, it is unique.
You have the ability to choose the best from the pool of talent that you have. The best coaches and players have great demands placed on them because they represent the community, not just themselves. They are the product of a program that has groomed and nurtured them to represent the community. That is the reason they play with tenacity.
Once you leave Key West, the situation changes. Areas with greater populations and more than one high school offer choices to parents and students while attending grades 9 - 12. Sometimes the first choice does not pan out for whatever reason.
Here in Tampa, children are usually offerred three schools to choose from under the school choice policy. If after attending one school of those three, you come to find that for whatever reason another school would be better, you can transfer.
The FHSSA has two transfer policies. One for a transfer after the semester has started and another for a transfer between semesters. In the first case, they offer a waiver for the mid-semester transfer. In the second case, the FHSSA becomes suspicious that recruiting may have taken place over the summer. I quote a portion of FHSSA Appendix A - Eligibility Rules - Rule 6 :
"If the student participates on a non-school team (i.e. AAU, American Legion, club settings, etc.) that is affiliated with or coached by a coach from a school other than the one the student attends, or has attended, and then enrolls in that school, IT WILL BE ASSUMED (my caps) the student has been recruited to attend that school or transferred to that school for athletic reasons and the student will be ineligible there for one year. If the student transfers to a school that his/her coach has relocated to withion the past year, it will be assumed the student transferred to that school for athletic reasons and he/she will be ineligible there fpr one year.(FHSSA Bylaw 11.4)"
Note the word ASSUMED. There does not have to be proof, merely circumstances that can be construed to fit one's argument to limit the participation of the student in an extra curricular activity. There is no mention of retaliation against the coach who recruited. There is no mention that recruiting has had to have taken place. There is only an assumption that has to be made that could keep a student athlete from participating.
Denial of the liberty to participate in extra curricular activity without due process has the ring of violations of constitutional rights as well as states rights.
You have the ability to choose the best from the pool of talent that you have. The best coaches and players have great demands placed on them because they represent the community, not just themselves. They are the product of a program that has groomed and nurtured them to represent the community. That is the reason they play with tenacity.
Once you leave Key West, the situation changes. Areas with greater populations and more than one high school offer choices to parents and students while attending grades 9 - 12. Sometimes the first choice does not pan out for whatever reason.
Here in Tampa, children are usually offerred three schools to choose from under the school choice policy. If after attending one school of those three, you come to find that for whatever reason another school would be better, you can transfer.
The FHSSA has two transfer policies. One for a transfer after the semester has started and another for a transfer between semesters. In the first case, they offer a waiver for the mid-semester transfer. In the second case, the FHSSA becomes suspicious that recruiting may have taken place over the summer. I quote a portion of FHSSA Appendix A - Eligibility Rules - Rule 6 :
"If the student participates on a non-school team (i.e. AAU, American Legion, club settings, etc.) that is affiliated with or coached by a coach from a school other than the one the student attends, or has attended, and then enrolls in that school, IT WILL BE ASSUMED (my caps) the student has been recruited to attend that school or transferred to that school for athletic reasons and the student will be ineligible there for one year. If the student transfers to a school that his/her coach has relocated to withion the past year, it will be assumed the student transferred to that school for athletic reasons and he/she will be ineligible there fpr one year.(FHSSA Bylaw 11.4)"
Note the word ASSUMED. There does not have to be proof, merely circumstances that can be construed to fit one's argument to limit the participation of the student in an extra curricular activity. There is no mention of retaliation against the coach who recruited. There is no mention that recruiting has had to have taken place. There is only an assumption that has to be made that could keep a student athlete from participating.
Denial of the liberty to participate in extra curricular activity without due process has the ring of violations of constitutional rights as well as states rights.
Thoughts on the denial of liberty without due process in the Constitution.
It has the ring of limiting free assembly. We all should be able to congregate and recreate with whomever we choose. That is the intent of the first amendment of the Bill of Rights.
It has the ring of a deprivation of liberty without due process. The ASSUMPTION is all that required to keep a student athlete from participating. Amendment Five says that this is illegal and a clear violation of the rights granted under the constitution.
It is a clear issue of violation of state or common law in that rights are being infringed upon. Amendment 7 guarantees us a jury trial to ascertain legality since the value of participation exceeds twenty ($20) dollars.
Because the student athlete is being punished by being declared ineligible without due process, it can be deemed a cruel and unusual punishment (Public embarrassment and Psychlogical damage) which is forbidden by Amendment 8.
The denial of Liberty without due process is again forbidden by the 14th amendment.
Being that the aggrieved parties would be minors, their parents would then become the aggrieved parties.
It has the ring of limiting free assembly. We all should be able to congregate and recreate with whomever we choose. That is the intent of the first amendment of the Bill of Rights.
It has the ring of a deprivation of liberty without due process. The ASSUMPTION is all that required to keep a student athlete from participating. Amendment Five says that this is illegal and a clear violation of the rights granted under the constitution.
It is a clear issue of violation of state or common law in that rights are being infringed upon. Amendment 7 guarantees us a jury trial to ascertain legality since the value of participation exceeds twenty ($20) dollars.
Because the student athlete is being punished by being declared ineligible without due process, it can be deemed a cruel and unusual punishment (Public embarrassment and Psychlogical damage) which is forbidden by Amendment 8.
The denial of Liberty without due process is again forbidden by the 14th amendment.
Being that the aggrieved parties would be minors, their parents would then become the aggrieved parties.
It amazes me that I can't type FHSAA on a regular basis.
quote:I have always enjoyed ammatuer baseball, from T-ball on up. I am overcome by its pastoral beauty and its competitive purity (kids playing because they love it...not because they are being paid). I feel it is one of the last bastions of Americana and I feel we are losing it.
Ace:
Thanks, for the above (partially quoted) post. I agree with the aesthetic comments and believe we are on the same wave length in that regard.
I know how unique Key West is in many areas, including (or especially) baseball. I have a story in return. About 20 + rears ago I was in a position where I was working in Key West on a regular basis. As is my wont, I was very curious about the island, its people, its history, and so on. I kept hearing from the natives about Key West heritage in HS baseball. Being a bit of a snob in that regard, I couldn't really credit all these "legends" as real, or worthy of consideration from we "serious" baseball types. After all, you have a tiny 2 X 4 mile island with an indigenous population not much larger than some of the high schools around here... how good could you be? Further in driving/walking around about every inch of the city over several years, where were the facilities? How could these kids challenge the heights of Fla. HS baseball without the advantages.
On one trip I called up a guy I was to be working with to set an appointment. I suggested several different places, but he asked whether it would be OK if we met at his home. The reason was soon apparent. Hidden away in his backyard, running along an inlet, was a full-sized batting cage with all the appropriate accoutrements. He had told the kids the cage would be open that day. All day long, while we worked, kids were coming and going. He apologized repeatedly for the numerous distractions, and the constant noise of bat on ball. But I told him it was, quite literally, music to my ears.
I was thrilled to see you guys win this year against, under the circumstances, truly improbable odds. But, (and there is always a but) we, meaning us, and the FHSAA, cannot compare Key West to e.g. Flanigan or Cypress Bay. These are HS's with nearly 5,000 students. They are both located in baseball intensive areas and could easily play games every day of the week (as could the neighboring HS's) and still have parents complaining about lack of playing time. By the same token, schools such as Pace, Gulliver, etc. and many other "smaller" private schools would be more than happy to play every day with the larger schools.
On the other hand, some very large schools (usually in the inner-city areas) have trouble filling a baseball roster and would be happy with a shorter schedule and so on.
The only thing the FHSAA does is run the state tournaments. That is what is was founded for, and its new found statutory status notwithstanding, that is what it is good for. It is controlled politically by programs who cannot begin to understand Key West, much less the burgeoning Western Dade, Broward and (soon to be) Palm Beach schools. (Actually, it probably does, as an entity, understand these situations, but it simply is not politically expedient to address them).
The FHSAA managed, after a storm of protest, to alter the criteria/classifications, etc between 2A/2B football. Why not alter the classifications for baseball? As far as baseball purists are concerned, who cares about FHSAA size-based classifications? The scouts/colleges will come out to see the games involving the best players. The more these kids can play, the more showcases for their individual abilities, the better chance they have at moving forward.
If we want to keep a "unified" state championship (and many states do not e.g. California, New York) it seems a simple solution for baseball would be to let the schools choose what level they wish to compete at.
Forget about size of school, it is essentially meaningless in baseball (eg the 1A Miami Brito teams from a couple years ago could, and did, beat most everybody). Classify the teams by the number of games they wish to play, the type of restrictions they want, if any, viz. baseball, and categorize it that way. The "recruiting teams" will not be able to recruit if they were not in the top categories, the teams that wish to keep it on a down-home level will be able to do so. Everybody will be happy? Well, probably not, but what have got to lose kicking things around?
Great stuff. The deliberation on this site is no less than stunning.
In familiarizing myself further with the by-laws of the FHSAA, I found myself chuckling. Two very interesting sections are ;
"AIM
2.1 Aim
2.1.1 The aim of this assosciation shall be to promote, direct, supervise and regulate all interscholasticathletic activities of high school students; to establish, maintain and enforce such regulations as may be necessary to assure that all such activities shall be part of and contribute towards the entire educational program of the State of Florida; to cooperate closely with the Florida Department of Education in the development of interscholastic athletic activities; to promote the spirit of sportsmanship and fair play in all athletic contests; to safeguard the physical, mental and moral welfare of high school students and protect them from exploitation."
Issuing penalties on a prima facie basis without due investigation is neither fair nor does it promote 'fair play'.
Doesn't it cause a student mental anguish when he/she is deemed ineligible by the FHSAA after the Florida Department of Education deems a transfer reasonable and customary?
Doesn't the ineligibility ruling mentally abuse a student athlete who may desire to play for a different school than the one he/she was formerly enrolled?
Doesn't the ineligibility ruling cause mental anxiety when a student meets all requirements for participation under the guidelines set forth by the Florida Department of Education?
Isn't it exploitation of the student when the student is punished for what is deemed recruiting by an adult member of the transfer school? The student athlete is used as a pawn to punish the recruiting and is therefore exploited by the FHSAA.
How is it protecting the student by punishing him/her?
"AIM
2.1 Aim
2.1.1 The aim of this assosciation shall be to promote, direct, supervise and regulate all interscholasticathletic activities of high school students; to establish, maintain and enforce such regulations as may be necessary to assure that all such activities shall be part of and contribute towards the entire educational program of the State of Florida; to cooperate closely with the Florida Department of Education in the development of interscholastic athletic activities; to promote the spirit of sportsmanship and fair play in all athletic contests; to safeguard the physical, mental and moral welfare of high school students and protect them from exploitation."
Issuing penalties on a prima facie basis without due investigation is neither fair nor does it promote 'fair play'.
Doesn't it cause a student mental anguish when he/she is deemed ineligible by the FHSAA after the Florida Department of Education deems a transfer reasonable and customary?
Doesn't the ineligibility ruling mentally abuse a student athlete who may desire to play for a different school than the one he/she was formerly enrolled?
Doesn't the ineligibility ruling cause mental anxiety when a student meets all requirements for participation under the guidelines set forth by the Florida Department of Education?
Isn't it exploitation of the student when the student is punished for what is deemed recruiting by an adult member of the transfer school? The student athlete is used as a pawn to punish the recruiting and is therefore exploited by the FHSAA.
How is it protecting the student by punishing him/her?
The second is the section regarding recruiting.
"7.6 Recruitment of Students
7.6.1 Recruitment of students or attempted recruitment of students for athletic purposes, regardless of their residence, is a gross violation of the spirit and philosophy of these By-laws and is expressly forbidden. Recruiting is the use of undue influence and/or special inducement by anyone associated with a school in an attempt to encourage a prospective student to attend or remain at that school for the purpose of participating in interscholastic athletics. A member school is responsible for any such action committed by any person associated with the school, including the principal, assistant principals, the athletic director, coaches, teachers, any other staff members or employees, students, parents or any organization, such as booster clubs, having connection to the school. A member school also is responsible for any violation committed bu any person acting at the direction of the school or anyone associated with the school. The Board of Directors shall establish and maintain a policy which defines undue influence and special inducement; lists examples of such actions which shall be considered to be violations of this article; establishes the penalties for such violations; and regulates academic recruitment programs and financial aid programs conducted and administered by member schools."
I consider the penalty for transfer for athletic reasons undue influence to keep a student at his/her present school.
The quaint custom of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' has been the norm it seems. Transfers happen every year and for some reason, nobody says anything so it is never questioned.
The transfer penalty for athletic reasons should be voided. It is in direct contadiction of the aims of the FHSAA as stated in its bylaw 2.1.1
If there are prima facie rulings that recruitment has taken place, punsih the recruiter, not the student.
"7.6 Recruitment of Students
7.6.1 Recruitment of students or attempted recruitment of students for athletic purposes, regardless of their residence, is a gross violation of the spirit and philosophy of these By-laws and is expressly forbidden. Recruiting is the use of undue influence and/or special inducement by anyone associated with a school in an attempt to encourage a prospective student to attend or remain at that school for the purpose of participating in interscholastic athletics. A member school is responsible for any such action committed by any person associated with the school, including the principal, assistant principals, the athletic director, coaches, teachers, any other staff members or employees, students, parents or any organization, such as booster clubs, having connection to the school. A member school also is responsible for any violation committed bu any person acting at the direction of the school or anyone associated with the school. The Board of Directors shall establish and maintain a policy which defines undue influence and special inducement; lists examples of such actions which shall be considered to be violations of this article; establishes the penalties for such violations; and regulates academic recruitment programs and financial aid programs conducted and administered by member schools."
I consider the penalty for transfer for athletic reasons undue influence to keep a student at his/her present school.
The quaint custom of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' has been the norm it seems. Transfers happen every year and for some reason, nobody says anything so it is never questioned.
The transfer penalty for athletic reasons should be voided. It is in direct contadiction of the aims of the FHSAA as stated in its bylaw 2.1.1
If there are prima facie rulings that recruitment has taken place, punsih the recruiter, not the student.
quote:Originally posted by fabeets:
Forget about size of school, it is essentially meaningless in baseball (eg the 1A Miami Brito teams from a couple years ago could, and did, beat most everybody). Classify the teams by the number of games they wish to play, the type of restrictions they want, if any, viz. baseball, and categorize it that way. The "recruiting teams" will not be able to recruit if they were not in the top categories, the teams that wish to keep it on a down-home level will be able to do so. Everybody will be happy? Well, probably not, but what have got to lose kicking things around?
I think the idea is great. I know that a few years ago there was a movement in the panhandle to separate public and private schools. If they did that AND enforced the public school boundaries, I think they would be on their way to correcting the situation.
Unfortunately, Key West would still have a problem. Most all schools our size are private. Key West would need to travel even further to find enough public schools our size to make up a District.