UIL to Rule on Coppell's Appeal

I am glad they will make a decision on the issue.
I am sure what ever they rule it will be fair and consider the facts they are aware of.

It will be interesting to see how they weight the individuals child's right to perform verse the right of coaches and school districts to compete fairly.

quote:

Originally posted by MeatsDad:
I am sure what ever they rule it will be fair and consider the facts they are aware of.

Why are you sure they will make a fair ruling? They are probably just more administrators, like the ones in Lewisville ISD, maybe even friends.

quote:

Originally posted by MeatsDad:
I am glad they will make a decision on the issue.
I am sure what ever they rule it will be fair and consider the facts they are aware of.

It will be interesting to see how they weight the individuals child's right to perform verse the right of coaches and school districts to compete fairly.

He has the right to perform at FMHS right now.

Precedent will be set in any case -- I imagine it's somewhat "dangerous" (relatively speaking, of course) to modify existing rules for one individual.

I'm not going to get back into my opinions on this specific case.

Overall, if you have rule regardless of what everyone feels about the rule it is a rule. I beleive the rule then need to be upheld. I think that is what the 6 5A committee did.

As far as being fair, I think they will hear from both sides and weigh what is presented. That seems fair. I am sure both sides have friends in Austin.

It just will be nice to have a final decision so everyone can move forward.

I totally agree with PD, even if in this one case appearances aren't what they seem and the UIL decides to re-instate the player, precedent will be set and that could be bad for many more schools, coaches and players.

quote:

Originally posted by MeatsDad:
I'm not going to get back into my opinions on this specific case.

Overall, if you have rule regardless of what everyone feels about the rule it is a rule. I beleive the rule then need to be upheld. I think that is what the 6 5A committee did.

As far as being fair, I think they will hear from both sides and weigh what is presented. That seems fair. I am sure both sides have friends in Austin.

It just will be nice to have a final decision so everyone can move forward.

I totally agree with PD, even if in this one case appearances aren't what they seem and the UIL decides to re-instate the player, precedent will be set and that could be bad for many more schools, coaches and players.

Far as "final" goes... doubt it.

Ruling is in

UIL Ruling, Player ineligible

I got bored over lunch and looked at the UIL web-site press releases.

They rarely over turn their rulings and there doesn't seem to be any pattern to the way they rule on "moving for Atheletic Purposes". So there doesn't seem to be any precedent being set or being followed. It is a case by case basis.

In this case, Meat says he looks forward to playing baseball with the player next year if he stays in town. With 5 senior outfielders and a couple of senior pitchers all leaving I am sure Coach English will find plenty of playing time for him.

Does anyone know what the UIL decided about the Pflugerville player, Micah Gibbs? This was his appeal and his dad had the Leander coach on tape admitting he wouldn't let the boy play cause he was a star and it was an inter-district move.

Are there further appeal options or grounds for possible lawsuits or does it appear that the decision is final for this case?

The Pflugerville player was given an additional appeal because of the additional evidence of the tape recording of the Leander coach.

This is final until something changes. I don't know if they can file a lawsuit or not.

There are always the grounds for a lawsuit...

quote:

Originally posted by Texan:
There are always the grounds for a lawsuit...

Especially if you are a Lawyer

quote:

Originally posted by KellerDad:

quote:

Originally posted by Texan:
There are always the grounds for a lawsuit...

Especially if you are a Lawyer

ESPECIALLY!

quote:

Originally posted by MeatsDad:
In this case, Meat says he looks forward to playing baseball with the player next year if he stays in town.

From everything I've seen and heard, he's staying. I don't why people are thinking he might leave.

From what I have heard at school, jacob is planning on another appeal with the state. They are also willing to go to court if necessary.

That court battle should be resolved by.....summer 2008 or so -- thereby defeating (bad word perhaps) the purpose of the suit. Since this is strictly a case of a family's word against a committee's interpretation of intent, it will come down to precedent (as we've discussed).

Unfortuantely, this kid's HS career -- football and baseball -- will be impacted in some way. Having said that, indications are that his sports future is bright, even beyond HS.

Today's world is complex at times, eh?

Does UIL have the dollares' to fight?

Would these schools, coaches, parents, or UIL care about this change of school by this student if he were the captain of the physics robotics team, or the undefeated captain of the debate team?

I think I understand what you're getting at -- but those aren't revenue sports -- and the rival debate coach is probably more concerned with the academia than his/her win-loss record. Having said that, there's nothing like a kick-*** argument!

To answer a few comments....

They (the parents) are more than willing to go to court. The kid will likely stay or go "private" and after witnessing the UIL funds generated by the football playoffs....yes they have the money!

quote:

Originally posted by UpnIn:
To answer a few comments....

They (the parents) are more than willing to go to court. The kid will likely stay or go "private" .....

If the family is willing to go "private" if the appeal and court battles don't go their way, doesn't that answer the question UIL is asking? Your statement seems to support the UIL's decision.

quote:

I think I understand what you're getting at -- but those aren't revenue sports

This isn't about revenue. My point is that there is an overemphasis placed on scholastic sports today.

Let's view this from a teaching perspective. The baseball/football coach (teacher) is supposed to be teaching these students the proper way to play the game. If I, as the parent, am dissatisfied with the quality of instruction received from these teachers why shouldn't I have the right to remove my student and place him into another school by moving into another community where I believe the school instruction is better? If I did this because I was dissatisfied with the English, or Music, or Physics department nobody would care.

Although I don't disagree that there is an over-emphasis on sports -- your comparisons are not apples to apples. The point in this case is -- are they moving for athletic purposes? They have never claimed to be dissatisfed with anything. And the fact that there is a general acceptance that transferring due to dissatisfaction with the quality of the EDUCATION supports the idea that there is appropriate focus when it comes to learning. I believe that a family that transfers due to problems with the quality of the education -- with documentation to support their claim -- can make a more legitimate argument.

JMO.

quote:

Originally posted by dbg_fan:

quote:

I think I understand what you're getting at -- but those aren't revenue sports

This isn't about revenue. My point is that there is an overemphasis placed on scholastic sports today.

Let's view this from a teaching perspective. The baseball/football coach (teacher) is supposed to be teaching these students the proper way to play the game. If I, as the parent, am dissatisfied with the quality of instruction received from these teachers why shouldn't I have the right to remove my student and place him into another school by moving into another community where I believe the school instruction is better? If I did this because I was dissatisfied with the English, or Music, or Physics department nobody would care.

You are not comparing apples to apples. Athletics are extracurricular not core to the school. The player in question has a bright future regardless of where he goes to school.

I believe the rule is in place w/the UIL to eliminate an abuse that has occurred, in the past, with recruiting athletes. Like most rules it was probably put in place as a reactive measure due to some violations of recruiting practices Unfortunatly, due to the legal climate of the world, most rules have to be drawn in black and white, if there are grey areas then you open yourself up to problems with parents/coaches/schools bending the rules for a myriad of reasons.

It doesn’t always seem fair, but it is the only way they can ensure that no one creates/looks for a loophole(s).

Currently, recruiting is mostly an issue in athletics but maybe with the heightened level of skill and competition within things like band, choir, drumline, academic decathlon, cheerleading, et al the issue of recruiting and discussions like this might become more common place, but until then it tends to be a discussion that is only affecting the athletic world and those involved in it.

If someone, someplace hadn’t abused the system then rules like this wouldn’t be in place and we could all be free to move around the district/system in whatever manner we so choose. Wouldn’t that be interesting????????????

But because it has been abused the UIL has had to put this in place to make sure that we are not stacking the decks at the HS level when it comes to sports and esp. with football. As we all know football is a major revenue producer for a school and when money is involved sometimes schools/coaches get greedy for the cash and the prestige of having a winning program and that is why we have rules like this……

We might not like how this case is playing out, we might like how it is being handled but the bottom line is the rule is the rule is the rule and we sometimes have to go back to basics and see why the rule was put in place to understand why the ruling is what it is.

Just my opinion.

My comparison is not that unreasonable.

UIL Speech & Debate
UIL Band & Orchestra

These are all extracurricular activites overseen by UIL.

quote:

Originally posted by dbg_fan:
My comparison is not that unreasonable.

UIL Speech & Debate
UIL Band & Orchestra

These are all extracurricular activites overseen by UIL.

Yes and apparently those overseeing, involved, participating, coaching, conducting etc., activites like debate, band, drill team, cheerleading , etc. have not had the recruiting problems that some athletic programs have. Looking back I must have went at it the wrong way. I looked for a good school district and school to put my kikds in the sports and extra activities would be of benefit not the focus.

IF the parents were concerned with the "teaching" (coaching in this case), which they plenty of time to observe, the kid would have changed schools/districts before his Freshman year.