|
Post by fantom on Jun 28, 2015 21:35:37 GMT -6
fantom, valid point. But I do think recruiting is more harmful to the kid than it is to the team. It perppetutes a high ego. Those who illegally recruit say like to hide under the veil of doing what's best for the kid. Well, why is it that the kid who runs a 5.4 40 and is a 190 lb linemen who doesn't fit well with his current team is never recruited? Isn't it also the best for him too? Don't look at me. I'm not recruiting anybody.
|
|
mhs99
Junior Member
Posts: 250
|
Post by mhs99 on Jun 28, 2015 21:44:16 GMT -6
School choice must die....put a stringent transfer rule in and these things will slow to a trickle
|
|
|
Post by 3rdandlong on Jun 28, 2015 21:52:37 GMT -6
Lol. Not saying you were fantom. my post is speaking in generalities and the questions are rhetorical.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 29, 2015 10:53:55 GMT -6
School choice must die....put a stringent transfer rule in and these things will slow to a trickle So making sure that the few boys who decide to play football stay at their school forever, is more important to than all students getting the best education or situation possible for them?
|
|
|
Post by natenator on Jun 29, 2015 11:16:55 GMT -6
School choice must die....put a stringent transfer rule in and these things will slow to a trickle So making sure that the few boys who decide to play football stay at their school forever, is more important to than all students getting the best education or situation possible for them? Right. Because most of them are transferring (and accepted) for better academics and environments. Athletics has nothing to do with it? How about: you transfer and you have an athletic history at your previous school then you must sit out a year or two of all athletics.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jun 29, 2015 11:38:33 GMT -6
So making sure that the few boys who decide to play football stay at their school forever, is more important to than all students getting the best education or situation possible for them? Right. Because most of them are transferring (and accepted) for better academics and environments. Athletics has nothing to do with it? How about: you transfer and you have an athletic history at your previous school then you must sit out a year or two of all athletics. I think the point here was that letting athletic rules dictate school attendance policy would be the ultimate example of a tail wagging a dog. Ideally, students should attend the school they would attend if HS no longer sponsored athletics, but rather the US had a club model like AAU for all sports. Obviously this is not a perfect world, but that is how I view things when determining if a school "recruits" or not. Would those kids be enrolled there if sports were no longer affiliated with schools.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 29, 2015 12:30:43 GMT -6
So making sure that the few boys who decide to play football stay at their school forever, is more important to than all students getting the best education or situation possible for them? Right. Because most of them are transferring (and accepted) for better academics and environments. Athletics has nothing to do with it? How about: you transfer and you have an athletic history at your previous school then you must sit out a year or two of all athletics. The only transfers you know about are the athletic ones. You don't ever get new kids in your school that don't play sports or kids that leave your school that don't play sports? That being said, I have no problem with the transfer in the same association having to sit out a year of athletics without a bona fide move.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 29, 2015 13:27:05 GMT -6
Right. Because most of them are transferring (and accepted) for better academics and environments. Athletics has nothing to do with it? How about: you transfer and you have an athletic history at your previous school then you must sit out a year or two of all athletics. The only transfers you know about are the athletic ones. You don't ever get new kids in your school that don't play sports or kids that leave your school that don't play sports? That being said, I have no problem with the transfer in the same association having to sit out a year of athletics without a bona fide move. For any reason?
|
|
|
Post by spreadpowero on Jun 29, 2015 13:38:41 GMT -6
Our best season came when a bigger school recruited our TB away from us. We replaced him with another TB who ran for over 2000 yards. In the end, I am glad he left. It brought our team closer together.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 29, 2015 17:33:27 GMT -6
The only transfers you know about are the athletic ones. You don't ever get new kids in your school that don't play sports or kids that leave your school that don't play sports? That being said, I have no problem with the transfer in the same association having to sit out a year of athletics without a bona fide move. For any reason? To help prevent recruiting if it is illegal. Also, I said I have no problem with it, not that I necessarily am in favor of it. Alabama has this policy.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 29, 2015 17:33:42 GMT -6
The only transfers you know about are the athletic ones. You don't ever get new kids in your school that don't play sports or kids that leave your school that don't play sports? That being said, I have no problem with the transfer in the same association having to sit out a year of athletics without a bona fide move. For any reason? To help prevent recruiting if it is illegal. Also, I said I have no problem with it, not that I necessarily am in favor of it. Alabama has this policy.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jun 30, 2015 9:23:26 GMT -6
Dang it I thought it was the quote in his signature. The Hot Rod. Seriously would be an experience to have Roddy Pipers kid. That is until he breaks a coconut on your head.
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Jun 30, 2015 9:33:33 GMT -6
Windigo, we're best friends now. Lol
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jun 30, 2015 10:46:41 GMT -6
I coached at a private school where the basketball program was continually accused of "recruiting" and it always gets my hackles up. Don't get me wrong, the HC of the basketball program wasn't exactly a man of high moral character but he knew that he'd lose his teaching and coaching jobs if anyone could prove he was actively recruiting people.
There are several things people have to realize about a quality private school:
1. Academics are king. You'll be booted out of the school if you can't cut it academically. Two things happen because of this policy. Firstly, creme rises to the top and the kids either develop a work ethic or the go away. The private school model draws in parents that want their kids to succeed and you more support. So, you not only get more dedicated students coming in but the academic environment produces work ethic that transfers over to athletics.
2. Poor behavior isn't tolerated; students who choose not to control themselves disappear in a hurry. In a public school, you have to jump through a lot of hoops to get rid of a kid who chooses not to behave themselves and/or have parents that don't take corrective action or follow through with the school's recommendations in terms of counseling and other services. These kids don't exist in a private school: they don't get thrown on a 504 Behavior Modification Plan where everyone bends over backwards to accommodate the kid's lack of self-control and the parent's apathy or sh-tty attitude. In the private school I taught it, the kids generally got three strikes (assuming it wasn't a major infraction) and then they were gone. So, Little Billy is shipped to ISS three times for poor behavior and he is asked to leave. It's that simple. This may be unfortunate for Little Billy but it's for the betterment of the rest of the student population. The overall school environment is more conducive to learning and high level achievement because the staff isn't continually dealing with bad behavior.
So, you can see where I'm going with this rambling post; private schools are packed full of kids who have a strong work ethic, who choose to behave themselves and who have parents and a community that support the school and the staff. This is evident in the athletics in this state; they tear people up. There's a private school in the town I live in that competes against schools twice it's size and has played in the state title game 9 out of the last 10 years. They're not the biggest or fastest team in the state but those kids can flat-out play football simply because it's a roster packed full of coachable, hard working players.
But, I have heard many coaches accusing their football program of recruiting which I find hilarious and moronic at the same time. They send fewer kids on to play college ball than anyone in their league; their kids just play at a higher level because losing (in any aspect of their lives) isn't an option.
|
|
mhs99
Junior Member
Posts: 250
|
Post by mhs99 on Jun 30, 2015 19:01:16 GMT -6
To help prevent recruiting if it is illegal. Also, I said I have no problem with it, not that I necessarily am in favor of it. Alabama has this policy. The point is there are legimate reasons for an academic transfer: better facilities, technology, academic profile etc. but let's be real when you have kids who are terrific athletes and average or subpar students aren't leaving for the AP Chemistry offering silkyice. Force kids to sit a year on the transfer if they were varsity kids that are transferring to a different school and not moving (ie schools choice, inter-district transfer, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 30, 2015 20:24:31 GMT -6
To help prevent recruiting if it is illegal. Also, I said I have no problem with it, not that I necessarily am in favor of it. Alabama has this policy. The point is there are legimate reasons for an academic transfer: better facilities, technology, academic profile etc. but let's be real when you have kids who are terrific athletes and average or subpar students aren't leaving for the AP Chemistry offering silkyice. Force kids to sit a year on the transfer if they were varsity kids that are transferring to a different school and not moving (ie schools choice, inter-district transfer, etc.) That's easy for coaches to say. We have the next year and the next and the next. The kids only get four years. I'm not in favor of hard and fast rules because there are always cases where a kid may have a perfectly legitimate reason to transfer. Should he be punished by being made to sit out 25% of their athletic career? If I was a lawyer-and if you make a rule like this you'll probably be talking to lawyers eventually- I'd ask you to prove that the kid wasn't transferring for AP Chemistry.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 30, 2015 21:00:52 GMT -6
It would be great if all transfers were for academic reasons since we are academic schools.
It has been pointed out that kids transfer for better acadmics, safety, environment, etc. We all think those are legimate.
But athletics are imprortant to us. Very important. Is it wrong if athletics is important to a young man or family also? Is it wrong for a kid to transfer to have a better shot at an athletic scholarship, or to get better coaching, or to have a better opportunity to win?
Don't we as coaches take better jobs? Why shouldn't a kid do the same?
That being said, I do wish that high school athletics was pure and every school was a safe neighborhood school with good athletics and academics, and every team was competing on a level playing field.
I also wish I had 10 million dollars, but that just isn't reality.
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Jun 30, 2015 21:04:43 GMT -6
Never looked at it from that perspective. I can see that.
|
|
|
Post by natenator on Jun 30, 2015 21:16:37 GMT -6
That's easy for coaches to say. We have the next year and the next and the next. The kids only get four years. I'm not in favor of hard and fast rules because there are always cases where a kid may have a perfectly legitimate reason to transfer. Should he be punished by being made to sit out 25% of their athletic career? If I was a lawyer-and if you make a rule like this you'll probably be talking to lawyers eventually- I'd ask you to prove that the kid wasn't transferring for AP Chemistry. From a legal perspective,the burden of proof would be on the kid to prove he is transferring for AP Chem (or another academic reason). This would be easy to prove given prior grades. If the GPA is 2.7 and they play a sport then probability is high that they are not transferring for advanced academics.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jun 30, 2015 21:34:13 GMT -6
That's easy for coaches to say. We have the next year and the next and the next. The kids only get four years. I'm not in favor of hard and fast rules because there are always cases where a kid may have a perfectly legitimate reason to transfer. Should he be punished by being made to sit out 25% of their athletic career? If I was a lawyer-and if you make a rule like this you'll probably be talking to lawyers eventually- I'd ask you to prove that the kid wasn't transferring for AP Chemistry. From a legal perspective,the burden of proof would be on the kid to prove he is transferring for AP Chem (or another academic reason). This would be easy to prove given prior grades. If the GPA is 2.7 and they play a sport then probability is high that they are not transferring for advanced academics. LOL. Here the push is on to get more kids in AP courses. Of course, in our district AP Chem is a bad example. All schools have it. We do have magnet schools. One's magnet is Culinary Arts (Cooking and running a restaurant). Go ahead and prove that some kid isn't tying to learn to cook.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jun 30, 2015 21:54:38 GMT -6
It would be great if all transfers were for academic reasons since we are academic schools. It has been pointed out that kids transfer for better acadmics, safety, environment, etc. We all think those are legimate. But athletics are imprortant to us. Very important. Is it wrong if athletics is important to a young man or family also? Is it wrong for a kid to transfer to have a better shot at an athletic scholarship, or to get better coaching, or to have a better opportunity to win? Don't we as coaches take better jobs? Why shouldn't a kid do the same? That being said, I do wish that high school athletics was pure and every school was a safe neighborhood school with good athletics and academics, and every team was competing on a level playing field. I also wish I had 10 million dollars, but that just isn't reality. I agree--- it definitely is not a simple issue. It is probably more simple for football thought than other sports. A girl lived down the street from me growing up. She was an excellent basketball player (and straight A student). The girls b-ball team for the school in her neighborhood district however was medicore at best. Across town however (Same school system, but different attendance zone) the girls program was top notch, comprised of girls who really really cared about basketball. So it just wasn't a natural talent issue, it was a shared interest issue. I guess it was "known" that she was going to the cross town school for basketball, but frankly why shouldn't she? Why shouldn't she get to play with other girls who had practiced and developed their skills for years, as opposed to a team where nobody could dribble with their off hand? Why shouldn't she get teammates who had worked year round on their game as opposed to girls who just played during b-ball season?
|
|
mhs99
Junior Member
Posts: 250
|
Post by mhs99 on Jul 1, 2015 22:26:34 GMT -6
I personally cannot stand this rationale. I agree with you about kids leaving a school that is a dump or ready to be taken over by the state. But....the above stated premise that a talented kid should transfer to a school where there is more established talent. Really? This is an AAU premise, find out where the best situation is and go there to win and get looks. Bottom line if you are good they will find you and the truly great ones are those who can carry a team or a program and establish a new identity in a struggling program and school. So many kids look for the easy way out today and the mindset that kids can transfer to a school that has success when their school struggles is a poor mindset and is not teaching toughness and perseverance in our kids. I saw this firsthand at a school that has become a rival of ours. The football program was near death, almost closed down completely. Their best kids went to large Catholics for years. Then they had a kid who came into the program and turned the whole thing around. 6'4 290 beast OL/DL kid shunned the Catholics and boarding schools and was quoted in a paper as a soph. "I am not going anywhere, I grew up here with the kids in my class and we want to bring a title to here (town) and establish our legacy". Kid won 2 sectional titles and now plays at an ACC school and his high school now is flush with numbers and all of their kids are staying as they see this kids success and message. Game changer.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2015 7:43:47 GMT -6
I personally cannot stand this rationale. I agree with you about kids leaving a school that is a dump or ready to be taken over by the state. But....the above stated premise that a talented kid should transfer to a school where there is more established talent. Really? First, I didn't say they should, or shouldn't. Just pointing out situations where it isn't the most abhorrent thing in the world. Second, the fact that you use the word TALENT kind of misses the point. In the example I posted, I think a much more appropriate word would be DEDICATED-- substitute THAT word and it changes a great deal. A DEDICATED kid transferring to a school where there is more established DEDICATION. It wasn't "to get looks"--she already was on everyone's radar. And it wasn't necessarily a transfer--she enrolled at the school as a Freshmen. Now granted, football is a bit different. It is much more a natural athleticism sport than a skill sport. If you have some combination of size, strength speed--you will probably ok. No real "dedication" needed growing up. So I am not talking about someone just going to were all the "good" (size, strength, speed) players are. Let me make the two analogies a bit more equal. Program 1 uses HUDL, watches film (am I showing my age with that word here?) and uses it as a teaching tool, has organized intense practices,has year round lifting program that goes year round (and is embedded throughout the athletic program, not just football). Program 1 has summer workouts and participates versus other schools in pass skell situations. The kids have great attendance not because of penalties or rewards, but because of the desire to compete. Assistant coaches are invested and involved in all facets of the program, they set the bar high and work the kids to get to the bar. They meet with their kids often to go over film, practice, etc. They keep in touch with the athletes during the offseason. The program has spring football drills. Program 2 doesn't use huddle, nor do the kids really watch tape as a teaching tool. They may watch the previous game together as a whole group one time through. Their S&C program begins when school lets out, takes a week off for the 4th of July, and stops when fall practice starts, and consists of the weight room being open and monitored (but not directed) from 3-6pm 3 days a week. Practices consist of lots of down time, slow paced drills with a great deal of standing around and watching followed by lots of scrimmaging. Some coaches are often late or miss to practice due to other responsibilities, and disappear after the last game--but they are all the HC can find. So, you have son who loves football, has been drawing up plays in his notebooks since he was 9, would rather go play catch with dad than sit and play video games--and because you live on Victoria street, and not Jefferson street, you HAVE to go to program 2?? And going to program 1 is the easy way out, and he avoiding learning "toughness and perseverance" by not going to program 2?
|
|
|
Post by coachphillip on Jul 2, 2015 7:44:51 GMT -6
I don't know guys. After that post by silky, I think we need to refocus here. If we're talking about transfers, even if it's for athletic reasons, there are a couple things to consider. If I'm speaking as a coach, I hate when kids choose to attend a school as an underclassman for athletic reasons. I hate it because I know that we could be just as good as the catholic school (since we do beat them pretty consistently) if we had the same pieces they had. Not only do they have more money and, in most cases, more parental support, but then they get the best players too?! So, I get bitter over it. It's a case of the haves and the have nots. That being said, if I'm speaking as a father then my kid is probably going to the private school depending on if I can swing the tuition and the drop off in quality of education and culture between them and the local public school. Why wouldn't I want my kid to be surrounded by other kids that have a lot of money riding on them being successful? I live in the Bay Area, CA. If I have the cash, my kid is going to De La Salle. That's a fact. Why? They have a 96% rate of kids who graduate and go on to some form of college. Meanwhile, my high school I coach at and an alumni of is only graduating 92% of its kids. Not moving on to college. Just graduating at all. And that number is UP from years past. I gotta do what's best for my kid.
Now, if we're talking transfers then that's a totally different thing. I HATE when kids transfer because of sports when they've already spent time in a program. That's selling out and turning your back on your guys. We've had guys leave because they think we're going to have a down year. That's crap. What does that kid learn? Cut and run when there's going to be actual effort necessary?
Now, recruiting is what the OP was talking about. That's total crap too. Let your success speak for itself. If your school is great and your facilities are great and your team is great then they will come. Don't be a guy that hamstrings other programs. You're supposed to be a coach. At least that's what you call yourself. Coach up whoever shows up.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 2, 2015 9:38:49 GMT -6
First, I didn't say they should, or shouldn't. Just pointing out situations where it isn't the most abhorrent thing in the world. Second, the fact that you use the word TALENT kind of misses the point. In the example I posted, I think a much more appropriate word would be DEDICATED-- substitute THAT word and it changes a great deal. A DEDICATED kid transferring to a school where there is more established DEDICATION. It wasn't "to get looks"--she already was on everyone's radar. And it wasn't necessarily a transfer--she enrolled at the school as a Freshmen. I think you are missing the point about the OP. This isn't about kids transferring. We are a successful program that flings the rock around more than anyone. We get transfers. We cant stop them from transferring and we cant keep them from playing nor would we. This is about illegal recruiting. This is about adult coaches going out and breaking the rules recruiting kids to their program so they can win. This I hate. At that age kids can break wither way. Fundamentally you are trying to get kids to abandon their teammates and friends by appealing to their ego. If they give in they will most likely break the wrong way for life. Even if you win they lose. It says nothing about your ability as a coach or a man if you pride yourself on your ability to manipulate a teenager to give into the dark-side of their nature. I'm very good at shooting fish and a barrel too. But I don't thump my chest about it.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2015 9:50:01 GMT -6
I agree-- i was replying to the tangent posts referring to school choice and transfers.
I don't think you will find any public support for ANYTHING illegal, recruiting included.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2015 9:53:33 GMT -6
First, I didn't say they should, or shouldn't. Just pointing out situations where it isn't the most abhorrent thing in the world. Second, the fact that you use the word TALENT kind of misses the point. In the example I posted, I think a much more appropriate word would be DEDICATED-- substitute THAT word and it changes a great deal. A DEDICATED kid transferring to a school where there is more established DEDICATION. It wasn't "to get looks"--she already was on everyone's radar. And it wasn't necessarily a transfer--she enrolled at the school as a Freshmen. I think you are missing the point about the OP. This isn't about kids transferring. We are a successful program that flings the rock around more than anyone. We get transfers. We cant stop them from transferring and we cant keep them from playing nor would we. This is about illegal recruiting. This is about adult coaches going out and breaking the rules recruiting kids to their program so they can win. This I hate. At that age kids can break wither way. Fundamentally you are trying to get kids to abandon their teammates and friends by appealing to their ego. If they give in they will most likely break the wrong way for life. Even if you win they lose. It says nothing about your ability as a coach or a man if you pride yourself on your ability to manipulate a teenager to give into the dark-side of their nature. I'm very good at shooting fish and a barrel too. But I don't thump my chest about it. What do you get by shooting a barrel? Sorry, My smarta$$ gene wouldn't let me pass on that. I agree with you. Transfers happen but recruiting is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 2, 2015 10:39:33 GMT -6
What do you get by shooting a barrel? Sorry, My smarta$$ gene wouldn't let me pass on that. Free fish, do you know how much a real fishing trip costs???
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jul 2, 2015 10:43:06 GMT -6
I don't think you will find any public support for ANYTHING illegal, recruiting included. Public in general or public at that school. I've seen schools where the booster club is 100% behind the recruiting.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2015 12:55:13 GMT -6
I don't think you will find any public support for ANYTHING illegal, recruiting included. Public in general or public at that school. I've seen schools where the booster club is 100% behind the recruiting. Ah, I was referring to COACHES making comments in public supporting illegal recruiting or other rule breaking. Semi-funny story about booster clubs and recruiting: After I graduated HS (Private) I had two younger brothers playing. I was in the stands once when the Booster President was in the stands at a game one night griping about the Head Coach. She says "He needs to be out recruiting players at the park on Saturdays instead of going home after practice (blah blah.. ). I overheard and chimed in "Absolutely. Billy Smith over at Jefferson Jr. High would be a perfect wingback for us. Coach needs to get out there and see what he can do!" A few other fans nodded their approval and agreed with my statement while the Booster President turned white and shut up... because unbeknownst to those fans she was that her son played wingback.
|
|