Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 8:49:41 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it.
|
|
|
Post by gentsandpios on May 2, 2016 9:21:35 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. If that is all it would take then seems like an easy compromise but some on here have said they will accept nothing less than a split due to disproportionate amount of games won by privates in playoffs. Most of those privates have no transfers so I doubt if this is really a major issue for split supporters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2016 9:26:04 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. If that is all it would take then seems like an easy compromise but some on here have said they will accept nothing less than a split due to disproportionate amount of games won by privates in playoffs. Most of those privates have no transfers so I doubt if this is really a major issue for split supporters. SPLIT NOW
|
|
|
Post by eag on May 2, 2016 10:47:05 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. Look,just to be clear, I'd support this in a heartbeat over the split. But, what does it mean that we are going to take a kid's ability to participate away because his dad gets a new job in Lake Charles and they move from Shreveport? Or what about military kids? Really, it's that important?! Now, if you say no transfers within 60 miles or something that would be different. Pick a school as a freshman, and if you move to another within 60 miles or something then sit a year. That would work as a worker can commute for a couple of years until a kid graduates and most of the problem issue would be covered by that. Anything over 60 miles could and should be evaluated by a committee. Heck, I'd like that as we tend to lose more athletes by transferring out due to cost, etc. But ANY move? That seems to be harming kids.
|
|
|
Post by btown on May 2, 2016 11:03:58 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. Look,just to be clear, I'd support this in a heartbeat over the split. But, what does it mean that we are going to take a kid's ability to participate away because his dad gets a new job in Lake Charles and they move from Shreveport? Or what about military kids? Really, it's that important?! Now, if you say no transfers within 60 miles or something that would be different. Pick a school as a freshman, and if you move to another within 60 miles or something then sit a year. That would work as a worker can commute for a couple of years until a kid graduates and most of the problem issue would be covered by that. Anything over 60 miles could and should be evaluated by a committee. Heck, I'd like that as we tend to lose more athletes by transferring out due to cost, etc. But ANY move? That seems to be harming kids. That is already happening. Parents are having their kids sit out their Freshman or Sophmore year to play on another team. They do not even have to move. What you do not understand this is not allowd in most public schools due to School Boards setting attendance zones. Even is you wanted to sit out 1 year school board would not allow transfer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2016 7:13:42 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. If that is all it would take then seems like an easy compromise but some on here have said they will accept nothing less than a split due to disproportionate amount of games won by privates in playoffs. Most of those privates have no transfers so I doubt if this is really a major issue for split supporters. Thats bc all you hear on here is fans voicing opinions, its basically like watching the Kardasians voicing their opinions. We've talked to some on the other side of the fence, they dont want to due to the "its not fair to the kid" scapegoat. Maybe it is or maybe it isnt fair to the kid that actually had to move his senior year due to a death. It's not like the kid is missing out in his education. He is still allowed to go to class, and at the end of the day, isnt that more important?
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on May 10, 2016 7:36:01 GMT -6
One thing that was mentioned to both sides was 1-yr ineligibility regardless of move. Public school coaches agreed with the principals if this was the case we most likely wouldn't have a split. If you are not in the attendance zone of either public or private you must sit for one calendar year no matter what. It needs to be proposed, we would agree to that. I have a feeling basketball schools wouldn't like it though If everyone TRULY wants to do away with a split, and TRULY wants kids at their school for the right reasons, NOT ATHLETICS, here is a simple rule that will solve the entire issue. If you transfer to a school or its feeder schools after the 5th grade, from another member school within a 50 mile radius, you are ineligible for ALL levels of play, your first 2 years in high school. Done, simple, over. Applies the same to all Here is what I said......Not a bad idea, but I would like to see some sort of committee set up for hardship transfers. Not gonna try to list all but ex: death of parent, divorce, or something like that. No reason to further punish a kid. Bob thought this a committee (not the director/Eddie Bonine) would be a good idea. Would you accept this as a compromise? How about this as a committee: Each District in ea classification elects 1 person to serve a 2 yr term. Each class committee will hear the hardship and rule as they see fit. The committee can meet quarterly so there shouldn't be a problem with having a decision made in a timely manner.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 10, 2016 10:36:35 GMT -6
If that is the kid from Northside, the LHSAA considered it a bonafide move. There are exceptions to the sit out rule, and I don't pretend to know all of them. He is legal the way the kids from Wossman and Carroll can go to West Monroe Once the split is complete with a the Cooperative in place, there will no longer be a sit out rule and ANY athlete from ANY public school that is not part of the Cooperative, will be allowed to transfer and the family will NOT have to be displaced from their home by a high school bona fide move rule. Then we will hear some whining.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 10, 2016 10:43:48 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. That is the way it use to be but that was not good enough and so the public schools move to change the rule. Then they did not like how they changed it. Once again, public schools make the rules, by a super majority approve the rules, then declare the rules they made to be unfair.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 10, 2016 10:47:23 GMT -6
This is why we want a 1 yr ineligibility rule in affect. You do that, we tell the principals to vote to stay together. We dont care about bonafide moves anymore. Out of zone, 1 yr. thats it. If that is all it would take then seems like an easy compromise but some on here have said they will accept nothing less than a split due to disproportionate amount of games won by privates in playoffs. Most of those privates have no transfers so I doubt if this is really a major issue for split supporters. The real problem with a rule like that is the concept of "ownership". This rule puts every kid into public school slavery. You either have a private school in your home school zone or you are the property of that public school and cannot participate elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 11, 2016 8:33:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on May 11, 2016 11:34:46 GMT -6
In the article it said he will only sit 1 game next year because he only played in 1 game this year. Does that mean that he only played in the playoff game? I think something like this happened in football to Catholic-NI but they had to forfeit there games. Do the players also have to sit the same # of games next Fall?
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on May 12, 2016 1:52:20 GMT -6
i hate those cases where everyone thinks a kid is eligible until he isn't... the punishment is well known, one ineligible kid disqualifies an entire team, so why does it still happen nowadays? seems like coaches would have more sense, especially when their team has something to lose
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 6:05:18 GMT -6
You gotta love an article from a guy who doesnt even call for comment from their side. The reason it is one game is bc it was a freaking JV GAME! And they didnt even want to play the game bc it wasnt on the original jv schedule. Nice try on stiring stuff up that you know nothing about. Oh and btw, this rule is so ridiculous that they are doing away with it for next year. Ineligible players can start playing jv as of August. And trust me, I know of a few that played jv ineligibly at your shinning beaken of moral compass you call the great stm. You keep enjoying Perkins tho lol! How many more are you guys going to lose to AES?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 6:06:52 GMT -6
Gotta love when they make it sound like it was a varsity game in the article. The only thing that was true in it was the dollar amount and the 1 game. Which can be a Jamboree lol
|
|
|
Post by btown on May 12, 2016 7:11:17 GMT -6
Gotta love when they make it sound like it was a varsity game in the article. The only thing that was true in it was the dollar amount and the 1 game. Which can be a Jamboree lol When you put the true store out no one wants to comment. Can not wait until June 8th.
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on May 12, 2016 7:53:01 GMT -6
Gotta love when they make it sound like it was a varsity game in the article. The only thing that was true in it was the dollar amount and the 1 game. Which can be a Jamboree lol When you put the true store out no one wants to comment. Can not wait until June 8th. No one may be commenting because they don't know the whole story. You read one thing in the paper and someone disputes what you are reading, anonymously. I've been accused of not telling the truth or believing parents when they tell me something, so hopefully the whole story can come out. I'm not saying I don't believe igt16, just letting you know what happened to me. I'm ready for June 8th as well.
|
|
|
Post by indy on May 12, 2016 7:56:30 GMT -6
When you put the true store out no one wants to comment. Can not wait until June 8th. No one may be commenting because they don't know the whole story. You read one thing in the paper and someone disputes what you are reading, anonymously. I've been accused of not telling the truth or believing parents when they tell me something, so hopefully the whole story can come out. I'm ready for June 8th as well. I'm looking forward to June 9th and beyond.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 8:13:03 GMT -6
When you put the true store out no one wants to comment. Can not wait until June 8th. No one may be commenting because they don't know the whole story. You read one thing in the paper and someone disputes what you are reading, anonymously. I've been accused of not telling the truth or believing parents when they tell me something, so hopefully the whole story can come out. I'm ready for June 8th as well. That's the thing, there is no story. This shouldnt have even been news worthy. The guys was probably looking for things to put in the paper and this came up. Knowing the LHSAA, they probably gave them a one line sentence about the small infraction, and this guy ran with it. If this is the case, this guy needs to write articles about all jv games in all sports, not just about a game that wasnt even suppose to happen. One coach at the spur of the moment said hey, want the play a jv game after the varsity game? Other coach said, sure but we dont have a full jv squad bc we're missing some youngs kids etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by eag on May 12, 2016 8:20:30 GMT -6
No one may be commenting because they don't know the whole story. You read one thing in the paper and someone disputes what you are reading, anonymously. I've been accused of not telling the truth or believing parents when they tell me something, so hopefully the whole story can come out. I'm ready for June 8th as well. That's the thing, there is no story. This shouldnt have even been news worthy. The guys was probably looking for things to put in the paper and this came up. Knowing the LHSAA, they probably gave them a one line sentence about the small infraction, and this guy ran with it. If this is the case, this guy needs to write articles about all jv games in all sports, not just about a game that wasnt even suppose to happen. One coach at the spur of the moment said hey, want the play a jv game after the varsity game? Other coach said, sure but we dont have a full jv squad bc we're missing some youngs kids etc etc. To be honest, in reading the story it certainly seems that they leave out a good bit of detail. That said, it is pretty evident between the lines that this wasn't a big deal. $50? Pretty obvious this wasn't a high level infraction. igt, educate me. I honestly didn't think there was much of anything that would make a player ineligible for JV, at least as pertains to a transfer. What makes a kid ineligible at a JV level? Grades, maybe?
|
|
|
Post by indy on May 12, 2016 8:22:46 GMT -6
"If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed." Mark Twain
Get over it Geez
|
|
|
Post by btown on May 12, 2016 8:41:13 GMT -6
But this is what you get. "Once again we have ANOTHER PUBLIC school leading the way as a CHEATER:" We are all guilty, including myself, of taking stores and using them to benifit our cause. We all have reason why we want the split and why we don't. Can not wait for June 8th to come then everyone does what they think is best for their program.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2016 9:03:34 GMT -6
That's the thing, there is no story. This shouldnt have even been news worthy. The guys was probably looking for things to put in the paper and this came up. Knowing the LHSAA, they probably gave them a one line sentence about the small infraction, and this guy ran with it. If this is the case, this guy needs to write articles about all jv games in all sports, not just about a game that wasnt even suppose to happen. One coach at the spur of the moment said hey, want the play a jv game after the varsity game? Other coach said, sure but we dont have a full jv squad bc we're missing some youngs kids etc etc. To be honest, in reading the story it certainly seems that they leave out a good bit of detail. That said, it is pretty evident between the lines that this wasn't a big deal. $50? Pretty obvious this wasn't a high level infraction. igt, educate me. I honestly didn't think there was much of anything that would make a player ineligible for JV, at least as pertains to a transfer. What makes a kid ineligible at a JV level? Grades, maybe? The rule this year states that a transfer can not even play sub varsity. It didn't use to be like that. This rule has been voted out for next school year going back to what it use to be.
|
|
|
Post by eag on May 12, 2016 11:02:04 GMT -6
Ok, gotcha. I have no issue with it either way, as I can see pros and cons of letting transfer play JV, but they need to stick to one way or the other!
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 13, 2016 8:22:59 GMT -6
But this is what you get. "Once again we have ANOTHER PUBLIC school leading the way as a CHEATER:" We are all guilty, including myself, of taking stores and using them to benifit our cause. We all have reason why we want the split and why we don't. Can not wait for June 8th to come then everyone does what they think is best for their program. Geez officer, I was only doing 75 in a 55? That is a stupid law, I should not have to obey it. That stop sign should not even be there. Golly judge, that is a stupid law the po-po should have not even stopped me. Next year the speed limit will be 85 so why should I be punished now. Please honey, I was only kissing her and she is going away in a couple of months anyway. It was only a JV game and this is all stupid and not news worthy. Cheaters is as cheater does. LOL..... Dang I hate it when that happens.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 13, 2016 8:26:20 GMT -6
To be honest, in reading the story it certainly seems that they leave out a good bit of detail. That said, it is pretty evident between the lines that this wasn't a big deal. $50? Pretty obvious this wasn't a high level infraction. igt, educate me. I honestly didn't think there was much of anything that would make a player ineligible for JV, at least as pertains to a transfer. What makes a kid ineligible at a JV level? Grades, maybe? The rule this year states that a transfer can not even play sub varsity. It didn't use to be like that. This rule has been voted out for next school year going back to what it use to be. Just another example of public school principals establishing a rule to "curb" the transfers to Private schools only to be found the ones violating the rule. It makes no difference whether it is a JV or Varsity game, the Lafayette High principal voted in favor of this rule and now they are only upset about it because it applies to them. Man up, they screwed upped. That is what you call hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by indy on May 13, 2016 8:30:54 GMT -6
The rule this year states that a transfer can not even play sub varsity. It didn't use to be like that. This rule has been voted out for next school year going back to what it use to be. Just another example of public school principals establishing a rule to "curb" the transfers to Private schools only to be found the ones violating the rule. It makes no difference whether it is a JV or Varsity game, the Lafayette High principal voted in favor of this rule and now they are only upset about it because it applies to them. Man up, they screwed upped. That is what you call hypocrisy. Bob did say that public schools bend the rules but only on a minamal basis, guessing this is one of those rare times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2016 9:39:23 GMT -6
But this is what you get. "Once again we have ANOTHER PUBLIC school leading the way as a CHEATER:" We are all guilty, including myself, of taking stores and using them to benifit our cause. We all have reason why we want the split and why we don't. Can not wait for June 8th to come then everyone does what they think is best for their program. Geez officer, I was only doing 75 in a 55? That is a stupid law, I should not have to obey it. That stop sign should not even be there. Golly judge, that is a stupid law the po-po should have not even stopped me. Next year the speed limit will be 85 so why should I be punished now. Please honey, I was only kissing her and she is going away in a couple of months anyway. It was only a JV game and this is all stupid and not news worthy. Cheaters is as cheater does. LOL..... Dang I hate it when that happens. Best thing you can possibly do at this point is delete your account on here. Bc comparing having to play a jv kid in an unscheduled jv game to reckless operation of a vehicle at 20 mph over the speed limit, shows your level of comprehension about the subject. But keep paying admission to the games, we always enjoy the support of the fans lol.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on May 13, 2016 9:49:07 GMT -6
Geez officer, I was only doing 75 in a 55? That is a stupid law, I should not have to obey it. That stop sign should not even be there. Golly judge, that is a stupid law the po-po should have not even stopped me. Next year the speed limit will be 85 so why should I be punished now. Please honey, I was only kissing her and she is going away in a couple of months anyway. It was only a JV game and this is all stupid and not news worthy. Cheaters is as cheater does. LOL..... Dang I hate it when that happens. Best thing you can possibly do at this point is delete your account on here. Bc comparing having to play a jv kid in an unscheduled jv game to reckless operation of a vehicle at 20 mph over the speed limit, shows your level of comprehension about the subject. But keep paying admission to the games, we always enjoy the support of the fans lol. SILENCE, THERE MUST BE SILENCE. Amazing how some always want to silence the opposition. Fact remains a violation occurred if it was reversed and STM was the culprit, it not only would have been news worthy and right, it would have appeared in the Daily Advertiser on the front page with photographs. But its Lafayette High, so it never shows up in the local newspaper. Only in the Baton Rouge newspaper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2016 10:13:28 GMT -6
Best thing you can possibly do at this point is delete your account on here. Bc comparing having to play a jv kid in an unscheduled jv game to reckless operation of a vehicle at 20 mph over the speed limit, shows your level of comprehension about the subject. But keep paying admission to the games, we always enjoy the support of the fans lol. SILENCE, THERE MUST BE SILENCE. Amazing how some always want to silence the opposition. Fact remains a violation occurred if it was reversed and STM was the culprit, it not only would have been news worthy and right, it would have appeared in the Daily Advertiser on the front page with photographs. But its Lafayette High, so it never shows up in the local newspaper. Only in the Baton Rouge newspaper. As it should be
|
|