[BoyleCounty]

Once again, Boyle had nothing to do with the late 1990's suit.

By the way. In todays Danville paper.

http://www.amnews.com/stories/2010/07/16/spo.295955.sto

Any chance of Will Dunn being eligible after this? Anyone?

[jbwill2]

I totally disagree with the rule for what it's worth. I believe that with only 4 years to participate in high school sports, if a kid or his parents are dissatisfied with a coach (for any one of numerous reasons; some valid and some invalid) the kid should be able to freely transfer to a school with a coach the player and parents approve of. But the rule is what the schools voted on and approved so that's what the KHSAA staff and Board have to follow (even if the staff and Board may disagree with the rule). I fully realize that there will be those people that think a kid should be forced to stay at a school and play for a coach the player disapproves of because that will teach him a lesson in life. I get that. But in my opinion it's not the job of the KHSAA rule system to teach the kid that lesson; it's the job of his parents and if his parents want to allow the kid to transfer for a silly or stupid reason, so be it and shame on the parents.

Amen! Kids have parents/legal guardians whose job is to look after their child's interests and act accordingly. Unless the State can make a case the kid's parents are neglecting the child in making decisions about where he/she goes to school from year to year, then it should be the parent's right to take their kid wherever they want to go and expect he/she can fully participate in all the school's available activities.

If the kid's parents feel their son's best interests are served by having him change schools SOLELY for football, then so be it. Some people (including the former KHSAA commissioner, apparently) feel this is not a legitimate reason for changing schools. Interestingly, participation in organized school athletics is considered a protective factor for a child (with regard to decreasing the risk of that child engaging in illegal behavior and abusing illicit drugs/alcohol later on). So, the issue of participation in school sports is no minor matter, and if the kid's parents feel he can get more out of his athletic participation at one school than another, then have at it!

[Hatz]

Of course I know Boyle doesnt file suit, but they know how to work the system and dont think they arent advising their student athletes on what to do. Im not saying its a bad thing. I think Kentucky should be more like Ohio.

If I'm right, I think you are speaking of the Bobby Leffew suit. Bobby wasn't 20 I believe but 19. What happened, if memory serves, was he had a devestating knee injury right at the start of his Senior Year. Every school interested in him backed off and the family petitioned to allow an extra year of eligibility for him to play so he could earn a scholly. UL rewarded him with one the next year and he started all 4 years at UL as a D Lineman (despite playing high school at LB). :Thumbs:

[Rebel55]

If I'm right, I think you are speaking of the Bobby Leffew suit. Bobby wasn't 20 I believe but 19. What happened, if memory serves, was he had a devestating knee injury right at the start of his Senior Year. Every school interested in him backed off and the family petitioned to allow an extra year of eligibility for him to play so he could earn a scholly. UL rewarded him with one the next year and he started all 4 years at UL as a D Lineman (despite playing high school at LB). :Thumbs:

Correct. If Bobby was 20 he would have not recieved another chance. He got the extra year because he was 19. Like Hatz said all the schools backed off (UK) after his injury during the first game of his Sr. year against Beechwood. This second chance changed this mans life forever and he became, I believe a freshman all-american his first year at Louisville.

[Hatz]

The Dunn's were set to appear in court today to seek an injunction vs. the KHSAA. But the KHSAA has petitioned to move the case to a Federal Court in Lexington.

http://www.amnews.com/stories/2010/07/21/loc.722949.sto

[charlie22]

Amen! Kids have parents/legal guardians whose job is to look after their child's interests and act accordingly. Unless the State can make a case the kid's parents are neglecting the child in making decisions about where he/she goes to school from year to year, then it should be the parent's right to take their kid wherever they want to go and expect he/she can fully participate in all the school's available activities.

If the kid's parents feel their son's best interests are served by having him change schools SOLELY for football, then so be it. Some people (including the former KHSAA commissioner, apparently) feel this is not a legitimate reason for changing schools. Interestingly, participation in organized school athletics is considered a protective factor for a child (with regard to decreasing the risk of that child engaging in illegal behavior and abusing illicit drugs/alcohol later on). So, the issue of participation in school sports is no minor matter, and if the kid's parents feel he can get more out of his athletic participation at one school than another, then have at it!

Please keep in mind that the former Commissioner, like the current Commissioner, is charged with enforcing the rules enacted by the member schools, even if the Commissioner doesn't agree with them. So while I know folks want to blame the KHSAA, the fault if you will lies more with the member schools for enacting such a rule. Why would member schools impose such a rule? In my opinion it's simply because there are a lot more "have nots" than there are "haves", and the "have nots" are concerned that if kids could freely transfer they'd lose a lot more of their talented athletes to the "haves". Again don't blame the KHSAA; blame the schools that enacted the rules.

[French For President]

I usually just know enough to be dangerous. So Hatz or anyone please help. Wasen't there a vote a few years back by the participating schools to seperate public and private schools. When the motion or whatever they do went to the board it was shot down.

If the above is true maybe the same thing happened with the rule about transfering.

Just thought I would ask, thanks in advance.:thanks:

[charlie22]

I usually just know enough to be dangerous. So Hatz or anyone please help. Wasen't there a vote a few years back by the participating schools to seperate public and private schools. When the motion or whatever they do went to the board it was shot down.

If the above is true maybe the same thing happened with the rule about transfering.

Just thought I would ask, thanks in advance.:thanks:

That's a very fair question/observation. Yes you are right in that the board voted (in a very close vote) not to support the public private split because they felt it would not be in the best interest of high school athletics; it was almost impossible to do logistically; and would be extremely expensive. Furthermore, it could force a very small private school to have to play a huge private school if there was going to be one private school division playoff system due to the small number of private schools in Ky. That was the mentality of the KHSAA board at that time I was told by someone I know who was on the board at the time.

I don't think the problems with the transfer rule are of quite the magnitude in the eyes of the KHSAA as were the problems with the public private split proposal. And I didn't meant to imply that everyone associated with the KHSAA is not in favor of the current transfer rule. Plus keep in mind that the transfer rule has been in effect for quite some time. Who knows: if the transfer rule was just now being placed in effect, perhaps it wouldn't pass KHSAA review either. Hard to say. I will say this: as Tackett pointed out in his recent interview with the CJ, the mentality at the General Assembly these days is "let the kids" play; it's about participation not about what impact freer transfers will have on who wins what state championship. If enough people opposed to the current rule contact their legislators and enough legislators want the rule to change, it will change. I don't think the change will come from the schools however, simply because there are more "have nots" than there are "haves". I don't think the change will come from the KHSAA board either because I believe 14 of the 18 board members are elected by the schools. Enough did buck up to resist the pressure of the schools that elected them to vote down the public private split, but I don't see that happening on any attempt to change the transfer rule "internally".