|
Post by fanofthegame on Oct 13, 2019 9:45:47 GMT -5
So basically what you're saying is do away with any transfer or switching school rules out there and make it a free for all? Since they can't even be allowed to get past step one, whats the sense of having anything in place?? Go ahead, go back to the old days of free for all.... Private schools would dominate once again... Yes. If a kid is properly enrolled in a public school, let him play unless there are local issues concerning grades, discipline or health. We need more kids playing, not less. If your school has a problem with how another school does sports, don't schedule them. If you lose to them in the playoffs?...guess what...that is one of those life lessons in adversity you mentioned earlier. And BTW, don't assume the transfer problem has been fixed by OHSAA rules. Certain programs will always find a way to game the system. Pretty soon you guys will be okay with an OHSAA Swat Team that swoops in on families after midnight searching for evidence of true residency such as orphan socks and husbands sleeping on the couch. Let’s take your argument to it’s logical conclusion. Sports are, by definition, governed by rules. The OHSAA sets the game rules, too. If a school decides the transfer rules don’t apply they can also decide blocking in the back or pass interference shouldn’t apply to them. Every member school has voluntarily decided to submit to these rules. They could choose not to be members. They could be independent. They could organize an entirely different organization. I agree that enforcement of the rules by the OHSAA seems arbitrary. That needs fixed. I think failing to penalize players/schools who transfer purely for athletics will adversely affect high school sports. There will be haves and have nots. The disparity between schools will grow. Think baseball payrolls versus NFL payrolls (no parity v league mandated parity). I agree proving intent behind the move is difficult, but IMO an attempt has to be made to determine it.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 9:51:43 GMT -5
I’m away from my computer right now so I can’t verify, But I remember reading that essentially OHSAA believed the father was lying about how much time he spent at his ‘new place’ due to conflicting reports between the father and mother about where the daughter? was living. So, the father did ‘move’ to the OH district, however still spent a majority of his time in Fremont and then lied to try to downplay how much time he actually wasn’t in OH. I’m just going on memory here. I’d recommend reading the OHSAA transcript notes and OHSAA closing remarks. I think when you factor in the timeline of AAU, the setup behind the scenes of that, the timeline of the known court documented dates, and the several contradictory statements given by the plaintiffs, it does not look good for the Plaintiffs or the OH school system. I have never understood why all the drama is needed. Make the rules simple and go. Do they live inside the district? If parents want to physically pick up they home and move it just for a kids education why is that not allowed? Eliminate the exceptions and just make the rules simple and clear. Bingo! We all say we believe sports is beneficial to the maturity, development and overall education of young people. But when parents make moves which they believe improves the sports situation for their child we cry foul. Why would anyone try to force parents into keeping their kids in sub-optimal situations. It reminds me of the leftists who would rather have the poor kids attend failing inner city schools than spend the same amount of money on vouchers the parents can use to put the child a better situation. Oh wait! A cabal of high school principals restricting the freedom of families to improve their situation just like leftist politicians and the education lobby? Whood of thunk it? lol
|
|
|
Post by dolittle on Oct 13, 2019 10:32:16 GMT -5
So the OHSAA and the schools who proposed and voted on the rules shouldn't apply to everyone right?
|
|
|
Post by galion on Oct 13, 2019 10:49:51 GMT -5
If your school chooses to be a member of the OHSAA by definition they are agreeing to whatever regulations are in place to govern it. And if your school is a public school in the State of Ohio, they are bound by state law as determined by state judges. If you are a principal and have the choice of violating an OHSAA bylaw or a state court ruling, which do you choose? It's not a ruling it's an injunction. Eventually there will be a ruling and it won't go in OH's favor. All they are doing now are potentially screwing over the kids that are there legitimately.
|
|
|
Post by galion on Oct 13, 2019 10:54:43 GMT -5
I have never understood why all the drama is needed. Make the rules simple and go. Do they live inside the district? If parents want to physically pick up they home and move it just for a kids education why is that not allowed? Eliminate the exceptions and just make the rules simple and clear. Bingo! We all say we believe sports is beneficial to the maturity, development and overall education of young people. But when parents make moves which they believe improves the sports situation for their child we cry foul. Why would anyone try to force parents into keeping their kids in sub-optimal situations. It reminds me of the leftists who would rather have the poor kids attend failing inner city schools than spend the same amount of money on vouchers the parents can use to put the child a better situation. Oh wait! A cabal of high school principals restricting the freedom of families to improve their situation just like leftist politicians and the education lobby? Whood of thunk it? lol Really? Leftists and illegal immigrants. Do you want throw a few more straw men out there to muddy the waters?
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 13, 2019 11:10:58 GMT -5
I have never understood why all the drama is needed. Make the rules simple and go. Do they live inside the district? If parents want to physically pick up they home and move it just for a kids education why is that not allowed? Eliminate the exceptions and just make the rules simple and clear. Bingo! We all say we believe sports is beneficial to the maturity, development and overall education of young people. But when parents make moves which they believe improves the sports situation for their child we cry foul. Why would anyone try to force parents into keeping their kids in sub-optimal situations. It reminds me of the leftists who would rather have the poor kids attend failing inner city schools than spend the same amount of money on vouchers the parents can use to put the child a better situation. Oh wait! A cabal of high school principals restricting the freedom of families to improve their situation just like leftist politicians and the education lobby? Whood of thunk it? lol Most cry foul when a kid changes schools for sports but still sleeps in the same bed he has for the last 10 years. OR many get upset when a fan or fans talk about success and tradition when their recent success is being built of kids who have won their colors for one season.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 11:19:36 GMT -5
Yes. If a kid is properly enrolled in a public school, let him play unless there are local issues concerning grades, discipline or health. We need more kids playing, not less. If your school has a problem with how another school does sports, don't schedule them. If you lose to them in the playoffs?...guess what...that is one of those life lessons in adversity you mentioned earlier. And BTW, don't assume the transfer problem has been fixed by OHSAA rules. Certain programs will always find a way to game the system. Pretty soon you guys will be okay with an OHSAA Swat Team that swoops in on families after midnight searching for evidence of true residency such as orphan socks and husbands sleeping on the couch. Let’s take your argument to it’s logical conclusion. Sports are, by definition, governed by rules. The OHSAA sets the game rules, too. If a school decides the transfer rules don’t apply they can also decide blocking in the back or pass interference shouldn’t apply to them. Every member school has voluntarily decided to submit to these rules. They could choose not to be members. They could be independent. They could organize an entirely different organization. I agree that enforcement of the rules by the OHSAA seems arbitrary. That needs fixed. I think failing to penalize players/schools who transfer purely for athletics will adversely affect high school sports. There will be haves and have nots. The disparity between schools will grow. Think baseball payrolls versus NFL payrolls (no parity v league mandated parity). I agree proving intent behind the move is difficult, but IMO an attempt has to be made to determine it. Good post. In a nutshell, I put more value on the freedom of the individual than I do on the fuzzy argument that transfers for athletics will adversely affect high school sports. A universal rule for blocking in the back is absolutely necessary if the game is to have fairness and credibility. And the purpose of the rule, injury prevention, is very important to parents and children. I can see no scenario where a kids future would be compromised because he couldn't block somebody in the back. By contrast, transfer and eligibility rules don't affect how the game is played, but who is playing the game. And the purpose of the rule is to prevent certain teams from becoming too talented. Is that a good enough reason to keep a kid from playing? Parity? And if we are willing to interfere in parental choices and a kid's future to improve parity, why not interfere in some other people's lives? Why not say that the head coach of any team that goes undefeated must coach for a sub .500 team next year or not coach at all? Why not say that all win-less teams increase their coach's pay to the region average? I don't think the desire for parity justifies any of those actions and I also don't think it justifies making a kid ineligible because his parents moved him to that district for what OHSAA thinks are the wrong reasons. I just fundamentally disagree with the idea of seeking parity by restricting the free movement families and the eligibility of kids. Kids do not belong to a school district because they lived there for X amount of years. Meanwhile, coaches, which are the biggest factor in wins & losses can transfer to any school at any time without a peep from OHSAA. If OHSAA cared about parity they would've suspended Bob Haas or Joe Balogh or Jude Roth or Jeff Jordan back in the day. That would have had 10 times the effect of what they're doing now. Funny how even though adults have always been the ones involved in high school recruiting, its always the kids that end up getting punished, either by losing eligibility or forfeiting games. Meh. Its much easier to screw with the random kid from a broken home than the adult school employee who supposedly recruited him. Seventeen year-olds don't have unions.
|
|
|
Post by kingmartinez on Oct 13, 2019 11:25:51 GMT -5
Whittaker - it's obvious you got beef with a principal or an administrator involved in this. CS? GP? DH? Enlighten us so you POV is clearer.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 11:26:45 GMT -5
Bingo! We all say we believe sports is beneficial to the maturity, development and overall education of young people. But when parents make moves which they believe improves the sports situation for their child we cry foul. Why would anyone try to force parents into keeping their kids in sub-optimal situations. It reminds me of the leftists who would rather have the poor kids attend failing inner city schools than spend the same amount of money on vouchers the parents can use to put the child a better situation. Oh wait! A cabal of high school principals restricting the freedom of families to improve their situation just like leftist politicians and the education lobby? Whood of thunk it? lol Most cry foul when a kid changes schools for sports but still sleeps in the same bed he has for the last 10 years. OR many get upset when a fan or fans talk about success and tradition when their recent success is being built of kids who have won their colors for one season. Does OHSAA have a rule about which beds head coaches sleep in? Because I've got a couple stories...
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 13, 2019 11:29:21 GMT -5
OHSAA does not have an eligibility rule about where coaches sleep at night.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 11:33:13 GMT -5
Whittaker - it's obvious you got beef with a principal or an administrator involved in this. CS? GP? DH? Enlighten us so you POV is clearer. Wrong. Try to avoid the ad hominem. Just stick to arguments and opinions. I know many don't agree with me. That's fine. Nothing personal. I just always lean toward max individual liberty. I agree that govt is necessary but it has the tendency to always seek expansion.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 11:37:16 GMT -5
OHSAA does not have an eligibility rule about where coaches sleep at night. That's a damn good for coaches. Also principals. God forbid the makers of the rules would be required to eat, sleep and carouse in their own district or face suspension.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 11:44:49 GMT -5
Okay staff, I did my best to get the post counts up. After this many years I felt I owed at least that much.
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 13, 2019 12:07:12 GMT -5
OHSAA does not have an eligibility rule about where coaches sleep at night. That's a damn good for coaches. Also principals. God forbid the makers of the rules would be required to eat, sleep and carouse in their own district or face suspension. Try to imagine the dynamics of school districts and sports if every administrator and every coach could only be hired by the district that they live in. Do we really want to tell Whirlpool they can only hire Clyde residents?
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 12:53:25 GMT -5
That's a damn good for coaches. Also principals. God forbid the makers of the rules would be required to eat, sleep and carouse in their own district or face suspension. Try to imagine the dynamics of school districts and sports if every administrator and every coach could only be hired by the district that they live in. Do we really want to tell Whirlpool they can only hire Clyde residents? Yep. School admins are the ultimate free agents. Couple years here, Couple years there, Check that box, Get that taxpayer-funded tuition that leads to that taxpayer-funded degree that leads to that taxpayer funded raise. Retire, Collect pension, Get rehired for that taxpayer funded double-dip. No loyalty no matter. Eat, sleep and play where you want. Admins don't get suspended for moving to a different district for more money and a better family fit. But those 17 year-olds from broken homes...they damn well better be loyal to the colors or they won't even dress! We principals decree it!
|
|
|
Post by dolittle on Oct 13, 2019 13:20:27 GMT -5
Comical.
There is no transfer portal in High School.
Why have rules for athletics then? Just free agency all over. With AAU and the travel game, people "recruit" non-stop. Take the rules out, then you will have people flying all over -- becomes the wild, wild west. Do we want that? Do we want teams practicing year round?
Rules and bylaws are in place for a reason, not for convenience
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 13, 2019 16:08:55 GMT -5
Thanks. That was mostly what I was going for. Although there is some truth behind the comedy.
|
|
|
Post by fanofthegame on Oct 13, 2019 18:15:12 GMT -5
Let’s take your argument to it’s logical conclusion. Sports are, by definition, governed by rules. The OHSAA sets the game rules, too. If a school decides the transfer rules don’t apply they can also decide blocking in the back or pass interference shouldn’t apply to them. Every member school has voluntarily decided to submit to these rules. They could choose not to be members. They could be independent. They could organize an entirely different organization. I agree that enforcement of the rules by the OHSAA seems arbitrary. That needs fixed. I think failing to penalize players/schools who transfer purely for athletics will adversely affect high school sports. There will be haves and have nots. The disparity between schools will grow. Think baseball payrolls versus NFL payrolls (no parity v league mandated parity). I agree proving intent behind the move is difficult, but IMO an attempt has to be made to determine it. Good post. In a nutshell, I put more value on the freedom of the individual than I do on the fuzzy argument that transfers for athletics will adversely affect high school sports. A universal rule for blocking in the back is absolutely necessary if the game is to have fairness and credibility. And the purpose of the rule, injury prevention, is very important to parents and children. I can see no scenario where a kids future would be compromised because he couldn't block somebody in the back. By contrast, transfer and eligibility rules don't affect how the game is played, but who is playing the game. And the purpose of the rule is to prevent certain teams from becoming too talented. Is that a good enough reason to keep a kid from playing? Parity? And if we are willing to interfere in parental choices and a kid's future to improve parity, why not interfere in some other people's lives? Why not say that the head coach of any team that goes undefeated must coach for a sub .500 team next year or not coach at all? Why not say that all win-less teams increase their coach's pay to the region average? I don't think the desire for parity justifies any of those actions and I also don't think it justifies making a kid ineligible because his parents moved him to that district for what OHSAA thinks are the wrong reasons. I just fundamentally disagree with the idea of seeking parity by restricting the free movement families and the eligibility of kids. Kids do not belong to a school district because they lived there for X amount of years. Meanwhile, coaches, which are the biggest factor in wins & losses can transfer to any school at any time without a peep from OHSAA. If OHSAA cared about parity they would've suspended Bob Haas or Joe Balogh or Jude Roth or Jeff Jordan back in the day. That would have had 10 times the effect of what they're doing now. Funny how even though adults have always been the ones involved in high school recruiting, its always the kids that end up getting punished, either by losing eligibility or forfeiting games. Meh. Its much easier to screw with the random kid from a broken home than the adult school employee who supposedly recruited him. Seventeen year-olds don't have unions. I appreciate your stance. I’m generally on the side of individual freedom over regulation. Unfortunately I think end result of your stance would be detrimental to high school sports. I barely watch Sunday football because of the shenanigans. There is no loyalty on either side (see Antonio Brown fiasco). College is headed that way (look at how many transfers occur now - see OSU’s would be number two QB). Maybe I’m hopelessly old fashioned to think high school athletics could remain sports in its purest form, home town kids playing for their school and their buddies. I don’t have a problem holding coaches and admins to the same standards as the kids. It might do more harm regarding parity, though. No way a good coach is going to move into an area where he might do the most good.
|
|
|
Post by sportsvideo on Oct 14, 2019 4:19:46 GMT -5
Try to imagine the dynamics of school districts and sports if every administrator and every coach could only be hired by the district that they live in. Do we really want to tell Whirlpool they can only hire Clyde residents? Yep. School admins are the ultimate free agents. Couple years here, Couple years there, Check that box, Get that taxpayer-funded tuition that leads to that taxpayer-funded degree that leads to that taxpayer funded raise. Retire, Collect pension, Get rehired for that taxpayer funded double-dip. No loyalty no matter. Eat, sleep and play where you want. Admins don't get suspended for moving to a different district for more money and a better family fit. But those 17 year-olds from broken homes...they damn well better be loyal to the colors or they won't even dress! We principals decree it! . They’re also paid. Should we be paying student athletes as well? If you’re ok. With St Ed’s loading up the stacked deck and winning 52 state titles in a row with kids 30 miles from their district then I guess we should all be happy about how they pick their team. Enjoy high school football now. It has about 10 more years to live , then it will be a thing of the past.
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 14, 2019 9:26:12 GMT -5
Yep. School admins are the ultimate free agents. Couple years here, Couple years there, Check that box, Get that taxpayer-funded tuition that leads to that taxpayer-funded degree that leads to that taxpayer funded raise. Retire, Collect pension, Get rehired for that taxpayer funded double-dip. No loyalty no matter. Eat, sleep and play where you want. Admins don't get suspended for moving to a different district for more money and a better family fit. But those 17 year-olds from broken homes...they damn well better be loyal to the colors or they won't even dress! We principals decree it! . They’re also paid. Should we be paying student athletes as well? If you’re ok. With St Ed’s loading up the stacked deck and winning 52 state titles in a row with kids 30 miles from their district then I guess we should all be happy about how they pick their team. Enjoy high school football now. It has about 10 more years to live , then it will be a thing of the past. You may be right about the bolded. But why is that a distinct possibility? Isn't it because less and less kids are choosing to play high school football? And why are they not playing? Maybe a combination of these things: ---Ridiculous contracts that discipline kids for just being at a party where people are drinking. Other stupid rules that stupid adults make, thinking they can control other people's kids.(Someone sees a football player smoking a cig in the alley. Boom. He's can't play football. LOL! What high school kid hasn't smoked a cig? Christ!) We need these kids to be in positive activities like sports yet we leap at the chance to kick them out. DUH. ---Fanatic coaches who bench kids for missing practice to go on Christmas and Thanksgiving vacations with their families, or even funerals for grandparents, uncles, etc. Idiots drunk with power. That skinny sophomore gets benched for a game, quits the team, and grows into a 6'2" 200lb stud who psssffffs at the coaches who stop him in the hall and ask him to play football ---Brain dead sports organizations like OHSAA who rule kids ineligible because their parent(s) have either (A) Not filled out paperwork they shouldn't have to fill out, or (B) Moved to put their child in a better position to get a free ride though sports to college worth many tens of thousands of dollars...and told the truth about it. ---Idiot AD's and coaches who schedule games 2+ hours away, oblivious in their little bubble to the burdens it puts on parents and students. They've got their inner circle of connected parents and that's all the feedback they take. ---Coaches who tell kids "either come to non-mandatory summer workouts or you will sit the bench". High school sports is supposed to be there for high school kids. Its not for there to entertain the fans. Its not there to give coaches employment. Its not there so OHSAA can blackmail parents into staying in bad situations. All of these things I listed above are causing less kids to play football and all of them are put into place by adults who claim high school sports is a great benefit to the kids, especially the kids lower the socio-economic scale. OMG! OMG! There's and instagram pic of Jimmy outside the theater Saturday night smoking a cig! OMG! He broke the rules! SPORTS IS A PRIVILEGE! SUSPEND HIM! For the love of God, high school sports is there for people like Jimmy. Leave him the hell alone. Let his parents deal with it. If high school football dies it won't be because of the St Ed's and recruiting. Those things were flourishing back in the 70's and high school football was strong through the 80's and 90's. Hardly anybody made the playoffs but somehow the kids still wanted to play. People who seriously want to save high school football would do well to tune out OHSAA, ADs and most coaches. Go to the only people who can save it. Go to the boys and the parents of the boys. Ask them what they like about it and what they don't like about it. And not just the boys that play. Ask all the boys. And don't record their names. They know how vindictive the coaches, ADs and principals get when criticized...just look at this thread lol. Fortunately I have no fear of y'all lol.
|
|
|
Post by sportsvideo on Oct 14, 2019 18:15:08 GMT -5
. They’re also paid. Should we be paying student athletes as well? If you’re ok. With St Ed’s loading up the stacked deck and winning 52 state titles in a row with kids 30 miles from their district then I guess we should all be happy about how they pick their team. Enjoy high school football now. It has about 10 more years to live , then it will be a thing of the past. You may be right about the bolded. But why is that a distinct possibility? Isn't it because less and less kids are choosing to play high school football? And why are they not playing? Maybe a combination of these things: ---Ridiculous contracts that discipline kids for just being at a party where people are drinking. Other stupid rules that stupid adults make, thinking they can control other people's kids.(Someone sees a football player smoking a cig in the alley. Boom. He's can't play football. LOL! What high school kid hasn't smoked a cig? Christ!) We need these kids to be in positive activities like sports yet we leap at the chance to kick them out. DUH. ---Fanatic coaches who bench kids for missing practice to go on Christmas and Thanksgiving vacations with their families, or even funerals for grandparents, uncles, etc. Idiots drunk with power. That skinny sophomore gets benched for a game, quits the team, and grows into a 6'2" 200lb stud who psssffffs at the coaches who stop him in the hall and ask him to play football ---Brain dead sports organizations like OHSAA who rule kids ineligible because their parent(s) have either (A) Not filled out paperwork they shouldn't have to fill out, or (B) Moved to put their child in a better position to get a free ride though sports to college worth many tens of thousands of dollars...and told the truth about it. ---Idiot AD's and coaches who schedule games 2+ hours away, oblivious in their little bubble to the burdens it puts on parents and students. They've got their inner circle of connected parents and that's all the feedback they take. ---Coaches who tell kids "either come to non-mandatory summer workouts or you will sit the bench". High school sports is supposed to be there for high school kids. Its not for there to entertain the fans. Its not there to give coaches employment. Its not there so OHSAA can blackmail parents into staying in bad situations. All of these things I listed above are causing less kids to play football and all of them are put into place by adults who claim high school sports is a great benefit to the kids, especially the kids lower the socio-economic scale. OMG! OMG! There's and instagram pic of Jimmy outside the theater Saturday night smoking a cig! OMG! He broke the rules! SPORTS IS A PRIVILEGE! SUSPEND HIM! For the love of God, high school sports is there for people like Jimmy. Leave him the hell alone. Let his parents deal with it. If high school football dies it won't be because of the St Ed's and recruiting. Those things were flourishing back in the 70's and high school football was strong through the 80's and 90's. Hardly anybody made the playoffs but somehow the kids still wanted to play. People who seriously want to save high school football would do well to tune out OHSAA, ADs and most coaches. Go to the only people who can save it. Go to the boys and the parents of the boys. Ask them what they like about it and what they don't like about it. And not just the boys that play. Ask all the boys. And don't record their names. They know how vindictive the coaches, ADs and principals get when criticized...just look at this thread lol. Fortunately I have no fear of y'all lol. WoW, just wow! So your league has no rules. I'd love to see how you raise kids.. Sure son, go out with your friends,, here is the key to the door come home when ever you feel like it.. if you want to drink a beer or two.. go ahead..have fun.. 70's 80's 90's compared to today is like apples and oranges.. kids were raised totally different then.. more respect, more disciplined.. you played sports because it was fun..yet you still had those same rules that kids have today.. the difference is.. mom and dad had rules too, and they was alot more tougher on you than parents are today with kids... hell we rode the bus to and from school, we wanted a car we got a job and bought our own.. now days mommy goes to school and drops off kiddos and picks them up... don't worry bout a car..we will get you one... You want a day off school son? hell yes i'll call them right now and tell them you're not coming in... Its no gosh darn wonder employers are struggling to find good workers today.. this is how they're raised... Football like any other sport or activity is to teach leadership, to teach teamwork, to teach how to prepare, to teach responsibility. Its hard for coaches to do that when we have parents who want to be jack@$$es.. And they wonder why their kid can't keep a job, and is begging for money at 30 years of age....
|
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Oct 14, 2019 18:18:28 GMT -5
I thought it was supposed to be fun. And I agree that if someone is allowed by law to go to school there they should not be forbidden by an outside agency from participating in all school activities.
|
|
|
Post by sportsvideo on Oct 14, 2019 18:21:27 GMT -5
I thought it was supposed to be fun. well today's world they only have fun if they make their own rules.....
|
|
|
Post by dolittle on Oct 14, 2019 19:12:11 GMT -5
I thought it was supposed to be fun. And I agree that if someone is allowed by law to go to school there they should not be forbidden by an outside agency from participating in all school activities. The OHSAA is a GOVERNING agency overseeing sports in OHIO. Why is that so hard to understand? Simply put they skirted the rules, ruled twice to be ineligible, found a judge (who resides in Oak Harbor) and ruled in their favor. Bottom line parents are NUTS today.
|
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Oct 16, 2019 10:08:33 GMT -5
I thought it was supposed to be fun. And I agree that if someone is allowed by law to go to school there they should not be forbidden by an outside agency from participating in all school activities. The OHSAA is a GOVERNING agency overseeing sports in OHIO. Why is that so hard to understand? The Ohio General Assembly is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Ohio Department of Education is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Benton Carroll Salem Board of Education is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Ottawa County Common Pleas Court is a GOVERNMENT agency. The OHSAA is not a government agency. According to the judge the Dowling family did comply with the rules of the OHSAA and the OHSAA did not. The Dowling's should not be punished when the OHSAA does not even go by their own rules. That's just absurd. Does that help?
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Oct 16, 2019 10:13:14 GMT -5
If the OHSAA appeals and wins do second half of the season and playoff wins become forfeits? Interesting question. Also, is there any chance of the appeal happening before the playoffs start? Because a potential forfeiture of half of Oak Harbor's wins would have huge ripple effects for many teams playoff hopes and seedings
|
|
|
Post by Whittaker on Oct 16, 2019 15:41:14 GMT -5
The OHSAA is a GOVERNING agency overseeing sports in OHIO. Why is that so hard to understand? The Ohio General Assembly is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Ohio Department of Education is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Benton Carroll Salem Board of Education is a GOVERNMENT agency. The Ottawa County Common Pleas Court is a GOVERNMENT agency. The OHSAA is not a government agency. According to the judge the Dowling family did comply with the rules of the OHSAA and the OHSAA did not. The Dowling's should not be punished when the OHSAA does not even go by their own rules. That's just absurd. Does that help? BOOM!
|
|
|
Post by dolittle on Oct 16, 2019 15:59:54 GMT -5
The OHSAA is a GOVERNING over the athletics...No the GOVERNMENT.
Lets do away with the OHSAA and have nothing?
|
|
|
Post by kingmartinez on Oct 16, 2019 18:45:56 GMT -5
Governing does not mean government.
adjective having authority to conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of a state, organization, or people.
|
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Oct 16, 2019 19:51:46 GMT -5
The OHSAA is a GOVERNING over the athletics...No the GOVERNMENT. Lets do away with the OHSAA and have nothing? If the OHSAA is not going to follow it's own rules then you have nothing, or anarchy. It was the judge who restored order.
|
|