|
|
Post by squeak11 on Jan 31, 2014 13:30:13 GMT -6
What if I give you my free food privileges I get at Vidrine's? Would you jump on the fire Chad bandwagon? I have plenty of other strong connections too What connections would you have for free food without me? Ill starve you all for this mutiny! Mwuhahahahaha! Now get to work slave boy! You have doubt duty today with high school and club training! And if you don't say yes sir, I'll add double LaPrep data entry duty for you. I'm sure soccermomalways could use the break!  Squeaks post Deleted as a vulgar display of power!   Beauchenecoach |
|
|
|
Post by newosoccerfan on Jan 31, 2014 13:30:39 GMT -6
Anyone know if the split was amended to start next year and still failed? NewO The amendment to change it to 14-15 passed. After that the proposal failed. Any details on why it failed? Ways to pass it in the future? I think it is key to growing soccer in La. NewO |
|
|
|
Post by Chalmetteowl on Jan 31, 2014 13:42:15 GMT -6
The fun begins. Soccer is not indoor basketball, or football. Given the soccer season, weather, holidays, end-or-semester, ACT-testing, etc., there are always going to be tens or hundreds of game cancelations, rescheduling, etc. The LHSAA may be in for a shock at how loose-goosey this sport operates. But in truth, the LHSAA is not particularly good at posting up-to-date results when they are charged with keeping the records. Take a look at basketball for instance - if you can find it on their site - ... many people check Ken's site to see latest BB results becaue of the time lag on the LHSAA. For soccer, I suspect this site will have more, not less, interaction and will still be the place to go for up to date results ... especially if the LHSAA site (?) does not keep up with the pace of play. Incidentally - does anyone know where is the LHSAA website is, and what format, etc.? lhsaa.org scores and schedules are under each individual sport as for results being up to date, i'd be okay with uploading schedules before the season and updating scores once a week as a sufficient amount of time for coaches and ADs to gather results... it should take like 5 minutes out of a coach's time. the LHSAA site isn't a message board with discussion on games... but it serves its purpose and if the sport operates loosey-goosey, it might be good to get some more organization into it. coaches should know when ACT testing and such might occur, and players should be like their counterparts in basketball and football and have a WHO DAT good reason when they miss games... it's part of being on a team |
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 31, 2014 14:00:15 GMT -6
The amendment to change it to 14-15 passed. After that the proposal failed. Any details on why it failed? Ways to pass it in the future? I think it is key to growing soccer in La. NewO As you know, I was for this... But from what I was told. Majority of coaches, especially above 3A, want the 4 equal division set up. It is more even and makes more sense across the board. I think both would grow soccer... And perhaps the 4 division set up would satisfy everyone more and still keep the sport the same across the board of all schools and divisions. |
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 31, 2014 14:02:06 GMT -6
The parish lines being the new LHSAA zones for schools passed.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Jan 31, 2014 14:41:18 GMT -6
The parish lines being the new LHSAA zones for schools passed. This is huge, especially for non-publics, meaning that incoming 9th graders from ANYWHERE within a parish will be immediately eligible. here is Ascension Parish, it means that any incoming 9th grader will be immediately eligible to participate in varsity athletics regardless of where they live in the parish. The Ascension Parish School board still has designated school attendance zones, meaning that it currently wont allow this kind of movement for public school students under its own policy, yet a student could move to a Private school The "below 7th grade rule" passed, meaning that no longer will students at any school be able to participate in ANY level of a sport below the the 7th grade. A rule change proposal that was a hot button a few years ago, but has been largely overlooked this year, was a change to the independent club coaching restrictions. Right now, HS coaches can only coach club teams with no more than 6 players on them from their school--regardless of gender. The rule change proposal was offered this year to allow club coaches to coach the opposite gender in club from their HS affiliation with no restriction. This would have been huge. It failed though, so the 6 man rule is still in effect. I'm still trying to get some info on the proposal that removes a year of eligibility for a student athlete that participates in varsity athletics at one school during their 8th grade year and then moves to another school in 9th Grade. So sorry to hear the DIII split didnt pass. Evidently the amendment to move it to next year passed, but the motion for the split failed--by a fairly wide margin. Looks like the best we're gonna do is go with a 4 Division system--which for all intents and purposes WONT provide for the "fairness" that the 5A and 4A schools that voted against are looking for..........but thats an argument for another day. |
|
|
|
Post by methuselah on Jan 31, 2014 15:33:56 GMT -6
The parish lines being the new LHSAA zones for schools passed. This IS very intriguing. But like Coachray says I guess it is still subject to local school board attendance zones. We have an entire school on the west bank of our parish - St. James High School - which doesn't have soccer (at least not yet) and I always felt bad for any of the kids that go there that would want to play. |
|
|
|
Post by Chalmetteowl on Jan 31, 2014 18:24:13 GMT -6
The parish lines being the new LHSAA zones for schools passed. This is huge, especially for non-publics, meaning that incoming 9th graders from ANYWHERE within a parish will be immediately eligible. here is Ascension Parish, it means that any incoming 9th grader will be immediately eligible to participate in varsity athletics regardless of where they live in the parish. The Ascension Parish School board still has designated school attendance zones, meaning that it currently wont allow this kind of movement for public school students under its own policy, yet a student could move to a Private school The "below 7th grade rule" passed, meaning that no longer will students at any school be able to participate in ANY level of a sport below the the 7th grade. A rule change proposal that was a hot button a few years ago, but has been largely overlooked this year, was a change to the independent club coaching restrictions. Right now, HS coaches can only coach club teams with no more than 6 players on them from their school--regardless of gender. The rule change proposal was offered this year to allow club coaches to coach the opposite gender in club from their HS affiliation with no restriction. This would have been huge. It failed though, so the 6 man rule is still in effect. I'm still trying to get some info on the proposal that removes a year of eligibility for a student athlete that participates in varsity athletics at one school during their 8th grade year and then moves to another school in 9th Grade. So sorry to hear the DIII split didnt pass. Evidently the amendment to move it to next year passed, but the motion for the split failed--by a fairly wide margin. Looks like the best we're gonna do is go with a 4 Division system--which for all intents and purposes WONT provide for the "fairness" that the 5A and 4A schools that voted against are looking for..........but thats an argument for another day. i do have a problem with the small schools essentially running the LHSAA... it doesn't seem fair to guarantee every small school into the playoffs while the big schools still have a chance to miss out... hopefully for soccer we see 5 equal divisions in the near future, each with 16 team playoff brackets, kind of like volleyball |
|
|
|
Post by newosoccerfan on Jan 31, 2014 18:54:58 GMT -6
Any details on why it failed? Ways to pass it in the future? I think it is key to growing soccer in La. NewO As you know, I was for this... But from what I was told. Majority of coaches, especially above 3A, want the 4 equal division set up. It is more even and makes more sense across the board. I think both would grow soccer... And perhaps the 4 division set up would satisfy everyone more and still keep the sport the same across the board of all schools and divisions. I just think we need some expansion now, to encourage smaller schools to start and maintain soccer programs because they won't have to compete with schools that are so much larger than they are. I believe that is where the most growth will come from. How long would a 4 equal divisions proposal take to put together, when is the earliest it could be voted on, and when is the earliest it could be effective? NewO |
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jan 31, 2014 19:05:54 GMT -6
So how is eligibility stuff with incoming students going to work for private schools? I'm looking at the agenda for the meeting and I'm trying to make sense out of what passed.
Let me see if I have this right: kid lives in New Orleans, enters Jesuit for 8th grade. He is eligible regardless of where he went to grade school (could've been public, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Orleans Parish, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Jefferson Parish), as long as the school was an elementary (or non-LHSAA?) school. I believe an amendment failed to continue the rule (I can't remember the number and I can't find it in the handbook) where a player could play for one LHSAA school in 8th grade and then transfer to another school in the same attendance zone for 9th grade, or where a player could come from an elementary school in a different zone/parish and be eligible right away. I believe someone had given the example of kids who play varsity at Lusher in 8th grade, then go to Franklin for high school and are eligible right away. Would that be no longer allowed?
Kid lives in Jefferson Parish and goes to a Catholic elementary school in Orleans Parish, then goes to Jesuit for 8th grade. He is immediately eligible under 1.14.3.1.
Kid lives in Jefferson Parish and goes to a Catholic elementary school in Jefferson Parish, then goes to Jesuit for 8th grade. Eligible under rule 1.14.3.2 "Provided the student’s situation is approved by the Executive Director or his/her designee." What does that mean? Does approval have to be granted if the steps outlined in the rule are followed?
Kid lives in Jefferson Parish and goes to a public school, then goes to Jesuit for 8th grade. He is not eligible until 9th grade.
What does "school system" mean? It's clear enough for public schools, but what about private schools? In the Archdiocese of New Orleans, some schools (like Jesuit) are independently run but are still overseen by the Archdiocese. Others are directly run by the Archdiocese (e.g. Chapelle). I presume they are all treated the same, but that isn't made clear. That also seems like a huge advantage for the Catholic schools compared to the other private schools (and I say that as a Catholic who graduated form a Catholic high school and works at a Catholic high school). Are there any "school systems" comprised of non-Catholic private schools, either religious or not? Can a kid from Trinity Episcopal transfer to St. Martin's Episcopal and play right away?
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Jan 31, 2014 19:09:19 GMT -6
I cannot recall any evidence that fear of competing against bigger schools has inhibited starting a soccer program in a single smaller school. I think this has just been an assumption, or the usual "we can't win a state championship" complaint similar to the desire to shed private schools in other sports.
Class A schools have won D-III, most recently Country Day two years ago. Class B is the same size as Class A, just without football. Maybe the three divisions with equal number of schools will be successful and still allow a State Championship to be special.
RE: eligibility. Apparently now a 9th grader can be immediately eligible at any school of his first choice in his parish of residence. If he later transfers from private to public, or from public to private within his parish, he is immediately eligible at his new school. But if he transfers from public to public, or from private to private, or he later returns to his original choice, he must sit a year.
What is not addressed is the magnet schools. What if a 10th grader from a D-rated public school in Jefferson Parish passes the admissions test and gets into Thom Jeff, or Haynes, or Pat Taylor? Those schools should be treated like a different category than just another public school.
We have a unfortunate case. An immigrant's kid started at Riverdale in ninth, transferred to Ridgewood for 3 days at start of his soph. year, some issues with finance so returned to Riverdale just after school year started. Next year, 11th grade, he was accepted to Haynes, passing the entrance exam. He was not eligible at Riverdale is soph year, and had to sit out his junior year at Haynes. Well, that's the rules. But it doesn't seem fair to the kid, taking away part of his high school experience. If he had been in Orleans parish, those schools are not magnet, but charter schools, so a transfer from any other school in Orleans parish is immediately eligible... i.e. Lusher to Ben Franklin. |
|
|
|
Post by newosoccerfan on Jan 31, 2014 20:51:57 GMT -6
I cannot recall any evidence that fear of competing against bigger schools has inhibited starting a soccer program in a single smaller school. I think this has just been an assumption, or the usual "we can't win a state championship" complaint similar to the desire to shed private schools in other sports.
Class A schools have won D-III, most recently Country Day two years ago. Class B is the same size as Class A, just without football. Maybe the three divisions with equal number of schools will be successful and still allow a State Championship to be special.
Boomer, Have you asked any Class A or smaller schools to start a soccer program and listened to their reply? Asked any of the Class A or smaller schools why they only play a district schedule in soccer? Why they opted out of the soccer playoffs? If you want evidence, you have to seek it out. Also, I don't think one (1!) Class A boys school getting to a DIII semi-final in the last 10-12 years is evidence of equal competition in DIII. In fact, I think it is evidence of the inability of Class A schools to compete in soccer. (And that team, Country Day, won their quarter final game 1-0 and won their semi-final game in PKs before winning their DIII Championship 1-0. My point? Even that team nearly didn't make the semi-finals.) That Country Day team is the very rare exception to the rule of a lack of competitiveness (as measured by merely a DIII semi-finals berth) of Class A schools in DIII soccer over the last 10-12 years. There has been one Class A DIII semi-final team out of 48 DIII semi-final teams (2%!) in the last 12 years for a class, Class A, with about 33% of the teams in DIII. Class A schools can't even get to the semi-finals in DIII, let alone advance further. There has to be a better system for high school soccer than three divisions. NewO |
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Jan 31, 2014 21:40:42 GMT -6
Well, Northlake only moved to 2A a couple of years ago... but I understand your point. It's kind of chicken and egg though... there aren't many 1A/B schools playing soccer so statistically they don't often advance, or is it they don't play because they can't advance?... which came first? And let me ask this... how man 3A schools have won vs 2A schools?
I guess I'm not sold that school size has a close relationship with competence. It is just as intimidating for ... say ... 5A St. Augustine to start a program as it is for 1A Ecole. The issue might be more related to school athletic culture, dedicated coaching, etc. I suspect that Curtis could have a good soccer program with the right coaching effort and school support.
But how does creating another championship class help draw schools into playing soccer? You will still have 5 or 6 top schools in each division dominating year after year, and the differential between them and the bottom schools will still be huge. I just think something more is needed to grow the game. Darn if I know what it is though...
I do know that under certain circumstances, a couple of focused coaches can go into a school with no soccer program and given the right student body, very quickly put a respectable team on the field. It's been done and once upon a time a start-up first-year team defeated the No. 1 ranked division team (at the time) in a season game before.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Jan 31, 2014 21:55:09 GMT -6
So how is eligibility stuff with incoming students going to work for private schools? I'm looking at the agenda for the meeting and I'm trying to make sense out of what passed. Let me see if I have this right: kid lives in New Orleans, enters Jesuit for 8th grade. He is eligible regardless of where he went to grade school (could've been public, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Orleans Parish, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Jefferson Parish), as long as the school was an elementary (or non-LHSAA?) school. I believe an amendment failed to continue the rule (I can't remember the number and I can't find it in the handbook) where a player could play for one LHSAA school in 8th grade and then transfer to another school in the same attendance zone for 9th grade, or where a player could come from an elementary school in a different zone/parish and be eligible right away. I believe someone had given the example of kids who play varsity at Lusher in 8th grade, then go to Franklin for high school and are eligible right away. Would that be no longer allowed? I beleive that the student athlete you mention that went to Jesuit in 8th grade would only be eligible if he came from Orleans Parish and was part of a feeder school in the home attendance zone of Jesuit HS--prior to today. In the case of the same situation with a student athlete coming from Jefferson Parish, I beleive they would eligible for sub-varsity competition only in the first year of attendance, because they were not from the home attendance zone--prior to today. After today the same player would be ineligble for the first year for any level of competition. In the case of the example you use for Lusher/Franklin, prior to today, a player at Lusher as an 8th or 7th grader, could transfer to another school in 9th grade and be immediately eligible in 9th grade, provided they met the conditions of being a bonafide student. I did not get a clear response as to whether the proposal to eliminate this rule passed or not. If it did, then a player who plays as an 8th grader, and is listed on the official participation roster for the sport and school (which MUST be provided to LHSAA for each school in each sport), and THEN transfers to another school in the 9th grade will be ineligible for one year from the time of his transfer. Im especially interested in this rule for my own personal reasons. My son attends Ascension Christian (ACH) and is a 6th grader. Ascension Christian is K-12. We live in what was the East Ascension home attendance zone (prior to today), which also shared by ACH. We started soccer this year and played a JV schedule only, and will go full varsity next year. My son played this year as a 6th grader, and will play again in the future (he was our teams leading scorer, so he certainly has some impact  ). He attends ACH as part of Gov. Jindals voucher system (he started last year in 5th grade). I probably wouldnt be able to afford ACH if not for the voucher, and with all of the current political wrangling over this program, we dont know what the future brings. My concern is if he plays through 7th grade, and then into 8th, and the voucher program could be suspended, thus making it necessary for us to switch schools if we cant afford to keep him where he is. If he is already playing in 8th grade when we find this out, we would have to transfer out immediately, otherwise run the risk of him be declared ineligible for his 9th grade year, regardless of where we live, or even if we were to move. We will be forced to make a decision on preserving his eligibility prior to his 8th grade year by possibly making him have sit out a year on a maybe. This rule--if it passed--could cost my child a year of the ability to play, and becomes even more problematic due to ACH being such a small school that needs players. As I am also the coach there, it may force me to have to change loyalties to the schools I am involved with (I'm certainly not going to coach AGAINST my own child.) An even worse part of this is that if my son would be forced to change schools, and do so either prior to or during 8th grade, then his school of choice would be the one he transferred to for 9th grade, thus making him ineligible at any other subsequent school for one year after his freshman year, even if we moved in Ascension Parish. I realize the intent here was to keep athletes from extending their HS careers by playing Varsity level sports as middleschoolers, then circumventing eligibility rules as incoming freshmen at other schools, but this is a very bad rule, with lots of unthought of and unconsidered potential consequences, and my hope is that it did not pass |
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Jan 31, 2014 22:06:24 GMT -6
The way I understand it, you do not now make your first choice until 9th grade. You have two systems in Ascension Parish, public and non-public.
Entering 9th grade, you choose a school in your Parish, it is your first choice school and you are immediately eligible in that system.
If after the start of 9th grade, you leave a private school and go to any public school in the Parish, that public school becomes your 1st choice public school and you are immediately eligible.
If you leave a private school for another private school after the start of 9th grade, you lose a year.
If you leave a public school and go to a private school in the same Parish (attendance zone), you are also immediately eligible regardless of grade if it is your first private school.
But leaving a public for another public in the same Parish (attendance zone) you lose a year if you do it after 9th grade. |
|
|
|
Post by squeak11 on Jan 31, 2014 22:08:05 GMT -6
What connections would you have for free food without me? Ill starve you all for this mutiny! Mwuhahahahaha! Now get to work slave boy! You have doubt duty today with high school and club training! And if you don't say yes sir, I'll add double LaPrep data entry duty for you. I'm sure soccermomalways could use the break! Squeaks post Deleted as a vulgar display of power! Beauchenecoach I don't like being censored! You are abusing your power by denying my freedom of speech! I vote we ban you for life with no chance of ever returning back |
|
p_malinich
Data Expert 
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Jan 31, 2014 22:08:35 GMT -6
So how is eligibility stuff with incoming students going to work for private schools? I'm looking at the agenda for the meeting and I'm trying to make sense out of what passed. Let me see if I have this right: kid lives in New Orleans, enters Jesuit for 8th grade. He is eligible regardless of where he went to grade school (could've been public, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Orleans Parish, could've been a Catholic or other private school in Jefferson Parish), as long as the school was an elementary (or non-LHSAA?) school. I believe an amendment failed to continue the rule (I can't remember the number and I can't find it in the handbook) where a player could play for one LHSAA school in 8th grade and then transfer to another school in the same attendance zone for 9th grade, or where a player could come from an elementary school in a different zone/parish and be eligible right away. I believe someone had given the example of kids who play varsity at Lusher in 8th grade, then go to Franklin for high school and are eligible right away. Would that be no longer allowed? In the case of the example you use for Lusher/Franklin, prior to today, a player at Lusher as an 8th or 7th grader, could transfer to another school in 9th grade and be immediately eligible in 9th grade, provided they met the conditions of being a bonafide student. I did not get a clear response as to whether the proposal to eliminate this rule passed or not. If it did, then a player who plays as an 8th grader, and is listed on the official participation roster for the sport and school (which MUST be provided to LHSAA for each school in each sport), and THEN transfers to another school in the 9th grade will be ineligible for one year from the time of his transfer. If true, that's a big switch. Many of the current Franklin roster have had 8th grade minutes with Lusher varsity. We currently have several 8th graders in our 18-man squad. Each year we play the wondering game of will they stay or will they go? Sometimes right up until the first day of school. When I first heard about this amendment, I was thrilled about it. No more of the guessing game. I had a coach outside of our area help me see the other side. 8th graders aren't thinking through eligibility issues. When Andrew started to play varsity in Middle School, I did my investigation, but that coach was right. Most parents/middle schoolers aren't going to think about that. There should almost be a requirement of full disclosure if this rule really did get passed in the way that it's being explained. |
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Jan 31, 2014 22:13:41 GMT -6
Well, Northlake only moved to 2A a couple of years ago... but I understand your point. It's kind of chicken and egg though... there aren't many 1A/B schools playing soccer so statistically they don't often advance, or is it they don't play because they can't advance?... which came first? And let me ask this... how man 3A schools have won vs 2A schools? I guess I'm not sold that school size has a close relationship with competence. It is just as intimidating for ... say ... 5A St. Augustine to start a program as it is for 1A Ecole. The issue might be more related to school athletic culture, dedicated coaching, etc. I suspect that Curtis could have a good soccer program with the right coaching effort and school support. But how does creating another championship class help draw schools into playing soccer? You will still have 5 or 6 top schools in each division dominating year after year, and the differential between them and the bottom schools will still be huge. I just think something more is needed to grow the game. Darn if I know what it is though... I do know that under certain circumstances, a couple of focused coaches can go into a school with no soccer program and given the right student body, very quickly put a respectable team on the field. It's been done and once upon a time a start-up first-year team defeated the No. 1 ranked division team (at the time) in a season game before. Well boomer, how many schools in D1 who a)arent privates(meaning those who have some say about the student athletes they attract-thus creating an exponential ability to increase quality of athletes through admission) and b)arent in the top 6 in enrollment in the state of LA won state titles in the last 15 years? ONE--Carencro in 2005-06 during the Katrina year--and they beat top 5 enrollment school at the time Fontainebleau. All that after the insanity with the Lafayette disqualification and then Jesuit basically just tossing it in. I beleive size and ability to attract students certainly does matter. in the case of the privates, ony Caddo in 2007-08 has any other potential impact. Size DEFINITELY matters, and it clearly runs directly parallel with competance. Using St Aug as an example is in many ways culturally biased. As for the right coaches and right student body--well yeah, if you find a school that has a full contingent of 15-18 club players and a top end coach willing to come in then yes, a perfect situation could be manufactured. This wont happen at a 1A school though, becasue the #s are against them. we see how quickly teams in 1A can decline...look at ST Martins this year. You sound like a coach that told me once that if we gave 12 really good players he could win state...Really? No kidding. In all ofthe higher classes, you see the same teams dominating every year because their circumsatnces never change--they keep their #'s, maintain their ability to attract new student athletes, and have developed and decicated feeder systems. Jesuit, STP, Cath-BR arent going to EVER be weak. 1A schools are the bastion of the cycles of HS athletics. They will have ups and downs, and really no school at that level will dominate year after year. The changes that will come to each small schools makeup year after year will see to that. |
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Jan 31, 2014 22:19:13 GMT -6
In the case of the example you use for Lusher/Franklin, prior to today, a player at Lusher as an 8th or 7th grader, could transfer to another school in 9th grade and be immediately eligible in 9th grade, provided they met the conditions of being a bonafide student. I did not get a clear response as to whether the proposal to eliminate this rule passed or not. If it did, then a player who plays as an 8th grader, and is listed on the official participation roster for the sport and school (which MUST be provided to LHSAA for each school in each sport), and THEN transfers to another school in the 9th grade will be ineligible for one year from the time of his transfer. If true, that's a big switch. Many of the current Franklin roster have had 8th grade minutes with Lusher varsity. We currently have several 8th graders in our 18-man squad. Each year we play the wondering game of will they stay or will they go? Sometimes right up until the first day of school. When I first heard about this amendment, I was thrilled about it. No more of the guessing game. I had a coach outside of our area help me see the other side. 8th graders aren't thinking through eligibility issues. When Andrew started to play varsity in Middle School, I did my investigation, but that coach was right. Most parents/middle schoolers aren't going to think about that. There should almost be a requirement of full disclosure if this rule really did get passed in the way that it's being explained. Part of this rule change actually required a signed disclosure form from the parents that was issued by the school actually making sure the family knows that the player can be deemed ineligible in 9th grade. If you guys use lots of 8th graders, this rule is going to be brutal on your program if these kids are thinking about going elsewhere for actual HS (9-12). You are 100% correct when you say students are not thinking of eligibility issues in 8th grade |
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jan 31, 2014 22:31:17 GMT -6
If I understand correctly based on the T-P's reporting by Jerit Roser, there was an amendment to the eligibility change to keep 1st year 9th grade/lower students immediately eligible. That amendment failed 148-146.
I really don't see what the point is in keeping a kid from playing in a Lusher/Franklin situation like that. Or really, any other situation at 9th grade and below. My guess is that the public school principals were probably mostly against it.
|
|
). He attends ACH as part of Gov. Jindals voucher system (he started last year in 5th grade). I probably wouldnt be able to afford ACH if not for the voucher, and with all of the current political wrangling over this program, we dont know what the future brings. My concern is if he plays through 7th grade, and then into 8th, and the voucher program could be suspended, thus making it necessary for us to switch schools if we cant afford to keep him where he is. If he is already playing in 8th grade when we find this out, we would have to transfer out immediately, otherwise run the risk of him be declared ineligible for his 9th grade year, regardless of where we live, or even if we were to move. We will be forced to make a decision on preserving his eligibility prior to his 8th grade year by possibly making him have sit out a year on a maybe. This rule--if it passed--could cost my child a year of the ability to play, and becomes even more problematic due to ACH being such a small school that needs players. As I am also the coach there, it may force me to have to change loyalties to the schools I am involved with (I'm certainly not going to coach AGAINST my own child.) An even worse part of this is that if my son would be forced to change schools, and do so either prior to or during 8th grade, then his school of choice would be the one he transferred to for 9th grade, thus making him ineligible at any other subsequent school for one year after his freshman year, even if we moved in Ascension Parish. I realize the intent here was to keep athletes from extending their HS careers by playing Varsity level sports as middleschoolers, then circumventing eligibility rules as incoming freshmen at other schools, but this is a very bad rule, with lots of unthought of and unconsidered potential consequences, and my hope is that it did not pass
