|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 8, 2009 11:19:36 GMT -6
Congratulations - to the Lady Raiders of nearby Bolingbrook for winning th girls 4A State Basketball title for the 2nd time in 4 years and 5 straight trips to the final four . Reminds me of WVHS's girls soccer squad in many ways - and again just one more poster child for why kids moving from WVHS to MVHS get totally screwed athletically.
Here we have the MVP of the state champions a FRESHMAN - and how many seniors on this team ?? Exactly 1 role player. Yet we listen to how teams can;t compete without upperclassmen so that is why MVHS will not have varsity teams ( although they will let individual sports athletetes compete> )
You would think a SD that has a HS ( Waubonsie) who has won back to back state titles in girls soccer with the same pair of stars - first as freshman then as sophomores would get it. They use that girls soccer team in about 75% of the footage of the intro to WVHS film. Yet will deny the class of 2012 the same opportuniy.
And forget about the IHSA being the bad guy - no says that chair - they would defer to the SD and conference - also for 'exceptions' - i.e. let a varsity level player stay at WVHS to play next year - they also defer to the SD to put up the exception for their review - there is no hard and fast rule the kid is disqualified. These exception requests would involve coaches making decisions - usually on club players they know in all team sports - whether here now or transfers from elsewhere, including move ins etc
So thank your lucky stars Morgan Tuck that you are not living in my area - as next year your follow up to best player int he state finals would be to play sophomore ball.
Wake up 204 !
-----------------------------------------------
Title game's a Tuck rout
Do-it-all freshman starts fast, scores 17 to lead Raiders to 2nd championship in 4 years
Recommend Comments
March 8, 2009
BY STEVE TUCKER stucker@suntimes.com
NORMAL, Ill. -- The question after Bolingbrook's demolition of Young isn't who is No. 1, it's how good is this Bolingbrook team?
In a game that had been anticipated since the teams met in last year's Class 4A title game, Bolingbrook took control early with a brilliant first half from freshman Morgan Tuck and went on to win its second state championship Saturday night by defeating top-rated Young 53-29 at Redbird Arena.
It also was a historic day for Bolingbrook's Satavia Taylor, who became the first girl in state history to play in four championship games. The Raiders beat Belleville Althoff in 2006, lost to Fenwick in 2007 and lost to Young last year.
''This is the most special,'' Taylor said. ''When I was a freshman, I really didn't play much, but I got to feel it on the bench. All four years, I believed in my team, and we worked hard. I just have to give it to all my teammates.
''Morgan, she's a beast, and she's just getting started.''
''She is a phenom,'' Bolingbrook coach Tony Smith said. ''I've never coached one like that, but it sure is fun.''
The Raiders (25-4) finished the first quarter on a 12-1 run to grab a 19-8 lead. Tuck (17 points, eight rebounds, two blocks) scored seven of her 12 first-quarter points in the tear. Ariel Massengale added a driving basket, and Taylor capped it with a three-pointer.
Tuck, who had eight three-pointers all season, was 2-for-2 from behind the arc and 5-for-5 from the floor in the first quarter.
''Before the game, we were so excited,'' Tuck said. ''We were all on the same page, and we went out and played that way.
''I was feeling it [on the three-pointers], and I was open, so I just shot it.''
By halftime, Bolingbrook upped the lead to 31-14, and its fans started a countdown to the title.
Taylor and Mercedes Griffin both scored nine points, and Nicossia Henry (eight rebounds) and Massengale both scored eight.
''Bolingbrook has been known for its defense ever since coach Smith took over,'' Massengale said. ''We played defense today. We knew we had to stop Porsha [Harris] inside, and we had to rebound.''
Harris led Young with nine points and seven rebounds, but the Raiders had a 31-27 advantage on the boards. The Dolphins shot 22 percent (6-for-27) in the first half.
In a matchup of teams ranked in the top 10 in the nation, Bolingbrook has a convincing argument that it belongs in the discussion of the state's best girls teams of all time.
Young (33-2), which had its 26-game winning streak snapped and scored a season low by 18 points, had not lost a game in state all season. It's last loss in Illinois was to Marshall in the quarterfinals of the 2008 Public League tournament. The Dolphins' only loss coming in was to Indiana state champion Heritage Christian in overtime on Dec. 5.
''I've been coming to this tournament for the past 30 years, and I've never seen a freshman like [Tuck],'' Streamwood coach George Rosner said. ''Her shooting, the three-pointers, the rebounding and her presence. Wow.''
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Mar 8, 2009 14:21:52 GMT -6
... And forget about the IHSA being the bad guy - no says that chair - they would defer to the SD and conference - also for 'exceptions' - i.e. let a varsity level player stay at WVHS to play next year - they also defer to the SD to put up the exception for their review - there is no hard and fast rule the kid is disqualified. These exception requests would involve coaches making decisions - usually on club players they know in all team sports - whether here now or transfers from elsewhere, including move ins etc drwho, thank for keeping us informed on this issue. The simplest solution about varsity sports for the non-football team sports, would be for MV to field varsity teams with only fresh and sophs. Is this still on the table? (My recollection was the Upstate 8 Conf already said no on this.) Yes its getting pretty "late in the game" (perhaps unrealistically late) but could the SD & Conference still come to an agreement and allow MV to field varsity next yr in some or all of the (non football) team sports? If the MV Athletic Director and Admin were in favor of this, I would strongly support them in seeking the exception. The example you give concerns individuals, where SD and conf. together could petition for an exception for a specific student-athlete. Here is a concern of mine: Couldn't that open the door to "recruiting" going on btw two HS's and their coaches? Or at least the perception of it? Could the student make their decision on coaches personalities, playing time promises? I am not saying this would happen. But I would hate to put the MV coaches in a position where they had to "sell" the benefits to this young athlete coming to their school, like a college attempting to recruit a good athlete. As I think about it, the MV coaches would be crazy not to do something to try and entice that student to chose to come to MV (even though they would have to play JV as soph). Because those are exactly the exceptional athlete the MV coaches are counting on to compete in the first year of varsity sports, where jrs are the oldest on the team. Is this a situation we want to expose these students, coaches, and our district to? It sounds like any freshman that made a varsity team (that wouldnt have a varsity team at MV) could apply for this. Is that what you are suggesting? I think that is not as clear cut a split on who does or does not get this opportunity, as it may at first appear. For instance, there may not that much of a difference between the last freshmen picked for the varsity team, and the very last freshman cut from the varsity team. Especially if the former doesn't get much playing time, and the latter really excels on their freshmen or JV team. I would say the latter has very strong chance to make the varsity team next year as a sophomore. And in team sports, it is very likely that one of those freshmen made the varsity, and the other did not, because of the position they play. If a different position were needed (outfielder, guard, goalkeeper, etc etc) maybe its the other player would have been picked. I worry that there is some arbitrariness to who would be eligible for this exception. Finally, I think it is unfair to make a blanket statement that "kids moving from WVHS to MVHS" are getting screwed athletically." First off, starting in 2009, all students in our district will have 50% more opportunity to be on a JV team. That too is playing the sport for your school, a wonderful thing to be doing. (In 2010, that opportunity increase will happen also at the varsity level). Specifically with MV, there will be students who get the chance to make a JV team, that otherwise would not, if they stayed a WV. Its not fair to hyper-focus on the "freshmen MVP for a state champion team" who becomes a sophomore and has to skip a year of varsity participation (he or she still will be playing for her school). When it comes to participating, playing time, or just making the team, most (I think virtually all) athletes moving from WV to MV will have MORE opportunity to enjoy HS athletics. In fact, if one of these sophs stays behind at WV, they of course would be taking away a varisity spot from another WV student (could be a sr, jr, soph, or new fresh). So while one student (the one drwho is focusing on) would not get the chance to play four years of varsity sports, there would another who might miss out on a couple of years of varsity participation. Granted, we are talking about the "last player cut", but the topic is fairness in varsity sport participation. This is not a simple matter! Again, thanks, drwho, for your insight and experience on this matter. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 8, 2009 18:04:45 GMT -6
... And forget about the IHSA being the bad guy - no says that chair - they would defer to the SD and conference - also for 'exceptions' - i.e. let a varsity level player stay at WVHS to play next year - they also defer to the SD to put up the exception for their review - there is no hard and fast rule the kid is disqualified. These exception requests would involve coaches making decisions - usually on club players they know in all team sports - whether here now or transfers from elsewhere, including move ins etc drwho, thank for keeping us informed on this issue. The simplest solution about varsity sports for the non-football team sports, would be for MV to field varsity teams with only fresh and sophs. Is this still on the table? (My recollection was the Upstate 8 Conf already said no on this.) Yes its getting pretty "late in the game" (perhaps unrealistically late) but could the SD & Conference still come to an agreement and allow MV to field varsity next yr in some or all of the (non football) team sports? If the MV Athletic Director and Admin were in favor of this, I would strongly support them in seeking the exception. The example you give concerns individuals, where SD and conf. together could petition for an exception for a specific student-athlete. Here is a concern of mine: Couldn't that open the door to "recruiting" going on btw two HS's and their coaches? Or at least the perception of it? Could the student make their decision on coaches personalities, playing time promises? I am not saying this would happen. But I would hate to put the MV coaches in a position where they had to "sell" the benefits to this young athlete coming to their school, like a college attempting to recruit a good athlete. As I think about it, the MV coaches would be crazy not to do something to try and entice that student to chose to come to MV (even though they would have to play JV as soph). Because those are exactly the exceptional athlete the MV coaches are counting on to compete in the first year of varsity sports, where jrs are the oldest on the team. Is this a situation we want to expose these students, coaches, and our district to? It sounds like any freshman that made a varsity team (that wouldnt have a varsity team at MV) could apply for this. Is that what you are suggesting? I think that is not as clear cut a split on who does or does not get this opportunity, as it may at first appear. For instance, there may not that much of a difference between the last freshmen picked for the varsity team, and the very last freshman cut from the varsity team. Especially if the former doesn't get much playing time, and the latter really excels on their freshmen or JV team. I would say the latter has very strong chance to make the varsity team next year as a sophomore. And in team sports, it is very likely that one of those freshmen made the varsity, and the other did not, because of the position they play. If a different position were needed (outfielder, guard, goalkeeper, etc etc) maybe its the other player would have been picked. I worry that there is some arbitrariness to who would be eligible for this exception. Finally, I think it is unfair to make a blanket statement that "kids moving from WVHS to MVHS" are getting screwed athletically." First off, starting in 2009, all students in our district will have 50% more opportunity to be on a JV team. That too is playing the sport for your school, a wonderful thing to be doing. (In 2010, that opportunity increase will happen also at the varsity level). Specifically with MV, there will be students who get the chance to make a JV team, that otherwise would not, if they stayed a WV. Its not fair to hyper-focus on the "freshmen MVP for a state champion team" who becomes a sophomore and has to skip a year of varsity participation (he or she still will be playing for her school). When it comes to participating, playing time, or just making the team, most (I think virtually all) athletes moving from WV to MV will have MORE opportunity to enjoy HS athletics. In fact, if one of these sophs stays behind at WV, they of course would be taking away a varisity spot from another WV student (could be a sr, jr, soph, or new fresh). So while one student (the one drwho is focusing on) would not get the chance to play four years of varsity sports, there would another who might miss out on a couple of years of varsity participation. Granted, we are talking about the "last player cut", but the topic is fairness in varsity sport participation. This is not a simple matter! Again, thanks, drwho, for your insight and experience on this matter. hey GD -- thanks for your talk on this: Couldn't that open the door to "recruiting" going on btw two HS's and their coaches? Or at least the perception of it? Could the student make their decision on coaches personalities, playing time promises?" no because it would be restricted to the fact that it is not offered at the other school. In other words if your 'attendance' school has the same offering you would not be approved to change. This is for all the MV kids who will be without varsity team sports and NV kids in gymnastics and girls lacrosse lets say. It's not 'recruiting' if one school doesn't offer you the same opportunity. This would not extend to who the better team is or who the better coach is - the key word here 'opportunity'" but the topic is fairness in varsity sport participation. "
where is the fairness is not getting to play varsity sports at all next year ? I fail to see that in any of your explanations
Also I highlight this one girl- but lets not try and make it sem like I have not highlighted many others in the past- I have. 2 years ago more 1/3 of the WVHS girls soccer team was freshman and sophs - what would be their opportunity at MVHS ?
and in your explanation you'd rather have a varsity player sit a year and give a player a chance to play varsity that really is not that level ? Is that the argument ? really ?
You're right in that starting with varsity NOW would fix the issue. Show me where the UEC stated no ? We have heard the smoke about the IHSA and that has now been called as a non factor." "In fact, if one of these sophs stays behind at WV, they of course would be taking away a varisity spot from another WV student (could be a sr, jr, soph, or new fresh). " the goal of varsity sports to field the best team possible. coaches are retained/ hired to win - as well as build leadership/teamwork etc. That would be quite the mixed message for all those coaches replaced after losing patterns. Taking away a sure opportunity for something that 'might' be is wrong...or else let's just stop keeping score in all sports and play for the funsies of it.
As for who could apply - that is why I suggested a 'hearing' with the AD/ head coach/ admin for each case. Anyone who made varsity or JV last year - or as identified by the coach as likely making varsity this fall could apply to be heard. These are team sports GD - and almost every coach in this district coaches club ball as well- they not only know the top players for their teams, they know the other schools as well - they see them play 6 months a year. There are very few surprises. They would know their own kids, other kids in the area as well as most transfers in is from general area.
As far as arbitrariness- the same coach making the decision will be making the cuts in August - same decision just a few months earlier.
And remember not every athlete would likely take them up on this - some may choose to move with their friends.No one said it would be easy - nothing about this transition is - but for me the overriding theme is to provide an equal opportunity at all 3 schools for each kid - penalizing those athletes that have to move is not fair and equal to them in any way"Finally, I think it is unfair to make a blanket statement that "kids moving from WVHS to MVHS" are getting screwed athletically" For team sport kids I stand by my statement - they have ZERO chance to be on a varsity team, earn a varsity letter and play against varsity competition or have a homecoming. Tell me where I am wrong on any of this list. This has nothing to do with the quality of either team- the coaches or anything else- it is strictly about opportunity. Individual sport athletes get to earn varsity letters, competeat state,play the best competition, why are team sports kids not given even that same chance ?thank you for keeping the discussion alive GD..... and as far as not being 100% cut and dried and easy - think of discussions we have with our own kids when they ...why do I have to take Geometry- it's hard....or why should I take honrs classes and compete against the smartest kids...do we let them take the easy way out or guide them ? |
|
|
|
Post by entitled on Mar 8, 2009 18:37:36 GMT -6
Perhaps I am mistaken, but isn't the decision whether to field varsity sports a district decision? Shouldn't the decision be left up to the athletic director/coach. Many of our athletes participate in travel leagues that prime them for competition beyond their years. If the coach and players are willing to meet the challenge, what's the problem?
BTW: The Sophomore Tuck watched from the bench as younger sister, Freshman Tuck, help win a state title. The family specifially moved from 202 to 365 attendance area to play for Bolingbrook.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 8, 2009 18:43:28 GMT -6
Perhaps I am mistaken, but isn't the decision whether to field varsity sports a district decision? Shouldn't the decision be left up to the athletic director/coach. Many of our athletes participate in travel leagues that prime them for competition beyond their years. If the coach and players are willing to meet the challenge, what's the problem? BTW: The Sophomore Tuck watched from the bench as younger sister, Freshman Tuck, help win a state title. The family specifially moved from 202 to 365 attendance area to play for Bolingbrook. the district would send their request to the conference and they would work together of course part of the problem is lack of facilities but no one will admit that |
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Mar 9, 2009 11:45:20 GMT -6
drwho,
For starters, just to clear up what is maybe a “philosophical” disconnect. You say sophomores at MV will have ZERO chance to play varsity team sports and compete at the varsity level. Yes, as it stands now, that is all true, for next school year only. However, they still WILL have the chance to represent their school, play the sport with their classmates, and compete against other schools (all very much the essence of school sports, albeit at the JV or freshman level). And the following year they WILL have the very unique honor of being on the very first varsity team ever at their school and lead to theirsschool to its very first wins (the first of many, I am sure!). So just for starters, to me, I cannot jump to the conclusion that there is gross unfairness to these athletes. (I acknowledge it is an issue….that is why we are discussing it here!….but I think we differ on its magnitude.)
As I have said, I would be fully supportive of MV starting up next year with the non-football team sports at varsity level, if the conference would allow it and MV Admin supports it. Just to follow up, I didn’t mean to imply that the UE8 had said “no”. I just think all along this was somewhat unlikely. I have no inside info or really experience at all….the only reason I say this is the last two times I know of when a HS was added to the UE8 conference (NV and St Ch N) they did so when they had juniors. Given the very short time frame involved for such decision making, and as you point out the MV facilities being incomplete, the likelyhood of this happening seems very small. I think, realistically, the chance of conference approval was always small.
That is all background....let me now ask some hard questions about your proposal. As we both know, a very fine use of message boards! (ah, the good ol’ days)
You have an idea about a hearing with the coaches for students who would move to MV but there is no varsity team sport for them. I really appreciate seeing some concrete, real ideas on what possibly could be done. I surely know you are very knowledgable on this topic. And we all learn from your great thoughts and insights on this (First, I do have to say….this hearing process does seem to be getting incredibly complex. A complex process can be difficult to make transparent! And it can create problems that were not previously there!)
Some questions:
1. If a sophomore chooses and is allowed to stay at WV for the 2009-10 school year, would they then be required to move to MV as a junior (when varsity sports now arrive at MV)? My reading of what you wrote is “yes”, because now the full opportunity is there for them. But maybe you can clarify.
2. Is this hearing opportunity open to incoming freshman?
3. Have you removed any concerns of “recruiting”? Not to me, I still see this as needlessly opening the door to recruiting! MV coaches would have incentive to say “come work with me, your future varisty coach, and with your future team-mates on the JV level, so we really hit the ground running with you as a junior leading your team.” WV coaches would say “we want your help right now to win now at the varsity level.” What is the right choice for a 15 yr old kid to make?
4. Do these hearings allow for fair opportunity for athletes at tryouts? This hearing concept—held in August!—seems absolutely contrary to the idea of players trying out and having to earn their spots at the announced tryouts. What if a student has the hearing in August and does not make the varsity team? Then, they are attending a school outside of their assigned attendance area, for what turns out to be, no reason at all. Or what if they experience a long term injury—during club sports---and physically cannot play, as it turns out? Does them successfully passing through the hearing automatically earn them a varsity spot? Would maybe a coach give them “the benefit of the doubt” and pick them? How in the world could you tell a kid that was cut---who maybe thinks they outperformed one of these “exceptions” that they had fair opportunity?
5. Are these hearings fair to the coaches? For some of the reasons outlined in 4….I think a coach would be very reluctant or uncomfortable with this hearing process.
6. How does keeping some of the very elite athletes away from MV affect the MV athletic programs starting up? Would there be a negative effect (morale wise, development wise) on the MV “not-as-elite” atheletes? We are talking team sports here, where the team needs have significant over solely individual needs. What about maybe an effect on the student body and school spirit?
7. How would some sophomores (or even freshmen) staying behind effect the future development of WV athletic programs? I may not be phrasing this very well. What I mean is: there will be a large amount of turnover in all the WV sports as ~1350 former or would-be students leave and are partially replaced by a strong group coming in from the former NV attendance area. Will not a lot of varsity spots be “up for grabs”? Next year at WV will not by any means be typical at all when it comes to filling out the varisity sports teams! Is it really at all realistic to imagine that this could be managed during a series of hearings in August?
Again, as you said, I am just trying to keep this discussing moving. Honestly, how I see it: any solution to the “no varsity sports unfairness”, short of the (unlikely?) UEC conference acceptance of soph-fresh varsity teams, may very well create more problems and unfairness than it eliminates. I look forward to your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 9, 2009 11:57:24 GMT -6
drwho, For starters, just to clear up what is maybe a “philosophical” disconnect. You say sophomores at MV will have ZERO chance to play varsity team sports and compete at the varsity level. Yes, as it stands now, that is all true, for next school year only. However, they still WILL have the chance to represent their school, play the sport with their classmates, and compete against other schools (all very much the essence of school sports, albeit at the JV or freshman level). And the following year they WILL have the very unique honor of being on the very first varsity team ever at their school and lead to theirsschool to its very first wins (the first of many, I am sure!). So just for starters, to me, I cannot jump to the conclusion that there is gross unfairness to these athletes. (I acknowledge it is an issue….that is why we are discussing it here!….but I think we differ on its magnitude.) As I have said, I would be fully supportive of MV starting up next year with the non-football team sports at varsity level, if the conference would allow it and MV Admin supports it. Just to follow up, I didn’t mean to imply that the UE8 had said “no”. I just think all along this was somewhat unlikely. I have no inside info or really experience at all….the only reason I say this is the last two times I know of when a HS was added to the UE8 conference (NV and St Ch N) they did so when they had juniors. Given the very short time frame involved for such decision making, and as you point out the MV facilities being incomplete, the likelyhood of this happening seems very small. I think, realistically, the chance of conference approval was always small. That is all background....let me now ask some hard questions about your proposal. As we both know, a very fine use of message boards! (ah, the good ol’ days) You have an idea about a hearing with the coaches for students who would move to MV but there is no varsity team sport for them. I really appreciate seeing some concrete, real ideas on what possibly could be done. I surely know you are very knowledgable on this topic. And we all learn from your great thoughts and insights on this (First, I do have to say….this hearing process does seem to be getting incredibly complex. A complex process can be difficult to make transparent! And it can create problems that were not previously there!) Some questions: 1. If a sophomore chooses and is allowed to stay at WV for the 2009-10 school year, would they then be required to move to MV as a junior (when varsity sports now arrive at MV)? My reading of what you wrote is “yes”, because now the full opportunity is there for them. But maybe you can clarify. 2. Is this hearing opportunity open to incoming freshman? 3. Have you removed any concerns of “recruiting”? Not to me, I still see this as needlessly opening the door to recruiting! MV coaches would have incentive to say “come work with me, your future varisty coach, and with your future team-mates on the JV level, so we really hit the ground running with you as a junior leading your team.” WV coaches would say “we want your help right now to win now at the varsity level.” What is the right choice for a 15 yr old kid to make? 4. Do these hearings allow for fair opportunity for athletes at tryouts? This hearing concept—held in August!—seems absolutely contrary to the idea of players trying out and having to earn their spots at the announced tryouts. What if a student has the hearing in August and does not make the varsity team? Then, they are attending a school outside of their assigned attendance area, for what turns out to be, no reason at all. Or what if they experience a long term injury—during club sports---and physically cannot play, as it turns out? Does them successfully passing through the hearing automatically earn them a varsity spot? Would maybe a coach give them “the benefit of the doubt” and pick them? How in the world could you tell a kid that was cut---who maybe thinks they outperformed one of these “exceptions” that they had fair opportunity? 5. Are these hearings fair to the coaches? For some of the reasons outlined in 4….I think a coach would be very reluctant or uncomfortable with this hearing process. 6. How does keeping some of the very elite athletes away from MV affect the MV athletic programs starting up? Would there be a negative effect (morale wise, development wise) on the MV “not-as-elite” atheletes? We are talking team sports here, where the team needs have significant over solely individual needs. What about maybe an effect on the student body and school spirit? 7. How would some sophomores (or even freshmen) staying behind effect the future development of WV athletic programs? I may not be phrasing this very well. What I mean is: there will be a large amount of turnover in all the WV sports as ~1350 former or would-be students leave and are partially replaced by a strong group coming in from the former NV attendance area. Will not a lot of varsity spots be “up for grabs”? Next year at WV will not by any means be typical at all when it comes to filling out the varisity sports teams! Is it really at all realistic to imagine that this could be managed during a series of hearings in August? Again, as you said, I am just trying to keep this discussing moving. Honestly, how I see it: any solution to the “no varsity sports unfairness”, short of the (unlikely?) UEC conference acceptance of soph-fresh varsity teams, may very well create more problems and unfairness than it eliminates. I look forward to your thoughts. "For starters, just to clear up what is maybe a “philosophical” disconnect. You say sophomores at MV will have ZERO chance to play varsity team sports and compete at the varsity level. Yes, as it stands now, that is all true, for next school year only" these kids only get 4 years total - GD- no do overs- so it's OK to forfeit 25% of your HS opportunity ? For the difference in magnitude- I suggest you talk to the students involved- I have. Get their opinion. When one is 14 or 15- they view things differently, and I don't think it is our right to tell them they are wrong."Given the very short time frame involved for such decision making, and as you point out the MV facilities being incomplete, the likelyhood of this happening seems very small. I think, realistically, the chance of conference approval was always small. " that is why I am saying give them the opportunity where they reside today. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 9, 2009 11:58:29 GMT -6
These are my thoughts - and influenced by other parents and coaches I talk to also. It would be nice if our admin spent as much time on this as I have......thanks for keeping the discussion alive..
Also GD just so I am clear, I don't claim to have the 100% fool proof system, my way or the highway drawn up....I need help and assistance too, but I am very confident it can be done fair and orderly for the number we are talking about..
You have an idea about a hearing with the coaches for students who would move to MV but there is no varsity team sport for them. I really appreciate seeing some concrete, real ideas on what possibly could be done. I surely know you are very knowledgable on this topic. And we all learn from your great thoughts and insights on this (First, I do have to say….this hearing process does seem to be getting incredibly complex. A complex process can be difficult to make transparent! And it can create problems that were not previously there!)
-- that is why it would have to be worked to be as simple as possible- but geez- some help from our admin would be nice- rather than turning a blind eye to this as they did boundaries.
Some questions:
1. If a sophomore chooses and is allowed to stay at WV for the 2009-10 school year, would they then be required to move to MV as a junior (when varsity sports now arrive at MV)? My reading of what you wrote is “yes”, because now the full opportunity is there for them. But maybe you can clarify.
_ I can go either way on this one and would look to input from other parents of athletes and coaches as well. If the exemption was only for the year the opportunity was not there- it does erase the inequity.
2. Is this hearing opportunity open to incoming freshman?
-yes. Again in these sports these are all club players- the coaches are well aware of whose comng in. When the 'team profiles' hit the papers for each sport- the coaches always comment on certain incoming kids and the impact they are going to have- they know. Also they ahve seen many of these kids play in MS as well and get input from those coaches
3. Have you removed any concerns of “recruiting”? Not to me, I still see this as needlessly opening the door to recruiting! MV coaches would have incentive to say “come work with me, your future varisty coach, and with your future team-mates on the JV level, so we really hit the ground running with you as a junior leading your team.” WV coaches would say “we want your help right now to win now at the varsity level.” What is the right choice for a 15 yr old kid to make?
One would hope within our own school district there would be more integrity than that from our head coaches. For those I know I think you don't give them enough credit... that's not 'recruiting' violations to me- that's mistreatment period. Letting them stay at the school they are at today ( from above question) does eliminate that however.
4. Do these hearings allow for fair opportunity for athletes at tryouts? This hearing concept—held in August!—seems absolutely contrary to the idea of players trying out and having to earn their spots at the announced tryouts. What if a student has the hearing in August and does not make the varsity team? Then, they are attending a school outside of their assigned attendance area, for what turns out to be, no reason at all. Or what if they experience a long term injury—during club sports---and physically cannot play, as it turns out? Does them successfully passing through the hearing automatically earn them a varsity spot? Would maybe a coach give them “the benefit of the doubt” and pick them? How in the world could you tell a kid that was cut---who maybe thinks they outperformed one of these “exceptions” that they had fair opportunity?
Allows them the 'opportuntiy to try out'. Again not sure how much you are involved in sports- or varsity level sports for the main teams- but there are very very very few 'surprises' to these coaches. That is why the hearing to determine this. No - no one automatically gets a spot but many of these kids are slam dunks GD. If at 14 years old you are say playing international soccer - voted in thetop 100 players in the country - do you think they're not going to make our varsity teams ? (btw- this is a real example)- I'll give you another real one- if you are named an all american in one of the largest volleyball torunaments in the country and play lets say for the best club in the country - what do you think the oddds are you make thae varsity team ?
The varsity team is to field the best team possible- you are using a theoretical cut situation vs a known entity in the high performing kids -
If the school doesn't open for some reason - that same kid you are concerned about doesn't make the team either. No, being cut is never fun, it stinks - however much like you are saying abou the MV kids- he has the opprtunity to play at a lower level- in this case until their skills are better, not just 'because' - but most of these kids are used to it. They play for clubs where 350 kids try out for 40 spots - ( real situation ) -
5. Are these hearings fair to the coaches? For some of the reasons outlined in 4….I think a coach would be very reluctant or uncomfortable with this hearing process.
-- talk to a few coaches - again, I have. You will likely find some on either side- but you won't find many that won't agree those not being allowed a varsity chance aren't getting the short end of the stick
6. How does keeping some of the very elite athletes away from MV affect the MV athletic programs starting up? Would there be a negative effect (morale wise, development wise) on the MV “not-as-elite” atheletes? We are talking team sports here, where the team needs have significant over solely individual needs. What about maybe an effect on the student body and school spirit?
How does not having a homecoming until you are a senior affect the same thing ? No one seems to care about that.
Being honest let's say what is going to happen here- very few soccer players play their senior years because their clubs tell them not to- some skip junior year. they are already signed- how does that affect morale today ? If the staff was truly concerned about team spirit they would push for varsity sport day one- give their kids something to cheer about and a real homecoming...like every other darn kid in this area. How does not playing varsity competiton 2009 affect the growth of the programs ? The message to these kids is ' you're not good enough' which is flat out bull and we see examples every single day. My concern for the individual carries over to the school spirit as well- put that out there and this argument goes away - right ?
7. How would some sophomores (or even freshmen) staying behind effect the future development of WV athletic programs? I may not be phrasing this very well. What I mean is: there will be a large amount of turnover in all the WV sports as ~1350 former or would-be students leave and are partially replaced by a strong group coming in from the former NV attendance area. Will not a lot of varsity spots be “up for grabs”? Next year at WV will not by any means be typical at all when it comes to filling out the varisity sports teams! Is it really at all realistic to imagine that this could be managed during a series of hearings in August?
You are likely talking max 10 kids in each sport- is that really overwhelming ? Also remembering some athletes may choose to pass on the 'opportunity' - at least then it is their choice.
After summer camps if you think many of those coaches decisions aren't already mostly made up you're kidding yourself. I look back to my oldest - after summer camps - the rosters were basically set. They announced who was on varsity 2 hours into tryouts- and really didn't have to wait that long.
Let the kids attend the summer camps @ WVHS ( have you seen anything for MV yet ?) - it is the closest thing to tryouts for all the sports. Unless the athlete stands out - no hearing. Remember before tryouts these coaches give their feedback to the newspapaer who review each sport - how do you think they ID the incoming freshman who will make a difference for those articles? These should be clear cut decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Mar 9, 2009 13:19:19 GMT -6
"For starters, just to clear up what is maybe a “philosophical” disconnect. You say sophomores at MV will have ZERO chance to play varsity team sports and compete at the varsity level. Yes, as it stands now, that is all true, for next school year only" these kids only get 4 years total - GD- no do overs- so it's OK to forfeit 25% of your HS opportunity ? For the difference in magnitude- I suggest you talk to the students involved- I have. Get their opinion. When one is 14 or 15- they view things differently, and I don't think it is our right to tell them they are wrong. I just have to disagree that playing JV for one year---still taking the field on behalf of your school, wearing the school jersey, playing with your classmates, competing against other schools---knocks out "25% of a students available HS sports opportunity". Yes, there is some diminishment. But I think it is a complete overstatement to say it costs them one entire year's worth of school sports experience. And I would be sorry if any 14 or 15 yr old felt that way....I am not denying that some do. But again, just because they might feel that may doesnt mean they arent overstating the impact. If it can be done in a fair and straightforward way, ok. But to me, the process you described is neither fair nor straightforward. I think I understand a lot of your reasoning behind it. But if it cannot be clearly understood by the general public in a few brief and clear words, I think it would prove very hard for the district to make this actual policy. Let me ask another question: the process you describe....do you think the conference would approve this? I really have no idea....but I will stick with what I understand to be the facts: they havent done this before when a new school opened in the conference, so I would be reluctant to assume they would approve this. They probably would give the "why start now?" argument. drwho, you are a very close to the process--you definitely have initmate knowledge and know all the ins and outs. But I am trying to give some perspective as a novice, from the general public, who has thought a bit about this. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 9, 2009 14:47:41 GMT -6
"For starters, just to clear up what is maybe a “philosophical” disconnect. You say sophomores at MV will have ZERO chance to play varsity team sports and compete at the varsity level. Yes, as it stands now, that is all true, for next school year only" these kids only get 4 years total - GD- no do overs- so it's OK to forfeit 25% of your HS opportunity ? For the difference in magnitude- I suggest you talk to the students involved- I have. Get their opinion. When one is 14 or 15- they view things differently, and I don't think it is our right to tell them they are wrong. I just have to disagree that playing JV for one year---still taking the field on behalf of your school, wearing the school jersey, playing with your classmates, competing against other schools---knocks out "25% of a students available HS sports opportunity". Yes, there is some diminishment. But I think it is a complete overstatement to say it costs them one entire year's worth of school sports experience. And I would be sorry if any 14 or 15 yr old felt that way....I am not denying that some do. But again, just because they might feel that may doesnt mean they arent overstating the impact. If it can be done in a fair and straightforward way, ok. But to me, the process you described is neither fair nor straightforward. I think I understand a lot of your reasoning behind it. But if it cannot be clearly understood by the general public in a few brief and clear words, I think it would prove very hard for the district to make this actual policy. Let me ask another question: the process you describe....do you think the conference would approve this? I really have no idea....but I will stick with what I understand to be the facts: they havent done this before when a new school opened in the conference, so I would be reluctant to assume they would approve this. They probably would give the "why start now?" argument. drwho, you are a very close to the process--you definitely have initmate knowledge and know all the ins and outs. But I am trying to give some perspective as a novice, from the general public, who has thought a bit about this.
Quite simply- does anyone other than varsity play for a conference title - chance to go to regionals / sectionals/state or a trophy for the school / jacket patch /etc.- NO. There is a reason for that - so to you if that doesn't completely diminsih the experience we will agree to disagree-- I think you will find your opinion in the extreme minority of you ask those athletes competing for varsity" drwho, you are a very close to the process--you definitely have initmate knowledge and know all the ins and outs. But I am trying to give some perspective as a novice, from the general public, who has thought a bit about this"
while I appreciate this GD- the general public doesn't understand a lot of things about a lot of things- because it isn't important to them. Case in point- if more than 15% of our areas votes April 7th it will be a shock - should we not have elections ? What it comes down to is fair and equitable experience - period. I don't care if it's sports/music/dance/business/language arts..makes no difference- and some of those I would defer to parents with more intimate knowledge than I have.
To those involved this is very important - and to dismiss that fact in that somehow everyone or even most must 'get it' would disqualify why we have PA classes/ why do we have accelerated track classes, why do we have orchesis or shop- or chorus or anything else. It still does not make it fair to those kids/athletes involved. It is even less fair to take it away from someone who already has it...
a clear cut procedure could be drafted - with the right people in the room. You said you are a sports novice- that is why some of this may not appear clear cut to you- to parents of athletes this would be already pretty clear- and working with a few coaches and admin could nail this down in relatively short order. As I said previously - by end of summer camps they will know 90%+ of their roster- if not more. |
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 9, 2009 14:52:57 GMT -6
This thread is a bit difficult to respond to. DrWho and Gatordog, you have both provided so much information that although I'd like to respond to your comments, I don't know where to start  . Many kids entering a sport gain a tremendous amount from participating with upperclassmen at the Varsity level as a freshman. I have a child that started her sport in 8th grade and ended the year on the Varsity team. It made her a much better athlete and one of two individuals to qualify at the state level for NVHS her sophomore year. Also, I believe this experience (both at the freshman and sophomore level) has made a huge difference to the colleges that she's applied to and those that have reached out to her. Simply put, had she not had the opportunity she had her freshman year (to participate with experienced Varsity team members), she would be in a different position today in terms of where she is going to college. There is no doubt in my mind about this. It saddens me to think there might be kids out there that will miss out in the opportunities she's had. eta: Doc, thank you for clarification regarding the IHSA policy. And forget about the IHSA being the bad guy - no says that chair - they would defer to the SD and conference - also for 'exceptions' - i.e. let a varsity level player stay at WVHS to play next year - they also defer to the SD to put up the exception for their review - there is no hard and fast rule the kid is disqualified. These exception requests would involve coaches making decisions - usually on club players they know in all team sports - whether here now or transfers from elsewhere, including move ins etc |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Mar 9, 2009 15:07:56 GMT -6
This thread is a bit difficult to respond to. DrWho and Gatordog, you have both provided so much information that although I'd like to respond to your comments, I don't know where to start . Many kids entering a sport gain a tremendous amount from participating with upperclassmen at the Varsity level as a freshman. I have a child that started her sport in 8th grade and ended the year on the Varsity team. It made her a much better athlete and one of two individuals to qualify at the state level for NVHS her sophomore year. Also, I believe this experience (both at the freshman and sophomore level) has made a huge difference to the colleges that she's applied to and those that have reached out to her. Simply put, had she not had the opportunity she had freshman year, she would be in a different position today in terms of where she is going to college. It saddens me to think there might be kids out there that will miss out in the opportunities she's had. Macy - you are correct. What we're talking about here is a few handfuls of kids who have a chance to play at a higher level later in life. I have posted before from the NCAA web site the odds of a D1 scholarship - they are relatively miniscule and reserved for the best of the best. in Basketball and volleyball approx 2% of varsity players as seniors get scholarships. I cannot remember soccer of the top of my head or else I'd quote it also- but want to be accurate. Mostly these are kids that already as freshman are dedicating 15-20 hours per week at the club level 8-9 months a year- then school season- and many with training programs for speed and agility etc. These kids eat and sleep their sports - and many of their best friends are other athletes. To tell them playing JV or Soph is the same as varsity - while every other player they play and train with has a different opportunity- and try and sell it as 'it's only 1 year' - just doesn't fly. Each of these kids is one ACL away from being done. And remember we are only doing this to team sport athletes - individual sport athletes are not facing this even at MVHS. They get the full opportunity. actually thee charts moved to 3% ( confirmed VB and BB about the same %) - www.ncaa.org/research/prob_of_competing/ |
|
|
|
Post by wvparent on Mar 9, 2009 21:05:26 GMT -6
To all those who in the MVHS attendence area who are so certain their 8th grade athelete phenon would make a varsity team: in May go rent and move into an apartment in the high school attendence area of your choice. You can break the lease right after school starts and move back to your home and then drive your prodigy to the attendence school every day. In Illinois, a student only has to attend a short amount of time to be grandfathered in for the rest of the year. Then, after all this, I really hope for your sake darling remains injury free, makes the team and has playing time. The financial sacrifice will be worth it, because having that freshman Varsity letter (and not club connections or showcases) is the only way to get that brass-ring college scholarship (the way you all are talking). And just think of the therapy $$ you'll save because phenon will not have to suffer the humiliation of having an imperfect letter jacket.
|
|
|
|
Post by macy on Mar 9, 2009 21:20:00 GMT -6
To all those who in the MVHS attendence area who are so certain their 8th grade athelete phenon would make a varsity team: in May go rent and move into an apartment in the high school attendence area of your choice. You can break the lease right after school starts and move back to your home and then drive your prodigy to the attendence school every day. In Illinois, a student only has to attend a short amount of time to be grandfathered in for the rest of the year. Then, after all this, I really hope for your sake darling remains injury free, makes the team and has playing time. The financial sacrifice will be worth it, because having that freshman Varsity letter (and not club connections or showcases) is the only way to get that brass-ring college scholarship (the way you all are talking). And just think of the therapy $$ you'll save because phenon will not have to suffer the humiliation of having an imperfect letter jacket. First off, I'm not sure anyone in the MVHS area is going to have an " athelete phenon". However, there might be some students that as freshman athletes do a phenominal job. I'd like to see many freshman from Metea turn out to be phenomenal athletes. And thanks for the advice regarding breaking the rules and renting an apartment, but no thanks. To me, that is plain wrong. I know it occurs in the district but would never personally condone such a thing. I don't have a prodigy, just a kid who has worked hard in both school and sports. Frankly, you are a complete jerk for calling any kid that works as hard as my daughter a "darling". And regarding your quote: " And just think of the therapy $$ you'll save because phenon will not have to suffer the humiliation of having an imperfect letter jacket. What the heck does that mean? An "imperfect letter jacket", what? What do you mean by that statement? I think you should either explain your post further, apologize, or get the heck off this message board. I could go on further but I won't. ETA: Wvparent, did you really intend your post to be as insulting as it was? Did I misread? I'd like to see you respond. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Mar 9, 2009 22:05:27 GMT -6
To all those who in the MVHS attendence area who are so certain their 8th grade athelete phenon would make a varsity team: in May go rent and move into an apartment in the high school attendence area of your choice. You can break the lease right after school starts and move back to your home and then drive your prodigy to the attendence school every day. In Illinois, a student only has to attend a short amount of time to be grandfathered in for the rest of the year. Then, after all this, I really hope for your sake darling remains injury free, makes the team and has playing time. The financial sacrifice will be worth it, because having that freshman Varsity letter (and not club connections or showcases) is the only way to get that brass-ring college scholarship (the way you all are talking). And just think of the therapy $$ you'll save because phenon will not have to suffer the humiliation of having an imperfect letter jacket. First off, I'm not sure anyone in the MVHS area is going to have an " athelete phenon". However, there might be some students that as freshman athletes do a phenominal job. I'd like to see many freshman from Metea turn out to be phenomenal athletes. And thanks for the advice regarding breaking the rules and renting an apartment, but no thanks. To me, that is plain wrong. I know it occurs in the district but would never personally condone such a thing. I don't have a prodigy, just a kid who has worked hard in both school and sports. Frankly, you are a moron for calling any kid that works as hard as my daughter a "darling". And regarding your quote: " And just think of the therapy $$ you'll save because phenon will not have to suffer the humiliation of having an imperfect letter jacket. What the heck does that mean? An "imperfect letter jacket", what? Again, only a moron would say such stupid nonsense. I think you should either explain your nonsense, apologize, or get the heck off this message board. In my opinion, you should just go away. The point of this thread is obviously above your intelligence level so I will not comment further. You should just go away for good! I'm sure 99 percent of the district would agree that you are a complete jerk. I could go on further but I won't. ETA: Wvparent, did you really intend your post to be as insulting as it was? Did I misread? I'd like to see you respond.  |
|
.