Championship Factor Thoughts?....

[4th_Quarter_Pinerider]

...and go...

 

[wahoolives]

I know some other states have implemented something along those lines, but don't know how successful it has been. It is like a lot of other things the intent is to make schools that "recruit" or have other advantages be moved up, the unintended consequences would be a school like Crane in girls that had a fantastic group come through then they would be forced to play up after that group was gone. Personally I don't like the championship factor and think it would do more harm than good.
Just go to a system where everyone is eligible when they start their sophomore year at the school they are at no questions asked and every move after that you are automatically ineligible until you prove that there was a bonafide move for non-athletic reasons and the move has to be greater than 100 miles or something along those lines.

 

[Eagles_Ball]

Dumb...

Millennial...

Those are the two most prevalent thoughts.

 

[Hoosier 1]

Do it in Indiana and yes it is dumb and stupid.

 

[Eagles_Ball]

All transfers subject to 365 days of sub-varsity competition. Only seniors could apply for varsity eligibility based on documented move and approved hardship reasons. This applies to all member schools and if it doesn't solve the problem, it greatly stems the direction the tide is moving. Public schools will lose fewer players who would rather stay and play varsity than spend a year on JV. I haven't heard a good objection to this. Is it harsh? Maybe in a mild sense, but something has to be done and the continued abuse of the system has to be put in check somehow or the entire sport is in jeopardy. If Timmy has to play JV as a junior because his family moved, he gets to compete, will play varsity the next season, the sun will come up tomorrow, and nobody has to worry about "recruiting" because even if they did, the school has to wait a year to reap the reward. This rule change could possibly eliminate the need for well-intentioned but ridiculous ideas like this and maybe the proposed public/private split.

Senseless. Punishment of a bunch for the sins of a few.

 

[blacktiger]

So I am an accountant in Springfield and I get a job in St. Louis with a big firm with more money, better long term prospects. My kid is a sophomore and may or may not be varsity athlete but because of his parents e can't be afforded the opportunity to play varsity sports for something he/she had no control over?

What if I am a teacher/coach who is in a small rural district who has some success and gets offered a job at a bigger district with more money/better situation? If I have an child who is an athlete they can't play varsity sports?

I agree with Eagles_Ball. Punishment of all for the sins of a few.

 

[Eagles_Ball]

I'm pretty sure you liked this idea the last time I floated it. It's not punishment, and I believe it makes way more sense than championship factor, or the current system.

It doesn't, and I wouldn't have. People move. For the "right", or necessary reasons. If ADs would just check the box when something is fishy, problem solved. But they won't do that for fear others would check the box on them.

 

[Eagles_Ball]

Something has to be done, since (I agree) most won't check the box.

It's literally the only rational thing to do. Asking cooperating schools and ADs to do their jobs.