ADVERTISEMENT

Semi-OT: Seton La Salle Recruiting

KR519 said:
That is interesting. I covered high school sports in Maryland (Frederick Co and west, although we would go into Carroll, Montgomery & Howard Co a little too) and I recall watching a kid play football for one team, starting a basketball season for the same team. Being kicked off the basketball team, and transferring schools and finishing the year at a rival school in the county, while leading them deep into the state playoffs.

I think that a lot of what Maryland (MPSSAA) does in high school sports would be great for the WPIAL and PIAA to embrace, but I always viewed Maryland's transfer and eligibility rules to be very lax.
Click to expand...

What year was this?

If I remember correctly, if you moved to a new school with your legal guardians you were eligible immediately.

If you got special permission for whatever reason to attend a school when you didn't live in the district you had to sit out for 365 calendar days.

There was a 45 day rule if you transferred within the county but I can't remember the specifics.

I'll be honest, I despised the way Maryland operated high school sports. As a coach, you could barely do anything in the offseason without potentially breaking the rules. That's why AAU sports are gigantic in that state. From December till June, I couldn't have a football present at any workout that included more than 2 athletes. During the summer, if I wanted to have a football present at any workout, I needed to have a 7 on 7 scheduled with another team. Yet, I couldn't use my school name, school colors, uniforms, etc... I hope PA never even entertains these types of things.
 
pittdan77 said:
I'm generally in favor of college transfers because you aren't beholden to a school based on where you live. I have mixed emotions about HS because there are supposed to be somewhat strict rules that seem to be applied differently and arbitrarily all the time. I've always had a bug up my backside about private, wealthier, schools that pluck athletes from the surrounding area in order to build all-star teams and then proceed to kick the snot out of everyone until somewhat deep into the playoffs. Again, lets have rules that are clear and enforceable so that everyone knows what the rules are and make it clear. If you can't do that, get rid of the rule because this is a dumb way to do it.
Click to expand...
You want to make specific divisions for those schools to compete against each other - fine by me

but those kids shouldn’t be limited from playing .
It’s high school sports for crying out loud -
It’s even more meaningless than college and pro sports
 
pittdan77 said:
I'd need to hear the explanation for this. A "moral and ethical" approach would be to get rid of real estate taxes and fund every student equally so that there aren't huge disparities in opportunities.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But the public school monopoly hurts the poorest kids and aids the wealthiest. Parochial schools don't spend nearly as much as public schools, and often have far superior results.
 
NTOP said:
Agreed. But the public school monopoly hurts the poorest kids and aids the wealthiest. Parochial schools don't spend nearly as much as public schools, and often have far superior results.
Click to expand...
Maybe,just maybe the Parochial school have better results because they don't have special needs students?Public schools educate all students not just the best students.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585
Bobtown Bob said:
Maybe,just maybe the Parochial school have better results because they don't have special needs students?Public schools educate all students not just the best students.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. When I went to Canevin there was a special needs school inside the school. If memory serves me right it was called St. Anthony's.

As for the real reason why Catholic schools perform better than most publics is what I stated many times when comparing schools. How involved are the parents? In a Private school setting, the parents are highly involved. In public school settings, the schools we consider good have highly involved parents. The schools that are not considered good only have a few involved parents. Geometry is Geometry at the Catholic school. City of Pittsburgh, USC, Sto Rox; as is Chemistry/ Biology/US History/Etc. The difference between them is parent involvement. Sto Rox is considered a bad school, but i know if my son went there, he would still do well, because I as his parent demand that. With that said it is a little easier at USC since other parents share that same value, so his peers are in line with that thinking too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585
pittdan77 said:
I agree. No kid should sit because coaches or fans are mad.
Click to expand...

Agree unless it is midseason. I know life isn't fair, but it is outrageous to play 75% of a season and getting ready for the playoffs, only for a kid who started all year now needs to sit because a superstar came in.

But transfer before season for whatever reason. Then let them play.
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
You want to make specific divisions for those schools to compete against each other - fine by me

but those kids shouldn’t be limited from playing .
It’s high school sports for crying out loud -
It’s even more meaningless than college and pro sports
Click to expand...
That's it right there. Make 2 divisions, those with geographic boundaries (publics) and those without (privates). All transfers are eligible immediately. Recruit away too. For privates, anyone who enrolls can play. For publics, anyone who enrolls and lives within the geographic boundaries can play. I don't even care if the family buys a 2nd home in another school district just for this purpose, they are paying the school taxes on that 2nd home, they should have access to the school.
 
Bobtown Bob said:
Maybe,just maybe the Parochial school have better results because they don't have special needs students?Public schools educate all students not just the best students.
Click to expand...
Yes they do, in many cases. And public schools in MANY districts are failing to educate kids adequately, including kids w/o special needs. Families of kids in Parochial schools pay the same taxes as folks with kids in public schools, and are willing and able to afford the other options. Give poor families their choice, too via income-range vouchers. When PPS spend 50% more than NA/P-R/USC/Lebo do per student, why are the results so inferior? Competition improves things, not monopolies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RaleighPittFan
NTOP said:
Yes they do, in many cases. And public schools in MANY districts are failing to educate kids adequately, including kids w/o special needs. Families of kids in Parochial schools pay the same taxes as folks with kids in public schools, and are willing and able to afford the other options. Give poor families their choice, too via income-range vouchers. When PPS spend 50% more than NA/P-R/USC/Lebo do per student, why are the results so inferior? Competition improves things, not monopolies.
Click to expand...

I know you aren't very bright but PPS test results are inferior because the parents of the students are poor on the average. Standardized test scores are directly correlated to average household income. If you made all the PPS kids go to NA and all the NA kids go to PPS, immediately PPS would have very high test scores and NA very low.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I know you aren't very bright but PPS test results are inferior because the parents of the students are poor on the average. Standardized test scores are directly correlated to average household income. If you made all the PPS kids go to NA and all the NA kids go to PPS, immediately PPS would have very high test scores and NA very low.
Click to expand...
Making excuses, as always. Give the families a chance to help their kids. Typical lib...feed the union monopoly, keep the poor....poor.
 
NTOP said:
Making excuses, as always. Give the families a chance to help their kids. Typical lib...feed the union monopoly, keep the poor....poor.
Click to expand...

I think both are right, but the difference is masses vs individual. for the masses I can't believe I am saying this, but SMF is right. With that said on a kid by kid basis, some of the kids in those bad schools would really benefit from having the choice to move up to a better school/school district.
 
Mikefln said:
I think both are right, but the difference is masses vs individual. for the masses I can't believe I am saying this, but SMF is right. With that said on a kid by kid basis, some of the kids in those bad schools would really benefit from having the choice to move up to a better school/school district.
Click to expand...
Huh? Class sizes are pretty close. If the results are better, let's give more kids a chance. But when 7 of 9 PPS Board members are either current or retired union teachers, the fix is in.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I know you aren't very bright but PPS test results are inferior because the parents of the students are poor on the average. Standardized test scores are directly correlated to average household income. If you made all the PPS kids go to NA and all the NA kids go to PPS, immediately PPS would have very high test scores and NA very low.
Click to expand...
But you're AGAINST giving poor kids the chance to be helped. And were you a Merit Scholar?
 
Parkview57 said:
Well this is not meant to offend anyone, but isn't that the whole drive behind a private education, your son/daughter can avoid the "ne'r do wells" and learn,associate with friends of similar goals, commitment levels and beliefs? It follows that extra-curriculars are no different.
Click to expand...
No. Believe it or not I sent my son to Catholic School for reasons that dealt with a faith based education and a belief in God.
That simple really.
 
Saboteur II said:
No. Believe it or not I sent my son to Catholic School for reasons that dealt with a faith based education and a belief in God.
Click to expand...
I 100% believe it. I also believe that he has a greater chance to associate with a greater percentage friends and families that value the same things he does than if he were stuck in a public school. I am pretty sure the Church is not actively recruiting the children of infidels to come intermingle with their own on a regular basis.
 
NTOP said:
Yes they do, in many cases. And public schools in MANY districts are failing to educate kids adequately, including kids w/o special needs. Families of kids in Parochial schools pay the same taxes as folks with kids in public schools, and are willing and able to afford the other options. Give poor families their choice, too via income-range vouchers. When PPS spend 50% more than NA/P-R/USC/Lebo do per student, why are the results so inferior? Competition improves things, not monopolies.
Click to expand...
Have a better idea let your parochial schools wave tuition for kids in at risk situations
Be sure to provide transportation before and after school programs too

pps does really well for the same kinda kids who succeed in your pay for play schools

I’m thrilled with our pps school and my son is thriving

just because you never went to Public school and sent your kids to private school doesn’t make them
Better
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I know you aren't very bright but PPS test results are inferior because the parents of the students are poor on the average. Standardized test scores are directly correlated to average household income. If you made all the PPS kids go to NA and all the NA kids go to PPS, immediately PPS would have very high test scores and NA very low.
Click to expand...
When you compare scores via socioeconomic strata -
You’ll have your correlation
And along those lines pps is very competitive
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
Have a better idea let your parochial schools wave tuition for kids in at risk situations
Be sure to provide transportation before and after school programs too

pps does really well for the same kinda kids who succeed in your pay for play schools

I’m thrilled with our pps school and my son is thriving

just because you never went to Public school and sent your kids to private school doesn’t make them
Better
Click to expand...

Parochial schools do have scholarships for at risk kids, but can't give all of them scholarships. That damn economics thing prevents that.

I have family involved with PPS, they have gotten a lot better at funneling good students to the better schools. So they have that both the family and village supporting them. It was not always that way, only the politically connected had the opportunity to go to the better schools.

I am glad your thrilled with your sons education, but make no mistake, chances are your kid would succeed regardless of school enviroment. It appears you are highly involved in his life/education. That is the most important aspect of education. Such a low % of students succeed without that involvement, and they are a special group.

Also back to that economics topic, PPS is a total train wreck.

I will agree public school vs private school student/alum, one is no better than the other. Just different environments and set of rules.
 
steelcurtain55. said:
What year was this?

If I remember correctly, if you moved to a new school with your legal guardians you were eligible immediately.

If you got special permission for whatever reason to attend a school when you didn't live in the district you had to sit out for 365 calendar days.

There was a 45 day rule if you transferred within the county but I can't remember the specifics.

I'll be honest, I despised the way Maryland operated high school sports. As a coach, you could barely do anything in the offseason without potentially breaking the rules. That's why AAU sports are gigantic in that state. From December till June, I couldn't have a football present at any workout that included more than 2 athletes. During the summer, if I wanted to have a football present at any workout, I needed to have a 7 on 7 scheduled with another team. Yet, I couldn't use my school name, school colors, uniforms, etc... I hope PA never even entertains these types of things.
Click to expand...
Not sure exactly the year. I was down there between 2010-2012. I think it was the 2010 football season. It was in Frederick Co.
 
Mikefln said:
Parochial schools do have scholarships for at risk kids, but can't give all of them scholarships. That damn economics thing prevents that.

I have family involved with PPS, they have gotten a lot better at funneling good students to the better schools. So they have that both the family and village supporting them. It was not always that way, only the politically connected had the opportunity to go to the better schools.

I am glad your thrilled with your sons education, but make no mistake, chances are your kid would succeed regardless of school enviroment. It appears you are highly involved in his life/education. That is the most important aspect of education. Such a low % of students succeed without that involvement, and they are a special group.

Also back to that economics topic, PPS is a total train wreck.

I will agree public school vs private school student/alum, one is no better than the other. Just different environments and set of rules.
Click to expand...
Well yeah
That’s kinda the point - the parents drive the academic success less than the schools .

not sure how much political clout there is since I know a city councilwoman who’s kids didn’t get in the magnet lottery .
We did for elementary - and we’re hoping for Obama or sci-tech for middle and high school
Obama is walkable which would be nice - two of our neighbors - both who are gifted - really like Obama .
 
Mikefln said:
Because for some strange reason, people feel if a kid grows up in a certain neighborhood, he belongs to that neighborhood/school. They act like that student is the schools property instead of a free citizen able to do what is best for their life. It is a strange attitude to say the least.
Click to expand...
bingo
 
Saboteur II said:
Uhhhh. Wrong. There are IEP students there as well.
Click to expand...
That really depends on the school. The St. Anthony’s kids were an amazing part of my kids’ elementary school. Other schools can’t deal with quirky kids, much less those with learning disabilities.

The thing is private/ religious/ public can mean almost anything. Some try to mold kids, others support their interests, some care a lot about sports, others don’t care much at all.
 
NTOP said:
But you're AGAINST giving poor kids the chance to be helped. And were you a Merit Scholar?
Click to expand...
I have said many times that school districts should be abolished and school enrollments should be based on somewhat equal demographics. Upper St. Clair shouldn't be 90% wealthy white kids and Clairton, 10 miles away be 90% poor black kids. I think the state should take over all school districts, get rid of property taxes (increase income tax to offset) and ensure that every kid in PA has an equal shot.

Another idea would be to offer students in poor school districts the opportunity to attend a nearby public school.

But your idea for taxpayers to pay for a kid to go to a private school is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
PeetWeet1 said:
That really depends on the school. The St. Anthony’s kids were an amazing part of my kids’ elementary school. Other schools can’t deal with quirky kids, much less those with learning disabilities.

The thing is private/ religious/ public can mean almost anything. Some try to mold kids, others support their interests, some care a lot about sports, others don’t care much at all.
Click to expand...
Well, all I can tell you is that the schools my son attended all had IEPs.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I have said many times that school districts should be abolished and school enrollments should be based on somewhat equal demographics. Upper St. Clair shouldn't be 90% wealthy white kids and Clairton, 10 miles away be 90% poor black kids. I think the state should take over all school districts, get rid of property taxes (increase income tax to offset) and ensure that every kid in PA has an equal shot.

Another idea would be to offer students in poor school districts the opportunity to attend a nearby public school.

But your idea for taxpayers to pay for a kid to go to a private school is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Not ridiculous at all. They pay taxes to the failing public schools and add on the costs of the private school. And for a guy who rushed to shortchange his own tax bill, you're exhibiting your bias. 90/10?? Yeah, that will work, like welfare.
Anytime a local issue gets punted to a bigger gov't level, it gets worse. See 2020/21 PA vaccine distribution.
No way the local district would cede their control, so there's no chance of your looney scheme . The solution is there right now, in private schools. Kids get vouchers based on family income, so the tax dollars are taken from the failed schools and deployed to the successful schools.
And basing the revenue for schools on income sounds good, but only gives non-reporters another reason to hide income. Not a simple solution.
BTW, bussing failed, your idea requires a lot of bussing, raising costs with no benefit.
 
NTOP said:
Not ridiculous at all. They pay taxes to the failing public schools and add on the costs of the private school. And for a guy who rushed to shortchange his own tax bill, you're exhibiting your bias. 90/10?? Yeah, that will work, like welfare.
Anytime a local issue gets punted to a bigger gov't level, it gets worse. See 2020/21 PA vaccine distribution.
No way the local district would cede their control, so there's no chance of your looney scheme . The solution is there right now, in private schools. Kids get vouchers based on family income, so the tax dollars are taken from the failed schools and deployed to the successful schools.
And basing the revenue for schools on income sounds good, but only gives non-reporters another reason to hide income. Not a simple solution.
BTW, bussing failed, your idea requires a lot of bussing, raising costs with no benefit.
Click to expand...
I would love for you to answer this.

Why is Clairton a "failing school" but Upper St. Clair is excelling? Does it have anything at all to do with the parents of USC students being much wealthier and having higher education levels on the average?
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
I would love for you to answer this.

Why is Clairton a "failing school" but Upper St. Clair is excelling? Does it have anything at all to do with the parents of USC students being much wealthier and having higher education levels on the average?
Click to expand...
Sure it does....but shifting 10% of the kids doesn't work. Bussing made it WORSE, and everyone hated it. It's not smart to have kids from poor towns try to compete with wealthy burbs. Better to provide solid schools in the small towns, break up the failed monopoly schools with the shift of tax money to private schools.
You moved to a fancy district, right. Why not a poorer place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

pittmeister

OC Names to consider for the future

Replies
23
Views
3K
Football Board
Slick Manager of Champs
Slick Manager of Champs
P

Pitt: Long Road Back To No. 1, Oct 3, 1980

Replies
11
Views
1K
Football Board
wbrpanther
W
CaptainSidneyReilly

Early Spring Practice Position Notes, Recruiting News, LINK!

Replies
0
Views
956
Football Board
CaptainSidneyReilly
CaptainSidneyReilly
CaptainSidneyReilly

New Ruling Paterno Lawsuit Update, LINK!

Replies
19
Views
1K
Football Board
melwood
melwood
Chris Peak
  • Locked
  • Sticky

In the Pitt - 11/7/08

Replies
2
Views
2K
In the Pitt Archives
dk16000
D
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back