Open Enrollment
- Thread starter ftball95
- Start date
Don't tell me where i should send my kids. You have no right to! Unless i can tell you where your kids should go!
I don't have anything against open enrollment. Families have different reasons for switching schools.
However: public, private, whatever, I think that you should only get to do it once in HS. If you open enroll a 2nd time, you should be ineligible for the rest of your HS career. If a family moves, that's ok & completely different if they want to go to that length.
Example: freshmen year school A, sophomore year open enroll at school B. School B is the last school you have eligibility at unless you move.
However: public, private, whatever, I think that you should only get to do it once in HS. If you open enroll a 2nd time, you should be ineligible for the rest of your HS career. If a family moves, that's ok & completely different if they want to go to that length.
Example: freshmen year school A, sophomore year open enroll at school B. School B is the last school you have eligibility at unless you move.
Please provide examples of when this has happened, complete with names of athletes and schools.
Keeney that left Cedar Bluffs to start on Class A Fremont's basketball team.
Reagan that left St. Mary's to start on O'Neill High's basketball team.
Don't you believe this also works the other way as well? I am sure some decent athletes from larger schools enroll at smaller schools so they can play b/c they aren't quite good enough for the largest schools. They may not be the elite athlete, but they can contribute a lot to their new school. I don't know of any examples, but I can't imagine this doesn't happen.
You stated "Please provide examples of when this has happened, complete with names of athletes and schools." That is what I did. I did not imply nor insinuate that school personnel had contacted these young men. I only listed them as an example of good small school athletes transferring to larger schools. That is all.
The original post (the one I responded to, asking for names of schools and kids that this has happened with) said larger schools contact these kids and "shimmy" then in. Your response to my question (asking for examples where a bigger school had contacted a smaller school kid to come there) led me to believe that you were saying Fremont school personnel and O'neill school personnel contacted the young men you listed.
Someone please provide an example (complete with transferring students name, former school, current school, and names of school personnel that initiated this process by reaching out to student) of this happening.
I think it is pretty safe to say that even IF someone had absolute knowledge of this, they would not publicly call someone out on it. If because you have no absolute knowledge of this going on, then I would say that it probably doesn't. If someone else has absolute knowledge of this happening, then I would say that it probably does go on.
Here's the thing, and you already know this...the only people that would know are the people directly involved. If you were involved with something like this would you be spreading it around? I wouldn't.
Do I think it goes on? How would I know? I believe there is more than one way for a school to "shimmy" in. Sure, the obvious would be pestering text messages and in home visits from another coaching staff. Another would be having the players from the other team pursue players. So High School A has a softball pitcher that plays for the Soft Ballers summer team with most of the High School B players. The High School B players start in on her about how good their High School team would be if she would transfer from School A over to School B.
I am not saying one way or another what goes on because I feel it is a wasted cause. If kids are being enticed to switch schools, ultimately there is nothing that can be done about it. It is just a reality of the system. So often, more rules end up making things worse.
It also works the other way as Sam Johnson of High Plains Community who has good chance to be 2nd team or better D-1 All-State opted in from Aurora.
Last edited:
A kid deserves to go where he or she wants. If a player feels like he or she can be successful elsewhere and play with kids and coaches who care, why not? Kids shouldn't be forced to go to school anywhere.
There are some things more important than sports. Open enrollment is a good thing.
Exactly. Back when college credit courses started getting more and more popular in high school, the school 8 miles from mine had more options.
I could have gone into college with 21 or 24 credits if I would have went to that neighboring school. Instead I went in with 9. That's an entire semesters worth I missed out on.
So sports play a big factor, but so do academics, more organizations to participate in, etc. open enrollment is a good thing and shouldn't be taken away.
You can cure the sports and switching schools if you make a few changes, If a student changes schools and does not move with in that school district from 9th grade to 12th grade they must set out all NSAA sponsored events at the varsity level for 365 days. If it is truly for education then this does not change that education.
Its not a punishment if your switching for a better education.
Back to my post (3rd one). Keep initial open enrollment the same with the same deadlines. You SHOULD be able to switch. Switching for sports only is a horrible idea IMO, but whatever.
However after one open enrollment, you can't be eligible at another school ever, unless you actually move to the district you plan on participating for. Exclusion would be that if you can't participate for your original school you left as that's the district you are probably already living in. Obviously you left for some "legitimate" reason, so why go back & be able to play?
However after one open enrollment, you can't be eligible at another school ever, unless you actually move to the district you plan on participating for. Exclusion would be that if you can't participate for your original school you left as that's the district you are probably already living in. Obviously you left for some "legitimate" reason, so why go back & be able to play?
No, because sports teach lessons and build character, too. You're treating kids as though they are playing sports for your enjoyment and your team winning is more important than someone else's choice. This is about their lives, not yours. Are there kids that transfer just for sports? Yes. There aren't as many as you might think in the grand scheme of it all, though. You only hear about the ones that would be starters, and not all those transfer just for sports even though people not associated with the family rush to that judgement. It's says more about you than it does the family's. I've seen this first hand and it's horrible how communities can treat families who send their kid to a better school, and that kid has the burden of being a good athlete. Yes I say burden because good athletes who go to a new school are automatically horrible people.
Believe it or not, sports aren't the driving force of everything like many on here think they are. Sports may be a factor more or less depending on the case, but you can't punish children for what ultimately amounts to a family decision.
It's hypocritical...people say winning isn't everything, and then someone transfers and all the sudden people need punished because that team is winning.
This is a copy/paste of a post that I wrote over on the Basketball message board. While it may not be 100% applicable, my basic opinion does apply. The post was in a thread about the whole parochial school debate, but my post really isn't. My opinions are coming from the "other side" of the open enrollment issue. I certainly understand that educational opportunities exist in some other school districts. My opinion stands. I believe that we should all have enough pride in our communities and faith in our school district to have our children educated within them. If we don't, then we should move into a school district in which that pride and faith exists.
The issue that I have with this is pretty simple. Yes, all schools (public or parochial) have students migrate around. Do parochial schools "recruit" players? I suppose they may, but I am not sure how convinced I am that there are in home visits with all of the promising 6th graders throughout the State. I can see more "attracting" than recruiting, but that is really not my point.
My kids are part of a football tradition that is poor to say the least. It doesn't seem to matter what we do, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. We get close to a .500 record on occasion, but really we are a 1 or 2 win per season team and have been for 15 years. Within that, we have some defections. These are public school defections. The defectors opt into another school system, and they make significant contributions on the field for their new teams. To be clear, these are all conference caliber players. Would these players make us 8-1 or 7-2, no. Would these players make us 6-3, absolutely. 6-3 with a token playoff appearance, and pretty soon our numbers increase, we get a little excitement about our program, and who knows?
What about the teams that these kids leave behind? What about Cedar Bluffs? How did they get along without their State Tournament qualifying North Bend Tiger? What about Madison? Madison has managed to bring in a very bright and fresh thinking young head coach. How is Madison getting along without their Humphrey St Francis Flyers on their roster? How is this bright young coach ever going to build his own team and program when 40% of his roster is starting for another team?
I don't believe that the multiplier for parochial schools is really fair, because parochial schools are not the only schools that benefit from kids moving around. I do however believe that there needs to be some way to level the field when these kids choose to defect from one school and participate in sports for another school. In my opinion, it isn't really about punishing the school that brings talent over. It is more about giving the school that loses these kids a concession of some type.
I am fairly active with the American Legion Baseball program in Nebraska. While I do not agree with all of their eligibility rules, there are a few that unquestionably keep the field level in the non-metro areas. If a kid from Madison wants to play Legion Baseball for Battle Creek, Battle Creek gets the player but also picks up the entire enrollment of the Madison school into the classification meeting. If you are going to take one of Madison's best players, that is fine...but you may end up being bumped up a Class in the process. Madison is losing their #1 pitcher. This is a player that the community has invested time and money to develop since he was playing T-Ball. Madison deserves a concession for losing this player.
Now I understand that this type of system gets pretty hairy when applied to football. It could end up bumping 8 man teams up to 11 man. But does it really? How many kids are standing on the sidelines of these perennial powerhouse 8 man football teams. I can tell you that my kids are in a mid-size C-2 school, and we are lucky if we get 25 kids to play. I am by no means an expert, but if my kids have to play 11 man football with 3 kids that would have started both ways playing for another school, why can't an 8-man team that has fleeced the school up the road have to do the same?
Others have talked about the commitment that many of the parochial schools have when it comes to athletics. I absolutely couldn't agree more. These programs get after it, and deserve the success that they have both athletically and in the classroom. My opinions are not directed to parochial schools, but rather all schools.
The issue that I have with this is pretty simple. Yes, all schools (public or parochial) have students migrate around. Do parochial schools "recruit" players? I suppose they may, but I am not sure how convinced I am that there are in home visits with all of the promising 6th graders throughout the State. I can see more "attracting" than recruiting, but that is really not my point.
My kids are part of a football tradition that is poor to say the least. It doesn't seem to matter what we do, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. We get close to a .500 record on occasion, but really we are a 1 or 2 win per season team and have been for 15 years. Within that, we have some defections. These are public school defections. The defectors opt into another school system, and they make significant contributions on the field for their new teams. To be clear, these are all conference caliber players. Would these players make us 8-1 or 7-2, no. Would these players make us 6-3, absolutely. 6-3 with a token playoff appearance, and pretty soon our numbers increase, we get a little excitement about our program, and who knows?
What about the teams that these kids leave behind? What about Cedar Bluffs? How did they get along without their State Tournament qualifying North Bend Tiger? What about Madison? Madison has managed to bring in a very bright and fresh thinking young head coach. How is Madison getting along without their Humphrey St Francis Flyers on their roster? How is this bright young coach ever going to build his own team and program when 40% of his roster is starting for another team?
I don't believe that the multiplier for parochial schools is really fair, because parochial schools are not the only schools that benefit from kids moving around. I do however believe that there needs to be some way to level the field when these kids choose to defect from one school and participate in sports for another school. In my opinion, it isn't really about punishing the school that brings talent over. It is more about giving the school that loses these kids a concession of some type.
I am fairly active with the American Legion Baseball program in Nebraska. While I do not agree with all of their eligibility rules, there are a few that unquestionably keep the field level in the non-metro areas. If a kid from Madison wants to play Legion Baseball for Battle Creek, Battle Creek gets the player but also picks up the entire enrollment of the Madison school into the classification meeting. If you are going to take one of Madison's best players, that is fine...but you may end up being bumped up a Class in the process. Madison is losing their #1 pitcher. This is a player that the community has invested time and money to develop since he was playing T-Ball. Madison deserves a concession for losing this player.
Now I understand that this type of system gets pretty hairy when applied to football. It could end up bumping 8 man teams up to 11 man. But does it really? How many kids are standing on the sidelines of these perennial powerhouse 8 man football teams. I can tell you that my kids are in a mid-size C-2 school, and we are lucky if we get 25 kids to play. I am by no means an expert, but if my kids have to play 11 man football with 3 kids that would have started both ways playing for another school, why can't an 8-man team that has fleeced the school up the road have to do the same?
Others have talked about the commitment that many of the parochial schools have when it comes to athletics. I absolutely couldn't agree more. These programs get after it, and deserve the success that they have both athletically and in the classroom. My opinions are not directed to parochial schools, but rather all schools.
If you are switching schools between your freshman and senior year because you want the better education the other school has to offer ( and for some reason you and your parents didnt realize it tell now) you set 365 days from all NSAA activities at the varsity level. You still get to play JV and practice so all of your building character opportunities are still there. I can see why some people dont like this rule because it has consequences. Right now they way we have it, we teach lack of planning, dont like something run, and the worst but most popular trait that it seems our newest generations loves, you can do what ever you want its your right to switch, no one can tell you what to do, they can not give you consequences its your right to do what you want.
At first, I was a little bit undecided on this type of rule. After thinking about it for a day, I see some merit here. I like your point about being eligible for JV athletics. Character is built during all of the preparation and training anyway. The lessons are learned doing all of the things that the fans don't see. This would actually promote all of the things that athletics stands for.
I believe that you have something here.