ADVERTISEMENT

Ocean Lakes...OUCH!

How can the VHSL let them keep their Championship? Will Centerville protest?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cat45
Its always the same crap when a team is too good for its own district players Coaches fans etc go crying to VHSL etc anything to make sure they don't make it to the playoffs etc.
 
It's not like anyone had to dig very deep. When you advertise yourself and promote Middle School players that are not zoned for your team as future players on that team then it makes it easy. Read the actual infractions listed, it didn't take a lot of digging to find dirt. Also ironic that a certain "recruiting" guru / website is awfully quiet on the issue when his articles are listed as evidence.
 
Records speak for them selves , once again look at all the kids who are getting free eduction next level. If I were in middle school id tell my parents move us OL district lol I'm sure he was careful with what he was doing its not the first time its happen 2009 forfeit 6 games after a player 18 year old kid was found living by him self own apartment with guardians watching over him etc etc but the school that the kid left waited until it was enough games go crying tell VHSL too forfeit 6 games he played they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs. Thank God Beach District finally gets to play outta district opponents starting this year sure next year they will schedule better opponents outta state other teams don't cry that they gotta face them lol
 
gwb16 said:
http://wavy.com/2015/06/25/ocean-lakes-football-coach-suspended-for-3-games/
Click to expand...

I would assume this isn't totally over. Infractions like this have to be reported to the VHSL within 5 days of being discovered. I really don't know how all this works, but I would say it's possible forfeits are still on the table. The thing is, if you're Ocean Lakes, why would you even bother recruiting? You're record the last few years is something like 100-8. Just coach the kids that come out. They're certainly recruiting themselves at this point.

I also think that with private schools coming in, the whole issue of recruiting needs a major overhaul by the VHSL.
 
babY_d757 said:
Records speak for them selves , once again look at all the kids who are getting free eduction next level. If I were in middle school id tell my parents move us OL district lol I'm sure he was careful with what he was doing its not the first time its happen 2009 forfeit 6 games after a player 18 year old kid was found living by him self own apartment with guardians watching over him etc etc but the school that the kid left waited until it was enough games go crying tell VHSL too forfeit 6 games he played they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs. Thank God Beach District finally gets to play outta district opponents starting this year sure next year they will schedule better opponents outta state other teams don't cry that they gotta face them lol
Click to expand...
If the situation you described is what actually happened no one would be getting punished. Is it really whining and complaining about having to play somebody or just an effort to ensure a reasonably level playing field within the rules prescribed? Looks to me like OL at a minimum got sloppy in handling their business and at worst got greedy along the lines of "pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered." Gilliam makes a good point that the entire issue needs to be revisited in light of private school inclusion and I would add the following. Not only do the rules need to be reviewed, updated, tweaked, etc. but, once complete, the schools, school districts and VHSL need to actually enforce the rules consistently across all systems. Doesn't do any good to have the rules if they are only selectively enforced or people look the other way.
 
Two things. First, if parents decide to move a kids to a different district for athletics, that's between them and their ethical and moral conscious. As long as they follow the VHSL rules.

When coaches go out and violate the rules, that is a totally different matter.

This OL deal is really a sad commentary. What about what most coaches preach. "Conduct your life on and off the field with honesty and integrity". This is a really fine example they are setting for the kids.

And babY_d757, BULL SHIT! What you are saying is "win at all cost" and "the end justifies the means". I'm glad you don't have anything to do with kids in our area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: falcettik and LBcoach25
VaPrepsRod said:
My breakdown of what it all means...

https://virginiapreps.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1778348
Click to expand...
Several questions and points of discussion come to mind as I read Rod's breakdown, and the letter on notification to Ocean Lakes.

Is this finding and punishment unprecedented in the public schools in Virginia? Have similar findings and/or punishment been handed down before? Either from a District or the VHSL?

(1) Warning-A warning may be given by the League to an individual sport, academic activity or school for a one-year period of time. Cumulative warnings over a period of time may result in suspension or probation for that sport, academic activity or the school. It is official notice that an inexcusable, unethical or unsportsmanlike action, has occurred, is a matter of record, and that such an action must not be repeated.

If a warning can be given for a one year time period, where did three years come from?

"any person or group connected with the school or not connected with the school"

I think this might possibly be the most damning evidence of all. For sure, if the entire case was based on recruiting by a person NOT connected with the school, there would be no case at all. Therefore, logic dictates that a person CONNECTED with the school is guilty of a violation.

I argue vehemently that the Beach District Executive Committee would not have wasted time on this issue if the evidence indicated that the recruitment violations were confined to a "non-connected" rogue person or two. Consequently, I don't agree with Rod that this incident may prophesy an awakening of a period of a pursuit of "non-school connected" recruiters. The threshold would have to be an awareness and at least the tacit approval of "school connected" individuals to warrant a significant effort to investigate and levy punishment. As I believe occurred in this incident.

This is not a criminal, nor civil pursuit of the law. It is better characterized as an Administrative ruling. And as such, the findings certainly do not have to rise to the level of "beyond reasonable doubt". Even the standard of a "preponderance of the evidence" is a higher standard than typically must be met in a purely administrative decision. Perhaps the most appropriate standard in a case like this is rendering a ruling based upon the "totality of the evidence".

As Rod pointed out, most factors stated in this finding are questionable if looked at as stand alone evidence. If this were a court of law, on appeal, even a poor lawyer would discredit each factor, one at a time, until there was eventually nothing left to offer as "a preponderance of evidence". But this is not a court of law. As a result, the old adage applies. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck.

Along this line of thinking there is something else to consider as strong evidence that Ocean Lakes is guilty as charged.

Certainly, OL participated in the process of information gathering by the District Committee. And certainly they had an opportunity to discuss and explain any findings as they were presented. Without question, if there was a plausible explanation for any and all evidence of the alleged violation(s), it would never have gotten this far. And since this is NOT a court of law, OL would not have been of the belief that "we will win on appeal". They would not simply let this situation go, so they could get the ruling thrown out on appeal.

Again, as Rod had pointed out, there is a real risk of the VHSL deciding after appeal that the punishment was not harsh enough. If the evidence against was fragile, it would never have gotten this far. The District Committee would not have thrown one of it's own under the bus based on weak evidence. And OL would not have let it get to this point if they had valid arguments to avoid the embarrassment of a public release of information.

One final note. I offer an example of a legal situation I am aware of. A terrible tragedy occurred years ago that took the life of a teenager. Another teenager was charged with the crime. All evidence pointed to this second teenager as the cuprit. In fact, there was no evidence whatsoever that anyone other than the second teenager was there at the time of the event. The verdict was "not guilty". The public outcry was enormous. It was not a jury trial so all of the ridicule was directed directly at the presiding Judge. Of course, the Judge could not publicly address the reason for their decision.

After the verdict, neither the prosecuting attorneys, nor the defendants attorneys made anything other than a token statement. (Also, the defendants attorneys waived the right to a jury trial. Almost unheard of in a crime of this type). Why? Because there was information concerning what really took place that was known by all parties, but tightly held. It doesn't require much thought to realize that this information was an embarrassment to the deceased. Consequently, an agreement was reached behind the scenes that saved the victim's family from the public disclosure of this embarrassing information. (Incidentally, this took a lot of guts on everybodies part).

The point here is simply this. I can all but guarantee that the Beach District Executive Committee members know a lot more than was released in the ruling. Also, the Ocean Lakes School Administration know that there is no way they could escape punishment.


Look for a token press release soon that states that "while we dispute the findings, for the sake of the atheletes and the football program, Ocean Lakes will comply with the requirements of the ruling and move forward".

The end. Or just the beginning?


 
I never really liked this rule much. It feels impotent and like it's designed to protect poor athletic programs, so they don't have to get their s__t straight. Here's some things that I think about with this rule.

#1 I don't think it's easy to recruit a kid to transfer to a particular public school for sports. The program had better do a great selling job, and there's really no guarantee for a kid that he or she will get to play once they get there.

#2 There's just a lot of grey area. Coach compliments a kids with a phrase like, "I'd love to have a kid like you on my team." Is he recruiting or just complimenting the kid? I had a coach of another school say that to me after I had a good baseball game against him, but I knew he wasn't recruiting me. There wasn't a spot on his first place team where I could have helped him; I only played because I was on a terrible team.

#3 Why shouldn't coaches be allowed to tell the truth about their programs. If they really think they can do more for you than the coach down the road, why should they have to keep that to themselves?

#4 Should kids be doomed to play for rotten coaches just because the principal of their high school made a poor hiring decision? What's wrong with a kid seeking out the best coaching they can get?

However, if it's a rule, it should be enforced. It's just a hard one to enforce. Especially since the VHSL doesn't have a staff of private detectives out investigating this stuff.
 
DinwiddieProud said:
Several questions and points of discussion come to mind as I read Rod's breakdown, and the letter on notification to Ocean Lakes.

Is this finding and punishment unprecedented in the public schools in Virginia? Have similar findings and/or punishment been handed down before? Either from a District or the VHSL?

(1) Warning-A warning may be given by the League to an individual sport, academic activity or school for a one-year period of time. Cumulative warnings over a period of time may result in suspension or probation for that sport, academic activity or the school. It is official notice that an inexcusable, unethical or unsportsmanlike action, has occurred, is a matter of record, and that such an action must not be repeated.

If a warning can be given for a one year time period, where did three years come from?

"any person or group connected with the school or not connected with the school"

I think this might possibly be the most damning evidence of all. For sure, if the entire case was based on recruiting by a person NOT connected with the school, there would be no case at all. Therefore, logic dictates that a person CONNECTED with the school is guilty of a violation.

I argue vehemently that the Beach District Executive Committee would not have wasted time on this issue if the evidence indicated that the recruitment violations were confined to a "non-connected" rogue person or two. Consequently, I don't agree with Rod that this incident may prophesy an awakening of a period of a pursuit of "non-school connected" recruiters. The threshold would have to be an awareness and at least the tacit approval of "school connected" individuals to warrant a significant effort to investigate and levy punishment. As I believe occurred in this incident.

This is not a criminal, nor civil pursuit of the law. It is better characterized as an Administrative ruling. And as such, the findings certainly do not have to rise to the level of "beyond reasonable doubt". Even the standard of a "preponderance of the evidence" is a higher standard than typically must be met in a purely administrative decision. Perhaps the most appropriate standard in a case like this is rendering a ruling based upon the "totality of the evidence".

As Rod pointed out, most factors stated in this finding are questionable if looked at as stand alone evidence. If this were a court of law, on appeal, even a poor lawyer would discredit each factor, one at a time, until there was eventually nothing left to offer as "a preponderance of evidence". But this is not a court of law. As a result, the old adage applies. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck.

Along this line of thinking there is something else to consider as strong evidence that Ocean Lakes is guilty as charged.

Certainly, OL participated in the process of information gathering by the District Committee. And certainly they had an opportunity to discuss and explain any findings as they were presented. Without question, if there was a plausible explanation for any and all evidence of the alleged violation(s), it would never have gotten this far. And since this is NOT a court of law, OL would not have been of the belief that "we will win on appeal". They would not simply let this situation go, so they could get the ruling thrown out on appeal.

Again, as Rod had pointed out, there is a real risk of the VHSL deciding after appeal that the punishment was not harsh enough. If the evidence against was fragile, it would never have gotten this far. The District Committee would not have thrown one of it's own under the bus based on weak evidence. And OL would not have let it get to this point if they had valid arguments to avoid the embarrassment of a public release of information.

One final note. I offer an example of a legal situation I am aware of. A terrible tragedy occurred years ago that took the life of a teenager. Another teenager was charged with the crime. All evidence pointed to this second teenager as the cuprit. In fact, there was no evidence whatsoever that anyone other than the second teenager was there at the time of the event. The verdict was "not guilty". The public outcry was enormous. It was not a jury trial so all of the ridicule was directed directly at the presiding Judge. Of course, the Judge could not publicly address the reason for their decision.

After the verdict, neither the prosecuting attorneys, nor the defendants attorneys made anything other than a token statement. (Also, the defendants attorneys waived the right to a jury trial. Almost unheard of in a crime of this type). Why? Because there was information concerning what really took place that was known by all parties, but tightly held. It doesn't require much thought to realize that this information was an embarrassment to the deceased. Consequently, an agreement was reached behind the scenes that saved the victim's family from the public disclosure of this embarrassing information. (Incidentally, this took a lot of guts on everybodies part).

The point here is simply this. I can all but guarantee that the Beach District Executive Committee members know a lot more than was released in the ruling. Also, the Ocean Lakes School Administration know that there is no way they could escape punishment.


Look for a token press release soon that states that "while we dispute the findings, for the sake of the atheletes and the football program, Ocean Lakes will comply with the requirements of the ruling and move forward".

The end. Or just the beginning?
Click to expand...

Much as I agree with the current punishment, OL should definitely appeal. I believe they will be smart enough to do so. According to VHSL rule, probation can only be one year. The District had no such restrictions. The VHSL must, at a minimum and by rule, reduce it to that. If they do not, OL can then go to Court as the VHSL will be in contract violation. In Court, due to the questionable evidence, the entire Suspension would be overturned. Here's what will happen in the end of this:

1 OL will appeal
2 OL will accept the one year
3 the Coach will get full reinstatement and miss no time or games because there is no precedent for this punishment and it cannot be supported if it goes to Court. The VHSL does not want to go there.
4 Recruitment in it's many forms will continue

All IMO.
 
shauntclair said:
Much as I agree with the current punishment, OL should definitely appeal. I believe they will be smart enough to do so. According to VHSL rule, probation can only be one year. The District had no such restrictions. The VHSL must, at a minimum and by rule, reduce it to that. If they do not, OL can then go to Court as the VHSL will be in contract violation. In Court, due to the questionable evidence, the entire Suspension would be overturned. Here's what will happen in the end of this:

1 OL will appeal
2 OL will accept the one year
3 the Coach will get full reinstatement and miss no time or games because there is no precedent for this punishment and it cannot be supported if it goes to Court. The VHSL does not want to go there.
4 Recruitment in it's many forms will continue

All IMO.
Click to expand...

Early talk is that Ocean Lakes will not appeal, though I've not heard that in any sort of official capacity.

Remember what I said about opening Pandora's Box? Consider the ribbon on top untied. Lots and lots of wild things flying around right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_vu6vqwsr4nf3b
VaPrepsRod said:
Early talk is that Ocean Lakes will not appeal, though I've not heard that in any sort of official capacity.

Remember what I said about opening Pandora's Box? Consider the ribbon on top untied. Lots and lots of wild things flying around right now.
Click to expand...
Gotta' agree. The box is already open. It's really gonna' get interesting.
 
babY_d757 said:
Records speak for them selves , once again look at all the kids who are getting free eduction next level. If I were in middle school id tell my parents move us OL district lol I'm sure he was careful with what he was doing its not the first time its happen 2009 forfeit 6 games after a player 18 year old kid was found living by him self own apartment with guardians watching over him etc etc but the school that the kid left waited until it was enough games go crying tell VHSL too forfeit 6 games he played they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs. Thank God Beach District finally gets to play outta district opponents starting this year sure next year they will schedule better opponents outta state other teams don't cry that they gotta face them lol
Click to expand...
The assumption you make is that where you go to school makes a difference in recruiting. Not an iota. You either have the goods or you don't. Any College Coach will tell you that.
 
I don't think it could be stated any clearer or more respectful than what Coach Haddock had to say.

Like virtually anything in life. It starts out small, everybody gets used to it, and it usually grows bigger and becomes the norm. Until it goes too far and has to be addressed. A pretty apt description of the recruitment situation in Tidewater, would you not agree?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwb16
Phantom, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. If NOVA is guilty, show the transfer numbers for the last few years.
 
DinwiddieProud said:
Phantom, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. If NOVA is guilty, show the transfer numbers for the last few years.
Click to expand...


I have no comment about OL because I have no idea about what happened and what's happening. What bothered me was the "That's just how they do it down there" attitude.
 
DinwiddieProud said:
Phantom, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. If NOVA is guilty, show the transfer numbers for the last few years.
Click to expand...

According to a NoVa source...transferred out of Freedom High School:

Chad Wiggins (Centreville)
Spencer Mizelle (Stone Bridge)
Brandon Polk (Briar Woods)
Two other starters (Westfield)

Others:
Matt Zanellato (from Robins to Lake Braddock)
Caleb Henderson (West Pot to Lake Braddock)

L.C. Bird's first state championship team:

QB from Henrico
RB from Meadowbrook
WR from Thomas Dale
OL from Petersburg

Tidewater-only issue? FALSE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwb16 and mtnclmbr
Correct, this is not a Tidewater only issue. I am anxious to find the results of the Beach Districts transfer research. I think it's the right direction to investigate them all and be done with it. A 42% transfer rate of Varsity players is difficult to believe can be a normal happenstance. IMO, anything over 5% seems abnormal. But I don't have the books on this so I have no clue for precedent. I hope the BD does a good job with the number one goal being truth and the right thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwb16 and DinwiddieProud
Haven't read the article, not worth a Post subscription IMO. If the interpretations of what the coach said are accurate its disingenuous at best. This transfer situation occurs often at a lot of schools. Usually in more urban areas(Centreville included) where there are alternatives it regularly occurs and it occurs, albeit probably with less frequency, in suburban and rural areas as well. Be it a philosophical disagreement or a budget/resource issue the rules are not being enforced and the fault lies at all levels IMO from the individuals and schools to school districts to the VHSL. Shauntclair is on point that it will be interesting to see the Beach District transfer research and if they really want to get a handle on the magnitude of the issue all Districts could be compelled to produce similar data, however, even with all the data available nothing changes until there is a reasonable rule in place and a mechanism in place to enforce it. The recent movement with private school participation provides a timely opportunity to review/redraft/modify the rules and then actually enforce them for a change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DinwiddieProud
I'm not sure there's a rule change required. On review of the VHSL bylaws, penalties are severe and clear for recruiting. As Rod pointed out in other posts, anyone can be guilty of recruiting if they try to influence a player to go to another team. I think that rule is there specifically for the Street Agents. But here's the rub. The VHSL does not have an enforcement arm. They do not investigate. They do not police.

Everything that happened to OL was Beach District only. The VHSL had nothing to do with it. They were kept in the loop but they did not penalize. The BD did. All due respect for their work and their continued effort to evaluate the role of transfers. I actually like this method and I would hope that it inspires every other District, across the board, to accept the challenge of running the numbers on transfers. It's a simple clerical task. Hopefully, no one finds their team to be made of almost half transfers but it can at least set a baseline of what indicates normal and what should raise an eyebrow.
 
shauntclair said:
I'm not sure there's a rule change required. On review of the VHSL bylaws, penalties are severe and clear for recruiting. As Rod pointed out in other posts, anyone can be guilty of recruiting if they try to influence a player to go to another team. I think that rule is there specifically for the Street Agents. But here's the rub. The VHSL does not have an enforcement arm. They do not investigate. They do not police.

Everything that happened to OL was Beach District only. The VHSL had nothing to do with it. They were kept in the loop but they did not penalize. The BD did. All due respect for their work and their continued effort to evaluate the role of transfers. I actually like this method and I would hope that it inspires every other District, across the board, to accept the challenge of running the numbers on transfers. It's a simple clerical task. Hopefully, no one finds their team to be made of almost half transfers but it can at least set a baseline of what indicates normal and what should raise an eyebrow.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily advocating a complete rule change and there could be sections such as the penalties that require no change at all, however, I would expect there are at least some areas that might need clarification and/or expansion with private schools entering and the increasing use of social media. I also realize the VHSL doesn't investigate which goes to my mention of resources and the potential need/benefit for independent third party investigations. Things could probably work fine at the school or District level in terms of investigation and enforcement and the backstop or threat of outside investigation might provide additional motivation. IMO the goal is a rule that is clear, enforceable and consistently applied across all districts and divisions
 
I think we're starting to mix things up (in the article and on the boards).

There is absolutely no rule against kids transferring. None. Nada. If Ocean Lakes had 100% of their kids transfer last year; that's nothing. There are rules against kids transferring illegally (not living in attendance zone, transferring back to a school they one left without corresponding MOVES by parents).

What Ocean Lakes is being punished for is for violating the proselytizing rule. You get hit with that when a kid transfer (even with a legal move), AFTER people recruited the kid to come there. I don't think the raw number of transfers can be used as evidence of anything. Like you say, people move around in cities or in rapidly growing counties like Loudoun. Those are also probably the most likely places where coaches are going to be tempted to recruit. I'm in Orange County. Recruiting doesn't do us any good. Families have to move 25 miles to change into our "zone."

Recruiting is super hard to prove. I actually don't remember another case of a school being penalized for violating this rule.

Showing a kid is attending illegally is easier to prove (here's his parent's electric bill sent to another school zone address, for instance). That's usually how this gets caught.

I think if I were Ocean Lakes I'd appeal this, unless I really thought there was a smoking gun. I'd say this is just another reason for coaches to stay off of social media and message boards (do as I say, not as I do).
 
VaPrepsRod said:
According to a NoVa source...transferred out of Freedom High School:

Chad Wiggins (Centreville)
Spencer Mizelle (Stone Bridge)
Brandon Polk (Briar Woods)
Two other starters (Westfield)

Others:
Matt Zanellato (from Robins to Lake Braddock)
Caleb Henderson (West Pot to Lake Braddock)

L.C. Bird's first state championship team:

QB from Henrico
RB from Meadowbrook
WR from Thomas Dale
OL from Petersburg

Tidewater-only issue? FALSE.
Click to expand...

OK, so there was a problem with the football program at Freedom-South Riding causing a mass exodus. The kids all ended up at different schools and there is no evidence they were recruited. And it was one player that went to Westfield - Devon Burns. Henderson's father left West Potomac after he was told he was not returning as head coach. Son followed him to his new high school/job. To attempt a comparison to OL is a bit of stretch.

Haddock's non-controversial quote: "My dealings with Chris have been positive and he seems to be a stand-up guy. I can’t speak to what he does with his program and in the offseason, but I do know there are some discrepancies about what is allowed across state and think that’s what should change and needs to be addressed.”
 
1amishfootballfan said:
OK, so there was a problem with the football program at Freedom-South Riding causing a mass exodus. The kids all ended up at different schools and there is no evidence they were recruited. And it was one player that went to Westfield - Devon Burns. Henderson's father left West Potomac after he was told he was not returning as head coach. Son followed him to his new high school/job. To attempt a comparison to OL is a bit of stretch.

Haddock's non-controversial quote: "My dealings with Chris have been positive and he seems to be a stand-up guy. I can’t speak to what he does with his program and in the offseason, but I do know there are some discrepancies about what is allowed across state and think that’s what should change and needs to be addressed.”
Click to expand...

Didn't try to make a comparison in any way, shape or form to OL. Sorry if that is what you got out of my post.

I was addressing the general feeling from people around the state that transferring "only" happens in Tidewater. I hear it from people outside of Tidewater at least once every two weeks, either on the boards or in person.

However, the fact is that transfers (legal or questioned) happens in EVERY part of the state and they happen often.

Then, like you did, there is a second part where "the transfers where I LIVE are all legal and on the up and up" while "the transfers where OTHER PEOPLE LIVE are certainly illegal and involve recruiting".

That notion is straight bunk.

Two weeks ago, when I was at the Westfield 7x7, several of my off-the-record conversations were coaches telling me which schools in NoVa are "cheating". There were at least four different schools mentioned.

The best part about this conversation is that this post won't even matter, most of you will keep selling the story. Those of us who have been around the state (reporters and coaches) all know better.
 
DinwiddieProud said:
I don't think it could be stated any clearer or more respectful than what Coach Haddock had to say.

Like virtually anything in life. It starts out small, everybody gets used to it, and it usually grows bigger and becomes the norm. Until it goes too far and has to be addressed. A pretty apt description of the recruitment situation in Tidewater, would you not agree?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Tidewater has a lot of kids that have different situations and the schools are so close together. Every year we at LT lose kids to other schools and there is no write up about it yet we get 1 kid that transfers from Smith and it's a big deal. People don't realize that the Berkeley (LT) South Norfolk (Smith) zones are right side by side

https://www.google.com/maps/place/S...2!3m1!1s0x89baa328c19b0279:0xccead1727f5a75c6

If you look to the North of South Norfolk on the map you see Berkeley. It's just a matter of if you move down the street you change schools. Hell in Hampton if you move across the street in some places you change schools.

Also I see Dinwiddie got a lil richer...https://virginiapreps.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1779992 of course his family moved and it had nothing to do with football. Just helps that the kid is good in football I know Coach Mills and his staff doesn't have to recruit kids its just shows the quality of the program when kids want to come there to play. Howcome that can't be the case everywhere?
 
  • Like
Reactions: phantom
DEVILSLB99 said:
Not at all. Tidewater has a lot of kids that have different situations and the schools are so close together. Every year we at LT lose kids to other schools and there is no write up about it yet we get 1 kid that transfers from Smith and it's a big deal. People don't realize that the Berkeley (LT) South Norfolk (Smith) zones are right side by side

https://www.google.com/maps/place/S...2!3m1!1s0x89baa328c19b0279:0xccead1727f5a75c6

If you look to the North of South Norfolk on the map you see Berkeley. It's just a matter of if you move down the street you change schools. Hell in Hampton if you move across the street in some places you change schools.

Also I see Dinwiddie got a lil richer...https://virginiapreps.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1779992 of course his family moved and it had nothing to do with football. Just helps that the kid is good in football I know Coach Mills and his staff doesn't have to recruit kids its just shows the quality of the program when kids want to come there to play. Howcome that can't be the case everywhere?
Click to expand...
I don't' have a problem with kid's moving or transferring. It happens. When almost half your squad is transfers, the questions have to be asked. Again, I don't have the numbers for every school in the State but damn, 42% is just not conceivable for me. Hope it's just another learning experience for me.
 
shauntclair said:
The assumption you make is that where you go to school makes a difference in recruiting. Not an iota. You either have the goods or you don't. Any College Coach will tell you that.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with this but if you look at that case of Zanellato transferring from a traditionally run-heavy Robinson program to a Lake Braddock team that liked to spread the field and throw the ball, it made sense from a "getting more noticed" standpoint. His numbers skyrocketed his senior year after transferring to Lake Braddock. I read an old article and it looked like he only had one offer going into his senior season, but he was eventually able to nab a bigger offer from Penn State probably as a result of his senior season production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

pizzzzza

Ocean Lakes 13 Landstown 12 - FINAL in OT

Replies
2
Views
140
SCOREBOARD
pizzzzza
pizzzzza
V

9/22 make-up games

Replies
0
Views
391
SCOREBOARD
VHSL-helper
V
P

PhoenixHS' 6A Top 25 - Week 1

Replies
6
Views
392
Class 6A (Fall)
PhoenixHS
P
O

Ejection Rule?

Replies
5
Views
526
Class 2A (Fall)
jffootball23
J
EPJr

FOOTBALL TOURNAMENT CENTRAL 2023

Replies
73
Views
4K
Class 6A (Fall)
EPJr
EPJr
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back