Tebow Bill Vetoed Today
- Thread starter tommythecpa
- Start date
Finally he does something the people want rather than his own desires.
How rediculous. A Bill to stop reps from entering Bills.
The current bill had no chance with the Governor. I'm surprised it made it through the to that level. Clearly, the majority of reps want this to happen but to try to push it through by saying, essentially:
"No Public School may be part of an Organization that does not allow home schoolers" was just plain stupid.
The reps and delegates want this to happen or it wouldn't have gotten to the point it did. The wording will have to be changed and be reasonable. This is a Bill that has been proposed often over the years. It never made it past committee. The last two years, it made it to the Governor. Just be straight and simple with it. If they do it right, welcome Home Schoolers. Happy to have you.
The other garbage the Governor put out there about an "unbalanced playing field", I do not believe at all. There aren't kids aren't out there waiting to be the next Lawrence Taylor. Yes, there will be outcries of unfair practices that blame home schoolers. But I cannot believe this will be greater than the whining of recruiting that go out there every season. Home schoolers will need to pass the same VHSL residency standards as any Public HS kid. They will need to attend SOME classes at their PS. They will need to uphold the same academic standards. They will be more carefully scrutinized than regular PS kids.
My kids went to Governor's School. They reported everyday to their own school and reported to home room. Then they got on the bus to go to another location. They came back in the afternoon and went to practices and any after school activity they desired. Is that so much different than what the home schoolers want? I don't see it.
Like the chant in "The Bad News Bears": LET THEM PLAY!
Just because you do not believe it or agree does not make it garbage. As has been pointed out to you on numerous prior occasions the fact your kids went to governor's school is totally irrelevant and not analogous to the home school issue due to attendance and state established and monitored standards for physically separate governor's schools. Are you aware of any similar structure that currently exists for home school kids in Virginia? Furthermore, the fact that it has been implemented in some form or fashion in approximately 22 states so far does not mean it is a slam dunk in Virginia without comparing the structures that existed and were modified in those other states.
The current kids who use the home school system are not the real issue here that the governor refers to in his level playing field comment. The issue is in the details of implementation and how to level the playing field as much as possible to prevent the abusers that will be waiting to take advantage of the loopholes. The whining over recruiting is absolutely no where near the outcries that will arise when the first stud player who isn't cutting it in regular school opts for home school and miraculously becomes a solid student. To reiterate, I have nothing against home school participation if a fair and equitable model can be developed and implemented, however, I have significant concerns that attendance, eligibility and curriculum standards can be developed without gaping loopholes that less than scrupulous adults will be willing to take advantage of to help their perceived "meal ticket".. Also to infer that the reps want this to happen ignores the possibility that their votes to support have more to do with the impact on similar legislation(charter schools, etc.) than any strong support for the home school issue itself or that they are comfortable letting the governor carry the water on the issue as opposed to dealing with negative feedback from a small but, vocal local constituency. If they really want it to pass they could muster the votes to override the veto.
Most Delegates and Senators in Richmond do not understand the VHSL and/or the Tebow Bill. I know this for a fact. I have talked with some and emailed many others. I talked with one Delegate and I am not sure she could spell VHSL.
The solution is very simple, allow home schooled kids in an area to band together to form teams and then allow them to compete in one of the classifications. Most likely that would be one of the lower ones like Group 1A due to the number of students involved.
Nobody is saying they can't be a part of the school. If they want to enroll in the school and be a part of it then we have no issue to discuss. The problem I and most other people have with it is that they want to remove themselves from the school and school system for everything but athletics. The school based teams are supposed to be representatives of the school. If someone doesn't wish to be a part of the school then that is exactly what they are saying they do NOT want to be.
Home schooled kids have ample opportunities to participate and compete in athletics through AAU, travel, rec league and YMCA teams. Those teams are not officially affiliated with the schools in most cases, so there is no problem with them taking in the home school kids.
In the end, it all comes back to making decisions and living with the benefits or consequences of those decisions. It's a great life lesson.
Nobody is saying they can't be a part of the school. If they want to enroll in the school and be a part of it then we have no issue to discuss. The problem I and most other people have with it is that they want to remove themselves from the school and school system for everything but athletics. The school based teams are supposed to be representatives of the school. If someone doesn't wish to be a part of the school then that is exactly what they are saying they do NOT want to be.
Home schooled kids have ample opportunities to participate and compete in athletics through AAU, travel, rec league and YMCA teams. Those teams are not officially affiliated with the schools in most cases, so there is no problem with them taking in the home school kids.
In the end, it all comes back to making decisions and living with the benefits or consequences of those decisions. It's a great life lesson.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't funding for public schools based on enrollment? If so, that's another reason not to allow the home schoolers to participate in the public school athletics, it puts a drain on the system. They can join the rec leagues, or form their own.
Allowing them to band together and compete in one of the classifications is not the simple solution you contend IMO. With kids that are currently home schooled it might be a simple solution, however, the issues would arise as more people choose to avail themselves of the home school option. Basketball is probably the best example of potential abuse. A coach convinces the top prospects in a geographic area to go the home school route. How do you monitor attendance in classes, academic advancement for eligibility, etc.,? Your recommendation and the example I offer is essentially what has already happened with these "special schools/basketball academies" that have cropped up from time to time. Some have been reputable, however, others have proven themselves fly by the seat of their pants ventures that left kids high and dry and with questionable eligibility to advance to the college level. With the home school solution you advocate you have let them in the league to compete with no assurance that there is a structure to address the potential abuses that will inevitably arise.
Banding together is one problem of home school deal. A rogue coach could assemble an all star team and play under home school umbrella. He could actually have a team consisting of high school drop-outs. Even now, some schools recruit and "hide" student"s resident under the current rules Imagine what could happen if resident and/or school were not in play here.
If it's an issue then why would they want to deal with the same issues by coming to a school team?
If the day ever comes that somebody bumps their heads and allows it, then the attendance and grade point requirements are going to create a mountain of paperwork for the parents to keep up with in order for their player to remain eligible.
If they went with other home school kids, at least they could save the regular public schools....you know, the ones they don't want their kids associated with in the first place.....from having to add to their already overly large amount of record keeping.
I still can't wrap my head around it. Why would someone think that they can opt out of the educational portion of being in a school but opt in for the athletic portion? The only argument that anyone has given me so far is "because we want to."
If the day ever comes that somebody bumps their heads and allows it, then the attendance and grade point requirements are going to create a mountain of paperwork for the parents to keep up with in order for their player to remain eligible.
If they went with other home school kids, at least they could save the regular public schools....you know, the ones they don't want their kids associated with in the first place.....from having to add to their already overly large amount of record keeping.
I still can't wrap my head around it. Why would someone think that they can opt out of the educational portion of being in a school but opt in for the athletic portion? The only argument that anyone has given me so far is "because we want to."
What I like most is that with the right structure, you don't have a problem with home schoolers playing either. We agree.
We do agree that the right structure is necessary. My biggest question so far is I cannot come up with a structure that is not ripe with opportunity for fraud/abuse. If procedures are implemented to try and minimize that likelihood I think the costs and red tape will be significant, maybe even prohibitive. To me the recruiting and place of residence issues are far easier to control than monitoring home school and we already have mountains of data suggesting that rule is abused. My opinion is, if/when football goes to the AAU model currently utilized in basketball there will no longer be a real obstacle to home school participation in public school sports in Virginia. I think the issue in Virginia will continue to follow the legislature vote/governor veto until such time as the landscape ships drastically for all high school sports either due to new models(AAU/travel) or budget constraints effect sports funding even more than at present.
One aspect of the argument Tebow Bill supporters use, really bugs me. They tend to draw a hard distinction between public school education and public school athletics. Home school advocates and public school supporters both agree that high school athletics are meant to be a part of the overall educational experience. Not a stand alone, separate endevour, but part of the homogeneous experience that helps prepare students to lead productive lives.
The choice home school parents make is to not have their child partake of the public school experience. The experience is not just classroom instruction, but the entire experience. Again, athletics is not a stand alone part of this. It is an integral part. They are entertained in such a manner that having "A" without "B" equals "F", (for failure).
And another sentiment of mine is really not valid excuse as part of the fact based argument. But....! I'm offended by the insinuation that my public school is inadequate, immoral, unsafe, and so unsatisfactory, that it's not good enough for your child. But, because you want your child to participate in athletics that are not otherwise available to you, you suddenly feel drastically different about the factors you used to decide to home school? Remember, it's these same students, the same teachers, the same administrators, the same cultural diversity, the same behavioral standards, that you wanted to avoid?
The choice home school parents make is to not have their child partake of the public school experience. The experience is not just classroom instruction, but the entire experience. Again, athletics is not a stand alone part of this. It is an integral part. They are entertained in such a manner that having "A" without "B" equals "F", (for failure).
And another sentiment of mine is really not valid excuse as part of the fact based argument. But....! I'm offended by the insinuation that my public school is inadequate, immoral, unsafe, and so unsatisfactory, that it's not good enough for your child. But, because you want your child to participate in athletics that are not otherwise available to you, you suddenly feel drastically different about the factors you used to decide to home school? Remember, it's these same students, the same teachers, the same administrators, the same cultural diversity, the same behavioral standards, that you wanted to avoid?
Other than 7-on-7 I think that would be pretty reckless. That's the whole problem with the rules in place now that allow sports to practice and play all year. They were all supposed to give everybody a level playing field with football. The only one that can't play all year now is football. Kids are having to pick a sport, two at the most, if the want to be the best.
If little Johnny wants to play, send him to school.
Sometimes, home schooled is the better way. However, I do accept that integration with the real world must eventually be done. Life cannot be experienced in a bubble but acclimation may be different for some. If sports helps this process, I'm for it.
Completely agree, with multiple opportunities available for everyone that wants to take advantage of them at the recreation league, AAU and YMCA levels. Again, nobody wants to deny young athletes the chance to be athletes. Most people who are against this only fight against them using the school system that they removed themselves from.
They are saying the education system is not good enough for little Johnny but the athletic teams are.
Athletics in high school are an extension of the classroom. In order to get on the field, you first have to get in the classroom.
Athletics in high school are an extension of the classroom. In order to get on the field, you first have to get in the classroom.
Others may be able to speak to this better than me, however, I do not think there are any states currently using an AAU model. USA football is running a 7 on 7 national championship over the coming spring/summer I believe(mentioned yesterday in USA Today). The difference from the current 7 on 7 tourneys is that this one will not be all star teams but, fielded by specific high schools. There are also rumblings Nike is looking at doing something probably similar to the EYBL series that currently exists for basketball and speculation is that Under Armor will not sit quietly by and let Nike have this option uncontested. The landscape for high school football, in my opinion, is ripe for change with concussion and liability issues, school budget constraints, declining youth league participation numbers and the ever growing demand for content across a variety of audio/video outlets. Going to be interesting to see how things shake out because football in high school(just like college) is a significant revenue source and high school athletic budgets could be significantly impacted across all sports.
I agree. HS Football is ripe for change. Litigation does that and the money is not available to fight a battle they cannot win. I really see that too. Eventually HS Football will be 7 v 7 or flag.
College can hold on longer but the play may actually recede. The NFL will hang on the longest because they have the money but the migration has started. Football is a great game but catastrophic injury is almost assured for all. 100% of players miss games due to injury. Long term and maybe not in my lifetime, the NFL will be all robotics and bionics. Real people will no longer play the game.
A
I don't agree Shaunty. That's all a pretty long stretch. But I whole heartedly agree that challenges and change are ahead.
I don't agree Shaunty. That's all a pretty long stretch. But I whole heartedly agree that challenges and change are ahead.
I see the Ivy League is out-lawing tackling during practice. I look for more conferences to do this, and eventually it will be done in high schools. I think it's a good idea. Some teams tackle to much in practice. Use practice dummies to teach technique and save wear and tear on the players.
I saw a team once using 5 large trash cans for offensive linemen in practice. They averaged over 50 points a game.
I saw a team once using 5 large trash cans for offensive linemen in practice. They averaged over 50 points a game.
Actually, College teams rarely practice full tackle anyway. Most practices are "thud" only and never below the waist. Spring games may be the one place tackling is done. So this was actually not such a stretch and really pretty smart. Now any practice injuries cannot be seen as collision related and, therefore, accidents. Not a reckless disregard of safety during practices.
Last edited:
I'd like to see this brought to the HS level as much as possible. It seems like a good portion of the injuries sustained by Salem every year is from practice. I like to see the intensity, but save it for the other team! When I notice someone not dressed out or a number missing on the field, I'll ask where is ____? Frequently, the answer is, He got hurt or tore something in practice. I know football is a tough physical sport, but I hate to see guys miss part of the season because of a practice injury.
Last edited:
Mag's is a tremendous Coach. He clearly believes in the intensity required but he's also like Belichick. He evolves. Very smart man.
Similar threads
