HS sports should be eliminated..... Really?

[default]

HS programs typically have some players not playing club/travel. A rec league can provide playing opportunities for the players that didn't make it on a HS team.

So in a district, everyone with-out kids is paying for someone else's kids to play sports.
And some people WITH kids in the district are paying so a select few can play instead of their kid and they have to go and pay again for their kid to play in a rec league.

Doesn't sound fair does it?

Apparently you didn't read/comprehend my entire post. I clearly stated schools should only provide a portion of the funding and the participants should be funding the rest out of their own pocket or via fundraising.

- The cost of ALL sports programs to a district should only be a few dollars a year per taxpayer due to the large base. It would cost taxpayers far more if they allowed their district to discontinue sports.

- The participants in the HS program would be paying most of the cost of their participation. From my experience, it is far higher than the cost of playing in a rec league. BTW, rec leagues are also typically taxpayer subsidized in one way or another (e.g. fields).

I actually agree with you in principle - to a degree, but feel you're making a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the cost per taxpayer. The real issue is the bait-and-switch that happens when popular items - currently funded ones - are held hostage to justify a tax increase so they can fund other items that would never pass.

 

[default]

In my opinion, education should not be a political football - period.

Fund it properly and responsibly and the problems we see now would lessen dramatically.

States that have levies are at the mercy of people who vote which is a shamefully low number.

States that let school boards make the taxing decisions are at the mercy of board members that sometimes have agendas that do not put students first.

Public, private and parocial schools all reap the benefits of taxpayers money so I'm not sure if that's really ad issue. To each their own, but privates and parochials also have their own problems with education.

I do believe that whatever the setting, all extracurriculars should be available to students to participate in and not at their own expense. Otherwise we are simply replacing HS softball teams with travelball teams and eliminating the economically disadvantaged from engaging.

I might be in the minority here but when two political candidates (and their factions) can spent billions on campaign commercials rallying against education/educators while still insisting on keeping this the greatest country on Earth, I tend to think their priorities are not in order and I worry about the futures of our children as a whole.

 

[default]

Here are just a few reasons:

1- cost , most schools are charging already

2- participation, lots of kids like playing BB but only 12 GET to...why not move it all out to clubs and everyone can play at the level they are at

3- coaches, example my DD is a short stocky power hitter, what is the coach only likes speed players? And the opposite is true also. So why should a player be married to a system that will only lead to fristration and failure?

These are 3 big ones for me. I think if sports went to a club format more people would play longer and fitness would also improve over the long haul. Right now most people quit do much fitness wise when they leave HS.

Sparty,

First cost is a poor argument. Travel/select sports usually cost more and some families may not be able to afford those fees. The cost to me is well worth the life lessons and hopefully trouble kids stay out of. I have always said too much free time for some kids and even adults means time to get into trouble.

Participation well that is why there is school sports, lot's of different levels of travel/select sports and rec sports so kids can play at the right level. Many kids work their butts off to make a school team and play travel/select to help their development and chance to play HS and College ball.

Coaches - Your argument is part of the problem in American today in my opinion. If something does neatly fit for a kid this day or they get frustrated too many parents over react. Work harder and get better. If your kid get's frustrated have them talk to the coach ( Parents should stay out of it). If a kid has talent it usually gets noticed. How is your DD going to deal with a boss in the work world that she does not get along with. What happens if she get's bypassed for the promotion she wants. That is the beauty of sports they teach life lessons. Do not blame failure on coaches. School sports are a big part of this.

 

[default]

Apparently you didn't read/comprehend my entire post. I clearly stated schools should only provide a portion of the funding and the participants should be funding the rest out of their own pocket or via fundraising.

- The cost of ALL sports programs to a district should only be a few dollars a year per taxpayer due to the large base. It would cost taxpayers far more if they allowed their district to discontinue sports.

- The participants in the HS program would be paying most of the cost of their participation. From my experience, it is far higher than the cost of playing in a rec league. BTW, rec leagues are also typically taxpayer subsidized in one way or another (e.g. fields).

I actually agree with you in principle - to a degree, but feel you're making a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the cost per taxpayer. The real issue is the bait-and-switch that happens when popular items - currently funded ones - are held hostage to justify a tax increase so they can fund other items that would never pass.

I read and comprehended the earlier post but you lost me on this one. Schools (taxpayers) have and are only paying a portion, albeit the largest portion and adding that it's only a portion doesn't change the statement on whether it's fair.

It's more then a "few dollars" and how would it cost taxpayers more if the district eliminated sports and lets say they all became club teams? Not sure what you mean.

You make it sound like the annual bill for sports in a district is a pittance. Maybe in yours but not in mine I'm sure. Our pay to play is $140 per sport. Boosters raise a few thousand. Uniforms, maintenance, equipment, trainers, coaches, insurance, utilities, administrators etc has to be a big bill. We have two indoor swimming pools and two turf football fields. I think I will ask for the annual budget for sports in our district. hehe

 

[default]

Well I think it's crazy to argue against tax dollars that help the school and district in any way when we are so overly taxed paying for people not to work. Want to puke when I drive to work every morning and pass all the new govt houses with driveways full of new cars! Those cars are still there when I am driving home. Must be nice.

 

[default]

[video=youtube_share;7QDv4sYwjO0]http://youtu.be/7QDv4sYwjO0[/video]

 

[default]

...So in a district, everyone with-out kids is paying for someone else's kids to play sports....

Hate to mention this but they're also paying to educate someone else's kids. My point is that sports are/should be part of an educational system, not separated from it.

 

[default]

You lost me at "waste of taxpayer's money"

 

[default]

Sports also generate money. Ticket sales, consession sales, merchandise sales. In some places ceratinly less than others, but if you are in a community with a traditional sports power that is widely supported the money brought in by sales in addition to that raised by boosters can be considerable. Do you really think a school like say massilion with the amount of support/money its football team generates would do better or have more cash with sports gone?

I live in a football crazed town and the last couple of leveies passed only beucase the sports programs were threatened.

 

[default]

Hate to mention this but they're also paying to educate someone else's kids. My point is that sports are/should be part of an educational system, not separated from it.

I had mentioned it back at post #9.
"Isn't it enough that they help pay to educate our kids??"

Guess your saying that's not enough for you. ha

 

[default]

There is an incredible amount of money spent in school districts every year on students with special needs. Not all parents have kids they send to school with special needs, yet we all pay for it. Should we take that away? let's eliminate all the programs, aides, wheelchairs, braille books, etc., that allow these students a chance to succeed. We would save thousands and thousands of dollars if we did that. Sound fair?

Of course not. Neither is eliminating sports because 'everyone' has to pay for it? My son is a sophomore football player, NEVER sees the field on Friday nights, and is a seldom used backup on the JV team. I have raised over $1000 this year for him to have the chance to be on the team. Whether he plays or not doesn't matter to him. It is all about Friday Night Lights! My kid is not alone in wanting to be a part of that. There are not cuts in football.

Furthermore, there are a multitude of kids that wouldn't even go to school if it wasn't for sports. For some, it is their saving grace. Keep it the way it is....it isn't broke, has some flaws, but keep sports in schools. I paid for other people's kids before I had kids, I am paying for mine now, and I will pay for others in the future. It's the American way! lol

 

[default]

There is an incredible amount of money spent in school districts every year on students with special needs. Not all parents have kids they send to school with special needs, yet we all pay for it. Should we take that away? let's eliminate all the programs, aides, wheelchairs, braille books, etc., that allow these students a chance to succeed. We would save thousands and thousands of dollars if we did that. Sound fair?

Of course not. Neither is eliminating sports because 'everyone' has to pay for it? My son is a sophomore football player, NEVER sees the field on Friday nights, and is a seldom used backup on the JV team. I have raised over $1000 this year for him to have the chance to be on the team. Whether he plays or not doesn't matter to him. It is all about Friday Night Lights! My kid is not alone in wanting to be a part of that. There are not cuts in football.

Furthermore, there are a multitude of kids that wouldn't even go to school if it wasn't for sports. For some, it is their saving grace. Keep it the way it is....it isn't broke, has some flaws, but keep sports in schools. I paid for other people's kids before I had kids, I am paying for mine now, and I will pay for others in the future. It's the American way! lol

Might want to rethink that first paragraph. You are comparing educating special needs students to healthy bodied kids playing recreational sports. Special needs parents will not like that one. There is no comparing there.

You talk about how wonderful school sports is for your family. I agree they are wonderful for mine too. My DD has or is doing softball, golf, s o c c e r, track and l a c r o s s e. It keeps her in with the "right" crowd. Teaches her a lot. Brings her mother and lots of enjoyment and makes us a closer family. TWO BIG THUMPS UP for school sports!

The debate is with funding school sports. IT IS BROKE! My district passed it's levy this year so we are happy. No cuts, pay to play is only $140 and they are even adding a sport this year. BUT all around us district's are not getting levies passed and MAJOR cuts are being made. I suspect you are one of the lucky ones like me but our time will come.

I feel that cuts to education while keeping sports funded at all is wrong. Dollars should go to educating the kids and only to sports if money is left over. Every kid in the district is involved in education but less then half are involved in sports. I believe the solution to the funding of school sports is to make them all club teams with the costs paid by the participants, donors and fundraising. I would like my district to stay as it is but they acknowledge it can't.

 

[default]

Musty,
you are correct it is broken but there are other operational areas to look at first. How many school buses do you see in Walmart lots during the day? Take note next time you are driving around, how many lights are left on 24/7, whos in the field house at midnight??? are they taking advantage of utility rebates? Why are there only 10 kids on some buses??? Look at that stuff first I say...

 

[default]

How about giving families a voucher for the cost of their child's education and then letting them choose a school? The individual schools can then decide for themselves how to spend their money and the ones that don't generate enough business do not survive.

 

[default]

Perhaps turn this into a poll? If a school system has to make cuts, where should they start first?

 

[default]

Musty while I understand your logic, creating clubs in exchange for organized school athletics where parents and sponsors would pay all expenses can, and would in my opinion, put girls sports at great risk overall.

Right now girls sports are under Title IX for a reason, because without it girls sports would have a hard time existing if they could exist at all.

Parents, boosters and local businesses are more than willing to spend money on football -- to name stadiums, put up banners, sponsor uniforms and supply turf fields -but ask for a tarp to cover the girls softball field (which is relatively low cost) and you would think someone asked for the moon.

For these reasons alone I would have to say I am against sacrificing girls organized athletics in favor of clubs.

 

[default]

I'm a HS assistant football coach and the head softball coach in a lower-income district. If we did not have HS sports, many of the kids that play currently would not participate. It is problematic to even have the parents (or usually parent) drop their kid off for practice. Not only would they never pay to play, but their desire to excel (and I'm using this term lightly) in the classroom would be gone. They do the schoolwork and get the grades so they can stay eligible to play. If they didn't have sports, they would not stay in school. But the coaches are constantly on them about their grades, whether they got their paper done, whether they turned this or that assignment in. The coaches hold study tables, and teachers participate during those times. The coaches are there for the kids, and they don't allow them to slack off. The HS field is the only place they learn teamwork, dedication, desire, and every other positive thing about sports. Sure, there are things that are frustrating for parents and students about HS sports, but the positive outweigh the negative. A club team could function in some sports at our school, but the kids that really need to be on the field are the ones that would not participate in a club sport.

The greatest lessons I ever learned were on a field, and not in the classroom. They translated into the classroom, and helped me become a more well-rounded (up to debate) individual. It was never the other way around. Geometry never helped me learn about teamwork. Calculus never provided me the desire to achieve. English never made me fight through adversity to achieve my goal. However, football made me want to excel in everything I did. Baseball made me learn to focus and concentrate on difficult tasks.

If anything, I'd want to make extracurricular (especially sports) mandatory participation in our high schools.

 

[default]

I would not be in favor of eliminating the HS sports, but they should definately use non parent coaches and non teacher coaches.

 

[default]

I like Buckeye Heat's Idea of some sort of mandatory sport participation, at some level. I would also extend that idea to the arts and not just sports. We should do everything we can do expose our children to as much as we can during their developemental years. After High School, how many are going to continue to play Softball, or any sport? How many are going to continue to play music, or be in a play? How can our children determine what they enjoy if their entire HS career is spent on two-a-day practices, or math homework? I'm a fan of a well rounded educational experience, not just sports, not just arts, not just academics. The entire package. Isn't that what growning up is about.....learning from your experiences?

 

[default]

Sparky I think you summed it up very nicely and I concur!