High Schools without sports

[blowfish]

Sad just sad...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/09/16/nosports/index.html?eref=sihpT1

[HEMOTOXIC]

Originally posted by blowfish
Sad just sad...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/09/16/nosports/index.html?eref=sihpT1


You're right! :(

[BuckeyeNut]

looks like there going to have some one school board members soon

[navscanmaster]

That is awful. It doesn't sound like the district had much of a choice, but I wonder about the budget shortfall. It could either truly be from collapsing property values, or from gross financial mismanagement. I hope that it catches enough attention to have the school district properly audited.

[cshscougar08]

Beat me to posting this. It is very sad. I can't even imagine as a student just recently out of high school what that would be like.

[Looking4number8]

It is sad but it looks to me like the school distict is holding the community ransom for an approval vote. Do the math, $5 a ticket and the artical says 11,000 fans in the stadium, thats $275,000 income. I know there are expenses but still, football is profitable.

Any ways, if that was to happen here, I admit, I would be very ticked off at the school district

[OldBison75]

Check your numbers again. 11,000 at $5.00 per person looks like $55,000 per game to me. Now factor in the cost of salaries for coaches, equipment, electricity, field maintenance, insurance, and all other necessities and suddenly the school might be clearing 8-10,000 dollars per game. If you factor in that they probably play 5 home games at that profit, but have to spen 3-5 thousand a week on transportation for the out of town games --suddenly the actual income from football amounts to less than 40,000 per year. That money is used to supplement the other sports in most school districts and added to thier budgets to try and balance them.

In most school districts the influx into the budget of the $275,000 you adress as the annual income from 5 games barely covers the cost of a small portion of the overall sports and extra curricular budget. Most 3A schools probably spend significantly more than that on sports each year.

[Rabid Cougar]

Worse yet, a high school without football in Texas --Lufkin Hudson

[dude]

one word for ya!! MOVE

[Farmersfan]

52% of students qualifing for free lunches tells the real story.
But is the part that worries me:
The School Board didn't want to charge a participation fee because they knew a large percent of the students could not afford the fee and would be excluded. Isn't this Obama type thinking?(sorry). Since when is it better to deny those who can afford to play than to allow those who can't afford to play to be excluded? We are so doomed as a nation!!!!!:(

[Looking4number8]

Originally posted by OldBison75
Check your numbers again. 11,000 at $5.00 per person looks like $55,000 per game to me.

Sorry, I left a little out, I was calculating 5 home games.

I understand there is a lot of cost in a game but football is usually a profitable sport, other sports are not so fortunate

[Inmateboss]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
52% of students qualifing for free lunches tells the real story.
But is the part that worries me:
The School Board didn't want to charge a participation fee because they knew a large percent of the students could not afford the fee and would be excluded. Isn't this Obama type thinking?(sorry). Since when is it better to deny those who can afford to play than to allow those who can't afford to play to be excluded? We are so doomed as a nation!!!!!:(

Tell it like it is Brother, Tell it like it is!!!

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
52% of students qualifing for free lunches tells the real story.
But is the part that worries me:
The School Board didn't want to charge a participation fee because they knew a large percent of the students could not afford the fee and would be excluded. Isn't this Obama type thinking?(sorry). Since when is it better to deny those who can afford to play than to allow those who can't afford to play to be excluded? We are so doomed as a nation!!!!!:(

Because its a public school. It receives government funding on top of municipal tax dollars and is not allowed to exclude anyone. If it were pay-to-play like PeeWee ball, it would be a different story. Not to mention, as a tax-payer, I would not want to pay anything else on top of the normal annual bill.

[Additup]

"Every day feels like a Tuesday," said Mike Mayers, the senior who thought he would start at quarterback this season. "Fridays are the days that everybody realizes things aren't the same."

[jdawg2012]

Think about all the athletes that could have gotten into college on a sports scholarship! Now, some of them dont have a chance to get into college. Its amazing at how much High School Sports affect the future of people.

[alaskacat]

That is truly a shame. I know myself that sports is all that kept me in school. During highschool I wrestled and played football, and was good enough to get severaql offers to places like Ok State, and OU to wrestle but turned them down. I lived on my own but I was riding horses as a jockey during that same period and had sports not beern there, I would have just dropped out.

I fear for those kids, as many will just drop out because of this.

When you look at the home owners, they too are scared. Most will be erlderly with no kids in school, living on shrinking Social
Security, getting this health program stuffed down there throat, which for seniors is a major thing, and then Cap and Trade coming on top of that.

On TV today they had one of the major power companys exec's explain just what it would cost them if Obama and friends force them into this. It now costs them 4 cents a killowat to produce electricity, with Cap and trade it will be 7 to 8 cents per Kw, iT DOESN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST to see, your electric bills are going to double. He guaranteed the costs will be passed to consumers.

So how are these elderly homeowners to feel when they vote. The levy is just a nuisence but when compounded with everything else, they could loose their homes they have worked all their lives for.

I think the teachers unions should make some consessions. They should get paid for excelence, and fired if they are inferior.

Here in Alaska we too have mixed cultures, many PHILLIPINOS And Somans, natives, and the like and all athletes have to pay a couple hundred to participate, and chip in for travel, and it isn't killing sports, although the numbers are not huge, but they get to play if they want. They have many community sponsored fundraisers to help those that are financially disadvantaged and some of the businesses adopt a player for the year...yes it can be done if they really want it, without killing sports completely.

[carter08]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
52% of students qualifing for free lunches tells the real story.
But is the part that worries me:
The School Board didn't want to charge a participation fee because they knew a large percent of the students could not afford the fee and would be excluded. Isn't this Obama type thinking?(sorry). Since when is it better to deny those who can afford to play than to allow those who can't afford to play to be excluded? We are so doomed as a nation!!!!!:(

wut? lol.

come on, 52% of students qualifying for reduced lunches, if we really wanna break it down i bet most of the best athletes would be in that percentage. why charge a fee that only a few can pay and end up with a lousy 0-10 team losing each game by 40? no kid wants to look back and remember that.

[GreenMonster]

Originally posted by alaskacat

I think the teachers unions should make some consessions. They should get paid for excelence, and fired if they are inferior.


The problem with this thinking is that you have to depend on kids with only God knows what kind of support that they get at home to determine how a teacher gets paid. That is already one of the problems with the system as wealthier school districts have better performing schools mainly because of the better home lives of the kids in that school. Throw in the fact that the school has a better tax base and can afford to pay better you end up with the better teachers gravitating to the better districts. The end result is that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. If teacher pay does indeed become performance based then you will only assure that the poorer performing, lower income districts will only get worse, because the good teachers will leave in order to save their jobs. This will leave these already poor performing students with poor performing teachers pushing them deeper into poverty. This is where the Robin Hood plan worked, it leveled the playing field between the districts that have $ and the districts that have poverty. Call it socialism or Democratic thinking if you want, but our future is riding on the education that ALL of our youth is receiving today, do you want to risk your future?

[Red&White_9x5]

sad