Jump to content

**Senate Passes Bill Forcing UIL To Accept Private Schools**


Recommended Posts

One more thing rtdirsh,and I am through. You said it doesn't cause problems in other states.In other states alot of these private schools are nothing more than sport factories.When Nike reps start scouting players and moving them out of state to places like Dematha or Oak hill I think we have lost sight of what High School is all about.Plus,I don't think the state of Texas should do something just because other states are doing it.All these other states sure do recruit Texas pretty hard so we must be doing something right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

tvc184 you are right the way that reads. I do not know that many of the schools will be aloud in if that is the case. Both Strake Jesuit and Dallas Jesuit where to big for TAPPS and had no league at the time they were aloud in UIL. There are a handful of other private schools that are not in TAPPS but they are in another league called SPC which is some private schools from Texas and OKlahoma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the worst ideas I've ever heard of.  If kids want to play in a public school district they need to attend public schools.  There is no way that the UIL could enforce all of the recruiting issues that could come with this.  TERRIBLE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the breakdown of championship football games in Louisiana this year:

1A - 2 private schools

2A - 2 private schools (John Curtis won it's 5th title in 6 years)

3A - 2 public schools

4A - 1 public, 1 private

5A - 2 public schools

That's a total of 5 public and 5 private schools in the finals.

Let's look at baseball last year:

1A - 2 private schools

2A - 2 private schools

3A - 2 private schools

4A - 1 private, 1 public magnet school

5A - 2 public schools

That's a total of 3 public schools and 7 private schools in the finals.

Let's look at basketball:

1A - 2 private schools

2A - 1 public, 1 private

3A - 2 private schools

4A - 2 public magnet schools

5A - 2 public schools

That's a total of 6 public and 4 private schools in the finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Wildcat 08

The schools that are going to get hit hard by this are the smaller classifications like 3A and 2A .You may not see it right off the bat, but eventually what Jasper posted about Louisiana is going to happen here in Texas and there won't be a darn thing you can do about it because of this idiotic and poorly thought out law.

What really incenses me about this is that I was under the impression that I lived in a state where the government was supposed to be as hands-off as possible and in this instance this is the state government forcing the UIL to do this. The UIL should not be forced to take in schools like Cornerstone, among many, many others, and I'd hope they'd at least appeal this decision in court. This whole situation really hacks me off, especially since this bill was proposed by the Dr. Nick of politicians in Dan Patrick. There's just no justification for this at all. If people thought the UIL was chaotic before, just wait until they have to deal with these private schools. They'll be pretty much powerless to regulate what they do and who goes to those schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ECBucFan

Seems like a big headache, so that means the UIL will love it.

Just as I said in  an earlier post: CB & the UIL LOVES to micro-manage things. What a joke the UIL has become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, based on what we have seen with the Jesuit schools, I really don't see this becoming a major major problem as long as schools such as Cornerstone abide by UIL rules and regulations. Sure, this thing raised a red flag with many people three, four years ago when Strake Jesuit and Dallas Jesuit joined the league. Looking back after three years of the Jesuits under the UIL umbrella, the jury is still out. Sure the private schools can be competitive in the UIL. For the sake of the kids in these schools, I doubt anyone really and truly wants to see them in a non-competitive nature.

For football, this will be a numbers game. I don't see the addition of private schools become a major topic of discussion come late November or December for quite some time unless the social and economic make up of the school systems change relatively soon. It wont be a big issue in football as it will in other sports simply because of the numbers and the make up of the Texas school system.

For other sports it is clearly possible to see a very competitive private school program in a solid playoff run. One thing this will do is add to the hunger of the public schools to knock them off. I have experienced this atmosphere in during my junior and senior years in Florida. You can ask every public school athlete in South Florida which schools they hate the most and 9 of 10 will say Ft. Lauderdale St. Thomas Aquinas and Hollywood Chaminade Madonna in no particular order. Its the same thing for public schools in Louisiana with Shreveport Evangel Christian. 

The reason St. Thomas Aquinas is so successful in Florida in almost every sport is because there are no guidelines to controlling the "recruiting" issue, nor are there guidelines to transfers from one school to the next. St. Thomas Aquinas is about as big a school, if not bigger than most public schools in the state of Florida. And knowing and having seen St. Thomas Aquinas in person, the big reason STA is so attractive is due to the fact that the educational value is much better there than it is in many public schools.

Point is, unless, you have the restrictions and guidelines in controlling these concerns, you will have the results of a St. Thomas Aquinas or an Evangel exposing the loopholes every year. With the UIL's policework and strict guidelines not just for the Jesuit schools, but for every public school system in Texas, its hard to imagine we will see what we see in Louisiana and California.

But this issue really varies from state to state based on the social and economic make up of the schools as a whole. For Texas, I don't see this becoming a big impact unless what I have previously stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ECBucFan

Well, based on what we have seen with the Jesuit schools, I really don't see this becoming a major major problem as long as schools such as Cornerstone abide by UIL rules and regulations............

:o

Point is, unless, you have the restrictions and guidelines in controlling these concerns, you will have the results of a St. Thomas Aquinas or an Evangel exposing the loopholes every year.............

:o

With the UIL's policework and strict guidelines not just for the Jesuit schools, but for every public school system in Texas, its hard to imagine we will see what we see in Louisiana and California.  :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest WBFan09

How is this fair...alot of the private schools recieve way more money than schools like Jasper Nederland or West Brook...West Brook cant improve something with sports from a private source without Central and Ozen getting it done too...but a school like Kelly can recieve all the money they want to get everything...i dont see how this can work...especially when other schools have more money coming in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ECBucFan

Things are decided behind the sceans. What goes on during gov't sessions is just window dressing. Money gets what money wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should all be passed and the privates join the uil, they should  most definitely follow UIL rules.

Then, when a kid transfers from a Public to Private, the PAPF form must be filled out(even for 8th graders).

IF the school in which the student left from believes the move is for athletic reasons, mark it as so with your justification.

The District Executive Committee can deny varsity eligibility and vote to revisit the same PAPF form for the next school year and start the cycle over.

This could put a squeeze on the "recruiting" process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very hard to prove a move is for athletic reasons,if the  parents say it is not.If a player was all everything as a soph. or jr. and then goes to a private school the district comm. may have serious questions,but if a private school uses jr. highs as a farm system that's very hard to prove.First,with a jr.high kid the district comm. would have to be projecting what kind of player this player is going to be down the road,I just don't see how you could enforce that.If a private school wanted to they could watch every jr. high team in the area and offer aid to a couple of kids a year and really nothing could be proven.Is that something that would be wide spread,I would say no. But you could build a good team that way and it is a luxury the public schools don't have.This can't work as long as the public schools have boundaries and the privates don't IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Megachurch behind UIL measures

It wants its private school to be able to compete for championships

By JIM VERTUNO

Associated Press

AUSTIN - A politically powerful megachurch in San Antonio is pushing Texas lawmakers to let its small Christian school with a history of bending the rules to field elite athletic teams join the state league for public schools.

A proposal by Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, to allow private schools to join the University Interscholastic League, the dominion of the state's public schools, passed the Senate late last month. A similar measure by Rep. Frank Corte, R-San Antonio, is pending in the House.

The church behind the push is Cornerstone Christian Church, founded in 1975 by televangelist John Hagee, whose television and radio programs are broadcast throughout the U.S.

The Cornerstone Christian school has been in trouble several times in recent years with the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools over concerns about how it put together basketball squads that included several out-of-state and international players.

While the bills would allow other private schools to apply to the UIL, there's little doubt Cornerstone is driving the proposed change. Cornerstone religious and administrative leaders were the only ones to testify in support of the Senate bill.

Cornerstone officials say they're pushing for the change for academic and athletic opportunities for their students.

"All we're asking for is a fair playing field and [to] be able to participate in UIL activities," said Cornerstone administrator Alan Hulme. "We want the best for our students. That's why we want to come under the umbrella of the UIL and embrace their integrity."

Cornerstone has grown from a small congregation of about 100 to a 5,000-member behemoth that dabbles in politics.

Last year, Hagee founded Christians United for Israel, a national lobbying group hoping to influence government on behalf of Israel. Republican Gov. Rick Perry and dozens of political candidates from both parties attended a Sunday service there two days before the 2006 election.

Texas is one of only three states with separate athletic championships for public and private schools. TAPPS has about 250 member schools. The UIL has about 1,300.

Public school officials and state lawmakers have long fought to keep private schools out of the UIL, fearing the private schools could recruit athletes and bend other rules.

The state made two exceptions in 2003, allowing Jesuit schools in Dallas and Houston to join after TAPPS determined they were too big to compete in a league composed mostly of small schools.

Essentially banished from TAPPS in September 2006, Cornerstone applied for entry to the UIL and was denied. The school then filed a federal religious discrimination lawsuit to force its way in.

"Our school is going to be the very best we can make it, and no one is going to prevent us from achieving excellence in any area," Hagee told his congregation when he announced the lawsuit in February.

But a lawsuit could drag on for years, and the school hopes lawmakers will crack open the doors to the UIL before the legislative session ends May 28.

Patrick calls it a fairness issue to private school families whose property taxes help support public schools but are being kept out of UIL competitions.

He compared it to the days of racial discrimination in athletics, noting the Texas Western (now Texas-El Paso) team that won the 1966 NCAA basketball tournament with an all-black starting lineup.

UIL Athletic Director Charles Breithaupt said public schools are happy to play regular season games against private schools, but don't want them competing for the same championships.

"Private schools have to recruit. That's their nature," Breithaupt said. "They have to open their doors and invite people to come in. They can be as big or small as they want to be."

The church school has played hardball in athletics and has gotten in trouble for it.

It first ran into trouble with TAPPS when it recruited five Mexican players, including future NBA player Eduardo Najera, for the 1994-95 season. Cornerstone sued for reinstatement and was readmitted in 2000.

It wasn't long before more troubles cropped up.

In December 2005, Cornerstone was kicked out of TAPPS postseason competition for the school year, although most of teams were later reinstated.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ECBucFan

It WAS a done deal, before anyone ever even heard about it. And as I said: Money will get whatever it wants to. The UIL (and our politicians) are for sale. How terribly sad.

:( Do yall believe me now?  :(   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got back from the combine at Cy-Fair ISD. There were about 300 coaches and the consensus was that if this is put into effect it will end Texas football (and all other sports) as we now know it.  Even though they say there will be rules about recruiting, there will always be ways around it.

A couple of arguments. 

First, private schools have entrance exams so they get to decide who gets in and who doesn't while as a public school teacher you must teach who ever shows up at the door.  This does a couple of things. One, it makes the school more appealing to parents. So the parents of a good athlete is approached and asked wouldn't it be better for your son/daughter at school X.  What parent wouldn't take it.  Two it allows them to control the size of the school so they can compete at whatever level "they" choose.  Example, Ned, PNG, WOS at the 2A level. 

Second, is it recruiting if you give scholarships, (hey we like you come to our $10,000 a year school for free) is it recruiting?  A lot, not all but a lot, of private schools have a lot of money and would have a lot more if dad and grandpa knew that they could attract better athletes with money specifically for facilities.  Where would you rather play, podunk field or at mini Reliant stadium.

Just my two cents.  But I would like to know where the legislator’s kids go to school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football won't be near impacted like basketball and baseball.

I think the larger cities will really feel the affect of this.

Can you imagine the "all Houston" team being recruited and going to ONE private school.

There is so much unknown also...

Will they have to follow the academic guidelines of the UIL.

Will the kids have to take and pass the TAKS test.

Next years 8th graders must pass math and reading TAKS to go to high school.

I smell rat poison all over this issue.

There is no way the UIL will be able to regulate the "illegal" recruiting and the academic elgibility that is bound to occur with these private schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever happens has to be quick. It is in committe in the House and there will be 21 days left in the session after today. There is usually a mad scramble at the end of the session with dozens (if not hundreds) of bills still in committee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...