|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 8:24:08 GMT -6
Once again, this isn't all about football but all activities. Small public schools will struggle here. I never said anything about the kids not getting educational opportunities either. I said that schools will consolidate with other schools. So jobs will be lost and schools will be closed as a result. Large schools will see a drop but probably won't affect them as badly depending on your location I guess. I know 4 schools right now off the top of my head that would consolidate if they got rid of activities such as football. A lot of kids will just get their GED I'm having a hard time understanding how you don't get that concept I am having a hard time because there are not any numbers involved. If what you are saying is correct, then almost every athlete, cheerleader, etc has dropped out of school (or simply quit attending and no truancy support existed) when they suffered a season ending injury? I just don't see a Tuba player saying "what..I can't stomp in place and kill the grass in our 7 minute performance on Fridays? Screw it, I am not going to school" I am pretty sure the Treasure of the French Club is not quitting school if they don't hold French Club Meetings. Coach when you say you know 4 schools that would consolidate, do you mean that the sole reason those schools exist is so that each can have its own athletic teams? That if there were no athletic teams, the LEA would consolidate into one school (regardless of attendance?) THAT I could see, but I think that is a different argument. No. If the enrollment falls below a certain point in my state then the schools get consolidated with a bigger school. Or 2 small schools combine to save money. It only has to be that way over a 2 year period to get shut down. There are a bunch of rural schools hanging on by a thread as it is. A 1 year shut down would doom them. I'm not saying that these schools sole reason for staying open is athletics. I'm saying that without athletics the kids will just get a GED and go about their lives. I'm saying that a lot of kids in those 4 schools i'm talking about are only their for the activities whether it be football or not. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2020 8:32:15 GMT -6
Once again, this isn't all about football but all activities. Small public schools will struggle here. I never said anything about the kids not getting educational opportunities either. I said that schools will consolidate with other schools. So jobs will be lost and schools will be closed as a result. Large schools will see a drop but probably won't affect them as badly depending on your location I guess. I know 4 schools right now off the top of my head that would consolidate if they got rid of activities such as football. A lot of kids will just get their GED I'm having a hard time understanding how you don't get that concept I am having a hard time because there are not any numbers involved. If what you are saying is correct, then almost every athlete, cheerleader, etc has dropped out of school (or simply quit attending and no truancy support existed) when they suffered a season ending injury? I just don't see a Tuba player saying "what..I can't stomp in place and kill the grass in our 7 minute performance on Fridays? Screw it, I am not going to school" I am pretty sure the Treasure of the French Club is not quitting school if they don't hold French Club Meetings. Coach when you say you know 4 schools that would consolidate, do you mean that the sole reason those schools exist is so that each can have its own athletic teams? That if there were no athletic teams, the LEA would consolidate into one school (regardless of attendance?) THAT I could see, but I think that is a different argument. If those schools are that small and poor maybe it's past time that they did consolidate. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 9:04:55 GMT -6
Correct. School being open as ‘normal’ will help meet those kids basics needs. I would assume if the schools are open then sports & activities will resume. I think your assumption is incorrect, and that is what I thought was being discussed in this thread. The fact that these schools and state associations are looking at not having athletics but having school buildings open. I have not heard of any state opening school but not having athletics/activities. If you have an article on one I'd like to see it. |
|
|
|
Post by dblwngr on Jul 2, 2020 9:10:09 GMT -6
A lot of kids will just get their GED This is exactly what I'm hearing more and more in my community. Parents have already seen how the virtual learning thing went and they are not for it in my area, in fact many are furious about it. A local newspaper article came out a few weeks back reflecting on how things went with distance learning, lets just say it was a distasteful experiment. Not only did the below average students check out, many of the straight A scholar students did the same thing. Like many have said, these kids are not going to just sit home in front of a computer. They will lose interest and move on to making money working on a hemp/pot farm, fixing cars, flipping burgers or whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 9:27:11 GMT -6
And of that percentage..you feel there is a high percentage of kids who will simply drop out without sports? Come on man.... And EVEN if that is true. I would say that is not representative of most schools. Quoting a paper written by a Washington State University student, 19% of the students in the country attend "rural schools" . In some states that number may sit closer to 33%. Anders4 is explaining our problem. They will sell weed before they lift a finger to do school work. And Here, that jobs is just so they can eat adequately. They will not have success with any form of virtual schooling, and kids will drop out left and right without sports, school activities. These do not have the funds and resources in many cases to do what the district wants. Anders4 is talking about distance learning issues. My comments, as well as others here are talking about open school buildings with no athletics. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 9:40:24 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 10:55:55 GMT -6
Anders4 is explaining our problem. They will sell weed before they lift a finger to do school work. And Here, that jobs is just so they can eat adequately. They will not have success with any form of virtual schooling, and kids will drop out left and right without sports, school activities. These do not have the funds and resources in many cases to do what the district wants. Anders4 is talking about distance learning issues. My comments, as well as others here are talking about open school buildings with no athletics. they are Not distinct ssues. And in fact very connected.It is uninformed to suggest otherwise. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 10:59:20 GMT -6
I am having a hard time because there are not any numbers involved. If what you are saying is correct, then almost every athlete, cheerleader, etc has dropped out of school (or simply quit attending and no truancy support existed) when they suffered a season ending injury? I just don't see a Tuba player saying "what..I can't stomp in place and kill the grass in our 7 minute performance on Fridays? Screw it, I am not going to school" I am pretty sure the Treasure of the French Club is not quitting school if they don't hold French Club Meetings. Coach when you say you know 4 schools that would consolidate, do you mean that the sole reason those schools exist is so that each can have its own athletic teams? That if there were no athletic teams, the LEA would consolidate into one school (regardless of attendance?) THAT I could see, but I think that is a different argument. If those schools are that small and poor maybe it's past time that they did consolidate. there would be no schools in this god awful county. Yes it’s that bad. And the surrounding won’t have it. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 11:17:41 GMT -6
Anders4 is talking about distance learning issues. My comments, as well as others here are talking about open school buildings with no athletics. they are Not distinct ssues. And in fact very connected.It is uninformed to suggest otherwise. Sorry coach, opening a school building, having face to face classes, serving breakfast and lunch, etc. but not having athletics is ABSOLUTELY a distinct issue from keeping school buildings closed and only offering remote learning opportunities. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 11:28:17 GMT -6
they are Not distinct ssues. And in fact very connected.It is uninformed to suggest otherwise. Sorry coach, opening a school building, having face to face classes, serving breakfast and lunch, etc. but not having athletics is ABSOLUTELY a distinct issue from keeping school buildings closed and only offering remote learning opportunities. wrong. Remote learning is not feasible reality for most kids. It is absolutely same thing in county. Especially when splitting between the two. And having no athletics. Absolutely related. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 11:49:57 GMT -6
Sorry coach, opening a school building, having face to face classes, serving breakfast and lunch, etc. but not having athletics is ABSOLUTELY a distinct issue from keeping school buildings closed and only offering remote learning opportunities. wrong. Remote learning is not feasible reality for most kids. It is absolutely same thing in county. Especially when splitting between the two. And having no athletics. Absolutely related. No coach. It is not. One is having school buildings open, breakfast and lunches served, transportation provided, face to face adult/youth interaction and just not football. So essentially the same experience that every student has had for decades up until 3pm. The other is distance learning which is vastly different then the educational experience that students have had for decades. I can absolutely see schools and communities affected greatly by the latter. The former, not so much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 12:11:43 GMT -6
wrong. Remote learning is not feasible reality for most kids. It is absolutely same thing in county. Especially when splitting between the two. And having no athletics. Absolutely related. No coach. It is not. One is having school buildings open, breakfast and lunches served, transportation provided, face to face adult/youth interaction and just not football. So essentially the same experience that every student has had for decades up until 3pm. The other is distance learning which is vastly different then the educational experience that students have had for decades. I can absolutely see schools and communities affected greatly by the latter. The former, not so much. in this county it’s both. Everybody will do both, which means neither will work.. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 12:41:57 GMT -6
No coach. It is not. One is having school buildings open, breakfast and lunches served, transportation provided, face to face adult/youth interaction and just not football. So essentially the same experience that every student has had for decades up until 3pm. The other is distance learning which is vastly different then the educational experience that students have had for decades. I can absolutely see schools and communities affected greatly by the latter. The former, not so much. in this county it’s both. Everybody will do both, which means neither will work.. I am trying to clarify So you are saying that in your one county, schools will offer students the option of either remote learning or in person traditional school, but that if sports aren't offered or if your state association delays/cancels sports that a tremendous amount of students and families will choose remote learning such that there will be economic ripples? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 12:52:54 GMT -6
in this county it’s both. Everybody will do both, which means neither will work.. I am trying to clarify So you are saying that in your one county, schools will offer students the option of either remote learning or in person traditional school, but that if sports aren't offered or if your state association delays/cancels sports that a tremendous amount of students and families will choose remote learning such that there will be economic ripples? they will split there week. The county passed everybody for semester last quarter of last year, no matter what students did. Most of the kids nothing online, zero. This fall they will just wait till there classroom time to do what they should have donle online. On top of that they want two parts to every school day. Morning, send you home for lunch and next group come in after. Sports be dammed. Kids won’t elgible to play after mid term. If you don’t Have after activities, no chance they are going to succeed.. So families will have to transport one to school in the morning, another in the afternoon, bring another back for practice.., and the days of the week rotate weekly.THAT AINT HAPPENING.. No chance with sports, After school activities, forget it without. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Jul 2, 2020 13:32:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 13:48:25 GMT -6
In NY our "beloved Governor" may reduce school aid by 20%. Not having fall sports MIGHT be a way they want to save some $.  Why? Money Crunch? |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 14:17:04 GMT -6
I am having a hard time because there are not any numbers involved. If what you are saying is correct, then almost every athlete, cheerleader, etc has dropped out of school (or simply quit attending and no truancy support existed) when they suffered a season ending injury? I just don't see a Tuba player saying "what..I can't stomp in place and kill the grass in our 7 minute performance on Fridays? Screw it, I am not going to school" I am pretty sure the Treasure of the French Club is not quitting school if they don't hold French Club Meetings. Coach when you say you know 4 schools that would consolidate, do you mean that the sole reason those schools exist is so that each can have its own athletic teams? That if there were no athletic teams, the LEA would consolidate into one school (regardless of attendance?) THAT I could see, but I think that is a different argument. If those schools are that small and poor maybe it's past time that they did consolidate. Easy to say on a message board. Harder to do when the community involved is tied in |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 14:48:16 GMT -6
If they're not having sports there won't be face to face school. There won't be any reason to risk students/teachers health. It's a black and white situation like I said 2 weeks ago. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 14:57:55 GMT -6
If they're not having sports there won't be face to face school. There won't be any reason to risk students/teachers health. It's a black and white situation like I said 2 weeks ago. I think general society would disagree with you on this. That the risks taken to have open school buildings will be deemed acceptable, but adding more risk on top of that is not. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2020 15:07:21 GMT -6
If those schools are that small and poor maybe it's past time that they did consolidate. Easy to say on a message board. Harder to do when the community involved is tied in I've been through one as a student. Three neighboring town, each with a population of about 6,000, with its own school, merged to form one school district. I've since become friends with my HS coaches so I've found out that there was a lot of drama among the adults but none of the kids noticed it. Turned out to be the best thing that could have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 15:19:13 GMT -6
If they're not having sports there won't be face to face school. There won't be any reason to risk students/teachers health. It's a black and white situation like I said 2 weeks ago. I think general society would disagree with you on this. That the risks taken to have open school buildings will be deemed acceptable, but adding more risk on top of that is not. I think you’re wrong about public perception. Especially in the Bible Belt. But we’ve never seen eye to eye on anything in 4 years. This shouldn’t be any different. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 15:35:17 GMT -6
I think general society would disagree with you on this. That the risks taken to have open school buildings will be deemed acceptable, but adding more risk on top of that is not. I think you’re wrong about public perception. Especially in the Bible Belt. But we’ve never seen eye to eye on anything in 4 years. This shouldn’t be any different. You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 15:37:38 GMT -6
I think you’re wrong about public perception. Especially in the Bible Belt. But we’ve never seen eye to eye on anything in 4 years. This shouldn’t be any different. You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 2, 2020 15:40:48 GMT -6
You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. The key word there is "trying". |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 15:54:36 GMT -6
You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. Which is? I don't follow you. When people get behind the wheel of a car, there is a risk to the community. When they do it without seatbelts, there is an increased risk to themselves (and a minor increase to others with a potential lack of control) When they drive 90 miles an hour, there is an increased risk to themselves and a substantial increased risk to others. I don't think people clamor "Either let me drive 90 without seatbelt, or don't drive at all". Regarding this situation, There will be a risk to the entire community in opening schools up. The reward is there will be some semblance to the educational process traditionally used. There is an argument that there will be an increased risk to the community by having football practice. The reward will be kids get to play football. Are you saying that if public officials, state organizations deem that the increased risk to the community of football isn't worth the reward of getting to play football that the public will then demand that the entire school system be shut down and a return to remote learning be put in place? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 16:29:59 GMT -6
The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. Which is? I don't follow you. When people get behind the wheel of a car, there is a risk to the community. When they do it without seatbelts, there is an increased risk to themselves (and a minor increase to others with a potential lack of control) When they drive 90 miles an hour, there is an increased risk to themselves and a substantial increased risk to others. I don't think people clamor "Either let me drive 90 without seatbelt, or don't drive at all". Regarding this situation, There will be a risk to the entire community in opening schools up. The reward is there will be some semblance to the educational process traditionally used. There is an argument that there will be an increased risk to the community by having football practice. The reward will be kids get to play football. Are you saying that if public officials, state organizations deem that the increased risk to the community of football isn't worth the reward of getting to play football that the public will then demand that the entire school system be shut down and a return to remote learning be put in place? In my community, there is zero point in opening up schools, or have remote learning without the extra curricular. The football thing is coming from the ncaa. |
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jul 2, 2020 16:56:46 GMT -6
I think you’re wrong about public perception. Especially in the Bible Belt. But we’ve never seen eye to eye on anything in 4 years. This shouldn’t be any different. You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? Our governor came out in his last press conference with a football and a mask and said if you want this you need to wear this. Pretty much sums up what the public here wants IMO |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 17:11:06 GMT -6
You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? Our governor came out in his last press conference with a football and a mask and said if you want this you need to wear this. Pretty much sums up what the public here wants IMO Sums up the entire Nation. |
|
|
|
Post by **** on Jul 2, 2020 17:12:01 GMT -6
The answer is pretty evident based on what the NFL, FBS Schools, and every HS in America is trying to do. The key word there is "trying". Correct. If life could go on without football then there would be no trying. Obviously it’s important or it would already be canceled. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 2, 2020 17:20:00 GMT -6
You think that if given the choice between open school buildings and face to face instruction, but not playing football or just shut the whole thing down, the public would say shut it all down. No football, no school buildings? Our governor came out in his last press conference with a football and a mask and said if you want this you need to wear this. Pretty much sums up what the public here wants IMO Yes.. but that is a non sequitur statement here. The tangent this thread has taken seems to be that a few coaches here believe that without fall sports schools would close up because so few students would attend. I don't understand why some coaches then post about virtual or remote learning. Sure, I would say anyone who wasn't "anti-football" before would like to see football in the fall. Not sure how that relates to the idea that open school buildings but without football/cheerleading/band services would soon become closed school buildings. It seems there are lots of coaches talking about several different issues. |
|
