10AA Basketball

[CPA4Ever]

Just another stain on an already tarnished CPA testimony!

I don't have the facts to totally defend anything, but if you do not have the facts to make accusations, you have no right to make this claim.

Here is all I heard (admittedly I do not know as fact):

- Player doesn't work out academically at one school

- Player needs to transfer out of situation due to academics.

- Player chooses another school. Free country - his family has a right to choose.

- New school submits eligibility paperwork to TSSAA to avoid non-compliance.

- TSSAA clears player to play.

- Player plays 6 games.

- TSSAA throws up red flag.

- Player immediately is benched.

- TSSAA admits mistake and player doesn't play anymore.

Now, IF that is true, where is CPA's fault? If it is not true, share with us the truth and the basis for your condemnation.

[kbrks]

OK, now let me get this straight, because this is a real head scratcher. Generally, what is being described is:

The Rule – An 8th grader repeating the 8th grade is not eligible to participate in HS athletics during that year.

The School – Certified him eligible and/or requested clarification on the player’s eligibility. (Why ask – Did you not read the rule?)

The Ruler (TSSAA) – Says the player is eligible and provides a start date. (Why - Did you not read your own rules?) then after 6 games they say the player is not eligible for the rest of the year (Why – Did someone finally read the rule?)

 

Are you kidding me? If true, I do not know if this is the basis for a Shakespearian comedy or tragedy (I never did understand Shakespeare very well).

[Hoopit10]

I don't have the facts to totally defend anything, but if you do not have the facts to make accusations, you have no right to make this claim.

Here is all I heard (admittedly I do not know as fact):

- Player doesn't work out academically at one school

- Player needs to transfer out of situation due to academics.

- Player chooses another school. Free country - his family has a right to choose.

- New school submits eligibility paperwork to TSSAA to avoid non-compliance.

- TSSAA clears player to play.

- Player plays 6 games.

- TSSAA throws up red flag.

- Player immediately is benched.

- TSSAA admits mistake and player doesn't play anymore.

Now, IF that is true, where is CPA's fault? If it is not true, share with us the truth and the basis for your condemnation.

OK CPA nation; defenders of truth and integrity, here is the facts.

 

Student A at CPA enrolls at another independent school at the end of 8th grade due to financial reasons, ends up staying at CPA along with student A's brother as well. Guess it just all worked out.

 

Student B leaves independent school while on financial aid and enrolls in CPA which gives no financial aid. Guess it just all work out.

 

Student C leaves independent school because of academics and enroll at CPA and repeats 8th grade and ends up playing varsity athletics when rules clearly state any student repeating 8th grade is ineligible to participate in varsity athletics the year they repeat. Guess it just all worked out.

 

Like I said... Another stain on a tarnished testimony. I don't think you want facts.

[CPA4Ever]

OK, now let me get this straight, because this is a real head scratcher. Generally, what is being described is:

The Rule – An 8th grader repeating the 8th grade is not eligible to participate in HS athletics during that year.

The School – Certified him eligible and/or requested clarification on the player’s eligibility. (Why ask – Did you not read the rule?)

The Ruler (TSSAA) – Says the player is eligible and provides a start date. (Why - Did you not read your own rules?) then after 6 games they say the player is not eligible for the rest of the year (Why – Did someone finally read the rule?)

 

Are you kidding me? If true, I do not know if this is the basis for a Shakespearian comedy or tragedy (I never did understand Shakespeare very well).

Again, I have no facts (as none of us really do yet), but I can see how the above can happen:

The Rule and the School - Maybe(?) CPA asked the TSSAA to clarify whether he would be eligible Jan. 1 (as with some transfers) or not at all for the school year. Maybe they felt the rule wasn't clear, or they wanted to be certain. There is nothing wrong with asking the rule makers to clarify a rule. That's better than sitting him for the whole year, and find out later he didn't have to.

The Ruler - If they made a mistake, they are human. It shouldn't have happened but if it did they have no choice but to change the ruling, and CPA has no choice but to abide. It is a tough deal for the kid, especially if the family's decision on school choice was partially based on the erroneous ruling. As far as the 6 games he played, the 4 district games outcome wouldn't have changed, and CPA should not be penalized if it was a TSSAA error.

It's a bit like you choosing to contact the IRS about a "gray area" deduction, rather than trying to totally comprehend the IRS laws. You assume what they tell you is right, and you proceed accordingly.

[CPA4Ever]

OK CPA nation; defenders of truth and integrity, here is the facts.

 

Student A at CPA enrolls at another independent school at the end of 8th grade due to financial reasons, ends up staying at CPA along with student A's brother as well. Guess it just all worked out.

 

Student B leaves independent school while on financial aid and enrolls in CPA which gives no financial aid. Guess it just all work out.

 

Student C leaves independent school because of academics and enroll at CPA and repeats 8th grade and ends up playing varsity athletics when rules clearly state any student repeating 8th grade is ineligible to participate in varsity athletics the year they repeat. Guess it just all worked out.

 

Like I said... Another stain on a tarnished testimony. I don't think you want facts.

You use the phrase "guess it just all worked out" three times while at the same time claiming you know the facts. So you are guessing - you do not know. That is not consistent. What you are doing is looking at results of situations, and making assumptions about the facts that created those results.

Its like someone commenting on a friend's divorce and assuming the spouse they didn't like was obviously at fault. You can't look at results and make up the reasons for them. I don't know the facts, but they are coming, so I suggest we all just let things play out before stones are thrown.

[williebgovs04]

Didnt this same thing happen at William Blount this year in football? Kid transfered from Maryville, TSSAA said u are eligible to play right away, 3 weeks later said no u werent eligible, and had to vacate wins. Signal Mt had something similar to that also..

 

Doesnt matter cause BBall is all about tournament play.

[OffTheRecord]

A few years ago the TSSAA said the same thing about Gallatin football. They ruled player eligible based on information provided to them by the school. After further investigation, they ruled the player in eligible and Gallatin had to forfeit most of their games.

[DAD1]

Why does the State of Tennessee Department of Education even bother with TSSAA when all they have to do is ask kbrks and Hoopit10? They could save a ton of money.

[nextlevel]

Why does the State of Tennessee Department of Education even bother with TSSAA when all they have to do is ask kbrks and Hoopit10? They could save a ton of money.

add cpa4ever to that for exponential increase

Edited February 6, 2012 by nextlevel

[BoDawgs]

OK, now let me get this straight, because this is a real head scratcher. Generally, what is being described is:

The Rule – An 8th grader repeating the 8th grade is not eligible to participate in HS athletics during that year.

The School – Certified him eligible and/or requested clarification on the player’s eligibility. (Why ask – Did you not read the rule?)

The Ruler (TSSAA) – Says the player is eligible and provides a start date. (Why - Did you not read your own rules?) then after 6 games they say the player is not eligible for the rest of the year (Why – Did someone finally read the rule?)

 

Are you kidding me? If true, I do not know if this is the basis for a Shakespearian comedy or tragedy (I never did understand Shakespeare very well).

 

 

Good post. Strong points all around.

 

I will restate my thoughts from earlier, shouldn't someone in admissions at CPA done a more thorough job in understanding the transfer rule and explaining, very clearly, the situation to the TSSAA? In fairness to the TSSAA they handle dozens of eligibility questions a season and do not have the resources to investigate every one of them. They take it on faith that the school and family submitting the request are providing all the information. In this case it seems that either 1) the information they received was incomplete (intentionally or otherwise) or 2) that this situation was so unique that the TSSAA had no precedent for a ruling, and because of the grey area involved in the case had cause to go back and redact their initial ruling. Option 2 is the most likely circumstance, and the fact that CPA would present a case that is so clearly in the "grey" should not be surprising to anyone.

 

The other question - as talented as this 8th grader is, why do you really need him or want to play him? This team is very strong and he doesn't fill an obvious need. The Middle School team on the other hand struggles to score and could very much use his talents (if that was even a possibility with transfer rules for middle school). It is also important to note that by playing this 8th grader in a varsity game they immediately prevent him from transferring to another school without losing a year of eligibility. Got to protect your assets I guess. In addition, if I were a parent whose son worked hard to find time on this talented team, and then have an 8th grader (with questionable eligibility) come in and take minutes from my child I would be very upset.

 

You would think administration would be tired of seeing CPA's name dragged through the mud in forums like this or out in the public and put their foot down on questionable decisions being made for the sake of athletics and winning; and it is even worse when the claims are falsely stated to be in the "best interest" of the student.

Edited February 6, 2012 by BoDawgs

[lbell615]

I think this situation has finally addressed an issue. CPA didn't do anything wrong from what I understand, however the "K-12" rule should be tweaked by the TSSAA. K-12 rule states that 8th graders can play varsity at schools that have K-12th grades in the same building. This is a great, but silent, recruiting tool that CPA has been clever to exploit. For example, when Lindsey is a senior, he will be playing his fifth year of varsity basketball. If they can continue to attract (or identify.. ?) young talent, the East Lits of the world won't have a prayer of winning Class AA or the other 96% of schools that don't have this luxury. I'm not saying CPA isn't playing by the rules. But, this will get out of control if the TSSAA doesn't do something to make things more balanced. Getting a kid from Greenbriar, Murfreesboro and getting a kid to repeat 8th grade at CPA after completing 8th grade at MBA screams CPA should probably be in Division II. MBA's weighted scale, regardless of the kids grade, speaks for itself. He should never played this year on that fact alone. Congrats to CPA for finding a way to make a basketball prep school in Tennessee. The football program is poised to follow the script.

Edited February 6, 2012 by lbell615

[LookingAround]

Good post. Strong points all around.

 

I will restate my thoughts from earlier, shouldn't someone in admissions at CPA done a more thorough job in understanding the transfer rule and explaining, very clearly, the situation to the TSSAA? In fairness to the TSSAA they handle dozens of eligibility questions a season and do not have the resources to investigate every one of them. They take it on faith that the school and family submitting the request are providing all the information. In this case it seems that either 1) the information they received was incomplete (intentionally or otherwise) or 2) that this situation was so unique that the TSSAA had no precedent for a ruling, and because of the grey area involved in the case had cause to go back and redact their initial ruling. Option 2 is the most likely circumstance, and the fact that CPA would present a case that is so clearly in the "grey" should not be surprising to anyone.

 

The other question - as talented as this 8th grader is, why do you really need him or want to play him? This team is very strong and he doesn't fill an obvious need. The Middle School team on the other hand struggles to score and could very much use his talents (if that was even a possibility with transfer rules for middle school). It is also important to note that by playing this 8th grader in a varsity game they immediately prevent him from transferring to another school without losing a year of eligibility. Got to protect your assets I guess. In addition, if I were a parent whose son worked hard to find time on this talented team, and then have an 8th grader (with questionable eligibility) come in and take minutes from my child I would be very upset.

 

You would think administration would be tired of seeing CPA's name dragged through the mud in forums like this or out in the public and put their foot down on questionable decisions being made for the sake of athletics and winning; and it is even worse when the claims are falsely stated to be in the "best interest" of the student.

 

The CPA Administration does not nor does any other school administration have any control of this forum or any other blogs that want to spread rumors, use misleading information or assume they know facts when they haven't been privy to any of it. Your statement "and it is even worse when the claims are falsely stated to be in the "best interest" of the student", is made without knowledge. What facts or quotes to do have to say that statement was made by CPA administration?