One more reason we are going to hell

[Abominable Gorilla]

Public school money doesn't raise near enough to pay for a stadium. Stadiums are a reflection of your tax dollars at work. If you consider the total cost of a high school football team, you can't name a public school team that will not come out in the red. The reason we accept this loss is because we are willing to pay for the value added to the lives of those who participate. However, I hypothesize that these lives might have value added in other ways if football wasn't available.

While powerhouse does not equal private, they definitely have an advantage. You might remember Lionel Turner who played linebacker on LSU's co-national champion team. I went to high school with him at WHS. The coach at John Curtis met with him and asked him to come play for them. I wonder how often public schools recruit talent across the state?

If football wasn't available at the high school level, maybe we'd open up some diversity in athletics? Perhaps we'd start seeing a higher interest in things such as soccer, lacrosse, tennis, golf, and the like at a younger level. I've spoken to a Baton Rouge ER doctor who says their ER will average 6 injuries a week that will leave a high school football player permanantly disabled.

I'm not against football. I love that we can play at the HS level. All I meant to say was that schools who don't have the funds to support academics shouldn't try to support athletics. I think reoccuring blowouts for a school are a symptom of being underfunded and perhaps that money could be put to better use.

[theprofessor]

Public school money doesn't raise near enough to pay for a stadium. Stadiums are a reflection of your tax dollars at work. If you consider the total cost of a high school football team, you can't name a public school team that will not come out in the red. The reason we accept this loss is because we are willing to pay for the value added to the lives of those who participate. However, I hypothesize that these lives might have value added in other ways if football wasn't available.

at many schools -- ruston high, for instance -- i know of plenty of players who wouldn't even be in school if they couldn't play sports. many of them struggle enough to keep their grades up even with the incentive of having sports taken away if they don't qualify academically. you take away football and many kids will drop out. look at ruston high's ladell gray, who was kicked off the team due to a run-in with the law. i would be very surprised if this kid, who has all the talent in the world and can legimitately play football at any bcs school, doesn't drop out if he's not allowed back on the team.

While powerhouse does not equal private, they definitely have an advantage. You might remember Lionel Turner who played linebacker on LSU's co-national champion team. I went to high school with him at WHS. The coach at John Curtis met with him and asked him to come play for them. I wonder how often public schools recruit talent across the state?.

surely you aren't naive enough to believe this doesn't go on at any school -- public or private -- all across the country. i've had a public school coach tell me directly to my coach that he was going to recruit a kid. in fact, while saying he didn't want to break any rules, he was admitting to do exactly that. the lhsaa has bylaws against recruiting. mlb has bylaws against steroids. unless those laws are actually enforced strictly -- not just a few random cases a year -- they do the sport no good. while evangel and curtis are most known to recruit, it goes on everywhere. west monroe has a long history of doing it. but you know, even schools like cedar creek or ruston high will find ways to get better players. no coach is going to turn someone down.

I'm not against football. I love that we can play at the HS level.

i don't think you're lying, but your continual arguments on this thread tend to make me believe you have something against prep football.

[bluecrew]

at many schools -- ruston high, for instance -- i know of plenty of players who wouldn't even be in school if they couldn't play sports. many of them struggle enough to keep their grades up even with the incentive of having sports taken away if they don't qualify academically. you take away football and many kids will drop out. look at ruston high's ladell gray, who was kicked off the team due to a run-in with the law. i would be very surprised if this kid, who has all the talent in the world and can legimitately play football at any bcs school, doesn't drop out if he's not allowed back on the team.



surely you aren't naive enough to believe this doesn't go on at any school -- public or private -- all across the country. i've had a public school coach tell me directly to my coach that he was going to recruit a kid. in fact, while saying he didn't want to break any rules, he was admitting to do exactly that. the lhsaa has bylaws against recruiting. mlb has bylaws against steroids. unless those laws are actually enforced strictly -- not just a few random cases a year -- they do the sport no good. while evangel and curtis are most known to recruit, it goes on everywhere. west monroe has a long history of doing it. but you know, even schools like cedar creek or ruston high will find ways to get better players. no coach is going to turn someone down.



i don't think you're lying, but your continual arguments on this thread tend to make me believe you have something against prep football.

Well said B_Hoss on all of the above!

[dhussdawg]

Yeh, I would love to see the statistics on how many high school football teams actually make money. I doubt many debate, basketball, choirs, academic rally, soccer, and baseball teams make much money either. Does it mean we have to cut them all? No, because it gets kids involved in their school. School isnt just about books and academics. I am not saying that we need to be throwing tons of money down the drain to fund these things, but as long as they can be funded at a reasonable amount, why not? I doubt football at these smaller schools is a huge investment. How much can it cost for 30 pairs of helmets, pads, etc., and 5 bus trips a year? It is all part of the educational and HS experience.

As far as building new stadiums goes, those things are voted on by the people. I sometimes find it disturbing what people vote to spend their tax money on (sports over education), but this is democracy. If a stadium is proposed and the people agree to it, then what is the problem?

[Abominable Gorilla]

I'm not arguing to ban HS football. I'm saying that teams that get blown out on a continuous basis because they are underfunded should consider something other than football. If any of you would like, I'd be more than willing to show you around some of the livingston and east baton rouge parish schools where I can show you school books from the 70's and T-buildings with holes large enough for you to enter/exit through.

I was fortunate enough to grow up in Walker where we had enough money to keep things decent. I know for a fact that we didn't recruit players because I grew up and knew the players. I sat with them in classes since the first grade and we were successful enough to win district on multiple occassions while I was a student.

While I agree that football helps keep kids in school, I would love to hear the argument of ignoring holes in buildings and requesting state grant money for new football equipment. All I'm saying is that smaller schools without the budget should consider smaller, cheaper sports.

Debate, basketball, choir, academic rally, soccer, and baseball teams don't make much money, but they don't lose money at near the same rate as football. In fact, many such activities require the participants to pay their own way to support the group through fundraisers or membership fees.

"This is a democracy. If a stadium is proposed and the people agree to it, then what is the problem?" The problem is that the same people are not agreeing to fund growth in academic areas. I'm not saying it should be illegal. I'm just saying I disagree with the logic. I wonder if many of you haven't traveled to the southern portion of the state and seen the condition of several of the schools.

The reason I discuss this in this thread is because I feel like regularly occurring blowouts might be a sign that perhaps football isn't the best decision for that school.

[Cool Hand Clyde]

I'm saying that teams that get blown out on a continuous basis because they are underfunded should consider something other than football. .

The good folks in Bastrop would disagree with you on that one.

This isn't a field of dreams. Win and they will come and then you can build it.

[dhussdawg]

"This is a democracy. If a stadium is proposed and the people agree to it, then what is the problem?" The problem is that the same people are not agreeing to fund growth in academic areas. I'm not saying it should be illegal. I'm just saying I disagree with the logic. I wonder if many of you haven't traveled to the southern portion of the state and seen the condition of several of the schools.

I see your point AG, and I agree that, in LA especially, people undervalue education as a whole, but what can you do? I dont believe in gvmt. mandating forcing stuff down people's throats too much. I do hope that these schools are getting the basic books they need for education, the gvmt. should step in and make sure that happens. Don't get me wrong, I find it disturbing when a city would rather fund a new football stadium instead of give teacher's a decent wage.

As far as paying your way in all of the other things, I dont think so. I participated in choir, drama, baseball, football, and many clubs in high school. I might have paid a few dues for the clubs, but I never paid any money for choir, drama, baseball, or football.