|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 12, 2012 15:32:13 GMT -5
I meant to separate the kids who were coming from Africa from the kids who were transferring from NoVa publics (Savage and others). I think the African import issue is an entirely different topic with its own intricacies.
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 12, 2012 16:07:45 GMT -5
I meant to separate the kids who were coming from Africa from the kids who were transferring from NoVa publics (Savage and others). I think the African import issue is an entirely different topic with its own intricacies. I, for one, am an EHS alum and I reclassified just for academics and knew quite a few who did the same. I dont really think it makes a difference whether you're an athlete or not, at the end of the day its still the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Jan 12, 2012 17:04:49 GMT -5
Historically, schools like Landon, St. Alban's, Georgetown Prep, and EHS very commonly required that entering students repeat a grade, whether it be in 3rd grade, 7th grade, or 9th grade (the grades in which they receive the most applications). I doubt at EHS there is anything out of the ordinary going on here. Elite academic candidates are allowed to not repeat, but for many kids, they are asked to repeat grades. At least this was the case a couple decades ago.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 12, 2012 17:48:28 GMT -5
Historically, schools like Landon, St. Alban's, Georgetown Prep, and EHS very commonly required that entering students repeat a grade, whether it be in 3rd grade, 7th grade, or 9th grade (the grades in which they receive the most applications). I doubt at EHS there is anything out of the ordinary going on here. Elite academic candidates are allowed to not repeat, but for many kids, they are asked to repeat grades. At least this was the case a couple decades ago. That's out of date. As I cited earlier, the other IAC schools who have been recruiting basketball players are not reclassifying them, even when they come from much less challenging schools. Only EHS has been reclassifying their basketball recruits, who enter as juniors, (at least Savage last year, and one for next year as well). And let's not act like it's for the kids' academics. If the other IAC schools can manage it, why can't EHS?
|
|
hoyajmw
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by hoyajmw on Jan 13, 2012 10:08:23 GMT -5
I'm not going to pretend that I know everything that goes (or doesn't go) into the relative academic requirements, rigor or culture that is important to the other IAC schools. I do know that EHS is one of four all-boarding (no day students at all) schools in the country and doesn't accept one and done students (such as Bullis's Robert Sampson a couple years ago); that the idea of reclassing in order to ensure the student gets the kind of immersion/education that EHS views as critical to its mission is not unique there to athletes; and that it faces some special challenges in the local recruiting environment precisely because it is all boarding (prior to last year, it had last won an IAC title in '98). In terms of how it has worked out for the student at issue, in terms of his performance on and off the court and his future compared to what it was, I think it has been a tremendous positive -- the same kind of result for the athlete (and the school) that Georgetown (to veer slightly back to relevance) strives to achieve in its recruiting. And of course any school in the IAC could decide to use the same course; not sure why they haven't -- that's their decision to make, based on their view of how to best balance the student's interests with the school's culture (I would hope).
Now, all that said, Dog, I understand your point and think it is a fair one in the context of saying maybe allowing a fifth year on the court is not something that should be permitted, and if the IAC leadership/Headmasters (and Episcopal's is as respected and fair-minded an individual as you will ever meet -- and for you Tigers, you may know he started as Woodberry's basketball coach way back when) were to weigh the relative merits of this policy -- or of allowing one and dones, or other things that they think don't fit the academic missions or fairness of the competition (famously, we all know they kicked Prep out for football) -- and then decide to bar it or other particular practices because they think they give an inappropriate advantage to a school or don't fit the educational mission of the conference, that's fine by me. But I really don't think it is right to assume ill-motives (about people you do not know) or rail about "unfair advantage" (esp. with a school that has been far from a dominant/Dematha) or say EHS is now "undermining its academic reputation") (as your initial note about this commented in implying the school has lowered its standards).
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 13, 2012 12:32:43 GMT -5
Regardless, one is only allowed 4 years of Varsity competition and Episcopal strictly adheres to that rule.
Also, you could look at it from the vantage point that other IAC dont have to reclassify their students because they give more support to their student-athletes. I know, for a fact, that Episcopal does not really have much in the realm of tutoring and such so a lot of their academic work is hands off. Its up to the student to complete his or her work.
And jmw makes a great point about Episcopal not accepting one year transfers, while other schools do.
But in reality, that is the nature of athletics at any level, I'd like for someone to show me the last time a good team has ever one a league championship without at least attempting to recruit.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 13, 2012 14:08:54 GMT -5
Regardless, one is only allowed 4 years of Varsity competition and Episcopal strictly adheres to that rule. Also, you could look at it from the vantage point that other IAC dont have to reclassify their students because they give more support to their student-athletes. I know, for a fact, that Episcopal does not really have much in the realm of tutoring and such so a lot of their academic work is hands off. Its up to the student to complete his or her work. And jmw makes a great point about Episcopal not accepting one year transfers, while other schools do. But in reality, that is the nature of athletics at any level, I'd like for someone to show me the last time a good team has ever one a league championship without at least attempting to recruit. No one's saying you can't recruit, but I think the way Episcopal has done it in contrast to some of the other IAC schools is a bit questionable (in basketball, as well as soccer). This is an issue that also comes up when people discuss IAC lacrosse, as Mater Dei (which is primarily a Prep feeder school, but also sends kids to Gonzaga and Landon) is notorious for reclassifying their kids in middle school and having a dominant middle school sports program (which they did with Nate Britt and Kris Jenkins when they attended Mater Dei).
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Jan 13, 2012 14:50:57 GMT -5
Why does it become "questionable" and "notorious" to reclassify students if it is done to ensure a smoother academic transition to the school? I don't get the complaining going on here. As I said earlier, IAC schools have been doing this decades. Many many students from these schools graduate at 19 years old. It's like a built in PG year for many of these students. They are more mature emotionally, academically, and sometimes athletically as a result. If that is the deal they strike with the kid's parents, then what is the problem.
I'd have more of a problem with an IAC school that doesn't reclassify when the entrance testing/academic record/quality of prior education supports holding the student back. That type of student is more likely to fall on his/her face.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 13, 2012 15:00:05 GMT -5
Why does it become "questionable" and "notorious" to reclassify students if it is done to ensure a smoother academic transition to the school? I don't get the complaining going on here. As I said earlier, IAC schools have been doing this decades. Many many students from these schools graduate at 19 years old. It's like a built in PG year for many of these students. They are more mature emotionally, academically, and sometimes athletically as a result. If that is the deal they strike with the kid's parents, then what is the problem. I'd have more of a problem with an IAC school that doesn't reclassify when the entrance testing/academic record/quality of prior education supports holding the student back. That type of student is more likely to fall on his/her face. Because it can always be sold as "smoothing the academic transition," when the real benefit to the school is the student's athletic prowess, and reclassifying them allows the school to maximize their time displaying that prowess. When schools that are at least as demanding have managed to recruit AND graduate students with tougher academic backgrounds without reclassifying them, then it's questionable. You keep saying that other IAC schools have done this for years, but the evidence doesn't support that, at least as regards IAC basketball recruits. As I mentioned before, Landon and Bullis' most recent recruits are examples of this.
|
|
swhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,137
|
Post by swhoya on Jan 13, 2012 15:23:31 GMT -5
Why does it become "questionable" and "notorious" to reclassify students if it is done to ensure a smoother academic transition to the school? I don't get the complaining going on here. As I said earlier, IAC schools have been doing this decades. Many many students from these schools graduate at 19 years old. It's like a built in PG year for many of these students. They are more mature emotionally, academically, and sometimes athletically as a result. If that is the deal they strike with the kid's parents, then what is the problem. I'd have more of a problem with an IAC school that doesn't reclassify when the entrance testing/academic record/quality of prior education supports holding the student back. That type of student is more likely to fall on his/her face. Because it can always be sold as "smoothing the academic transition," when the real benefit to the school is the student's athletic prowess, and reclassifying them allows the school to maximize their time displaying that prowess. When schools that are at least as demanding have managed to recruit AND graduate students with tougher academic backgrounds without reclassifying them, then it's questionable. You keep saying that other IAC schools have done this for years, but the evidence doesn't support that, at least as regards IAC basketball recruits. As I mentioned before, Landon and Bullis' most recent recruits are examples of this. As I said earlier, I was a transfer into EHS and had a heck of a time meeting academic requirements to graduate on time. Here's the problem with your analysis: you're saying that other schools don't reclassify, why is it alright for Episcopal to do it? What you're doing is setting those other schools up as the benchmark. The better question would be: is Episcopal doing anything different with its athletes from what it does with its other students? Each school is different, and each sets its own standards. Why should EHS submit to the same standards as Landon or otherwise. That's why it's a private school and not a public: so it can do things differently from every other school. Do you have any evidence at all that EHS is treating its athletes different than its other students that transfer in? No, of course you don't. Given my experience there and the difficulty I had as a non-athlete transfer (who was coming from a private school), I don't see anything suspicious about it at all. EHS expected all of its graduates to meet certain graduation requirements. To me, the wrong thing to do would be to compromise those standards so that they could get athletes. And frankly, I know a lot of the faculty and administrators at EHS, and they've got FAR more integrity than you're giving them credit for. Don't question someone else's honesty unless you have something more solid than "well other schools do it differently, therefor they must be doing it to skate the system." Give it a rest.
|
|
hoyajmw
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by hoyajmw on Jan 13, 2012 16:38:03 GMT -5
Just FYI on the facts: The 6'10" kid (Andre Walker) that Bullis recruited from Clarksburg has been reclassed as a sophomore, being held out of play this year so he can get his academics up to par AND expressly (per the Bullis coach) so he THEN can play two more years, including as a fifth-year senior (see link below). Holding him (and Bullis) out as the exemplars of "others don't reclass" is simply wrong. Now, someone could make arguments from there about the "lowering of standards" that goes into admitting someone who can't both play the sport and uphold their academics, or the fairness/mindset of deciding you'd rather have a kid 6'10" have a fifth year to grow/compete for you instead of requiring him to give up the year and play as a "true" senior, but I won't do that. The simple point is there are different approaches/standards that each school may apply as they address an issue like this, and they may well vary with each athlete as well. EHS had a great year last year (for the first time in a long time) and was in absolute dogfights three times with Landon (and lost to Bullis in 2OTs at home). The game with Bullis earlier this year was a scorcher (another on tap tonight), and they will likely be neck and neck all year, with Landon not far off. And next year, good chance EHS recedes and Bullis (with its 6'10" redshirt recruit) begins crushing folks -- or maybe Landon reassumes its role as perernnial power. So this whole "oh, it is so unfair and anti-competitive for Episcopal to have done this; they must have horrible motives, unlike those exemplars of virtue and impeccable academic standards at Bullis and Landon" is just... misplaced . . .. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/recruiting-insider/post/center-andre-walker-transfers-to-bullis-from-clarksburg/2011/09/07/gIQAUib79J_blog.html
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 13, 2012 21:48:37 GMT -5
Just FYI on the facts: The 6'10" kid (Andre Walker) that Bullis recruited from Clarksburg has been reclassed as a sophomore, being held out of play this year so he can get his academics up to par AND expressly (per the Bullis coach) so he THEN can play two more years, including as a fifth-year senior (see link below). Holding him (and Bullis) out as the exemplars of "others don't reclass" is simply wrong. Now, someone could make arguments from there about the "lowering of standards" that goes into admitting someone who can't both play the sport and uphold their academics, or the fairness/mindset of deciding you'd rather have a kid 6'10" have a fifth year to grow/compete for you instead of requiring him to give up the year and play as a "true" senior, but I won't do that. The simple point is there are different approaches/standards that each school may apply as they address an issue like this, and they may well vary with each athlete as well. EHS had a great year last year (for the first time in a long time) and was in absolute dogfights three times with Landon (and lost to Bullis in 2OTs at home). The game with Bullis earlier this year was a scorcher (another on tap tonight), and they will likely be neck and neck all year, with Landon not far off. And next year, good chance EHS recedes and Bullis (with its 6'10" redshirt recruit) begins crushing folks -- or maybe Landon reassumes its role as perernnial power. So this whole "oh, it is so unfair and anti-competitive for Episcopal to have done this; they must have horrible motives, unlike those exemplars of virtue and impeccable academic standards at Bullis and Landon" is just... misplaced . . .. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/recruiting-insider/post/center-andre-walker-transfers-to-bullis-from-clarksburg/2011/09/07/gIQAUib79J_blog.htmlExcuse me. First of all, I should have clarified my point using Walker as an example with what Bullis was doing with him. Secondly, I think there is a major difference between reclassing and letting a kid sit out a year to get acclimated, and reclassing and letting them play immediately. One seems to actually be for the benefit of the kid's academics, while the other simply maximizes the player's eligibility under the guise of being for the purpose of a player's academics.
|
|
hoyajmw
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,031
|
Post by hoyajmw on Jan 14, 2012 9:19:13 GMT -5
There is no competitive difference; in either case, the student ends up with four years of varsity (public and private seasons combined) eligibility -- as tgdHoya pointed out above (and I confirmed is the rule last night). Both situations "maximize the player's eligibility," as Bullis's Coach Kelly says in the article is one of the reasons he is sitting Walker this year (then I can have him for TWO years after!) One can argue over what is or is not better for the student, but again that is an indivdiual situation depending on where the student is academically (and as I said above, I think assuming it is more noble to have him sit for a year is far from an obvious conclusion -- and having seen the kid at the game last night I think for my own non-noble selfish coaching reasons I'd want to sit him for a year now to get him stronger/lose the baby fat too for a better next two years). And it also is not even close to the case that this is somehow a rare situation only done by EHS and/or only for athletes -- it is fairly common (again, for academic/get the kid's schooling up to snuff) at St. Stephen's/St. Agnes (where my wife has been on the board for 7 years and knows more than a little about the subject) and what Bullis is doing with Walker now pretty much speaks for itself about what other schools feel they can do/sometimes actually do. The situation with EHS this year apparently has gotten the attention it has because gee, this player is better than some others of late have been, and oh-my-God we've gotten beaten by this team, upsetting the long time order of things in the IAC, so let's gripe about it. Considering esp. where some of this is coming from within the IAC, it is just too rich for words.
Great game last night, by the way. Down 13 late in the third Q at Bullis, EHS storms back to win 62-57 (Adala-Moto with power lay-up, breakaway dunk, and two free throws in the last minute to break a tie game/seal the win). And oh yeah, Kethan Savage didn't play at all (infected toe). Circling back again to some Hoya relevance, I'm pretty sure Sidwell's/possible future Hoya Josh Hart was in the house (rocking a Chicago Bulls cap in place of the usual Georgetown one) with Dematha's James Robinson, as was ex-Hoya '79 Felix Yeoman (there is Yeoman on Bullis, which I'm guessing is a son/maybe nephew).
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 15, 2012 10:51:43 GMT -5
There is also a strict rule in the IAC of no player being able to play a varsity sport if they turn 19 before the beginning of the school year or some date in September I think. And also, schools in the IAC are not allowed to recruit. A potential student athlete must first make contact with the school before talks begin. I know the ins and outs of EHS and the AD and Head BB Coach personally, and I know they have more than enough integrity to respect those rules. So why exactly is it wrong to maximize athletic prowess within the confines of the rules? Thats called running an efficient program.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 15, 2012 14:38:45 GMT -5
There is also a strict rule in the IAC of no player being able to play a varsity sport if they turn 19 before the beginning of the school year or some date in September I think. And also, schools in the IAC are not allowed to recruit. A potential student athlete must first make contact with the school before talks begin. I know the ins and outs of EHS and the AD and Head BB Coach personally, and I know they have more than enough integrity to respect those rules. So why exactly is it wrong to maximize athletic prowess within the confines of the rules? Thats called running an efficient program. First of all, you're kidding yourself if you don't think IAC schools recruit, or make the initial contact to "encourage" kids to apply to their school. Not to mention "encouraging" players who perform well at what amounts to a tryout camp in Africa, to apply to Episcopal. You don't call that "recruiting"? From a Scout.com article: "How did Arnaud and Coach Fitzpatrick’s worlds collide? “At Episcopal, we do a lot of work with consultants, who bring quality young men from Africa to our program. Joe Touomou has the Kossengwe Foundation and we worked through him and Arnaud was the result. Joe played at Georgetown, so he knows both sides of the equation in finding quality young men and having them assimilate into basketball in the U.S." Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you. All of the IAC schools do it. I get it, you went to Episcopal, you're inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. From an absolutely neutral position here, however, it looks differently. (Unfortunately, I apparently am strongly outnumbered by Episcopal grads on this board. Who knew? Haha... ;D)
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 15, 2012 15:35:16 GMT -5
There is also a strict rule in the IAC of no player being able to play a varsity sport if they turn 19 before the beginning of the school year or some date in September I think. And also, schools in the IAC are not allowed to recruit. A potential student athlete must first make contact with the school before talks begin. I know the ins and outs of EHS and the AD and Head BB Coach personally, and I know they have more than enough integrity to respect those rules. So why exactly is it wrong to maximize athletic prowess within the confines of the rules? Thats called running an efficient program. First of all, you're kidding yourself if you don't think IAC schools recruit, or make the initial contact to "encourage" kids to apply to their school. Not to mention "encouraging" players who perform well at what amounts to a tryout camp in Africa, to apply to Episcopal. You don't call that "recruiting"? From a Scout.com article: "How did Arnaud and Coach Fitzpatrick’s worlds collide? “At Episcopal, we do a lot of work with consultants, who bring quality young men from Africa to our program. Joe Touomou has the Kossengwe Foundation and we worked through him and Arnaud was the result. Joe played at Georgetown, so he knows both sides of the equation in finding quality young men and having them assimilate into basketball in the U.S." Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you. All of the IAC schools do it. I get it, you went to Episcopal, you're inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. From an absolutely neutral position here, however, it looks differently. (Unfortunately, I apparently am strongly outnumbered by Episcopal grads on this board. Who knew? Haha... ;D) First of all I wasnt speaking for all IAC schools, just Episcopal. I know many ridiculously athletic kids that were not admitted into Episcopal because they were not up to admission standards. Its not as if athletics carry much weight in EHS's admission process. And as for AAM, Episcopal is highly involved in many good will programs around the country and the world, and since they are a boarding school they have the opportunity to participate in programs like Basketball Without Borders. Every student comes from somewhere different, and there is a certain level of freedom that comes from being an all boarding school in the nation's capitol. Having the opportunity to help run camps and programs like Basketball Without Boarders to help children overseas is something any school would love to take advantage of, regardless of the talent level of these camps/events. So you're trying to tell me that a good will program in Africa to give underprivileged kids opportunities in the US is somehow wrong? Arnaud has improved tremendously since at EHS, and I can assure you that upon his arrival he wasn't even sniffing national prominence. It is recruiting, in a sense, but really it isn't what you think of when you talk about typical recruiting. There is not much convincing having to be done on EHS's side because all of these kids are ITCHING to pursue their dreams in America and have been working all of their lives for an opportunity like that. I guess that constitutes as recruiting, but its within the parameters of the rules and the school doesn't show a lack of integrity. All of this fuss because Kethan Savage re-classified ONE year and will still be of average age upon graduating? Give me a break. Everyone does that at every school. Its not as if its a secret.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 15, 2012 15:42:03 GMT -5
First of all, you're kidding yourself if you don't think IAC schools recruit, or make the initial contact to "encourage" kids to apply to their school. Not to mention "encouraging" players who perform well at what amounts to a tryout camp in Africa, to apply to Episcopal. You don't call that "recruiting"? From a Scout.com article: "How did Arnaud and Coach Fitzpatrick’s worlds collide? “At Episcopal, we do a lot of work with consultants, who bring quality young men from Africa to our program. Joe Touomou has the Kossengwe Foundation and we worked through him and Arnaud was the result. Joe played at Georgetown, so he knows both sides of the equation in finding quality young men and having them assimilate into basketball in the U.S." Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you. All of the IAC schools do it. I get it, you went to Episcopal, you're inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. From an absolutely neutral position here, however, it looks differently. (Unfortunately, I apparently am strongly outnumbered by Episcopal grads on this board. Who knew? Haha... ;D) First of all I wasnt speaking for all IAC schools, just Episcopal. I know many ridiculously athletic kids that were not admitted into Episcopal because they were not up to admission standards. Its not as if athletics carry much weight in EHS's admission process. And as for AAM, Episcopal is highly involved in many good will programs around the country and the world, and since they are a boarding school they have the opportunity to participate in programs like Basketball Without Borders. Every student comes from somewhere different, and there is a certain level of freedom that comes from being an all boarding school in the nation's capitol. Having the opportunity to help run camps and programs like Basketball Without Boarders to help children overseas is something any school would love to take advantage of, regardless of the talent level of these camps/events. So you're trying to tell me that a good will program in Africa to give underprivileged kids opportunities in the US is somehow wrong? Arnaud has improved tremendously since at EHS, and I can assure you that upon his arrival he wasn't even sniffing national prominence. It is recruiting, in a sense, but really it isn't what you think of when you talk about typical recruiting. There is not much convincing having to be done on EHS's side because all of these kids are ITCHING to pursue their dreams in America and have been working all of their lives for an opportunity like that. I guess that constitutes as recruiting, but its within the parameters of the rules and the school doesn't show a lack of integrity. All of this fuss because Kethan Savage re-classified ONE year and will still be of average age upon graduating? Give me a break. Everyone does that at every school. Its not as if its a secret. First of all, of course Savage re-classified ONE year. No one reclassifies two. Secondly, not "everyone" does that, that's the main problem. As for your rant about Episcopal's recruiting in Africa, did seeing negative comments about EHS send you into such a tizzy that you didn't read what I wrote at all? I'll repeat it here for you: "Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you." You were asserting it wasn't recruiting, and EHS does not recruit by the letter of the IAC law. It is recruiting. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 15, 2012 21:10:14 GMT -5
First of all I wasnt speaking for all IAC schools, just Episcopal. I know many ridiculously athletic kids that were not admitted into Episcopal because they were not up to admission standards. Its not as if athletics carry much weight in EHS's admission process. And as for AAM, Episcopal is highly involved in many good will programs around the country and the world, and since they are a boarding school they have the opportunity to participate in programs like Basketball Without Borders. Every student comes from somewhere different, and there is a certain level of freedom that comes from being an all boarding school in the nation's capitol. Having the opportunity to help run camps and programs like Basketball Without Boarders to help children overseas is something any school would love to take advantage of, regardless of the talent level of these camps/events. So you're trying to tell me that a good will program in Africa to give underprivileged kids opportunities in the US is somehow wrong? Arnaud has improved tremendously since at EHS, and I can assure you that upon his arrival he wasn't even sniffing national prominence. It is recruiting, in a sense, but really it isn't what you think of when you talk about typical recruiting. There is not much convincing having to be done on EHS's side because all of these kids are ITCHING to pursue their dreams in America and have been working all of their lives for an opportunity like that. I guess that constitutes as recruiting, but its within the parameters of the rules and the school doesn't show a lack of integrity. All of this fuss because Kethan Savage re-classified ONE year and will still be of average age upon graduating? Give me a break. Everyone does that at every school. Its not as if its a secret. First of all, of course Savage re-classified ONE year. No one reclassifies two. Secondly, not "everyone" does that, that's the main problem. As for your rant about Episcopal's recruiting in Africa, did seeing negative comments about EHS send you into such a tizzy that you didn't read what I wrote at all? I'll repeat it here for you: "Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you." You were asserting it wasn't recruiting, and EHS does not recruit by the letter of the IAC law. It is recruiting. That's all. I meant ONE by the fact that NOBODY else has reclassified at EHS. He is the only person to do so that you can name. Wait...so youre meaning to tell me that no other school reclassifies kids? give me a break EHS doesnt do anything out of the ordinary. And it isnt recruiting. These kids are itching to get to the US and make a name for themselves. Fortunately for EHS that is probably the only school the majority of these kids have ever heard of. Its still up to their families to make the best decision for them. EHS is one of four all boarding schools in the nation, and that, naturally, makes it an easy destination for many. I just dont see how its recruiting for a family to be exposed to and informed of a potential option and them acting to get their kid in. Its their decision which school they should attend. If you grew up in the DMV and wanted to go to an IAC school you could pick which best suits your situation. But for programs like Basketball Without Borders, these families only know one option, and that is EHS.
|
|
|
Post by hoyas big supporter on Jan 15, 2012 21:15:29 GMT -5
I, personally, encourage all other schools (IAC, WCAC and MAC counterparts alike) to participate in similar showcases and programs because it gives many kids who would have not otherwise had the chance great opportunities to succeed. They can do as much as they can, but in the end, they aren't boarding schools and at the end of the day that completely rules out the vast majority of those schools because these kids' families are not able to relocate to America along with them.
And by the way, the majority of said "recruiting" is done by people outside of the actual administration. i.e. kids spreading the word themselves. Specifically in the case of the African students, they go back home and tell others of their experience and that attracts interest in the schools. I can say for a fact that Kethan Savage's interest in Episcopal stemmed purely from his conversations with his AAU teammate Arnad Adala Moto about the school. He liked what he heard about the situation and then went about figuring out how he could attend EHS. You CANNOT deny that this does not happen at EVERY successful school in the nation. People see a brand name where there is a high chance of success and want to go there. Nothing is wrong, or out of the ordinary with that.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 15, 2012 22:10:21 GMT -5
First of all, of course Savage re-classified ONE year. No one reclassifies two. Secondly, not "everyone" does that, that's the main problem. As for your rant about Episcopal's recruiting in Africa, did seeing negative comments about EHS send you into such a tizzy that you didn't read what I wrote at all? I'll repeat it here for you: "Really? That's not recruiting? I have no problem with the program, I think it offers kids a great opportunity to improve their lives, and Episcopal is one of the unique schools with the resources to facilitate one of those programs. But if you don't think that's recruiting, then I don't know what to say to you." You were asserting it wasn't recruiting, and EHS does not recruit by the letter of the IAC law. It is recruiting. That's all. I meant ONE by the fact that NOBODY else has reclassified at EHS. He is the only person to do so that you can name. Wait...so youre meaning to tell me that no other school reclassifies kids? give me a break EHS doesnt do anything out of the ordinary. And it isnt recruiting. These kids are itching to get to the US and make a name for themselves. Fortunately for EHS that is probably the only school the majority of these kids have ever heard of. Its still up to their families to make the best decision for them. EHS is one of four all boarding schools in the nation, and that, naturally, makes it an easy destination for many. I just dont see how its recruiting for a family to be exposed to and informed of a potential option and them acting to get their kid in. Its their decision which school they should attend. If you grew up in the DMV and wanted to go to an IAC school you could pick which best suits your situation. But for programs like Basketball Without Borders, these families only know one option, and that is EHS. EHS uses a consultant to identify talented players in Africa and bring them to EHS. That is recruiting. Plain and simple. This is a losing argument for you.
|
|