Damn Oh Damn. If this doesn't support what I see and believe I do not know what does. For the most part this board is divided on the issue. The destination schools, Privates vs Publics. This article and poll says it all. We are talking TEXAS and ALABAMA here people so do not just hiss, piss and dismiss.
READ ~~> http://highschoolsports.al.com/news/art ... exas-does/
Texas has hard core rules against any recruitment. Alabama coaches surveyed agree recruiting and privates are a big problem in high school sport. They by majority agree with Texas and its tough stance. Of course the puffs, riffs and flakes in CIF couldn't muster enough guts to defend their original stand and we are now where we are.
Either way give this a good read. "A majority of Alabama high school coaches, based on an AL.com online survey and interviews, believe high school recruiting is a major problem."
And in Texas if you answer YES to one of these questions you are likely not going to play for your desired destination team. The responsibility here of the coaches is huge no doubt.
In Texas, UIL members use what’s called the Previous Athletic Participation Form, or PAPF, which must be filled out by the athlete’s former and new school.
The form includes six yes/no questions:1) Was there any conflict or dissatisfaction between the student, his/her parents, and the athletic/academic supervisors at the school?
2) Was this student recruited to attend another school or was any undue influence exerted upon this student or family to change schools?
3) Did this student quit an athletic activity or program while enrolled in your school?
4) Was this student ever suspended or removed from your school athletic program?
5) Would the student be prohibited from participation in athletics had they not changed schools?
6) Based on your knowledge of the student and their circumstances, is this student changing schools for athletic purposes?
If either school answers yes
to any of the six questions, the case is referred to a district executive committee for a hearing, according to UIL rules provided to AL.com. If the DEC rules the player ineligible, the player can then appeal the ruling to the state executive committee, said UIL media coordinator Kate Hector.
Former coaches and administrators sit on those committees instead of UIL staffers, Hector said, and coaches found guilty of recruiting can face a range of punishment from a public reprimand to a suspension.[/color]
That fact that major high school states as well as College NCAA states say we have a problem it adds credence to what many here have expressed over the past few years. We have a problem.
Here is the caveat, If California is allowed to continue as it is now how long can these other states resist building super teams from their state talent to equal what is happening out in California?