recruiting

[fbinnd]

Folks, I was asked by a moderator, in the form of a thread being locked, to leave the Shaunna Knife case alone.  Now, I have tried to uphold that.  But she keeps getting reworked back into this thread.  This recruiting thread and the transferring discussion can be had without referencing Shaunna Knife.  I don't know why she transferred, some claim they do know, and my best guess is that only Shaunna will ever truly know. 

Second, CDUB, do you spend any time around a college basketball coach at all?  I can guarandamntee you that college coaches know about anyone averaging more than 10 a game anywhere in our state.  If there is a player that can help a college, that player is scoring more than 10 a game.  High school coaches know that one of their players getting time in college helps the high school program.  The up-and-comers get excited to see one of their own playing on a bigger stage.  So every high school coach in the state will try to get their players on a college roster.  Any kid who can play in college is being presented to many, many college coaches.  It doesn't matter where you're dropping your 15-18, you are getting press.

Now, if you're Pat Summit down at Tennessee, and you get a call about some kid in ND that loves the Vols and wants to play there, you will look up her numbers.  If she dropped 18 against Fairmount-Campbell-Tintah, maybe you'll care, maybe you won't.  If you dropped 15 against Mandan, who Summit has heard of as ranked in the country, she'll notice.  So, does it make sense to transfer out of the WDA to a Class B community to get noticed by college coaches at the DI level?  Not really.

Of course, there's the idea of transferring to a school that's really good, where you are not the only option, teams have to defend everyone, and you can finally work against a player one-on-one instead of being triple-teamed.  Sure, your numbers may improve, but if playing in college is the goal, then what's better:  simply getting recruited by a DI, landing there and not being ready, or working against the triple team, earning your 15, and being ready to play DII or NAIA?  Everyone talks about all the kids that have gone DI in basketball.  What about the kids like Tyler Koenig or Tyrone Terry.  Went DI (UW-Green Bay and some Texas team respectively), didn't survive, and ended up back in ND with limited eligibility remaining to work with (UND and VCSU, respectively).  Why not start at UND and VCSU and be a star in your league for a couple of years?  Is it really worth it to go DI just to say you went DI?  Credibility sells for so little these days, and fans are really hard on kids who go DI and then come back after washing out.  Who wants that?

And that's all at the college level.  For baller and everyone else who thinks that transferring is the route to athletic happiness in high school:  Your route to happiness is not even earned during the season.  It's earned out of season.  A kid that handles the ball every day during the summer, puts up his 300 shots a day, hits the weights, goes to camps, and works hard on developing his game will be successful.......in college.  You're better off showing prospective college coaches that you're willing to be a part of something bigger than yourself by sticking with your team, seeing them through the bad, even if it's all bad, and being a leader.  College coaches will respect.  Transferring for your own success and happiness and abandoning your roots tells a coach that when it comes to basketball, you're only out for #1.  College coaches aren't very fond of kids that are out for #1.  They don't go DI very often.  Jeff Boschee is arguably the most successful college basketball player to ever come out of North Dakota.  He never won a state title.  The writing was on the wall that he wouldn't the entire time, but he stuck it out, Roy Williams said he liked his character, and the kid was in the Final 4.  How many transfers can say that?

[luvmy3gbb1wr]

www.oak-hill.net  is an baptist, non military school that according to its own mission statement is a school for kids who need a change in school, peer, community or family relationships....yep they offer sports too, looks like they have a very good mens team...........okay, now what?

 

please forget about shauna knife.......we're talking about other situations, you keep bringing her back; it's almost like we're touching a nerve.....

aaarrgh, i did it again.......mentioned the girl........:tape:

[baller01]

I don't think every situation deserves a transfer. I'm not saying one year everyone should transfer to Dickinson Trinity, and then the next year Parshall, and the next year who knows. I'm just saying there is no difference getting an education in Kildeer then Hazen or Watford City, or MPCG, so if you are located closely to a school that can provide you with a better basketball program. Why not take it?

[fbinnd]

Tell someone from Killdeer or Hazen or Watford City or MPCG that there's no difference in the education you get from any of those schools.  Then call me.  I'll find some donors to pay your medical bills.

It's also about priorities.  You are willing to allow high school kids to make basketball their priority in life in high school, and you're trying to wrap it up in a flowery, sweet-smelling story about positive experiences and getting the most out of high school.  What about the kid that is average?  If you're willing to allow the good players to transfer, you should be more willing to allow the average kids to transfer to good teams.  After all, the good kids will get another chance to win after high school.  But for the average kids, this is their only shot. 

So I say we allow all the average kids to transfer wherever they think the next state tournament team will be so they can get the absolute most out of their high school experience.  Sure, they won't get to play much, but at least they'll get to experience winning instead of losing all the time.  Shouldn't every kid get to be on a winner once?  Or should only the really good kids get to transfer and win.

The point here is that for every kid who gets to transfer to a winner, there's a kid on that winning team that either doesn't get to play or gets cut altogether.  You don't care about that kid, do you?  If you did, you'd see the harm the transfer creates.  A kid who would score 30 in Dunseith will score 20 in Bottineau, but a kid in Bottineau loses his playing time to the transferring kid from Bottineau, even his starting spot that he's earned through committing himself to the program since he was 5, while the transfer would have plenty of opportunities in Dunseith if he stayed home. 

You get it now?  High school is about educational opportunities.  Athletics are a part of that education.  For every kid that transfers, a kid loses an opportunity.  Sure, at the end of the day, not everyone gets to play, but the system we have affords certain opportunities based on your school size.  There's a balance there, and transfers disrupt that balance.

Really, if transferring to a school that "produces good players and good teams" is the right thing to do, then half the kids that currently play Class B ball should be cut.  Because we could string together plenty of players that would start on half the B teams out there that can't even earn a uniform at Fargo South or West Fargo or Bismarck or other Class A schools.  Maybe the kid that gets cut at South should transfer to Hillsboro so he can play varsity ball, even if a kid from Hillsboro loses his spot in the process. 

If transferring is the right thing for the great player on a bad team, then transferring must be the right thing for the average player on a great team.  Every starting spot for every team in the state should then be up for grabs for whoever can make it there on time.  This is the part of the transfer game you're not seeing.  It's easy to feel sorry for the great player thats losing, but he will get his turn if he's good enough.  But for a lot of kids, this is their only chance to be a part of a team of any kind, and they lose that chance just because some other kid thinks he deserves to win now rather than later.

[baseball]

http://www.oak-hill.net  is an baptist, non military school that according to its own mission statement is a school for kids who need a change in school, peer, community or family relationships....yep they offer sports too, looks like they have a very good mens team...........okay, now what?

 

please forget about shauna knife.......we're talking about other situations, you keep bringing her back; it's almost like we're touching a nerve.....

aaarrgh, i did it again.......mentioned the girl........:tape:

so your saying for sure she didnt transfer for a change in scenery which has been suggested before, peer and community relationships which was discussed in the possible harrassing making her trasnfer..........yea and botno offers sports to?  good arguement you had there.  ask Carmelo Anthony, Josh Smith, anyone who played/plays basektball for that school why they went to Oak Hill and see if its for the basketball team or the other stuff.  but since Knife transfers everyone rips into her becasue its automatically for sports and none of those other things just because its not in the school's "mission statement"????? why?

[baller01]

Tell someone from Killdeer or Hazen or Watford City or MPCG that there's no difference in the education you get from any of those schools.  Then call me.  I'll find some donors to pay your medical bills.

It's also about priorities.  You are willing to allow high school kids to make basketball their priority in life in high school, and you're trying to wrap it up in a flowery, sweet-smelling story about positive experiences and getting the most out of high school.  What about the kid that is average?  If you're willing to allow the good players to transfer, you should be more willing to allow the average kids to transfer to good teams.  After all, the good kids will get another chance to win after high school.  But for the average kids, this is their only shot. 

So I say we allow all the average kids to transfer wherever they think the next state tournament team will be so they can get the absolute most out of their high school experience.  Sure, they won't get to play much, but at least they'll get to experience winning instead of losing all the time.  Shouldn't every kid get to be on a winner once?  Or should only the really good kids get to transfer and win.

The point here is that for every kid who gets to transfer to a winner, there's a kid on that winning team that either doesn't get to play or gets cut altogether.  You don't care about that kid, do you?  If you did, you'd see the harm the transfer creates.  A kid who would score 30 in Dunseith will score 20 in Bottineau, but a kid in Bottineau loses his playing time to the transferring kid from Bottineau, even his starting spot that he's earned through committing himself to the program since he was 5, while the transfer would have plenty of opportunities in Dunseith if he stayed home. 

You get it now?  High school is about educational opportunities.  Athletics are a part of that education.  For every kid that transfers, a kid loses an opportunity.  Sure, at the end of the day, not everyone gets to play, but the system we have affords certain opportunities based on your school size.  There's a balance there, and transfers disrupt that balance.

Really, if transferring to a school that "produces good players and good teams" is the right thing to do, then half the kids that currently play Class B ball should be cut.  Because we could string together plenty of players that would start on half the B teams out there that can't even earn a uniform at Fargo South or West Fargo or Bismarck or other Class A schools.  Maybe the kid that gets cut at South should transfer to Hillsboro so he can play varsity ball, even if a kid from Hillsboro loses his spot in the process. 

If transferring is the right thing for the great player on a bad team, then transferring must be the right thing for the average player on a great team.  Every starting spot for every team in the state should then be up for grabs for whoever can make it there on time.  This is the part of the transfer game you're not seeing.  It's easy to feel sorry for the great player thats losing, but he will get his turn if he's good enough.  But for a lot of kids, this is their only chance to be a part of a team of any kind, and they lose that chance just because some other kid thinks he deserves to win now rather than later.

I get it now. It makes sense. You are a parent whos kid's spot was "taken" by a transfer student and that is why you are so upset about it. Am I right?

Ok in discussion with your first paragraph, I don't really understand what it means. But if it makes you feel better I will give Dufault, Marshall, and Lorenz a call later and ask them what there curriculum is like.

Second paragraph: Who ever said an "average" play can't transfer. I sure as heck didn't say it. You are the one saying players shouldn't be able to transfer, not me. How many kids have "learning" as there priority in high school? Honestly? We are in school to get an education, correct. But how many students actually want to be there for the learning? Hardly any. 15, 20, 25 years down the road do old classmates talk about there GPA there senior year or there undefeated state championship season there senior year.

Third paragraph: Once again, I never said the "average" player can't transfer. I say those that deserve to win, should win. If I bust my butt everday with shooting and weights etc. is it fair that I am stuck with teammates that don't care about basketball and don't play 9 months out of the year? Maybe if they would have improved themselves and became better then "average" Johnny Superstar wouldn't have transfered and maybe they could have had a winning team at that school. Too bad the other 7 players didn't care about that and were off partying everyday in the summer. Seems to me like that is pretty selfish on the other 7 players fault.

Fourth paragraph: If that kid would have "committed" himself since he was 5 in that program, he wouldn't have his spot "taken" that easily.

Fifth paragraph: That transfer student might "take" a players spot that he transfered to but think of the spot he opened up for some other kid at that school he left. I can't help it that kid wasn't good enough to continue playing. Why don't we just blame our lack of playing time on the transfer student instead of bettering ourself.:(

Sixth paragraph: There are kids that don't go to a class A before they start high school because they realize it will be tough for them to make the team.

Seventh paragraph: If you just would have put in that extra time when you were playing video games, or going to the mall, or going to a party, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about losing your spot.

[baseball]

so you say we can let average players transfer?  why do they get a privlidge to do that and not the good or great players??  and where is the line drawn on who is average and who is above average?  send the stats to NDHSAA and see if his field goal percentage is low enough to transfer?

[baller01]

"Athletics are a part of that education."

So wait a second. You said right there that "athletics" are a part of that education." Therefore, if you transfer schools based on "athletics" you are actually transferring for "education" therefore there is no harm in transferring.

[baseball]

"Athletics are a part of that education."

So wait a second. You said right there that "athletics are a part of that education." Therefore if you transfer schools based on "athletics" you are actually transferring for "education" therefore there is no harm in transferring.

winner................

[fbinnd]

Nice try.  Your theory has nothing to do with education.  It has only to do with becoming a better basketball player. 

The truth is that athletics are a part of education, but the education is not just in school education, but life education.  Life lessons include learning that you don't just get to skip out on your committments you make.  Transferring solely to play basketball somewhere teaches none of that.  It instead tells you that you can make committments and drop them without a second thought to anyone else.  That's anti-education.

Education and basketball only work together when a player has to work within a system.  Players that are allowed to move around freely with no regard to anything else do not work within that system. 

And baseball, geez.  I said that if great kids can transfer, so can average kids.  My point is that you are all willing to accept a great kid transferring to a great team, because all you really care about is wins and losses.  You would cry to high Heaven if a bunch of players cut from South's program started taking away other kids' spots in class B communities. 

I guess when people are trapped in the world of North Dakota high school basketball, a world where they are all brainwashed into thinking that North Dakota high school basketball is the greatest thing in the world, they can only see titles and records, and not what high school athletics is really all about.

Winner.

[baseball]

hahaha winner?  try and keep the same arguement from post to post and you might be able to win.....

[fbinnd]

Hey that was good.  Everyone knows my argument has changed so much.  :shock:

[baller01]

Nice try.  Your theory has nothing to do with education.  It has only to do with becoming a better basketball player. 

The truth is that athletics are a part of education, but the education is not just in school education, but life education.  Life lessons include learning that you don't just get to skip out on your committments you make.  Transferring solely to play basketball somewhere teaches none of that.  It instead tells you that you can make committments and drop them without a second thought to anyone else.  That's anti-education.

Education and basketball only work together when a player has to work within a system.  Players that are allowed to move around freely with no regard to anything else do not work within that system. 

And baseball, geez.  I said that if great kids can transfer, so can average kids.  My point is that you are all willing to accept a great kid transferring to a great team, because all you really care about is wins and losses.  You would cry to high Heaven if a bunch of players cut from South's program started taking away other kids' spots in class B communities. 

I guess when people are trapped in the world of North Dakota high school basketball, a world where they are all brainwashed into thinking that North Dakota high school basketball is the greatest thing in the world, they can only see titles and records, and not what high school athletics is really all about.

Winner.

Please tell me FBINND, what his high school athletics about. Please, I've already throwin up twice, make me throw up again.

Education=Learning
Athletics=Winning

[baseball]

Nice try.  Your theory has nothing to do with education.  It has only to do with becoming a better basketball player. 

The truth is that athletics are a part of education, but the education is not just in school education, but life education.  Life lessons include learning that you don't just get to skip out on your committments you make.  Transferring solely to play basketball somewhere teaches none of that.  It instead tells you that you can make committments and drop them without a second thought to anyone else.  That's anti-education.

Education and basketball only work together when a player has to work within a system.  Players that are allowed to move around freely with no regard to anything else do not work within that system. 

And baseball, geez.  I said that if great kids can transfer, so can average kids.  My point is that you are all willing to accept a great kid transferring to a great team, because all you really care about is wins and losses.  You would cry to high Heaven if a bunch of players cut from South's program started taking away other kids' spots in class B communities. 

I guess when people are trapped in the world of North Dakota high school basketball, a world where they are all brainwashed into thinking that North Dakota high school basketball is the greatest thing in the world, they can only see titles and records, and not what high school athletics is really all about.

Winner.

Please tell me FBINND, what his high school athletics about. Please, I've already throwin up twice, make me throw up again.

Education=Learning
Athletics=Winning

athletics is about learning about life.....thats what he has said over and over and over again...............of course the posts that athletics is not about learning life its all about winning so i dont think he even knows:?

o and about the average kids transferring.....i already brought that up (Stroh comment).  people just dont make a big deal about it because they wont have an impact on the team as significant as teh great players

[baller01]

I want to hear it directly from fbinnd.

What is North Dakota athletics about?

[baseball]

i want to hear it too but all we are going to get is a 6 paragraph post restating whats been said 15 times already

[fbinnd]

I had something else written.  Forget it.  High school athletics are about coming together as a group and doing what you can do to compete.  Learning how to work toward a goal within a group. 

Transferring to a school that "produces good players and good teams" is about going to where the work is already done for you, and you just have to join.  You don't create anything, you just show up and move into something that has already been created.  You didn't struggle and put the time into that group that you should of.  You just hooked up with a group of kids already there to share the success they have earned.

If that makes you feel good, then do it, I guess.

 

[baller01]

I had something else written.  Forget it.  High school athletics are about coming together as a group and doing what you can do to compete.  Learning how to work toward a goal within a group. 

Transferring to a school that "produces good players and good teams" is about going to where the work is already done for you, and you just have to join.  You don't create anything, you just show up and move into something that has already been created.  You didn't struggle and put the time into that group that you should of.  You just hooked up with a group of kids already there to share the success they have earned.

If that makes you feel good, then do it, I guess.

 

For your information, I have done it. And by you saying that it is already done for you is a bunch of crap. My teammates and I put in probably more time then 90% of teams in the state. Nothing was given to me or my teammates. We had to work for everything we have received.

You also say that it is coming together as a group and achieving a goal. I agree with that 100%. BUT, a basketball team is made up of 5 starters plus the reserves. One person alone cannot bring a group together if the others are not willing. And he most certainly can't obtain a high goal if no one else has the same standards.

Say you and me are on the same team. Your goal is to average 3 points a game and win 8 games. My goal is to average 25 points a game and make it to state. We probably aren't going to get very far considering I'll be in the weightroom and gym everyday while pretty much if you go to 1 camp a summer and shoot around a couple times a month, you should be able to average 3 points a game.

Our team isn't going to get very far is it? To be successful you need a good coach and atleast 5 dedicated players who are willing to put in the time and effort. Just by transferring to a different school doesn't mean you are going to be great as an individual and as a team.

"There is no substitute for hardwork."

[baseball]

yea he cant be beat in this arguement....

[fbinnd]

Hey, you said it yourself, if you're gonna transfer, why transfer to some school that's losing.  You may have put in the work from the time you transferred till the time you went to state, but unless you transferred before elementary basketball, the players that were there before you put in way more work than you did.  Your work was to make yourself better.  They were working since day 1 to make their team better.

Sorry, hate to burst your transferring bubble, but it's not the same thing.

[baller01]

Hey, you said it yourself, if you're gonna transfer, why transfer to some school that's losing.  You may have put in the work from the time you transferred till the time you went to state, but unless you transferred before elementary basketball, the players that were there before you put in way more work than you did.  Your work was to make yourself better.  They were working since day 1 to make their team better.

Sorry, hate to burst your transferring bubble, but it's not the same thing.

For you information again, we didn't make it to state. So now you are making a rule that as long as you transfer before elementary, it's ok. Good thing I didn't transfer to your school. If you were smart, you understand that if a kid is transferring schools for "athletic" reasons, he might be pretty good (not saying I'm good because I'm not), and that might make your team a little bit better. Which in turn might make everyone better and giving you a better chance of success.

New Rule as brought to our attention by FBINND.
1. As long as an athlete (because we know how good we are before we start elementary) transfers schools based on athletic reasons before elementary school, he or she is perfectly fine.

Hey FBINND, stick to football.

[fbinnd]

If you were smart, you'd understand that kids shouldn't transfer for "athletic" reasons, which is the point of this thread in the first place.

Hey baller, stick to knitting.

[cdub1]

If you were smart, you'd understand that kids shouldn't transfer for "athletic" reasons, which is the point of this thread in the first place.

Hey baller, stick to knitting.

knitting honestly the worst comeback i have heard on hear and there is NO PROBLEM with kids transferring for athletic reasons as long as they are still getting and education

[fbinnd]

Then you haven't been listening, and by the way, sentences require punctuation.  And the term that refers to a specific location that you are at is "here", not hear.  Hear is the action of using your ears to pick up audio sounds, which you don't seem to do very well anyway.

[baller01]

Haha you are totally beat and now you are telling me to stick to knitting and are picking on Cdubs grammar, haha. Good work FBINND!