I assume this is the whole pre-existing relationship loophole. Also, does the rule say program or athlete?
Pleasant Valley girls track
- Thread starter tm3308
- Start date
I assume this is the whole pre-existing relationship loophole. Also, does the rule say program or athlete?
I think if you went to the Iowa State practice and ran with them you would be, but I don't think just running with your sister would qualify as a violation.
If she did it in the offseason, then I think that it should be allowed. I threw shot at a college tournament a few times in the winter before track season and wrestled at a college tournament as well in the summer. It helped to just get a feel for things. I don't get why this is a rule in the first place, unless she did it along side her High School Track season.
People can argue the merits of the rule. In fact, there are a lot of rules (and laws) that are ridiculous.
But that's not the point. If you get caught breaking them, you get punished. And the worst part is she obviously new this, and tried to hide it. Maybe it'll be a life lesson for her. :skeptical:
But that's not the point. If you get caught breaking them, you get punished. And the worst part is she obviously new this, and tried to hide it. Maybe it'll be a life lesson for her. :skeptical:
It's technically a different sport, so it's okay. No different than a guy like Russell Wilson playing minor league baseball while still maintaining eligibility in football. Jenks chose not to run cross country because she's one of the nation's top triathletes and elected to use the fall to compete against athletes who would make her better for that. She also went out for the Linn-Mar swim team. She didn't break the rule and then still try to compete on the L-M cross country team.
Personally, I disagree with the rule in the first place. I understand not wanting some high school athletes training with college TEAMS and getting the benefit of collegiate resources (lifting with a college team in better weight rooms, etc.). But training with an college athlete (in most cases, this involves a recently-graduated friend who now competes collegiately, but doesn't qualify for the prior relationship loophole; as I understand it, that loophole is only for family), shouldn't be a big deal, IMO. Say, for instance, that Katie Flood was now done competing and an athlete wanted to train with her. The benefit of running with Flood would be no different if she were still a college athlete or not.
In that more personal set of circumstances, the only real issue I could see would be coming from the NCAA side (potential for illegal recruiting), not the IGHSU/IHSAA side.
That said, she broke the rules and allegedly knew perfectly well that she could get in trouble if it was discovered she was competing in these extra events. So she definitely deserves what she's getting.
She did it in the middle of track season. She and especially her parents didn't care about her team or the rules.
Last year she did not do well at State, well under her season's best times. I think PV finished barely in the top 20 4A that year. Reason? She was tapering to prepare for the 'big' summer meets.
She is a good runner but not nationally elite by any means. I hope any college recruiting her takes her and her parent's character into consideration.
I think you're incorrect, she was 9th in the nation for the 800 at one point.
http://usa.milesplit.com/articles/1...school-outdoor-t-f-rankings-4-16#.U9bBKPldW4s
What is the justification for ineligibility? She was better, so she cant compete? She gained an advantage by running with greater competition? Didnt Jeff Demps run in the Olympic qualifiers when he was in HS? Did that make him ineligible?
This is not performance enhancement type stuff. She was good enough to compete with college kids and did. They obviously knew she was a HS and had no issue with it, but the IHSAA does?
This is ridiculous. Unless she was paid at the events this seems just stupid. I understand she knew it and the punishment should stand, but the rule is silly.
Last edited:
Did she lap your little girl in the 800 last year? Your post screams of sour grapes.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but she did win the 800 in the AAU Junior Nationals AND the USATF nationals. Her state record time wouldn't have put her in the finals in this year's NCAA's, but she would have been 22nd (a shade over 2 seconds from making the finals) as a junior in high school. Maybe she's not nationally elite compared to collegiate athletes who are several years older than her, but she could certainly get to that point down the road.
This rule has been in place for awhile, and I think most High Schools know about it. Back in 1996, we had a church basketball tourney, and one of our players had to drop off the team at the last minute because he was on the high school freshman basketball team, and his coach found out and made him get off the team ASAP. Luckily for him, and his freshman team, he never competed, only practiced, because had he competed, his team would of had to forfeit games.
Several things- 1) discussion of the merit of the rule is fair 2) Currently, the rule exists and since it exists, it needs to be followed- even if not popular. 3) this case has NOTHING to do with the IHSAA. IGHSAU is the governing body for girls. They don't make this decision either. Their board of control does, the board is made up of select representatives from member schools from across the state.
4) she is indeed a high major recruit but colleges recruit females differently. Some go by time, some go by body-type and potential (like Lisa Koll)
If you knew the type of person that typically attends PV you wouldn't feel too bad for them.
Actually I am a Bett alum but we put our kid in Dav Central upon moving back. Don't like Bett sports either. And don't get me started on Assumption.
