Here is how to transfer to any high school in the area

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football.

Most of the posters on this thread don't care about football and don't know anything about this situation other than what they could glean from twitter bios. It's just people with axes to grind against FCPS.

You’re right, I don’t give a flip about football but I do care about whether my Principal and school officials are corrupt.

I'd bet money you're not a Hayfield parent.

Why should that matter? My kid goes to CHS and I have been following this story since July. I don't want my tax dollars paying for kids who don't live in Fairfax County to show up. And, I hate cheaters. School teams are for the kids who live within that boundary. Its hard enough to make teams at these schools already without having to compete with a handpicked supersquad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone suggesting FCPS is covering this up? Why would they do that? Honestly, why would they care to protect this 1 program in such a large district?

I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football. This is so low on my radar of things to care about but I'm nosey. It could also be because I have 4 girls.

Ok imagine your girls played a sport, and had worked really hard on their sport at your zoned local public HS. The school hired a new GirlSport coach. He shows up with 16 girls he has recruited from other counties. They don't live in your school zone.
Your daughter and her friends are
Kicked off her own school team to make room for all these kids from other places. The new
Coach also starts fundraising money and it disappears. He is hired for a job at the school he is not qualified to do. And so on.

Well these same girls are her recruiting competition no matter what so my girls either need to improve or pick a new sport or activity. If they're not even trying to go D1 then even better, find something else to do. HS has so many opportunities. Classwork is the priority and each of my girls volunteer and work so they're not pressed for something to fill their time. They'd be fine.

Don't care about the money. Wasn't out of my wallet. As for the job, it seems he held it before so he is qualified.

Most people don't care about "recruiting'. They want their child to have the opportunity to play for their school team. That's the end goal. They shouldn't have to compete with people from all over the country to play for their local FCPS school.
He was hired to be a full time security specialist. He was not qualified for that position.
]
Its interesting that you are in this thread reading along and...defending this guy.. if you don't care and it doesn't interest you, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone suggesting FCPS is covering this up? Why would they do that? Honestly, why would they care to protect this 1 program in such a large district?

I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football. This is so low on my radar of things to care about but I'm nosey. It could also be because I have 4 girls.

Ok imagine your girls played a sport, and had worked really hard on their sport at your zoned local public HS. The school hired a new GirlSport coach. He shows up with 16 girls he has recruited from other counties. They don't live in your school zone.
Your daughter and her friends are
Kicked off her own school team to make room for all these kids from other places. The new
Coach also starts fundraising money and it disappears. He is hired for a job at the school he is not qualified to do. And so on.

Well these same girls are her recruiting competition no matter what so my girls either need to improve or pick a new sport or activity. If they're not even trying to go D1 then even better, find something else to do. HS has so many opportunities. Classwork is the priority and each of my girls volunteer and work so they're not pressed for something to fill their time. They'd be fine.

Don't care about the money. Wasn't out of my wallet. As for the job, it seems he held it before so he is qualified.

Yes, all FCPS taxpayers are paying for 18 (?) out of county kids to attend school at FCPS. So, it is in fact out of your wallet.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone suggesting FCPS is covering this up? Why would they do that? Honestly, why would they care to protect this 1 program in such a large district?

I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football. This is so low on my radar of things to care about but I'm nosey. It could also be because I have 4 girls.

You're nosy but don't understand other's perspectives? You have four girls so this is why you don't care. They don't even have a girl's football team and few girls play football for high school. If whatever program they were interested in in high school that you felt they were eligible were suddenly overtaken by other kids not living in your district or even your county, you would be ok with all four of them not doing their passion in high school because of cuts related to relationships with the teacher and illegal entry? Let's say it's theater and your kid was a star performer in middle school and now can't even get a minor role because some teacher who wants to be a stage manager on Broadway and has had some success with two students has come to your school and brought all these kids she's trained as if to open up a school within a school and she doesn't know your kid and wants to promote the talent she's already helped to make a name for herself. Your kids are now stagehands and on top of it these new theater kids are entitled and bully your kids because they feel special.

You don't think this happens in sports and theater and all types of activities in HS then you clearly don't have kids in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone suggesting FCPS is covering this up? Why would they do that? Honestly, why would they care to protect this 1 program in such a large district?

I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football. This is so low on my radar of things to care about but I'm nosey. It could also be because I have 4 girls.

You're nosy but don't understand other's perspectives? You have four girls so this is why you don't care. They don't even have a girl's football team and few girls play football for high school. If whatever program they were interested in in high school that you felt they were eligible were suddenly overtaken by other kids not living in your district or even your county, you would be ok with all four of them not doing their passion in high school because of cuts related to relationships with the teacher and illegal entry? Let's say it's theater and your kid was a star performer in middle school and now can't even get a minor role because some teacher who wants to be a stage manager on Broadway and has had some success with two students has come to your school and brought all these kids she's trained as if to open up a school within a school and she doesn't know your kid and wants to promote the talent she's already helped to make a name for herself. Your kids are now stagehands and on top of it these new theater kids are entitled and bully your kids because they feel special.

You don't think this happens in sports and theater and all types of activities in HS then you clearly don't have kids in HS.

It does NOT happen in any public school activity like this. You clearly don't have kids in HS.

[Anonymous]

oh right, I totally remember reading about that Model UN Recruiting Scandal at Woodson and that Yearbook Photographer Recruiting Scandal over at Yorktown.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

I didn't say anything even close to that. The initial claim was that 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield and I expressed skepticism of that allegation. My skepticism seems to have been born out as the argument is now about 12-14 kids max. Maybe even 8 as you suggest. I assume that you agree that there is a big difference between 25-30 and 8? With regard to the 8, I have no opinion. That still seems like a large number of football players, especially good ones, to hide from scrutiny. But that is an issue for FCPS to resolve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I am fascinated how many in this thread even care this much about football.

Most of the posters on this thread don't care about football and don't know anything about this situation other than what they could glean from twitter bios. It's just people with axes to grind against FCPS.

You’re right, I don’t give a flip about football but I do care about whether my Principal and school officials are corrupt.

I'd bet money you're not a Hayfield parent.

I used to be. My DS graduated from Hayfield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

You don't know where any of these students live.

Allegations were made. An investigation was conducted that determined the allegations to be unfounded. You have no evidence to the contrary. What are you even doing here?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

I didn't say anything even close to that. The initial claim was that 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield and I expressed skepticism of that allegation. My skepticism seems to have been born out as the argument is now about 12-14 kids max. Maybe even 8 as you suggest. I assume that you agree that there is a big difference between 25-30 and 8? With regard to the 8, I have no opinion. That still seems like a large number of football players, especially good ones, to hide from scrutiny. But that is an issue for FCPS to resolve.

Maybe dozens is exaggerated but it only takes a handful of recruited ringers on a high school roster to dramatically alter a team. In football, a dynamic quarterback, wide receiver (who can also play db or safety), running back, maybe a huge defensive end. 3 or 4 kids. In high school basketball, 1 or 2 tall ringers can lead you to a championship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

If the parents, school board, and admins allow it, I don’t really care. It’s up to parents at that school paying taxes to make a stink about any alleged non-resident leeches committing fraud to go to their kids’ school. Truth is, these wacko and/or passive parents don’t even care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to respond to something just posted in the DCUM blog about this thread:

I am skeptical about this claim because that would mean that nearly the entire team is made up of "homeless" kids, something that would be difficult to conceal and would likely cause protest from local kids unable to win a spot on the team.

This grossly underestimates how insane and rah-rah sports-obsessed families can be for a high school football team. The win at any cost crazies exponentially out number any bench warmer kids' families who didn't make the roster because of a dozen or even two dozen illicitly recruited student-athletes.

Even in this thread the initial allegation that there were 25-30 former players enrolled at Hayfield seems to have been rejected. Now, the focus is on 12-14 students, some of whom posters here seem to agree legitimately moved into the school district. I stand by my blog post. If there really were a high school team in wealthy Fairfax County that had 25-30 homeless kids on it, that would not only be hard to hide, it would be newsworthy.

You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

If the parents, school board, and admins allow it, I don’t really care. It’s up to parents at that school paying taxes to make a stink about any alleged non-resident leeches committing fraud to go to their kids’ school. Truth is, these wacko and/or passive parents don’t even care.

If you live in the county, your taxes are paying for non-resident kids to attend school here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't think its significant for 14 students to live outside the school boundaries and be attending the school? Even if 6 moved (we have no evidence of that either way), then that's 8 kids who shouldn't be there.

You don't know where any of these students live.

Allegations were made. An investigation was conducted that determined the allegations to be unfounded. You have no evidence to the contrary. What are you even doing here?

What are you doing here? You seem satisfied with FCPS's response, so why are you still hanging out here on page 25?