Bullis School adding Second Grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So that is why they added a second grade. Make sense.

Anonymous wrote:Item #3 - its pretty aparent to anyone who follows HS sports, Bullis is trying to become the next DeMatha in football and basketball in mens sports. F

It actually does -- they are looking for full tuition payers to balance out the full scholarship athletic admits in the Upper School.

[Anonymous]

or maybe 2nd and 3rd grade are when parents understand that their child will profit from a smaller class size.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So that is why they added a second grade. Make sense.

Anonymous wrote:Item #3 - its pretty aparent to anyone who follows HS sports, Bullis is trying to become the next DeMatha in football and basketball in mens sports. F

It actually does -- they are looking for full tuition payers to balance out the full scholarship athletic admits in the Upper School.

[Anonymous]

Did Bullis kidnap these students from Prep and Landon?

Shouldn't one rather ask why these other schools have done such a poor job of holding onto these students, if they value them?

Transferring schools is a big deal. They leave behind a school community, close friends and importantly for student athletes, teammates they've forged a close bond with over the course of months or years.

It sounds as if, according to the Gazette article, the transfer student mentioned had to shore up his grades and heal physically before being able to transfer, and that he was able to find a softer landing at Bullis than elsewhere.

I say, good for Bullis if they are able to provide a better fit for some student athletes than might have been achieved at other schools. The kid -- who might not have found academic success elsewhere -- gets to be the beneficiary of a very fine education (although, yes, I understand that many on this board question just how fine it is) and the school get a terrific athlete who seems thrilled to be there, and is having success on and off the court.

What am I missing? Where is the problem here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Did Bullis kidnap these students from Prep and Landon?

Shouldn't one rather ask why these other schools have done such a poor job of holding onto these students, if they value them?

Transferring schools is a big deal. They leave behind a school community, close friends and importantly for student athletes, teammates they've forged a close bond with over the course of months or years.

It sounds as if, according to the Gazette article, the transfer student mentioned had to shore up his grades and heal physically before being able to transfer, and that he was able to find a softer landing at Bullis than elsewhere.

I say, good for Bullis if they are able to provide a better fit for some student athletes than might have been achieved at other schools. The kid -- who might not have found academic success elsewhere -- gets to be the beneficiary of a very fine education (although, yes, I understand that many on this board question just how fine it is) and the school get a terrific athlete who seems thrilled to be there, and is having success on and off the court.

What am I missing? Where is the problem here?

There are a few issues.

First, at least in lacrosse, a source of many of the recent transfers, Bullis actually recruits the students when they are still at the prior league school. This has been reported by a number of families with talented younger players. (Has also been seen in at least one girls' sport, btw.) Most people would agree that it is not particularly healthy for 8th/9th/10th graders to be the subject of recruiting pitches from other high schools -- it is distracting and confusing.

Second, as the recent case of the Blake football player suggests (one semester -- the football season -- then he transferred back to his original school), this is about the sports, not the academics. It was the high school equivalent of the "rent a player" scenario in major league baseball where teams in contention pick up a player whose contract will expire at the end of the current season to help with a "stretch run." Not a great example for other students, whether athletes or not.

Third, there are strong indications that Bullis is functionally giving athletic scholarships -- for example, giving a full ride to an athlete with two professional parents who did not qualify for aid under the "regular" standard at the prior school. Although the local private school leagues are not the NCAA (they are fairly loose on many things), this would be absolutely against the rules -- so Bullis is seen as out and out cheating to get an advantage. In the non-sports context, it is also unfortunate if Bullis is using their available financial aid on athletes who don't need it to the detriment of students with a real need. (Maybe they are meeting all available need, but in general, that's a pot of money that's not unlimited at a school.)

Fourth, sports work because of the concept of a level playing field. Don't get me wrong -- it seems obvious that sports are clearly overemphasized at the high school level in the USA and these private schools are no exception. So I get the "what's the big deal" response. Nevertheless, the kids, coaches, and families do care about the outcomes, and when one school operates like a junior college (athletic scholarships, short term transfers, trying to recruit athletes away from league schools), people see the results as tainted and question the motives/integrity of the institution in general.

Most longtime observers shake their heads, chuckle, and say "that's Bullis" -- there is a feeling that this is cyclical, and that it will ultimately be financially unsustainable to bring in a team of scholarship football players, for example (there's no TV contract or gate receipts here), and that the "Bullis as Good Counsel" experiment will run its course. If this conventional wisdom that it is unsustainable is wrong, and Bullis does put together a long-term string of dominance in the private school equivalent of "revenue sports" (football, boys' basketball, boys' lacrosse), you may see a movement to expel them from the league (as happened with Georgetown Prep for football).

[Anonymous]

Where is there a rule that you can't give athletic scholarships? I know most schools (DC Metro) say they don't give athletic scholarships but you state it is "against the rules". Are there actually rules? I just wonder because coming from Baltimore - it is not against any rules. I think DC privates take themselves too seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Did Bullis kidnap these students from Prep and Landon?

Shouldn't one rather ask why these other schools have done such a poor job of holding onto these students, if they value them?

Transferring schools is a big deal. They leave behind a school community, close friends and importantly for student athletes, teammates they've forged a close bond with over the course of months or years.

It sounds as if, according to the Gazette article, the transfer student mentioned had to shore up his grades and heal physically before being able to transfer, and that he was able to find a softer landing at Bullis than elsewhere.

I say, good for Bullis if they are able to provide a better fit for some student athletes than might have been achieved at other schools. The kid -- who might not have found academic success elsewhere -- gets to be the beneficiary of a very fine education (although, yes, I understand that many on this board question just how fine it is) and the school get a terrific athlete who seems thrilled to be there, and is having success on and off the court.

What am I missing? Where is the problem here?

There are a few issues.

First, at least in lacrosse, a source of many of the recent transfers, Bullis actually recruits the students when they are still at the prior league school. This has been reported by a number of families with talented younger players. (Has also been seen in at least one girls' sport, btw.) Most people would agree that it is not particularly healthy for 8th/9th/10th graders to be the subject of recruiting pitches from other high schools -- it is distracting and confusing.

Second, as the recent case of the Blake football player suggests (one semester -- the football season -- then he transferred back to his original school), this is about the sports, not the academics. It was the high school equivalent of the "rent a player" scenario in major league baseball where teams in contention pick up a player whose contract will expire at the end of the current season to help with a "stretch run." Not a great example for other students, whether athletes or not.

Third, there are strong indications that Bullis is functionally giving athletic scholarships -- for example, giving a full ride to an athlete with two professional parents who did not qualify for aid under the "regular" standard at the prior school. Although the local private school leagues are not the NCAA (they are fairly loose on many things), this would be absolutely against the rules -- so Bullis is seen as out and out cheating to get an advantage. In the non-sports context, it is also unfortunate if Bullis is using their available financial aid on athletes who don't need it to the detriment of students with a real need. (Maybe they are meeting all available need, but in general, that's a pot of money that's not unlimited at a school.)

Fourth, sports work because of the concept of a level playing field. Don't get me wrong -- it seems obvious that sports are clearly overemphasized at the high school level in the USA and these private schools are no exception. So I get the "what's the big deal" response. Nevertheless, the kids, coaches, and families do care about the outcomes, and when one school operates like a junior college (athletic scholarships, short term transfers, trying to recruit athletes away from league schools), people see the results as tainted and question the motives/integrity of the institution in general.

Most longtime observers shake their heads, chuckle, and say "that's Bullis" -- there is a feeling that this is cyclical, and that it will ultimately be financially unsustainable to bring in a team of scholarship football players, for example (there's no TV contract or gate receipts here), and that the "Bullis as Good Counsel" experiment will run its course. If this conventional wisdom that it is unsustainable is wrong, and Bullis does put together a long-term string of dominance in the private school equivalent of "revenue sports" (football, boys' basketball, boys' lacrosse), you may see a movement to expel them from the league (as happened with Georgetown Prep for football).

Excellent summary. I am still having a hard time understanding why parents at this school who claim that academically Bullis is so good would want this to continue. It does not give the school a good reputation.

[Anonymous]

I know what will the neighbors think.

[Anonymous]

If you don't think there is something wrong with Bullis bringing a senior transfer for football purposes only (he was there for 4 months) and now is back in his old school, there is something wrong with you.

It seems like the only sports Bullis is focusing on is football and basketball. I attended two Bullis football games this Fall and even though the school is located in Potomac MD, after sitting in the stands, you would have thought you were watching a game in PG county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a few issues.

First, at least in lacrosse, a source of many of the recent transfers, Bullis actually recruits the students when they are still at the prior league school. This has been reported by a number of families with talented younger players. (Has also been seen in at least one girls' sport, btw.) Most people would agree that it is not particularly healthy for 8th/9th/10th graders to be the subject of recruiting pitches from other high schools -- it is distracting and confusing.Second, as the recent case of the Blake football player suggests (one semester -- the football season -- then he transferred back to his original school), this is about the sports, not the academics. It was the high school equivalent of the "rent a player" scenario in major league baseball where teams in contention pick up a player whose contract will expire at the end of the current season to help with a "stretch run." Not a great example for other students, whether athletes or not.

Third, there are strong indications that Bullis is functionally giving athletic scholarships -- for example, giving a full ride to an athlete with two professional parents who did not qualify for aid under the "regular" standard at the prior school. Although the local private school leagues are not the NCAA (they are fairly loose on many things), this would be absolutely against the rules -- so Bullis is seen as out and out cheating to get an advantage. In the non-sports context, it is also unfortunate if Bullis is using their available financial aid on athletes who don't need it to the detriment of students with a real need. (Maybe they are meeting all available need, but in general, that's a pot of money that's not unlimited at a school.)

Fourth, sports work because of the concept of a level playing field. Don't get me wrong -- it seems obvious that sports are clearly overemphasized at the high school level in the USA and these private schools are no exception. So I get the "what's the big deal" response. Nevertheless, the kids, coaches, and families do care about the outcomes, and when one school operates like a junior college (athletic scholarships, short term transfers, trying to recruit athletes away from league schools), people see the results as tainted and question the motives/integrity of the institution in general.

Most longtime observers shake their heads, chuckle, and say "that's Bullis" -- there is a feeling that this is cyclical, and that it will ultimately be financially unsustainable to bring in a team of scholarship football players, for example (there's no TV contract or gate receipts here), and that the "Bullis as Good Counsel" experiment will run its course. If this conventional wisdom that it is unsustainable is wrong, and Bullis does put together a long-term string of dominance in the private school equivalent of "revenue sports" (football, boys' basketball, boys' lacrosse), you may see a movement to expel them from the league (as happened with Georgetown Prep for football).

I see your point here, but I think a lot of that is on the parents of these students. "No, we will not be moving our child. Please don't contact him/her/me again."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It seems like the only sports Bullis is focusing on is football and basketball. I attended two Bullis football games this Fall and even though the school is located in Potomac MD, after sitting in the stands, you would have thought you were watching a game in PG county.

What exactly are you saying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It seems like the only sports Bullis is focusing on is football and basketball. I attended two Bullis football games this Fall and even though the school is located in Potomac MD, after sitting in the stands, you would have thought you were watching a game in PG county.

What exactly are you saying?

Oh come now, you KNOW what the PP was saying! There were too many faces of color in the crowd! I guess since it is a private school in Potomac, the PP thinks that the football team should be all White. It would be interesting to know how many of those players are actually from PG since that is the PP's example. The same thing was said about Good Counsel until people realized that most of the Black kids on the team were, in fact, from Montgomery, Howard, Baltimore or Frederick County.

[Anonymous]

Bullis is adding second grade. They are putting it after Junior Year so they can attract athletes.

[Anonymous]

Why is everybody picking on Bullis on the athletic front? Maret did the same thing with it's basketball team? Do they get a pass?

And I certainly do not want to pick on Maret, but it seems to me that a lot of schools (especially in the IAC and ISL) do it. At least in the WCAC, a upper class transfer coming in needs special permission from the commissioner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't think there is something wrong with Bullis bringing a senior transfer for football purposes only (he was there for 4 months) and now is back in his old school, there is something wrong with you.

It seems like the only sports Bullis is focusing on is football and basketball. I attended two Bullis football games this Fall and even though the school is located in Potomac MD, after sitting in the stands, you would have thought you were watching a game in PG county.

Thanks you for writing this - there is clearly something wrong with you. Case closed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where is there a rule that you can't give athletic scholarships? I know most schools (DC Metro) say they don't give athletic scholarships but you state it is "against the rules". Are there actually rules? I just wonder because coming from Baltimore - it is not against any rules. I think DC privates take themselves too seriously.

Are Mary Jo White and the feds coming after Bullis? No. But they are members of two athletic conferences (IAC for boys, ISL for girls) which prohibit athletic scholarshps, and they themselves assert on their website that financial aid at Bullis is solely need based. Violating the league rules makes them cheats, violating their own guidelines hypocrites, but they aren't criminals.