Quantcast
Jump to content

Miamidade92

Members
  • Content Count

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by Miamidade92

  1. I agree the 1993 Southridge offense was the best of the decade. They ran the Wing-T to perfection. Impossible to stop with 3 D1 (all 3 All-Americans in college) running backs in the backfield.

    For the 2000's as good as STA was, I have to give 2006 and 2007 Northwestern squads some love. The 2006 squad was just as explosive as 2007 but they had a 2000 yard rusher in Antwain Easterling. The 2007 version averaged 42 points a game over the whole season and was never challenged. Both years they put up Playstation like numbers on offense with Jacory Harris at QB. It was ridiculous. 

  2. I could be wrong, but it looks like Orlando Iglesias class of 97. Played at Coral Park in Miami, played college at University of Houston.

    His senior year in 1996 he led Coral Park deep into the playoffs but they lost to HML led by Rohan Davey (played for LSU and the Patriots) Coral Park led late in the 4th qtr but HML ran a draw on 4th and long to scored a touchdown for the win. The HML running back also played D1 football, Rashad Armstrong. 

     

    HML ended up losing to Carol City in state semis. Carol City won state that year. 

  3. It's hard to pick one from that list of legends, but as my personal favorite, I'll go with Bo Jackson.

    When it comes to year of the running back in a backfield, no one tops 1993 Southridge, they had 3 division 1 running backs in the backfield at the same time . Two of them were All-Americans in college and the third was All Big 12 in college.

  4. 1 hour ago, Perspective said:

    I think the FHSAA would beg to differ with you (at least in terms of what they have the ability to regulate).  This comes from the FHSAA football manual:

    36.1.5 Financial Assistance Permissible. Private schools, as well as developmental research schools operated by state universities, may administer school-based financial assistance programs for students who attend those schools. Financial assistance must be totally unrelated to a student’s athletic interest, potential or performance. Financial assistance based even partially on a student’s athletic interest, potential or performance is not permitted.

    (Emphasis added).

    I agree with you, I guess what I meant was the FHSAA has no way of proving what we all know, or has no interest in doing so. 

  5. 1 hour ago, Perspective said:

    So, what do we think about a system where athletically talented kids of color are subtly (or not so subtly) 'invited' to attend schools that, in all likelihood, they would not be able to afford (and likely wouldn't really want to attend anyway) but for the opportunity to play sports?  And before I go any further, I'll apologize in advance for the over-generalizations and lack of caveats used in this post.  I'm trying to paint a realistic picture, but I'm only using a couple of colors. 

    Clearly, kids are getting financial assistance (in some/many cases, full scholarships) based primarily/exclusively on their athletic talent.  According to FHSAA rules, this is not allowed.   But look back at the comments in this thread.  Everyone seems to believe/understand that it is going on.  And I'm not picking on Columbus.   This goes on in private schools everywhere.   Does the rule need to be changed?   Why is everyone willing to turn their heads to this system of apparent violations?   Is it because there is a sentiment that the minority kids who attend private schools to play football are getting a better education in a better environment than they otherwise would be getting -- and that makes everything OK?  

    Let's look at this from another angle.   Why do the schools do it?  Do they feel better about themselves as educators -- and as people -- if in their minds, they can provide a 'Blind Side' opportunity to kids who have athletic talent but who might otherwise get lost in the public school shuffle?  Or do they simply do it because the alums/parents/administrators at those schools cherish their state championships and know that they're considerably less likely to hoist the trophy without the speed/athleticism that the scholarship kids bring? 

    Best I can tell, this is a state-wide phenomenon.  I could start listing schools in South Florida, Ft. Lauderdale, the Tampa Bay area, Jacksonville, etc. by name or simply by initials, but I think most of us know who they are.   Is this a situation where, in general, we all know it's against the strict letter of the law (i.e., FHSAA rules), but enough good -- or at least enough perceived good -- comes out of the situation, so we choose to just let it slide?   

    It looks like I've raised a half-dozen or so questions . . . feel free to answer any or all.  I'd love to get the thoughts of those folks on this board who have a public school background (attended/coached/currently have kids attending/etc.), as well as those who can bring a private school perspective to the table.   

    I agree with you entire post. Working in a public school in Miami-Dade, it's frustrating when you have a two or three year starter and then Columbus, STA, Gulliver, or AHP come in and take your skill position players for their senior year. 

    However, with the recent rule changes where athletes are free to transfer, public schools have gotten in on the action. MNW, BTW, Central all recruit players from all over the area, so it has leveled the playing field some. 

    Private schools can still offer a better educational environment, which parents love, and that's hard to argue against. 

    But to your point, private schools would not be handing out scholarships if you couldn't contribute to their teams. I don't think the FHSAA can regulate how scholarships are handed out in high school.

×
×
  • Create New...