Tru Prep Academy @ IMG

[Legion37]

Are they playing IMG 
Blue or White? 

 

[Proseteye]

1 hour ago, Legion37 said:

Are they playing IMG 
Blue or White? 

 

Blue the National team.

[Legion37]

Well IMG started kind of slow but like Venice and Edgewater that didn't last...

[Proseteye]

5 hours ago, Legion37 said:

Well IMG started kind of slow but like Venice and Edgewater that didn't last...

The problem with most opponents of IMG is that, no matter how good they are (Duncanville is an example) most of the opposing team players have to play both offense and defense. IMG players only play either offense or defense just like college or the NFL. By the end of the 3rd quarter the opposing team, especially their line, is dragging while IMG is continuing what they do best. Also, IMO, many of the IMG players are D-1 commits and thus can break the game open at any given time on their own.

[Perspective]

Amazing.   Seriously, who would have ever thought that if you bring in a large group of some of the best high school football players in the state/South/country and let them train together year-round in facilities that equal, if not surpass, the facilities of many of the smaller and mid-size colleges and universities across the nation, you'd end up with a team that wins all of its games?   It's totally mind-blowing.    

[Proseteye]

8 minutes ago, Perspective said:

Amazing.   Seriously, who would have ever thought that if you bring in a large group of some of the best high school football players in the state/South/country and let them train together year-round in facilities that equal, if not surpass, the facilities of many of the smaller and mid-size colleges and universities across the nation, you'd end up with a team that wins all of its games?   It's totally mind-blowing.    

Well, I was just responding by stating facts that some people may not know about IMG. Remember, these opposing teams agreed to play IMG knowing all of the facts. Thus, no excuses if and when they lose.

[OldSchoolLion]

Cannot speak for this year, but in the past I did deep dives on the IMG roster at the time.  If I remember correctly..

• There were a number of elite players. 
• There were out-of-shape lineman who had great potential and IMG was likely asked by one or more Power 5 schools to get them in shape so they could play his freshman year in college.  
• There were a number of 3-star players.
• There were some very marginal kids on the roster who saw regular playing time.  I am guessing that some of these players came from families of privilege trying to fulfill their son's dream of playing.

My point is that the IMG teams I looked at were not stacked with 4 and 5-star players at every position.  Sure, they are much better than your average hs football team.  But they were not some world-beaters good enough to beat a Power 5 school.  Some years they seem better than others.  

     

[VeniceIndianFan]

19 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

Cannot speak for this year, but in the past I did deep dives on the IMG roster at the time.  If I remember correctly..

• There were a number of elite players. 
• There were out-of-shape lineman who had great potential and IMG was likely asked by one or more Power 5 schools to get them in shape so they could play his freshman year in college.  
• There were a number of 3-star players.
• There were some very marginal kids on the roster who saw regular playing time.  I am guessing that some of these players came from families of privilege trying to fulfill their son's dream of playing.

My point is that the IMG teams I looked at were not stacked with 4 and 5-star players at every position.  Sure, they are much better than your average hs football team.  But they were not some world-beaters good enough to beat a Power 5 school.  Some years they seem better than others.  

     

I believe a main difference between this years IMG team and those of the past is a massive shift in quarterback play. Although they usually are known for having a ground-and-pound approach, it seems that this year they had a more balanced attack that they needed to go undefeated through their rough schedule. It’s a shame that Covid cancelled the seasons of teams like St. Frances and a few others that could have given IMG a real test this year. I feel that a good passing scheme as well as quarterback play was missing from the 2018 and 2019, and even in some respects their 2017 team who all lost one game (with the exception of 2017) because they were one-dimensional. Just my two cents. 

[Perspective]

2 minutes ago, Proseteye said:

Well, I was just responding by stating facts that some people may not know about IMG. Remember, these opposing teams agreed to play IMG knowing all of the facts. Thus, no excuses if and when they lose.

Proset, my post wasn't really in response to your post, but more of a commentary about IMG.  Having said that, I can't imagine there are too many people that come to this site and read the forum posts that don't already know all about IMG.  

I cannot argue with IMG's success.  In my opinion, however, they are the antithesis of high school football.  They have few, if any, home-grown kids.  They recruit kids from all over in blatant disregard of FHSAA rules (and, yes, I have the receipts) and the FHSAA turns a blind eye to such activities because of cozy financial relationships, etc.  Call it Prep School Football, call it High School Plus, call it anything other than "high school football" and I might even feel proud about having the "national champion" in my back yard.  

OldSchool, just saw your post:  IMG hasn't been around all that long and in some respects I will admit that I'm impressed with what they have built in a short time.   They are a true testament to the philosophy that 'if you build it, they will come.'   Their facilities are truly impressive.   And from the get-go, they (the school and the facilities) attracted the interest of kids who dreamed of playing big-time college football.  

Like a small college, IMG has had to supplement their collection of 3, 4 and 5-star kids with a handful of "preferred walkons."  In the beginning, there were more of these kids than there are now.   IMG has had to balance "scholarship" kids with the kids who come from families that can afford the steep IMG bill.  In the early years, the kids whose families could pay had more money than talent, which created weaknesses on the team that other really good 'high school' teams could exploit.  Now, there are enough families that have money that also have kids who have talent.  Maybe not 4-5 star talent, but "good enough to start on virtually any other team in the state" talent.   And I guarantee if you compare the IMG roster now to the IMG roster of old, you'd find a lot more out of state kids now.  Hey, look, I get it:  parents are willing to make an investment in their kids.  Spend $50K or more on a kid's senior year of high school in order to get him a full-ride scholarship to a P-5 school could be a smart bet.   But if IMG had been the team in the Friday Night Lights series, the show would have been cancelled after 3-4 shows, because it's just not the kind of high school program that resonates with people across the country.  And certainly not with me. 

 

[OldSchoolLion]

36 minutes ago, Perspective said:

Proset, my post wasn't really in response to your post, but more of a commentary about IMG.  Having said that, I can't imagine there are too many people that come to this site and read the forum posts that don't already know all about IMG.  

I cannot argue with IMG's success.  In my opinion, however, they are the antithesis of high school football.  They have few, if any, home-grown kids.  They recruit kids from all over in blatant disregard of FHSAA rules (and, yes, I have the receipts) and the FHSAA turns a blind eye to such activities because of cozy financial relationships, etc.  Call it Prep School Football, call it High School Plus, call it anything other than "high school football" and I might even feel proud about having the "national champion" in my back yard.  

OldSchool, just saw your post:  IMG hasn't been around all that long and in some respects I will admit that I'm impressed with what they have built in a short time.   They are a true testament to the philosophy that 'if you build it, they will come.'   Their facilities are truly impressive.   And from the get-go, they (the school and the facilities) attracted the interest of kids who dreamed of playing big-time college football.  

Like a small college, IMG has had to supplement their collection of 3, 4 and 5-star kids with a handful of "preferred walkons."  In the beginning, there were more of these kids than there are now.   IMG has had to balance "scholarship" kids with the kids who come from families that can afford the steep IMG bill.  In the early years, the kids whose families could pay had more money than talent, which created weaknesses on the team that other really good 'high school' teams could exploit.  Now, there are enough families that have money that also have kids who have talent.  Maybe not 4-5 star talent, but "good enough to start on virtually any other team in the state" talent.   And I guarantee if you compare the IMG roster now to the IMG roster of old, you'd find a lot more out of state kids now.  Hey, look, I get it:  parents are willing to make an investment in their kids.  Spend $50K or more on a kid's senior year of high school in order to get him a full-ride scholarship to a P-5 school could be a smart bet.   But if IMG had been the team in the Friday Night Lights series, the show would have been cancelled after 3-4 shows, because it's just not the kind of high school program that resonates with people across the country.  And certainly not with me. 

 

It's all relative.  The "local" all-star teams of today would not resonate with certain hs fans from the past.  But now they are the norm.  The athletic facilities at many high schools today are mindblowing to me, but they have become the norm.   People wanted progress and they got it.  

But we always seem to pine for the "good 'ol days."  We want that old school, local feel to the game, but we also wanted progress.  And we got the latter and then some in the past 30 years.  It's hard to have both.

IMG is not the problem.  IMG is simply a product of what the market demands.  People don't like IMG, but yet they support the very things that make the IMG's of the world possible.  Allowing my kid to play for four different local high schools in 4 years is really no different than the mindset of a parent sending their kid to IMG.    

IMG is a product of our obsession.  Nobody likes looking at it.  But it is the beast that we created.  We wanted hs to become larger than life and we encouraged it.  Those of us who tried to keep it on the back page of the sports section of the newspaper were labeled as "old and out of touch."  And we find it ironic that now some of those same people who nurtured the beast are complaining we have gone too far.  The horse is out of the barn.  Good luck getting it back inside.

It used to be admirable to work a blue collar job at the factory just like your dad.  But some folks poopoo'd that idea along the way and convinced folks that unless you go to college you somehow didn't make it in the world.  And look how many parents bought into that idea.  Now everyone wants their kids to go to college, and are desperate to make it happen.  People are doing anything possible, including sending their kids to IMG.  So, why should we look down upon IMG?   We wanted progress, and we got it.  I guess one needs to be careful what you ask for in this world.

     

[DarterBlue2]

43 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

It used to be admirable to work a blue collar job at the factory just like your dad.  But some folks poopoo'd that idea along the way and convinced folks that unless you go to college you somehow didn't make it in the world.  And look how many parents bought into that idea.  Now everyone wants their kids to go to college, and are desperate to make it happen.  People are doing anything possible, including sending their kids to IMG.  So, why should we look down upon IMG?   We wanted progress, and we got it.  I guess one needs to be careful what you ask for in this world.

We got change. I would not necessarily call it progress. Indeed, regress seems more appropriate to me. But I am just a poor, old, third world type. So what would I know?

[OldSchoolLion]

13 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

We got change. I would not necessarily call it progress. Indeed, regress seems more appropriate to me. But I am just a poor, old, third world type. So what would I know?

When computers first emerged many claimed how they were going to make our lives easier and that in decades to come we would have more leisure time as a society.  Fast forward...Americans work more hours than ever and it's impossible to disconnect because your electronic device makes you available 24/7.  

More kids are going to college than ever, yet we have huge student debt and this is supposedly the first generation ever whose standard of living will be lesser than that of their parents. 

Computers, college diplomas and hs football on ESPN = great progress as society.  Look at how happy everyone is.  

 

[Proseteye]

55 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

It's all relative.  The "local" all-star teams of today would not resonate with certain hs fans from the past.  But now they are the norm.  The athletic facilities at many high schools today are mindblowing to me, but they have become the norm.   People wanted progress and they got it.  

But we always seem to pine for the "good 'ol days."  We want that old school, local feel to the game, but we also wanted progress.  And we got the latter and then some in the past 30 years.  It's hard to have both.

IMG is not the problem.  IMG is simply a product of what the market demands.  People don't like IMG, but yet they support the very things that make the IMG's of the world possible.  Allowing my kid to play for four different local high schools in 4 years is really no different than the mindset of a parent sending their kid to IMG.    

IMG is a product of our obsession.  Nobody likes looking at it.  But it is the beast that we created.  We wanted hs to become larger than life and we encouraged it.  Those of us who tried to keep it on the back page of the sports section of the newspaper were labeled as "old and out of touch."  And we find it ironic that now some of those same people who nurtured the beast are complaining we have gone too far.  The horse is out of the barn.  Good luck getting it back inside.

It used to be admirable to work a blue collar job at the factory just like your dad.  But some folks poopoo'd that idea along the way and convinced folks that unless you go to college you somehow didn't make it in the world.  And look how many parents bought into that idea.  Now everyone wants their kids to go to college, and are desperate to make it happen.  People are doing anything possible, including sending their kids to IMG.  So, why should we look down upon IMG?   We wanted progress, and we got it.  I guess one needs to be careful what you ask for in this world.

     

Well Said. It seems a lot of folks in Florida have a hard on for IMG. But, what about the other Florida teams that recruit from all over the place. Bolles, Jesuit, St. Thomas, etc. TCA is virtually a plethora of recruits.  I'm quite sure that Miami Central and Northwestern don't have the same faces around the neighborhood as they had the winter before. How about some of the top players that move en-masse to play for the best teams in Florida, either public or private. What about teams like DeMatha, De La Salle, Mater Dei, Centennial, etc. I don't think theses powerhouses play only with local talent. People that complain that St. Thomas shouldn't play IMG because IMG recruits and is a football factory need to learn how to spell oxymoron. I have no problem with IMG and have never had. I do have a problem with people that say that Florida high school teams should not play IMG and that IMG doesn't belong in the FHSAA. If that is the case then why are Florida teams lining up to play IMG? To sharpen their skills and for the opportunity to play one of the best teams in the country to see how they compare. 

[OldSchoolLion]

9 minutes ago, Proseteye said:

Well Said. It seems a lot of folks in Florida have a hard on for IMG. But, what about the other Florida teams that recruit from all over the place. Bolles, Jesuit, St. Thomas, etc. TCA is virtually a plethora of recruits.  I'm quite sure that Miami Central and Northwestern don't have the same faces around the neighborhood as they had the winter before. How about some of the top players that move en-masse to play for the best teams in Florida, either public or private. What about teams like DeMatha, De La Salle, Mater Dei, Centennial, etc. I don't think theses powerhouses play only with local talent. People that complain that St. Thomas shouldn't play IMG because IMG recruits and is a football factory need to learn how to spell oxymoron. I have no problem with IMG and have never had. I do have a problem with people that say that Florida high school teams should not play IMG and that IMG doesn't belong in the FHSAA. If that is the case then why are Florida teams lining up to play IMG? To sharpen their skills and for the opportunity to play one of the best teams in the country to see how they compare. 

Would be interesting to ask kids today who they would rather win a game against...IMG or their school's historical rival.     

[DisabledAccount]

1 hour ago, Proseteye said:

Well Said. It seems a lot of folks in Florida have a hard on for IMG. But, what about the other Florida teams that recruit from all over the place. Bolles, Jesuit, St. Thomas, etc. TCA is virtually a plethora of recruits.  I'm quite sure that Miami Central and Northwestern don't have the same faces around the neighborhood as they had the winter before. How about some of the top players that move en-masse to play for the best teams in Florida, either public or private. What about teams like DeMatha, De La Salle, Mater Dei, Centennial, etc. I don't think theses powerhouses play only with local talent. People that complain that St. Thomas shouldn't play IMG because IMG recruits and is a football factory need to learn how to spell oxymoron. I have no problem with IMG and have never had. I do have a problem with people that say that Florida high school teams should not play IMG and that IMG doesn't belong in the FHSAA. If that is the case then why are Florida teams lining up to play IMG? To sharpen their skills and for the opportunity to play one of the best teams in the country to see how they compare. 

There are public schools that probably get more transfers than what you listed above 

 

Gaither for example got several key transfers including I believe 2 starters including a QB from Jesuit (probably more but many transfers outside of SFL aren't reported unless they are major)

 

Lee gets transfers, heck in 2015 they probably picked up double digit transfers between Terry Parker, first coast and ed White but nobody talks about that because the jacksonville media refuses to report on transfers and people think they are all "home grown talent" 

 

Not even close to home grown unless all of jacksonville is considered their "zone"

 

As mentioned Miami Central and Northwestern probably get as many transfers as STA each year but most people wouldn't know that unless they looked very closely

 

This idea that privates recruit but publics don't is misrepresented and I'm not bashing you or anything but I figured I would add that in because it's very much connected to what you accurately mentioned with the metro publics like Central and Northwestern

[Perspective]

I know we've probably beat this topic to death over the last year or two, but I believe you have to make a distinction between "transfers" and "recruiting."  Certainly the FHSAA treats the two differently (at least on paper). 

I'm not going to repeat the whole ordeal that led to the legislation a few years back, but the bottom line is that state legislature changed the law so that a kid can go to any school in his county so long as he lives in the district or there is capacity at the school  that he wants to attend.  And even if that school is at capacity, there are still a couple of ways for a kid to attend that particular school.  So, if Johnny is at West Springfield and he decides, for whatever reasons, that he wants to attend East Springfield (assuming ESHS has capacity), Johnny can transfer.  This is legal and expressly allowed by the FHSAA (because the legislature forced them to make it legal).   And there are schools and coaches across the state that have created attractive destinations for kids who play football, just as there are schools that have established a reputation in a particular sport such that kids in that county or moving into the district would want to go there instead of another school in the same district.   And for some kids and some sports, the academic side of the schools might even become a factor. 

Recruiting is different.  Recruiting is the action to 'pressure, urge or entice' a kid not currently at a school to attend that school to play sports.  The solicitation can come from the head coach, an assistant coach, a parent, a player or anyone else that fits the definition of "a representative of a school's athletic interests" in the FHSAA handbook/administrative policies.   Recruiting is expressly prohibited by the FHSAA.  So, to borrow from the hypothetical above, if Johnny is at West Springfield and a coach from East Springfield sends him a text message encouraging Johnny to transfer over to East Springfield, that's recruiting and that's against the rules.  But it happens.  A lot.  Usually in more subtle ways, but it happens all the time.  

So, sometimes the one (recruiting) results in the other (transferring).  Sometimes a kid just makes the decision on his own that he'd be better off at another school.   But when the kid is being urged or enticed by someone associated with a school, that's when it's wrong.   

[OldSchoolLion]

This is from American Heritage's Linkedin page.  Send your kid here and he'll go to a great college like these kids!  Go to their facebook page and they have a "recruiting" video as slick as the big colleges.  And there is nothing wrong with it, per se, because they are a private institution and need to actively solicit students. 

Nobody faults them for doing so, but when it comes to doing the same with athletes people get their feathers ruffled.  I'm not saying schools recruiting athletes is right, I just find it interesting that people try to create this ethical boundary when it comes to what private schools should and should not be doing.  If it is OK to recruit students, why is it not OK to recruit athletes?   What's the difference?  I am just trying to have an open mind.

[DarterBlue2]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolLion said:

This is from American Heritage's Linkedin page.  Send your kid here and he'll go to a great college like these kids!  Go to their facebook page and they have a "recruiting" video as slick as the big colleges.  And there is nothing wrong with it, per se, because they are a private institution and need to actively solicit students. 

Nobody faults them for doing so, but when it comes to doing the same with athletes people get their feathers ruffled.  I'm not saying schools recruiting athletes is right, I just find it interesting that people try to create this ethical boundary when it comes to what private schools should and should not be doing.  If it is OK to recruit students, why is it not OK to recruit athletes?   What's the difference?  I am just trying to have an open mind.

Old School, to be honest, I have no problem with a private school taking in an impressive athlete as a 9th grader with a scholarship or whatever they can use to entice him/her. In that situation, they are assuming some degree of risk as the kid may not fulfil early promise. On the other hand, I do have an issue with these same privates taking in Juniors and Seniors from public school programs via recruiting. It just seems to me that this is a blatant attempt to poach talent from publics after coaching staffs have invested heavily in developing the athlete. Further, this later stage recruiting does little for the kids from an academic standpoint as one or two years are hardly ever enough to benefit the kid academically or ensure their success in college, and life beyond. 

[OldSchoolLion]

6 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Old School, to be honest, I have no problem with a private school taking in an impressive athlete as a 9th grader with a scholarship or whatever they can use to entice him/her. In that situation, they are assuming some degree of risk as the kid may not fulfil early promise. On the other hand, I do have an issue with these same privates taking in Juniors and Seniors from public school programs via recruiting. It just seems to me that this is a blatant attempt to poach talent from publics after coaching staffs have invested heavily in developing the athlete. Further, this later stage recruiting does little for the kids from an academic standpoint as one or two years are hardly ever enough to benefit the kid academically or ensure their success in college, and life beyond. 

In Broward County, the private schools seem to have the upper hand when it comes to getting the talent.  But there is no other county like Broward in the state. 

I wonder how many of the lesser-known private schools around the state lose kids to the powerhouse public schools in the same way during their later years.  The vast majority of private schools in the state do not dominate in hs football.   

And one could argue that the STA's and AHP's don't need to recruit.  Their reputations alone attract kids.  I think the "recruiting" done by teens' peers is likely just as persuasive if not more so than any recruiting done by adults. 

The playing field has been leveled to some extent.  Two wrongs don't make a right, but I don't think it is quite as easy to point the finger nowadays at private schools as it was in the past.

 

[OldSchoolLion]

25 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Old School, to be honest, I have no problem with a private school taking in an impressive athlete as a 9th grader with a scholarship or whatever they can use to entice him/her. In that situation, they are assuming some degree of risk as the kid may not fulfil early promise. On the other hand, I do have an issue with these same privates taking in Juniors and Seniors from public school programs via recruiting. It just seems to me that this is a blatant attempt to poach talent from publics after coaching staffs have invested heavily in developing the athlete. Further, this later stage recruiting does little for the kids from an academic standpoint as one or two years are hardly ever enough to benefit the kid academically or ensure their success in college, and life beyond. 

Here's an example, Darter.  Look at Monsignor Pace in Miami-Dade.  MP was a perennial contender in the 90's and 00's.  But in this past decade I think they only won one playoff game.  A few years ago they had 7 starters transfer out before the season.  I cannot say it for a fact, but I would be willing to bet this is a private school that has gotten routinely poached by the MD public powerhouses this past decade.    

[DarterBlue2]

49 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

I wonder how many of the lesser-known private schools around the state lose kids to the powerhouse public schools in the same way during their later years.  The vast majority of private schools in the state do not dominate in hs football. 

In Orlando, it goes both ways. WP picked up a Bishop Moore two way starter. Apopka has in the recent past, picked up a kid from TFA. Mike Brewster transferred from Lake Highland to Edgewater. Those are notable private to public transfers. But the list of public to private is much longer. In Orlando, this is more pronounced in basketball, as aside from Bishop Moore and, to a lesser extent, TFA, most of the privates here don't have very strong football programs. But in Broward county, that is not the case at all. The privates dominate football. Recently, Columbus has been showing signs in Dade of doing the same. I find it funny, indeed, when I see the rosters of a Columbus or a St. Thomas, which typically have at least 50% (usually more) minority participation when these schools usually have less than 10% minority enrollees in total. 

[DisabledAccount]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolLion said:

In Broward County, the private schools seem to have the upper hand when it comes to getting the talent.  But there is no other county like Broward in the state. 

I wonder how many of the lesser-known private schools around the state lose kids to the powerhouse public schools in the same way during their later years.  The vast majority of private schools in the state do not dominate in hs football.   

And one could argue that the STA's and AHP's don't need to recruit.  Their reputations alone attract kids.  I think the "recruiting" done by teens' peers is likely just as persuasive if not more so than any recruiting done by adults. 

The playing field has been leveled to some extent.  Two wrongs don't make a right, but I don't think it is quite as easy to point the finger nowadays at private schools as it was in the past.

 

Two things

 

One technically by FHSAA rules kids recruiting other kids can get a school in just as much trouble as the adults doing it "officially" but normally the kids are more subtle with recruiting and have easy access at camps to talk to players and entice them to come while it would raise suspicions to see a coach having a long conversation with a player from another team 

 

Also when we look at comparison between Dade/Broward with publics and privates there is only a few privates in Dade that have been successful recently and have stability, argubly the publics in Dade are far more stable and successful

 

In Broward it's the opposite where the publics lack stability and many can't be successful on a consistent basis while programs like STA and AHP are stable coaching wise compared to say Ely where coaches are changed every year or two 

 

If I was a high school athlete i would like to go somewhere where I could play for the same coach/Scheme for 4 years versus 3 different coaches in a 4 year period so in that case I see why transfers keep going up

 

I bet if you look up the numbers at the college level you will see a correlation between rising early declaring/transfer rates and the more wide open coaching carousel. How can you convince a kid to stay committed when their coach and in some cases parental figure can't stay committed themselves or stay at a team long term

[Proseteye]

2 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

In Orlando, it goes both ways. WP picked up a Bishop Moore two way starter. Apopka has in the recent past, picked up a kid from TFA. Mike Brewster transferred from Lake Highland to Edgewater. Those are notable private to public transfers. But the list of public to private is much longer. In Orlando, this is more pronounced in basketball, as aside from Bishop Moore and, to a lesser extent, TFA, most of the privates here don't have very strong football programs. But in Broward county, that is not the case at all. The privates dominate football. Recently, Columbus has been showing signs in Dade of doing the same. I find it funny, indeed, when I see the rosters of a Columbus or a St. Thomas, which typically have at least 50% (usually more) minority participation when these schools usually have less than 10% minority enrollees in total. 

The same holds true for most public schools whereby the school population is 75 to 80 percent non minority and the football team is 75 to 80 per cent minority. Minorities excel in football and basketball. Doesn't make any difference if it is a public or private school. We all know that recruiting goes on and it's mostly word to mouth as coaches don't risk it for obvious reasons. You can never stop word to mouth recruiting especially with all the social media there is. By the way I believe that any student in the state of Florida can transfer to any other school in the state of Florida no matter the distance if the recipient school has room.

[DarterBlue2]

7 hours ago, Proseteye said:

The same holds true for most public schools whereby the school population is 75 to 80 percent non minority and the football team is 75 to 80 per cent minority. Minorities excel in football and basketball. Doesn't make any difference if it is a public or private school. We all know that recruiting goes on and it's mostly word to mouth as coaches don't risk it for obvious reasons. You can never stop word to mouth recruiting especially with all the social media there is. By the way I believe that any student in the state of Florida can transfer to any other school in the state of Florida no matter the distance if the recipient school has room.

In basketball, that is true in Orlando. In football, that is not the case at all. While the correlation between school population and football is not 1/1, in largely white schools the football team is, well, largely white. In more diverse schools, it is largely black. In private schools, that have strong teams, both in Orlando and the rest of the state, it is largely minority. 

[OldSchoolLion]

12 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Old School, to be honest, I have no problem with a private school taking in an impressive athlete as a 9th grader with a scholarship or whatever they can use to entice him/her. In that situation, they are assuming some degree of risk as the kid may not fulfil early promise. On the other hand, I do have an issue with these same privates taking in Juniors and Seniors from public school programs via recruiting. It just seems to me that this is a blatant attempt to poach talent from publics after coaching staffs have invested heavily in developing the athlete. Further, this later stage recruiting does little for the kids from an academic standpoint as one or two years are hardly ever enough to benefit the kid academically or ensure their success in college, and life beyond. 

I used to feel the same way, but have changed my tune.  Too many employers bitch about losing their talent to other employers.  And that victim mentality hinders them from looking themselves in the mirror to see what they are doing/not doing to retain their talent.  

Likewise, as a coach, I need to be actively working to win the trust of the kids and their subsequent desire to play for me.  It is taking more of an effort to do this nowadays, but that is just the world we are living in. 

If a public school coach loses a kid to a private school, he should..

a. be happy for the child if the change creates a better experience for the child

b. be glad the kid left if he was not a team player

c. reflect upon what he could have done differently to connect with the kid