Player eligibility!

[Beek]

I would like opinions on this topic please.

My AD, came to me friday 3 hours before the game and told me that 5 of my players were going to be deemed ineligible due to the fact that their GPA while being above a 2.0 on the record dated on sept 2nd,  had "I" listed as a grade and that wasnt correctly factored in their gpa by our system. meaning that it just didnt count the "I" at all. 

The 'i" comes from state assessments have not been finalized and added to their course to determine the final grade for the course. (this is a state problem, not a district problem or so I was told) therefore every team in the state should be suffering from the same issue! Correct?

My AD and or district decided that we must err on the side of caution. for example a player with less than a 2.4 gpa who has an "I" on their report card would be considered ineligible per the AD's ruling. because we do not want to take a chance on playing a potentially ineligible player or have to pay a fine, which the school cannot afford.

So I argued that, a player with a 2.4 gpa, who has an "i" (which is considered by florida statutes as a "0" on the 4 point gpa scale) cannot play even though when you figure the gpa using the "0" for the "i" is still above a 2.0.  I explained that you cannot have a -1 on a Gpa so the score cannot get any lower. This got me nowhere! So we had to sit many starters from the fall classic. 

The bigger issue is when we get to Week 2 when we have a game that counts. Will my players be able to play?  should be!, but!  this is the thinking that keeps us where we are!

[DarterBlue2]

I feel for you. If the kid's grade cannot fall below 2.0 even with an I, then I cannot see why he should not play. 

[Ray Icaza]

4 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

I feel for you. If the kid's grade cannot fall below 2.0 even with an I, then I cannot see why he should not play. 

Doubt it is a district problem but a quick call to the county office can easily clear that up.  School just started so I would assume this is a last year's grade issue and if that is the case onus falls on the AD as he should have given you notice during the spring game or at the very least start of school year; definitely not at 3PM Friday.  Our protocol many years ago was weekly progress reports from each player (Fridays) leading up to the nine week grading period to avoid last minute surprises.  Feel terrible for the kids that have worked hard thru summer and now fall camp to be handed this deck.

[Beek]

10 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

Doubt it is a district problem but a quick call to the county office can easily clear that up.  School just started so I would assume this is a last year's grade issue and if that is the case onus falls on the AD as he should have given you notice during the spring game or at the very least start of school year; definitely not at 3PM Friday.  Our protocol many years ago was weekly progress reports from each player (Fridays) leading up to the nine week grading period to avoid last minute surprises.  Feel terrible for the kids that have worked hard thru summer and now fall camp to be handed this deck.

We have tried progress reports. some of the teachers say its too much work. the administration says it cannot mandate that teachers help with progress reports. These are kids who by all rights have a 2.0 but it cannot be proven by record due to the lack of imputed scores. ( I also tell the kids, Had you worked harder and had above a 2.5 you wouldn't even been in this situation to begin with). But the teams overall gpa isnt that bad considering that only 5 players are affected. 

Math is math. that is my point, yet kids cant play!  So this should also affect Osceola!  bet it doesn't! Their AD probably fights to make their kids eligible, not just say, well they kids should have tried better in the past!

 

[HornetFan]

On 8/22/2021 at 1:26 PM, Beek said:

I would like opinions on this topic please.

My AD, came to me friday 3 hours before the game and told me that 5 of my players were going to be deemed ineligible due to the fact that their GPA while being above a 2.0 on the record dated on sept 2nd,  had "I" listed as a grade and that wasnt correctly factored in their gpa by our system. meaning that it just didnt count the "I" at all. 

The 'i" comes from state assessments have not been finalized and added to their course to determine the final grade for the course. (this is a state problem, not a district problem or so I was told) therefore every team in the state should be suffering from the same issue! Correct?

My AD and or district decided that we must err on the side of caution. for example a player with less than a 2.4 gpa who has an "I" on their report card would be considered ineligible per the AD's ruling. because we do not want to take a chance on playing a potentially ineligible player or have to pay a fine, which the school cannot afford.

So I argued that, a player with a 2.4 gpa, who has an "i" (which is considered by florida statutes as a "0" on the 4 point gpa scale) cannot play even though when you figure the gpa using the "0" for the "i" is still above a 2.0.  I explained that you cannot have a -1 on a Gpa so the score cannot get any lower. This got me nowhere! So we had to sit many starters from the fall classic. 

The bigger issue is when we get to Week 2 when we have a game that counts. Will my players be able to play?  should be!, but!  this is the thinking that keeps us where we are!

The 'i" comes from state assessments have not been finalized and added to their course to determine the final grade for the course. (this is a state problem, not a district problem or so I was told) therefore every team in the state should be suffering from the same issue! Correct?

I'm a bit confused as to the "I" grade designation and what this has to do with a "state assessment".  I was never a teacher or a school administrator, but I did attend schools through graduate school, and an "I" always meant "incomplete". It meant that the student had not completed all the requirements for the course , and that if they weren't met by a prescribed date, the grade would convert to an "F". Is this not what these kids are facing now? If it isn't a deficiency for which the student is responsible, it would not seem fair that the student/athletes were denied the opportunity to play football solely because the school district and/or the state failed to meet their obligations. 

[Beek]

The "I" comes from the state mandated EOC exam. That exam can count up to 30% of the students final grade. 

The state has not sent the results back to the county so they can be factored in the students final grade.

The problem as I see it is FHSAA has its rules and bylaws that have to be followed and the state doesnt care about the athletes and the date their grades have to be tabulated.

That is the story I am being given. Hopefully it is all true 

[HornetFan]

6 minutes ago, Beek said:

The "I" comes from the state mandated EOC exam. That exam can count up to 30% of the students final grade. 

The state has not sent the results back to the county so they can be factored in the students final grade.

The problem as I see it is FHSAA has its rules and bylaws that have to be followed and the state doesnt care about the athletes and the date their grades have to be tabulated.

That is the story I am being given. Hopefully it is all true 

The "I" comes from the state mandated EOC exam. That exam can count up to 30% of the students final grade. 

Help me understand this please; I'm an old man. What is a state mandated EOC exam? If it counts for up to 30% of a student's grade, how can the student move on to the next level class not knowing if he/she passed the last course? This seems to leave the kid in limbo not only as an athlete but academically. If these kids took these EOC exams this past Spring semester and the State has not yet tabulated the results, something is amiss. Hopefully it gets straightened out before it effects the kids classes for this semester and their chance to play football.

[Beek]

EOC = end of course. These are graduation requirement benchmarks

[HornetFan]

1 hour ago, Beek said:

EOC = end of course. These are graduation requirement benchmarks

Thanks for the clarification; I like to learn something new every day. Before I disparage the State of Florida education system, are we referring to EOC exams taken back in May or after Summer school courses? I could see a potential problem with exams taken at the end of the Summer, especially with this crazy Covid year, but there is no excuse for not having final grade results for this past May. 

[gatorman-uf]

On 8/22/2021 at 1:26 PM, Beek said:

I would like opinions on this topic please.

My AD, came to me friday 3 hours before the game and told me that 5 of my players were going to be deemed ineligible due to the fact that their GPA while being above a 2.0 on the record dated on sept 2nd,  had "I" listed as a grade and that wasnt correctly factored in their gpa by our system. meaning that it just didnt count the "I" at all. 

The 'i" comes from state assessments have not been finalized and added to their course to determine the final grade for the course. (this is a state problem, not a district problem or so I was told) therefore every team in the state should be suffering from the same issue! Correct?

My AD and or district decided that we must err on the side of caution. for example a player with less than a 2.4 gpa who has an "I" on their report card would be considered ineligible per the AD's ruling. because we do not want to take a chance on playing a potentially ineligible player or have to pay a fine, which the school cannot afford.

So I argued that, a player with a 2.4 gpa, who has an "i" (which is considered by florida statutes as a "0" on the 4 point gpa scale) cannot play even though when you figure the gpa using the "0" for the "i" is still above a 2.0.  I explained that you cannot have a -1 on a Gpa so the score cannot get any lower. This got me nowhere! So we had to sit many starters from the fall classic. 

The bigger issue is when we get to Week 2 when we have a game that counts. Will my players be able to play?  should be!, but!  this is the thinking that keeps us where we are!

A lot to unravel here.

First good on the AD for potentially catching a problem. I know it sucks, but he is right. You would rather not play the players, win the game then win the game and end up losing your win because of ineligible players. 

Second, is the AD saying the individual scores for students have not been released to the school districts from when they took the exams in the Spring? If so, he is wrong, scores were released to the schools on July 29th, which is much later than normal. So it could just be the school district is slow in entering and calculating the grades of the students. Now, could some of those students not taken the EoC (Biology, Algebra I, Geometry, US History) for subject, maybe. Every district is different on how a student who missed the exam is handled and  how that would calculate into a student's overall grade.

Third, If the AD isn't willing to look at the math, then they are in heavy "Cover Your Ass (CYA)" mode. Little can be done to fix them. If you show them the hypothetical of an F, and the GPA is still above 2.0, then how will the player become ineligible?
 

[Beek]

16 minutes ago, gatorman-uf said:

A lot to unravel here.

First good on the AD for potentially catching a problem. I know it sucks, but he is right. You would rather not play the players, win the game then win the game and end up losing your win because of ineligible players. 

Second, is the AD saying the individual scores for students have not been released to the school districts from when they took the exams in the Spring? If so, he is wrong, scores were released to the schools on July 29th, which is much later than normal. So it could just be the school district is slow in entering and calculating the grades of the students. Now, could some of those students not taken the EoC (Biology, Algebra I, Geometry, US History) for subject, maybe. Every district is different on how a student who missed the exam is handled and  how that would calculate into a student's overall grade.

Third, If the AD isn't willing to look at the math, then they are in heavy "Cover Your Ass (CYA)" mode. Little can be done to fix them. If you show them the hypothetical of an F, and the GPA is still above 2.0, then how will the player become ineligible?
 

Good thing we won the game anyway!

From what I was told, St Cloud had the same issue last friday night. At least that was what I was told. 

It is a large case of CYA, but in my opinion, without logic applied. Calculate the gpa, with a "0" or "f" and if its above 2.0 the kid is good. 

My principal also sees it that way and is supposed to be working on that fix. 

I am being told it is the state, not the county!  So that may be the first incorrect thing I am being told. My ad has the best electron microscope for anything that is not exactly what the ad wants. Takes my players off the field for mandatory study halls, during practice time. 'because we dont want them to become ineligible", Doesnt matter if the kid has a 3.9, still has to attend. If you dont go to study hall, you may end up not playing!  My ad thinks ad stands for athletic disciplinarian. I know why it is tough here and why so many coaches leave. This situation is very tough to handle when you are always being thrown a curve ball at the last minute. This is but just 1 of many things.  Now on a positive note, the ad truly means well and thinks what is being done is in the best interests of the students. 

[HornetFan]

20 minutes ago, Beek said:

Good thing we won the game anyway!

From what I was told, St Cloud had the same issue last friday night. At least that was what I was told. 

It is a large case of CYA, but in my opinion, without logic applied. Calculate the gpa, with a "0" or "f" and if its above 2.0 the kid is good. 

My principal also sees it that way and is supposed to be working on that fix. 

I am being told it is the state, not the county!  So that may be the first incorrect thing I am being told. My ad has the best electron microscope for anything that is not exactly what the ad wants. Takes my players off the field for mandatory study halls, during practice time. 'because we dont want them to become ineligible", Doesnt matter if the kid has a 3.9, still has to attend. If you dont go to study hall, you may end up not playing!  My ad thinks ad stands for athletic disciplinarian. I know why it is tough here and why so many coaches leave. This situation is very tough to handle when you are always being thrown a curve ball at the last minute. This is but just 1 of many things.  Now on a positive note, the ad truly means well and thinks what is being done is in the best interests of the students. 

It sounds like you and the AD need to have a meeting and figure a way to meet your team's practice requirements and still schedule mandatory study halls. It's hard to argue against the AD's motives; he wants to make sure these kids are successful academically so they can be successful in life in the future; football should not be the first priority if it gets in the way of a kid's education. Some kids are well disciplined when it comes to their studies and may not need a mandatory study hall, but to exempt the kid with the 3.9 gpa from the study period could be divisive for the team. Kids should not be encouraged to try for a 2.0 gpa just so they can be eligible to play football; they should be encouraged to excel in the classroom so they meet or exceed the same college academic entrance requirements that non-athletes must achieve. 

[Beek]

I am totally about the student - athlete, student comes first always.  Our teams average gpa last year was a 2.8. With this issue that we have now it only affects 5 players, which means I only have 5 players below a 2.4 gpa. So it seems we are working in the right direction

[HornetFan]

18 hours ago, Beek said:

I am totally about the student - athlete, student comes first always.  Our teams average gpa last year was a 2.8. With this issue that we have now it only affects 5 players, which means I only have 5 players below a 2.4 gpa. So it seems we are working in the right direction

I am totally about the student - athlete, student comes first always.

That's exactly what I would expect from a coach and it's great that your priorities are in the right order. With  5 players below a 2.4 gpa, it does seem that your staff is working in the right direction, but still have a way to go. As I've never been a coach and haven't had to focus on the grades of so many kids at the same time, I don't profess to know how you feel because so often, coaches assume the role of quasi-father and authority figure to many kids. I can only imagine how overwhelming it can get, and with the pandemic and remote schooling, it has made the task of educating kids even more difficult, but it's admirable what you coaches do for the kids. Is there a member of your staff whose primary responsibility is to track the academic progress of your student/athletes especially those that may tend to struggle meeting academic requirements, not only during the football season, but during the entire school year, including Summer school if necessary? I ask that not to be critical, but to understand the task that you face. If this position doesn't currently exist, it may be a thing to consider. I wish you the best; don't give up on those kids.

[Beek]

I do that personally. I keep up with all the kids grades. 

[PinellasFB]

On 8/24/2021 at 7:55 PM, Beek said:

It is a large case of CYA, but in my opinion, without logic applied. Calculate the gpa, with a "0" or "f" and if its above 2.0 the kid is good. 

My principal also sees it that way and is supposed to be working on that fix. 

I dont understand how the EOC scores have not come back from *last year*?  If thats the case, how can any kid move on to the next grade with pending incomplete grades?  Something doesnt add up correctly here and maybe there is a misunderstanding of the "I" grade causes?

Regardless, I agree with your math (and I'm a mathematician), which is to calculate all GPAs while substituting F's for the I's so the worst case GPA is known.  If it falls below 2.0, then the kid is ineligible as this is too much risk to the team otherwise.  The exception to this is if a teacher gives a favorable assessment of the incomplete grade such that an F is unlikely/impossible but you've already said this is too much burden on the already stretched thin staff.

[gatorman-uf]

7 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

I dont understand how the EOC scores have not come back from *last year*?  If thats the case, how can any kid move on to the next grade with pending incomplete grades?  Something doesnt add up correctly here and maybe there is a misunderstanding of the "I" grade causes?

Most schools move the kids on to the next course no matter what they scored. They just will put them in a "Learning Lab" or a Recovery Credit Course. So a kid took Algebra I freshman year, they put them in Geometry sophomore and if they failed Algebra I they will put them in a credit recovery class. If they find out later that they failed due to late exams (I stand by the idea that Spring Exams scores were released in late July), they can pull them from an elective to put them in the lab.

[OHS_Kboys]

We have a kid that falls under this same thing. The lady at the District office told our guidance people to check back on Monday and it all should be finalized. 

[Ray Icaza]

Mirrors the advice I tried to give him 5 days ago to call county office.  That recommendation was met with the implication that our AD, one of the most honorable people I know would stoop to cheating (fights to make them eligible) which didn't merit a response as my intent was sincere.

[DarterBlue2]

25 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

Mirrors the advice I tried to give him 5 days ago to call county office.  That recommendation was met with the implication that our AD, one of the most honorable people I know would stoop to cheating (fights to make them eligible) which didn't merit a response as my intent was sincere.

Sadly, sometimes help is not appreciated. 

[Perspective]

40 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Sadly, sometimes help is not appreciated. 

So true, Darter.   I try to give my wife advice on how she can lose weight and cook better, but she never seems to appreciate my help.   

 

(Truth is, my wife is in much better shape than I am and is a terrific cook)

[DarterBlue2]

11 minutes ago, Perspective said:

So true, Darter.   I try to give my wife advice on how she can lose weight and cook better, but she never seems to appreciate my help.   

 

(Truth is, my wife is in much better shape than I am and is a terrific cook)

I am sure she is an excellent cook. Hopefully, you are in great shape. It would be sad to lose a mind like yours in the near future. 

[gatorman-uf]

9 hours ago, Perspective said:

So true, Darter.   I try to give my wife advice on how she can lose weight and cook better, but she never seems to appreciate my help.   

 

(Truth is, my wife is in much better shape than I am and is a terrific cook)

Create a topic that will bring Madison County to talk about how great they are if you are being held hostage by your wife.

[Beek]

11 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

Mirrors the advice I tried to give him 5 days ago to call county office.  That recommendation was met with the implication that our AD, one of the most honorable people I know would stoop to cheating (fights to make them eligible) which didn't merit a response as my intent was sincere.

If what I said was taken in a way to dishonor the Osceola Ad,there was never an implication of cheating. What i said truly was not intended that way. I coach against him in wrestling and have much respect.  In my opinion I feel he would fight for his kids, not illegally, but in the correct way, where other ad's seem to try to disqualify kids rather than fight for them. I apologize if the words i used were taken in any other way. Meaning he would contact guidance and work with the counselors and try to figure the gpa's. That is fighting for the kids, Not saying, The kids should have tried better in the past and when the grades eventually get posted , maybe they will be high enough

[Ray Icaza]

3 minutes ago, Beek said:

If what I said was taken in a way to dishonor the Osceola Ad,there was never an implication of cheating. What i said truly was not intended that way. I coach against him in wrestling and have much respect. I was merely referring to how things seem to get handled in the county. It is an appearance. not an allegation.  In my opinion I feel he would fight for his kids, not illegally, but in the correct way, where other ad's seem to try to disqualify kids rather than fight for them. I apologize if the words i used were taken in any other way.

Well, I truly appreciate that as Coach Bird would never do something illegal to make someone eligible to play football, basketball, his wrestling squad, etc..  Never helps the kids in the long run when person that leads is setting that kind of example.  So thanks, glad you will be getting your problem resolved and good luck the rest of the year.