Damn Scots……

It is a strange situation. The kid gets his grades up to be able to play at the end of the week before the championship. After a seven-day waiting period would have made him eligible that day to play, but the day doesn't count until the end of the regular school day. The rule was thinking that athletics occur after school, but this game was at 1 pm.

Huge mess up by the AD and the coach to not confirm that he was eligible before inserting him into the game, especially when from what I have heard he wasn't a key contributor.

Also, the interesting thing is that a teacher from the school was the one that reported it. While he shouldn't be able to play, she must hate this kid. My guess is that she will be vilified by the student body.

That doesn't make sense to me. The UIL wouldn't care about district standards that are higher than their own. And the UIL certainly wouldn't be reporting it as a vacated title due to playing an ineligible player if that player had met their eligibility standards.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

TurboVelo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

TurboVelo said:

---

So, the rest of the story: he is and was always eligible under UIL rules. Highland Park holds a higher academic standing, and deemed him ineligible per that.

---

I'm sorry but that sounds like HP propaganda. As long as the kid was above 69, he would be eligible in the eyes of the UIL. And the principal and teacher know that, if I'm a betting man.

---

The School Board is meeting tonight to look at firing the AD and Superintendent. https://meetings.boardbook.org/Public/PublicNotice/2024?meeting=685310

The player has never failed a class.

---

What was decided?

---

Nothing was finalized or announced, when I started typing this, although that could change at any minute.

Here's what I understand:
1. Grading period ended 3 weeks ago.
2. Player was never ineligible per UIL standards, and has played every game this season, including playoffs and all travel, according to public statements made by the parents after the AD named the student publicly (parents have started a lawsuit)
3. Player was apparently told by the teacher that he wasn't allowed to play the day before the game (despite being in the middle of a grading period, and having played 5 days before).
4. Player was specifically told by the coach that he was allowed to play. He traveled with the team to the game.
5. Teacher told AD immediately after the game that the player wasn't eligible.
6. AD informed the UIL that the player was ineligible without any details on why the player was ineligible or by what standards. Only that he was ineligible and that Highland Park was forfeiting. UIL did not ask for clarification, and simply stated that if HP wanted to forfeit, they'd accept it.
7. AD pulled the Trophy and Medals from the bus en route back in Dallas, and returned those to the Stadium. My understanding is those have already been awarded to the other team.
8. Parents and Public were notified through social media of the forfeiture as they were driving back to Dallas.
9. Parents are looking at suing the District / Superintendent / AD
10. Parents want the UIL to reinstate the team as State Champions (I see zero chance of that happening).

Clearly there has been a huge breakdown in the governance of athletics in Highland Park.

Caveats & disclosures:
1. I am an HP grad, but have no direct connection to anyone on the team. Obviously, I have some level of emotional interest.
2. My sister is a parent in the district, friends with parents on the team, and her husband is a recently retired Superintendent (of another district). He has had a working relationship with the AD and Superintendent, but no contact with them on this situation.
3. Another sister is also a parent in the district, and friends with parents on the team, including being neighbors with 2 players / families, so I am hearing a lot from their perspectives, which is obviously biased.
3. I do know several of the current and past board members (HP is a very small community), but have had no contact with any of them on this. It'll be interesting to grab beers after the dust settles.
4. My best friend (also HP Grad) is the head coach of the Colleyville Heritage Girls team, who played immediately afterwards, so I happened to be down there when all of this happened. I was not involved in anyway with the HP team.
5. I have no professional experience in school sports. My background is elite level cycling, having been a US National Team Coach, and UCI Team Director (of the #1 team in the world, I will brag). My only experience with UIL eligibility was when I screwed around in 7th grade and found out. That was a very long time ago, and things change.

My thoughts:
1. There does not seem to be strong leadership within the Athletic Department if teachers and coaches are confused about eligibility. If the Player was ineligible by any standard, and the coach played him, that seems like an immediate termination.
2. If the player was UIL eligible, but HP ineligible, and the coach told him to play, it seems the proper course of action would be to punish the coach, not the players, especially the other players who may have no idea about the situation.
3. I hear what y'all are saying about a Principal is plenty experienced enough to be an AD, but it does not appear that is the situation here. In dealing with the IOC and UCI on a daily basis, I know there are a lot of politics, and things must be handled carefully. I would assume that being the AD at Highland Park would also require that level of care.
4. The current sentiment in HP right now is that there is a disdain for athletics from the Administration, which seems absolutely crazy.

Questions:
1. In reading through the UIL rules (and acknowledging that reading them isn't enough to fully understand all the nuances), why would a player's eligibility change in the middle of a grading period?
2. My uninformed guess is also that this somehow relates to an Honors Class, as that is the only place I see the UIL making allowances for Districts to have alternative standards of eligibility. Are there others?

I probably left some stuff off, but I've got tired head.

If that is all true, it's one of the most bizarre situations I've come across and that teachers should have stayed in their lane. And they AD needed to verify.

Your last question, some classes are considered exempt from UIL, primarily AP and some Pre-AP classes. I believe dual-credit as well. Eligibility can only be lost at the six weeks, not at progress report. So if all of that is true, AD should lose his job and HP probably should regain the trophies.

What a cluster ****. HP was our rival in the early 90s and it seemed that they were supported well by the district. Maybe Chris Young should put some pressure on them.

PatAg said:

---

TurboVelo said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

TurboVelo said:

---

So, the rest of the story: he is and was always eligible under UIL rules. Highland Park holds a higher academic standing, and deemed him ineligible per that.

---

I'm sorry but that sounds like HP propaganda. As long as the kid was above 69, he would be eligible in the eyes of the UIL. And the principal and teacher know that, if I'm a betting man.

---

The School Board is meeting tonight to look at firing the AD and Superintendent. https://meetings.boardbook.org/Public/PublicNotice/2024?meeting=685310

The player has never failed a class.

---

you are related to the player or have a kid on the team, clearly

---

Your reading comprehension needs work

HP Admin released a clarification email today stating that their standard is such than any student with an average below 70 in any class at any time is ineligible until that student is above 70 in all classes. The player failed a test in an honors class earlier in the week, making him ineligible per HP's standards. According to the email, the coach "missed" the updated ineligible list. Clearly the system at HP needs work.

All personnel decisions will be made at the end of the school year.

The UIL has said they will honor any school's higher academic standards on eligiblility.

TurboVelo said:

---

HP Admin released a clarification email today stating that their standard is such than any student with an average below 70 in any class at any time is ineligible until that student is above 70 in all classes. The player failed a test in an honors class earlier in the week, making him ineligible per HP's standards. According to the email, the coach "missed" the updated ineligible list. Clearly the system at HP needs work.

All personnel decisions will be made at the end of the school year.

The UIL has said they will honor any school's higher academic standards on eligiblility.

---

So let's say it's a new grading period, and kid fails first test, that means he's ineligible ? That's crazy.

Is the teachers name Karen?

That's an insane policy and would make it almost impossible to coach an athletic team at the high school level. You'd have to couple it with some sort of immediate retesting policy if you wanted to be able to field a squad.

Also, that's not what's outlined in the current HPHS student handbook on athletic eligibility. They keep to normal UIL calendar seems. (Starts on p. 23.)

https://4.files.edl.io/0026/01/23/25/171815-6de6531b-4e57-4efc-9a14-fb44ae44a94c.pdf#page23