Let us discuss Jeff Rotsky...

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

What do you think you know?

Know ? Know is a four-letter word......


I do know that I'd be hard-pressed to find another multi-million dollar edifice named for a simple cement finisher and his wife anywhere else in the world. Wealthy people do what they do and share how they wish. All good. Just don't pretend that these schools are on equal footing, and don't go all hater when some common public school reaps similar benefit - even if the benefactor may be a little loony.

[eastisbest]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

The word does not reflect reality. The home school district expectation is unreasonable

emm, ok

but it is.

If one company, for example, develops a talent then another comes in and "recruits" it away, "poaching" is the term used. It's just a term, nothing to get hung-up about. It doesn't imply "ownership" of the thing. It's not "stealing." It has more than the hunting on someone else's land connotation (though your point taken, that's how some are using it).

[y2h]

Originally Posted by eastisbest

Convincing a kid there are better options than the present situation? Showing the kid the way isn't as hard and unclimbable as he has been led to believe? This is "lunatic" to you?

Being facetious?

Obsessed? Yeah. The kind of guy that sees time running out? Yeah. Selfish? No.

Only wins on talent he recruits? Don't know, it's kind of beside the point. Doesn't seem to be his overall driving motivation.

Read to me like a man who "get's it," even more impressive given he never lived it. His words didn't come to me as someone whose goal was to win at any cost. Read to me like a guy who was sacrificing to teach young people who'd never directly viewed outside world success, how it can be achieved.

When you grow up "in" the neighborhood, where there is little success, it's easy to think people like him, people from "Gates Mills" have it handed to them. To a point, there's no denying the advantage and there's a certain amount of made luck starting ahead but that can translate to anyone from anywhere, if they're shown the possibility. We have these debates all the time, those that think it is "easy" to succeed." It's impossible if you're not shown a way. If the parents have never seen it, don't know how to teach it, doesn't mean they don't love, sacrifice and care for their children. It just means they don't have the experience and a skill to help their child move up. A man like this comes in and helps them is lunatic?

It's terrific that a man like this would come in where he's out of place, not of the culture or the neighborhood or the educational environment and put it on the line to at least try. This is what a "coach" does. No one puts in more time for less money than the coaching staff at a high school. If that's "lunatic," then so be it.

Yeah he and Ted Ginn are saints

[clarkgriswold]

Originally Posted by eastisbest

Convincing a kid there are better options than the present situation? Showing the kid the way isn't as hard and unclimbable as he has been led to believe? This is "lunatic" to you?

Being facetious?

Obsessed? Yeah. The kind of guy that sees time running out? Yeah. Selfish? No.

Only wins on talent he recruits? Don't know, it's kind of beside the point. Doesn't seem to be his overall driving motivation.

Read to me like a man who "get's it," even more impressive given he never lived it. His words didn't come to me as someone whose goal was to win at any cost. Read to me like a guy who was sacrificing to teach young people who'd never directly viewed outside world success, how it can be achieved.

When you grow up "in" the neighborhood, where there is little success, it's easy to think people like him, people from "Gates Mills" have it handed to them. To a point, there's no denying the advantage and there's a certain amount of made luck starting ahead but that can translate to anyone from anywhere, if they're shown the possibility. We have these debates all the time, those that think it is "easy" to succeed." It's impossible if you're not shown a way. If the parents have never seen it, don't know how to teach it, doesn't mean they don't love, sacrifice and care for their children. It just means they don't have the experience and a skill to help their child move up. A man like this comes in and helps them is lunatic?

It's terrific that a man like this would come in where he's out of place, not of the culture or the neighborhood or the educational environment and put it on the line to at least try. This is what a "coach" does. No one puts in more time for less money than the coaching staff at a high school. If that's "lunatic," then so be it.

DB has used that article in Rotsky argument before. I don't think he realizes there are more positives than negatives in that article. I'd also never try to make a point from a Cleveland Scene article.

I get that the guy is controversial and unconventional and has many critics. People sure seem to expend a lot of emotional energy pointing out his flaws, energy that could be better spent making an effort to help some of those inner city kids Rotsky directs his energy towards.

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by clarkgriswold

DB has used that article in Rotsky argument before. I don't think he realizes there are more positives than negatives in that article. I'd also never try to make a point from a Cleveland Scene article.

I get that the guy is controversial and unconventional and has many critics. People sure seem to expend a lot of emotional energy pointing out his flaws, energy that could be better spent making an effort to help some of those inner city kids Rotsky directs his energy towards.

well said



I'm still waiting for the development of the "scumbag" moniker beyond hater mud-slinging.

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by eastisbest

emm, ok

but it is.

If one company, for example, develops a talent then another comes in and "recruits" it away, "poaching" is the term used. It's just a term, nothing to get hung-up about. It doesn't imply "ownership" of the thing. It's not "stealing." It has more than the hunting on someone else's land connotation (though your point taken, that's how some are using it).

also well said

Two fine analogies

[Bennies'01]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

The districts that students happen to live in have no "rights" to any student/athlete. 8th graders and their parents certainly have the right to choose a high school and the district they live in just happens top be one choice, so any alternative choice is not a loss for that home district.

This is an argument that might seem cut and dry but is actually pretty complicated. A student that isn't accepted or is kicked out of a private school or a charter school by default attends the local public school. Students in those situations certainly "belong" to the district. The implications for this are significant, athletically in regards to public school enrollments, and academically in regards to the learning environment.

[DB 04]

Originally Posted by clarkgriswold

DB has used that article in Rotsky argument before. I don't think he realizes there are more positives than negatives in that article. I'd also never try to make a point from a Cleveland Scene article.

I get that the guy is controversial and unconventional and has many critics. People sure seem to expend a lot of emotional energy pointing out his flaws, energy that could be better spent making an effort to help some of those inner city kids Rotsky directs his energy towards.

And why was he asked to leave Chanel?

[clarkgriswold]

And why should I give a a $h!+?

[Bennies'01]

Originally Posted by DB 04

And why was he asked to leave Chanel?

That was a long time ago, but I'd love to hear the real story, too. However the Cleveland Scene piece seems to indicate that he was bringing in too many non-Catholics to play football.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by cabezadecaballo

Just don't pretend that these schools are on equal footing

I don't.

Originally Posted by cabezadecaballo

and don't go all hater when some common public school reaps similar benefit - even if the benefactor may be a little loony.

I have no problem with Rotsky.

[James x2]

Originally Posted by hsfan60

Not all home town talent, fact!
Would be interested to see what it would be with no jump starts, that would be a better result to measure against, fact!

I don't dispute the talent that comes from other schools.As far as I can see Shabazz was the starting qb for VASJ.Ronald Lee was at Euclid before transferring to Heights,and back to Euclid.Lindsey was at Garfield last year.Most of those kids are Euclidians.When Euclid got beat two years ago in the regional final at Byers against Ed's the P.A. announcer stated the two starting db's were from hometown....EUCLID.Delvon Roe...Remember him from Ed's basketball lore.Euclid.Lombardo lives in EUCLID.See where I'm going here? Euclid is not,has never been,a talentless area.Ed's ,Iggy,VASJ, all know this.I was calling for Thom McDaniels to coach this team years ago. Euclid suffered from the good old boy network.Banc,Razzola,Gibbons.Never sought outside candidates to shake things up.Euclid has a boatload of winning seasons,college talent but no playoff success.Any Knowledgeable Mentor fan would tell you Euclid could be a major player with the right man in charge.They being Euclids rival,responsible for helping Euclid gain acceptance into the G.C.C. Mentor is the benchmark for public school success against the Allied powers of Ignatius/Ed's.They are the only ones who took em' on and won with intense coaching,and a good feeder system.But even Mentor will lose more than win against the privates.Seems like Rotsky is scheduling up and taking this challenge head on.Everyone bashing him just fuels this guys fire.The white Ted Ginn.Yea.. he will get Glenvilles talent if he gets the chance.When Euclid plays Glenville it's like a big family reunion between the fanbases.Because most of these kids have relatives in both area's.Euclid is to innercity Cleveland,what Mentor and lake county was to middleclass whites seeking a better life for their kids.If your African American,live in Cleveland and your kid plays football where would you send him too? Glenville or some other CMSD school? Or Euclid where its not what it once was,but a way better lifestyle and safer than the innercity.Just what I've observed over the years .Big D-1 public with a gem of a stadium,and plenty of rescources.Why would this guy go anywhere? We will see though.

[Lakeshore5]

A lot of people in this thread are down on a guy who helps a bunch of kids that under any other circumstance would not be going to college. This isn't about the 3 or 4 D1 kids he coaches. It's about the ten others that end up D2 or D3 and the 40 additional kids on the team who get the experience of being a part of a group that hangs with the big boys like Ed's, Iggy, and Mentor. Rotsky making this Euclid team competitive puts a lot of at risk kids in a situation where they have responsibilities and expectations and have to work hard to meet them, is that such a bad thing? Sure he's crazy and his antics are questionable, he might even bend some rules, but ultimately at Chanel, Maple, Heights, and Euclid, many kids have better outcomes than they previously would have because of his presence.

[the123kidz]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I don't understand the term "poaching". The districts that students happen to live in have no "rights" to any student/athlete. 8th graders and their parents certainly have the right to choose a high school and the district they live in just happens top be one choice, so any alternative choice is not a loss for that home district.

All that said, private schools certainly have a better opportunity to attract student athletes from a larger geography.

Agreed, my children have never stepped foot inside a school within the school district we live in. We choose the other route and couldn't be happier. Both are athletes and excel in sports and the school district we live in would love to have them as part of the athletic programs in the district. Interesting to think they were "poached" from something they were never part of. Where does arrogance like that come from?

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by clarkgriswold

And why should I give a a $h!+?

there is that....



I heard Chuck Kyle hid an extra strip of bacon under his pancakes while in a cafeteria check out line once......



.....to which he later confessed. True story.

[Friday night light]

A lot of kids who attended SMU in the 80s benifitted as well but it doesn't make "bending" the rules ok.

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I don't.

I have no problem with Rotsky.

Then, sorry. Perhaps I was provoked by your avatar ? It did inspire me.....

[cabezadecaballo]

I missed DB when he was gone pouting

[DB 04]

Originally Posted by Bennies'01

That was a long time ago, but I'd love to hear the real story, too. However the Cleveland Scene piece seems to indicate that he was bringing in too many non-Catholics to play football.

He destroyed the culture of the school.

Why play for someone when you know you could lose your starting spot from a transfer?

[Lakeshore5]

Originally Posted by Friday night light

A lot of kids who attended SMU in the 80s benifitted as well but it doesn't make "bending" the rules ok.

You're right, and he should be punished if any wrongdoing is found as should any coach who breaks the rules. Nonetheless, I still enjoy seeing kids who weren't doing so well do a little better because of his presence.

[clarkgriswold]

Originally Posted by DB 04

He destroyed the culture of the school.

Why play for someone when you know you could lose your starting spot from a transfer?

You may be the most predictable poster in Yappi history, based in large part on your profound inability to see shades of gray on any subject.

I've found over the years that a "change in the culture of the school" is code for something far more ugly.

[Bennies'01]

Originally Posted by DB 04

He destroyed the culture of the school.

Why play for someone when you know you could lose your starting spot from a transfer?

Did he really though? I mean, in its latter years Chanel was always a diverse school with many non-Catholics enrolled.

[akronoldie]

Originally Posted by cjb56

Did Chanel win a title with him as head coach? I don’t remember now. Thought it was Powers?

What was Chanel like before he got there?

[James x2]

Originally Posted by Lakeshore5

A lot of people in this thread are down on a guy who helps a bunch of kids that under any other circumstance would not be going to college. This isn't about the 3 or 4 D1 kids he coaches. It's about the ten others that end up D2 or D3 and the 40 additional kids on the team who get the experience of being a part of a group that hangs with the big boys like Ed's, Iggy, and Mentor. Rotsky making this Euclid team competitive puts a lot of at risk kids in a situation where they have responsibilities and expectations and have to work hard to meet them, is that such a bad thing? Sure he's crazy and his antics are questionable, he might even bend some rules, but ultimately at Chanel, Maple, Heights, and Euclid, many kids have better outcomes than they previously would have because of his presence.

Testify

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by DB 04

He destroyed the culture of the school.

Why play for someone when you know you could lose your starting spot from a transfer?

What price, greatness ? Seems like a common story.

In an environment in which one can be displaced by a younger player on a growth spurt or a move-in anyway, your beef rings a bit hollow.

But "destroyed the culture of the school" ? Really ?

Was he more of a lunatic on the practice field than Fr LaCrosse ? I've heard some hellacious stories...

[cabezadecaballo]

Originally Posted by James x2

Testify

+1

Great post by lakeshore

[hsfan60]

Originally Posted by DB 04

He destroyed the culture of the school.

Why play for someone when you know you could lose your starting spot from a transfer?

"culture of the school" not in the way you put it or applied. Chanel was and had been a diverse school for quit awhile, too it's benefit.
It was the way he treated people in the school and not all players were treated the same.
I don't think you have to constantly swear and belittle kids to get them to play and then say I'm loving and building them up after. If that is the only way you can coach you should not be in education at all, imho!

[akronoldie]

Originally Posted by Lep2002

I have no way of knowing if this is true. Furthermore, I think that stance is very easy to take for a school that is able to go all the way down to Summit County and grab an all star while simultaneously being able to go out to Lorain County to grab an all star.

Public schools have have two types of open enrollment. In one type that can except students from the contiguous school districts. In the other type, they can except students from any area in Ohio. The second type could have the entire teams from St. Ignatius, St. Edward, Elder, Moeller and St. Xavier transfer to their schools, so what’s the question?

[Flood]

Originally Posted by lc5397

There's a finite number of families interested in a Catholic education that comes with a significant price tag.

And for some GREAT athletes (some not even Catholic) at private schools, that price tag is paid for them.

Hmmm...

[hsfan60]

Originally Posted by cabezadecaballo

What price, greatness ? Seems like a common story.

In an environment in which one can be displaced by a younger player on a growth spurt or a move-in anyway, your beef rings a bit hollow.

But "destroyed the culture of the school" ? Really ?

Was he more of a lunatic on the practice field than Fr LaCrosse ? I've heard some hellacious stories...

Really? Congrats the lowest post ever by you, not surprised!