Texas High School To Build New $35 Million Football Stadium Despite Incredibly Small Enrollment (Plano: tech job, private schools)

[rabbit33]

Well, I graduated from a "dinky little school" that had 70 seniors. Yes, we all played various sports, participated in a wide variety of activities. None of us went on to play college football. Somehow we seem to have coped pretty well.

Making "walk-on to a D1 or play for a D2 school" as any kind of a goal for the average high school student strikes me as supremely silly.

[ChristieP]

Originally Posted by DFWGuy422

Sports teach a ton of useful life lessons, including hard work, responsibility, and teamwork.

Speaking as a non-athlete, I learned those skills from being in marching band and on the school newspaper staff. The nice thing about a fancy football stadium is that the band gets to use it, too!

[Taub201]

Yep, HP lost last year's football game to SLC but beat two other 6A schools in a down year. SLC has a great football team and great support.

HP won the HS hockey title last night over Prosper. They're also as good as SLC at lacrosse.
What about girl's track and field and CC?

Academic Decathlon? HP plus 6A Dulles and Rockwall top the charts each year.
https://acadecscores.gilslotd.com/wiki/Regionals/Texas

Will Melissa attract or develop great players thanks to its incredible indoor practice facility and stadium?

[DFWGuy422]

Originally Posted by NP78

I agree with you regarding the argument in favor of having athletics programs. One thing I would say though, is that I don't really see why the competitive success (unless on the extreme low end, since that isn't fun for anyone) really matters to evaluating the school.

The kids at HP, just to use the example in this thread, that participate in athletics likely get the same benefits you describe above as the kids that participate in athletics at Allen.

One could argue that the benefits of having athletics programs is actually reduced in schools like Allen where a smaller percentage of students actually get to participate.

I agree that participation matters more than success, but a lot of parents think differently. A lot of kids definitely think differently. Stuff like the stadiums can recruit kids and give the appearance of being a successful program. I would also rather play on a smaller team and contribute more (or play multiple sports), but a lot of the people who care enough to athletic transfer think that there is no way their kid would ever sit on the bench.

I guess some of my answers seem a little contradictory, but in short I don’t have a problem with the stadium and think it could help in some indirect ways; I also don’t think it’s the best use of funds.

[Cicnod]

Originally Posted by Taub201

Yep, HP lost last year's football game to SLC but beat two other 6A schools in a down year. SLC has a great football team and great support.

HP won the HS hockey title last night over Prosper. They're also as good as SLC at lacrosse.
What about girl's track and field and CC?

Academic Decathlon? HP plus 6A Dulles and Rockwall top the charts each year.
https://acadecscores.gilslotd.com/wiki/Regionals/Texas

Will Melissa attract or develop great players thanks to its incredible indoor practice facility and stadium?

Their best girls CC runner would have not been top 4 at Carroll. Carroll wasn’t even that good. Again the best there is mediocre at a good 6a school. All One needs to do is see where they end up in the Lone Star Cup standings next year. Looking at about 10-15 other sports they don’t come close. But hey they have 1 or 2

Hockey
https://myhockeyrankings.com/rank.php?y=2021&v=754

Ranked 26 vs a ton of 6A schools above them. Again they aren't going to be garbage next year. They will be a solid school. They won't be elite anymore. Academic wise they of course will be. They are used to competing for state championships in many many sports while in 5A. That will no longer happen in 6A. 1 or 2 sports maybe.

[tcualum]

Originally Posted by rabbit33

Well, I graduated from a "dinky little school" that had 70 seniors. Yes, we all played various sports, participated in a wide variety of activities. None of us went on to play college football. Somehow we seem to have coped pretty well.

My younger son goes to a small private school for middle school. This year he is on the school's coed flag football team. My son is great at many things but team sports isn't one of them. Being on the team though has been really good for him and he's really enjoyed it. There are not many options for team sports for kids like my son once they reach middle school and I think that's a shame.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by DFWGuy422

I agree that participation matters more than success, but a lot of parents think differently. A lot of kids definitely think differently. Stuff like the stadiums can recruit kids and give the appearance of being a successful program. I would also rather play on a smaller team and contribute more (or play multiple sports), but a lot of the people who care enough to athletic transfer think that there is no way their kid would ever sit on the bench.

I guess some of my answers seem a little contradictory, but in short I don’t have a problem with the stadium and think it could help in some indirect ways; I also don’t think it’s the best use of funds.

Spending this kind of money to try to attract better football players to your high school is a terrible use of funds. I'm not even sure why a high school should have the goal of attracting new players to its program. Yes, it might make the team better, but it also makes one less spot for an existing student.

Given what we now know about football and head injuries, high schools should be trying to discourage football participation, not encourage it.

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by DFWGuy422

A substantial decline in athletics would absolutely have a negative impact. Sports teach a ton of useful life lessons, including hard work, responsibility, and teamwork. They're also a great way for kids in high school to make friends and socialize. I would argue that they also can benefit academics to a certain extent - most sports teams have fairly stringent grade requirements. A dramatic slash in athletic focus/participation, even at mini-college football programs like Allen, would have a negative effect

You're confusing a decline in athletic performance with a decline in athletic participation. The life lessons you mention are a product of participating and trying hard, not a product of winning state championships.

I was a college baseball player and lettered in multiple sports in high school. I'm not anti-sport in any way. But the idea that a high school competing at the top level of the most competitive sport in a state somehow benefits its academic program to the point that the school can justify spending this kind of money on the sport is silly. I think I learned life lessons through sports, but I also think my grades were worse because of sports. If you expand this to the college level, this point is undebatable. College football and basketball players almost always take easier tracks and end up with less useful degrees due to their participation in sports (but to be fair, in many cases they would never have been admitted to the school if it weren't for athletics).

[Wittgenstein's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Rakin

Melissa is the next small town on it's way to being to bigger large town. It's just north of Allen and McKinney that had built those other huge stadiums. Huge population growth in that area.

Allen BTW gave us Gave us Kyler Murray, Heisman Trophy winner and QB for Phoenix. Texas Football rocks the NFL.

I can't imagine why a school district should care about this. Decisions should be made based on the interests of the 2000+ students in the school, not the 1-in-10,000 (or less) who might end up being an NFL star.

[ThomasCrown]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

I can't imagine why a school district should care about this. Decisions should be made based on the interests of the 2000+ students in the school, not the 1-in-10,000 (or less) who might end up being an NFL star.

I don't think it's a primary concern of theirs. I bet much of the reasoning behind these fancy new stadiums boils down to FOMO. They look around at surrounding cities/suburbs who have been able to get bond packages approved for tens and hundreds of millions, so why shouldn't they have the same level of infrastructure if voters will approve it? Rational need has taken a back seat to these decisions.



The affluent suburbs in the DFW area are all caught up in a stadium measuring contest. It's ridiculous.