While it is marketing in the end, the effort does make me chuckle.
Like many of you, I get marketing emails — you can control most of the flow, but not all.
One of them that feels ironic emanates from Experian. It’s along the lines of, “Congratulations. You have new credit card matches.”
When in actuality, it should likely state, “Congratulations. You have the opportunity to accumulate more debt. So instead of paying down debt and living within your means, we want you to be more indebted.”
It’s easy to spend someone else’s money.
We all do it. But some are more blatant than others.
As we wind down another school year, one of the last things in the world I want to bring up in this space is anything attached to school funding.
On your social-media feeds. In your communities. Everyone’s seemingly an expert on what to do about this obvious problem in Ohio.
Districts are cutting. Levies are proposed. A bleak future without changes is outlined.
Daring to broach the subject on, say, Facebook is mission impossible. Because there are certain topics, even when addressed lightly, that lead to those Facebook friends — who wouldn’t react to anything else from personal triumph to tragedy — but will pounce in those comments to argue.
In other words, there is enough debate to go around on school funding.
Far be it for me to “go there.” You don’t want to hear it here. You don’t want to argue it here. Neither do I.
However, with that noted, that aforementioned bleak future with funding does have an effect on the facet that unites us here: High school sports.
No, when the No. 1 priority of a school or school district is to educate children, high school sports in and of itself isn’t the primary consideration. Ever.
But, as this topic becomes louder and more frequent, we do have to ask ourselves:
When do we begin to start worrying about a lack of funding having a catastrophic impact on high school sports? And no, by the way, the word “catastrophic” is not reaching.
While asking that all-too-vital question as well, it is natural to also ponder, “Just how much does that matter if sports can be or cannot be funded?”
Please, again, I’m not trying to get into a debate on school funding. Have your opinions. Argue with others and refine them in due course toward a solution.
But if available funds must be applied to education and high school sports — middle school sports, too, obviously — is not a priority in comparison, sports budgets are a place that can and will be cut.
You hear it all the time when levies go on the ballot, as they have this year.
A school district will head to its residents seeking sustained or more funds.
It will lay out how the money would be spent.
It will also lay out what cuts would be made if it’s not available.
The aspects that get cut or are adjusted do not vary that much.
Freshman and junior varsity. So-called “niche sports” might face the proverbial ax.
Fewer coaches. No money for new equipment or facility upgrades.
Not to mention the one adjustment that makes everyone involved cringe: The introduction of or increase to “pay to play.”
There are districts right now in our coverage area facing pay to play well into the triple digits, if not four figures per student. Those costs, as well as the amount of schools who will have to ask, will only grow as the school funding impasse grows.
Some families can afford it. Some student-athletes can make it happen through jobs or fundraising. Some districts are fortunate enough to have generous local businesses or residents/alumni who act as underwriters so competition can continue. But not all.
Dips in participation. Not enough resources to field teams.
If the money isn’t there, that’s what happens.
No one prefers it, of course. But that’s what happens.
Under that scenario, as it normally does, the power will rest even more with the haves vs. the have nots. Is that fair? Right? Society in action?
Whatever the answers are, it’s going to be more prevalent if there’s less money or none at all.
It’s natural, I think, for all of us to play backseat logistics manager or chief financial officer from time to time.
When you see a bus drop off student-athletes at an event, say, 30 miles away, and then they head back to campus without other scheduled stops but then head back to pick them up after the event, you do wonder if gas and transportation could be spared to some extent just staying there and not doing the 60 extra miles round-trip.
When you see conferences of neighboring, similar-sized schools unable to stay together and having to opt for conferences with longer miles and longer days and nights, you do wonder if it’s worth the tradeoff.
When you see new uniforms or new upgrades, you do wonder if it could have waited a year.
But on the other side, the people dispersing these funds and managing budgets are facing the same conundrums. And headaches.
It’s impossible not to go there, so to speak: Will it ever get so bad with not having resources that schools, rightly needing to focus on the academic component of their mission, just can’t offer some or all sports or extracurriculars?
And if they can’t, how consequential is that?
The last thing along these lines anyone wants — and I couldn’t care less if or how you argue the point of school funding — is to begin seeing stories about high school sports taking body blows toward elimination.
Seemingly, however, that’s where we are.
So hopefully, people a lot smarter and more powerful than me can figure this out.
Because high school sports are on the line here.
How much? Here’s to hoping we never find out.
