These schools are perfectly good schools, but are at a disadvantage by virtue of being in the country. For example, Kinross was 163rd in the HSC rankings last year and Stannies were 355th. If the boys in question thought they were better off staying at their previous schools then they would have.
R or D,
Having watched this mini series unfold, here is a view that you might find interesting having been through all this before Barker.
Old saying : All that appears Rosie...
The HSC rankings are not the best measure of a good school by any means, so quoting rankings is a falsehood, often they are manipulated, additionally I would add, that academia in it's own right is a worry, and most of these boys, from our experience are not academically focused to support the ATAR rankings of any school.
Now, back to footy. Having been a part of the Waves fabric, as a Waves parent Rugby group helper for the last 5 years, here's what will more than likely happen at Barker, IMO.
The sugar hit of bringing in superstars, when they are proven superstars in year 11, will eventually face massive backlash from longer term parents, who are the real customers of the school, and who often do nearly all of the heavy lifting when it comes to donations, helping out at BBQs, Canteens, after match functions, home end-of-season dinners etc, the list is long, as are the efforts.
We have found that the vast majorities of imports parents have no interest in any such support of the school, and not will you see generations of these players.
So it is not hard to see what effect, and playback to the Headmaster, happens eventually, guarantee it!
There are also many other sports whose parents start arking up about their sport, and rightfully so.
Aside from all this, it has a major impact on the culture within the sport, having heard younger A age group boys say, "would luv to play in the 1s but I think by the time I get there, they will just bring some superstar in". It's a killer!
To say, they just need to get better, is not the point, particularly when their team dominates in most games, as they are clearly already up there.
So when you bring in wholesale imports it's a losing strategy for 2 reasons.
1. If you win the comp everyone says, so you should have because it's fake, you bought it.
2. If you don't win then everyone says what a bunch of idiots.
It's about balance, maybe a few new boys, prior to established year 11 players, is warranted, particularly in key positions like prop, for safety reasons, but only a small number, if any.
You can't win either way, however if you win with a home grown team from the early years eg years 7/8, then you are the real thing and everyone applauds the legitimacy of the achievement.
From a business point of view I can't see any school positioning it's prowess on a sport, in this case Rugby, if they do, I suspect that decision will come under review very quickly, for all the reasons mentioned.
Even if you think it will encourage a stronger program, as younger starters will/may be attracted, there is a no guarantee they won't be subject to the same treatment later when they get bigger.
A TERRIFIC school like Barker, I think, is, will eventually become smarter.
This is a short term sugar rush!
www.rugby.com.au
