rollredroll

Maybe I can clarify for you. The original "split" referred to (I thought very clearly, but I will simplify), is the choice to leave (or never attend) a public school in the first place. Many private school supporters speak time and again, on this and every other board, about the superiority of their schools over the public schools. It is an oft repeated refrain. However, when it comes to sports, the refrain changes to one of "no advantages". I am truly frustrated by the circular nature of the arguments presented here. VG, there is not vindictive mentality here, only the desire to see a level playing field. We may not agree on what that level playing field is, but we all have that desire. To constantly belittle others as so many on here do, it only serves to solidify everyone in their individual viewpoints. The question was asked what the separation of educational opportunities had to do with athletic opportunities. To put it bluntly: Many public school supporters are angered, frustrated, and downright insulted at the elitist attitude that some private school supporters adopt on this board. And the way that attitude carries over into the field of athletic endeavor on too many occasions. I don't pretend to know the answer to the problem, but at least I can recognize there is one. The main problem I see is that the majority of people in this argument measure athletic respect, athletic achievement, and competitiveness by the number of state championships a particular program has won. To be competitive you do not have to win a state championship. There are many teams in this state that consistently win the vast majority of thier games, are we to assume that just because they do not have the gold football they are not competitive? Whether or not a private school wins the championship is not the issue here. It is the fairness of the level of competition. If a school has the ability to draw high level achievers from the entire Metro area, IT IS NOT the equal of a team that draws from an entire county and only has 300 students of all types. There is no way to justify them playing together that makes any kind of sense. By the way, this quote is precious "This comment makes no sense either: "If the public schools are not good enough to go to school with, what makes them good enough to play ball with?" What in the world? If one is attending a private school, how can he/she attend a public school (and vice versa) at the same time???" I do hope that was an attempt at levity, and not an attempt to desparage the feelings of the many of your peers. And that is the question asked in private on many occasions. My apologies if I didn't understand the context of the word "split". Use the word "split" on this board and one almost automatically thinks of the public/private (DI vs. DII) split. You can make your point without the sarcasm. I still don't understand why you call your own quote (with my comments mixed in) "precious". Even in the context of the "split" to which you are referring, I don't understand why private school kids wouldn't want to play certain public school kids if that public school is a worthy opponent (or even if it's not). A student's, and/or his parents', choice to attend a private school is usually (not always, but usually) for academic/college placement purposes. When it comes to the athletic fields, that's all thrown out the window. As horrible as this sounds (and it's not a comment I condone, so don't call me out on this), in the spirit of the way you are referring to the word "split", a private school kid is shunning a public school more for academic purposes than for athletic purposes. When it comes to the playing fields, trust me, most (not all) private school kids do not see themselves at an advantage versus public school kids. Go watch a private school with high academic standards (MBA, MUS, McCallie, to name a few) play a big public school like D-B, Gallatin, Riverdale, etc. and tell me how much of an advantage that private school has. Look at the numbers on the sidelines. Look at the size of the kids on the sidelines. Sure, the private school may win some of those matchups, but it's not because of a boatload of recruited athletes - what you see in front of your eyes would bear that out. As I have said time and time again (and if you want to talk about questions being unanswered..), while private schools do have the advantage of "no zones", throw in the academic, financial, and/or character standards that are considered in the private school acceptance process, and the pool from which to choose is not as large as you may think. My mother - a public school teacher for thirty years - taught some academically-challenged kids, some kids from low income families, some kids with run-ins with the law. Some of these kids were athletes. Most of those kids played for the schools they attended; most, if not all, of those same kids likely would not have made it at a private school (probably would not have made it into the school in the first place). I am not being an "elitist" by saying that; I'm just being a realist (not that I necessarily agree with the way it works). So much is said of the fact that "private schools can take anyone". Oddly enough, in the context of my last statement, so can public schools - at an advantage over a private school. [Edited by rollredroll on 10-4-02 12:02A]

I am confused by this post. For one, I was under the impression (correct me if I am wrong) that it was a few public schools (particularly one in Murfreesboro) which led the split charge. Am I missing something here? [Edited by rollredroll on 10-3-02 3:53P] I think you have totally missed the point. It is crystal clear in this post: If the public schools are not good enough to go to school with, what makes them good enough to play ball with? A very valid question, and one that most public school supporters are asking. It all boils down to you (private schoolers) wanted away from us, now why don't you just leave us alone? Clear enough? :confused: No, it's not clear enough. As I said, I was under the impression that it was a group of public schools (primarily one in Murfreesboro) that led the charge to split. According to imasoftballer, the privates are "so dead-set against a sports split". If that's the case, why would they have led the charge to split in the first place? What private school(s) are you saying led the charge to split? This comment makes no sense either: "If the public schools are not good enough to go to school with, what makes them good enough to play ball with?" What in the world? If one is attending a private school, how can he/she attend a public school (and vice versa) at the same time??? Admittedly, I haven't read every single post on this site, but who on here (and where) said that public school students "were not good enough to go to school with"? Even if someone said it, what does that have to do with what kind of schools (public or private) a school chooses to play?

I am confused by this post. For one, I was under the impression (correct me if I am wrong) that it was a few public schools (particularly one in Murfreesboro) which led the split charge. Am I missing something here? [Edited by rollredroll on 10-3-02 3:53P]

The post of the week right there. Your first good mark is coming.

I actually think it's been down the last two years as well. This year it's arguably stronger than either 99 or 00. One thing about DII-AAA - the championship games have been thrillers. With the exception of MBA's 34-point rout of Christian Brothers in 1999, the four other championship games have been decided by a total of 7 points: '97: Ryan 10, MBA 7 '98: MBA 21, BA 19 '00: MBA 8, BA 7 '01: McCallie 17, BA 16 Four of the five champions finished the year undefeated (and I think BA was undefeated going into the 1998 title game), and each beat some pretty good 4A and 5A programs along the way to titles. Yes, the playoff format is a joke (through no fault of the schools involved), but it's hard to argue the quality and parity in the league.

BA-McCallie is obviously the game of the night of the three mentioned. I'm with Stan - a McCallie "W" would not be a surprise. But I'll say BA wins this one with the revenge factor working in its favor. I'll say BA 21-17. Baylor vs. Ryan probably will not be close (sorry, Dom). With all due respect to Goodpasture and Brentwood High, Baylor may be the best opponent FRHS has faced yet. I'll say Baylor 34-7. MUS vs. MBA is interesting. A "Did You Know?": MUS is one of two Super 7 teams which hasn't been to a Super 7 championship game (Baylor being the other), yet is the only team with a non-losing record (3-3) to MBA in Super 7 play. MBA's defense may be coming around a little bit, and it will need to again. No prediction since I'm biased!

Don't forget, that was Bolles' payback in 2000 after MBA beat them (without technicality) in 1999. It doesn't make too much sense for the Super 7 to travel out of state these days since "region" games can be as much as 5-hour bus rides for the Memphis and Chattanooga schools. Nevertheless, I'm sure we'll see more out-of-state opponents for all of the aforementioned schools in the years to come. [Edited by rollredroll on 9-26-02 6:42A]

Love 'em or hate 'em, I don't think anyone can rightfully say that BA has avoided, or would avoid, anyone. They have played teams (and in many cases, good teams) from MS, AL, OH, AK, etc., just in recent history, and probably teams from other states before that time. 10 regular season games a year...you can't schedule everyone.

I agree. Whether the game counts doesn't concern me so much - BA will not need this win to make the playoffs. However, I'm not sure why the stats should count. I presume that all state and national high school records are based on results versus varsity teams. Why should stats be counted against non-varsity teams? Will this open up a can of worms where varsity teams petition to play JV teams?

A new Catholic high school just outside of Nashville. I think they field their first official varsity team in '03 or '04. I would assume this game would not count towards standings or statistics.

I understand, WesVols. BAEagles would be doing his school a favor to let classy guys like you and itzme represent BA and not himself.

itzme, you obviously are an example of character and class. I support and agree with your responses. WesVols does a great job of being diplomatic in his responses, too. BAEagles, respond to me as you wish, but before you post, don't forget that more people are going to remember your displays of "character and class" than itzme's and WesVols's displays of true character and class when they form their opinions. To all interested, you will note that nowhere on this thread have I tried to compare BA to one particular school (including the one I support). I have asked why the data were not made available, and a couple of supporters have provided answers, albeit different ones, as to the reasons why. If BAEagles's response is correct, I am sure BA will have the information made available next year, and those people who use that data to make educational decisions will appreciate having access to the data. Yes, this is a sports board, but we only are able to talk about sports because of the presence of the school. The high school can exist without high school sports, but high school sports cannot exist without the high school.

Thanks for responding. I think your responses not only adequately address the absence of the data but also enlighten us all regarding the "character and class" you were taught in high school (your posts on the BA/Harding thread on the Football Board - particularly your use of the word "rape" - are great examples, too).

Well, i think that harding is a joke this year just like last year. Also, I hope harding looked better than briarcrest or mus because we raped them, and that is the bottom line. harding is not the most physical team that ba has played all year. that is a lie. ba played st.xavier from ohio. they were in the top 25 in the nation, just like us. they hit us so hard. they took david holbert out of the game in the first quarter. harding did nothing, nothing. ba was hitting harding too. harding got lucky off of one play. the same play they had last year. basically, harding can never hang with ba, never. so dont even try to make it seem like they can. What a heartwarming display of humility and sportsmanship.

Exactly (and in some cases as much as twice that amount). [Edited by rollredroll on 9-19-02 10:27A]

I acknowledge that not having geographical boundaries (no zones) is a significant advantage for privates. I doubt anyone on either side of the debate can dispute that fact. I also doubt anyone can give me an example of a private school (at least in Tennessee) saying, "Johnny Football, who lives 1,000 miles from our school, is a heckuva ball player. Let's go get him". I also doubt anyone can convince me that the public schools don't have an equally significant advantage of not being hamstrung by the stringent academic and financial requirements with which the private schools must contend (not to mention politics, alumni pressures, character issues, etc.). [Edited by rollredroll on 9-19-02 10:30A]

You are correct, landersmom. It's much easier for a kid living in San Francisco to make that five-day-a-week, multi-thousand mile commute to, say, Brentwood Academy than it is to Brentwood High School. This concept of nationwide recruiting is ludicrous. In theory, yes, BA has "access" to the S.F. kid and BHS does not, but get real - 99.9999% of this country's parents are not moving (or commuting) hundreds or thousands of miles so their kids can play ball at a private school. [Edited by rollredroll on 9-18-02 3:48P] Stan, we both know that Baylor and McCallie should be excluded from this discussion since (1) both are boarding schools and can house students from anywhere if their parents want to send them away to school and (2) Chattanooga's proximity to Georgia is such that a Georgia resident who is a day student at either school conceivably could have a shorter drive to school than a Tennessee resident. As for the boarding issue, I'd like to know how many out-of-state boarders are children of alumni. I bet the percentage is high. True, MBA (and other Nashville privates) students come from different counties and school zones, but wouldn't you say all are from the Nashville MSA? I live in Brentwood (Williamson County) but also live a half-mile from the Davidson County border and two miles from CPA, which is in Nashville. It would be a stretch for someone to say that CPA is digging into the bowels of the Nashville MSA to grab my boy if he went to school there - he would be living closer to a Nashville/Davidson County school than he would Brentwood Academy, which is in Williamson County. I understand your point, but in the spirit of the post to which I originally responded, I think it's important to understand that geography limits private schools more than the public supporters think (although privates obviously have an advantage by not having zones). If the best football player in the state resides in Cookeville, Cookeville High will get the kid (if he's zoned there), not any of the privates in Nashville or Knoxville which don't board. [Edited by rollredroll on 9-18-02 11:48P]

I agree, irish01. I think Webb will be in a dogfight with MBA in the 4th quarter, provided they have an effective running game. MBA's passing defense is not bad, although that is somewhat misleading because DB, BGA, Catholic, and Baylor all have found a lot of success in the running game and haven't had to rely on the pass. If Webb tries to throw its way to victory, they likely will be unsuccessful. But, I am sure Webb's scouts know that the ground game will likely be its bread and butter. On a side note, I am interested to see how BGA and Baylor fare, as should Webb fans since BGA looks to be the team to be in DII-AA. That one may come down to Baylor's depth. Rollredroll, how many linemen and Lb's did yall loose from last years team? I played for Webb last year and ya'll had some real good linemen (78, 72, 15, 79...) and some good lb's (7 and 8 i think). We actually ended up passing a lot last year and had some success just got tired in the second half and got run over. The halftime score was only 14-10 I think. Anyways just wondering if these guys graduated, thanks I don't know exact numbers, but a lot. A lot of new names are making plays (and not making plays) on defense. Whereas defense was a relative strength last year (three shutouts of Catholic, BGA, and Brentwood Academy), it's not this year. I'm not sure if that's due to a lack of talent or the new coach's focus on offense. MBA is probably a year away from being a serious contender again for the DII-AAA title. The junior class is stacked and the freshman and JV teams look to be really good. Yes, last year's game was tight in the first half. If memory serves, KW scored first on a long play. This year's game will be tight for the entire game if MBA's defense doesn't find a new wrinkle this week. And if the offense struggles, the Big Red may be chasing. [Edited by rollredroll on 9-18-02 11:56P]

I agree, irish01. I think Webb will be in a dogfight with MBA in the 4th quarter, provided they have an effective running game. MBA's passing defense is not bad, although that is somewhat misleading because DB, BGA, Catholic, and Baylor all have found a lot of success in the running game and haven't had to rely on the pass. If Webb tries to throw its way to victory, they likely will be unsuccessful. But, I am sure Webb's scouts know that the ground game will likely be its bread and butter. On a side note, I am interested to see how BGA and Baylor fare, as should Webb fans since BGA looks to be the team to be in DII-AA. That one may come down to Baylor's depth.

It will depend on Webb's running game. MBA cannot defend the run well at all. Knoxville Catholic was the worst (no offense intended, Catholic fans) of the four teams MBA has played this year and I think they still had 200+ yards rushing to make a game of it. I assume Webb is better than KC, at least based on history. On the plus side for MBA, their offense, if clicking, could break out for 30+ points any given night and could compete with most teams in a shootout. I'm pulling for MBA, but if Webb's running game excels, I wouldn't be surprised if they are in the game late in the 4th quarter. I saw last year's game and, despite losing 35-10 to MBA last year, I thought Webb was a good DII-AA team.

You are correct, landersmom. It's much easier for a kid living in San Francisco to make that five-day-a-week, multi-thousand mile commute to, say, Brentwood Academy than it is to Brentwood High School. This concept of nationwide recruiting is ludicrous. In theory, yes, BA has "access" to the S.F. kid and BHS does not, but get real - 99.9999% of this country's parents are not moving (or commuting) hundreds or thousands of miles so their kids can play ball at a private school. [Edited by rollredroll on 9-18-02 3:48P]

If I read a newspaper article that had the headline, "(Insert Public High School Name Here) Student Arrested in Classroom for Narcotics, Gun Possession", would it be fair for me to come on here and say: "All public school kids are gun-toting druggies. Debate Over." Not fair, is it?

The article in question tells me nothing, other than some kids wanted to try to play football and transferred to a school that offered football. As it relates to any kind of "debate", I think it would help us all if we knew a few more facts, such as: How many CA student/athletes (football players) did not transfer versus how many that did? What was the financial situation of the students in question that transferred vis-a-vis the financial situation of the average student at CA? What was the academic standing of the students in question that transferred vis-a-vis the academic standing of the average student at CA? [Edited by rollredroll on 9-17-02 3:32P]

FYI: I think you mean St. Xavier is ranked in the top 10 in its division in Ohio. St. X was blanked 21-0 the week after it beat BA and is nowhere to be found in the USA Today or any other national rankings I have seen.

You are a class act, RollRed. Good mark for you, and best of luck to your team this year, except when they play mine! Thanks, itzme. I'm not sure who you root for, but if that team has any kind of rushing game, it will cause fits for MBA's rushing defense.