math man

Gutsy move for a scout for both the NCAA post here especially considering their regulations. Might want to be careful.

CPA Player: Well put, and that's EXACTLY the way it should be. Excellent job at leaving it on the court. DHfanatic: Feel free to beat your chest over the win against CPA. That was a FINE victory. As far as your first round success, though, I'd just call that a gift and move along. Good luck in the tourney. It's hard to pick either team because I like them both. They're scrappy and ner' say die squads, both of them. For me, tomorrow is a win-win.

Poor shooting. Greenfield didn't even make a basket in the third. Grace looked to be forcing shots. After scoring well in the first quarter, Greenfield backed out to shoot three-pointers the rest of the night. Two fell. Twelve didn't. The charge at the end of the game was a good call, and there was no hesitation.

You guys probably don't remember having it at Vandy . That's a fun place to have a tourney, too, and I believe it's easier to get in and out of. The "hill" is okay, though.

We aim to please!

What criteria do they use to choose the families they help and the ones they don't? I'm NOT attacking CPA. That's hardly the case. I'm more interested in discussing the SYSTEM. One or two examples aren't relevant. The system as a whole is.

Not at all! What I'm saying is that you aren't MANDATED to take ANYONE. Public schools are. Please don't read into my posts things that aren't there or meant to be there. It wasn't meant as one. It was meant to show that ANY private school has criteria and a selection process. Public schools don't. They take anyone and everyone that wants to come REGARDLESS of performance level. NO matter how you twist and turn the evaluation, there's no escaping the selectivity issue.

Ah, but you have standards both in religion and financial status. So you ARE selective. Regardless of NATURE of criteria, you have them. Public schools don't. Once again, where is my statement inaccurate. And we agree there, whole-heartedly. However, the direction of the discussion was Single A private and public and not D2 v.s. D1 Race doesn't matter. Even if it did, we'd be precluded from discussing it, so let's both run away QUICKLY from that one! LOL! On the other hand, socio-economic factors DO matter, and the fact that a D1 private school precludes those who can't meet financial obligations puts them in an advantageous position over public schools that are mandated to take anyone and everyone (as it SHOULD be for a public school). So this has no bearing on the argument other than to say the schools are interested in getting GOOD students. Therefore, the bar is raised in private schools once again . . . and lowered for public schools because you removed a good student from THEIR pool. But, regardless of source, the students have the choice to got to private or public. Not everyone has that choice, and they go to public. Once again, you strengthen my case that people who are inclined to accel and have resources choose private schools. I'm sure that there are families struggling financially TO SEND THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL. I seriously doubt that there are families using food stamp money or welfare to pay CPA's tuition. Basically, no one is going hungry to go to school. If they ARE, that's irresponsible since public schools are free.

How is it not accurate? So, what standards does your school have? Also, is this the norm for private schools in general. Remember, the argument is NOT with CPA specifically. It's with the system. Why not? I don't argue to defend a position. I argue to challenge my OWN position. If you'd like to bring up private school v.s. public school Single A performance in other sports to show that the field is level, I'd welcome that discussion. Ah, very good question with a very simple answer. All of them. Every black, white, Christian, druidic, smart, not-so-smart, and in-between student in Rockwood goes. Unless, of course, they choose to go to a private school that they can both qualify and afford to attend. Ah, so if you can't pay, you don't go. There's a selection criteria that you can base some statistics off of. And the statistics are in public schools' favor. Yup, but I think the distinction in the discussion is pretty evident. Excellent point to make, though, for some people who may not be familiar with the area.

Genetics

So, exactly what does that last part mean? You agree with the statement until it disputes your position? If so, you're arguing for the sake of arguing instead of a pursuit to find facts or solve a problem. If this is not the case, I'm not sure what you mean, then. Not at all. I said you picked the top 1000, and you get 15% of them. I didn't say you get the top 150. I said you get 150 of the top 1000. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Of that, I have no doubt. What I DO doubt is that there is a wide range of NON-talent (so to speak). How many kids do you have there who's parents are at or below the poverty line? How many drug busts has your school had? How does your school rank on standardized tests in comparison to public schools? What percentage of your school goes on to college versus a public school? How about this: if a student can't make the grades, what do you do? Is expulsion because of grades or even behaviour on option for your school? Is this as true for a public school? Now, more pertinent: what is your athletic record against Single A schools? Is that a trend or annomaly for private schools? Regardless of criteria, any private school has the advantage of selectivity when admitting students. Public schools don't enjoy the same luxury. So, other than members of the Church, what are your criteria for accepting students? How many inner-city blacks do you have bused in to CPA? What is their population percentage versus the general population? Do students who AREN'T members of the Church have to pay i.e. can anyone just show up and go to class? The end is, no matter HOW you select students, you select. Public schools can't often do that. And, when you CAN select your students, you have an advantage over a school that can't regardless of size or location. I'll return to my previous argument. Until you can quantify it, you can't accurately comment on it either being large or small. It just simply is. That's quite true! However, it doesn't mean schools lower their standards or their tuitions. It means that students who are considering private schools have choices. With scholarships, it means that some kids that wouldn't have gone to private school can go. AND THAT'S GREAT! That also means that some kid who would have been a star at Brentwood can be a star somewhere else. But, in a sense, doesn't that just reinforce my position? Think about it: Brentwood offers some kid from a low-income family the chance to play ball and get a great education. It's a wonderful country! However, in the grand scheme, you just took a potential public school star out of the pool to choose from. Also, you MAY have just bumped a paying private school jock down to another private school. So, who's hurt here? CPA? No. They weren't going to get that kid, anyway. He/she didn't have the money to pay, and CPA wasn't offering a scholarship, right? In truth, NO ONE is hurt! You're in Nashville! The 3A publics will get another star! In the end, the impact on small public Single A schools is nil. CPA can still select students based on a selection criteria, and Rockwood and Halls will take whoever comes to the door. Maybe so! I can't address that point, but if Brentwood DOES offer scholarships, then the DEFINITELY don't need to be lumped in with public schools at all.

Very simple. Whatever region you happen to come from . I'm that some Middleton and JCS people would argue theirs. Temple fans will tout their region, and Halls/Greenfield can espouse 8A. Deciding who has the toughest region is like going to a nursery and deciding who's kid is the cutest. It's simple: YOURS!

That's up for debate. Call that your opinion .

That is possibly the most well said response to any of the positions, yet. Bravo! Good sounding counterpoint, but it's illogical. It's not stupid or dumb! Just the logic is flawed, and here's why I say that. If you, on one hand, say you can't come to a logical quantification of the advantage i.e. it can't be measured regardless of quantity, you can't, on the other hand, say the advantage is non-existent or small. If you can't measure it, you can't comment on the quantity. Now, can I quantify it? Of course not. It's a trend. BUT, proving the trend is easy. Go back to my random selection versus exclusionary selection. The trend is that a selected group based on skill sets will normally outperform a randomly chosen group. Always? No. Will the deviation in performance fluctuate. Of course. But the TREND is that the selected group will normally have the advantage, and that's the argument here. I don't think that the argument is that public schools can't compete. Clearly, some can on any given year. The trend, however, is that private schools will maintain an advantage, and disputing the trend defies logic and facts in evidence. But you CAN compare the performance of Single A schools both public and private. Limiting things just to baseball, over the last 5 years, how have private schools done against public schools in athletics in Single A?

Excellent question, and I wish I had an answer. I don't think the magnet schools have been around long enough to get any historical data on them. Maybe in 3 or 4 years, we can make an educated observation. Okay, the last statement is kind of hard to understand as you more or less agree that CPA has an advantage and then seem to refute that same fact. Could you clarify that a bit, please? I may just be missing something. I think what people are saying is that you can't compare CPA (large pool) to another Single A Public with a large pool because virtually none exist. They may have existed in Memphis at one time, and the comparison was clear: the teams COULD compete. Of course, this is the rational conclusion as you are comparing two small schools with a large pool to choose from. Their selection criteria may be different, but the result isn't. When you can pick and choose your players from a large pool, you have an advantage over a school that must accept players randomly selected from any sized pool i.e. a small rural school.