Not responding to anyone in particular here, but I think I have something to offer to the conversation, having played sports at Baylor before the D1/D2 split, having kids currently at Boyd and a sibling that went public.
There are studies out there which suggest the primary contributing factor to a student success, academically and athletically, is parental involvement.
Take schools like South Pitt, Signal Mountain... publics who have their community behind them, which would likely include that parents of said students, they regularly do well in a number of things, not just athletics. Those are just a couple of examples. I'm know there are exceptions, so save the crucifixion please. There are also plenty of privates that don't necessarily do well.
I recall a person from Texas posting on here a year or two ago about this very subject and the general tone of the post was that we were stupid for even talking about it.
There is no doubt that schools like Baylor, that have large endowments, can throw money around for facilities, equipment, etc. But does that really make for better athletes... students? I think you might also find some private coaches/teachers who would argue they get paid much more, if any, than a public school coach/teacher.
My personal belief is it just doesn't matter and splitting them masks the larger issue in society as a whole. It's like saying that WalMart and the local convenience store aren't aloud to complete for the same customers. It's not realistic and not reflective of real life. It is doing a disservice to our student-athletes.