Multiplier Rule

[Antwan]

I'll play merit if you guys will...###### for tat.  Merit is fair, multipliers can't be.  Certainly illegally discriminating against one kind of school and forcing them out of the TSSAA and into an artificially created division for no rule violations can't be.  Let me ask this, do metro schools vs rural schools post the same winning ratio as private vs rural? 

Answer: yes. 

Do Magnet schools vs rurals post the same winning ratio as private vs rural?

Answer: yes. 

Have we multiplied the metro schools or the magnet schools? 

Answer: no. 

Question: Why? 

Answer: Because it has nothing to do with winning ratios, even though you guys try to pretend it does.  And it has nothing to do with a level playing field.  It has to do with a prejudice by some public schools and their supporters against private schools.  If we are gonna discuss the subject let's at least agree to call'em like they are.

 

I've said over and over a merit system is fair but it will never be enacted.  Why?  Because people who claim the multiplier or DII is about fairness are not being honest.  If it was about fairness then either all metro schools and magnets would have gotten a multiplier too, or we would have gone to a merit system.  It is about punishment for about 5 or 6 private schools that moved from punching bags to powerhouses over the last 20 years.  And I thought we should reward excellence...silly me.

 

Man, I actually got into that post lol

825731339[/snapback]

 

Who are these small metro public schools (1a or 2a)you are referring to? Please name them for me. The multiplier only affects 1a and 2a schools.

Edited August 29, 2005 by Antwan

[silverpie]

Who are these small metro public schools (1a or 2a)you are referring to?  Please name them for me.  The multiplier only affects 1a and 2a schools.

825731445[/snapback]

 

Well, start with Tyner. Also a few years ago, Arts and Sciences (Chattanooga) played MLK (Nashville) in the A boys hoop final, both magnets.

[Antwan]

Well, start with Tyner. Also a few years ago, Arts and Sciences (Chattanooga) played MLK (Nashville) in the A boys hoop final, both magnets.

825731752[/snapback]

 

They are magnets...as is Hume Fogg and Liberty. I don't know if magnets have the same advantage as privates. It really depends on the admission standards. What are they? If we have 20 or so magnets in the next several years...they could be grouped with privates if they are deemed to have an unfair advantage. That day is not today. What about metro public schools? List them.

[ksgovols]

I don't disagree with a merit system to rank the teams based on past performance and schedule difficulty. There are plenty of open zoned publics and kid's moving to play for different schools, that something needs to be done across the board. The small privates domination is just one of the playing fields that needed to be leveled for the small rurals to compete. I don't recall the magnet schools ever being dominate in the Nashville area for any extended period.

[Bighurt]

A merit system that moves teams that have success up in class and moves teams down that are less successful would seem to be the most equitable means of leveling the playing field. I don't know that the TSSAA has ever even discussed this option. I will always believe that both the creation of Division II and the 1.8 multiplier were knee-jerk reactions.

 

BTW, Boyd's facilities are Spartan (I find that "spartan" is not a word) but we were treated very well. I think it speaks well of Boyd that they upgraded their visitor's stands and are waiting until more money comes in to upgrade their home stands.

 

You can bust me for the misspelling comments if you like. I have worked with robjim at least 10 Fridays per year for the last 10 years. So, I can tolerate a great deal of grief.

Edited August 29, 2005 by Bighurt

[Antwan]

A merit system that moves teams that have success up in class and moves teams down that are less successful would seem to be the most equitable means of leveling the playing field.  I don't know that the TSSAA has ever even discussed this option.  I will always believe that both the creation of Division II and the 1.8 multiplier were knee-jerk reactions. 

 

BTW, Boyd's facilities are Spartan (I find that "spartan" is not a word) but we were treated very well.  I think it speaks well of Boyd that they upgraded their visitor's stands and are waiting until more money comes in to upgrade their home stands.

 

You can bust me for the misspelling comments if you like.  I have worked with robjim at least 10 Fridays per year for the last 10 years.  So, I can tolerate a great deal of grief. 

825732145[/snapback]

 

I totally agree the multiplier was a "knee-jerk reaction" as you so well put it.

A total split would have been a "backbone reaction". That's something...evidently...five board of control members did not have.

Edited August 29, 2005 by Antwan

[silverpie]

They are magnets...as is Hume Fogg and Liberty. I don't know if magnets have the same advantage as privates. It really depends on the admission standards. What are they? If we have 20 or so magnets in the next several years...they could be grouped with privates if they are deemed to have an unfair advantage. That day is not today.  What about metro public schools?  List them.

825731761[/snapback]

 

Fair enough... but silly me, how did I forget Alcoa?

[Antwan]

Fair enough... but silly me, how did I forget Alcoa?

825732488[/snapback]

 

Alcoa and Milan are close...but I really wouldn't say they are metro areas.

[Baldcoach]

Silver, don't fall for it.

 

Antwan is trying to change the debate...again. I never said anything about "small" metro schools, he did. My point is that in every category Metro schools consistently outperform rural schools...but there is no metro multiplier. Thus, the mutliplier certainly isn't meant to be fair, it is a punishment to privates for winning. If it WAS meant to be fair then any category of school that outperformed the poor rurals would get a multiplier, but we all know that won't happen.

 

So, some metro powerhouses(excluding the privates, which are almost all metro)..

 

Oak Ridge, Maryville, Riverdale, Hillsboro, Powel, Tyner, (do I need to go on? I can...) and it gets even worse when you add in the other sports.

 

So, where is the multiplier for the public metro schools? Where is the "fair"? That was my original question Antwan, which you tried to dodge by changing the debate. Can you answer it? Of course you can...the answer is there isn't anything fair about a multiplier applied to one group of schools when other groups outperform too. In fact, what would be a more fair way to adjust would be to give all rural schools a divisor...say a 1.3 or so. That way a 1000 person rural school would count as a 770 etc.

[silverpie]

Alcoa and Milan are close...but I really wouldn't say they are metro areas.

825732567[/snapback]

 

Based on my research, the Census Bureau agrees with you on Milan (as do I)--the county of Gibson is considered "micropolitan" with its center at Humboldt and a loose connection to Jackson. Alcoa, though, is solidly within the Knoxville metro area. (Those small cities within larger metro areas have advantages everywhere--for example, Fort Meade, a small town on the edge of Lakeland, is a multi-sport powerhouse in South Florida 1A.)

[silverpie]

Hillsboro is actually unfairly classified for a different reason: their co-op with MLK gives them almost as many students to draw from as Riverdale. (I do not in any way object to co-ops, but they should be classified on combined enrollment.)

 

As I've said many times, though, there are so many factors influencing results that trying to come up with multipliers and divisors for them all is a fool's errand. Some form of merit system (of which a promotion/relegation-based is both the purest and the easiest to understand) is what needs to happen.

[Antwan]

Silver, don't fall for it.

 

Antwan is trying to change the debate...again.  I never said anything about "small" metro schools, he did.  My point is that in every category Metro schools consistently outperform rural schools...but there is no metro multiplier.  Thus, the mutliplier certainly isn't meant to be fair, it is a punishment to privates for winning.  If it WAS meant to be fair then any category of school that outperformed the poor rurals would get a multiplier, but we all know that won't happen.

 

So, some metro powerhouses(excluding the privates, which are almost all metro)..

 

Oak Ridge, Maryville, Riverdale, Hillsboro, Powel, Tyner, (do I need to go on?  I can...) and it gets even worse when you add in the other sports.

 

So, where is the multiplier for the public metro schools?  Where is the "fair"?  That was my original question Antwan, which you tried to dodge by changing the debate.  Can you answer it?  Of course you can...the answer is there isn't anything fair about a multiplier applied to one group of schools when other groups outperform too.  In fact, what would be a more fair way to adjust would be to give all rural schools a divisor...say a 1.3 or so.  That way a 1000 person rural school would count as a 770 etc.

825732620[/snapback]

 

 

 

You are right...I did say "small metro schools". There is no such animal. The larger metro public schools are already in the larger classes. Do you need to go on? Yeah...please do.

 

Change the debate...what the heck are you talking about? How are you going to give Riverdale and Oak Ridge a multiplier? Yeah...you need to go on to tell me how that's going to work. The point is that these schools are already in the largest class. Hillsboro and Maryville are in the next to largest class. Your small privates are competing in areas with that same population. They were classed with very rural areas. You can think that's fair if you want...but 226-0 kind of makes my point valid.

Just keep those blinders on for another 4 years. After that...you can take them off and you will see all private schools in your class. The multiplier is not the answer. We'll see that soon enough. A total split is. Do you think 226-0 is fair? You tell me the reason for those numbers. I'm all ears again.