Multiplier rule did what it was suppose to do!

[BUC4LIFE]

And that is a disadvantage...how?

Because they are 1/2 the size of their competition now. Because they do not give financial aid to athletes. They have as much "advantage" as anyone else in D1 before the multiplier. I was hoping you would tell me what their unfair "advantage" was that you continue to talk about.

[Antwan]

Because they are 1/2 the size of their competition now. Because they do not give financial aid to athletes. They have as much "advantage" as anyone else in D1 before the multiplier. I was hoping you would tell me what their unfair "advantage" was that you continue to talk about.

 

BUCCO...I think you might be the slow one. You and yours keep talking about how 1a is void of competition. Which is it? Is it tougher or easier? You do realize they are still in 1a...right?

Edited December 12, 2005 by Antwan

[Antwan]

Once again, your a little slow. I didn't say they had an advantage. I said they were better.

 

They could be...but I doubt it. DL got hammered by LA. LA was a much better team last year...and the previous few years. DL had about the same team they always do. There were at least 4 teams in their region that would have beaten DL pretty easily. GP didn't look too good either...even though they were probably a little down from the last couple of years. Nah...the teams in our 3a region were just as good or better. I know Fulton was better.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Antwan

[Dogstar]

I did not include Catholic and Notre Dame...because they could not play a public in their class. In fact...they played very few publics at all.

 

Another note is that the schools you mentioned are only one school in each class except for Melrose and Maryville. The privates were all in the same class except for DL.

 

If the dominance had been by one school only...I doubt we would have seen a multiplier.

 

Also...you have to look at the most recent classification period...because that is what you base the next 4 years on.

I only named a few schools that came to mind. After this week I will do more research and try to give you a better response. I don't have the time to do adequate job researching the data. I really thought you would understand that I was just giving a few examples and not a final report. I did notice that one region in 1A is mostly private schools but I have not had time to see if that matters or not. See you next week.

[Antwan]

I only named a few schools that came to mind. After this week I will do more research and try to give you a better response. I don't have the time to do adequate job researching the data. I really thought you would understand that I was just giving a few examples and not a final report. I did notice that one region in 1A is mostly private schools but I have not had time to see if that matters or not. See you next week.

 

I can only go by what you say. I assume you mean before the multiplier.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Antwan

[Dogstar]

I can only go by what you say. I assume you mean before the multiplier.

As I, you. Next week.

[yellowdog]

There was a meeting in another state some years back where athletic directors were discussing private/public issues. One older fellow who hadn't said anything during the long discussion finally laid back in his chair and said "Wouldn't it be nice if we could all close our eyes and wish away about five schools in our states - then we wouldn't be having this discussion".

[TalentWinsGames]

Look at the last 4 years (last classification period) before the multiplier. You are right...there is no one school. It was several schools in 1a. The one thing they had in common was that they were all private. In 2a there were only 2 schools that were private. Look at the records for both. Pre-split really doesn't matter. That is before the privates became dominant.

[/quote

Look the reason for a split was because since the mid-nineties sports has taken a priority in many schools, especially in the private schools. For example, Boyd did not take off until 96. BGA became dominant in 95. Also, you see a decline in public sports at that time. Just telling you the reason for the split in the first place.

[TalentWinsGames]

Look at the last 4 years (last classification period) before the multiplier. You are right...there is no one school. It was several schools in 1a. The one thing they had in common was that they were all private. In 2a there were only 2 schools that were private. Look at the records for both. Pre-split really doesn't matter. That is before the privates became dominant.

[/quote

Look the reason for a split was because since the mid-nineties sports has taken a priority in many schools, especially in the private schools. For example, Boyd did not take off until 96. BGA became dominant in 95. Also, you see a decline in public sports at that time. Just telling you the reason for the split in the first place.

[big red big blue]

 

 

How is it that Public schools Trousdale with 6 titles, Maryville with 9 titles, Alcoa with 7 titles to name three are not considered to have an advantage while Private Schools David Lipscomb with 2 titles, DCA with 3 titles and FRA 1 title to name three have an advantage. Please explain what the advantages are?

 

 

This is precisely the question I have been asking ever since I started posting on these boards. Statistically, there is far, far less evidence that supports sustained private school domination over publics than there is evidence of a handful of public schools dominating their public school peers.

 

It really ought to be a far greater cause for concern when there are this disparate results for teams that supposedly operate under identical conditions

[BUC4LIFE]

BUCCO...I think you might be the slow one. You and yours keep talking about how 1a is void of competition. Which is it? Is it tougher or easier? You do realize they are still in 1a...right?

 

So typical you aintone. I have never said 1A was "void of competition" I haven't read that on any other board. You can't discuss an issue without putting words in other peoples mouth. Yes I do realize Temple is still in 1A. They are one of many 1A schools still struggling to get their program going. If they grow just a little more, then YOU AND YOURS can throw them into 2A and let them play schools twice their size. Please tell me again what their "unfair advantage" is. They are a private 1A school that does not give financial aid to athletes, just like all the rest of us. So please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of "unfair advantage"

[Antwan]

So typical you aintone. I have never said 1A was "void of competition" I haven't read that on any other board. You can't discuss an issue without putting words in other peoples mouth. Yes I do realize Temple is still in 1A. They are one of many 1A schools still struggling to get their program going. If they grow just a little more, then YOU AND YOURS can throw them into 2A and let them play schools twice their size. Please tell me again what their "unfair advantage" is. They are a private 1A school that does not give financial aid to athletes, just like all the rest of us. So please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of "unfair advantage"

 

Population base...oh great one. Read the many posts on the subject. Look at the numbers on private vs. public at the 1a level in the 4 years before the multiplier. Believe me...I'm not putting words in your mouth. Is 1a tough or not? Why is Temple...and other 1a privates not in an easier division? Heck...they are...and you still whine about it. All YOU AND YOURS have done is whine because you were moved up. You should know I am against the multiplier...always have been. Aren't you the intellectual grand poobah of coacht? It has been said over and over all of the tough competition in 1a has been eliminated by the multiplier. Where have you been reading? Certainly not this site.

Edited December 13, 2005 by Antwan