There Is Not A Solution

[I Love HS Football]

I don't know if the multiplier was the best thing or not. It will take more than one year for me to decide. Something tells me that the smaller privates are going to struggle with this.

 

See the problem is, not all private schools are the same. But yet, we are treating them the same. Some privates, and you can tell who they are on coacht, really don't have lots of money and they don't try to finagle through the loop holes.

 

When talking about privates having the advantage over public schools, you hear the schools like David Lipscomb, Brentwood Academy, Goodpasture, MBA, CPA, Knoxville Catholic, and many more. The multiplier was intact because of these schools and their way of doing things.

 

Bottom line....private schools have the possibility of having an unfair advantage, but not all have of them are actually doing those things. Some are getting the shaft by the multiplier IMO. But what do you do, let the others dominate everything? A complete split is the only cure, IMO.

[rollredroll]

When talking about privates having the advantage over public schools, you hear the schools like David Lipscomb, Brentwood Academy, Goodpasture, MBA, CPA, Knoxville Catholic, and many more. The multiplier was intact because of these schools and their way of doing things.

 

Point of clarification: Brentwood Academy and MBA have nothing to do with the multiplier, no matter how they "do things" (or how others think they "do things").

 

MBA continues to churn out tremendous student-athletes. I'd bet that the percentage of their senior football players alone who are either National Merit semifinalists or commended students (that figure is about 18% this year) is higher than the percentages of the entire student bodies at most other schools. As an MBA fan/alum, I hope they continue to do things the same way they've been doing them all along.

Edited December 10, 2005 by rollredroll

[silverpie]

Bottom line....private schools have the possibility of having an unfair advantage, but not all have of them are actually doing those things. Some are getting the shaft by the multiplier IMO. But what do you do, let the others dominate everything? A complete split is the only cure, IMO.

 

So, fix "giving them the shaft" by sticking it to those same schools even worse. Brilliant!

[Antwan]

So, fix "giving them the shaft" by sticking it to those same schools even worse. Brilliant!

 

I don't understand your logic. How would it be giving them the shaft?

[VolunteerGeneral]

I don`t think there was a problem to begin with. So why are we looking for a solution?

[Ohio Vol]

I think the first question is this. What is the problem that needs addressed?

 

Is it private schools dominating football?

Is it private schools dominating other sports?

Is "domination" determined by number of championships won, by number of playoff teams, or by number of "high-level" teams?

Is the idea of recruiting for strictly athletics the problem?

 

Antwan,

 

I think he uses "giving the shaft" to refer to those small private schools who don't excel at sports (nor have any desire to have their prestige determined on the gridiron) and will never have that chance due to playing up two levels. To give an example, there are five Catholic schools in Columbus. Two of them dominate football at the Division 2 and 3 levels, two others are average in Division 5, and the fifth one is an annual joke in football. They've won something like two conference games in 22 years, and haven't beaten their primary rival since the late 1970s. They don't really care; they average around $2 million in scholarships for every senior class of around 150 boys.

 

Now, if they were to get some incoming freshmen who passed all the tough entrance exams and played football, they'd be going up against the mammoth powerhouses with an enrollment of up to 1800 kids (compared to their 600) in Division 1. They'd be hard-pressed to even make the playoffs, let alone win. After all, the Division 1 regional champions (four of them) ordinarily all find their way into the USA Today Super 25; you're asking a one-year wonder to go up against them.

 

What the multiplier inherently says is that public school students are only 55% as good as a private school student. Frankly, I'd be steamed just about that. That's like the way that the inherent message of affirmative action is that minorities aren't good enough or smart enough to make it on their own, so there has to be legislation to "level the playing field."

 

My primary problem with a total split anywhere is the economics of the situation don't make sense. Let's say that privates and publics aren't allowed to play each other in anything; how far then does a school have to go to simply play a game? Besides much longer bus rides (even to the point of possibly chartering buses), there's the possiblity of lodging, more time missed in school, etc. We've already seen that in Ohio where some publics refuse to play good private schools; the end result is that the good privates have to play anywhere from 2-5 hours away at least 4 times out of 10 games. That's a total waste of money and resources, and a tremendous drain on an educational system that is in business to educate.

[Antwan]

I think the first question is this. What is the problem that needs addressed?

 

Is it private schools dominating football? yes

Is it private schools dominating other sports? yes

Is "domination" determined by number of championships won, by number of playoff teams, or by number of "high-level" teams? yes...all 3

Is the idea of recruiting for strictly athletics the problem? yes..the idea

 

Antwan,

 

I think he uses "giving the shaft" to refer to those small private schools who don't excel at sports (nor have any desire to have their prestige determined on the gridiron) and will never have that chance due to playing up two levels. To give an example, there are five Catholic schools in Columbus. Two of them dominate football at the Division 2 and 3 levels, two others are average in Division 5, and the fifth one is an annual joke in football. They've won something like two conference games in 22 years, and haven't beaten their primary rival since the late 1970s. They don't really care; they average around $2 million in scholarships for every senior class of around 150 boys.

 

Now, if they were to get some incoming freshmen who passed all the tough entrance exams and played football, they'd be going up against the mammoth powerhouses with an enrollment of up to 1800 kids (compared to their 600) in Division 1. They'd be hard-pressed to even make the playoffs, let alone win. After all, the Division 1 regional champions (four of them) ordinarily all find their way into the USA Today Super 25; you're asking a one-year wonder to go up against them.

 

What the multiplier inherently says is that public school students are only 55% as good as a private school student. Frankly, I'd be steamed just about that. That's like the way that the inherent message of affirmative action is that minorities aren't good enough or smart enough to make it on their own, so there has to be legislation to "level the playing field."

 

My primary problem with a total split anywhere is the economics of the situation don't make sense. Let's say that privates and publics aren't allowed to play each other in anything; how far then does a school have to go to simply play a game? Besides much longer bus rides (even to the point of possibly chartering buses), there's the possiblity of lodging, more time missed in school, etc. We've already seen that in Ohio where some publics refuse to play good private schools; the end result is that the good privates have to play anywhere from 2-5 hours away at least 4 times out of 10 games. That's a total waste of money and resources, and a tremendous drain on an educational system that is in business to educate.

 

The private schools that don't excel in 1a today...won't excel whether there is a split or not.

 

I don't agree with the multiplier either. I think it was a temporary band-aid solution.

 

If you are so familiar with TN...you should know about the travel. I don't forsee a total split (not play each other in regular season) unless the privates make that move. If they want to do that...I don't think the publics would care one bit. If they want to play...that would be fine too. Travel for the public schools would not change much...if any. The travel problem would be for the Chattanooga and Knoxville privates. The Nashville and Memphis privates wouldn't have much of a problem. It's the aid schools most large publics will not play. I doubt they will play no matter if there is a split or not. I think those days are long gone.

[flashgordon]

I don't understand your logic. How would it be giving them the shaft?

The "shaft" would be the multiplier!....It's not that hard to figure out.

[flashgordon]

Point of clarification: Brentwood Academy and MBA have nothing to do with the multiplier, no matter how they "do things" (or how others think they "do things").

 

MBA continues to churn out tremendous student-athletes. I'd bet that the percentage of their senior football players alone who are either National Merit semifinalists or commended students (that figure is about 18% this year) is higher than the percentages of the entire student bodies at most other schools. As an MBA fan/alum, I hope they continue to do things the same way they've been doing them all along.

They do turn out good Student/Athletes (as do many schools - public and private)...but a "State Championships" determined by 8 teams is a little hollow.

[flashgordon]

I don't know if the multiplier was the best thing or not. It will take more than one year for me to decide. Something tells me that the smaller privates are going to struggle with this.

 

See the problem is, not all private schools are the same. But yet, we are treating them the same. Some privates, and you can tell who they are on coacht, really don't have lots of money and they don't try to finagle through the loop holes.

 

When talking about privates having the advantage over public schools, you hear the schools like David Lipscomb, Brentwood Academy, Goodpasture, MBA, CPA, Knoxville Catholic, and many more. The multiplier was intact because of these schools and their way of doing things.

 

Bottom line....private schools have the possibility of having an unfair advantage, but not all have of them are actually doing those things. Some are getting the shaft by the multiplier IMO. But what do you do, let the others dominate everything? A complete split is the only cure, IMO.

What if.....you let everyone play every one. You would be foolish to just play "bunnies" during the regular season because it won't prep you for the playoffs. Cut the regular season to 8 games if you need to have a larger playoff group. You have a playoff that segregates public and private into publics and privates (3 classes - A/AA/AAA)..then you can have a State Charity Bowl with the 3 classes playing each other public versus private one one day in the Boro???? Shoot if it makes everyone happy you could declare 6 state champions and the Boro Bowl would just be "for Charity"???

[rollredroll]

They do turn out good Student/Athletes (as do many schools - public and private)...but a "State Championships" determined by 8 teams is a little hollow.

 

As are the large school DI championships, which exclude the DII-AAA schools which have won at a 77% clip versus DI-5A and DI-4A since the split.

Edited December 11, 2005 by rollredroll

[VolunteerGeneral]

The private schools that don't excel in 1a today...won't excel whether there is a split or not.

 

 

 

And you should also metion that the public schools that don`t excel in 1A today won`t excel if there is a split or not. In fact a split will have no bearing whatsoever in making any team better or worse.