Every key stroke must have been made

[Indian]

duh

 

 

You pointed out how they gave that up, they could get it back easily.

[VolunteerGeneral]

Clearly there is a difference between "52% of all schools polled" not voting for a split (I'm going to assume that no privates of the 368 polled in the data you are citing actually voted for the split), and "62% of publics (privates not included) voted for a split." maybe the vote wasn't as decisive as it was in the original poll, when only two options were given, but still, the data shows that a majority of public schools favored the split the second time around.

 

But you know something? The TSSAA is comprised of just more than public schools. Private schools should have their voice too. Don`t you agree?

 

And with that I still submit that the majority of schools in the TSSAA did not vote for a split. I commend the BOC which is made up of public school officials in recognizing this and not voting for the split.

[big red big blue]

But you know something? The TSSAA is comprised of just more than public schools. Private schools should have their voice too. Don`t you agree?

 

And with that I still submit that the majority of schools in the TSSAA did not vote for a split. I commend the BOC which is made up of public school officials in recognizing this and not voting for the split.

 

I agree with you...to give credit where it is due, RC, after seeing the overwhelming numbers in favor of a split the first time around, put in place a "cooling off period," disseminated more information, posed the question differently, and got a different outcome the second time around. And that led to the BOC voting against the split (albeit by 1 vote). The process was actually careful and deliberate this time.

 

My question to coach T is: why couldn't he have done that back in 1997? Why did he let 2 years of results (1995 and 1996) out of almost 100 completely drive the decision making process? Far fewer people were affected back than the more recent debate regarding non-financial aid privates. Why couldn't RC have implemented a "cooling off" period and presented the facts that clearly show financial aid schools, prior to DII in 1997, weren't winning titles in such a way to justify banishing them to DII?

[tnsddeveloper]

merit system

(unfortunately i couldnt find RI's calculations-it sounds interesting)

Rhode Islands info:

http://www.nasports.com/members/documents/...iteria_Memo.pdf

 

if we are ever going to have a satisfactory system,

we will all have to swallow some bitter pills.

do you think we can do it?

I think the privates have proven that they can. I think it is up to the public schools now.

[CoachT]

I agree with you...to give credit where it is due, RC, after seeing the overwhelming numbers in favor of a split the first time around, put in place a "cooling off period," disseminated more information, posed the question differently, and got a different outcome the second time around. And that led to the BOC voting against the split (albeit by 1 vote). The process was actually careful and deliberate this time.

 

My question to coach T is: why couldn't he have done that back in 1997? Why did he let 2 years of results (1995 and 1996) out of almost 100 completely drive the decision making process? Far fewer people were affected back than the more recent debate regarding non-financial aid privates. Why couldn't RC have implemented a "cooling off" period and presented the facts that clearly show financial aid schools, prior to DII in 1997, weren't winning titles in such a way to justify banishing them to DII?

I don't know, other than the fact that the schools (public and private alike) that make up the BOC and Legislative Council told him to do it a certain way and he listened to his bosses. Maybe with hindsight he would have done things differently, as would we all.

[big red big blue]

 

thing is, we tend to think of compromise as

"everyone gets something"

but the heart of compromise is

"everyone has to give something up"

 

if we are ever going to have a satisfactory system,

we will all have to swallow some bitter pills.

do you think we can do it?

 

my general feeling is "no" because most public schools have nothing to gain from making the compromises you're talking about. There are some macro issues facing everyone that a reconciliation would help resolve--like the abysmal attendance #s at the Blue Cross Bowl, waning attendance for everyone, the watered down play-off system, etc.--but which have very little impact on the day to day lives of the people who will be asked to compromise. I can't imagine that any coach is going to welcome playing private schools unless there is some clear upside attached to it.

 

I don't really think BA can leverage its victory in the courts for some sort of settlement because, as you imply, it would be the TSSAA forcing the publics into playing the privates down the barrell of a gun. I think the publics would probably much prefer just to let the TSSAA die, and have BA's lawyers fight a defunct entity's insurance company for its legal bills and start over than be forced into a system against their wills.

 

The only way I see any sort of compromise happening is if the privates can somehow convince the publics that their interests (financial or otherwise) are better served by playing the privates than not...I just don't see how that is possible.

[lazarus]

brbb,

 

i have to admit that you seem to be correct on every count.

but possibly there are some other selling points besides the good ones you already listed:

 

a satisfactory classification system would also address the issues of magnets and such, and there is a growing awareness of those issues.

 

it could provide some relief for programs that have hit rock bottom in the upper classes.

 

more schools means less sprawling districts/regions/etc

 

and BA has the ability to offer to make the legal stuff just go away...

 

perhaps the barriers would not be insurmountable:

surely the privates could be all (or nearly all) persuaded to support one solid proposal.

there is a core group of publics that would embrace a solution that did not entail a total split.

tssaa has already proven itself capable of making unpopular decisions.

 

i am sure it would take some work, but i would bet you could muster enough support to marginalize the total split extremists. there is a lot of middle ground out there just waiting to be claimed.

Edited March 28, 2006 by lazarus

[cbg]

JMO, but this is what will happen:

 

Brentwood will not burden the TSSAA with "most" of the legal fees that would probably force the TSSAA into bankruptcy in exchange of the following:

 

Everyone will be placed back together into one division and probably four classifications. We will have a multiplier or merit system for the football & basketball playoffs and maybe the olympic sports. The public schools will probably be forced to agree that they will not exit the TSSAA and form another association and they will schedule games with both private and current D2 schools. The financial aid giving schools will agree to only have X number of football and basketball players on financial aid. The number use to be 3 or 4 football players could receive any financial aid and my guess is that we will see a number similar to that.

 

Let's keep in mind a few things:

1. Brentwood Academy won the legal war and they are in the drivers seat. I don't feel that the TSSAA want's to go back to court again with BA as their record is not that good when the case get's moved out of Tennessee.

2. If the TSSAA is forced to pay the legal fees of Brentwood Academy then every member of the TSSAA will more than likely be invoiced their equal portion of the bill. If your school decides to leave the TSSAA your school will still be responsible for that amount of money if they were a member when the court decision was handed down.

3. While we may not like the courts decision we must now accept it and hope that Brentwood Academy wants to be fair with everyone. If the TSSAA & the board of control does not want to go back to court they had better be very humble during their negotiation process with Brentwood Adacemy.

Edited March 28, 2006 by cbg

[FadePattern]

This might open a can of worms that is best left closed but it just struck me. Is it possibly that the large urban schools (most near to the privates) would vote against a split because of the fear of the private schools possibly leaving the TSSAA. The private schools unfettered by the TSSAA could then(if they so chose and if they could afford to) begin to more openly recruit or encourage or entice or approach those large urban school student/athletes to enroll at the respective private schools. I am not saying this is the case. I would be curious to see how the 5 and 4 A football schools and the 3A basketball/baseball/softball schools have voted on the public/private split.

[tnsddeveloper]

This might open a can of worms that is best left closed but it just struck me. Is it possibly that the large urban schools (most near to the privates) would vote against a split because of the fear of the private schools possibly leaving the TSSAA. The private schools unfettered by the TSSAA could then(if they so chose and if they could afford to) begin to more openly recruit or encourage or entice or approach those large urban school student/athletes to enroll at the respective private schools. I am not saying this is the case. I would be curious to see how the 5 and 4 A football schools and the 3A basketball/baseball/softball schools have voted on the public/private split.

I think that is a distinct possibility. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer and I was able to put that together several months ago on another thread pertaining to the privates potentially thinking about starting their own organization. If I can get it through my thick skull, surely someone else can too.

 

I do think that if they do start their own organization, it will be a sort of open season on some of the better athletes at the large publics. You have to remember, most of the D1 privates used to give some scholarships to students that were athletes ... I think 3 or 4 for football. It wouldn't be too big of a push to reinstitute that and then add several more. They may even look at it as a "marketing" cost as good athletics programs seem to really push attendance and the school's stature up.

Edited March 28, 2006 by tnsddeveloper

[Indian]

I think that is a distinct possibility. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer and I was able to put that together several months ago on another thread pertaining to the privates potentially thinking about starting their own organization. If I can get it through my thick skull, surely someone else can too.

 

I do think that if they do start their own organization, it will be a sort of open season on some of the better athletes at the large publics. You have to remember, most of the D1 privates used to give some scholarships to students that were athletes ... I think 3 or 4 for football. It wouldn't be too big of a push to reinstitute that and then add several more. They may even look at it as a "marketing" cost as good athletics programs seem to really push attendance and the school's stature up.

 

 

How about showing some ethical behavior and not recruiting, even if in a different organization? Would that be out the window once they're not regulated?

[tnsddeveloper]

How about showing some ethical behavior and not recruiting, even if in a different organization? Would that be out the window once they're not regulated?

What's unethical about getting a kid to attend your school for whatever reason - academics, spirituality, athletics, drama, band, etc.? Those are the things that make for a really good school ... not just a private school.

 

And I was responding to and also tossing the hypothetical. I didn't say it would happen ... but I would bet my life on it happening if the privates are split off. It seems like the publics are so heck-bent on making sure that the privates are "taken care of" (like Tony Soprano would say) that they don't realize they would actually be biting their own noses to spite their face.