Fact that may only interest me

[BigG]

Just curious, how many of the above mentioned public schools are open zoned. Not trying to start anything, but I would like to see if that was a factor. Maryville is, I believe, but I am not sure about the others.

[tnsddeveloper]

Just curious, how many of the above mentioned public schools are open zoned. Not trying to start anything, but I would like to see if that was a factor. Maryville is, I believe, but I am not sure about the others.

Maryville is. Alcoa is. Hillsboro is. Riverdale was (why do you think Rankin left). TC is the only game in town and draws families/kids from surrounding counties. Tyner is magnet.

[VolunteerGeneral]

Maryville is. Alcoa is. Hillsboro is. Riverdale was (why do you think Rankin left). TC is the only game in town and draws families/kids from surrounding counties. Tyner is magnet.

 

And you know...I don`t mind folks saying the fact that private schools having an open zone is an advantage. It`s just a bit hypocritcal though to ignore public schools that have them.

[lazarus]

might be that the lack of response was due to the lack of a premise to respond to.

listing a few dominant programs doesnt say much, i think we are all aware that dominant programs are a part of sports.

it might have been that the premise was supposed to be that the poor private schools are singled out, but self pity isnt much of a premise, and criticism is part of being dominant. if brentwood academy's football teams have an edge on shelbyville's girls basketball teams for detractors, it hasnt been obvious to me.

 

now that we finally have something of a premise, "open zone schools have an advantage", there is something to respond to.

 

the data is a little skimpy, barely enough to call the "advantage" a reasonable possibility. feel free to perform a more substantial analysis.

intuitively, it is hard to see how open zones could fail to be a potential advantage. you have to have the horses, and the larger the pool, the more horses there will be. all that remains is to draw a disproportionate number of those horses from the overall pool into your individual population. again, we all seem to agree that athletes are drawn to successful programs, so there seems to be little argument that open zone schools have a better chance to create a powerhouse.

 

but here is the rub. if your premise is that open zone schools have "advantages", by extension all schools would have inherent advantages, or disadvantages, based on their method of filling their enrollment.

and there is significant (i would consider it conclusive) data collected that indicates that privates have the largest advantages of all. again, i would welcome a set of data demonstrating that all open zone schools have a winning record against all privates.

 

good luck.

[Baldcoach]

might be that the lack of response was due to the lack of a premise to respond to.

listing a few dominant programs doesnt say much, i think we are all aware that dominant programs are a part of sports.

it might have been that the premise was supposed to be that the poor private schools are singled out, but self pity isnt much of a premise, and criticism is part of being dominant. if brentwood academy's football teams have an edge on shelbyville's girls basketball teams for detractors, it hasnt been obvious to me.

 

now that we finally have something of a premise, "open zone schools have an advantage", there is something to respond to.

 

the data is a little skimpy, barely enough to call the "advantage" a reasonable possibility. feel free to perform a more substantial analysis.

intuitively, it is hard to see how open zones could fail to be a potential advantage. you have to have the horses, and the larger the pool, the more horses there will be. all that remains is to draw a disproportionate number of those horses from the overall pool into your individual population. again, we all seem to agree that athletes are drawn to successful programs, so there seems to be little argument that open zone schools have a better chance to create a powerhouse.

 

but here is the rub. if your premise is that open zone schools have "advantages", by extension all schools would have inherent advantages, or disadvantages, based on their method of filling their enrollment.

and there is significant (i would consider it conclusive) data collected that indicates that privates have the largest advantages of all. again, i would welcome a set of data demonstrating that all open zone schools have a winning record against all privates.

 

good luck.

 

 

Laz,

 

I think you framed the problem in impossible terms, and misunderstood the premise. The premise was that there are public school teams with dominate records that far eclipse any private school's dominance...yet no one ever attacks them as having some sort of advantage. If we are defining "advantage" as "anything that enables a school to consistently beat its competitors" as your post seems to infer, then surely Riverdale, Maryville, Alcoa, Fulton, etc. must have huge advantages over the other schools their size. Shouldn't their advantages earn a multiplier for them just as the privates' advantages earned one for the privates? Or, to take it a step further, no DII school has racked up a record like those publics over the last 10 years vs anyone. If DII schools have a huge enough advantage with financial aid that they need to be shunted into a seperate division, surely whatever greater advantages the unbeatable publics seem to have should earn them an unquestioned move to DII also?

 

Now, as to advantages to fill enrollments. I'm not sure of the number, but I think there are 40 or 50 small privates around the state? There are, however, many fewer open zoned or magnets. Yet, of the open zoned or magnet schools a MUCH higher percentage have elite football programs...Tyner, S. Pitt, Alcoa, Maryville are four I can think of right off the bat. Wouldn't that, by definition, imply that the magnets have a larger advantage than privates when it comes to open enrollment? I submit it is exactly what was said in a previous post...magnets are a private education at no charge...anyone can go there. The biggest problem the small privates have is that their potential enrollment pool is limited to those who can afford tuition...magnets and open zoned schools avoid that problem.

[lazarus]

"The premise was that there are public school teams with dominate records that far eclipse any private school's dominance...yet no one ever attacks them as having some sort of advantage."

 

they dont?

you could have fooled me.

admittedly, the dominant teams are more often accused of cheating

(not that the private schools get any of that)

but i do not know of any dominant program whose weaker opponents dont call on all manner of "advantages" as an excuse.

 

and as far as eclipsing any private school's dominance, i believe BA went for 20+ years before D-II was formed without ever losing a district/region game in football.

 

"many fewer open zoned or magnets."

 

now the magnets are a new kind of animal. they began as "geek" schools, but the new thing seems to be specific sport magnets. and they are drawing plenty of attention.

as for "open zoned" some form of open zone seems to be the prevailing structure for public school systems. the oddity would be the school that is truly closed zone...

if there are any at all.

[big red big blue]

I think you framed the problem in impossible terms, and misunderstood the premise. The premise was that there are public school teams with dominate records that far eclipse any private school's dominance...yet no one ever attacks them as having some sort of advantage. If we are defining "advantage" as "anything that enables a school to consistently beat its competitors" as your post seems to infer, then surely Riverdale, Maryville, Alcoa, Fulton, etc. must have huge advantages over the other schools their size. Shouldn't their advantages earn a multiplier for them just as the privates' advantages earned one for the privates? Or, to take it a step further, no DII school has racked up a record like those publics over the last 10 years vs anyone. If DII schools have a huge enough advantage with financial aid that they need to be shunted into a seperate division, surely whatever greater advantages the unbeatable publics seem to have should earn them an unquestioned move to DII also?

 

that is a homerun....thank you...that is precisely the point. When these very same statistics were used in the context of the public-private debate, they were grounds for special meetings, rules being rewritten, radical changes like the formation of DII that permanently turned a system on its head that had been in place for decades and decades. This was the very evidence that was used to make the arguments for the multiplier/dII. Maybe it was the fair thing to do. I can't say one way or the other. But if that is the standard--i.e., change the rules when one group enjoys "dominant" status over its peers--then why isn't it applied all over the state? Why did the private schools get singled out?

 

I guess the real challenge of this thread is for someone to explain why those stats mattered in the public-private debate but don't matter at all in this context.

[Bighurt]

JMHO.

 

It matters if your name is MBA, Brentwood Academy, Goodpasture, Lipscomb, Boyd-Buchanan, USJ, CPA, etc.

 

It does not matter if your name is Riverdale, Alcoa, Maryville, Tyner, Fulton, Ridgeway, Melrose, White Station, Germantown, etc.

 

Now what is the difference?

[lazarus]

"Now what is the difference?"

 

while your emotions seem to be running high, i am at a loss to understand what it is you are looking for.

the difference is what is the common bond? what "group" do these schools belong to that is winning a disproportionate amount?

if you are simply calling for teams that win a lot to be reclassed, that would be called a merit system. i (and a lot of others) would love to see a merit system.

if it is because of the proverbial "open zones", i am still waiting to discover the first public school that doesnt have "out of zone" kids.

so i suppose that the open zone schools already have a multiplier... that would be 1.0.

maybe if a school exists that doesnt take ANY out of zone kids, they could cry out to have a multiplier of 0.8?

 

what is the common thread that you want to see everyone all tore up about? we know that selection of schools is currently having a lot of success (in at least one sport), but what is it that defines them as a group, besides having winning programs?

[Indian]

There aren't a lot of Maryvilles, Alcoas, Riverdales, Trousdales, in the public schools, when you remember you're looking at 250 or so public football programs. Out of about 50 privates, quite a few would be considered top level programs. That's my point.

[Bighurt]

"Now what is the difference?"

 

while your emotions seem to be running high, i am at a loss to understand what it is you are looking for.

the difference is what is the common bond? what "group" do these schools belong to that is winning a disproportionate amount?

if you are simply calling for teams that win a lot to be reclassed, that would be called a merit system. i (and a lot of others) would love to see a merit system.

if it is because of the proverbial "open zones", i am still waiting to discover the first public school that doesnt have "out of zone" kids.

so i suppose that the open zone schools already have a multiplier... that would be 1.0.

maybe if a school exists that doesnt take ANY out of zone kids, they could cry out to have a multiplier of 0.8?

 

what is the common thread that you want to see everyone all tore up about? we know that selection of schools is currently having a lot of success (in at least one sport), but what is it that defines them as a group, besides having winning programs?

I also am for a merit system but it won't happen. Because it would force the successful public school program to play up just like the multiplier now does with private schools only.

 

My point is (and the point of this topic) is that successful private school programs are labeled as cheaters and successful public school programs are labeled as hard-working and tradition-rich programs.

 

It wouldn't make any difference if there were 100 programs like Maryville and Aloca. You would still be critical of private school programs.

Edited August 24, 2006 by Bighurt

[Baldcoach]

"The premise was that there are public school teams with dominate records that far eclipse any private school's dominance...yet no one ever attacks them as having some sort of advantage."

 

they dont?

you could have fooled me.

admittedly, the dominant teams are more often accused of cheating

(not that the private schools get any of that)

but i do not know of any dominant program whose weaker opponents dont call on all manner of "advantages" as an excuse.

 

and as far as eclipsing any private school's dominance, i believe BA went for 20+ years before D-II was formed without ever losing a district/region game in football.

 

"many fewer open zoned or magnets."

 

now the magnets are a new kind of animal. they began as "geek" schools, but the new thing seems to be specific sport magnets. and they are drawing plenty of attention.

as for "open zoned" some form of open zone seems to be the prevailing structure for public school systems. the oddity would be the school that is truly closed zone...

if there are any at all.

 

Ok, so let's split BA (if they truly have that record) and the five or six dominant publics too...we can call it Division III, The Real Deal. Let all the other schools which have been good but not impossibly good back in and kill the multiplier. But you and I know that won't happen...because even though BA's record isn't appreciably better than the unbeatable publics, and even though NO other private has that kind of record, the publics don't want ANY private to be too good. So CPA, for example, who has a couple of State Championships and some hard luck seasons too over the last 10 years in 1a, gets 1.8'ed while Trousdale, who has more titles and a better 1a record for its last 10 years in 1a, has a coach who cries about the dominating privates. Double standard.

 

Again, if dominance implies an advantage, then the dominating publics must have one and need to be split/modified so we can have that elusive "level playing field" that all the private bashers like to babble about. If dominance or a winning team does not imply an advantage, then kill the multiplier and let the DII school back in. But to say that a team that becomes dominant has an advantage IF IT IS PRIVATE, but doesn't have an advantage IF IT IS A PUBLIC is simply discrimination. Either it does or doesn't...I think you are a fair person, you tell me.