The Ultimate Solution

[soccerdad]

How is playing schools equal to you, in every aspect, suddenly about politics and not teaching them the right lessons? I'll tell you when-- when it suits private school supporters to pompously proclaim it.

 

Which of these is not "about the kids"?

 

(1) Split public and private, completely, and let the private schools have their own Board of Control to set their regions, playoffs, etc.

 

(2) Classify public schools by enrollment EXCEPT for open-zone schools which will use the merit system for possible re-classification every two years.

 

Why, why why? What have you got against the privates? And there's pompus ones on both sides.

 

How about we put all of us together and use the merit system? Seems like a good idea to me - as long as we get rid of recruiting. I've worked on both sides and think unity is best for all.

[larry]

What have you got against the publics? It seems that it is about the kids as long as most of the private schools are making the playoffs. When you can put a 1A private school in an urban area and draw from 25,000 kids and then lineup on Friday night against teams who don't have 1,000 people in the whole town then "it's about the kids".

[larry]

How about we put all of us together and use the merit system?

Lately all of you have countered the argument about public-private with the merit system because there are some, in fact quite a few, open-zone public schools. My proposal takes that argument away from you because it uses the merit system to decide the open-zone issue so that is not longer a concern for you. We will deal with the open-zone schools through the merit system and would like to thank you for the idea. You may want to use it, too, to decide how you classify the private schools.

[soccerdad]

What have you got against the publics? It seems that it is about the kids as long as most of the private schools are making the playoffs. When you can put a 1A private school in an urban area and draw from 25,000 kids and then lineup on Friday night against teams who don't have 1,000 people in the whole town then "it's about the kids".

 

It's the same with most PUBLIC schools in urban areas - the athletes get waivers, pay out-of-district tuition, or just move so they can play in PUBLIC schools (that have winning traditions of course). So your argument is more about rural vs. urban, lack of choice vs. multiple choices. A merit system would help even this out.

[Baldcoach]

Lately all of you have countered the argument about public-private with the merit system because there are some, in fact quite a few, open-zone public schools. My proposal takes that argument away from you because it uses the merit system to decide the open-zone issue so that is not longer a concern for you. We will deal with the open-zone schools through the merit system and would like to thank you for the idea. You may want to use it, too, to decide how you classify the private schools.

 

 

I noticed you didn't respond to my post Larry. I know why. Because your position assumes that the only fair thing is for a split to occur, and you argue from there. Most people (both public and private) on these boards are well beyond that...they acknowledge that a split is not fair, the debate centers around whether there is a more fair way to handle things or not (and possibly whether a split is legal or not). Some say no, some say yes. You are way out of the loop...because your viewpoint is prejudiced against the small privates from the start.

 

YOu see, anyone can take your merit argument and see that it applies just as well if we all play together...except possibly you. That is why many of us argue for a merit system...it is the fair thing, not a split. The only reason for a split + a merit system is raw prejudice, which you seem to have in spades.

[larry]

It's the same with most PUBLIC schools in urban areas - the athletes get waivers, pay out-of-district tuition, or just move so they can play in PUBLIC schools (that have winning traditions of course). So your argument is more about rural vs. urban, lack of choice vs. multiple choices. A merit system would help even this out.

The public schools in urban areas are 4A and 5A publics. No privates play them. IF the argument is, indeed, more rural vs urban then where are the DI privates, in urban or rural areas? And where are the teams they play, in urban or rural areas?

[larry]

I noticed you didn't respond to my post Larry. I know why. Because your position assumes that the only fair thing is for a split to occur, and you argue from there. Most people (both public and private) on these boards are well beyond that...they acknowledge that a split is not fair, the debate centers around whether there is a more fair way to handle things or not (and possibly whether a split is legal or not). Some say no, some say yes. You are way out of the loop...because your viewpoint is prejudiced against the small privates from the start.

 

YOu see, anyone can take your merit argument and see that it applies just as well if we all play together...except possibly you. That is why many of us argue for a merit system...it is the fair thing, not a split. The only reason for a split + a merit system is raw prejudice, which you seem to have in spades.

Why would I argue a position I don't believe it? Public vs public and private versus private, so you don't have to soil your hands with us, is fair to everyone. Your viewpoint is prejudiced against the small publics from the start.

[VolunteerGeneral]

Why would I argue a position I don't believe it? Public vs public and private versus private, so you don't have to soil your hands with us, is fair to everyone. Your viewpoint is prejudiced against the small publics from the start.

No Larry, you are wrong. Baldcoach is a very fair and open minded guy. He`s posted on here a lot and makes very well thought out posts.

[larry]

No Larry, you are wrong. Baldcoach is a very fair and open minded guy. He`s posted on here a lot and makes very well thought out posts.

Good. Hopefully he will share some of them.

[soccerdad]

The public schools in urban areas are 4A and 5A publics. No privates play them. IF the argument is, indeed, more rural vs urban then where are the DI privates, in urban or rural areas? And where are the teams they play, in urban or rural areas?

 

But you assume these great athletes all choose the small privates. Also, not all public schools in urban areas are 4 & 5A. There's quite a few smaller schools in urban areas. DI privates locate where there's enough population to support them and play teams of public and private schools in urban and rural areas.

[larry]

But you assume these great athletes all choose the small privates. Also, not all public schools in urban areas are 4 & 5A. There's quite a few smaller schools in urban areas. DI privates locate where there's enough population to support them and play teams of public and private schools in urban and rural areas.

They don't have to be great athletes, just athletes. Are you telling me there aren't more athletes to go around, per school, in Nashville or Jackson than there is in Perry County or Hampton?

 

There is nothing wrong with privates having this advantage but it IS an advantage.

[soccerdad]

Good. Hopefully he will share some of them.

 

Let's ditch this thread and go where reason rules!