The Ultimate Solution

[tnsddeveloper]

Looks like to me a merit system would have GP in 5A, DL in 4A, and FCS in 3A along with Jackson Christian. The crying from you would be of sonic proportion.

You don't seem to understand the merit system. You don't just jump 4 classes ... it is gradual. Depending on your good, bad, or mediocre performance - you would move up 1 class per reclassification period. So no screaming here ... other than screaming for my team.

[cbg]

The merit system will not work on that large a scale. You wouldn't like it if it did. You complain about the multiplier even though 4 of the 12 teams in the A-AAA semis are private. Privates don't make up anywhere close to 33% of the schools in those classes. So, why not tweak the system we have now by raising the multiplier to a more effective level? That would have merit.

 

 

Why will it not work on a large scale? Give it a chance because what we are using now is truly not fair to the rual public school or small private schools. Show me where I have ever complained about the multiplier. My response is that while it may not be the solution, everyone needs to stop complaining a get to work. The TSSAA needs a long range plan to solve this and several other problems but I don't feel that they have to leadership to solve any problems. They have knee jerk a reaction to most every problem instead fixing the problem. The TSSAA acts and conducts business just like any other government agency that has ZERO competition.

Edited November 21, 2006 by cbg

[larry]

Ohio is a MUCH more populated state with a richer high school football history than TN and it works more the fine.

Texas is a MUCH more populated state with a richer high school football history than Ohio and they have totally separate public and private organizations.

[tnsddeveloper]

Texas is a MUCH more populated state with a richer high school football history than Ohio and they have totally separate public and private organizations.

They might not reletively soon ... if the BA vs. T$$AA ruling finally settles in BA's favor (which it has at almost every turn). It will set a precedent that the Texas private orgazination is watching closely according to reports.

 

I love how you dodge answering questions about the domination of other publics. Where are you from again?

Edited November 21, 2006 by tnsddeveloper

[larry]

Why will it not work on a large scale? Give it a chance because what we are using now is truly not fair to the rual public school or small private schools. Show me where I have ever complained about the multiplier. My response is that while it may not be the solution, everyone needs to stop complaining a get to work. The TSSAA needs a long range plan to solve this and several other problems but I don't feel that they have to leadership to solve any problems. They have knee jerk a reaction to most every problem instead fixing the problem. The TSSAA acts and conducts business just like any other government agency that has ZERO competition.

The knee-jerk reeaction of the TSSAA comes from the member schools who decide these issues. If you don't trust the leadership of the TSSAA, through their member schools, why do you expect them to be able to implement a merit system? Why would small private schools playing small private schools and rural public schools playing rural public schools be unfair? How could it be more fair?

 

They might not reletively soon ... if the BA vs. T$$AA ruling finally settles in BA's favor (which it has at almost every turn). It will set a precedent that the Texas private orgazination is watching closely according to reports.

 

I love how you dodge answering questions about the domination of other publics. Where are you from again?

According to your imagination, you mean.

Edited November 21, 2006 by larry

[tnsddeveloper]

According to your imagination, you mean.

You need to do your research larry. There are actually several state organizations watching the filings closely - such as IL, GA, KY, TX, etc. If you dig, you will find where the rulings from other states are going in the privates favor too. You are going to have a real hard time dealing with the issue when the chips fall and BA is holding them all.

[larry]

You need to do your research larry. There are actually several state organizations watching the filings closely - such as IL, GA, KY, TX, etc. If you dig, you will find where the rulings from other states are going in the privates favor too. You are going to have a real hard time dealing with the issue when the chips fall and BA is holding them all.

Your school is one of the ones that will get to pay the bill when it is all over. Thank BA for that.

 

I don't have a problem with the publics that you mentioned earlier dominating just as you don't have a problem with private schools dominating. We don't like each other, remember. Once the split occurs we will worry about those public schools and you can worry about being dominated by DL, or GP, or CPA, or a multitude of others. Take your pick.

[tnsddeveloper]

Your school is one of the ones that will get to pay the bill when it is all over. Thank BA for that.

I'm not worried about the bill ... it will be spread over enough schools that it won't matter to us much. It is the power that they hold at that point. Can you see the T$$AA coming after them or anyone else anytime soon? Or for that matter ... that the T$$AA will then be legally liable for developing non-discriminatory practices and rules. Oh, how the cookie crumbles.

 

I don't have a problem with the publics that you mentioned earlier dominating just as you don't have a problem with private schools dominating. We don't like each other, remember. Once the split occurs we will worry about those public schools and you can worry about being dominated by DL, or GP, or CPA, or a multitude of others. Take your pick.

Oh, you never heard me say that I liked the private schools that are and/or were dominating did you?

 

The multiplier actually helped my school greatly ... we had a very hard time getting around the likes of Boyd, CPA, DCA, and Ezell.

[VolunteerGeneral]

Larry...do you mind me asking how old you are?

[larry]

If all of that pans out then 15 years from now there will be no playoffs, everyone will form conferences and play ten games against whoever they want to play, and have a bowl game at the end if they win 7 games or more. In other words, the 1960s, back when no one got sued for trying to enforce the rules passed by the member schools.

 

Larry...do you mind me asking how old you are?

Yes, but I bet you do anyway.

[Bighurt]

Larry,

I like the "merit" system idea. Rather than just "promoting" all teams at all private schools to a higher classification which is what the multiplier does, teams that have enjoyed success over a 2, 3 or 4-year period of time (whatever works best) would be "promoted" to the next class. So that if a school's football team did well, they would move up, but if the baseball team wasn't successful, they would remain in the same classification. Conversely if a team was not successful over a period of time, they would have the option of dropping down a class.

 

After each classification period - 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, the cycle would start over. Success might be measured by making the second or third round of the playoffs for example. You can use whatever is the best measurement of success.

 

No public/private discrimination. No power ranking. What is unfair with this system? Why would it not work?

 

Without the multiplier Boyd, CPA, DCA, USJ, Trousdale and South Pitt might move up from 1A to 2A in football; Goodpasture, Lipscomb and Alcoa might move up from 2A to 3A in football; Maryville might move up from 4A to 5A in football. You would have to make allowances for balancing the number within a classification with some moving up and some moving down - it doesn't have to be one-for-one.

Edited November 21, 2006 by Bighurt

[CoachT]

Larry,

I like the "merit" system idea. Rather than just "promoting" all teams at all private schools to a higher classification which is what the multiplier does, teams that have enjoyed success over a 2, 3 or 4-year period of time (whatever works best) would be "promoted" to the next class. So that if a school's football team did well, they would move up, but if the baseball team wasn't successful, they would remain in the same classification. Conversely if a team was not successful over a period of time, they would have the option of dropping down a class.

 

After each classification period - 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, the cycle would start over. Success might be measured by making the second or third round of the playoffs for example. You can use whatever is the best measurement of success.

 

No public/private discrimination. No power ranking. What is unfair with this system? Why would it not work?

 

Without the multiplier Boyd, CPA, DCA, USJ, Trousdale and South Pitt might move up from 1A to 2A in football; Goodpasture, Lipscomb and Alcoa might move up from 2A to 3A in football; Maryville might move up from 4A to 5A in football. You would have to make allowances for balancing the number within a classification with some moving up and some moving down - it doesn't have to be one-for-one.

I would have to hire someone just to keep up with the classifications from year-to-year. It is hard enough once every four years. Guess I would manage, though.