A Question for those who favor a split

[Solomon]

Reading through most of these threads, it seems that most of the uproar comes from the parents of the kids playing. I've been wondering this for a while, so I figured I would ask.

 

Do all of you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete against private schools when they play them? And do you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete with them in the game of life because kids who go to private schools have so many "advantages" over your kids? Do all of you teach your kids that the wealthy people cheated to get where they are?

 

Basically, do you teach your kids the same rhetoric that you speak on here?

[FCSprideatUT]

QUOTE(Solomon @ May 26 2007 - 09:32 PM) 826467817[/snapback]Reading through most of these threads, it seems that most of the uproar comes from the parents of the kids playing. I've been wondering this for a while, so I figured I would ask.

 

Do all of you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete against private schools when they play them? And do you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete with them in the game of life because kids who go to private schools have so many "advantages" over your kids? Do all of you teach your kids that the wealthy people cheated to get where they are?

 

Basically, do you teach your kids the same rhetoric that you speak on here?

 

 

First of all i support private schools and just wanted to tell you that you are making the assumption that all public school parents would favor a split which is not true.

 

There is two thoughts on your question that i have heard before. There is the group that tells their kids to play their guts out and if and when their team beats a private school they say good job just like it was any other game. If and when their team losses to a private they say you lost to a better team tonight. I know a few people who would prefere a total split but when their team losses they will still just maintain that they got beat by a better team plain and simple.

 

Then there is the thought process that most people know of which is the parent who tells there kid that when they beat a private school it is a good job just like any other win, but when they lose they console them with comments like "it is ok your not expected to beat a private", "they recruited their players", " how are you supposed to compete against a private school anyways" or my favorite which is " Your school is the public schools champions this year" ...

 

But really the point i would like to get across is that while there is extremist on both sides of the argument, there is also normal people mixed in who will say "yes i favor a split, but son you still got beat by a better team tonight...sorry"

[therock]

Public schools get 1 or 2 players just as good as anyone the private schools get however public schools have a small area they get their players from when private schools get their players from all over the world. We don't tell our kids they cant compete but its hard to when the school you are playing has that big of an area they can draw players from. Why continue to fight this battle? Don"t go away mad, just go away and take Ronnie with you.

[MPHSTIGERS87]

QUOTE(Solomon @ May 26 2007 - 09:32 PM) 826467817[/snapback]Reading through most of these threads, it seems that most of the uproar comes from the parents of the kids playing. I've been wondering this for a while, so I figured I would ask.

 

Do all of you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete against private schools when they play them? And do you tell your kids that they have no chance to compete with them in the game of life because kids who go to private schools have so many "advantages" over your kids? Do all of you teach your kids that the wealthy people cheated to get where they are?

 

Basically, do you teach your kids the same rhetoric that you speak on here?

 

 

I have 4 children ages 8 thru 19. If I were to split them up to play a little 2 on 2, the 8 and 11 year old versus the 15 and 19 year old, without any adults saying a word or even being there, I can bet the 8 and 11 year old will cry foul after about 10 to 12 games of getting their butts kicked. Yea I can say practice and work harder, but the fact is fact that there is no way on a continues basis that the disadvantaged team will ever win consistently.

[Solomon]

QUOTE(MPHSTIGERS87 @ May 27 2007 - 03:18 PM) 826468126[/snapback]I have 4 children ages 8 thru 19. If I were to split them up to play a little 2 on 2, the 8 and 11 year old versus the 15 and 19 year old, without any adults saying a word or even being there, I can bet the 8 and 11 year old will cry foul after about 10 to 12 games of getting their butts kicked. Yea I can say practice and work harder, but the fact is fact that there is no way on a continues basis that the disadvantaged team will ever win consistently.

 

 

That did not answer my question.

[MPHSTIGERS87]

QUOTE(Solomon @ May 27 2007 - 07:39 PM) 826468176[/snapback]That did not answer my question.

 

 

Only answer you want from is to agrree with you and step over to the dark side. LOL. That was a joke. My ananolgy was to show that when logistically matched unfair (nothin the privates do wrong) you dont have a chance to win no matter how hard you work or how much money you raise.

[supersteve17]

QUOTE(MPHSTIGERS87 @ May 27 2007 - 03:18 PM) 826468126[/snapback]I have 4 children ages 8 thru 19. If I were to split them up to play a little 2 on 2, the 8 and 11 year old versus the 15 and 19 year old, without any adults saying a word or even being there, I can bet the 8 and 11 year old will cry foul after about 10 to 12 games of getting their butts kicked. Yea I can say practice and work harder, but the fact is fact that there is no way on a continues basis that the disadvantaged team will ever win consistently.

 

 

If public school kids were having to play against competitors from the private schools that were seven or eight years older than them, THAT would be a disadvantage.

[Baldcoach]

QUOTE(MPHSTIGERS87 @ May 27 2007 - 05:18 PM) 826468126[/snapback]I have 4 children ages 8 thru 19. If I were to split them up to play a little 2 on 2, the 8 and 11 year old versus the 15 and 19 year old, without any adults saying a word or even being there, I can bet the 8 and 11 year old will cry foul after about 10 to 12 games of getting their butts kicked. Yea I can say practice and work harder, but the fact is fact that there is no way on a continues basis that the disadvantaged team will ever win consistently.

 

 

MP,

 

I have shown over and over that the publics actually have more of the best athletes. So are you saying the privates are like your younger children (joking, I know what you mean)? In reality the analogy implies that private school athletes are so superior to public kids that there is no hope...but that is misleading. In fact, there are more college capable athletes at the small publics than at the small privates.

 

I can give you sizes, 40 times, etc for the starters on our 02-04 Football teams (lost State in OT, won it, lost it in OT) but you wouldn't believe me. I'll give you this to chew on though...of all the kids on those teams exactly 4 are playing in college...all at small schools.

 

p.s. Here is an example no one ever believes...Jeremy Davis, Middle Linebacker and Guard. 5'10" (in shoes). 174pounds(as a Senior). 5.2 second forty time. Most Valuable defensive player Clinic Bowl 03...all state...108 regular season tackles, 14 in the championship. All State 04, 115 regular season tackles, 12 in the Bowl.

 

We used to say he's small but he's slow. He was my biggest linebacker for all 3 years. NOT a college level athlete (too small and slow) but a great kid...gonna be a missionary. Has spent his last 2 summers in the Congo.

[MPHSTIGERS87]

QUOTE(Baldcoach @ May 30 2007 - 12:40 PM) 826469095[/snapback]MP,

 

I have shown over and over that the publics actually have more of the best athletes. So are you saying the privates are like your younger children (joking, I know what you mean)? In reality the analogy implies that private school athletes are so superior to public kids that there is no hope...but that is misleading. In fact, there are more college capable athletes at the small publics than at the small privates.

 

I can give you sizes, 40 times, etc for the starters on our 02-04 Football teams (lost State in OT, won it, lost it in OT) but you wouldn't believe me. I'll give you this to chew on though...of all the kids on those teams exactly 4 are playing in college...all at small schools.

 

p.s. Here is an example no one ever believes...Jeremy Davis, Middle Linebacker and Guard. 5'10" (in shoes). 174pounds(as a Senior). 5.2 second forty time. Most Valuable defensive player Clinic Bowl 03...all state...108 regular season tackles, 14 in the championship. All State 04, 115 regular season tackles, 12 in the Bowl.

 

We used to say he's small but he's slow. He was my biggest linebacker for all 3 years. NOT a college level athlete (too small and slow) but a great kid...gonna be a missionary. Has spent his last 2 summers in the Congo.

 

 

Great post and its great to hear about his mission work. Saying that, why has the privates dominated both basball and football in 1A for so long. I could see the get better and get stronger if the privates had a two or three year run with the publics winning as many before that. However, the privates have dominated in championships for atleast a decade in both football and baseball. My question to you is why do think that is?

[Baldcoach]

QUOTE(MPHSTIGERS87 @ May 30 2007 - 01:54 PM) 826469106[/snapback]Great post and its great to hear about his mission work. Saying that, why has the privates dominated both basball and football in 1A for so long. I could see the get better and get stronger if the privates had a two or three year run with the publics winning as many before that. However, the privates have dominated in championships for atleast a decade in both football and baseball. My question to you is why do think that is?

 

 

I have two opinions, but that is all that they are, opinions. I really don't think anyone can pin down the reasons that one school or group or area comes to dominance in a sport, or why they fade.

 

Here are my opinions:

 

1) Most of the future DI small privates that were in 1a just before and after the creation of DII were either relatively new or had never been able to compete in Football. But the economy was good and they were all growing. So they started looking around for something that would help them compete. I was coaching at the time and we had only ever had 2 winning seasons and 2 break-evens in 28 years in Football. I got the chance to ask the O-line coach form U of Miami why we couldn't compete. He said it was me and the other coaches. I was not pleased. He said that high school kids NEVER give less than 100%, and since schools are close to the same size there shouldn't be any school that consistently out-athleted us, so it must be the coaching. That hurt, but I decided it had to be true. So we all went back to ground 0 and learned how to coach Football. My point is that a lot of the small privates were turning it around about that time, and since they were reinventing themselves from scratch they tended to have more modern O's and D's than a lot of the established publics. It was those same schools that you heard over and over in the 2000's...Ezell, CPA, Boyd, DCA. I think being more modern in their approach and having to reinvent their programs gave them the edge...I've noticed that the good small publics have done the same in the last few years.

 

2) I believe that getting pounded for so many years taught the small privates in no uncertain terms to play to their strengths, and that isn't athletes, it is discipline and intellect. Most of us simply can't field the athletes that our public school competition can. I still remember in 04 one of our rivals had about 15 seniors...all great athletes, bigggg, fast, strong kids. They outweighed us by about 20 pounds per man in the line, and they were not slow. We watched the film and realized that their D-ends actually still played a box technique but tried to hide it by occasionally sliding inside and bringing the outside LB. We had our FB read the end on the fly for our power...if he boxed we kicked him and ran inside. If he squeezed we left him alone, logged the LB, and took our TE to the middle LB. Our Tailback had 16 carries for 6 TDs and 256yards in the first half. He ran 26 power or 25 power EVERY TIME. Our Fb made the right read on the fly every time(he was 5'7" 175lbs blocking a 6'3" 230 pound kid) , and their kids didn't know what was happening. Worse, they kept trying to run outside us, giving our small quick guys a chance to respond. If they had played to their strengths...size and good speed and pounded us up the middle Offensively and staying flat on the line Defensively they would have beaten us...as it was we ran 1 series with the starters in the 3rd, ran 1 series with the 2nd team, and then put in the Freshmen.

 

So I think newer techniques and O and D schemes combined with mediocre but very disciplined athletes did it. That is why I think that the small publics will return to the top of the heap...as they adjust and learn to play to their strengths. And that is why I think teams like TC and S. Pitt in 1a, Alcoa, Milan, Smith County, and Huntingdon in 2a, and Fulton and some others in 3a are consistently good. They have great athletes and great coaching...so they get the discipline along with the athleticism.

 

And that is why I keep using those teams in our discussions. They have made the adjustment...other good teams will do so in the next few years. I already see it happening.

[Antwan]

QUOTE(Baldcoach @ May 30 2007 - 10:08 PM) 826469406[/snapback]I have two opinions, but that is all that they are, opinions. I really don't think anyone can pin down the reasons that one school or group or area comes to dominance in a sport, or why they fade.

 

Here are my opinions:

 

1) Most of the future DI small privates that were in 1a just before and after the creation of DII were either relatively new or had never been able to compete in Football. But the economy was good and they were all growing. So they started looking around for something that would help them compete. I was coaching at the time and we had only ever had 2 winning seasons and 2 break-evens in 28 years in Football. I got the chance to ask the O-line coach form U of Miami why we couldn't compete. He said it was me and the other coaches. I was not pleased. He said that high school kids NEVER give less than 100%, and since schools are close to the same size there shouldn't be any school that consistently out-athleted us, so it must be the coaching. That hurt, but I decided it had to be true. So we all went back to ground 0 and learned how to coach Football. My point is that a lot of the small privates were turning it around about that time, and since they were reinventing themselves from scratch they tended to have more modern O's and D's than a lot of the established publics. It was those same schools that you heard over and over in the 2000's...Ezell, CPA, Boyd, DCA. I think being more modern in their approach and having to reinvent their programs gave them the edge...I've noticed that the good small publics have done the same in the last few years.

 

2) I believe that getting pounded for so many years taught the small privates in no uncertain terms to play to their strengths, and that isn't athletes, it is discipline and intellect. Most of us simply can't field the athletes that our public school competition can. I still remember in 04 one of our rivals had about 15 seniors...all great athletes, bigggg, fast, strong kids. They outweighed us by about 20 pounds per man in the line, and they were not slow. We watched the film and realized that their D-ends actually still played a box technique but tried to hide it by occasionally sliding inside and bringing the outside LB. We had our FB read the end on the fly for our power...if he boxed we kicked him and ran inside. If he squeezed we left him alone, logged the LB, and took our TE to the middle LB. Our Tailback had 16 carries for 6 TDs and 256yards in the first half. He ran 26 power or 25 power EVERY TIME. Our Fb made the right read on the fly every time(he was 5'7" 175lbs blocking a 6'3" 230 pound kid) , and their kids didn't know what was happening. Worse, they kept trying to run outside us, giving our small quick guys a chance to respond. If they had played to their strengths...size and good speed and pounded us up the middle Offensively and staying flat on the line Defensively they would have beaten us...as it was we ran 1 series with the starters in the 3rd, ran 1 series with the 2nd team, and then put in the Freshmen.

 

So I think newer techniques and O and D schemes combined with mediocre but very disciplined athletes did it. That is why I think that the small publics will return to the top of the heap...as they adjust and learn to play to their strengths. And that is why I think teams like TC and S. Pitt in 1a, Alcoa, Milan, Smith County, and Huntingdon in 2a, and Fulton and some others in 3a are consistently good. They have great athletes and great coaching...so they get the discipline along with the athleticism.

 

And that is why I keep using those teams in our discussions. They have made the adjustment...other good teams will do so in the next few years. I already see it happening.

 

 

 

So...what you are saying is that you out coached and out worked the public school in question...right? /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> Your athletes are as good or better than ours...year in and year out. I think we do get the most out of what we have. I think you are correct that some don't. Those that don't are mostly public.

[Baldcoach]

QUOTE(Antwan @ May 30 2007 - 11:29 PM) 826469416[/snapback]So...what you are saying is that you out coached and out worked the public school in question...right? /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> Your athletes are as good or better than ours...year in and year out. I think we do get the most out of what we have. I think you are correct that some don't. Those that don't are mostly public.

 

 

We did out coach them, there isn't any question about it. But getting out coached happens to all of us. It is the guys who adjust to make sure it doesn't happen much who consistently win. We had a modern O scheme and they had a 1960s D scheme...I'm sure they have updated now.

 

You guys are as well coached as anyone we play. That is why you are good year in and year out. In fact, there is a lot of good coaching up around your area...Gordonsville being a consistently well coached 1a team. Last year we didn't have your athletes for sure...but I understand you guys had a lot of seniors, so we might be even year to year...I doubt it. This year we are probably a bit more athletic than we were last year...the question is will we be disciplined enough to take advantage of it.

 

What I was saying is that things go in cycles...I see the shift headed back to the small publics as they make the move to more modern Os and Ds, (and that is a good thing for Tennessee Football in general)...but I could be wrong.