Public's should not play private schools

[rollredroll]

Rollredroll, the reason a school like Riverdale has the record they do against privates, is because they have 2,000 kids to choose from.

 

 

jvaughan, please read the first post in this thread. The poster said "I don't care if you have 2000 kids...if you can hand pick your team, you have a huge unfair advantage." I countered with the Riverdale reference (and even acknowledged in my post about RHS's enrollment of ~2,000) as an example of how a school with 2,000 kids can actually overcome the "huge unfair advantage" [that privates are alleged to have].

[PBandJ]

While recruiting is a big issue when it comes to public v. private, it is not the main issue. The main issue is that a private school can get any kid regardless of where he lives, a public can not. A public is limited to what kids live in there zone, and a private can get a kid that lives in three counties away.

 

This statement is untrue. I'll name two schools that have kids attending school from outside their city school zones as well as many kids attending that live in other counties (many surrounding counties and further away counties). You may recognize the names of the two schools. Do you dare to venture a guess?

 

 

 

 

They would be:

 

 

Alcoa & Maryville - I sure wish they could compete.

 

PS. I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I'm just pointing out that while folks get up in arms about privates, very very few have ever been as successful as those two schools. AND no one ever gripes about why they are so successful. Go figure.

[big red big blue]

This statement is untrue. I'll name two schools that have kids attending school from outside their city school zones as well as many kids attending that live in other counties (many surrounding counties and further away counties). You may recognize the names of the two schools. Do you dare to venture a guess?

They would be:

Alcoa & Maryville - I sure wish they could compete.

 

PS. I'm not trying to pick a fight here. I'm just pointing out that while folks get up in arms about privates, very very few have ever been as successful as those two schools. AND no one ever gripes about why they are so successful. Go figure.

 

 

Doesn't Alcoa beating McCallie last year make this whole thing moot anyways? Consider that:

 

--Alcoa is a 2A school. McCallie has (I think) around 700 boys and has always played at the highest levels of competition possible.

--McCallie had a D1 signee at qb, and perhaps one of its best teams ever...which lost in the D-2AA finals to BA. McCallie's only two losses were to Alcoa and BA in the champ game. So this wasn't a case of Alcoa just beating up on McC during a down year.

--McCallie has a tremendous amount of resources with its massive endowment...and as a boarding school can draw kids from all over the country. They have the money to build whatever weight rooms, practice fields, etc., they want.

 

so, that pretty much exhausts the list of advantages that any private school conceivably could have over a public school: money, resources, numbers, infinite boundries from which to draw students....if we were to listen to all the arguments made on these boards, that McCallie team should have blown out any public school 5A by about 50 points...a 2A school????????? why would they even bother to play the game?

 

So what are we to conclude from the fact that Alcoa won the game?

[larry]

So what are we to conclude from the fact that Alcoa won the game?

 

That there are no private schools in Blount County and only four in Knox County, three of which are church-affiliated. Alcoa and Maryville get to keep their athletes.

[BackinTN]

That there are no private schools in Blount County and only four in Knox County, three of which are church-affiliated. Alcoa and Maryville get to keep their athletes.

 

 

you nailed it. In the absence of private choices, the publics remain very successful. In Nashville, where there are dozens of private choices, the publics generally are not as competitive. There are exceptions; pearl cohn and hillsboro come to mind, with occassional good seasons by some of the others.

[Antwan]

Doesn't Alcoa beating McCallie last year make this whole thing moot anyways? Consider that:

 

--Alcoa is a 2A school. McCallie has (I think) around 700 boys and has always played at the highest levels of competition possible.

--McCallie had a D1 signee at qb, and perhaps one of its best teams ever...which lost in the D-2AA finals to BA. McCallie's only two losses were to Alcoa and BA in the champ game. So this wasn't a case of Alcoa just beating up on McC during a down year.

--McCallie has a tremendous amount of resources with its massive endowment...and as a boarding school can draw kids from all over the country. They have the money to build whatever weight rooms, practice fields, etc., they want.

 

so, that pretty much exhausts the list of advantages that any private school conceivably could have over a public school: money, resources, numbers, infinite boundries from which to draw students....if we were to listen to all the arguments made on these boards, that McCallie team should have blown out any public school 5A by about 50 points...a 2A school????????? why would they even bother to play the game?

 

So what are we to conclude from the fact that Alcoa won the game?

 

 

I don't know...maybe that Alcoa was about as good as any team in the state...all classes? I don't think there's any question they were.

[big red big blue]

you nailed it. In the absence of private choices, the publics remain very successful. In Nashville, where there are dozens of private choices, the publics generally are not as competitive. There are exceptions; pearl cohn and hillsboro come to mind, with occassional good seasons by some of the others.

 

 

so again, this is no longer about public v. private, but public v. other public (as in, public schools that exist in areas where they don't compete with private schools for students have a distinct advantage over public schools that exist in areas where they do). Because obviously McCallie's inherent advantages meant nothing in its match-up with Alcoa. Even one of McCallie's best teams in the last 10 years wasn't good enough for Alcoa.

[larry]

so again, this is no longer about public v. private, but public v. other public (as in, public schools that exist in areas where they don't compete with private schools for students have a distinct advantage over public schools that exist in areas where they do). Because obviously McCallie's inherent advantages meant nothing in its match-up with Alcoa. Even one of McCallie's best teams in the last 10 years wasn't good enough for Alcoa.

 

You confuse public vs public with public vs lack of private. It is true that Alcoa is not hurt by the presence of private schools which helps them compete with nationwide mega-privates like McCallie. But, the small schools that must compete with private schools, especially in Mid-Tennessee, is where the big discrepancy occurs, as you know. If you put the 1,200 boys at MBA, BA, Ensworth, and Father Ryan at public schools the public schools there would be much better, too. Likewise, take 1,000 boys out of Blount County schools and see how they do.

[BackinTN]

so again, this is no longer about public v. private, but public v. other public (as in, public schools that exist in areas where they don't compete with private schools for students have a distinct advantage over public schools that exist in areas where they do). Because obviously McCallie's inherent advantages meant nothing in its match-up with Alcoa. Even one of McCallie's best teams in the last 10 years wasn't good enough for Alcoa.

 

I think it could be said that in some areas, the better teams are privates. In other areas it is publics. In the absence of privates, publics do better, there is no other option. IF you take a school that has a large population, and its ranks of athletes have not been raided by area privates, and they have quality coaching, they will do well every season. You take a huge school like McGavock, but you have multiple privates pulling kids away (not necessarily talking about recruiting, talking about natural progression of parents not wanting their students exposed to certain things and to have a better educational experience), then you get underachieving large schools. You take a huge public like Riverdale, but there are no area privates to take kids away, you get winning seasons year after year.

[robjim]

I think it could be said that in some areas, the better teams are privates. In other areas it is publics. In the absence of privates, publics do better, there is no other option. IF you take a school that has a large population, and its ranks of athletes have not been raided by area privates, and they have quality coaching, they will do well every season. You take a huge school like McGavock, but you have multiple privates pulling kids away (not necessarily talking about recruiting, talking about natural progression of parents not wanting their students exposed to certain things and to have a better educational experience), then you get underachieving large schools. You take a huge public like Riverdale, but there are no area privates to take kids away, you get winning seasons year after year.

 

 

Ok, in the BA case thread you said,"A lot of what you say is true, but a public has to work with what they are handed. A private can go look for what they want/need. That is an advantage no matter what. Publics don't have a larger pool, they have a larger school. Because of zoning, their pool is very limited. A private has a pool that can cover several counties."

 

If your statement is true, then explain why the 4 Knox Co. privates haven't "raided" the Blount Co. athletes.

If your statement is true, then explain why the 15+ Davidson Co./ Williamson Co. privates haven't "raided" the Rutherford Co. athletes.

[big red big blue]

I think it could be said that in some areas, the better teams are privates. In other areas it is publics. In the absence of privates, publics do better, there is no other option. IF you take a school that has a large population, and its ranks of athletes have not been raided by area privates, and they have quality coaching, they will do well every season. You take a huge school like McGavock, but you have multiple privates pulling kids away (not necessarily talking about recruiting, talking about natural progression of parents not wanting their students exposed to certain things and to have a better educational experience), then you get underachieving large schools. You take a huge public like Riverdale, but there are no area privates to take kids away, you get winning seasons year after year.

 

 

I come to the same conclusion--that suburban schools are the ones who have reaped the biggest gains of anyone from everything that has happened to the metro areas. Why are there no private schools in these areas? Murfreesboro, Franklin, Maryville, etc...why haven't the citizenry of these areas, with their growing wealth, demanded that private schools be built to educate their kids? Because (IMO) they are happy with the product they have...it's not necessary. They aren't battling the legacies of the past decision-making.

 

On the other hand, if you look at metro Nashville for example, private schools have sprouted up consistently all over town for the past 25+ years...why? because there is a demand for it, as the citizenry isn't happy with the product it is offered, and doesn't see any hope that it will get better.

 

So, I agree that private schools (I'm talking those that have consistently played at the highest levels of competition) in and around Nashville have an advantage over the schools in metro. they DON'T have any inherent advantages over the surrounding suburban county schools....the case of Alcoa is just the most recent example. Look at the record. All those years while financial-aid granting schools (CBHS, MBA, FRHS, Baylor, McCallie) were playing in 3A, look to see how many times they won state titles. Between those 5 schools, in the play-off era, they managed a whopping 3 state titles, all in the 1970's. It wasn't until BA won in '95 that a financial aid-granting private school won again at the highest level. In the meantime the county schools--Gallatin, Oak Ridge, Lincoln County, Jefferson County--were raking in trophies.

 

It's pretty clear to me--policy has been shaped, time and time again, to benefit the big suburban schools, and not either the metro schools or small-town schools who actually need it.

[Antwan]

Ok, in the BA case thread you said,"A lot of what you say is true, but a public has to work with what they are handed. A private can go look for what they want/need. That is an advantage no matter what. Publics don't have a larger pool, they have a larger school. Because of zoning, their pool is very limited. A private has a pool that can cover several counties."

 

If your statement is true, then explain why the 4 Knox Co. privates haven't "raided" the Blount Co. athletes.

If your statement is true, then explain why the 15+ Davidson Co./ Williamson Co. privates haven't "raided" the Rutherford Co. athletes.

 

 

They have somewhat. Wasn't Tito Lee from Murfreesboro? There have been others from Rutherford County that went to BA.