What the heck is a "level playing field"

[BDURHAM]

Laz,

 

You are a word man. I had to look this one up:

 

A heuristic is a method to help solve a problem, commonly informal. It is particularly used for a method that often rapidly leads to a solution that is usually reasonably close to the best possible answer. Heuristics are "rules of thumb", educated guesses, intuitive judgments or simply common sense.

 

On these boards the views are often, if not entirely one-sided, lacking

objectivity. If our lens of perception were cleansed, we could see

things as they really are. Like Obama, I will not cite my sources for

my quotes.

 

The public administrators clearly out-number the other guys. So, there is

always the possibility that the privates will be pushed into their own

classification.

 

 

(laz,

Would you agree with this statement:

"The vast majority of public school administrators and coaches do not

believe private schools belong in the same classification with public

schools.")

 

yes, i believe that is a true statement.

 

(No matter what the numbers say, many people believe that there is an

unfair advantage held by the privates. Put privates in 4A and 5A and

WW III will break out.)

 

i'd say that is accurate as well.

 

(Who is "BC"?)

 

balled coach.......

 

now, would you agree with this statement:

 

the arguments made on either side of the public-private debate

offer views of reality that are grossly distorted by personal interest,

and prove little beyond the validity of the theories of psychological heuristics.

[rick7425]

Gee...the number of schools in each of the private classes would be based on how many schools there are. That would also be the case in the 3 public classes. Heck...didn't we have just 7 schools a couple of year ago in the highest DII class?

 

Whatever the reason...privates of the same enrollment win more than publics. I think population base is the reason. Others think a much higher level of participation is the reason. The point is...they do. It is no more fair to put privates in the same class as publics than it is to put 4a schools in the same class as 2a schools...or 1a schools in the same class as 3a schools. Some 3a schools might lose to some 1a schools...but as a whole...they should not be in the same class.

 

No, actually, the number of schools in each of the 3 public classes would be based on the decision to only have three classes so that each class could have about 100 schools. There could just as easily be 10 public classes, but the decision makers wouldn't do that to themselves because they don't want to water their championships down that much. But in your model, the private schools wouldn't have that choice.

 

Your candor in the rest of this post is laudable -- privates need to be banished to DII because they win too much, regardless of why. I may disagree that separation is wise, but at least I appreciate the honesty of this position a lot more than the various efforts to rationalize separation based on "unfair advantages" that don't really hold up under close scrutiny.

[Indian]

I'm missing your point. If the publics, after a complete split, are as concerned on "watering down" as you've said they are/will be, then they'd have multiple classes even with private schools out. Four would be a good number, with three the smallest public class might go all the way to around 650 or 700.

 

A better idea than having an equal amount in each would be to have a cutoff number of somewhere around 450-500, that would leave about 45 in the small class, about 15 in another, but still enough in the large class to have three regions. The small class might have eight regions, averaging about six teams in each depending on the sport. If you go three classes after a complete split travel would become an issue, the given reason some failed to join Division II from the get-go.

[rick7425]

I'm missing your point. If the publics, after a complete split, are as concerned on "watering down" as you've said they are/will be, then they'd have multiple classes even with private schools out. Four would be a good number, with three the smallest public class might go all the way to around 650 or 700.

 

A better idea than having an equal amount in each would be to have a cutoff number of somewhere around 450-500, that would leave about 45 in the small class, about 15 in another, but still enough in the large class to have three regions. The small class might have eight regions, averaging about six teams in each depending on the sport. If you go three classes after a complete split travel would become an issue, the given reason some failed to join Division II from the get-go.

 

Indian, if this was addressed to me, I think you did miss my point. The point is that if a "complete split" occurred, there would still be roughly 300 publics in DI -- enough to draw up the classes whatever way works best logistically without watering down championships to the point that they are meaningless. In DII there would be roughly 65 schools, divided fairly evenly at this point between aid and non-aid schools (a difference that apparently was significant enough, regardless of enrollment, to warrant the creation of DII in the first place). If DII is divided into two classes, you've got roughly 30 schools in each class. The "championships" of the non-aid privates would be earned against such limited competition that they truly would be watered down.

 

This doesn't even cover issues like scheduling difficulties the DII schools will have; the loss to kids (both public and private) of the benefits of interaction with kids from different environments and settings; the likelihood that the privates will eventually tire of having their rules dictated to them by public school officials who have ostracized them; the revenue and facility issues that would be confronted (by all schools public and private) if all the private schools eventually formed their own separate association; kids (both public and private) knowing that their "championships" are not as meaningful because they aren't really playing all the comparable competition; and any number of other eventualities that could flow from what I personally think is a short-sighted idea.

 

My prior posts reveal that I am an FRA follower. When the FRA girls basketball team split games this year with CPA, Hume Fogg, Pearl Cohn, and Station Camp, it didn't matter one bit to those girls whether the other team was a public school or a private school. When Hume Fogg ended their season, they didn't sit around and moan that Hume Fogg had some sort of "unfair advantage" because it is a magnet school. The girls were playing basketball, and they were visiting gyms and competing against other girls from different communities and different backgrounds in different settings. It was a valuable part of their education and preparation for life as an adult. They didn't win a state championship -- they didn't even make it out of their district tournament. But they got the important benefits of high school athletic competition. I'm glad for the girls on all those teams that they had those opportunities.

 

We have a pretty good system of high school athletic competition. I sure hope the adults don't screw that up for the kids.

[lazarus]

stan,

 

well, that is kind of a rough description.

but there is a lot more going on than that.

 

 

there is one paper i think you would enjoy and find informative:

 

"cognitive biases potentially affecting judgement of global risks"

by eliezer yudkowsky

 

it includes the definition:

"the systematic experimental study of reproducable errors of human reasoning,

and what these errors reveal about underlying mental processes..."

 

i checked and you can google it up by entering the name of the paper.

 

while not designed as an introduction to the discipline itself,

it is written in plain language and i think you'll find it a good starting point.

(and it only takes a few minutes to read. it's about 20 pages long)

i warn you; you might have a hard time stopping, once you get started.

this is fascinating stuff and there is a lot out there.

[Antwan]

Indian, if this was addressed to me, I think you did miss my point. The point is that if a "complete split" occurred, there would still be roughly 300 publics in DI -- enough to draw up the classes whatever way works best logistically without watering down championships to the point that they are meaningless. In DII there would be roughly 65 schools, divided fairly evenly at this point between aid and non-aid schools (a difference that apparently was significant enough, regardless of enrollment, to warrant the creation of DII in the first place). If DII is divided into two classes, you've got roughly 30 schools in each class. The "championships" of the non-aid privates would be earned against such limited competition that they truly would be watered down.

 

This doesn't even cover issues like scheduling difficulties the DII schools will have; the loss to kids (both public and private) of the benefits of interaction with kids from different environments and settings; the likelihood that the privates will eventually tire of having their rules dictated to them by public school officials who have ostracized them; the revenue and facility issues that would be confronted (by all schools public and private) if all the private schools eventually formed their own separate association; kids (both public and private) knowing that their "championships" are not as meaningful because they aren't really playing all the comparable competition; and any number of other eventualities that could flow from what I personally think is a short-sighted idea.

 

My prior posts reveal that I am an FRA follower. When the FRA girls basketball team split games this year with CPA, Hume Fogg, Pearl Cohn, and Station Camp, it didn't matter one bit to those girls whether the other team was a public school or a private school. When Hume Fogg ended their season, they didn't sit around and moan that Hume Fogg had some sort of "unfair advantage" because it is a magnet school. The girls were playing basketball, and they were visiting gyms and competing against other girls from different communities and different backgrounds in different settings. It was a valuable part of their education and preparation for life as an adult. They didn't win a state championship -- they didn't even make it out of their district tournament. But they got the important benefits of high school athletic competition. I'm glad for the girls on all those teams that they had those opportunities.

 

We have a pretty good system of high school athletic competition. I sure hope the adults don't screw that up for the kids.

 

 

FRA kids would still play those same teams or other publics like them in the regular season. The only change would be the playoffs/tournaments. They will still get to interact with those "different" as you put it....publics school kids...just in the regular season.

 

So...you are saying a magnet has an advantage over an elite (or semi-elite to some) private school. That's funny. What possible advantage do they have over you? Don't they have a lottery for admission? They are more limited than you.

 

Thirty something in one class is plenty. We now have a few over 50 now in each DI class. DII has fewer now. Those classes will be plenty tough to compete in. The winner of each of those classes will be very good teams.

 

I think 3 public classes is enough. Basketball...baseball...and softball has that now. Just use the same districts for football as a model. Just take 2 teams to the playoffs as we did before.

 

Like I said before....I think population base is the reason for the private school advantage. It is borne out. Some others think it is participation. I think it is probably a combination of many factors. That does translate to winning too much...as you put it. 4a schools in 2a would probably win too much too.

 

Scheduling will be no worse than it is now. In fact...the Nashville privates won't have any trouble at all. Some will have a much easier time scheduling...such as the elite privates.

 

It would be a huge mistake for privates to form their own association if the split does occur. If you think scheduling is a problem now...just wait. Publics would not be allowed to play privates at all. If you think you would travel...just wait.

[rick7425]

FRA kids would still play those same teams or other publics like them in the regular season. The only change would be the playoffs/tournaments. They will still get to interact with those "different" as you put it....publics school kids...just in the regular season.

 

So...you are saying a magnet has an advantage over an elite (or semi-elite to some) private school. That's funny. What possible advantage do they have over you? Don't they have a lottery for admission? They are more limited than you.

 

Thirty something in one class is plenty. We now have a few over 50 now in each DI class. DII has fewer now. Those classes will be plenty tough to compete in. The winner of each of those classes will be very good teams.

 

I think 3 public classes is enough. Basketball...baseball...and softball has that now. Just use the same districts for football as a model. Just take 2 teams to the playoffs as we did before.

 

Like I said before....I think population base is the reason for the private school advantage. It is borne out. Some others think it is participation. I think it is probably a combination of many factors. That does translate to winning too much...as you put it. 4a schools in 2a would probably win too much too.

 

Scheduling will be no worse than it is now. In fact...the Nashville privates won't have any trouble at all. Some will have a much easier time scheduling...such as the elite privates.

 

It would be a huge mistake for privates to form their own association if the split does occur. If you think scheduling is a problem now...just wait. Publics would not be allowed to play privates at all. If you think you would travel...just wait.

 

You can call what I say "mumbo jumbo" all you want, as you did the last time you responded to something I posted. But don't deliberately distort what I said. I didn't say anything about "'different' as you put it ... public school kids." I spoke of visiting gyms and competing with girls from different backgrounds in different communities. Why would you try to distort that?

 

And no, I'm not saying that a magnet school has an advantage over what you label as an "elite" private school (whatever "elite" means). The point was that when Hume Fogg won the game against FRA, the FRA kids didn't sit around and try to find some mystical advantage they could use as an excuse to explain it away. Hume Fogg just played better.

 

As for scheduling, I've heard plenty of DII folks who talk very differently than you do about the difficulties they encounter scheduling games.

 

There is only one out of the 18 TSSAA sports in which the size of all the classes in DI is a little over 50 -- football. The classes are larger in all the other sports because there are only three classes for well over 300 schools, and in some of those sports the A and AA classes are combined for championship events (e.g., soccer, track, cross country). And it is still a bit curious to me that you don't see any inconsistency between your notion that 30 or so is enough for each class in every sport in DII, on the one hand, and your belief (with which I agree) on the other hand that DI football should be cut down to three classes like the other sports. Why do you think DI football should be cut down to three classes, by the way?

 

Do I think the formation of a separate association by the private schools would be bad? Absolutely, for both public and private schools. But if the public school folks keep making things more and more difficult for the privates, it should come as no surprise if something like that occurs. I don't really know why you say "[p]ublics would not be allowed to play privates at all," since the TSSAA rules allow a member school to schedule games against any school team (whether a member or not).

 

Hopefully the folks that make classification decisions will be wise, recognize that they need to consider the interests of and be fair to all the member schools they represent (including the privates), and come up with something better than a complete split, and then none of the "what ifs" will be an issue.

[Indian]

You're coming across, to me at least, as arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

There is only one out of the 18 TSSAA sports in which the size of all the classes in DI is a little over 50 -- football. The classes are larger in all the other sports because there are only three classes for well over 300 schools, and in some of those sports the A and AA classes are combined for championship events (e.g., soccer, track, cross country). And it is still a bit curious to me that you don't see any inconsistency between your notion that 30 or so is enough for each class in every sport in DII, on the one hand, and your belief (with which I agree) on the other hand that DI football should be cut down to three classes like the other sports. Why do you think DI football should be cut down to three classes, by the way?

 

The reason football is classified into larger groups is the fear of injury and non-competitive games between smaller and much larger schools. There would be exceptions like Alcoa playing against most 4A and 5A teams. Track, cross-country, golf can have individual champions, even if the school loses out big in team points. Soccer I don't follow much honestly but I'd say with more schools gaining teams there would be more of a move to add a class. I know it's talked about in volleyball.

 

The reason he's going for 30 in a class is because that would be based on what's available in the private school division after a total split. I myself would go for roughly 45 and 15 (with the 15 including McCallie, MBA, etc, maybe Lipscomb, Notre Dame and a couple of others). I've gone over it numerous times but having the 45 in the small class wouldn't affect competition other than the normal strong and not-so-strong programs, the financial aid wouldn't change anything in my view. If you have 60 in a class (all 60) you might end up with Brentwood Academy playing SAS in football. Does anyone want that?

 

You seem to be on him for wanting to go down to three public classes after a split, but it's not as far a jump as his projected halving the private schools into two classes. So again, I don't get your point.

 

As far as scheduling should the private schools pull out on their own, doubtful the TSSAA would allow its remaining schools, the publics, to schedule them. If they were still in the same organization, just a different division, I'm sure it would continue-nonregion, nondistrict and not in the postseason.

[reaction]

We have a pretty good system of high school athletic competition. I sure hope the adults don't screw that up for the kids.

 

 

I like this statement. Cause the only people complaining about anything are adults. Kids could careless they just want to play.

[rick7425]

The reason he's going for 30 in a class is because that would be based on what's available in the private school division after a total split. I myself would go for roughly 45 and 15 (with the 15 including McCallie, MBA, etc, maybe Lipscomb, Notre Dame and a couple of others). I've gone over it numerous times but having the 45 in the small class wouldn't affect competition other than the normal strong and not-so-strong programs, the financial aid wouldn't change anything in my view. If you have 60 in a class (all 60) you might end up with Brentwood Academy playing SAS in football. Does anyone want that?

 

You seem to be on him for wanting to go down to three public classes after a split, but it's not as far a jump as his projected halving the private schools into two classes. So again, I don't get your point.

 

I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I was hoping some of my comments and questions could prompt one to see things from a different perspective. I'll see if I can be more clear.

 

I oppose a public/private split. I think it is a bad idea for a lot of reasons, both short term and long term. My preference would be to move in the other direction -- perhaps leave DII in place for aid-giving schools in football since that seems the hardest problem to solve, but use some sort of multiplier to put the aid-giving schools back in DI for the other sports.

 

I am not "on" anyone for wanting to reduce DI to three public classes in football after a split. I said I agreed with that idea. I would agree with that reduction right now, even if there were no "split." The reason I would agree with it is because I think that when there are too many classes, the "state championships" become too watered down and less meaningful.

 

You're right, for the non-aid schools in DII after a total split, 30 is the number of schools that would be available as a classification -- and that is part of why I think a total split would be unfair to those schools. 30 schools comprise less than 10% of the membership in TSSAA. To me, a "state championship" in a classification consisting of just 30 schools would be too watered down.

 

I thought that if Antwan believed too many classes in DI meant watered-down championships because so few schools were competing for each one, then he might understand at least one reason why I would find a complete split so bothersome. That's why I asked why he thought fewer classifications in DI football was a good idea.

 

I could go on and on about things like what I believe to be the over-emphasis on winning state championships, the adverse effect that the demise of neighborhood schools has had on high school sports, and so on. But now that I've experienced the "mumbo jumbo" remark, distortion of my words, and a suggestion that I'm arguing just to argue, I'm really not enjoying this anymore. I think I'll just stay out of this debate. You guys can go back to beating up on Baldcoach.

[Antwan]

You can call what I say "mumbo jumbo" all you want, as you did the last time you responded to something I posted. But don't deliberately distort what I said. I didn't say anything about "'different' as you put it ... public school kids." I spoke of visiting gyms and competing with girls from different backgrounds in different communities. Why would you try to distort that?

 

And no, I'm not saying that a magnet school has an advantage over what you label as an "elite" private school (whatever "elite" means). The point was that when Hume Fogg won the game against FRA, the FRA kids didn't sit around and try to find some mystical advantage they could use as an excuse to explain it away. Hume Fogg just played better.

 

As for scheduling, I've heard plenty of DII folks who talk very differently than you do about the difficulties they encounter scheduling games.

 

There is only one out of the 18 TSSAA sports in which the size of all the classes in DI is a little over 50 -- football. The classes are larger in all the other sports because there are only three classes for well over 300 schools, and in some of those sports the A and AA classes are combined for championship events (e.g., soccer, track, cross country). And it is still a bit curious to me that you don't see any inconsistency between your notion that 30 or so is enough for each class in every sport in DII, on the one hand, and your belief (with which I agree) on the other hand that DI football should be cut down to three classes like the other sports. Why do you think DI football should be cut down to three classes, by the way?

 

Do I think the formation of a separate association by the private schools would be bad? Absolutely, for both public and private schools. But if the public school folks keep making things more and more difficult for the privates, it should come as no surprise if something like that occurs. I don't really know why you say "[p]ublics would not be allowed to play privates at all," since the TSSAA rules allow a member school to schedule games against any school team (whether a member or not).

 

Hopefully the folks that make classification decisions will be wise, recognize that they need to consider the interests of and be fair to all the member schools they represent (including the privates), and come up with something better than a complete split, and then none of the "what ifs" will be an issue.

 

 

Okay...let's see if I get it. You say FRA played public school kids from different backgrounds and from different communities...but they are not different. Okay...if you say so.

 

The elite moniker came from your cohert baldy. He uses that term often to describe private schools that charge $16,000 a year with goals and missions different from his school. I think your school definitely qualifies according to his standards.

 

As for scheduling...DII aid would be the same as it is now. Yes...I am sure they don't have an easy time scheduling...but that would be the same as it is now unless some more DI privates move to aid.

I would think your school is on the way to doing just that. DII non-aid schools wouldn't have any trouble with scheduling unless you do secede. The NHFS does not recognize but one association per state. By rule...publics could not play privates if they secede...at all. I don't think that's going to happen.

 

I do think 3 public classes would be enough because the smaller schools in each class would have a chance to compete with the largest schools in the same class. That would put my school playing with the largest 3a teams. I think that is okay. I also think 35 or so schools in the non-aid class would be plenty. That would be a very tough league. I don't think that's watered down at all.

 

Wise is relative.

[rick7425]

Okay...let's see if I get it. You say FRA played public school kids from different backgrounds and from different communities...but they are not different. Okay...if you say so.

 

The elite moniker came from your cohert baldy. He uses that term often to describe private schools that charge $16,000 a year with goals and missions different from his school. I think your school definitely qualifies according to his standards.

 

As for scheduling...DII aid would be the same as it is now. Yes...I am sure they don't have an easy time scheduling...but that would be the same as it is now unless some more DI privates move to aid.

I would think your school is on the way to doing just that. DII non-aid schools wouldn't have any trouble with scheduling unless you do secede. The NHFS does not recognize but one association per state. By rule...publics could not play privates if they secede...at all. I don't think that's going to happen.

 

I do think 3 public classes would be enough because the smaller schools in each class would have a chance to compete with the largest schools in the same class. That would put my school playing with the largest 3a teams. I think that is okay. I also think 35 or so schools in the non-aid class would be plenty. That would be a very tough league. I don't think that's watered down at all.

 

Wise is relative.

 

The fact that the NFHS (not the NHFS) recognizes only one association per state is irrelevant when it comes to scheduling regular season contests. Your assertion that "By rule...publics could not play privates if they secede...at all" is wrong. Article IV, Section 1 of the TSSAA bylaws states, "A member of the Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association is permitted to play or scrimmage any secondary school team with grades 9 and above in regular season play." TSSAA member schools already compete in the regular season against schools that are not TSSAA members, including even home school teams.

 

[indian, I suppose this truly may be arguing for the sake of arguing, because I guess it doesn't really matter except as a pure hypothetical.]

 

Baldcoach is not my "cohort." I don't know who he is or what school he is from or follows. It does appear that neither of us believes a complete split of public and private schools in TSSAA is a good idea. I suspect that beyond that shared belief, he and I may have very little in common.

 

As for the rest, it seems pointless to keep this up. You may have the last word.