What the heck is a "level playing field"

[rick7425]

Again Public Schools have a de facto monopoly on students, public schools will get them unless parents pay extra (tax dollars already going to public schools), to get them into private schools, Public school kids get free books, free transportation, and in some cases free lunches. So quit crying about supposed private school advantages.

 

Yes, public schools have the advantage of being the de facto home for student-athletes unless parents pay extra to get them into private schools. Private schools have the advantage of selective admission. I personally think that to the extent these "advantages" affect athletic competition, they tend to offset one another. But financial aid is an added factor in determining the competitive balance, because it broadens the pool of potential private school applicants by removing the tuition barrier. The point of my post was that the private schools themselves apparently believed this long ago when they developed the old "quota rule."

 

No crying here. Just a little realism.

[Baldcoach]

The private division would be aid or non-aid. In aid schools...I don't think the size of the school makes much difference.

 

I think 3 public classes would be enough. A 200 or so student school could compete with a 600 or so student school.

It would be difficult...but not unreasonable. You could make the middle and largest class bigger than the smallest class.

 

I don't think open zoning makes much if any difference in rural areas. I think it does make a difference in urban areas. I also think the larger the school...or class...the less difference it makes.

 

 

You realize that a 2 class private division would put schools with 260 or so kids against the super 7, right? How fair is that? Especially if those smaller schools are not financial aid schools?

 

How is that situation more equitable than what we have now?

 

And how do you justify splitting privates and in the same post admit that there are publics that have the same advantages? It seems odd to me.

 

Did you read my philisophical post on what does and doesn't make a fair levelling device?

[Baldcoach]

Yes, public schools have the advantage of being the de facto home for student-athletes unless parents pay extra to get them into private schools. Private schools have the advantage of selective admission. I personally think that to the extent these "advantages" affect athletic competition, they tend to offset one another. But financial aid is an added factor in determining the competitive balance, because it broadens the pool of potential private school applicants by removing the tuition barrier. The point of my post was that the private schools themselves apparently believed this long ago when they developed the old "quota rule."

 

No crying here. Just a little realism.

 

 

Rick,

 

This is a common misperception. Almost all of the remaining privates in DI do NOT have selective admissions. I have heard this claim over and over but it simply isn't so. The big preps DO have selective admissions policies. The religious privates are a completely different animal with a completely different philosophy.

 

Our 'admissions test' is a basic reading and math test to make sure the prospective student has some chance of passing. We still get multiple students who are well below average academically. Why? Because our mission is Christian Education, not to have the most National Merit Scholars or State Championships. That is the mission of the preps, not the current DI privates.

[Baldcoach]

Okay...thanks. I haven't read those posts. They're too long.Yeah...that makes sense. BA has about 200 boys and they are always one of the best teams in the state. Nah...no advantage there.

 

 

 

Antwan,

 

You keep relating your reasons for splitting the privates to the Aid giving schools...who are already split!

 

Name a private that is currently playing in DI who has performed as well as the best publics in their division. You can't because there aren't any. All of your arguments...selective admissions, small schools killing big schools, more money, better facilities, etc. are based on the schools already split. What do you think gives the current DI schools advantages, and if they have them why aren't they the best in the state?

[rick7425]

Rick,

 

This is a common misperception. Almost all of the remaining privates in DI do NOT have selective admissions. I have heard this claim over and over but it simply isn't so. The big preps DO have selective admissions policies. The religious privates are a completely different animal with a completely different philosophy.

 

Our 'admissions test' is a basic reading and math test to make sure the prospective student has some chance of passing. We still get multiple students who are well below average academically. Why? Because our mission is Christian Education, not to have the most National Merit Scholars or State Championships. That is the mission of the preps, not the current DI privates.

 

Baldcoach: Perhaps I wasn't clear on what I mean by "selective admission." All I am saying is that most private schools, including those in Division I, get more applicants than they have spaces for. Accordingly, there is some selection that occurs. What the criteria is on which that selection is based may vary from school to school. I'm not suggesting that every school, or any particular school for that matter, uses athletic ability as a part of the criteria. All I am saying is that if a private school wants to do that, it has the ability to do that. Once again, as I said earlier, I think whatever minimal competitive "advantage" that may be versus a public school is offset by the tuition factor. That's why I think it is entirely appropriate to keep the public schools and the Division I private schools together.

[OnlineLC]

I am not that good at reading between the lines of what people say, but the interview with Ronnie Carter at halftime of the Goodpasture Alcoa game yesterday did catch my attention. He mentioned that he had never witnessed such dominance as seen by both Alcoa and Maryville over a period of time going back even to the Brentwood Academy years of the 90's.

 

Was that a dig at Rankin for starting the whole issue when he was coach at Riverdale?

Was it an indicator that he has no appetite for trying to justify a split next time around?

Was it an indication that a multiplier should also be applied to open zone publics?

 

I personally have no problem with Alcoa or Maryville, they are great programs and I believe great coaching is at the core of their success. The next few months are going to be very difficult for the TSSAA to navigate as they decide where to go next.

[Antwan]

Antwan,

 

You keep relating your reasons for splitting the privates to the Aid giving schools...who are already split!

 

Name a private that is currently playing in DI who has performed as well as the best publics in their division. You can't because there aren't any. All of your arguments...selective admissions, small schools killing big schools, more money, better facilities, etc. are based on the schools already split. What do you think gives the current DI schools advantages, and if they have them why aren't they the best in the state?

 

 

Lipscomb They have the 2nd best record of anyone from 1993-2004. They had the best record in 2a during that period. Since their move up to 3a...they have been in the title game every year.

 

Them and Goodpasture especially are among the best in the state in their class every year. They have advantages because they are located in the metro area. They do have great facilities. DCA is not far behind. They have great facilities too.

 

My previous post about BA has nothing to do with my reasoning for a complete split. It was an answer to a previous post saying aid schools don't have an advantage. I have never said aid schools are not different from non-aid schools. In every post I've made about a complete split...I have always said aid and non-aid schools should be in separate classes.

[Antwan]

I am not that good at reading between the lines of what people say, but the interview with Ronnie Carter at halftime of the Goodpasture Alcoa game yesterday did catch my attention. He mentioned that he had never witnessed such dominance as seen by both Alcoa and Maryville over a period of time going back even to the Brentwood Academy years of the 90's.

 

Was that a dig at Rankin for starting the whole issue when he was coach at Riverdale?

Was it an indicator that he has no appetite for trying to justify a split next time around?

Was it an indication that a multiplier should also be applied to open zone publics?

 

I personally have no problem with Alcoa or Maryville, they are great programs and I believe great coaching is at the core of their success. The next few months are going to be very difficult for the TSSAA to navigate as they decide where to go next.

 

 

Carter has stated that open zone and tuition paying schools are going to be "looked at". What that means...I really

don't know. He also said the multiplier is not doing what it was intended to do...so far.

 

I think you are correct that great coaching is the core of Maryville's and Alcoa's success. Of course...having players of the caliber they do doesn't hurt either. How could a school Alcoa's size have so many DI athletes? I could see it at a large 4a school...but not at a small 2a school.

[Antwan]

You realize that a 2 class private division would put schools with 260 or so kids against the super 7, right? How fair is that? Especially if those smaller schools are not financial aid schools?

 

How is that situation more equitable than what we have now?

 

And how do you justify splitting privates and in the same post admit that there are publics that have the same advantages? It seems odd to me.

 

Did you read my philisophical post on what does and doesn't make a fair levelling device?

 

 

You didn't read my post...again. The 2 class private division would be 1 aid and 1 non-aid. If a school chooses to give aid they would be in the same class with the Super 7 (or ever how many there are now). I don't think the size of an aid school matters much. All non-aid schools would be in one class.

 

It is more equitable...in that it addresses the open zone/tuition paying schools. It also addresses the public/private issue.

 

The reason to move open zone/tuition paying schools up would be to encourage them to close their zone and don't allow tuition. If they do that...they can stay in their normal class. If not...they move up 1 class.

[Baldcoach]

Baldcoach: Perhaps I wasn't clear on what I mean by "selective admission." All I am saying is that most private schools, including those in Division I, get more applicants than they have spaces for. Accordingly, there is some selection that occurs. What the criteria is on which that selection is based may vary from school to school. I'm not suggesting that every school, or any particular school for that matter, uses athletic ability as a part of the criteria. All I am saying is that if a private school wants to do that, it has the ability to do that. Once again, as I said earlier, I think whatever minimal competitive "advantage" that may be versus a public school is offset by the tuition factor. That's why I think it is entirely appropriate to keep the public schools and the Division I private schools together.

 

 

I went back and read...heh

 

I agree that the potential for selecting for athleticism exists. I would also admit that some religious privates have probably sold out and used the potential (to me this is like selling your soul...it just isn't the mission!). But I also agree with you that the potential for publics to manipulate NCLB and no tuition (especially metro, open zoned, and magnet schools) to get athletes at least offsets the private potential. Besides, if we punished on potential then all schools would be in trouble...I guess this is why I have such a problem with split talk. I can't help but believe that the only reason that can justify the people who want a split is their assumption that most or all privates cheat because they see the potential. Somehow they miss that in their own schools. I guess that is human nature.

[Baldcoach]

You didn't read my post...again. The 2 class private division would be 1 aid and 1 non-aid. If a school chooses to give aid they would be in the same class with the Super 7 (or ever how many there are now). I don't think the size of an aid school matters much. All non-aid schools would be in one class.

 

It is more equitable...in that it addresses the open zone/tuition paying schools. It also addresses the public/private issue.

 

The reason to move open zone/tuition paying schools up would be to encourage them to close their zone and don't allow tuition. If they do that...they can stay in their normal class. If not...they move up 1 class.

 

 

I see now...so really 3 divisions and a multiplier? Don't you think that is getting a bit out of hand? How about this...a merit system and we all play together.

 

I know, I know, you don't like the merit system. But, honestly, man to man, I understand why...SC would have to play 3a or maybe 4a. Especially since you guys are near 3a sized anyway and a really good team year in and year out. You realize a merit system isn't to our advantage either...it lands us squarely in 2a and into 3a fairly often I'm guessing. I just think it is the only equitable solution that treats everyone fairly.

 

I do have an alternative that would bring everyone back. I don't particularly like it but you might like it more than a merit system. Put us all back together. Reduce the multiplier to 1.5ish for non-aid and open zoned/magnets. Give a 2.0 multiplier to the aid schools. Personally I think multipliers are way too subjective (see my post) but that way we at least acknowledge that there ARE publics with the very same advantages as privates. Heck, better ones since they can get who they want for free IF they decide to go that road (which I think most do not, just like most privates do not select for athletes).

[Baldcoach]

Carter has stated that open zone and tuition paying schools are going to be "looked at". What that means...I really

don't know. He also said the multiplier is not doing what it was intended to do...so far.

 

I think you are correct that great coaching is the core of Maryville's and Alcoa's success. Of course...having players of the caliber they do doesn't hurt either. How could a school Alcoa's size have so many DI athletes? I could see it at a large 4a school...but not at a small 2a school.

 

 

Tyner produces about as many...a lot of them don't score well enough on the ACT to go though...same with South Pitt.

But both also have fine coaching staffs. Which is why I think they are consistently good. Coaching is the reason that ANY school is good year in and year out imho. Which is why I get fairly upset when people claim the privates should be split because they have all the good athletes. Been doing this for a while, been a very poor coach (could still be lol...like to think I've gotten better) with a losing team and I've coached on championship teams. The difference isn't the athletes' innate ability as much as it is the ability of the coaches to help them to their potential.