It's Official Now.......

[Baldcoach]

Asitis:

 

It is my understanding that the current privates in D-I, with enrollments adjusted by the multiplier, will be included in the initial classification breakdown sent out by the TSSAA after the fall enrollment numbers are all in. The privates will then be asked to make a choice between D-I and D-II. Once that choice is made, the D-I classification breakdown will be made without those privates that have elected to go to D-II. Theoretically, I suppose depending upon how many elect to go, that someone who is sitting close to a break in classification could go up or down from the initial classification.

 

The Board of Control did vote in its June meeting that the enrollment break line for A and AA be the same in Division II as it is in Division I. You can find this in the minutes of the June Board of Control meeting posted on the TSSAA website. Item 40 E. of those minutes.

 

As far as your questions about where USJ and JCS might have been "guaranteed" to land, the "projected" classification using "current" enrollment numbers ( 2008-2009?) that was published in the Tennessean immediately following the June Board of Control meeting at which the Z Plan was adopted and the multiplier left at 1.8 did "project" both JCS and USJ to be in AA. However, they are shown as being in the lower half, 3(A), based on multiplied enrollment, of District 14 ( the top half of AA is called 4A under the Z Plan). So, that could mean that they are bubble teams, near the projected break between A and AA, which could shift depending on who stays and who goes. I do not know what their current enrollment is. Also, it is hard to project where the break is going to be. For the current period, the break between A/AA is at 461/462. However, Oliver Springs High School, which is in A and shown as having had an enrollment of 461 in 2004 according to the TSSAA website, had a 2006 enrollment of 492 as shown on that same site. This places it at No. 112 of the 336 schools shown as being in D-I, with Jackson Co. at 113. If the TSSAA, which I am told likes to have even numbers, were to simply split that list into thirds to get an even number in each classification, then the break point using 2006 enrollments might have been at 492/494. If school enrollments in the publics, which make up the vast majority of D-I schools, have increased, the break point could be higher than it now is, maybe even significantly so. Who knows at this point. We really won't know until all this shakes out next month.

 

As for D-II, keep in mind that while the break between A and AA will be the same for D-II as it is in D-I, for purposes of determining classification in D-II, enrollments are not multiplied. The multiplier applies only in D-I; not D-II. The minutes of the June meeting of the BOC state that the BOC voted to continue to use a multiplier of 1.8 for "enrollments of private schools that participate in Division I". Once they elect to participate in D-II, the multiplier goes away. It serves no purpose in D-II, after all. So, it is entirely possible, in fact likely, that D-I privates who, when their enrollments are multiplied by 1.8, would be in AA for D-I, are in A for D-II. JCS had a 2006 enrollment of 251. USJ had an enrollment of 378. ( According to the TSSAA website). Those numbers are nowhere near the current break of 461/462. So, I think it is entirely possible that both schools will and could be "guaranteed" to be in the small school classification of D-II. In fact, it would probably be a surprise if they were not. Unless their enrollments have jumped significantly, if theA/AA break were low enough to catch them, it would mean there has been a mass exodus from the D-I public schools in numbers that even the most cynical could not blame on recruiting.

 

All I can say is that, eventually, we will all know and then we can go back to our day jobs.

 

 

 

Buck,

 

Using the TSSAA current DI Football schools I get a break point of more like 530 or so for the 1a2a/3a4a split. Are you using the numbers on the TSSAA website?

[MetFan]

Buck,

 

Using the TSSAA current DI Football schools I get a break point of more like 530 or so for the 1a2a/3a4a split. Are you using the numbers on the TSSAA website?

 

The 530 is not a hard number. The TSSAA wants to have 55 to 65 teams in each class. and a total of 70 for the combined classes 1A/2A. If a team is projected to be in 3A or above a 2a team on "the bubble" would most likely be moved up to 3A. With the number of private schools going to D2 under this odious plan, I see that 530 number going down to keep the numbers right. They are stacking this from top down so the bottom (1A/2A) which has 24 playoff spots (as oppssed to 32 for all the others) is the one most likely to be affected. Most of the small privates that will be making a decision to leave are at 275 to 400 students (495-720) with the multiplier. They have a little wiggle room on the upper classes but have to consider logistics but as you can see from the following statement it would apper that they intend to use 2a to fill any void left by exodus.

 

The earlier press release stated it this way.........

 

2. Each class is divided in half by enrollment. AAA is divided into 6A/5A; AA into 4A/3A; A into 2A/1A. This will place approximately 55-65 schools in each football classification. If the number of football schools in Class A is less than 70, then the Board would determine whether Class A would be divided for playoffs or remain as one class. Using present enrollments, there would be 83 football-playing schools in Class A.

[Redog]

So, how do you feel about students being denied the right to play sports because they are on need based financial aid, while all the other students around them are able to play? Tell me you think that is fair.

Please, would a representative or a supporter of an independent school that does this (gives aid and keeps those students out of sports in order to stay in DI) present a justifiable, defensible reason for such a policy?

 

A student/athlete can receive financial aid - they can work it off - IF you play atheltics - if you dont play athletics you don't have to work it off - students aren't "denied" the right to play sports.........

[MetFan]

A student/athlete can receive financial aid - they can work it off - IF you play atheltics - if you dont play athletics you don't have to work it off - students aren't "denied" the right to play sports.........

 

If you know of a student that is receiving aid and playing sports in D1 report them. That school will have to forfeit all games in which that student played. The key here is "D1".

[bigchief]

A student/athlete can receive financial aid - they can work it off - IF you play atheltics - if you dont play athletics you don't have to work it off - students aren't "denied" the right to play sports.........

 

That is called "work study" and happens at nearly all D1 privates. They do work around the campus at minimum wage rate to pay towards their tuition.

[Asitis]

That is called "work study" and happens at nearly all D1 privates. They do work around the campus at minimum wage rate to pay towards their tuition.

 

 

Never heard of this?

[minihaha5]

Never heard of this?

 

I have never heard of this either. Would have to be a lot of hours to pay off tuition scholership money at the current tuition prices. I would love to see verification of thisas I have had children at DI and DII schools and nobody I have spoken to knows anything about it.

[BuckLateral]

Buck,

 

Using the TSSAA current DI Football schools I get a break point of more like 530 or so for the 1a2a/3a4a split. Are you using the numbers on the TSSAA website?

 

 

BC:

 

The numbers I used are the ones on the TSSAA website, from the list of schools shown under " Classification", then "2007-2009 Classification Changes". As noted, these are 2006 enrollment numbers. The proposed classification plan published in the Tennessean after the BOC meeting said that it used "current enrollment figures" which, as I also noted, I assume are the 2007-2008 enrollment numbers. I don't have those numbers. But the proposed classification plan has Oliver Springs, which had a 2004 enrollment of 461 and a 2006 enrollment of 492 according to the TSSAA, as still being in A. If you go to the TSSAA website and click on Member Schools, then search for Oliver Springs, it shows an enrollment of 507. I do not know if the 507 number is 2007-2008 or not. So, it seems to that the break point between A/AA with all the current privates in D-I would be greater than the current 461, possibly significantly greater as you suggest.

 

But keep in mind something that Metfan has pointed out. There really are going to be two "break points", an initial, unofficial and temporary one for the private school decision making process and a final, official one after that decision is made. My understanding of how the process works is that once the enrollment numbers are in, the TSSAA is going to send out a list of all member schools based on the fall 2008 enrollments. That list will allow D-I schools to project where each school might land in terms of classification, with the privates still in the mix. With that list is going to come a request ( more like a demand) to each private school to tell the TSSAA whether it elects to stay in D-I or go to D-II. One of the gripes about 2004 was that the privates were asked to make their "stay or go" decision in early August, before enrollments were known and each school knew what the effect of the newly installed multiplier would be. Wanting to be "fair" to the privates as they always are (cough, cough, choke, choke), the TSSAA decided that this time around they would give the privates that information before they had to make the decision so they could make an informed one.. The initial, unofficial "break points" reflected by this list from the TSSAA is the one that most of us have been talking about, I think, since it is what the privates will base their " stay or go" decision on.

 

We know some of the privates are going to go to D-II. Once that decision is made, the TSSAA will then determine classifications for D-I and D-II. This will establish the final D-I A/AA/AAA break points, without those privates that have left for D-II. I think what Metfan is pointing out is that what may be the initial A/AA breakpoint is not a hard number, that the final break point could be lower than what the privates make their " stay or go" decision on, depending upon how many privates bolt for D-II, and that there are some "bubble" teams that could be surprised where they ultimately end up as a result. This point was also made by someone else earlier in this thread.

 

Metfan also points out that The TSSAA is stacking this from the top down. Based on everything I've read or heard, this seems to be correct. It appears that they will try to fill AAA up, then AA and what is left will be in A. And if there are less than 70 football playing teams in A, they are not going to split it----it would have only one football champion. So, for every D-I private that would have been in AA but leaves for D-II, there is the possibility that a public school that would have been in A could get "dragged up" to AA to fill out that class. I'm sure they would not be happy campers. If enough of that happens, then A might have only one class and one champion. If so, and the privates that are left in A dominate that one class and one championship, then, as someone else has already mentioned, you might see an increased multiplier or a full D-I/D-II split next time around. Again, as someone else has already said earlier in this thread, it could be the old "careful what you ask for" for some of the public schools or, as a famous Tennessean is alleged to have once said ( edited for this board): "darn, bit in the rear by my own dog".

[Asitis]

uWhat is now evident, and I think all should recognize it now, Football is large in all schools who have it but the misconception that Football pays the bills for the athletic program is ridiculous. Yes, it has the major cost and very likely has the largest budget and the most coaches but we are finding out a lot of schools are restricted as to how many paid coaches each school can have and if a schools program doesn't have attendance, and the TSSAA gets the major part of that, where does the money come from. I again suggest to you that Football does not have any attendance clout or financial clout with attendance because its paying for the Tssaa bills and the light bills and the equipment costs. So when we talk about this situation of going Division II, what is at the bottom of the matter. It's easily seen, in my viewpoint, its the financing of an athletic program thru the parents fees and donations for enrolling in a private school and today its financing thru parents donations and fees and business donations in the public schools. The loud noise about Football financing all of anything is just a loud noise. Football is mostly just financing itself and sometime Title 9 is going to rear its head and lead to accountability of all of these misconceptions. If your student is going to a Public School, you are going to pay to play. If your student is going to a private school, you are going to pay to play. Who is going to foot the bill for the coaches? The athletic program is going to do that. Football is larger and it is easier to do that. Most of the Title 9 sports , if are done by teacher/coaches, are funded by School/Boosters and if are run by coaches hired by the school from outside, are supplied small supplements from a Booster Club. Big Football just pays its bills and its budget is high because it just has a high attendance sometimes, which the Tssaa gets the most of but is agreed to by the member schools.

Now lets understand about the real cost which Football has caused when two factions could not get along and have a law suit that goes clear to the supreme court and the rest of the athletic community HAS to just sit back and watch and wonder what is going to happen. The State legislators and the Governor of the State should have put an end to the fiasco but no, the two big kids on the block keep rocking and the rest on the HS sporting community just like everything else, sits back wondering what is going to happen to them. Now lets split the pie a little more and now have attendance go down a little more and travel a little further and increase the pay to play, to cheerlead, and blame it on each other. There is no doubt that the Schools are the only entity to make this work but they are also the only entity that can stop this madness, to get their educational house in order, provide a product they do exceptionally well and keep the cost down internally and externally to their fans. So now we hear that some of the privates may not be doing well, not all but some. Attendance is not good? Attendance to games not good? Travel expense risen? And now continue on the same course and add to the cost? The only thing I can see are the two sides are not in court but now are in a competition area with the taxpayers that the stakes are higher. Nobody again will give. Highest Multiplier in the United States. Nobody is talking. We'll just try this for 4 years, cost the fans and taxpayers and let the Heads of Schools and the Heads of Education satisfy their power needs and that will take care of the problem. If some of the privates go to Division II and it winds up with 40 schools how is that going to help. What does control of a few athletes and a little more power to a head of a school matter to the taxpayer. What is happening in Jackson Tennessee right now is an embarassment to the people that run the Educational Department in Madison county. Maybe its not so and maybe the State has taken over your schools but if its not Education, the major part of this is over football and basketball. Now we hear that the coaches think this is right. Why would they not think that? I would suggest, let the heads of schools and directors do it but if it doesn't work, let it be at the cost of their jobs and let it not be for four years, let it be for two and there be someone to control it. Lets get this back to one Division, negotiate on whatever the multiplier is and finish this for good. The taxpayer and the fans are footing the bill and honestly are getting tired of it.

 

 

With all due respect, I have NO idea what your point is.

 

I gathered you are for one division, yet outside of that, could not really follow the rest.

 

Privates going D2 are embarrasing the Madison County School system?

 

Taxpayers are tired of paying for Private school travel expenses?

 

I'm sure you are making some valid points, yet obviously I was not smart enough to follow.

[RedUp]

That is called "work study" and happens at nearly all D1 privates. They do work around the campus at minimum wage rate to pay towards their tuition.

 

Here are a few lines from the TSSAA bylaws:

Tuition and Financial Aid

1.

Q. Is it permissible for a school to employ a student for summer work who has not attended the school the previous year?

A. No. In order for a student, who will be participating in athletics, to be employed by a school during the summer the student must have attended the school the previous school year.

2.

Q. Can a school employ student-athletes to ???work off??? tuition?

A. No. Article II, Section 16 sets forth the only means for reduction of tuition. A school may employ student-athletes as long as the remuneration or consideration for work is not in excess of the amount regularly paid for such service.

3.

Q. Must all financial aid to student-athletes be need-based?

A. Yes

 

Legal work study disappeared long ago. However, I have a hunch illegal work study still exists in some form or fashion in many DI independent schools. Bigchief seems to think so.

[RedUp]

"Let me ask you a question on fairness. Is it fair for the parents of a student to be paying full tuition and then see a percentage of that tuition payment be redirected to a fund to offer aid to another student who may end up stealing his place on the team?"

 

Straight up answer on fairness----but you and I obviously see things differently:

If I were a parent paying full tuition, (and I am) and part of my tuition payment went to help a student attend the school that he/she could not otherwise attend, and the presence of that student amongst the student body made that student body more diverse and helped prepare my child for a world full of diversity, I would (and do) consider that a good investment. I could care less if that child "steals" (strange choice of words) my child's spot on the roster.

[Old Timer]

"Let me ask you a question on fairness. Is it fair for the parents of a student to be paying full tuition and then see a percentage of that tuition payment be redirected to a fund to offer aid to another student who may end up stealing his place on the team?"

 

Straight up answer on fairness----but you and I obviously see things differently:

If I were a parent paying full tuition, (and I am) and part of my tuition payment went to help a student attend the school that he/she could not otherwise attend, and the presence of that student amongst the student body made that student body more diverse and helped prepare my child for a world full of diversity, I would (and do) consider that a good investment. I could care less if that child "steals" (strange choice of words) my child's spot on the roster.

 

 

RedUp, I too am a parent paying full tuition, so I have a question for you on your last statement above.....How would your child feel knowing the school (parents) paid the way for someone to come in and take a spot he/she had worked hard for?