Open zone schools: A level playing field?

[Govolsknox]

I wanted to hold off until the season was over to ask this question. First, let me say that this is not directed toward a particular school or program. One of the 2 schools that I support is open zone as well. Also, before I say anything else, I want to be clear that I believe the open zone schools are completely complying with the current TSSAA rules. However, I think this is a legitimate question that deserves thoughtful consideration by the TSSAA. How can it be considered a level playing field to have zero consideration for a school that accepts out of zone players competing equally with schools that don't accept out of zone players? Why does it matter? It is obvious that if you have a good school academically that is also historically a football powerhouse in the same area with school(s) that have not been particularly dominant in football, it stands to reason that many families will elect to attempt to send their athlete to the school with a strong football program. This has been seen to some degree over the years at Oak Ridge, Maryville, Alcoa, and others. Rural schools and non open zone schools don't have the opportunity to essentially draw from a much larger talent pool than just what is naturally in their school district. Private schools do have a similar ability to draw from a larger talent pool, and consequently the TSSAA has instituted a multiplier to force them to play larger schools than their student population would indicate. The discussion of public / private has been beaten to death, and regardless of where you stand on that issue, the fact is that the TSSAA has at least attempted to level the playing field between publics and privates. Yet there is nothing in the system to even attempt to address open zone schools.

 

It seems to me that the schools that they compete against have a legitimate issue that should be considered and addressed by the TSSAA, just as opponents of private schools would have a legitimate argument against the TSSAA if there was no multiplier to address the difference between publics and privates. (Whether the multiplier is too little, too much, or just right is a discussion for another thread...) Frankly, I'm surprised that this has not been addressed long before now. Certainly, there are things that could be done to at least attempt to level the playing field. For example, a multiplier could be used for open zone schools. The multiplier could be less than or greater than the multiplier used for privates, however the TSSAA sees fit. Consideration could be given to what percentage of out of zone players a team has. For instance, perhaps no multiplier for a school that technically accepts out of zone players but doesn't have any on the roster. A graduated multiplier would be a possibility, giving a higher multiplier for a higher percentage of out of zone players. (i.e. a team with a roster of 10% out of zone would have a lower multiplier than a team with 25% out of zone players etc.) This could be reported annually by the schools and adjusted periodically, such as every 4 years, much in the way enrollment is considered.

 

I'm quite sure there are better options than the one I described. My point is not the specifics of what I proposed, but the concept that something could and should be done to level the playing field. I would be interested to hear other opinions, whether agreeing or disaggreeing as well as other ideas to level the playing field if you believe this is a legitimate issue. If you don't believe this is a legitimate issue for consideration by the TSSAA, I would be interested to hear why you feel that way.

[EarlVolFan]

Yawn, the favorite topic for West Knoxvillians that now realize that Maryville can compete with and beat their beloved 6A teams...and the answer can only be because they can have players who live outside the city and pay tuition to attend the school...which rarely happens at Maryville...most players that have come to Maryville from outside the county have moved, with their parents there, which is the same thing they can do in Knox County, assuming the school board doesn't change the zones after they move!

 

Sorry, but you'd have that option, too if the City of Knoxville hadn't abandoned its school system to the county several years ago. Or better yet why doesn't the city of Farragut go ahead and start its own school system? What about a multiplier based on enrollment? Maryville has 1600 students to Farragut's 2400, which means it has a 50% larger student population to draw from.

 

My point is a public school is a public school and Maryville's is no different from any other. If you watched any of the Maryville vs. Farragut/Catholic/Oak Ridge/D-B/Riverdale/Bearden games Maryville was 'undersized' compared to any of those teams. I suggest that if you want your Knoxville teams to be able to compete, you look inwardly at your conditioning programs and coaching as well as the commitment of the players.

[pepvol]

While we're at it why don't we have about 24 more classifications so everybody can win a State Championship . If one team wins 2 years in a row why don't we make a rule where they have to change the coaching Staff ? How bout if one team goes winless one year , the next year they play in 1A , If they're already in 1A , well why don't we just keep on making a few more classifications till everyone's a Winner !! Why don't we just quit keeping score and we just give the win to the team that has the fewer wins ?

 

If you want to " Level the playing field " , be willing to sink a bunch of money into getting great coaches and have Crazy fans who show up no matter what ! Coaching , hard work , tradition , and fan support will go a lot farther to building a winning program ..... not legislation .

[thesmartestpersonalive]

I’ll try to be a little more opened minded in my response than the Maryville fans that preceded my post; they obviously believe everyone has an agenda to defame their program and its very impressive achievements, when the question you posed was a legitimate one. I attended Alcoa High School as a tuition student from kindergarten through high school because my parents felt that the quality of education at Alcoa was superior to that Blount County Schools. Having many friends who attended Blount County Schools I would absolutely have to agree with my parent’s assessment, my friends were not provided with the same quality of education as I. I did play sports at Alcoa but never made a significant impact on a game and many players on the sideline were capable of doing the same things I could do. This is the case of most tuition students; they take advantage of the education provided to them so they can achieve more in their future, compared to what they could have achieved at a lesser school. Now of course tuition students do play important roles on many sports teams and certainly several helped Alcoa win its last six state championships, but if you were to look at the percentages I would guess that if you took the percentage of tuition students on the football compared to tuition students in honors English, the English class would be at least double the football team. You are correct sir in saying that there is an advantage in having an “open zone” system you increase revenue, test scores, and often times athletic performance. This increase in school potential is not limitless, first the school has to accept every student within their zone, if there is still room then the school accepts students based on their potential contribution to the systems. Yes athletics are considered when accepting students but in the vast majority of situations that is secondary to academics. This is what distinguishes an “open zone” school from private schools, private schools have the ability to choose every single student that enters the door and if they want to choose a school of only exceptional athletes they have the ability to do that, where as an open zone school has a set capacity and they can only accept tuition students after zoned students and up to the set capacity. So obviously treating them like a private school would not make sense. But how do we compensate for this advantage. The way I see best is to do nothing and encourage all schools to open their zones, it seems to me that if we create competition among schools for students they will be forced to provide better products to students which would logically lead to better students being produced by all schools. This will without a doubt hurt many schools who choose to not compete as vigorously for students but there product would be reflective the effort they put in to gaining students. Maryville, Alcoa, and Oak Ridge are doing positive things for students and the rest of the schools in the state have no excuse not to do the same. Fans needing quit complaining( I don’t believe the original poster is) and encourage their school to catch up because nothing is stopping every system in the state from doing the exact sane thing.

[Govolsknox]

I’ll try to be a little more opened minded in my response than the Maryville fans that preceded my post; they obviously believe everyone has an agenda to defame their program and its very impressive achievements, when the question you posed was a legitimate one. I attended Alcoa High School as a tuition student from kindergarten through high school because my parents felt that the quality of education at Alcoa was superior to that Blount County Schools. Having many friends who attended Blount County Schools I would absolutely have to agree with my parent’s assessment, my friends were not provided with the same quality of education as I. I did play sports at Alcoa but never made a significant impact on a game and many players on the sideline were capable of doing the same things I could do. This is the case of most tuition students; they take advantage of the education provided to them so they can achieve more in their future, compared to what they could have achieved at a lesser school. Now of course tuition students do play important roles on many sports teams and certainly several helped Alcoa win its last six state championships, but if you were to look at the percentages I would guess that if you took the percentage of tuition students on the football compared to tuition students in honors English, the English class would be at least double the football team. You are correct sir in saying that there is an advantage in having an “open zone” system you increase revenue, test scores, and often times athletic performance. This increase in school potential is not limitless, first the school has to accept every student within their zone, if there is still room then the school accepts students based on their potential contribution to the systems. Yes athletics are considered when accepting students but in the vast majority of situations that is secondary to academics. This is what distinguishes an “open zone” school from private schools, private schools have the ability to choose every single student that enters the door and if they want to choose a school of only exceptional athletes they have the ability to do that, where as an open zone school has a set capacity and they can only accept tuition students after zoned students and up to the set capacity. So obviously treating them like a private school would not make sense. But how do we compensate for this advantage. The way I see best is to do nothing and encourage all schools to open their zones, it seems to me that if we create competition among schools for students they will be forced to provide better products to students which would logically lead to better students being produced by all schools. This will without a doubt hurt many schools who choose to not compete as vigorously for students but there product would be reflective the effort they put in to gaining students. Maryville, Alcoa, and Oak Ridge are doing positive things for students and the rest of the schools in the state have no excuse not to do the same. Fans needing quit complaining( I don’t believe the original poster is) and encourage their school to catch up because nothing is stopping every system in the state from doing the exact sane thing.

 

You make interesting points as well as making a case for all schools going to open zone. At this point, I'll hold off in responding directly to your comments and see if anyone else wants to weigh in. However, I'll have to say that I'm not too surprised with the first two responses. Rather than address the issue, some take offense. It is completely obvious that there is an advantage to having open zones. People can argue how much IF ANY it contributed to past success of a particular program. To me, that is not the issue. The issue is that under the current regulations, schools that have open zone enrollment have the ability to field athletes from a larger talent pool than schools that don't.

 

None of the following examples are exactly like open zones, but each has one common theme: There is an advantage to a school having a larger talent pool, and therefore the TSSAA has attempted to do something to level the playing field.

1. Private schools who offer scholarships. TSSAA action: force them to play in a separate division.

 

2. Private schools who don't offer scholarships but can field athletes from literally anywhere the kid lives. TSSAA action: Institute a multiplier.

 

3. Overall school enrollment disparity. TSSAA action: Institute the classification system 1A - 6A, so that schools that have 300 students aren't competing against schools with 2000 students.

 

Again, the common theme here is the TSSAA attempting to level the playing field where a school has the OPPORTUNITY to receive an advantage by accepting student athletes from a larger talent pool. Gentlemen (and ladies), if this is not a valid issue, then the TSSAA should do away with the above 3 examples and have one large classification, and let the chips fall. If this isn't a valid issue, schools that offer scholarships, are private, or have 2000 students should compete with schools with 200 students.

 

In conclusion, my point in this thread is that this is a valid issue that deserves consideration. There may be many ways to address the issue, but whether we like it or not, it needs to be addressed just like scholarships, private schools, and enrollment have been addressed. For the record, I support 2 schools, one of which is open zone and the other is a private.

[BCsportsfan]

Put open zone schools in DII. Don't let Privates play in DI with mulitipliers. Do away with 6 divisions in DI and go back to 1A, 2A, and 3A. Do away with A1 and A2 in DII! Alcoa and Maryville could play DII classification with Webb, Catholic, CAK, every year! !

[likearock]

No surprise that those whom beneift grossly from open school zones fail to see the issues at hand. It took forever for attention to be given to private schools and all the issues that abound with them. It is really no different with open zoned schools. They should be bound with a significant mulitplier or have the option to play in DII. DII catagories certianly have a need for more teams. Wouldn't a MUS vs Alcoa game have been great to see in Cookeville?

The topic is not to attack schools that have been successful but to reach a balance. There is simply no way for rural schools to go open zone, just not that many people out there.

[ksgovols]

It's really a rural vs urban/suburban issue. What other zone are players from Lewis County going to go? It's a one school county. The rural schools are at a disadvantage because they have a limited pool to draw from and they aren't in an area where players can commute or parents can find housing and jobs as readily as in more urban areas. There's nothing to stop any family from renting or selling their house and renting an apartment for a couple of years so that their child can play for another program. As long as kids aren't being recruited, I don't think there's any leveling of the playing field to be had.

[jangel]

It's really a rural vs urban/suburban issue. ... The rural schools are at a disadvantage because they have a limited pool to draw from ...

 

I agree completely here. I don't think the open zone issue itself is the problem so much as the pools of residents teams have access to. A school from a county of 100,000 residents is always going to have a large advantage over a school from a county of 10,000 residents. The pool of possible students is what creates the advantage. Open enrollment only allows schools to take more advantage of it.

 

I personally thought the Urban/Rural split that was suggested alongside the current classifications was very interesting. There were too many flaws built into that system for it to ever be truly considered, though. With some more thought, I believe that type of system would be the fairest. One that takes potential student pool into consideration.

[Indian]

It would take a lot of work, but experts who specialize in such matters as population density could determine any school's potential zone (even no zone and magnets) and the distances around which would fill it. For some schools it might be a 10 mile radius, others, 3 or 4. The TSSAA could come up with a percentage of varsity athletes any school could have outside that zone, averaged over a four-year period, and if the school surpasses that set limit, they move up a class. If they pass the next limit, they move up again, and so on all the way to AAA basketball and AAA/6A football if necessary.

 

The same process could work on paying students.

 

The big negative I could see, some coaches might not want many such students participating for fear of being moved up.

[likearock]

It would take a lot of work, but experts who specialize in such matters as population density could determine any school's potential zone (even no zone and magnets) and the distances around which would fill it. For some schools it might be a 10 mile radius, others, 3 or 4. The TSSAA could come up with a percentage of varsity athletes any school could have outside that zone, averaged over a four-year period, and if the school surpasses that set limit, they move up a class. If they pass the next limit, they move up again, and so on all the way to AAA basketball and AAA/6A football if necessary.

 

The same process could work on paying students.

 

The big negative I could see, some coaches might not want many such students participating for fear of being moved up.

Some unique points there, I've always been a proponent of fielding teams which can be considered to be competing on a level playing field. That doesn't mean they have to be the same....just really similiar.

I like some of your ideas but one factor which could also be considered is the ratio of males to females in a school. If a school has 65% males to 35% females that might very well be an eye opener.

 

Your big negative truly is a biggy. No doubt coaches want to win, and want to lead their players to become winners but this could quickly turn in to a bit of a slippery slope.

[Indian]

It can't be any more complicated than the playoff format.