This is the second time...

[TheEgoHasLanded]

We know why public school supporters don't want to compete with private schools. Those points have been beaten to death on this board. The one thing that I haven't understood is why private schools demand to compete with public schools in the post-season.

The reason private schools wish to play public is very simple.

 

Look at who they would have to play if they leave D1 (even though there isn't a D1). Are you going to want to play D2 schools like BA, CBHS, MUS, MBA that have more people than you. Better tradition, more coaches, better facilities, and will give out scholarships to kids while you do not.

 

If you answer YES (you can't answer yes to the scholarship thing since that doesn't hold true for public schools) then fine...Go to AA. The public schools are just as unwilling to leave 1A and go to 2A as the private schools are to leave 1A and 2A and have to go to D2.

 

Do you think Lipscomb would be nearly as good in D2? Probably not, They have struggled against BGA the last couple of years, who is a very good D2-AA school, but I would place them behind MBA, CBHS, BA, McCallie, and perhaps MUS.

[CSense]

Look at who they would have to play if they leave D1 (even though there isn't a D1). Are you going to want to play D2 schools like BA, CBHS, MUS, MBA that have more people than you. Better tradition, more coaches, better facilities, and will give out scholarships to kids while you do not.

 

 

Are you saying the above are UNFAIR advantages ego? Please say it ain't so!!

[TheEgoHasLanded]

I don't classify any advantage as fair or unfair...including a free education.

[lazarus]

"Do you think Lipscomb would be nearly as good in D2? Probably not,"

 

why wouldn't they be as good? would they quit working, fire their good coaches, or just give up?

they might not enjoy the same success, because they would face more actual competition, but they would probably be better for the same reason.

[krichunaka]

Baldcoach, Ego,

 

Sum this up for me. I don't expect any of this to apply to my little ole Unaka; so don't get the impression that I have a personal axe to grind. That said, and try to simply be objective. And again....let's keep it in the real world. Both of you know that the rural publics are NOT gonna get better. And both of you know that the Privates will continue to dominate, and before long, in all three major sports, plus girls sports.

 

So............. What do you suggest... a Multiplier? And we know what will happen there. Baldcoach, you can see where Boyd could, with a 1.2....easily creep just underneath the AA wire. And several of the others are in the same scenario.

 

And this is getting repetitive, but: Where do you think the talent level, and specifically in football, is with the single A privates; and we're considering Boyd, CPA, DCA, et al? And please, enough with the "ya'll should shut up and get better, smut." At what level would you say Boyd is now, and for the foreseeable future? I don't claim to know, but it appears they would be fine and dandy at the Public AA level. Happy New Year.

Edited December 30, 2003 by krichunaka

[TheEgoHasLanded]

I asked a question and I gave the reason that I didn't think they would be as good...BGA has done pretty well against them recently, and BGA isnt as good as the D2-AAA teams. I didn't say they wouldn't work is hard, or their coaches would quit, I wasn't trying to imply that either. So please don't make it out like I was.

[Tacoma]

I asked a question and I gave the reason that I didn't think they would be as good...BGA has done pretty well against them recently, and BGA isnt as good as the D2-AAA teams. I didn't say they wouldn't work is hard, or their coaches would quit, I wasn't trying to imply that either. So please don't make it out like I was.

This has been a prominent argument as to why the private schools outperform the public schools. Just seems like it should also work from DI to DII.

[lazarus]

i still dont see why you think they wouldnt be as good. not as successful, sure. everybody has more success against weak opponents than strong ones. but it doesnt make them less "good".

CPA didnt have any success against rivendale, but thrashed slezell harding. do you propose that the CPA that played rivendale was not as good as the CPA that played slezell?

[Baldcoach]

Baldcoach, Ego,

 

Sum this up for me. I don't expect any of this to apply to my little ole Unaka; so don't get the impression that I have a personal axe to grind. That said, and try to simply be objective. And again....let's keep it in the real world. Both of you know that the rural publics are NOT gonna get better. And both of you know that the Privates will continue to dominate, and before long, in all three major sports, plus girls sports.

 

So............. What do you suggest... a Multiplier? And we know what will happen there. Baldcoach, you can see where Boyd could, with a 1.2....easily creep just underneath the AA wire. And several of the others are in the same scenario.

 

And this is getting repetitive, but: Where do you think the talent level, and specifically in football, is with the single A privates; and we're considering Boyd, CPA, DCA, et al? And please, enough with the "ya'll should shut up and get better, smut." At what level would you say Boyd is now, and for the foreseeable future? I don't claim to know, but it appears they would be fine and dandy at the Public AA level. Happy New Year.

 

Krich,

 

I don't really think that the privates will necessarily continue to dominate...they may. Objectively I would say the current data points that way, but the data from 10 years ago pointed the other way. Again I say we don't have a large enough data sample size to draw conclusions yet.

 

My suggestion is a merit system. It is the only fair way to take care of things. Consider that any system that says "You belong to category X and therefore we will do Y to you" is discriminatory. Truth is that only a handful of privates are really good...most of them are not real good at all. Also not all metro schools are real good, and neither are all open zoned schools. Conversly not all of the rural publics are bad.

 

Since there is no 100% way to judge a school's competitive level by type, or location, or zoning, or enrollment I say let's do something radical. Let's judge a school's competitiveness by the school's competitiveness. Let's look at a school's record in a sport for the last few years and decide if they are dominating or doormats. Move the dominate teams up and let the doormats come down.

 

Silver's plan, the Virginia plan, or the simpler version that I like (b/c I can understand it hehe) all address the actual performance of a school. And they are not discriminatory (or possibly illegal as we have all glimpsed from the BA case) since ALL TSSAA members are treated equally.

 

As for the current talent level in single A privates...if we look at the current top 4 or 5 then it is really good. Easily competitive into 3a ball. After that I don't know...there are still some pretty good teams but certainly they aren't dominating...after all, how many have you heard of in the finals? I would submit that South Pittsburg had every bit as much talent as any private school this year. We beat them twice but we couldn't score on them and they couldn't score on us. A few mistakes and a great night kicking decided both games. I really think (not to take anything away from DCA...a fine team with a lot of heart) that if South Pitt had beaten us the second time they would have won it all. They were bigger, stronger, and just as well coached as we were. We probably had more team speed but they had a couple of guys who were faster than any of ours.

 

Sorry about the book...I thought your post deserved a complete answer.

[TheEgoHasLanded]

i still dont see why you think they wouldnt be as good. not as successful, sure. everybody has more success against weak opponents than strong ones. but it doesnt make them less "good".

CPA didnt have any success against rivendale, but thrashed slezell harding. do you propose that the CPA that played rivendale was not as good as the CPA that played slezell?

I propose that CPA is a very good team when it plays teams that are near their enrollment. They are going to struggle against teams like MBA and here is why.

 

1-Three times the enrollment

2-Better Coaches (Look at Rutledge)

3-Better Facilities

4-Give out more money for financial aid...if you want to substitue BA, McCallie, Baylor instead of MBA, I'm actually not sure if MBA does financial aide.

 

 

The first reason and the fourth reason are differences that CPA can not control. If you took those reasons out, and left just the second and third, then I would say that CPA should just deal with it...just as I say the publics should just deal with it in 1A (assuming the privates have #2 and #3)

[TheEgoHasLanded]

krich-

 

The merit system is a good system but is flawed. The problem with it is simple. FINANCIAL AIDE Brentwood academy and all the rest of the D2 schools would play up to the highest classification (against the Riverdales of the world) and they would beat them again...we would then have the same problem we had in 96. Clearly MBA was the best team in the state this year, and BA beat them so everyone would agree they are up there as well. Those two teams would beat 95% of the football teams out there (last year BA beat the 5A state champion BHS).

 

I support a multiplier and a 1.5 cus I don't want to hear people complaining that schools are intentionally lowering their numbers. I don't think you all realize that when you lower your numbers, you are lowering your revenue. There are many things that are more important than what classification you are in...

 

Paying the day to day bills, paying the teachers salaries, insurance, etc. Remember, private schools aren't getting that government money for education.

[Baldcoach]

We know why public school supporters don't want to compete with private schools.  Those points have been beaten to death on this board.  The one thing that I haven't understood is why private schools demand to compete with public schools in the post-season.  Continue to compete during the regular season to assist with travel expenses and to keep any rivals.  However, separate them in the playoffs and allow similar schools to compete with each other.  I am anxious to read your response.

 

It's a fair question I think. I would answer it first this way...privates aren't demanding anything. The way things are now is the way they have always been. It is actually the other side that is making demands...demands that private schools be split, or moved up simply because they are private. When one is suddenly faced with a demand for change the natural reaction is to ask Why? Why the sudden animosity or anger or concern (depending on the emotional level of the person involved) over privates playing publics when that has always been the case?

 

There can be only one reason...the privates have started winning. A lot. So one has to ask onesself if winning is the real reason that there is a demand for change. If so then surely we can all see the wrongness of that. Demand a change and punish someone because they happen to be winning? It's the very opposite of who we as Coaches, Atheletes, Players, and Americans are. After all, don't we keep score in games to decide who wins?

 

What other reason could be behind the demand for change? I accept that many of the proponents of change are after a more competitive division of the schools. If so then they should all be for a merit system. Such a system would move schools to a competitive level regardless of whether they are public, private, magnet, open zoned, rural, metro etc. And such a system would make sure that no team dominated a division for more than a couple of years before it moved up. Everyone who is for competitiveness should jump at this type of system BUT... every time I or Silver or someone else brings up a merit system many of the public posters shoot it down out of hand. To say I am wary of their true motives is an understatement...

 

I think that forcing any group of schools into a category based solely on what kind of school they are is wrong. All schools in the TSSAA should be treated equally under the rules. To discriminate against any school is not equal treatment...even if only in the playoffs.

 

Finally, I would submit that we are all 'similar' schools. We all have 14 - 18 year old high-school students. We all struggle with some aspects of athletics (money, facilities, discipline, coaching, support, etc.) and excell at other aspects. Some private schools are really good...some open zoned schools are really good...some rural schools are really good...and some of each of those categories are average or really bad. Surely we can find a better way to help our kids compete than to single out this or that category of school and punish them. If we can't just accept that there will always be advantages for some schools and play together anyway then let's go to a merit system...let everyone fall where they may and let's let all the fussin' and fightin' go away.

 

PHEW! What a book!