This is the second time...

[krichunaka]

EGO,

 

"Punish"??? That's an escape clause on your part. No one will be punished. The idea is to take the teams as they are; not what they "could be." You don't just say, "Alright, this team could do better, but they don't have the community support, so let's have them play the much better equipped and supported privates."

 

You should place your comments back into a real-world scenario. Yes, it is a stretch to group ETSU football into the framework with UT football; and that was exactly my point. It's apples and oranges (again).

 

Yes, ego, several of the public schools, North Greene, Unaka, Jellico, etc., could do much better....if if if if if. But at this point they're not in the same league with the privates; nor will they be. That fact is all that is to be considered here.

 

Now, usuing your criteria, we could say...OK, let's dole out $450,000 to the North Greenes and Unakas of the world, to even the playing field...sort of a Title IX approach. You and I both know how ridiculous that would be; as is the case with the privates being grouped with the rural publics. It's about much more than money. Different kids. Different priorities. College-bound; not college-bound.

 

There's much more to it than money (though it sure helps...nicer uniforms). And yes, it's alright to try to have teams play teams at (not where they could be) their competition level. It's really a no-brainer. I don't know why you continually insist that some poor souls will be "punished."

 

It really comes down to a couple fundamental questions: In your heart and mind, do you feel that the privates will be "punished" playing in AA? Do you think that Boyd, CPA, DCA, EZELL, et al couldn't compete at the AA level?

 

Finally, as I stated earlier, the privates, many of them, will, with a 1.2 multiplier, actually manage to stay in A. That's the real trick here. Do the math, and compare the amazing closeness when the 1.2 factor is considered for the privates. Lose a dozen or so students, and sure-nuff, several of them will manage to stay Single A. Your deflection to punishment will take a back seat to reality then.

Edited December 30, 2003 by krichunaka

[TheEgoHasLanded]

It really comes down to a couple fundamental questions: In your heart and mind, do you feel that the privates will be "punished" playing in AA? Do you think that Boyd, CPA, DCA, EZELL, et al couldn't compete at the AA level?

krich- I've been in this debate probably longer than 80% of the people on coachT have been members...everything has been said has been said for years...it hasn't changed.

 

 

How about instead of punish, we use the word...REWARD. Do we reward the public 1A schools that can't compete by weeding out the best competetion.

 

We do not do that in D2. I have spoken at length the advantages that MBA, MUS, CBHS, BA, and many other D2-AAA schools have over the D2-AA schools (larger enrollment, better facilities, more coaches, perhaps better coaches (Rutledge is probably as good as you will find in the country), more scholarship money)

 

Do I complain about this? No...I really could care less, but it troubles me when I look at my school and my brothers school and I see how much more other schools have, and then I have people on here that complain about playing schools with the same enrollment as themselves.

 

I do not have any argument against Brentwood Academy. Their school is relatively the same size as mine. Their facilities are about the same, they give out more scholarship money...but on the whole..they are the same as my school. MBA, is not the same in terms of enrollment...Do you think I am wrong for saying that MBA shouldn't be playing against the D2-AA schools (BY FAR THE BEST FOOTBALL TEAM IN THE STATE THIS YEAR).

 

It really comes down to a couple fundamental questions: In your heart and mind, do you feel that the privates will be "punished" playing in AA? Do you think that Boyd, CPA, DCA, EZELL, et al couldn't compete at the AA level?

 

Yes, you are punishing them and I will tell you why. When I was a senior, we were ordered by the TSSAA to play two of our regular season games against the D2-AAA schools. A third game must also be played against a fellow D2-AA team but it had to be from another region...There are only 2 regions in D2-AA...Middle/EAST, and West. So we played BA, they didn't bring a lot of people, and we got thumped good in the second half (they had over 100 guys). We then played MUS and lost to them in the second half as well (They had over 100 guys as well). Both games was only a 7 point game at half. We then had to drive 6 hours to play Knoxville Catholic a team we beat...My school plays at least 7 home games a year...we rotate home and home with SBA, ECS, BCS and thats it...the rest of our games are at home. Do you think we lost money on this deal...remember, we were ordered to play those three teams? The answer is obvious.

 

Yes we were punished, and if you do the same thing to the private schools, they will go through exactly what we went through...it's not all about winning and losing...if we had beaten those three schools, it wouldn't have changed our seeding for the playoffs so who really cares, but we lost money that way. If we had been forced to travel across the state in other sports...golf, wrestling, basketball, cross country, I guarantee you...we couldn't manage.

 

That is the reason the D2 schools wanted all the privates to come to D2, so they wouldn't encounter the problems we encountered.

 

 

I'm still not against a multiplier...i'm for it, because of the participation ratio, thats the only reason I'll endorse it.

[Baldcoach]

You cannot compare high school to college football. Regardless of the school size, fan base or financial package, college football teams playing in the same division may all offer the same number of scholarships. That is the same participation number.

 

You hit the nail on the head...as long as we are talking number of scholarships, in Div1 who gets to offer them? Oh, wait, all schools get the same number...0!

 

Glad we cleared that up.

[Baldcoach]

How do you see that private schools will be punished?

 

Schools that have been good upstanding members of the TSSAA may be forced to move up or out based on their success, not based on rules violations. How is that not punishment? Further, how is that not discriminatory or retaliatory punishment?

[Indian]

Baldcoach-Way off topic but did UTC recruit Alan Dunn? It's pretty annoying for to see a legit NFL prospect that could have dominated in the Southern Conference at tackle just as he did at Tusculum not playing for his hometown college team.

[Baldcoach]

Baldcoach-Way off topic but did UTC recruit Alan Dunn? It's pretty annoying for to see a legit NFL prospect that could have dominated in the Southern Conference at tackle just as he did at Tusculum not playing for his hometown college team.

 

It's crazy isn't it?

 

The answer is no...at least they didn't go after him very hard. Hard to believe when you have a 6'4" 225 pound senior who plays offensive tackle and middle linebacker (and not insignificantly maintains a 3.8 in honors classes). Surely he has the footspeed and frame to be a lineman for 1aa?? Tusculum got him and he has started 4 years...All American 2...and he grew 3 more inches and now weighs in at about 300.

 

It'll be fun to see him on Sunday if he makes it.

 

p.s. UTC didn't go after Healy very hard either...or John David Blair, or several others I can name who could have helped them. I understand it is the same with other schools in the area. Can't understand it.

[Indian]

Jim Thurman of Red Bank, all he did was start at linebacker for a national semifinalist (Wofford) as a sophomore, Nick Rivers of Hixson last year, said on this site to me when I asked that UTC didn't recruit or offer even though he was a "first alternate" of the linebackers Vanderbilt was recruiting, would have signed with Vandy had any of the four above him changed their minds, and this isn't the current staff's fault but they didn't even offer Josh Cain out of high school, he had to transfer and walk on. You can't expect them to get a Gerald Riggs or Demonte Bouldin, but they better get every 1-AA caliber player or they're in trouble.

[Tacoma]

 

Schools that have been good upstanding members of the TSSAA may be forced to move up or out based on their success, not based on rules violations. How is that not punishment? Further, how is that not discriminatory or retaliatory punishment?

So what is your solution? If the single A public schools continue to be dominated in ALL SPORTS as has taken place the last few years, either the private schools will have to move up or the public schools will pull out. What other alternative is there? Just continue to battle against that "glass ceiling".

[Baldcoach]

 

So what is your solution? If the single A public schools continue to be dominated in ALL SPORTS as has taken place the last few years, either the private schools will have to move up or the public schools will pull out. What other alternative is there? Just continue to battle against that "glass ceiling".

 

As I have said before and will continue to say...the best solution is for the teams who aren't doing well to do better. Football isn't about evenness, it is about excelling. However...

 

If something is to be done then it should apply to ALL the dominate teams. Thus once again I say put a merit system in place and let the teams fall where they may. This is VERY unpopular among the public radicals because the issue isn't really fairness, it is punishment.

 

Some have gone so far as to say a merit system is rediculous...as if punishing teams just because they are private is the height of reason.

 

And as for "battling against the glass ceiling" I have 2 comments:

 

1) When I played Football in the early/mid 80's the Publics clobbered the privates every year. And yes, we continued to battle. Now that some of the privates are really good why shouldn't the publics get the chance to show that kind of courage and fortitude...isn't that what we try to teach kids in athletics?

 

2) Personally, I find it insulting on behalf of all the great Public School programs out there that there is so much whining going on. South Pittsburg, Cloudland, Greenback, Gordonsville and others from other parts of the state are all good and competitive programs vs. public or private. Quit putting these and other outstanding programs down by implying they can't compete! I would bet that the young men who play for them would beg to differ with you...and their records prove that they are every bit as good as the privates.

[Tacoma]

Go to the TSSAA website and check the final four in all single A sports over the last five years. Then tell me that this is a football issue. When public schools aren't even competing there is a problem. How did the private schools pass the public schools in all sports?

 

By the way I'm not whining. I thought we were having an intelligent conversation via this format.

Edited December 30, 2003 by Tacoma

[Baldcoach]

Go to the TSSAA website and check the final four in all single A sports over the last five years. Then tell me that this is a football issue. When public schools aren't even competing there is a problem. How did the private schools pass the public schools in all sports?

 

By the way I'm not whining. I thought we were having an intelligent conversation via this format.

 

I did. 5 years does not make an insurmountable object out of private school athletics. After all, the publics dominated the privates for 20 years in every sport. So I stand by what I said.

 

Again I say Public schools are competing, and there are only a few privates that are doing all the winning. The tide will turn...look at Huntingdon and Lipscomb. I notice that Perry County is always in the hunt for a title in basketball too...great programs deserve respect and praise whether public or private. They certainly don't deserve to be punished.

 

Let me pose a question. Suppose your child struggled early on in school and then worked very hard and turned his/her school work around. What would you think if some of the parents of other children claimed your child was a cheater, or that he/she didn't belong with the other children because he/she had too many advantages? What if the teacher met with the principle without you there to decide whether your child should be punished for doing well by having a 'grade divider' put on them to bring them down to the level of the rest of the class...something like they only get 75% credit on all their work. How would you respond to that especially if there were other children in the class that were just as good students as your child...in fact had had better grades for years until just recently? And how do you think the parents of children who were keeping up would feel when their children were lumped into the 'rest of the class' category?

 

"struggle against the glass ceiling" sounds whiny to me...sorry if I took it wrong. I'm just a defensive coach and you know we get real aggressive if we think we hear any whining...

[Tacoma]

Baldcoach,

 

I understand the argument. However athletics are very difficult to compare to anything else, especially the academic world.

 

For example, all students have to be taught but they don't all have to play athletics. If someone doesn't cut it in the classroom you make accomodations for them or they receive some sort of special classes. If they don't cut it on the athletic field, they may be dismissed from the team.

 

Some schools have quotas on student councils to insure that all students are represented by sex and race. Athletics doesn't care about your color. Coaches will play the individuals that they believe to be the best at that time for his or her team to win. For obvious reasons, sex does matter. Males and females do not compete against each other.

 

Some students don't have the money to pay for lunch while at school. They get it free. If they don't have the money to buy golf clubs, they just don't play golf.

 

These are some examples as to the difference.

 

It is obvious that we have a philosophical difference in this. I have nothing against private schools. I do believe that they have a different makeup than public schools. This gives them an inherent advantage in all aspects of the school setting. This is one of the main reasons to send your child to one. I totally support that.

 

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.