News from the TSSAA

[Antwan]

 

Antwan,

 

If you want a system that applies equally then you are against a split. Good to hear it. Not sure what changed your mind between posts though.

 

If we look at all the factors that everyone has claimed causes "unfair" competition then we are still looking at one thing in reality...competition. Therefore any system that addresses competitive advantage is going to take care of all the other things.

 

But no system is fair unless it applies equally to all the parties involved. You tell me that the small publics can't compete with some of the privates. Ok, I accept that. It seems apparent from the last few years. But there are several publics that they won't be able to compete with either.

 

What I am saying (and what I thought you were saying) is that the specefics don't really matter...the competition does. So let's put into place a system that moves everyone up or down based on their competitive levels. Not by whether they are public or private...that is discriminatory and extremely unfair. After all, there are good, average, and poor private programs just as there are good, average, and poor public ones.

BC,

 

Don't try to put words in my mouth. YOU state YOUR opinions...I'll state mine.

A split would not be discriminatory for DI or DII. If there was a split...and DII had one class...that would be discriminatory. They would be playing under a different set of guidelines...just as 1a publics and 1a privates are now. The difference is location. All 1a privates are in urban areas. All 1a publics are in rural areas.

1a publics cannot compete because of that reason.

 

Merit based system is ridiculous. How could a small school ever hope to compete? Everytime you get better...you move up. Do you think any public 1a could ever compete with 5a schools? That would never happen. Conversely...how would a mediocre 5a school feel about playing 1a or 2a schools (probably nowhere near their area). I just don't see it working.

[3rdchance]

 

 

Merit based system is ridiculous. How could a small school ever hope to compete? Everytime you get better...you move up. Do you think any public 1a could ever compete with 5a schools? That would never happen. Conversely...how would a mediocre 5a school feel about playing 1a or 2a schools (probably nowhere near their area). I just don't see it working.

Antwan,

 

I am new to this topic so forgive me if I'm taking the spirit of these posts out of context but the beauty of a merit based system is that the 1A publics would compete up to the level they are capable of. In other words, they would never have to compete against a 5A school unless, of course, they were capable to play at that level. If the primary goal is to win, publics and privates should be opposed to any merit based system because under one, there is no place to hide. If the primary goal is to play against the best competition, then based on past performance a merit based system should sift out the right pool of teams for a school to compete against regardless of current classification.

[lazarus]

"What kind of message does it send to kids that if they give it their all and are winners that they are punished for it?"

 

so here is more common ground for privates & publics. both believe that if success leads to playing tougher opponents, they are being punished.

 

but i can sympathize. that seems to be the way the whole public school system is set up. when i worked hard, and passed my classes in first grade, i was just punished by getting sent to second grade. and the same kept happening until i ran out of grades.

after that came the real punishment. i had to work all the time, instead of only after school and weekends.

 

isnt the whole playoff system, then, punishment? you beat your region opponents and are penalized by having to play tough teams from other regions? if you beat them, you have to play other winners? and so forth. maybe, the region winners should be rewarded by getting to play gleason and rbs before being declared a state champion?

[Gov]

Thats the problem with you antwan, you know that if a split happens you will move down to 2-A and dominate. You have your own motives, not what is best for everyone. Eliminate the competition. You could really care less what is fair as long as your team has the advantage. Which they would if there were a split. You are a master of the spin. I will give you that, but really all that you are doing is hurting high school athletics by splitting. If your not careful, public high schools will get out of ahtletics altogether. Be careful what you wish for.

[Dalton91]

 

Merit based system is ridiculous.  How could a small school ever hope to compete?  Everytime you get better...you move up.  Do you think any public 1a could ever compete with 5a schools?  That would never happen.  Conversely...how would a mediocre 5a school feel about playing 1a or 2a schools (probably nowhere near their area).  I just don't see it working.

First, its not a matter of just "get(ting) better". You would have to show dominance in a sport before you're moved up. If you go to the semi's or finals every year you should WANT to move up. Second, a 1a school wouldn't have to compete with a 5a school unless they first show dominance in 2a, then 3a, then 4a. Third, a school would not be forced to move down. If they are mediocre they could stay in the class there're in. Don't say it would never work. Other states, (California for one) do it and it is sucessful.

Edited December 12, 2003 by Dalton91

[mustang69]

"What kind of message does it send to kids that if they give it their all and are winners that they are punished for it?"

 

so here is more common ground for privates & publics. both believe that if success leads to playing tougher opponents, they are being punished.

 

but i can sympathize. that seems to be the way the whole public school system is set up. when i worked hard, and passed my classes in first grade, i was just punished by getting sent to second grade. and the same kept happening until i ran out of grades.

after that came the real punishment. i had to work all the time, instead of only after school and weekends.

 

isnt the whole playoff system, then, punishment? you beat your region opponents and are penalized by having to play tough teams from other regions? if you beat them, you have to play other winners? and so forth. maybe, the region winners should be rewarded by getting to play gleason and rbs before being declared a state champion?

Your goal was to graduate. Public schools goal is to be competitive in a system where everyone is on a even playing field.

 

What if you had got to the fourth grade and had an A average and everyone decided beings you were an above average fourth grader they would just move you to eighth grade? Would that be fair? No. You had no other advantage over any other 4th graders.

[silverpie]

Any system of classification other than a single class for all schools is "discrimination"--it's treating schools differently because they are somehow different. Even small/large classes are "discrimination." The question is, on the many kinds of differences between schools--which go far beyond public/private or financial aid/non-financial aid--which ones are legitimate grounds for some kind of discrimination, and which are not? To which I say, that's a fool's errand. My plan discriminates on the basis of history--the better you've done before, the better you're expected to do now.

[Antwan]

 

Merit based system is ridiculous.  How could a small school ever hope to compete?  Everytime you get better...you move up.  Do you think any public 1a could ever compete with 5a schools?  That would never happen.  Conversely...how would a mediocre 5a school feel about playing 1a or 2a schools (probably nowhere near their area).  I just don't see it working.

First, its not a matter of just "get(ting) better". You would have to show dominance in a sport before you're moved up. If you go to the semi's or finals every year you should WANT to move up. Second, a 1a school wouldn't have to compete with a 5a school unless they first show dominance in 2a, then 3a, then 4a. Third, a school would not be forced to move down. If they are mediocre they could stay in the class there're in. Don't say it would never work. Other states, (California for one) do it and it is sucessful.

If the 1a dominant privates would voluntarily move up...there wouldn't be a problem. They haven't so far...don't expect they will.

[Gov]

This sliding scale makes me dizzy, Yea, I would like to be the coach who wins the state loses 12 seniors, have to move up on a rebuilding year and get thrashed by schools that have 300 more students. This is ludicrius. Just put everyone back in, if it makes you feel better use a multiplier, but I don't think it will solve your parity, level, or what ever you want to call it problem. I have got a headache trying to figure out all this.

[Antwan]

Don't say it would never work. Other states, (California for one) do it and it is sucessful.

I didn't say it would never work. I did say I don't see it working here. I don't think anyone here wants to be anything like California in any way.

[Antwan]

This sliding scale makes me dizzy, Yea, I would like to be the coach who wins the state loses 12 seniors, have to move up on a rebuilding year and get thrashed by schools that have 300 more students. This is ludicrius. Just put everyone back in, if it makes you feel better use a multiplier, but I don't think it will solve your parity, level, or what ever you want to call it problem. I have got a headache trying to figure out all this.

Gov,

 

You are right. It would be a nightmare for public schools that have down years.

Most privates don't. When is the last year DL and GP had down years?

[Gov]

I have to agree one time with Antwan, no one wants to be like California, in any way.