Forgive my ignorance

[derek782]

please forgive me for asking, but what advantage do the non financial aid giving private schools have? The only thing I can draw from what most people have posted is that there isn't any zoning policies concerning where privates get their students. I don't understand how that gives a school any advantage or disadvantage. ASSUMING that their is no "recruiting" or any kind of special privelages allowed to athletes applying to private schools(moving good athletes to the top of waiting lists ,etc.), then what makes a group of 300 students from various locations any more talented or driven than 300 students from a central specified location? If their is recruiting going on then prove it, take it to the TSSAA and perhaps to a federal court. If their isn't recruiting or other such questionable enrollment practices then what advantage do the non financial aid giving private schools have?

[beethoven]

please forgive me for asking, but what advantage do the non financial aid giving private schools have? The only thing I can draw from what most people have posted is that there isn't any zoning policies concerning where privates get their students. I don't understand how that gives a school any advantage or disadvantage. ASSUMING that their is no "recruiting" or any kind of special privelages allowed to athletes applying to private schools(moving good athletes to the top of waiting lists ,etc.), then what makes a group of 300 students from various locations any more talented or driven than 300 students from a central specified location? If their is recruiting going on then prove it, take it to the TSSAA and perhaps to a federal court. If their isn't recruiting or other such questionable enrollment practices then what advantage do the non financial aid giving private schools have?

you'll find your answers on the pages and pages of the great debate within this forum.

[FatCat]

please forgive me for asking, but what advantage do the non financial aid giving private schools have?

Derek,

 

I will try to use some logic from some of my previous posts in other threads and let's see if you can comprehend.

 

There is never a hard, fast rule. But, in general, the public schools who do better usually have a higher participation rate. So, that applies to this fact immensely. If the AVERAGE public school has 30% participation and the AVERAGE private has 60%.....that is a HUGE disparity. Then, you take into account the higher level of the average student athlete at a private school and you have quite an advantage building!

 

The general rule is that the greater your student population, the greater the chance you will have more quality athletes. But, it doesn't guarantee that. Trousdale County is a perfect example of the exception. There are many factors (as you said) that determine the quality of the teams that come onto the field. That is why it is a rare team that continually dominates in the public schools. There are too many factors that can change. But, the one constant is the size of the pool from which they have to draw from.

 

On the other hand, the private schools don't face such a fluid situation in the types of kids they get in. They have a pretty consistant high level of student athlete.

 

Now, if a private school has twice as many kids participating in athletics on the average, then that is almost equivalent to doubling the size of the student population. It is not exactly the same, but it sure is close. And, because of the nature of the student athlete at private schools, that pool they are choosing from is generally more talented than the AVERAGE public school.

 

That doesn't apply to ALL private schools and that doesn't apply to ALL public schools. But, the averages ABSOLUTELY go that way. If you don't think a group of kids whose parents PAY several thousand dollars a year for them to go to a certain school is not a very different situation from a group of kids whose parents send them to the local public school, then you will never grasp this argument.

 

Again, I would like to see if you think public schools should perform as well academically as private schools. Based on your arguments, the performance of public schools on standardized tests should be the same as that of private schools. But it is not and it will never be!!!

 

OK FatCat, I'll bite. You say it is rare team that continually dominates in the public schools, and you mention Trousdale County as a rare exception.

 

How do you explain the perenneal strength of a few additional public school programs that come to mind? How do they do it?

 

Riverdale football

Maryville football

Milan football

South Pittsburg football

Shelbyville women's basketball

White Station men's basketball

Germantown baseball

 

I would suggest that the dominance you reference is not all that rare!

 

This post has been edited by gobigred on Feb 11 2004 - 06:03 PM

GoBigRed,

 

You still have shown exceptions and not the rule. And, for most of those schools you listed, I would say that community pride and spirit go a long way to contributing to sustaining those situations. But, that is just one of many factors involved.

 

Now, if we all knew the answer as to how they did it, we would be MILLIONAIRES! I ask myself all the time about how do some of these guys do it. I have some thoughts, but nothing concrete.

 

Sometimes it is a VERY GOOD Coach who stays with that school for many, many years. An exceptional coach can produce winners no matter the talent or participation. Sometimes it is the "in thing" in the community that drives that sport.

 

But, here is a better question. What public schools consistantly perform well in ALL TSSAA sports? NONE!!! There are a lot of factors that I just touched on as to why a school might excel in ONE sport.......but NONE OF THEM do well in ALL SPORTS. On the contrary, the average private school excels in ALL SPORTS or MOST SPORTS.

 

If you can answer me that one, then you might have an argument!!!

 

(FatCat @ Feb 11 2004 - 06:16 PM)

Sometimes it is a VERY GOOD Coach who stays with that school for many, many years. An exceptional coach can produce winners no matter the talent or participation. Sometimes it is the "in thing" in the community that drives that sport.

 

 

 

Yep, that is the key to success at many private schools also!

 

Yes, it is. Now, answer this. Knowing that he has the option to coach at MBA for a decent salary and he doesn't have to teach, do you think Jeff Rutledge would ever coach at a public school where he would have to teach and make not very much money? Again, there are always exceptions to the rule, but what percentage of private schools have good coaches (and why) and what percentage of public schools do (and why)?

 

And, BigRed, don't get me wrong. I have stated before that I like playing against schools such as DCA, David Lipscomb, etc. It gives our guys something to shoot for to improve themselves. Our football team has scheduled private schools to play in the non-region portion of their schedule for several years. It is fun to compete with them. But, no matter how much fun it is....it is not fair to compete with them for titles if we are the same size. However, we are bigger population-wise, so I think it evens the field A LITTLE....but not completely. So, imagine our delite last year when we lost to David Lipscomb at every level of the Girls Softball Playoffs until the state tournament where we beat them out for the state championship.

 

VolGen, the first statement you made that I quoted did not need me to refer to Earl Nall's article. You said that participation rates should have nothing to do with classification. The part about 60% v. 30% is the second quote. I read that article when it first came out. I thought you had some info that might discount his statistic, but you don't. It does matter what the 1A percentage of participation is instead of all public schools. But, I infer from the article that we have pretty even participation rates, no matter the classification, for public schools.

 

The bottom line is that participation rates matter a great deal in this argument!!! But, it is not the only factor involved. The multiplier just makes the situation better, but it does not address the PROBLEM. The problem is we have apples competing against oranges.

 

I have plenty more if you want it.....just bring it on!

[sportsguy1]

I have to disagree with the statement that private schools tend to dominate in all sports and publics that dominate only do it in one sport. The statement about the private schools is simply not true. I know for a fact that in the Chattanooga area the only DI private that is pretty much good at everything is Chattanooga Christian. Schools like Boyd, Grace, and Temple may have some good teams in some sports in some years but they don't dominate everything that they field a team for.

 

So to use the same words...private schools that dominate every sport that they participate in are the exception rather than the rule.

[charlie]

Someone explain why Tennessee is the ONLY state that discriminates against member schools because they are private and/or they have a need-based financial aid program? Georgia has state power Marist who for years has dominated 4A. There are over 20 private schools in Georgia that give need-based financial aid and there seems to be no problem. Georgia has instituted a 1.5 multiplier.

 

Am not sure what makes Tennessee so unique. DII schools pay the same TSSAA fees as everyone else, yet they have been segregated. Some have to travel six hours to play a region game -- miss classes, chances of road accidents are greater, expenses more. Why? Because several years ago they began to win too many championships. Have always played under the same rules and regulations as everyone else.

 

People use the term "level playing field". Well heck, Tennessee Tech and the Vols aren't on a level field because the Vols have more resources. That's life. Somebody come along and give Tennessee Tech football $20 million and they might soon be up there with the mighty Vols. Why punish Tennessee because Tech is not as strong?

[dandy82]

Tech and Tennessee play in different divisions.

[silverpie]

OK then, Tennessee and Memphis. Bad example of a good concept.

[bigmon]

Small privates have to have a large participation rate in order to compete. The majority of the students that play sports, play 2 or 3 different sports. This past football season we had 19 players, but we only had 55 boys in high school to choose from. ( 34.5% participation) My son plays football and baseball, plans to play basketball next year, and would play golf if it didn't interfere with football.

[1AMAN]

Small privates have to have a large participation rate in order to compete. The majority of the students that play sports, play 2 or 3 different sports. This past football season we had 19 players, but we only had 55 boys in high school to choose from. ( 34.5% participation) My son plays football and baseball, plans to play basketball next year, and would play golf if it didn't interfere with football.

Any small school has to have a high participation rate in order to be competative, private or public.

[bulldawg bomber]

the plain and simple fact is outside of south-pitt, no one can play with the CPA's, the Boyd's and the DCA's.

[Dalton91]

Exactly how is the "participation rate" determined? If one school offers only three sports and another offers six then wouldn't that lead to a higher particiaption rate for the second school? At CAK we offer several sports most 1a publics don't. How does having 50 kids(boys & girls) playing soccer make us better in football? We also offer tennis(18-20), golf(8-12), swimming(15-20), and track(18-22) along with baseball and basketball. With an enrollment of 280, sure participation is going to be higher than, say, a Midway that only offers three sports.

 

Also, does a student who plays three sports count as one or three when determining the rate? Again, these facts can really skew the rates. Maybe the private schools have about the same number playing but more play multiple sports. I know that's common in small public schools as well but with private schools offering more sports it is much more typical.

 

One of my favorite myths on CoachT.com about private schools(there's SO many) is that they require the students to particapate in extracurriculars. But again, this is just a myth. What coach wants a player who is REQUIRED to be there?

[youshouldstay25]

"Yes, it is. Now, answer this. Knowing that he has the option to coach at MBA for a decent salary and he doesn't have to teach, do you think Jeff Rutledge would ever coach at a public school where he would have to teach and make not very much money? Again, there are always exceptions to the rule, but what percentage of private schools have good coaches (and why) and what percentage of public schools do (and why)?"

 

ok fatcat... mba is already DII... keep them out of this debate... first of all, their stinkin creed is "gentleman, scholar, athlete"... our coaches at cpa teach classes, as do most coaches as most 1A schools.