Harding Academy

[Gov]

I think bald coach is on to something. Maybe the numbers that should be used is the number of athletes who have cleared the ncaa clearing house from each school. Obviously you are going to have a higher percentage of athletes that qualify for D-1 scholarships at private schools than at public schools because of entrance exams, students without learning disabilities, etc. Also I would assume that private schools have a higher percentage of thier student body participating in athletics. To try to compare total population numbers with each other isn't going to give you an honest percentage of who has the most athletes. For instance, no one will deny that Cleveland or Alcoa has some of the best ahletes year in and year out yet they don't always put players in D-1 consistantly. Some don't qualify, loose interest, or as in baseball Juco may be a better route if they are drafted out of high school. Yes, Laz is the greatest at putting in numbers but the variences is this equation are to broad to come to any conclusion.

[lazarus]

bc, (and now gove)

just to let you know i am not ignoring you.

simply havent had time to put together a proper response,

altho there are some thoughts percolating in my head.

 

to be honest,

i hope i dont get too much time freed up for a while yet.

(mid march would work just fine!)

[trackman]

bigmon - I don't think you're quite right in your assessment of the football talent in Clarksville. The Clarksville schools were down a few years ago, but this year there were a couple of teams in the playoffs. Not that they did real well, but most of the schools are between 1000 and 1200 in 4A or 5A and compete in pretty tough regions.

 

Come on. The reason athletes aren't attending Clarksville Academy has nothing to do with entrance exams or money. No offense, but if your body is warm and your dad is a doctor, you can get in.

 

Maybe it's because they don't recruit athletes now. Or they do and they athletes go to Davidson Academy or the publics. Clarksville Academy is slowly dropping off. When was the last time they had a competitive team in anything: oops tennis, golf?

 

Good luck with football because without major changes you won't play a schedule next year either.

[bigmon]

Trackman,

My comment about the football talent in Clarksville was that we have plenty of good players, but we have them spread between too many schools. Every time we add another high school it takes time to rebound.

No we do not recruit at CA. The program is building. The schedule is set. We had 25 players last year. We are losing 5 seniors, but there are at least 8 coming up, plus three more that have told me that they were going to play this coming year.

About the entrance exam: If a prospective student doesn't test to his/her grade level they can still be admitted, but at the grade level that they scored on the exam. By the way, the doctor's kids are all top students.

And finally, as for "major changes", there could be a surprising announcement within the next couple of weeks.

[CSense]

Ok, we have 85%+ of private school athletes capable of playing in college actually eligible while we have 35% of Public school athletes.

 

Here is the original chart

 

Class...............Students............chlarships..........% of population

Public A............15,623...................37.......................0.237

Private A...........4,353................... 27.......................0.620

D-II A...............2,181.....................5........................0.229

 

Public AA...........28,647..................73......................... 0.255

Private AA...........1.260...................9...........................0.714

D-II AA...............7,101..................20..........................0.282

 

Public AAA.........46,308..................85..........................0.184

D-II AAA.............2,348....................9..........................0.256

 

Public AAAA.......64,068.................131........................0.204

D-II AAAA...........2,208....................9.........................0.408

 

Public AAAAA.....93,697..................204.......................0.218

D-II AAAAA.........1,722...................10........................0.581

 

If we apply the numbers to get the athletes available in High School (which is what we are talking about) in Public A we get 106 of 15623 students = .678%  in Private A we get 32 of 4353 students = .735%  OR .7% vs .7%...given the generous assumptions we made these two are identical

 

In Public AA we get 209 of 28647 = .730% in Private AA we get 11 of 1260 =  .873%. OR .7% vs. .8%...a possible inequity.

 

Note that the 2 or 3 % difference that private graduation rates and college entry rates make in statewide graduation/college entry figures actually would reverse the A figures and would bring the AA figures into sync with each other.

 

Note: This whole line of reasoning rests on athletes falling into the same statistical averages as the school population as a whole...which I just don't know for sure actually occurs.

825554829[/snapback]

 

 

These "college ineligible" students/athletes still account for the numbers in classification.

Edited February 11, 2005 by CSense

[Mustang]

These "college ineligible" students/athletes still account for the numbers in classification.

825561471[/snapback]

They should. Just because the are "college ineligible" doesn't mean that they cannot play high school athletics.

[Bighurt]

These "college ineligible" students/athletes still account for the numbers in classification.

825561471[/snapback]

If a student/athlete does not qualify for a college then they obviouly could not sign a scholarship. Thus, they would be included in the number of student but not included in the number who signed scholarships. This would make the percentage of student signing scholarship in that category lower.

 

This may be a statistically insignificant number. However if 2 schools have the same number of students say 100 and school "A" qualifies 90% of their students for college and school "B" qualifies 60% and each school has 5 athletes sign. Under the current chart, the percentage in that category would be 5%. If you factor in the number of student who actually qualify, school "A" has a percentage of approximately 5.6% and school "B" has a percentage of 8.3%.

[Baldcoach]

If a student/athlete does not qualify for a college then they obviouly could not sign a scholarship.  Thus, they would be included in the number of student but not included in the number who signed scholarships.  This would make the percentage of student signing scholarship in that category lower. 

 

This may be a statistically insignificant number.  However if 2 schools have the same number of students say 100 and school "A" qualifies 90% of their students for college and school "B" qualifies 60% and each school has 5 athletes sign.  Under the current chart, the percentage in that category would be 5%.  If you factor in the number of student who actually qualify, school "A" has a percentage of approximately 5.6% and school "B" has a percentage of 8.3%.

825565838[/snapback]

 

 

Right...that was my line of reasoning. Still not sure it is valid and having a terribly hard time finding any specific Tennessee figures. I think the state must be so ashamed of its college entry rate that it hides it??

Edited February 15, 2005 by Baldcoach

[Baldcoach]

Ok, I finally found something.

 

http://www.educationreview.homestead.com/2...ationRates.html

 

This report breaks out graduation rates overall and by race. It also gives "college readiness" rates by state and race. "College readiness" is defined in the report as "the bare minimum required to enter college"...in other words anyone who qualifies at all.

 

These figures are 60% for Tennessee as discussed before (grad rate) and 35% "College readiness".

 

Amazingly I guessed 35% in the original post.

 

So the 35% of athletes is pretty close I suppose. There are some other factors that influence the figures some, but this gives us a good starting point.

Edited February 15, 2005 by Baldcoach