How big is Public vs Private debate in your area?

Public and private schools are completly separate in VA..

It's not that big here. The majority of private schools play in their own organization, but a few pay to play against the public schools. They aren't that good, and don't do very well in football. They are good in the other sports, soccer and baseball mostly, but fans do complain about one of them because they do recruit. They bring in baseball players from all over, and often win the state title in 2A.

They are for the most part seperate here in Texas. They let in two large private schools and should not have.

The private/public debate is huge in California. Our BCS style of choosing a state champion might become a bigger issue though.

Down here, So-Cal, they are mixed into our divisions pretty equally. Most are in their own league however. The privates did dominate a little more in the 90s than they have recently.

We only have a couple in our state, but this year the large school state champ was a private school that had 8 DI seniors who just blew everybody out of the water all year long and it has started some debate about how "fair" it is for them to be playing the public schools.

Funny thing is, when they won it all 2 years ago it was their first time even winning their league in like 10 years, so while the playing field may not be "level", it's not like none of the public schools have a chance, so I doubt it gets much farther than discussion at this point.

Huge in TN where privates get a 1.8 multiplier. Doesn't really matter as all DI championships were public this year. Class 1A (smallest school division) had two publics, 2A was one public vs one private, and 3A, 4A, 5A, and 6A were all public as well.

I may be wrong (I will preference this by stating I coach at a private school) but in PA you don't really see the private schools dominating in football at least. I am sure there are those that feel strongly the two should be separate or have a multiplier but the private schools aren't out there winning it year in and year out. They have had a true state playoff since 1988 with four class and I think 11 privates have won titles.

I dont get all the hatred toward private schools on this board. I am in PA and it seems to me that the public schools have all the advantages over almost everyone in the private sector. The facilities are better, I didnt even have my own field to play on, weight rooms, money to pay coaches, money to pay lots of coaches, my local public high school has ten coaches. Practice equipment is better. The list could go on.

Anyone of the public schools could win a state title and there are 500 public school districts. There are like 5 private schools that have it together and could win a state title. This doesn't seem unfair to me. It seems more like people trying to win by eliminating competition.

This debate always heats up here around state finals time because private schools win a disproportionate amount (or so the argument goes) of state titles compared to number of schools playing football.

Of course most of the people complaining are those whose teams get eliminated by a private school team. It does get people's blood pressure up on both sides, though.

It's a moot point though because MHSAA representative council and administration have shown absolutely no inclination to divide tournament, even though issue has been brought up every so often for years.

I have always coached in public schools and really don't care one way or the other. Besides, it's not going to change, at least in my coaching lifetime, so why worry about it?

And that is how it should be.

In Virginia, although the publics and privates don't directly compete, there are complaints about privates recruiting. It's mostly not in football here, too. Basketball and baseball is s different story.

Aren't charter schools allowed to field athletic teams up there ? I remember reading the Statesman and seeing a few charter schools scores in the paper.

Few years ago there was a big debate here in central ca about allowing charter schools to participate in athletics. They were afraid schools would open up just to field teams.

I live in wisconsin and in Illinois what I find interesting about the argument in both states is they hammer the private schools in football but totally look the other way in urban centers of milwaukee and chicago when it comes to basketball for public schools.

I have worked at both public and private schools and the half truths presented by both but mainly public schools makes me laugh. Here is the real truth about most private schools, their staffs are underpaid, lack the benefits of public schools, have less then comparable facilities and at least 50% barely keep their doors open every year to keep costs down.

what private schools have are two things. firstly the staff moral at private schools is higher and have a can do attitude. the sad myth presented by virtually all churches is the a vow of poverty is some how honorable. this is why they do more with less. second thing they have going for them in virtually all the parents who send their kids to private schools want their kids to be high achievers for a better life.

what I feel urban privates offer is a safe place. I mean if you are going to inner city public in milwaukee or chicago why would you not want to go to a private school. football in the public schools in the cities of chicago and milwaukee suck. why would you not try to go private or open enroll to a suburban public.