|
Post by John Knight on Dec 15, 2009 10:38:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by norcaldiaz on Dec 15, 2009 13:35:19 GMT -6
To me, it seems like the Public vs. Private affects the small schools much more than the large schools, as CA does not distinguish between little private schools/football factories (Oaks Christian, Central Catholic, etc) and small town schools. I mean since the CA SBG started, Canyon, Centennial, Grant, and Oceanside have all won state titles (Canyon and Centennial have beaten private school De la Salle) - all large public schools... However in the medium and small sized schools no publics have won and few have even been selected to play. Are there other states where small public schools can compete with small private schools?
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Dec 15, 2009 14:26:32 GMT -6
To me, it seems like the Public vs. Private affects the small schools much more than the large schools, as CA does not distinguish between little private schools/football factories (Oaks Christian, Central Catholic, etc) and small town schools. I mean since the CA SBG started, Canyon, Centennial, Grant, and Oceanside have all won state titles (Canyon and Centennial have beaten private school De la Salle) - all large public schools... However in the medium and small sized schools no publics have won and few have even been selected to play. Are there other states where small public schools can compete with small private schools? I know in PA the small school divisions have been dominated by public schools, many of the same public schools, since the state title games began. I coach at a small private school and can tell you first hand that the public schools can and do compete in the small classes along with all the classes.
|
|
|
Post by coachbrown3 on Dec 15, 2009 17:47:36 GMT -6
Over here in Eastern PA, the privates schools are going to be just as dominant in the next few years....this year, LaSalle is already in the AAAA championship game & District 12 has only been competing in the state championships for three years.
Schools like that can pool from a large area outside of a big city like Philadelphia. My biggest problem is when a school like St. Joe's Prep (which is located in Center City Philadelphia) not only recruits all of Philly & its four surrounding suburbs, but they also get kids from across the bridge in New Jersey! (For those of you who are unfamiliar, South Jersey is a hidden gem of talent. Just ask JoePa and any Big Ten coach)
They basically have a metropolis the size of NYC in which to pull kids! It's amazing that it took this long for a Catholic league school to get to the title game.
|
|
|
Post by canyoncoach on Dec 15, 2009 19:30:03 GMT -6
It's a huge problem in southern California, overall the play has been pretty even over the last few years, the issue is more with the recruiting and pulling talent from the publics, which is not supposed to be happening.
Coaches from private schools showing up to pop warner practices and talking to parents is more of the issue.
I coach at a public school and we were recently very succesful so naturally I love to complain about it but if I was at a private I would be doing the same things as far as recruiting
|
|
|
Post by coach6525 on Dec 15, 2009 19:38:06 GMT -6
In wisconsin it has been a problem in both football and basketball. There have been alot of rumors of recruiting. Not by coaches but by big boosters of the schools athletics. Like I said i have just heard rumors, but have seen several good athletes leave public programs that are coming up just short and going to the private schools. I our smaller divisions is where it really shows.
|
|
|
Post by coachinghopeful on Dec 15, 2009 23:27:56 GMT -6
Used to be huge before they thankfully split the privates into their own divisions in the late 90s, IIRC. Now we have 2 divisions for privates and 6 divisions for publics in football. It's a good system.
Locally only one of the privates plays football, and they're also the only 8 man team in the area who answers to an all-private school governing body. The rest are either too small/too broke to put a team together. There are some excellent private school programs in other parts of the state, though.
|
|
|
Post by blueswarm on Dec 16, 2009 0:16:23 GMT -6
In Oregon, everyone plays together and the private schools do have an advantage. Our private schools do win more regularly. The other thing that we deal with is Open Enrollment. This allows kids within an area to choose the school they want to go, so it a way the schools in an area can get the better football athletes. Between these two things, the schools with open enrollement or the private schools win more state championships. For example, in our state championships this weekend, 3 out of the 6 state finalists in the top three size brackets were private or open enrollment schools, in which 2 of the 3 state championships were won by those schools. It is unfair and inequitable in Oregon.
|
|
|
Post by CVBears on Dec 16, 2009 13:16:10 GMT -6
In our section of CA, the section championships were:
DI (largest): public vs public (our own "tothehouse" took home the hardware in this one) DII: public vs public DIII: public vs public DIV: public vs private (won) DV: public vs private (won) DVI: private vs private
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 17, 2009 7:55:28 GMT -6
IN Division 1 and 2 in Ohio Public School won. Div II final was two public schools. Div 3, 4, 5 and six were won by private powerhouses and 3 and 6 had two privates in the finals. Since private schools make up less than 20% of the 718 schools that play football, something appears to be rotten in Denmark! www.ohsaa.org/sports/ft/boys/2009/statebrkt.pdf
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 17, 2009 10:47:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 17, 2009 10:55:18 GMT -6
Based off statistics from 1999 through 2007 in Ohio high school athletics, public schools that field a football team outnumber private schools 717 to 73. So basically private schools make up about 10% of the total schools and public schools make up the other 90%. With only a 10% representation, privates schools have managed to appear in the state final four 32% of the time and have won the state championship in football 44% of the time. The success rates in other sports are just as high or higher. In volleyball, private schools win the state title 66% of the time, 39% in boys soccer, 50% in girls soccer, 39% in boys basketball, 50% in girls basketball, and 46% of the time in baseball. A local private school we can relate to is the Alter Knights. Tippecanoe High School, although very strong in athletics, has never won a team state championship. Alter, on the other hand, has won 19.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 18, 2009 8:35:55 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Dec 18, 2009 8:47:52 GMT -6
Why? What is the reason? To say recruiting is too simple an answer for me.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 18, 2009 8:50:39 GMT -6
What makes the best college teams the best? If you look at the common public school district in Ohio that has 500 students in the high school, 250 of those are boys and of those 250 boys you have at least 150 that do not do any after school activities. That leaves a pretty small pool to field a band, soccer, golf, cross county and football team from. Take a private school of 250 boys and most of them will be involved in some extracurricular activity. More often than not these private schools have more kids that are good students and fewer special education students. Some public schools now have a 10-12% special education population. As a rule few of those play sports. So you can see why it is fair to use a multiplier when seeding those private schools in a division. If we all thought that fairness was not necessary why have divisions? Everyone play in one division whether you have 100 boys or 1000, it only takes 11 to play, right? en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_American_School/Ch8_Sports_in_Public_and_Private_Schools
|
|
ccox16
Junior Member
Posts: 343
|
Post by ccox16 on Dec 18, 2009 12:54:37 GMT -6
In florida it doent really become a problem until you hit the lower classifications. Florida goes by the number enrolled in the school. being up in the 6A classification we dont see any of the public vs private, we just have to deal with suspossed "recruiting". But unless you have a paper trail nothing really gets done about that.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Dec 18, 2009 13:46:04 GMT -6
iggy - thanks for the props. The problem with the argument in our section is that there aren't many privates in our area. Jesuit and St. Mary's come to mind, but the other "powers" are much smaller private schools.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Dec 18, 2009 15:18:28 GMT -6
This may come off as not PC at all, but consider the following with an open mind and not being defensive: Why are extra curicular activities so flooded in Private schools, not just football? I just went to a parade in Lincoln, NE there were many bands marching in it. Some of the Publics had huge and well organized bands, some of the publics had tiny and awful bands, 1 private school had 1 bigger than them all and was much smaller school and was the best from what I could tell.
Same private school has a ton of kids out for football and do well. Is it all recuiting? Are the private schools recruiting all the band kids, all the math club and DECA kids etc? This school btw DOES NOT have great facilities, worse than most public schools in its class.
Private school costs money. The vast majority of students come from families that have probably had some success on the job, in order to pay the big tuition dollars. Probably pretty hard working, good decision makers, delayed gratification part of the mindset etc No ones perfect. but as a whole probably better at all the above than say parents in the hood etc
Kids often model what they see at home If home is full of acheivers, that engage, participate and drive for excellence, wouldnt you expect the same from the kids coming from these families? The above premise works for the demographic of the all top 4 consistent performers in the largest class in Nebraska - 3 of the 4 being public schools, 1 private. The above premise works works for the demographic for 2 of the top 3 consistent peformers in second largest class, both are private. Seems like a fairly reasonable premise that has been very consistent here.
I dont know about any illegal recruting, but like many places the talk of a mutiplier here was seen as the ever popular penalizing those making good decisions thing, it hasnt gained much traction. These privates had a lower % of their kids going DI than their conterparts etc, the most consistent DI talent pools are all Public schools here.
The kids I get from 2 parent families, hard working parents etc kids are much easier to coach (dont have to be as much of a social worker) than the 8 years of coaching kids in the ghetto, 70% single parent homes. Coaching the ghetto kids was a lot more rewarding personally, but more difficult. Made very good teams from both, 1 was much easier to do than the other for me anyways at the youth level. Exceptions abound but over the last 20 years, pretty consistent aggregate.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 18, 2009 16:48:37 GMT -6
Dave--I would agree with many of your assertions. I agree the biggest "advantage" that many of the successful private schools have is that the students come from a culture of achievement.
The Multiplier concept is geared to those small privates in urban areas that enjoy the ability to skew statistics and draw from a very large population base.
The achieving population and parental involvement is a major factor, however that doesn't account for a school with 160 boys consistently averaging at least 260 across year after year after year... The fact is that these small urban privates are accessible to very large populations
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Dec 18, 2009 17:59:16 GMT -6
I understand there certainly may be some shennanigans going on. Not trying to be argumentative, just making some observations and floating a plausible premise. But how many of those 260 pound kids were 180 pound kids as 9th graders and worked themselves up? I gained over 30 lbs in less than 1 year and took .15 off my 40 time with a reasonably good weight program and consistency. Mom and dad never told me to do it, I just saw them both working hard, telling me if youre not playing, dont whine, quit or do something about it- thats all. Do we penalize those that work hard and achieve? Seems like that is the trend today.
How many of those kids go to the private school because the coach and team have a history of maxing out potential? Ive had maybe 12 kids from my inner city program go the private route, some were pretty talented kids, some not really at all. They got to go from a school with a 33% drop out rate and shootings to 1 where 95% of the kids go on to college, no violence in the school. Hard to say no to that, while Im a public school grad, I was very happy for all of them. Tough deal when all we want is what's best for the kids.
I might add, Ive been told this theory by a HS head coach in my area and I think there is a lot of validity to it. I come from a lower middle class hard working blue collar area, the area is now in transtion, very old and very proud neigborhood. Now lots of people there with no roots, no hooks and very little pride in the neighborhood. Many of the kids I grew up with, have excelled and have left. The ones that havent left: a handful of holdouts, and the rest guys that never really progressed after HS. His theory: the hard driving successful families moved out, the slackers stuck around and the rest are pretty transient. Not very pretty picture, but seems to have some legs. Very doubtful even Lombardi could win there, won 2 games total last 3 years. Class "A" (largest class school) that would probably be 1-8 in class B, might be .500 in class C etc
|
|
|
Post by rhscoachbh on Dec 18, 2009 22:55:25 GMT -6
In the California state championship bowl games 7 of the 10 teams are private schools.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Dec 18, 2009 23:45:45 GMT -6
Dave--I would agree with many of your assertions. I agree the biggest "advantage" that many of the successful private schools have is that the students come from a culture of achievement.
The Multiplier concept is geared to those small privates in urban areas that enjoy the ability to skew statistics and draw from a very large population base.
I had this discussion with a very successful private school coach RE; the multiplier... he asked which of his kids was worth 1.35 students? Since it was rhetorical, my answer was a question as well: "Coach... you've got a good point, but come up to our place and I'll show you a lot of 0.2s walking our halls.
I do not really advocate a multiplier- but I'd like a divider (or subtractor). In our (and many others) case... we count 4 students who are at alternative school... technically allowed to play- but will NEVER do so (and wouldn't help), 4 students who we had to take back until they did nothing/did not show for a month... then they were gone. Plus we have to count 1 down syndrome student who will play no sports and two others with severe mental handicaps. That is 11... not a big deal in a big school.
In our class... 11 amounts to 18% of our enrollment for classification purposes. This is where I have an issue... and it has nothing to do with my contempt for private schools, for parents who choose to get a better situation for kids... heck, I don't even have a problem with the recruiting issues (which in our class are largely non-existent).
But... if St. Peter of Holy Name... whatever school has 40 boys in school and 38 play football... good for them. But they don't belong in the same class as those of us who might have 17 play football.
I hear the mantra from those schools all the time... "Get better"... I'll be honest here, our winning percentage is about 80% over 22 years. It is about 45% against the private schools.
Maybe... just maybe the private schools: have better coaches and work harder and have better weight programs... and schemes... and boosters and administrations...
or maybe... teams will be better choosing from 40 athletes as opposed to choosing from 15 athletes and 25 pot-smoking, skateboarding, video game playing misdemeanoring knuckleheads...
But what do I know... I'm at the public school... so I'm not as good as those private school guys (which IS the sentiment among uninformed message board idiots here).
After a while... it gets to the point where we feel it is a successful season when we finish 8-2 (8-0 vs. public schools... and, well... do the math).
I like the challenge... believe me. Love it when we beat the private schools. But over the long haul, it is a tall order to have to constantly beat someone who is twice your enrollment when it comes to available bodies for football.
|
|
de58
Freshmen Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by de58 on Dec 20, 2009 15:18:31 GMT -6
Private schools are hated in Kentucky. I don't know if the private school are necessarily better, but they do seem to be at a higher level than most of the public schools.
The main issue is recruiting. Private schools offer scholarships, and they pretty much go after who they want. There have been many instances where a kid has transferred from a public school to a private school, helping that school to a state championship.
It's a pretty serious debate around my neck of the woods.
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Dec 20, 2009 16:04:51 GMT -6
I had this discussion with a very successful private school coach RE; the multiplier... he asked which of his kids was worth 1.35 students? Since it was rhetorical, my answer was a question as well: "Coach... you've got a good point, but come up to our place and I'll show you a lot of 0.2s walking our halls. This killed me. I'll totally agree with Dave and CoachD's points about atmospheres of success, achievement, and expectations that help to set the stage for any school's success.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 20, 2009 20:15:59 GMT -6
|
|
redbug
Sophomore Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by redbug on Dec 20, 2009 21:51:04 GMT -6
It will only get bigger in Arkansas now, a team in the middle classification in the state was in the top 25 teams in the country according to USA Today with only 177 students in their school. The biggest gripe in the state is their ability to "advertise their school to individuals and convince them how it is beneficial for them to join their school and football team" aka recruiting. Their claim that the majority of the team has been there since grade school may be true however all of their players beign recruited by D1 schools all came to them between 9th and 10th grade. The governing body for arkansas passed a new rule that any student transfering to a private school after 7th grade must sit out of athletics for a full year.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Dec 21, 2009 7:13:15 GMT -6
In order to keep the doors open (many here admit that many private schools are operated on a shoe string) private schools must advertise for kids. If they didnt, they would have to close their doors, simple reality. They have no mandated guarantee of "customers" hence they must market themselves and create a "product" that is vaulable enough to get parents to part with some very big $$$. If you were to tour many of the privates near where I live you would see teachers making less than the publics and facilities that are far inferior to the Public schools. While many can afford it, there are also plenty that cant and stretch to make it work. Ive seen men have to take second jobs, women give up staying at home and enter the work force, seen big families have to go without vacations for 10-12 years, no restraunt meals for 10-12 years and drive beater cars instead of getting a new one all which of course they could have done had they sent their kids to the schools theyve already paid for once with their tax dollars. Most probably choose for the right reasons, others maybe not. The ones I know that send their kids to privates dont do it for sports, it is for the discipline, safety, closeness, curriculum (no Sally has 2 mommys stuff) and values they feel is important enough to sacrifice 6-11K per year per child for. HUGE sacrifice for many. THe publics have a huge advantage over these schools, especially in tough ecomonomic times. Outlawjoseywales Im sure can attest to losing plenty of good kids to public schools due to $$$, maybe even having some of them "recruited" away, it's a two way street in many places Im sure. Again not an attack on public schools, I went to one, my kids attend one, just stating what I know is a reality where I live. People choose to go elsewhere and often make HUGE sacrifices to do so ( I know blue collar family of 8 living in 1400 sq foot house, all in private school etc). There are 2 sides to every equation.
I might add the most consistent largest class teams in my state in football are HUGE suburban schools with unreal facilities, great coaching, huge numbers, an excellent youth feeder program and supportive families.
Competition in most dynamics make both parties stronger, no event will ever have two perfectly matched entities. That is what happens out in the working world as well. Each entity will have always have some advantages the other does not, rarely is anything a 100% perfect match or 1oo% "fair". Having a one store monopoly rarely breeds excellence- that is just a time proven reality.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 21, 2009 7:24:36 GMT -6
That is a quality in itself Dave. I am by no way putting down parochial schools and there are many just like you say. What the heck does that have to do with them bringing in 10-20 great football players and giving them scholarships so the money backers of football can gloat about this poor little private school winning all those big games? It almost makes it more vile, in my opinion. Here is the history in OH remember the ratio of public to private is 718 to 72 approx. www.ohsaa.org/sports/history/FT/state_results.htm
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Dec 21, 2009 7:42:27 GMT -6
WHere I live, the ones I see dont do that at all. Facts are the teams with maybe the exception of a sliver of one Class A team, look all alike, the demographic is static accross the entire student body. The 1 school that maybe has an athletic sliver that is a bit different than the typcial demographic of the school- the sliver is small and their are non athletes from that group as well. I know, the 1 school got a few kids from my program- I also know specifically they DIDNT offer schollys to very needy athletic kids in the program too- Ex Jon Lechner -Creighton Prep- kid played for me for 6 years. He lived 2 blocks away from Huge Public school that wasnt very safe, 33% drop rate etc. Dad wanted Jon to go to Prep, applied etc. Jon is student council kid, in 8th grade 6'2" and about 230 good athlete, 1 of our top 2-3 kids. Dad begged for scholarship. Living in 1100 square foot house, 1 parent, working poor etc He only got a tiny partial- still cost him 9-10 k every year. The kid is on scholarship to Ohio. A tiny black player from my team, maybe out of 25 kids he was our 10th-12th best player- working class parents, tiny house etc- no full ride either, about 6K per year (based on income). This kids BTW had gone to this schools parochial grade and middle school. He never started on the football team.
Everyone on our team and probably in the city assumed these kids got full rides, they didnt. EVERYONE gives this school a hard time for recruiting, they win quite a bit, but it didnt happen when we were up close and personal with it. The parents and kids were the ones that made it happen, not the school. One of our coaches/dads has a relationship with this school and has gotten several "problem" kids with potential in (non athletic). Of course this school gets blamed all the time for recruiting and for "scholarshiping" kids, when in reality it isnt like that. I might add this school was my schools huge rival, so I have no allegiance or love for the school.
Sometimes its real, sometimes its sour grapes and sometimes maybe a little of both.
So it does happen the other way as well, situations vary from spot to spot.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 21, 2009 7:45:06 GMT -6
|
|