|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 10, 2007 23:42:04 GMT -6
Quarterfinal game today in Illinois...7A playoffs (2nd largest in 8-class system). Playoff class in Illinois is based on the school's total enrollment if the school is public. If the school is private (or has open enrollment) the school's enrollment is "mulitiplied" by 1.65.
Anyway, Team "A" is a big, suburban high school of 2200+ kids. At this school, everything is first class...kind of school where they use $5 bills for toilet paper. Think of every conceivable advantage that a school can possibly have and then multiple that by two!
Team "B" is a Catholic high school of less than 1300 students. If they were a public school, they would have been a mid-sized 5A school. But, because of the multiplier, they get bumped up 2 full playoff classes to 7A.
They Catholic kids played their butts off...actually had a 17-14 lead at the half (thanks to a 53-yard field goal!) but lost the game 28-17 after simply getting worn down.
I couldn't help but feeling that the Catholic kids got screwed today. They should NOT have been playing the team that beat them today. It is a shame that because a relatively small handful of Catholic high schools have won a lot of state championships that ALL of the Catholic high schools in Illinois get crippled with the multiplier.
|
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 6:41:07 GMT -6
If the school is private (or has open enrollment) the school's enrollment is "mulitiplied" by 1.65. Sounds like a good idea to deal with all the "non-recruiting recruiting" that the private high schools and open enrollment public schools do. |
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Nov 11, 2007 7:49:35 GMT -6
Reason I don't like the rule, and think it should be repealed. The MAJORITY of private schools play by the rules. Just like the MAJORITY of public schools with state-wide open enrollment play by the rules. Punish the rule breakers, not those hwo play by the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 7:58:39 GMT -6
If the school is private (or has open enrollment) the school's enrollment is "mulitiplied" by 1.65. Sounds like a good idea to deal with all the "non-recruiting recruiting" that the private high schools and open enrollment public schools do. Typical knee-jerk response. This particular school has NEVER been sanctioned for recruiting or any other prohibited activities. |
|
|
|
Post by bulldogoption on Nov 11, 2007 7:58:41 GMT -6
If the school is private (or has open enrollment) the school's enrollment is "mulitiplied" by 1.65. Sounds like a good idea to deal with all the "non-recruiting recruiting" that the private high schools and open enrollment public schools do. Multipliers exist because state associations "know" that private schools recruit?  IMO, multipliers exist to account for the discrepency in types of students. In other words, what % of your kids participate and their parents are interested in the student's involvement and success. In most public schools there is quite a range of students and parents. If you take out the bottom half of those kids who don't participate in anything from a public school, then you have a pretty solid school. If you wipe out the bottom half of our kids none of our activities (not just sports) would be affected. The kids participating in co-curriculars would still be there. Let us drop down a couple of divisions for playoffs and I like our chances........... |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 8:07:39 GMT -6
Sounds like a good idea to deal with all the "non-recruiting recruiting" that the private high schools and open enrollment public schools do. Multipliers exist because state associations "know" that private schools recruit? IMO, multipliers exist to account for the discrepency in types of students. In other words, what % of your kids participate and their parents are interested in the student's involvement and success. In most public schools there is quite a range of students and parents. If you take out the bottom half of those kids who don't participate in anything from a public school, then you have a pretty solid school. If you wipe out the bottom half of our kids none of our activities (not just sports) would be affected. The kids participating in co-curriculars would still be there. Let us drop down a couple of divisions for playoffs and I like our chances........... So are you going to say that a giant, suburban high school in one of the wealthiest school districts in the state...a school with 1000 more students than the school they are playing...a school where 95% of the graduating class goes on to college...a school that has had a TON of post-season success in football... that school does not also have a ton of their own advantages? |
|
|
|
Post by cjkal30 on Nov 11, 2007 8:55:49 GMT -6
Just because a school has not been sanctioned does not mean it doesn't recruit. In New Jersey in the State playoffs the Catholic have a seperate championship because they can get players from all over the state and even out of state as some teams like DOn Bosco have. THe public schools can not get players except from the towns or cities that they reside in therefore the catholic schools are at a tremendous advantage. If Public is going to play private as is the case for you wildcat I think the multiplier is a great equalizer!
I have 2 kids on my team that contiueously say the local catholic school (that is in our league) talks to their parents and their relatives to try and get them to go there. Much better football team than us, but we take care of the kids and they love playing for us and they don't want to leave their friends. This team has never been sanctioned!
|
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:12:45 GMT -6
I have 2 kids on my team that contiueously say the local catholic school (that is in our league) talks to their parents and their relatives to try and get them to go there. Same here. They have never been sanctioned yet "parents" from the school show up at our middle school program and "talk up" the private school to the best athletes moving up to high school. Funny thing is that it isn't two kids. Just about every one of the Freshmen this year who were any good told me of "parents" ie "Volunteer Coaches" trying to recruit them. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 9:14:12 GMT -6
This team has never been sanctioned! ...Then it has not happened! You can make all of the allegations you want, but unless you can PROVE that an OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE of the Catholic school in question has made recruiting overtures to your kids, it is simply hearsay. I'm not talking about some overzealous alumni or parent trying to take your kids away...I'm talking about someone who is OFFICIALLY employed by the school recruiting your kids. I hear kids make claims like this..."I was recruited by a Catholic school". It usually is a bunch of BS...some kid trying to impress his friends or some kid's parents trying to intimidate the coach by inferring that they are going to send their kid to the local Catholic school. If you have PROOF, then let's see it...a bunch of unfounded allegations and hearsay don't count. The FACT of the matter is that the VAST MAJORITY of kids who attend a Catholic high school also attended Catholic middle school and Catholic grade school...in other words, the Catholic high schools aren't "stealing" huge numbers of public school kids...the kids who go to Catholic school more likely than not would go there anyway, football or no football! I agree that an open enrollment school may have certain advantage that the local public school doesn't have (no attendance boundaries, better parent and community support, higher value placed on academics and athletics, etc, etc...), but I think that it is completely RIDICULOUS that a school is forced to play "up" two entire playoff classes against a giant suburban public school with 1000 MORE students that has the EXACT SAME (if not MORE) advantages that the smaller private school has. |
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:17:49 GMT -6
Typical knee-jerk response. This particular school has NEVER been sanctioned for recruiting or any other prohibited activities. And? Just because it has not been punished doesn't mean the actions don't happen. I don't believe that a private high school exists with a strong football program that doesn't use that as a way to recruit kids not only to benefit the football program but to benefit the school financially. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 9:18:35 GMT -6
I have 2 kids on my team that contiueously say the local catholic school (that is in our league) talks to their parents and their relatives to try and get them to go there. Same here. They have never been sanctioned yet "parents" from the school show up at our middle school program and "talk up" the private school to the best athletes moving up to high school. Funny thing is that it isn't two kids. Just about every one of the Freshmen this year who were any good told me of "parents" ie "Volunteer Coaches" trying to recruit them. Is it illegal in your state for people who are not employed by a Catholic school to espouse the benefits of said Catholic school? How is the Catholic school supposed to stop that? |
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:19:52 GMT -6
Sounds like you're advocating just the thing that makes me want to wish we had such a multiplier here. |
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:20:32 GMT -6
How is the Catholic school supposed to stop that? Which makes the multiplier make perfect sense. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 9:21:26 GMT -6
Typical knee-jerk response. This particular school has NEVER been sanctioned for recruiting or any other prohibited activities. And? Just because it has not been punished doesn't mean the actions don't happen. I don't believe that a private high school exists with a strong football program that doesn't use that as a way to recruit kids not only to benefit the football program but to benefit the school financially.  But that is NOT the way it works, thankfully! If a school violates ANY bylaws of the state athletic association, there is a procedure that must be followed. Thankfully, those investigations are not left up to whiny public school coaches. |
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:26:01 GMT -6
Thankfully, those investigations are not left up to whiny public school coaches. No reason to make personal attacks just because someone doesn't agree that private schools should be able to get away with "non-recruitment recruitment." =( |
|
|
|
Post by k on Nov 11, 2007 9:27:15 GMT -6
Open enrollment schools should not be allowed to participate with public enrollment schools regardless of size. They should have their own playoff system and format. ...... Every state has classifications based on school size for a reason... to try and level the playing field. Throwing private schools into the mix can disrupt that balance. True story. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 9:37:32 GMT -6
Here in Section 6 of NYS (Buffalo) we have only a handful of catholic schools left, but the ones that are left all have strong football programs. They do get very good football players from all over the section. It's not wrong, it's just a fact. They play a high end schedule and travel. If my son were a D1 prospect I would send him to one of their schools too. Section 6 does not even allow any private or catholic school to participate in the playoffs. Open enrollment schools should not be allowed to participate with public enrollment schools regardless of size. They should have their own playoff system and format. I would take a catholic school with 500 boys and open enrollment any day over a 2,000 public school where half are girls and only kids living in your defined district are allowed in. Every state has classifications based on school size for a reason... to try and level the playing field. Throwing private schools into the mix can disrupt that balance. Okay..I'll take that challenge! You take these guys: www.ihsa.org/school/records/sum2828.htmI'll take these guys: www.ihsa.org/school/records/sum1328.htmYou will have to scroll down to look at the football records over the past 20 years. Who do you think will win? Does the Catholic school really have a huge advantage here? |
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Nov 11, 2007 9:51:04 GMT -6
I coach at a catholic school and we most def. recruit! Everyone in the school recruits from the art department to the theater dept to the football team. Do we have money to give kids just for football. Nope. Do they turn away lots of great players who dont have the grades. Yep. The school I am at now really does it right they give us no special treatment and give us no breaks. Now I know the other all boys school in town, where I coached before, will take just about anyone and has "sponsors" for the really good players who can't afford it(which makes up alot of their team right now and parents who pay are getting pissed). So before you go and cast the whole "you should play up u recruit" deal at us rember that there are a few schools out there who do it the wrong way but you have a ton of schools who do it the right way that get punished for when you bring the multipler into it. I guess its worse in some states and they need it to keep it in balance but it really isn't that much of a problem in PA with the private schools in football at least.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2007 9:58:19 GMT -6
I coach in IL too and I'm in favor of the multiplier. Wildcat, I think what you've done here is pull an example that's convenient to your arguement. In most cases, the private school is not going to be the disadvantaged school. I'm NOT in favor of separate private-public playoffs. I disagree with a lot of what the IHSA does, but I think we do football right in IL and that includes the multiplier.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 10:00:08 GMT -6
So before you go and cast the whole "you should play up u recruit" deal at us rember that there are a few schools out there who do it the wrong way but you have a ton of schools who do it the right way that get punished for when you bring the multipler into it. Bingo. And that is PRECISELY what has happened in Illinois. A very small number of Catholic high schools have been very successful in football (but have not done ANYTHING illegal or prohibited to achieve that success), so the public schools who couldn't beat those Catholic schools simply changed the rules so they wouldn't have to play them. The result is that vast majority of Catholic schools in Illinois that had moderate or little success in football were crippled once the playoffs began. |
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 10:05:29 GMT -6
I coach in IL too and I'm in favor of the multiplier. Wildcat, I think what you've done here is pull an example that's convenient to your arguement. In most cases, the private school is not going to be the disadvantaged school. I'm NOT in favor of separate private-public playoffs. I disagree with a lot of what the IHSA does, but I think we do football right in IL and that includes the multiplier. So you think that it was fair when St. Francis DeSales, a Catholic school of 310 kids that hadn't made the playoffs in 20 years before last season, got to play Burlington Central, a public school of almost 900 kids with a lot of money and great facilities that has made the playoffs 5 of the last 6 years? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2007 10:12:48 GMT -6
Not necessarily. But, given the enrollment advantages, I still feel the multiplier is necessary. I support the multiplier, but wouldn't classify myself as public school whiner. I have several (as you do too I think) friends on SHG staff and generally support and respect what a program like Quincy Notre Dame does. I feel that overall private schools do it right and I would not hesitate to send my kid to a private school. But, all that being said, they do have advantages with the ability to be selective with letting students in and this is why the multiplier levels the playing field. Now, I will add this too--it used to be schools under 450 WEREN'T multiplied. Maybe we should go back to that?
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 10:59:25 GMT -6
Not necessarily. But, given the enrollment advantages, I still feel the multiplier is necessary. I support the multiplier, but wouldn't classify myself as public school whiner. I have several (as you do too I think) friends on SHG staff and generally support and respect what a program like Quincy Notre Dame does. I feel that overall private schools do it right and I would not hesitate to send my kid to a private school. But, all that being said, they do have advantages with the ability to be selective with letting students in and this is why the multiplier levels the playing field. Now, I will add this too--it used to be schools under 450 WEREN'T multiplied. Maybe we should go back to that? I should also add that the scenario I described (small Catholic school of 310 kids playing a big public school of almost 900 kids) won't happen anymore because "football enrollment" has been taken out of the equation for this year. With that being said, I still think that playing up two classes is excessive. I think what SHOULD happen is some kind of "success" mulitiplier should be used...in other words, teams get moved up classes only after demonstrating dominance in a lower class. I just don't like the sledgehammer approach the IHSA uses. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 11, 2007 16:20:12 GMT -6
It is funny how things happen differently in different areas. Here in Louisiana, the big stink was that the small schools (Evangel, John Curtis,) with enrollments of less than 300 dominating the top two classes in Louisiana football. While Curtis is somewhat more respected because they gradually moved their program up in class over a 20 year span, Evangel hit the scene with a BIG spash, and won state titles in the lowest class, middle class, and top class over a 5 year period,and went on to dominate the top class for several years until the member schools of the LHSAA did something a little different from what you guys describe.
Theorizing that playing up in class was part of their "football factory" design, and with a new potential factory being created when there was a split amongst the Evangel congregation/school...the LHSAA principals passed a rule that stated that effectively PREVENTED schools from playing up. So for the last 3 or 4 seasons, schools of 300 kids that had developed programs dominating schools of over 2000 kids were now playing against schools with just 300 kids.
|
|
prossi
Sophomore Member
Posts: 108
|
Post by prossi on Nov 11, 2007 20:46:47 GMT -6
This strikes a nerve with me. As Catholic I understand the idea a catholic education and all that and the things that includes. Not that the education is any better but as far as discipline goes what can happen in a catholic school would never fly in a public school. The things you can hold over a kid the money and all can go a long way. Also twice as many boys should at least double the numbers to keep it even. Public schools have to take all the kids in a community special Ed and all, where as parochial schools can pick and choose the kids that are accepted. The area I coach in is surrounded by Catholic school and we get recruited and academic scholarship ed to death and anyone who tells you that does not happen is full of crap. Garret Wolfe never lived in River Grove but happened to transfer to Holy Cross there in his Junior year from the city. And with all that Catholic schools have dominated 4,5,6 and but for Prospect 7A the last few years. So let's not shed so many tears.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildcat on Nov 11, 2007 21:15:58 GMT -6
Holy Cross, the school that Wolfe transferred to, is not even OPEN any more. They had to close because they didn't have enough students.
Some football success!
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Nov 11, 2007 21:19:40 GMT -6
texas totally screwed this up by allowing the private schools in in the first place
should never have let them in
period
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Nov 11, 2007 22:27:14 GMT -6
texas totally screwed this up by allowing the private schools in in the first place should never have let them in period In Virginia, where Jeff coaches, publics and privates are totally separate. It eliminates all of the controversy. |
|
|
|
Post by bulldogoption on Nov 12, 2007 9:32:26 GMT -6
Multipliers exist because state associations "know" that private schools recruit? IMO, multipliers exist to account for the discrepency in types of students. In other words, what % of your kids participate and their parents are interested in the student's involvement and success. In most public schools there is quite a range of students and parents. If you take out the bottom half of those kids who don't participate in anything from a public school, then you have a pretty solid school. If you wipe out the bottom half of our kids none of our activities (not just sports) would be affected. The kids participating in co-curriculars would still be there. Let us drop down a couple of divisions for playoffs and I like our chances........... So are you going to say that a giant, suburban high school in one of the wealthiest school districts in the state...a school with 1000 more students than the school they are playing...a school where 95% of the graduating class goes on to college...a school that has had a TON of post-season success in football... that school does not also have a ton of their own advantages? I'm assuming that MOST of the kids attending a private school are achievers. Their parents have spent money to send them there and they want to see them participate and succeed. Kind of like the top half of most public school students and parents. All I'm saying is that if you cut my enrollment in half, my numbers for football won't change. Take out the bottom half of "underachievers" (to use a blanket statement). Let me compete down two divisions in the playoffs and I like my chances. Kids play the game. I don't know the details of the Illinois system and how the multiplier works, but it makes sense to me. That private school may have been at a disadvantage in terms of facilities, but their enrollment number is greater than what it says for the reasons I stated above, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Nov 12, 2007 11:28:48 GMT -6
In the NE part of the state (Nebraska), several private schools have tremendous facilities. Plus, since the multiplier (1.35) was voted down, those schools do seemingly have an advantage. Most of them play small school football in a big school town. If the big public school routinely wins about 30% of their games and the catholic school wins 80%... it is a very attractive situation.
1.65 seems high to me- and we've discussed it here (Nebraska) at length. I understand that some of these small private schools are just hanging on- trying to keep their doors open.
Still, we've played a school (in our class at the time) who have had 54 dressed out to our 15. That seems like the advantage is in their favor... and it isn't sour grapes from me. We've had a good program- so have they... and we actually beat them 2 out of 3 (W 20-14, W 8-6...KOR for TD with under 2 min. left... probably should have lost that one, and L 24-28. We only had 21 boys in the school so unless we suited up the girls and teachers aides, we couldn't get 54.
The multiplier didn't pass here mainly because the coaches/ADs at the private schools (especially up here in the NE part of the state) have too much pull and too many connections. Not that it's such a terrible thing- that's just the way it is.
I honestly don't know the answer... one thing that was brought up here is a "divider" for special needs, special ed. students. Seems like that might be more fair but there are some concerns over the legality of it.
I am curious what other states do... it might help us here (and those everywhere) get a better idea of how to manage this issue.
I'll start another thread on that.
|
|
