|
Post by 3rdandlong on Apr 15, 2016 20:37:35 GMT -6
Southern California almost separates the leagues into private and public schools but a few of the private schools have sued as a result of this smh
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 15, 2016 21:20:55 GMT -6
Went and looked up the multipliers. Seems logical and addresses most of the issues that public schools have. It would probably never work in Louisiana. Actually, the LHSAA did the opposite several years ago when they forced the "play in class" restriction, forcing Evangel Christian and John Curtis to play in their class (1A and 2A respectively, then 2A and 2A I believe) with other schools of 300 or less enrollment. I personally believe the thought process was to try and magnify the fact that they had 4-7 BCS scholarship athletes signing each year, that their O lines averaged 280lbs etc...and other schools their size lined up 200lbs across and had a FCS caliber player every couple of years. Also I think the idea was to try and "devalue" the brand of football to make it less attractive. Prior to the restriction, ECA actually used the fact that it played in 5A as a tool to ensure that it was attractive to the best athletes in their area. I've spent my career in both public and Catholic, and I feel that I have a pretty good understanding of both sides of it. The proposal put up this week was laughable, and it seems almost designed to be voted down by interests on both sides.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 15, 2016 23:58:26 GMT -6
we have fairly rigid academic and behavioral standards. We hope to run a good program and that kids will want to come to our school Ding ding ding! There we go. Thats the point of this argument. The bottom 50% of a private school don't even come close to comparing to the bottom 50% of a public school. Thats the major difference. And I dont blame you for it. But its so evident that the schools themselves are SO different. Totally different pool of kids. The enrollment comparisons are null and void. Thats why public and private should compete in different classifications. My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2016 8:19:57 GMT -6
Ding ding ding! There we go. Thats the point of this argument. The bottom 50% of a private school don't even come close to comparing to the bottom 50% of a public school. Thats the major difference. And I dont blame you for it. But its so evident that the schools themselves are SO different. Totally different pool of kids. The enrollment comparisons are null and void. Thats why public and private should compete in different classifications. My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. It is very interesting that one point can be taken in two different lights by people with two opposing opinions on the subject. Proof that it is a complex issue with no real "solution" because the "problem" isn't really well defined
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Apr 16, 2016 8:53:56 GMT -6
My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. It is very interesting that one point can be taken in two different lights by people with two opposing opinions on the subject. Proof that it is a complex issue with no real "solution" because the "problem" isn't really well defined For sure. Just shows the different experiences. And thats why I say theres nothing wrong with either. Theyre just different. And so I think they should compete as such too.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 16, 2016 8:55:22 GMT -6
My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. It is very interesting that one point can be taken in two different lights by people with two opposing opinions on the subject. Proof that it is a complex issue with no real "solution" because the "problem" isn't really well defined Absolutely, and allow me to state, I would agree that there should be different sections, leagues, whatever your state has; private ones and public ones. I was just writing that most private schools are not the stereotypical factories that a lot of people think of. I would add that having been on both sides private school kids are not that much different than public school kids. Do we have academic requirements to get, yeah; but its not like an ivy league school (most 2.5 gpas at public get into ours, and we are upper middle locally). Still have kids drinking, doing drugs, having sex, problems at homes, etc. Kids are kids, we just got less of them
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Apr 16, 2016 8:58:21 GMT -6
In NY some sections allow private schools to compete for the state playoffs. Aquinas (Rochester) almost always represents AA in the playoffs for Section V. Where I am in Section VI (Buffalo) private and public are separate and private schools cannot play in the playoffs. Most of the big public schools won't play the private schools because of recruiting.
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 16, 2016 8:58:21 GMT -6
My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. It is very interesting that one point can be taken in two different lights by people with two opposing opinions on the subject. Proof that it is a complex issue with no real "solution" because the "problem" isn't really well defined It is a very complex situation: A number of years ago I worked at a prominent Catholic school in Louisiana. We were solid in the big three, but totally dominant in our girls sports/soccer/tennis/golf. We were constantly being accused of recruiting from the local public schools because of our overall program success. The vast majority (and I'm talking about 95%) of our kids had always been educated in the Catholic school system. They were never recruited from the public school pool of athletes, because they were in the Catholic schools from day one. The private school coach sees a natural matriculation process. The public school coach cries recruitment because the kid lives down the street but plays across town at the private school.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Apr 16, 2016 9:04:44 GMT -6
It is very interesting that one point can be taken in two different lights by people with two opposing opinions on the subject. Proof that it is a complex issue with no real "solution" because the "problem" isn't really well defined Absolutely, and allow me to state, I would agree that there should be different sections, leagues, whatever your state has; private ones and public ones. I was just writing that most private schools are not the stereotypical factories that a lot of people think of. I would add that having been on both sides private school kids are not that much different than public school kids. Do we have academic requirements to get, yeah; but its not like an ivy league school (most 2.5 gpas at public get into ours, and we are upper middle locally). Still have kids drinking, doing drugs, having sex, problems at homes, etc. Kids are kids, we just got less of them Then the pool isn't THAT much smaller.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2016 9:19:00 GMT -6
When discussing public/private issues, the reason it is so complex is that it is generally driven by socioeconomic factors. Those are complex.
I think one of the issue when discussing this topic is that everyone wants to paint schools with one brush. That isn't the case though. There are football factory private schools, football power house public schools, there are doormat public schools, there are doormat private schools, there are middling public schools, there are middling private schools etc.
What I find interesting (at least in Louisiana) is that the football debate is obviously king..and basketball also stirs up some heated discussion. Baseball less so, but private schools are relatively more dominant in baseball than in the other two sports and barely a peep is heard regarding soccer, volleyball, tennis, golf etc (which are absolutely DOMINATED by private schools, due to socioeconomic issues)
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 16, 2016 9:33:08 GMT -6
Absolutely, and allow me to state, I would agree that there should be different sections, leagues, whatever your state has; private ones and public ones. I was just writing that most private schools are not the stereotypical factories that a lot of people think of. I would add that having been on both sides private school kids are not that much different than public school kids. Do we have academic requirements to get, yeah; but its not like an ivy league school (most 2.5 gpas at public get into ours, and we are upper middle locally). Still have kids drinking, doing drugs, having sex, problems at homes, etc. Kids are kids, we just got less of them Then the pool isn't THAT much smaller. I am at a private school of 250 kids (we cap enrollment) in playoffs we can face public schools of 1200. I would say that is MUCH smaller. Most private schools out here are generally smaller, but I get that "THAT" is a relative term.
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 16, 2016 9:40:11 GMT -6
When discussing public/private issues, the reason it is so complex is that it is generally driven by socioeconomic factors. Those are complex. I think one of the issue when discussing this topic is that everyone wants to paint schools with one brush. That isn't the case though. There are football factory private schools, football power house public schools, there are doormat public schools, there are doormat private schools, there are middling public schools, there are middling private schools etc. What I find interesting (at least in Louisiana) is that the football debate is obviously king..and basketball also stirs up some heated discussion. Baseball less so, but private schools are relatively more dominant in baseball than in the other two sports and barely a peep is heard regarding soccer, volleyball, tennis, golf etc (which are absolutely DOMINATED by private schools, due to socioeconomic issues) Exactly. And if everybody is honest the issue in Louisiana is all about the success of 2-3 schools in football and the fact that nobody in any classification wants to play them.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2016 9:50:30 GMT -6
When discussing public/private issues, the reason it is so complex is that it is generally driven by socioeconomic factors. Those are complex. I think one of the issue when discussing this topic is that everyone wants to paint schools with one brush. That isn't the case though. There are football factory private schools, football power house public schools, there are doormat public schools, there are doormat private schools, there are middling public schools, there are middling private schools etc. What I find interesting (at least in Louisiana) is that the football debate is obviously king..and basketball also stirs up some heated discussion. Baseball less so, but private schools are relatively more dominant in baseball than in the other two sports and barely a peep is heard regarding soccer, volleyball, tennis, golf etc (which are absolutely DOMINATED by private schools, due to socioeconomic issues) Exactly. And if everybody is honest the issue in Louisiana is all about the success of 2-3 schools in football and the fact that nobody in any classification wants to play them. I believe there have always been grumblings about Curtis and the Catholic League, and those grumblings grew with the rise of ECA. I would say that the current landscape would involve more than just 2-3 schools though. I would say 6-7, and atleast one in each class that could be considered the favorite for each class every other year or so.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2016 10:05:53 GMT -6
Then the pool isn't THAT much smaller. I am at a private school of 250 kids (we cap enrollment) in playoffs we can face public schools of 1200. I would say that is MUCH smaller. Most private schools out here are generally smaller, but I get that "THAT" is a relative term. I am not sure if that is a private/public discussion, or a classification system discussion though coach. That said, it is kind of funny because that is exactly the situation that Evangel Christian WANTED to be in. That was the beginning of the serious noise in Louisiana, when a Coed school with 300 students beats schools with 1500+ people. The answer from the school was always "hard work, School Spirit, and great coaching" (which are definitely factors), but when asked how come they couldn't even field a girls basketball team with all that hard work, school spirit etc...they didn't really have a response.
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 16, 2016 10:06:45 GMT -6
Exactly. And if everybody is honest the issue in Louisiana is all about the success of 2-3 schools in football and the fact that nobody in any classification wants to play them. I believe there have always been grumblings about Curtis and the Catholic League, and those grumblings grew with the rise of ECA. I would say that the current landscape would involve more than just 2-3 schools though. I would say 6-7, and atleast one in each class that could be considered the favorite for each class every other year or so. I guess I should have stated that's where it started... Now every Catholic/Private school is being painted with a broad brush. With the OneApp Orleans Parish is a free for all, and you can find kids at just about every school Public, Private, Charter that have been recruited on some level. I would like to see the LHSAA stay together, and compete together. I just don't see the state having enough teams to operate two separate associations and the playoffs the past couple of years have been kinda meh... I started this thread looking for some options... I think the system from Ohio has some potential. I think it comes down to three issues: 1. How do you create a metric that accurately compares schools for enrollment purposes? 2. How do you create classes based on enrollment that have some measure of equity. 3. How are you going to enforce the rules? The LHSAA has continually failed to even ask these questions, much less come up with solutions.
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Apr 16, 2016 10:21:21 GMT -6
I am at a private school of 250 kids (we cap enrollment) in playoffs we can face public schools of 1200. I would say that is MUCH smaller. Most private schools out here are generally smaller, but I get that "THAT" is a relative term. I am not sure if that is a private/public discussion, or a classification system discussion though coach. That said, it is kind of funny because that is exactly the situation that Evangel Christian WANTED to be in. That was the beginning of the serious noise in Louisiana, when a Coed school with 300 students beats schools with 1500+ people. The answer from the school was always "hard work, School Spirit, and great coaching" (which are definitely factors), but when asked how come they couldn't even field a girls basketball team with all that hard work, school spirit etc...they didn't really have a response. I get that, but how many private schools are Evangel Christian? St John Bosco is about an hour from me, they are a top national school so they draw lots of attention; and can beat schools with significantly more students. But there are over 100 private schools between us and them who are not gaming the system. Most private schools do not actively recruit strictly athletes to just build a program; heck the public schools out here recruit more than most private schools. If we get a transfer, he needs to have changed addresses or he sits out, same as everyone else. But once again, I agree, public and privates should be separate for playoffs; I am simply writing most private schools are not the football factory types
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 16, 2016 10:30:54 GMT -6
But once again, I agree, public and privates should be separate for playoffs; I am simply writing most private schools are not the football factory types The issue here is that not all areas/regions etc have the logistics to support quality separate playoffs. For example, in Louisiana the split essentially has put private schools that raise eyebrows for things you describe against private schools that haven't had a BCS signee in its history.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Apr 16, 2016 11:47:56 GMT -6
Ding ding ding! There we go. Thats the point of this argument. The bottom 50% of a private school don't even come close to comparing to the bottom 50% of a public school. Thats the major difference. And I dont blame you for it. But its so evident that the schools themselves are SO different. Totally different pool of kids. The enrollment comparisons are null and void. Thats why public and private should compete in different classifications. I DON'T support separating private and public schools but as much as people make a big deal about recruiting, I think an AD I worked for in the past said it best: "The advantage private schools have isn't the students they have, it's the students they don't have." Again, not for separate classes but there should be some sort of multiplier in place to somewhat account for this difference. I do support keeping them separate. It's true that the cast majority of private schools have no interest in compromising their values to become an athletic power but some might. If some want to accept athletes who are subpar students there's nothing stopping them. If they want to provide scholarships, that's up to them. And do they recruit? Sure they do. I mentioned earlier that the Virginia state association has accepted one private school. Nobody expects that to become a flood. Most private schools are perfectly happy to compete with like-minded schools. I'm sure that they're as happy to get rid of private schools with athletic ambitions as we're nervous of getting them.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Apr 17, 2016 6:36:47 GMT -6
In Michigan we aren't separate. We have some good schools (Detroit Catholic Central, Brother Rice, De La Salle, Orchard Lake St. Mary's, etc.) that are all very good teams on a consistent basis. All have won state titles but the only one that is dominant instead of just really tough every year is St. Mary's.
They participate in our playoff system with the publics and it doesn't bother me. We will play anybody, anytime, and anywhere. We don't care. I'm different than some of you because enrollment wise my school is the 3rd or 4th largest in the state which allows us to compete with anybody, anytime, anywhere.
For those of you who are in a school of 300-400 and have to play a catholic school the same size, that is probably really tough and I get that.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 17, 2016 7:04:29 GMT -6
For those of you who are in a school of 300-400 and have to play a catholic school the same size, that is probably really tough and I get that. Not necessarily...and that is the issue (in Louisiana at least in my opinion). There are your John Curtis and Evangels with 300 students who seem to have AT LEAST 3-4 kids every single year sign D1, avg 280+ across and are National powers, then there are a tier of state powers, who are very tough with multiple state appearances the last decade or so, and there are a whole host of small private schools that struggle to win ball games.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Apr 17, 2016 7:05:56 GMT -6
For those of you who are in a school of 300-400 and have to play a catholic school the same size, that is probably really tough and I get that. Not necessarily...and that is the issue (in Louisiana at least in my opinion). There are your John Curtis and Evangels with 300 students who seem to have AT LEAST 3-4 kids every single year sign D1, avg 280+ across and are National powers, then there are a tier of state powers, who are very tough with multiple state appearances the last decade or so, and there are a whole host of small private schools that struggle to win ball games. We have those schools that struggle as well. The only ones that we would ever potentially see are the power houses.
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 17, 2016 7:58:47 GMT -6
For those of you who are in a school of 300-400 and have to play a catholic school the same size, that is probably really tough and I get that. Not necessarily...and that is the issue (in Louisiana at least in my opinion). There are your John Curtis and Evangels with 300 students who seem to have AT LEAST 3-4 kids every single year sign D1, avg 280+ across and are National powers, then there are a tier of state powers, who are very tough with multiple state appearances the last decade or so, and there are a whole host of small private schools that struggle to win ball games. I guess that's my deal. How do you put every school on the same metric? How do you compare John Curtis to say Sacred Heart of Ville Platte?
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Apr 17, 2016 9:11:44 GMT -6
Not necessarily...and that is the issue (in Louisiana at least in my opinion). There are your John Curtis and Evangels with 300 students who seem to have AT LEAST 3-4 kids every single year sign D1, avg 280+ across and are National powers, then there are a tier of state powers, who are very tough with multiple state appearances the last decade or so, and there are a whole host of small private schools that struggle to win ball games. I guess that's my deal. How do you put every school on the same metric? How do you compare John Curtis to say Sacred Heart of Ville Platte? You don't quite honestly, and that is why this is such a complex issue nationwide (as well as Louisiana). I understand the theory behind what those on differing sides are arguing, but I believe all such arguments are simply too narrow and fail to address the fact that since every school is different, trying to treat them as equals is going to result in some "unfair" provisions. I also think that lost in all of this is the fact that there have always been, and always will be stratification in athletics. By removing the top tier of private schools, the strata has simply been shifted, and now the same public schools seem to be right there each year, advancing to about the same point in the playoffs etc. That said, I absolutely see the public school perspective, and wouldn't want to be a top smaller class school and know "well, we have a great team this year..but here comes parkview baptist"
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Apr 17, 2016 10:20:18 GMT -6
I guess that's my deal. How do you put every school on the same metric? How do you compare John Curtis to say Sacred Heart of Ville Platte? You don't quite honestly, and that is why this is such a complex issue nationwide (as well as Louisiana). I understand the theory behind what those on differing sides are arguing, but I believe all such arguments are simply too narrow and fail to address the fact that since every school is different, trying to treat them as equals is going to result in some "unfair" provisions. I also think that lost in all of this is the fact that there have always been, and always will be stratification in athletics. By removing the top tier of private schools, the strata has simply been shifted, and now the same public schools seem to be right there each year, advancing to about the same point in the playoffs etc. That said, I absolutely see the public school perspective, and wouldn't want to be a top smaller class school and know "well, we have a great team this year..but here comes parkview baptist" This is a good point, there are always differences, demographics, resources, etc. that create stratification. Obviously the degree of separation in the tiers can be huge if a "powerhouse" private gets involved. For example in my state we've got three "regions" in the highest classification. In one region is the private school that has won the state championship 7 times in a row, and has a couple of mythical national championships in that stretch, they are head and shoulders above everyone else. But of the other two regions there is a public school that has won its region title 6 straight times, and a public school that has won its region title 6 out of the last 7 years. And I believe that the private school has only played 2 different teams in the championship game for its region in the last 7 years. So if they were removed it's pretty fair to assume that our state would have the same 3 to 4 public schools competing for the state title each year for the last 6 or 7 years.
|
|
|
Post by marinercoach1 on Apr 17, 2016 12:55:17 GMT -6
In the Monterey Bay area, there is one or two private schools in each league. one is good, one is gaining steam and the other not so much. It works out here
|
|
|
Post by 60zgo on Apr 17, 2016 14:20:32 GMT -6
I guess that's my deal. How do you put every school on the same metric? How do you compare John Curtis to say Sacred Heart of Ville Platte? You don't quite honestly, and that is why this is such a complex issue nationwide (as well as Louisiana). I understand the theory behind what those on differing sides are arguing, but I believe all such arguments are simply too narrow and fail to address the fact that since every school is different, trying to treat them as equals is going to result in some "unfair" provisions. I also think that lost in all of this is the fact that there have always been, and always will be stratification in athletics. By removing the top tier of private schools, the strata has simply been shifted, and now the same public schools seem to be right there each year, advancing to about the same point in the playoffs etc. That said, I absolutely see the public school perspective, and wouldn't want to be a top smaller class school and know "well, we have a great team this year..but here comes parkview baptist" True. Some schools both public & private will always be top tier. Some will always have great athletes, facilities, and other advantages that some schools will never have. But if we don't find a valid compromise it will be a pretty sad state of affairs in La.
|
|
|
Post by chidesta on Dec 8, 2016 15:57:24 GMT -6
Ding ding ding! There we go. Thats the point of this argument. The bottom 50% of a private school don't even come close to comparing to the bottom 50% of a public school. Thats the major difference. And I dont blame you for it. But its so evident that the schools themselves are SO different. Totally different pool of kids. The enrollment comparisons are null and void. Thats why public and private should compete in different classifications. My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. Here is my point Private schools have a larger pool in which to choose athlete than a boundary/public school has, even though you may have more academically rigorous standards at your private school your "pool to select from" is still larger than a public school that gets what it get within it's boundaries. Here in Utah you have private schools like Wasatch Academy who pull kids all the way from New Zealand, so their "pool to select from" is pretty big. For a private school the pool you select from is related to how big of an area you want to recruit, where as public is related to the boundaries of your area. You can't argue that fact. Also, your point about having less kids to choose from because of academic standards is wrong. In my experience dumb students are also dumb football players, my best football players are always the best students in the school. The perception that you are somehow missing out on talented stupid kids is flat false, you aren't missing out on anyone, you're just making your job easier. I have coached at a public school and a private school, and at a public school you get what you get and that's it. When you have good athletes life is great, when you don't you coach them up, help them get their grades up and make sure they are eligible to play and then live with the mistakes they make on the field.
|
|
|
Post by tabs52 on Dec 8, 2016 17:18:39 GMT -6
In Pennsylvania there is no separation for private and public. This weekend is our state championships and the disparity between the bigger and smaller classification are very noticeable. The smaller three division 5 of 6 are public and the larger three division 5 of 6 are private. In terms of transfers, the issue lies more in basketball then football, but also the Eastern Part of the state out by Philly seems to have more lax rules on transferring then the Western Part of the state
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Dec 8, 2016 22:22:37 GMT -6
My point was that private schools for the most part don't have an inherent advantage. Having stricter academic rigors does not make us more viable for football; it gives us less of a pool to select from. Here is my point Private schools have a larger pool in which to choose athlete than a boundary/public school has, even though you may have more academically rigorous standards at your private school your "pool to select from" is still larger than a public school that gets what it get within it's boundaries. Here in Utah you have private schools like Wasatch Academy who pull kids all the way from New Zealand, so their "pool to select from" is pretty big. For a private school the pool you select from is related to how big of an area you want to recruit, where as public is related to the boundaries of your area. You can't argue that fact. Also, your point about having less kids to choose from because of academic standards is wrong. In my experience dumb students are also dumb football players, my best football players are always the best students in the school. The perception that you are somehow missing out on talented stupid kids is flat false, you aren't missing out on anyone, you're just making your job easier. I have coached at a public school and a private school, and at a public school you get what you get and that's it. When you have good athletes life is great, when you don't you coach them up, help them get their grades up and make sure they are eligible to play and then live with the mistakes they make on the field. Yes, if it was a goal of a private school, then they could have a larger pool to draw from. Of course they would have to convince said students to come to their school (whereas public schools have you already enrolled). But back to my theme here- most private schools aren't doing this. For every big name, poaching your talent private school, there are dozens of private schools who are NOT in it to become a football factory. They just arent in the spotlight.
|
|
|
Post by tabs52 on Dec 9, 2016 4:42:38 GMT -6
I truly believe a private school has a tremendous advantage over a public school, just in basketball we have a charter school that has players who home district is over an hour away from the charter school.
|
|