|
Post by captain31 on Dec 13, 2009 14:21:45 GMT -6
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. That statement doesn't make much sense to me. Having a huge multiplier (I have never heard of anything more than 1.5 in other states) is obviously going to keep privates out of the championships.
|
|
|
Post by gdn56 on Dec 13, 2009 14:31:15 GMT -6
In Alabama I'd say a greater controversy is the recruiting accusations against the big public schools (i.e. Prattville, Hoover). The Private School league is kinda irrelevant and the Privates who play in the public school league don't seem to have a huge advantage in terms of success.
|
|
kahok
Sophomore Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by kahok on Dec 13, 2009 14:32:31 GMT -6
In Illinois our multiplier is 1.65. It's more to limit the dominance that privates have in "country club sports", than it is in football. With 8 total classes the 1.65 doesn't hurt the privates too bad. They still competed for state championships this year.
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Dec 13, 2009 15:05:12 GMT -6
Can somebody explain how the multiplier works?
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 13, 2009 15:14:43 GMT -6
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. That statement doesn't make much sense to me. Having a huge multiplier (I have never heard of anything more than 1.5 in other states) is obviously going to keep privates out of the championships. Not necessarily. Oddly enough, Evangel Christian is a weaker football program now that they are no longer allowed to play "up" above the classification their enrollment dictates. Louisiana actually did the OPPOSITE of what most states do. LA's two biggest private powers are both smaller schools. for most of its existence, ECA high school has been 1A and John Curtis 2A. both schools elected to play UP in class however after multiple strings of back to back to back championships. (slightly different rates of advancement, JC took multiple decades to move up just two classes, ECA jumped from 1A to 3A to 5A in a 5 year span winning titles in each) After several years of the schools (mainly ECA in 5A) dominating schools with up to 8 or 9 times their enrollments, a proposal (authored by a big school principal..surprise) to force schools to play in their classification. The rational being to expose those schools as "football factories" (some merit in the accusation) by forcing the reality of the situation to the forefront of the argument. They wanted parents, principals, media etc to say "Hey, we are a 1A school and our biggest player is 215. We dress out 34 players They have more players on their roster over 220 lbs than we have players dressed out. What is the deal". In the 5th year of this experiment...while the titles and domination of their respective classes still exists, and the programs are still relatively the same in terms of being a juggernaut, the absolute state of the programs are weaker.
|
|
|
Post by airman on Dec 13, 2009 15:23:44 GMT -6
for those who advocate a multiplier say like illinois does this mean that your private school student is 1.65 times better then your public school student.
I hate the multiplier because it says private school students are better and public school students need a crutch or handicap to compete. like it or not in the real world the strong survive and the weak perish.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 13, 2009 15:33:38 GMT -6
for those who advocate a multiplier say like illinois does this mean that your private school student is 1.65 times better then your public school student. I hate the multiplier because it says private school students are better and public school students need a crutch or handicap to compete. like it or not in the real world the strong survive and the weak perish. I disagree. The multiplier represents the fact that urban area private schools are able to usurp the statistical correlation between enrollment and % of students with athletic prowess.
|
|
|
Post by airman on Dec 13, 2009 15:47:19 GMT -6
for those who advocate a multiplier say like illinois does this mean that your private school student is 1.65 times better then your public school student. I hate the multiplier because it says private school students are better and public school students need a crutch or handicap to compete. like it or not in the real world the strong survive and the weak perish. I disagree. The multiplier represents the fact that urban area private schools are able to usurp the statistical correlation between enrollment and % of students with athletic prowess. or is it a failure of public schools. for example up in St. Paul where my sister lives there is a powerful football school call Cretin Derhman hall. They have produced guys like joe mauer, chirs walsh and other qbs plus numerous skill players. they have a current kid who is 6-7 and 300lbs left tackle sentrell henderson is his name. he is one of the top recruits in the nation. people do not like Cretin very much because they draw kids from minneapolis and st paul. now i say why would you want to play at a public school in Minneapolis where they have to play their games at 3pm in the afternoon because of gang violence issues and rarely have competitive programs when it comes playoff time. I would want to go to a private school where they win games and have a chance at a state championship. interesting thing is cretin has been to the championship game 8 times winning twice. maybe it is time inner city public school up their games to keep their talent.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 13, 2009 16:13:15 GMT -6
I disagree. The multiplier represents the fact that urban area private schools are able to usurp the statistical correlation between enrollment and % of students with athletic prowess. or is it a failure of public schools. for example up in St. Paul where my sister lives there is a powerful football school call Cretin Derhman hall. They have produced guys like joe mauer, chirs walsh and other qbs plus numerous skill players. they have a current kid who is 6-7 and 300lbs left tackle sentrell henderson is his name. he is one of the top recruits in the nation. people do not like Cretin very much because they draw kids from minneapolis and st paul. now i say why would you want to play at a public school in Minneapolis where they have to play their games at 3pm in the afternoon because of gang violence issues and rarely have competitive programs when it comes playoff time. I would want to go to a private school where they win games and have a chance at a state championship. interesting thing is cretin has been to the championship game 8 times winning twice. maybe it is time inner city public school up their games to keep their talent. I will give this a sincere answer, but then I will ask that we try to not make this a "private vs public" thread where everyone flings mud. I was simply curious as to if it was a big deal in other places, and apparently it is very similar in other places as it is in Louisiana. As to the modifier, regardless of the reason that certain urban private schools are attractive and enjoy a drawing base much much much larger (several districs in a highly populated area), the fact remains that this skews the correlation between enrollment and % of quality players. These schools might then compete against public schools that have nothing to do with the things you described. Now, lets get back on point.
|
|
|
Post by Coach Goodnight on Dec 13, 2009 16:26:52 GMT -6
Its getting worse here in Oklahoma. They (privates) say they dont recruit but when you have a school that is in its 3rd year of football existance and it wins a state title bny 40 something points, its hard to convince people there isnt any recruiting going on. Bad thing is the OSSAA hasnt even started looking in to the privates but they are hammering the publics with "violations"
|
|
|
Post by tango on Dec 13, 2009 16:28:21 GMT -6
In Florida it is a big deal in the smaller classes. Watched the 1A state finals and both teams OL ave. weight 260. Most didn't play defense. They also had th 4.4 guys and good backups. If you have around 150 boys in your school and can't recruit this doesn't happen every year maybe once in 10 or so years.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 13, 2009 16:48:48 GMT -6
In Florida it is a big deal in the smaller classes. Watched the 1A state finals and both teams OL ave. weight 260. Most didn't play defense. They also had th 4.4 guys and good backups. If you have around 150 boys in your school and can't recruit this doesn't happen every year maybe once in 10 or so years. But is there a heated debate clamoring for a split?
|
|
|
Post by captain31 on Dec 13, 2009 19:52:26 GMT -6
That statement doesn't make much sense to me. Having a huge multiplier (I have never heard of anything more than 1.5 in other states) is obviously going to keep privates out of the championships. Not necessarily. Oddly enough, Evangel Christian is a weaker football program now that they are no longer allowed to play "up" above the classification their enrollment dictates. Louisiana actually did the OPPOSITE of what most states do. LA's two biggest private powers are both smaller schools. for most of its existence, ECA high school has been 1A and John Curtis 2A. both schools elected to play UP in class however after multiple strings of back to back to back championships. (slightly different rates of advancement, JC took multiple decades to move up just two classes, ECA jumped from 1A to 3A to 5A in a 5 year span winning titles in each) After several years of the schools (mainly ECA in 5A) dominating schools with up to 8 or 9 times their enrollments, a proposal (authored by a big school principal..surprise) to force schools to play in their classification. The rational being to expose those schools as "football factories" (some merit in the accusation) by forcing the reality of the situation to the forefront of the argument. They wanted parents, principals, media etc to say "Hey, we are a 1A school and our biggest player is 215. We dress out 34 players They have more players on their roster over 220 lbs than we have players dressed out. What is the deal". In the 5th year of this experiment...while the titles and domination of their respective classes still exists, and the programs are still relatively the same in terms of being a juggernaut, the absolute state of the programs are weaker. I see. That is an interesting situation I would not have thought of.
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 13, 2009 20:28:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 13, 2009 20:57:57 GMT -6
Not necessarily. Oddly enough, Evangel Christian is a weaker football program now that they are no longer allowed to play "up" above the classification their enrollment dictates. Louisiana actually did the OPPOSITE of what most states do. LA's two biggest private powers are both smaller schools. for most of its existence, ECA high school has been 1A and John Curtis 2A. both schools elected to play UP in class however after multiple strings of back to back to back championships. (slightly different rates of advancement, JC took multiple decades to move up just two classes, ECA jumped from 1A to 3A to 5A in a 5 year span winning titles in each) After several years of the schools (mainly ECA in 5A) dominating schools with up to 8 or 9 times their enrollments, a proposal (authored by a big school principal..surprise) to force schools to play in their classification. The rational being to expose those schools as "football factories" (some merit in the accusation) by forcing the reality of the situation to the forefront of the argument. They wanted parents, principals, media etc to say "Hey, we are a 1A school and our biggest player is 215. We dress out 34 players They have more players on their roster over 220 lbs than we have players dressed out. What is the deal". In the 5th year of this experiment...while the titles and domination of their respective classes still exists, and the programs are still relatively the same in terms of being a juggernaut, the absolute state of the programs are weaker. I see. That is an interesting situation I would not have thought of. Yes, it was interesting. JC chose not to play in the HIGHEST class so that they could compete in other sports (which they did quite well) and ECA choose to play ALL the way up (and their basketball programs suffered greatly). Playing at these levels was actually a springboard to a stronger program as the best players in their major metropolitan areas (shreveport and new orleans) always seemed to find their way there. The schools routinely had 4-6 D 1 players a year with an enrollement of under 300 total kids 9-12.
|
|
neil
Sophomore Member
Posts: 218
|
Post by neil on Dec 13, 2009 21:40:54 GMT -6
[/quote]
Yes, it was interesting. JC chose not to play in the HIGHEST class so that they could compete in other sports (which they did quite well) and ECA choose to play ALL the way up (and their basketball programs suffered greatly). Playing at these levels was actually a springboard to a stronger program as the best players in their major metropolitan areas (shreveport and new orleans) always seemed to find their way there. The schools routinely had 4-6 D 1 players a year with an enrollement of under 300 total kids 9-12.
[/quote]
I don't think JC has dropped at all form what they usually have when it comes to talent because of the "play in class" rule.
Evangel has not had the ridiculous amount of State Championship success like they had before the "play in class" rule. However, I think it has nothing to do with that. The big Calvary/Evangel split has been the biggest difference. They have every bit as much talent as they had before. Just not as much of the "core" players that are in ECA from K-12.
I still say that public schools that have great community support (West Monroe/Lutcher/etc.) have every opportunity to build long-lasting successful programs equal to or better than private schools.
|
|
|
Post by senatorblutarsky on Dec 14, 2009 7:52:30 GMT -6
Big issue in Nebraska.of the 8 schools in the finals in the lowest classes... 4 were private schools.
It's usually a pretty heated debate here.
|
|
|
Post by morris on Dec 14, 2009 8:04:18 GMT -6
Its a big debate here in KY. I think more of the noise comes from fans then coaches. In the large class the privates win almost ever year over the past 10-15 years. If the 2 large privates are not on the same side of the bracket they both end up in the championship game.
We do not have a ton of private schools but a number of them do very well. We do have one public school that rivals the success of the privates.
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Dec 14, 2009 8:29:43 GMT -6
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. Then its obviously not an issue where you are from. Three years ago two students transfered to Evangel Christian School in Jan. Just a month earlier the school's volunteer basketball coach took the two students down to watch Evangel in the state football championship game. Those two students were then students at BTW High School. The LHSAA investigated and suspended the coach for a year from coaching at any LHSAA school. I cant remember what all happened with the kids.. they may have been made to sit out a year.. But they just helps ECA win another state championship as seniors this past weekend... That has alot of people up in arms around here..
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 14, 2009 8:43:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Dec 14, 2009 8:45:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Dec 14, 2009 11:41:07 GMT -6
Thanks for that link. Some very good information in there. I wonder if in states where there are fewer schools competing for state tiles in divisions, like some of these states that have 30 or so schools in a class, does that make the private schools more dominate than in states where you have a much larger number of schools competing for a state title? Do the so called "football states" have lesser of a problem with the private vs public since they have more established public programs that compete with and beat private schools on a regular basis?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Dec 14, 2009 13:37:43 GMT -6
In Michigan its a pretty good debate, especially in the lower divisions. The bottom 4 divisions are dominated by teams with a "private school monopoly" over large metro areas. There was a private school in nearly ever title game (except for D2 I believe).
I think a multiplier would be a good fix and keep everyone happy, but I don't think it's a huge issue. The private schools win because they are usually the best coached school (which has reasons to do with how coaches are hired and unions more than anything else).
|
|
|
Post by struceri on Dec 14, 2009 13:40:05 GMT -6
it was pretty big here in South Dakota but now that we have open enrollment I don't think it is as a big a problem. A private school in the area used to dominate football because an athletes only options were to stay where they were at or go to the private school. Most of them chose the private school option if their regular high school wasn't very good. Now with open enrollment those kids can choose any high school and that has hurt the local private school. They used to win the state championship or be in it about every other year but haven't been there in the last 5 and the future doesn't look that great for them
|
|
|
Post by coach31 on Dec 14, 2009 15:26:39 GMT -6
I'm at a private school in PA. We hear about recruting all the time, but I really feel the big public football powers get more kids to transfer from our school than we get total. In basketball it is a huge deal. But in football after the BECA teams in the 90s we have not really had a dominate private football program.
|
|
|
Post by lsrood on Dec 15, 2009 9:38:45 GMT -6
coach31 you must be from eastern PA because Pittsburgh Central Catholic has had a pretty good run lately in Western PA. But even so, there are just not the number of private schools at least in our part of PA to make a major impact overall. In WPIAL District 7 (over 140 some schools, I think in football there are only 5 private schools (all Catholic) that participate. Wingtol, there are almost that many in District 10 the Erie area right?
|
|
|
Post by lsrood on Dec 15, 2009 9:41:02 GMT -6
Make that 7 schools as I forgot about Shady Side Academy and Summit Academy.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Dec 15, 2009 10:08:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Dec 15, 2009 10:17:36 GMT -6
If they are that upset about it why don't they have a real state playoff instead of this wacky bowl system.
|
|
|
Post by tothehouse on Dec 15, 2009 10:30:16 GMT -6
Don't go there wingt The state can't figure out a budget...you think a state playoff is high on their list of things to figured out?
|
|