|
Post by indy on Jul 6, 2016 12:45:17 GMT -6
Well, killing off private schools is what you people want, so what's your complaint? If you're right, you get what you wanted all along. if all that is indeed what happens. I don't think it will. It seems to me that a lot of this doom and gloom may backfire and we may see numbers at private school grow. Given this split garbage (that normal thinking folk can see is just a stab at private schools) and the constant waste of tax dollars at public schools, and the sub-par education that goes with many public schools, I can certainly see an increase in numbers at private schools. So that means everyone’s pockets have feeled up with money to pay for private schools. Hate to break your heart but private school attendance numbers for the state have been going down each year. If someone can afford to send their kid to private school and want to they are already doing it. The split does not change that. 5% drop across the state and 17% drop in the New Orleans, Baton Rouge area. Article out of NOLA. Notre Dame has even showed a drop going from 3A to 2A, unless someone is controling enrollment. Your ic statements continue to amaze me. So you accuse ND of recruiting then at the same time say we control our numbers to drop to 2a. That's an oxi moron with the emphasis on moron. Geez
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jul 6, 2016 13:17:49 GMT -6
Well, killing off private schools is what you people want, so what's your complaint? If you're right, you get what you wanted all along. if all that is indeed what happens. I don't think it will. It seems to me that a lot of this doom and gloom may backfire and we may see numbers at private school grow. Given this split garbage (that normal thinking folk can see is just a stab at private schools) and the constant waste of tax dollars at public schools, and the sub-par education that goes with many public schools, I can certainly see an increase in numbers at private schools. So that means everyone’s pockets have feeled up with money to pay for private schools. Hate to break your heart but private school attendance numbers for the state have been going down each year. If someone can afford to send their kid to private school and want to they are already doing it. The split does not change that. 5% drop across the state and 17% drop in the New Orleans, Baton Rouge area. Article out of NOLA. Notre Dame has even showed a drop going from 3A to 2A, unless someone is controling enrollment. Yep All this "open enrollment" crap is just that. Private schools do not have open enrollment. They have barriers to enrollment just like public schools do. Public barriers are geographic, private schools are financial, academic, behavioral. Outcomes analysis shows that the differing barriers do not result automatically in differing success. Establishing community support, deep programs that start at junior high level or before, and having participation be important by supporting the kids does result in improved success.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 6, 2016 14:41:10 GMT -6
All this "open enrollment" crap is just that. Private schools do not have open enrollment. They have barriers to enrollment just like public schools do. Public barriers are geographic, private schools are financial, academic, behavioral. Outcomes analysis shows that the differing barriers do not result automatically in differing success. Establishing community support, deep programs that start at junior high level or before, and having participation be important by supporting the kids does result in improved success. I suspect that the perception of "open enrollment" is not crap. Its crap to you, because it is working for you. Probably because you make it work. And I commend you for it. Some people are not in that position. Public barriers are geographic. They are also the rule (law). Public schools have very valid reasons to setting up geographic boundaries. And none of them have to do with athletic success. Not that some people don't find a way around them... The perception is that the barriers for private schools (financial, academic, behavioral), while there, can be sidestepped with ease, if the school so desires. I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but I have no doubt that both the financial and academic barriers wave been waived for exceptional athletes. (Yes, I left out "behavioral" since most behavioral guys don't have the willingness to compete and work.) Again, this is perception. I don't have a clue if it is true, because I don't have actual data. (The devil is always in the data.) But I suspect that getting around the financial and academic barriers for privates is easier than getting around the geographic barriers for publics. And again getting around the financial and academic barriers are a matter of convenience, not rules. It would be reasonable to me to prevent private schools from offering "scholarships" to any student participating in athletics. It would be reasonable to prevent any student with below average grades from transferring to a private school to play athletics. Those things are both reasonable to me, yet I am against them. I am against them because they are not fair to the student. I wish that every kid could go to private school. I am in favor of vouchers. And I don't think that getting an opportunity to go to a private school on scholarship should require you to forfeit athletics. The perception is that privates have an advantage in getting student athletes that aren't available to publics. I don't know how that can be proven true or false in this instance. But I balance my perception of the advantage for the privates against the advantage for the student. I let the student win. However, I still see an advantage for the privates, so I have no problem with a split. Everybody gives up a little something, and everybody get a little something. (To be fair, I still don't understand why this is such a big deal for the privates. You spend all of your time denigrating the public schools so you can...play the public schools. If the public schools are so terrible and are cheaters, why do you want to play them so badly? What is a split really costing you? Bragging rights? Can someone tell me what options the privates have put forth to even the playing field? I'm sure that some have been offered, I just don't know what they are. And if you say multipliers, explain how that helps with Catholic-Baton Rouge and Rummel.) For the record, I went to high school out of state, my kids went to a magnet school that did not participate in major sports, and my grand kids will probably got to private school.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 6, 2016 15:27:33 GMT -6
All this "open enrollment" crap is just that. Private schools do not have open enrollment. They have barriers to enrollment just like public schools do. Public barriers are geographic, private schools are financial, academic, behavioral. Outcomes analysis shows that the differing barriers do not result automatically in differing success. Establishing community support, deep programs that start at junior high level or before, and having participation be important by supporting the kids does result in improved success. I suspect that the perception of "open enrollment" is not crap. Its crap to you, because it is working for you. Probably because you make it work. And I commend you for it. Some people are not in that position. Public barriers are geographic. They are also the rule (law). Public schools have very valid reasons to setting up geographic boundaries. And none of them have to do with athletic success. Not that some people don't find a way around them... The perception is that the barriers for private schools (financial, academic, behavioral), while there, can be sidestepped with ease, if the school so desires. I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but I have no doubt that both the financial and academic barriers wave been waived for exceptional athletes. (Yes, I left out "behavioral" since most behavioral guys don't have the willingness to compete and work.) Again, this is perception. I don't have a clue if it is true, because I don't have actual data. (The devil is always in the data.) But I suspect that getting around the financial and academic barriers for privates is easier than getting around the geographic barriers for publics. And again getting around the financial and academic barriers are a matter of convenience, not rules. It would be reasonable to me to prevent private schools from offering "scholarships" to any student participating in athletics. It would be reasonable to prevent any student with below average grades from transferring to a private school to play athletics. Those things are both reasonable to me, yet I am against them. I am against them because they are not fair to the student. I wish that every kid could go to private school. I am in favor of vouchers. And I don't think that getting an opportunity to go to a private school on scholarship should require you to forfeit athletics. The perception is that privates have an advantage in getting student athletes that aren't available to publics. I don't know how that can be proven true or false in this instance. But I balance my perception of the advantage for the privates against the advantage for the student. I let the student win. However, I still see an advantage for the privates, so I have no problem with a split. Everybody gives up a little something, and everybody get a little something. (To be fair, I still don't understand why this is such a big deal for the privates. You spend all of your time denigrating the public schools so you can...play the public schools. If the public schools are so terrible and are cheaters, why do you want to play them so badly? What is a split really costing you? Bragging rights? Can someone tell me what options the privates have put forth to even the playing field? I'm sure that some have been offered, I just don't know what they are. And if you say multipliers, explain how that helps with Catholic-Baton Rouge and Rummel.) For the record, I went to high school out of state, my kids went to a magnet school that did not participate in major sports, and my grand kids will probably got to private school. What counteracts against Catholic and Rummel is that the top 5A nonselect programs are good enough that they should be expected to compete well against 5A select. Zachary did a number on Catholic last season, and I'm pretty sure Acadiana beat up on Rummel in 2013. It's the reason competitive 5A programs don't really like the split.
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jul 6, 2016 16:22:45 GMT -6
All this "open enrollment" crap is just that. Private schools do not have open enrollment. They have barriers to enrollment just like public schools do. Public barriers are geographic, private schools are financial, academic, behavioral. Outcomes analysis shows that the differing barriers do not result automatically in differing success. Establishing community support, deep programs that start at junior high level or before, and having participation be important by supporting the kids does result in improved success. I suspect that the perception of "open enrollment" is not crap. Its crap to you, because it is working for you. Probably because you make it work. And I commend you for it. Some people are not in that position. Public barriers are geographic. They are also the rule (law). Public schools have very valid reasons to setting up geographic boundaries. And none of them have to do with athletic success. Not that some people don't find a way around them... The perception is that the barriers for private schools (financial, academic, behavioral), while there, can be sidestepped with ease, if the school so desires. I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but I have no doubt that both the financial and academic barriers wave been waived for exceptional athletes. (Yes, I left out "behavioral" since most behavioral guys don't have the willingness to compete and work.) Again, this is perception. I don't have a clue if it is true, because I don't have actual data. (The devil is always in the data.) But I suspect that getting around the financial and academic barriers for privates is easier than getting around the geographic barriers for publics. And again getting around the financial and academic barriers are a matter of convenience, not rules. It would be reasonable to me to prevent private schools from offering "scholarships" to any student participating in athletics. It would be reasonable to prevent any student with below average grades from transferring to a private school to play athletics. Those things are both reasonable to me, yet I am against them. I am against them because they are not fair to the student. I wish that every kid could go to private school. I am in favor of vouchers. And I don't think that getting an opportunity to go to a private school on scholarship should require you to forfeit athletics. The perception is that privates have an advantage in getting student athletes that aren't available to publics. I don't know how that can be proven true or false in this instance. But I balance my perception of the advantage for the privates against the advantage for the student. I let the student win. However, I still see an advantage for the privates, so I have no problem with a split. Everybody gives up a little something, and everybody get a little something. (To be fair, I still don't understand why this is such a big deal for the privates. You spend all of your time denigrating the public schools so you can...play the public schools. If the public schools are so terrible and are cheaters, why do you want to play them so badly? What is a split really costing you? Bragging rights? Can someone tell me what options the privates have put forth to even the playing field? I'm sure that some have been offered, I just don't know what they are. And if you say multipliers, explain how that helps with Catholic-Baton Rouge and Rummel.) For the record, I went to high school out of state, my kids went to a magnet school that did not participate in major sports, and my grand kids will probably got to private school. I am glad to see your outlook leans towards the benefit of the student. I think sometimes fans are so focused on whatever they see as fair and equal that they fail to see what is in the best interest of the average kid. <<(To be fair, I still don't understand why this is such a big deal for the privates. You spend all of your time denigrating the public schools so you can...play the public schools. If the public schools are so terrible and are cheaters, why do you want to play them so badly? What is a split really costing you? >> 1) I don't denigrate public schools as far as cheating and the like, though some may. I think that schools that prioritize winning at all costs can cheat, regardless of public/private status. Fake addresses, living with relatives, etc. 2) The split costs the run of the mill private schools, who are about equally competitive with the bulk of the public schools, the chance to compete. If juggernauts like Calvary and JC are too much for Kentwood, Mangham, Many, or Neville then why are they not too much for Vandy, St Michaels, Sacred Heart, or Menard? These private schools have no more history of success vs the juggernaut programs than do the public schools. The organization they pay to be members of, ostensibly to protect their interests, has made their situation worse. They are now in smaller divisions with higher percentage of goliaths, but in which most everyone makes the playoffs. The brackets will basically be exactly the same year after year, in pretty much the same order. How much fun is it to know on Sept 1 that you will likely make the playoffs and play Team X week 1, just like the last 5 years? As far as proposals, there were several at this last meeting. Too many, in fact. But the revealing thing about it is that the private schools were divided among the alternative proposals but predominantly the public schools just prefer to split. That tells me they aren't interested in evaluating issues, or in the fact that most private schools aren't any more successful against the juggernauts than they are and would likely support a well thought out plan. Like I've said before, moving Vanderbilt to a separate playoff because no one can beat Curtis makes no sense. I was at the Vandy/Uhigh playoff game last year. Whole bunch of public schools would have had a better chance vs Uhigh than Vandy did.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 6, 2016 18:59:09 GMT -6
EAG, sorry to include you into a group unfairly. I shouldn't have included you in the group that denigrates publics. I threw that paragraph in at the last minute without thinking it through. You have my apologies for that.
I too find it unfortunate that run of the mill privates get steamrolled. Again, that is why I asked what options have been offered by the privates. I really would be interested in knowing what they were.
The reality, I think, is that if there was a solution that solved this, another state would have discovered it, and this problem would not exist. While I freely admit that the split was done by the publics to enhance the competitiveness of the publics, I also have a strong suspicion that the perception of the publics was that any counter proposals didn't really do anything to address their concerns. (For instance, if a certain 3A school is able to compete and win at the 5A level EVERY year, why should the 5A teams have it plopped in their lap? Just becasue they are 5A? Should the answer for the run of the mill privates be "As long as someone else has to deal with it, I don't care"?)
I'm pretty sure the the run of the mill privates could come up with a solution that would be acceptable to both themselves, and the publics. I don't know what it is, but I'm pretty sure that no one else has figured it out either. But I'm willing to listen.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 6, 2016 19:27:09 GMT -6
EAG, sorry to include you into a group unfairly. I shouldn't have included you in the group that denigrates publics. I threw that paragraph in at the last minute without thinking it through. You have my apologies for that. I too find it unfortunate that run of the mill privates get steamrolled. Again, that is why I asked what options have been offered by the privates. I really would be interested in knowing what they were. The reality, I think, is that if there was a solution that solved this, another state would have discovered it, and this problem would not exist. While I freely admit that the split was done by the publics to enhance the competitiveness of the publics, I also have a strong suspicion that the perception of the publics was that any counter proposals didn't really do anything to address their concerns. (For instance, if a certain 3A school is able to compete and win at the 5A level EVERY year, why should the 5A teams have it plopped in their lap? Just becasue they are 5A? Should the answer for the run of the mill privates be "As long as someone else has to deal with it, I don't care"?) I'm pretty sure the the run of the mill privates could come up with a solution that would be acceptable to both themselves, and the publics. I don't know what it is, but I'm pretty sure that no one else has figured it out either. But I'm willing to listen. Kay Banes, You are so sweet and thoughtful. You should take Bonines place!
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 6, 2016 20:02:20 GMT -6
I'm not very smart, but I'm smart enough to refuse that job.
|
|
|
Post by btown on Jul 6, 2016 20:31:11 GMT -6
So that means everyone’s pockets have feeled up with money to pay for private schools. Hate to break your heart but private school attendance numbers for the state have been going down each year. If someone can afford to send their kid to private school and want to they are already doing it. The split does not change that. 5% drop across the state and 17% drop in the New Orleans, Baton Rouge area. Article out of NOLA. Notre Dame has even showed a drop going from 3A to 2A, unless someone is controling enrollment. Your ic statements continue to amaze me. So you accuse ND of recruiting then at the same time say we control our numbers to drop to 2a. That's an oxi moron with the emphasis on moron. Geez Wow hit a nerve. That was all you got out of the post, my experience tells me when people rant like that you have hit close to home.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 6, 2016 20:52:01 GMT -6
Your ic statements continue to amaze me. So you accuse ND of recruiting then at the same time say we control our numbers to drop to 2a. That's an oxi moron with the emphasis on moron. Geez Wow hit a nerve. That was all you got out of the post, my experience tells me when people rant like that you have hit close to home. Glad to hear you have experiences. I was wondering because many of your kind don't. Do you get to go on field trips? Do you get visitors?
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 7, 2016 1:18:18 GMT -6
(For instance, if a certain 3A school is able to compete and win at the 5A level EVERY year, why should the 5A teams have it plopped in their lap? Just becasue they are 5A? yeah. We're the biggest schools. Curtis and Evangel have been 0-fer the last few years playing in just the select 5A bracket, and thats not even including nonselect schools who could probably beat them too
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jul 7, 2016 9:57:05 GMT -6
EAG, sorry to include you into a group unfairly. I shouldn't have included you in the group that denigrates publics. I threw that paragraph in at the last minute without thinking it through. You have my apologies for that. I too find it unfortunate that run of the mill privates get steamrolled. Again, that is why I asked what options have been offered by the privates. I really would be interested in knowing what they were. The reality, I think, is that if there was a solution that solved this, another state would have discovered it, and this problem would not exist. While I freely admit that the split was done by the publics to enhance the competitiveness of the publics, I also have a strong suspicion that the perception of the publics was that any counter proposals didn't really do anything to address their concerns. (For instance, if a certain 3A school is able to compete and win at the 5A level EVERY year, why should the 5A teams have it plopped in their lap? Just becasue they are 5A? Should the answer for the run of the mill privates be "As long as someone else has to deal with it, I don't care"?) I'm pretty sure the the run of the mill privates could come up with a solution that would be acceptable to both themselves, and the publics. I don't know what it is, but I'm pretty sure that no one else has figured it out either. But I'm willing to listen. As far as other states, there are a few that have come up with a better solution than this one. The Indiana plan has been referenced on here many times and IMO is as close to an ideal plan as anything is likely to be. As far as run of the mill privates, I guess my feeling is why is it OK to hang the millstone around their necks. If we are going to remove it from some, should we not as an organization remove it from all? Why does a paying member of LHSAA that is a public school feel it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member with a problem that they themselves wish to avoid? That is not how a well-run organization should work.
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on Jul 7, 2016 11:47:11 GMT -6
All this "open enrollment" crap is just that. Private schools do not have open enrollment. They have barriers to enrollment just like public schools do. Public barriers are geographic, private schools are financial, academic, behavioral. Outcomes analysis shows that the differing barriers do not result automatically in differing success. Establishing community support, deep programs that start at junior high level or before, and having participation be important by supporting the kids does result in improved success. I suspect that the perception of "open enrollment" is not crap. Its crap to you, because it is working for you. Probably because you make it work. And I commend you for it. Some people are not in that position. Public barriers are geographic. They are also the rule (law). Public schools have very valid reasons to setting up geographic boundaries. And none of them have to do with athletic success. Not that some people don't find a way around them... The perception is that the barriers for private schools (financial, academic, behavioral), while there, can be sidestepped with ease, if the school so desires. I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but I have no doubt that both the financial and academic barriers wave been waived for exceptional athletes. (Yes, I left out "behavioral" since most behavioral guys don't have the willingness to compete and work.) Again, this is perception. I don't have a clue if it is true, because I don't have actual data. (The devil is always in the data.) But I suspect that getting around the financial and academic barriers for privates is easier than getting around the geographic barriers for publics. And again getting around the financial and academic barriers are a matter of convenience, not rules. It would be reasonable to me to prevent private schools from offering "scholarships" to any student participating in athletics. It would be reasonable to prevent any student with below average grades from transferring to a private school to play athletics. Those things are both reasonable to me, yet I am against them. I am against them because they are not fair to the student. I wish that every kid could go to private school. I am in favor of vouchers. And I don't think that getting an opportunity to go to a private school on scholarship should require you to forfeit athletics. The perception is that privates have an advantage in getting student athletes that aren't available to publics. I don't know how that can be proven true or false in this instance. But I balance my perception of the advantage for the privates against the advantage for the student. I let the student win. However, I still see an advantage for the privates, so I have no problem with a split. Everybody gives up a little something, and everybody get a little something. (To be fair, I still don't understand why this is such a big deal for the privates. You spend all of your time denigrating the public schools so you can...play the public schools. If the public schools are so terrible and are cheaters, why do you want to play them so badly? What is a split really costing you? Bragging rights? Can someone tell me what options the privates have put forth to even the playing field? I'm sure that some have been offered, I just don't know what they are. And if you say multipliers, explain how that helps with Catholic-Baton Rouge and Rummel.) For the record, I went to high school out of state, my kids went to a magnet school that did not participate in major sports, and my grand kids will probably got to private school. Normally it works in the opposite direction, most of the voucher students (at the school I support) aren't able to make the grades to pass, let alone stay eligible and end up transferring back to the school they came from. Not sure what you mean by "getting student athletes not available to Public schools", please let me know what you mean. Not denigrating the public schools, most of the public & private schools are in the same boat as being able to compete with the "factory" schools. I'm not a fan of the split: I don't think a team with 0-3 wins should make the playoffs, playoffs should be earned not just given out to fill out the bracket. I know that many have said they haven't had a chance to work out the kinks of the split, but I think the Jan vote showed that smaller brackets aren't in the plans or it would have been included in the vote to split all the major sports. I am for the students also, as far as a better plan, The Indiana Plan I feel would work the best to make the playing field as level as you can possibly can.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 12:42:30 GMT -6
Yes, I agree. Why is it OK to hang a millstone around the "run of the mills"? Its not.
I don't think that we can ever get around the problem that one of these things is not like the other. (And actually, it like 5 of these things are not like the others.) Its always the outliers that make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness. (And I don't mean that in a bad way. Underperformers also make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness.)
"Why does a paying member of LHSAA that is a public school feel it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member with a problem that they themselves wish to avoid?" Exactly, and why does a dues paying member in a lower classification feel that it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member in a higher classification with a problem that they wish to avoid? Because some of these teams are not like the others.
Having just read the Indiana High School Classification rules, I can understand the theory, and could probably live with it myself, but I can understand that, to the publics, you are just passing off the problem to someone else. I didn't see any proposal for that in the 2016 Business Meeting Agenda. Any idea why it wasn't submitted for a vote? The closest that I saw was the "Elite Program" Rule. This would have partially done the same thing as the Indiana system. It failed 110-160. Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep were against it. Curtis, and most of the Catholic League were for it. There may be valid reasons why it failed, other than that some schools didn't want to be forced to play up. It could be that they didn't like the discretion afforded to Bonine. So, in essence, they chose a split. I would love for a points system to get a vote, just to see what would happen.
It is impossible to make everyone happy. Given their different charters and restrictions, you can't make things perfectly fair between selects and non-select.
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on Jul 7, 2016 12:43:03 GMT -6
Well, killing off private schools is what you people want, so what's your complaint? If you're right, you get what you wanted all along. if all that is indeed what happens. I don't think it will. It seems to me that a lot of this doom and gloom may backfire and we may see numbers at private school grow. Given this split garbage (that normal thinking folk can see is just a stab at private schools) and the constant waste of tax dollars at public schools, and the sub-par education that goes with many public schools, I can certainly see an increase in numbers at private schools. So that means everyone’s pockets have feeled up with money to pay for private schools. Hate to break your heart but private school attendance numbers for the state have been going down each year. If someone can afford to send their kid to private school and want to they are already doing it. The split does not change that. 5% drop across the state and 17% drop in the New Orleans, Baton Rouge area. Article out of NOLA. Notre Dame has even showed a drop going from 3A to 2A, unless someone is controling enrollment. Your using skewed numbers, particularly in the NOLA area. The drop in NOLA is primarily because they are moving to Charter Schools which have a greater success rate. They are NOT moving back to traditional public education because there is NO traditional public education remaining in NOLA. That cross state number includes that 17% drop in NOLA, so that again is a major turn not to traditional public but to charters. Lake Charles has new charters, Lafayette has new charters, Baton Rouge ETC...... Public school have been consolidating at a greater rate and will have to continue to consolidate particularly in rural areas. While schools like Notre Dame, (mostly rural) will see fluctuations year to year, (they were really a small 3A) moving up and down in class is always a function of the feeder systems. The question should be asked how are the feeders doing? Also, there have been several new private schools in this same area that have opened and pulling new potential students away from the ND feeder system. Yesterday the D of Lafayette announced the closing of Immaculate Heart school due to lack of support. The second Catholic school to close in two years. This is precisely what happens when a private school is no longer viable with low scores and falling attendance. People leave, they send their schools either to a better public school or they seek out alternative private schools such as St. Genevieve, St. Leo Seton, St. Cecilia, Cathedral, Fatima, St Edwards in New Iberia etc..... Mean while new private schools are opening by both the catholic and protestant churches. We have a new school being constructed in Youngsville, a relatively new school in Scott and Both Teurlings and STM are busting at the seams with their largest freshmen classes ever.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 12:53:14 GMT -6
Not sure what you mean by "getting student athletes not available to Public schools", please let me know what you mean. Not denigrating the public schools, most of the public & private schools are in the same boat as being able to compete with the "factory" schools. I'm not a fan of the split: I don't think a team with 0-3 wins should make the playoffs, playoffs should be earned not just given out to fill out the bracket. I know that many have said they haven't had a chance to work out the kinks of the split, but I think the Jan vote showed that smaller brackets aren't in the plans or it would have been included in the vote to split all the major sports. I am for the students also, as far as a better plan, The Indiana Plan I feel would work the best to make the playing field as level as you can possibly can. Sorry that I was unclear. By that, I meant a public school not being able to get a student from outside of it's attendance zone. I'm not crazy about the split. I don't like teams with a losing record making the playoffs. Smaller brackets should only have 16 (or fewer) teams make the playoffs. I've bounced around the term "factory schools". Some of these teams are not like the others. Outliers. But I don't see how you tell a school to quit being a "factory school". Again, while I'm not crazy for it, I would love to see a vote on an Indiana type proposal.
|
|
|
Post by btown on Jul 7, 2016 13:18:09 GMT -6
Yes, I agree. Why is it OK to hang a millstone around the "run of the mills"? Its not. I don't think that we can ever get around the problem that one of these things is not like the other. (And actually, it like 5 of these things are not like the others.) Its always the outliers that make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness. (And I don't mean that in a bad way. Underperformers also make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness.) "Why does a paying member of LHSAA that is a public school feel it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member with a problem that they themselves wish to avoid?" Exactly, and why does a dues paying member in a lower classification feel that it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member in a higher classification with a problem that they wish to avoid? Because some of these teams are not like the others. Having just read the Indiana High School Classification rules, I can understand the theory, and could probably live with it myself, but I can understand that, to the publics, you are just passing off the problem to someone else. I didn't see any proposal for that in the 2016 Business Meeting Agenda. Any idea why it wasn't submitted for a vote? The closest that I saw was the "Elite Program" Rule. This would have partially done the same thing as the Indiana system. It failed 110-160. Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep were against it. Curtis, and most of the Catholic League were for it. There may be valid reasons why it failed, other than that some schools didn't want to be forced to play up. It could be that they didn't like the discretion afforded to Bonine. So, in essence, they chose a split. I would love for a points system to get a vote, just to see what would happen. It is impossible to make everyone happy. Given their different charters and restrictions, you can't make things perfectly fair between selects and non-select. "It could be that they didn't like the discretion afforded to Bonine. So, in essence, they chose a split." This is the statement that says it all but no one ever comments on it. This is how I see it. 1. Bonine came to the January 2015 meeting. There were some issues on the table concerning the split. He said wait give 1 year to see what I can do. What did he do for that year? 2. 2016 meeting approaches and what does he do. He waits until after the agenda has come out for the 2016 meeting in Jan. and nothing can be added to say the split was not voted in correctly. What would you do in that case on something you supported and someone kills it after a final agenda of items have been put out and nothing can be added. 3. Then the dumpster fire email. No matter what you think you never put it in writing. Tell me what professional could do that and get away with?
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 13:41:57 GMT -6
Well, the split was not voted in correctly. I was there. I heard the explanation. I understand it. It was a bad deal. But it was also revoted* on, and passed again. This just seems like something of a red herring to me. There is no doubt that a majority are in favor of the split. It doesn't matter. You had a split before the screw up was announced. You had one after. That doesn't explain why the Indiana solution wasn't voted on, or why the Elite rule failed, with Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep voting against. Being close to the Indiana plan, I would have assumed that the Elite Rule would have been better than a split.
*At the 2016 Annual Convention, Agenda Item 12 approved the split for baseball, and it passed 182-120.
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jul 7, 2016 13:51:42 GMT -6
Yes, I agree. Why is it OK to hang a millstone around the "run of the mills"? Its not. I don't think that we can ever get around the problem that one of these things is not like the other. (And actually, it like 5 of these things are not like the others.) Its always the outliers that make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness. (And I don't mean that in a bad way. Underperformers also make it difficult to make rules and promote fairness.) "Why does a paying member of LHSAA that is a public school feel it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member with a problem that they themselves wish to avoid?" Exactly, and why does a dues paying member in a lower classification feel that it is OK to saddle their dues paying co-member in a higher classification with a problem that they wish to avoid? Because some of these teams are not like the others. Having just read the Indiana High School Classification rules, I can understand the theory, and could probably live with it myself, but I can understand that, to the publics, you are just passing off the problem to someone else. I didn't see any proposal for that in the 2016 Business Meeting Agenda. Any idea why it wasn't submitted for a vote? The closest that I saw was the "Elite Program" Rule. This would have partially done the same thing as the Indiana system. It failed 110-160. Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep were against it. Curtis, and most of the Catholic League were for it. There may be valid reasons why it failed, other than that some schools didn't want to be forced to play up. It could be that they didn't like the discretion afforded to Bonine. So, in essence, they chose a split. I would love for a points system to get a vote, just to see what would happen. It is impossible to make everyone happy. Given their different charters and restrictions, you can't make things perfectly fair between selects and non-select. I agree with pretty much all of this, with the exception of the part I just bolded. I think you simply cannot make things perfectly fair, period. Some public zones are smaller, some are bigger. Some communities priotritize one sport over others. Some privates are located in large cities and can pretty much draw from a large population to get their 300 students, some are in less populated and less affluent areas and simply struggle to keep the rolls filled to where they are viable, and athletics are just a nice extracurricular. There are just as big of spread of success WITHIN public ranks and WITHIN private ranks as there are between the two. That is meaningful to me, in that it shows that the public or private status in and of itself brings about no change in success. IMO that leaves the only solution, if we feel we need one, being to use on-field performance as criteria. Now, I've said before, I'm perfectly fine with just lumping everyone together again like it was and stratify by size. I personally don't care if JC wins 300 state championships in a row. At least in the old system it was pretty easy to identify a successful program. Good programs made the playoffs most years, really good programs won a game or two consistently, and truly great years meant a deep run. Now, who can even say? Everyone pretty much makes the playoffs. Especially on the private side, only the juggernauts will make it past 1 rd. So every year is the same, every team from well below average to well above, ends up in the same place. It just is a bad system in that it takes a superficial characteristic shared by some ( but not all) of the most successful programs but also shared by many average or below average programs and makes that the SOLE criteria for separation. In the end, if you examine the most successful programs you will find several common themes. Community support, high levels of participation, stable coaching staffs, developmental programs going back to junior high or elementary school, kids and families willing to give up the time necessary to have effective offseason programs will be present in each one of those programs. They will vary in public/private status. So why is that the criteria we use to separate?
|
|
|
Post by btown on Jul 7, 2016 13:59:09 GMT -6
Well, the split was not voted in correctly. I was there. I heard the explanation. I understand it. It was a bad deal. But it was also revoted* on, and passed again. This just seems like something of a red herring to me. There is no doubt that a majority are in favor of the split. It doesn't matter. You had a split before the screw up was announced. You had one after. That doesn't explain why the Indiana solution wasn't voted on, or why the Elite rule failed, with Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep voting against. Being close to the Indiana plan, I would have assumed that the Elite Rule would have been better than a split. *At the 2016 Annual Convention, Agenda Item 12 approved the split for baseball, and it passed 182-120. Again no one answers the questions as to what did Bonine do for the year that he asked for in 2015? How many meetings did he have with the split supports such as Booker? Has it ever dawn on you that the majority go with the split because of the way Bonine has handled it?
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 14:18:26 GMT -6
"In the end, if you examine the most successful programs you will find several common themes. Community support, high levels of participation, stable coaching staffs, developmental programs going back to junior high or elementary school, kids and families willing to give up the time necessary to have effective offseason programs will be present in each one of those programs. They will vary in public/private status. So why is that the criteria we use to separate?"
Because if you have two comparable schools, one public and one private, and both schools have community support, high levels of participation, stable coaching staffs, developmental programs going back to junior high or elementary school, kids and families willing to give up the time necessary to have effective offseason programs will be present in each one of those programs, the private school will STILL have a legal advantage over the public school. In fact, it has the legal potential to acquire kids from the attendance zone of the public school.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 14:31:38 GMT -6
Has it ever dawn on you that the majority go with the split because of the way Bonine has handled it? I can't answer the question, because I don't know. I don't know how many meetings he had with split supporters. I don't know how many meetings he had with split opponents. I know that he had a series of meetings with all principals, in his traveling road shows. It was not done in a vacuum. It was done because neither side would compromise. To some (on both sides), "compromise" means "do it my way". I guess that it is possible that a majority went with the split because of the way that Bonine handled it. It is also possible that the principals are not mind-numbed robots that can't make a decision for themselves. I'm going with "principals are not mind-numbed robots". Has it ever dawned on you that that the majority went with the split because of the way that certain schools handled it? Has it dawned on you that there was an option to move closer to the Indiana process, getting away from the split and that it lost by 50 votes, including those of Catholic BR, Ouachita Christian, Parkview, University, Evangel, Calvary, and Madison Prep? Was that a smart choice?
|
|
|
Post by Raven on Jul 7, 2016 14:52:08 GMT -6
"In the end, if you examine the most successful programs you will find several common themes. Community support, high levels of participation, stable coaching staffs, developmental programs going back to junior high or elementary school, kids and families willing to give up the time necessary to have effective offseason programs will be present in each one of those programs. They will vary in public/private status. So why is that the criteria we use to separate?" Because if you have two comparable schools, one public and one private, and both schools have community support, high levels of participation, stable coaching staffs, developmental programs going back to junior high or elementary school, kids and families willing to give up the time necessary to have effective offseason programs will be present in each one of those programs, the private school will STILL have a legal advantage over the public school. In fact, it has the legal potential to acquire kids from the attendance zone of the public school. Only from one perspective. The private school is still limited by the number of students whose parents are able and willing to pay the tuition. The public school has access to EVERY student within their zone, the same is not true for the private school. So with all else being equal, the ability to draw from a larger area only levels the playing field for the private school, it doesn't give them an advantage.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 15:07:11 GMT -6
Raven, Only if you assume the the financial restraints are enforced. I don't know one way or another, but the perception is that scholarships and tuition adjustments are made, frequently or infrequently, for certain students. Without data, the perception will continue unabated.
|
|
|
Post by Raven on Jul 7, 2016 15:28:53 GMT -6
Raven, Only if you assume the the financial restraints are enforced. I don't know one way or another, but the perception is that scholarships and tuition adjustments are made, frequently or infrequently, for certain students. Without data, the perception will continue unabated. There are absolutely financial aids and scholarships that are available, but these are available to ALL students. It's not used as an inducement to attract athletes. I understand that the perception exists that private schools can just go out and collect all the good talent from a certain area and simply waive that tuition, but it doesn't work that way. The perception exists on the private school side that it's as easy as using an aunt's or grandmother's address to send your kid to the public school of your choice if you don't want to go to the one that you are zoned to attend. Odds are that doesn't happen as often as it is rumored. I would say the same thing applies to that private school tuition waiver thing...
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 7, 2016 15:33:13 GMT -6
it speaks to a larger issue that private schools create their tuition value out of thin air... say one charges 10k tuition, but they give a stud QB a break on it. now he's only paying 5k, but the family thinks they have a 5k discount, when, he wouldn't be paying anything at the public school in his area. everyone makes the private school the bad guys when the family is still paying more to go there. public schools should ask why people pay so much not to go there...
let me tell yall the real reason for the split... white middle class parents. these are the type particularly in NOLA that will never enroll their kid a day in public school. they brag about Catholic school acceptance like it's freaking college. their booster clubs decide "bring in a few kids, we want to win, but not too many, we have our paying parents to worry about"
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 15:50:45 GMT -6
it speaks to a larger issue that private schools create their tuition value out of thin air... say one charges 10k tuition, but they give a stud QB a break on it. now he's only paying 5k, but the family thinks they have a 5k discount, when, he wouldn't be paying anything at the public school in his area. everyone makes the private school the bad guys when the family is still paying more to go there. public schools should ask why people pay so much not to go there... I'll not say anything bad about parents that send their kids to private school. There are excellent reasons to attend private school, and accordingly, miserable public schools that aren't really doing what they are supposed to do. A private school is just like any other business. They can set their prices as they please, and the free market will sort it out. If a private school charges too much for an education that is comparable to a public school, they will go out of business. You have to look no further than Redeptorist-BR. When schools in Zachary and Central left the E Baton Rouge School district, their school scores increased, their enrollment increased and Redeptorist fell out the bottom. For the most part, parents recognize the value of the education that their children receive. And like any business, private schools can pass along discounts to selected customers (real discounts) if they feel that it can be recouped with the bounds of their business or their mission.
|
|
|
Post by kbanes on Jul 7, 2016 16:05:51 GMT -6
There are absolutely financial aids and scholarships that are available, but these are available to ALL students. It's not used as an inducement to attract athletes. I understand that the perception exists that private schools can just go out and collect all the good talent from a certain area and simply waive that tuition, but it doesn't work that way. The perception exists on the private school side that it's as easy as using an aunt's or grandmother's address to send your kid to the public school of your choice if you don't want to go to the one that you are zoned to attend. Odds are that doesn't happen as often as it is rumored. I would say the same thing applies to that private school tuition waiver thing... Raven, you sound pretty sure about that, and I am in no position to argue. Anecdotally, I have a friend that sends his kids to a Baton Rouge private school prominent in athletics, and he has described a group of parents that are upset that their tuitions costs are being used to prop up the Athletics programs through the use of athletic scholarships. Either way, the perception will not go away until someone provides actual data to show that scholarships are not used to attract athletes. I know that parents use the "switchable address" trick to get their kids into different schools. I know because I get multiple notices each month from the LHSAA for infractions related to this behavior. The difference between "address switching" and athletic scholarships? One is against the rules, and public schools are frequently cited for violating the rule. Scholarships at private schools are not against the rules and there is no accounting for them, that I am aware of.
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jul 7, 2016 21:13:08 GMT -6
There are absolutely financial aids and scholarships that are available, but these are available to ALL students. It's not used as an inducement to attract athletes. I understand that the perception exists that private schools can just go out and collect all the good talent from a certain area and simply waive that tuition, but it doesn't work that way. The perception exists on the private school side that it's as easy as using an aunt's or grandmother's address to send your kid to the public school of your choice if you don't want to go to the one that you are zoned to attend. Odds are that doesn't happen as often as it is rumored. I would say the same thing applies to that private school tuition waiver thing... Raven, you sound pretty sure about that, and I am in no position to argue. Anecdotally, I have a friend that sends his kids to a Baton Rouge private school prominent in athletics, and he has described a group of parents that are upset that their tuitions costs are being used to prop up the Athletics programs through the use of athletic scholarships. Either way, the perception will not go away until someone provides actual data to show that scholarships are not used to attract athletes. I know that parents use the "switchable address" trick to get their kids into different schools. I know because I get multiple notices each month from the LHSAA for infractions related to this behavior. The difference between "address switching" and athletic scholarships? One is against the rules, and public schools are frequently cited for violating the rule. Scholarships at private schools are not against the rules and there is no accounting for them, that I am aware of. Scholarships are available at private schools, yes. At least in the ones I'm familiar with, they are sponsored by various organizations who select the student and I have not seen any awarded simply for athletic prowess. Not saying it isn't done, but it wouldn't work out for very long to have the kids who's parents have been paying full freight from K-12 constantly be replaced with scholarship kids who show up in high school. Remember, three are no municipal funds so every price of equipment and salary is paid in one way or another by parents. Upsetting the core group of feeder school families is not the recipe for long-term success. Anyway, I appreciate your dialogue. We don't completely agree but I respect your position and demeanor.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 8, 2016 1:22:06 GMT -6
that's why you bring in enough to win, and make those people happy, and not enough that the freight-paying parents will rebel...
|
|