|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 12:12:56 GMT -6
Agreed that in general attendance has been down but this hasn’t been true of the final nfl or college games
So based off of that we shouldn’t see the attendance in New Orleans we do
Look at the scores in the “semifinal” games
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 12:13:54 GMT -6
Fanman I agree we never need to go back Curtis and Evangel playing in their class by enrollment
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 12:23:10 GMT -6
Also the math of attendance
10/18 that’s 56% of the games
If you were getting 56% of each original crowd you would match the numbers of those original crowds.
What you’re looking at is what the college football playoff has done to the bcs bowls that aren’t in it. It’s promoting inferior football because you don’t have the best match ups
|
|
|
Post by fanman on Jul 4, 2019 12:41:29 GMT -6
I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I’m in medicine not a coach. All I know is many here have baked this cake till it’s clay. I never liked led the bad effects it had. With small schools with 200 in high School recruiting many kids. I’ll leave it there
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 4, 2019 13:21:51 GMT -6
Agreed that in general attendance has been down but this hasn’t been true of the final nfl or college games So based off of that we shouldn’t see the attendance in New Orleans we do Are you trying to equate the Superbowl and CFP championship game to Louisiana HS football? I don't think that is a fair or accurate comparison. Like the 2006 ND 21- Independence 0 game? Or its Redemptorist 31-Benton 3 counterpart? Or the St. Charles 23-Sterlington 0 game? Or the Acadiana 31-Hanville 7 game? Maybe the 2007 Destrehan 59-7 win over Westgate? Or the Westlake 36- Patterson 7 game? How about South Plaq's 50 point semi and 40 point final win? Or the 2008 West Monroe 47-12 win over Barbe? Lutcher 58-26 win over Cecilia? Or South Plaq's 32 point semi final or 46 point final victories? Or in 2009, when West Monroe notched a 46 point semi final and 30 point final win margins? Or in 4A, where Franklinton beat Salmen 60-0 and Neville beat Lutcher 42-0? Or ND 43 point semi final win? Or Parkview Baptist's 42 point semi final win? Or Haynesville's 26-0 win? Or 2010 when WM and Acadiana both had 31 point semi final wins? Karr had a 32 point semi final win, Franklinton had a 30 point victory. Do I have to go on? And keep in mind I didn't even inclued ECA OR Curtis in any of those.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 13:53:51 GMT -6
Fanman
Definitely understand your frustration with the recruiting of the kids. And I think we see eye to eye on the negative results. I can see where it turns into well what do we do so this doesn’t happen again. I look too since Curtis and Evangel have been moved up they don’t have near the success anymore.
And if it was just private’s that recruited I could see this better but living in crowley watching Iota pick crowley high dry for baseball kids or watch Acadiana get every good kid possible from Lafayette High and Northside or watch loreauville and Westgate get kids from NISH I can’t justify what’s happening to innocent schools when guilty exist on the other side doing worse. Not to mention the other people and forms of collateral damage out there.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 14:00:12 GMT -6
Retired I’m pretty sure you’ve got some ax to grind against me and I can see why. I have engaged in some name calling and other juvenile and annoying behaviors.
In response to your last post in what way is it not valid to compare championship game to championship game in terms of relative attendance? I don’t want to compare it head to head but to look at last six of each of the three and compare that head to head against each other seems valid.
Now on the scores
Thanks for proving my point. You had to go back over ten years to cherry pick enough lopsided scores and even had to adjust what you considered to be an unbalanced enough score to mention
I can’t see where you think ND vs Amite wouldn’t be a better to watch than we what he had
And being as Amite has multiple kids from HAMMOND on the team maybe y’all can see where I don’t think that’s different than our mythical five parish draw
My favorite part of our five parish draw is not only that we don’t have kids from the five parishes but we don’t even have five on the team who spent a day of their life attending public school
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 4, 2019 14:46:57 GMT -6
Retired I’m pretty sure you’ve got some ax to grind against me and I can see why. I have engaged in some name calling and other juvenile and annoying behaviors. In response to your last post in what way is it not valid to compare championship game to championship game in terms of relative attendance? I don’t want to compare it head to head but to look at last six of each of the three and compare that head to head against each other seems valid. Now on the scores Thanks for proving my point. You had to go back over ten years to cherry pick enough lopsided scores and even had to adjust what you considered to be an unbalanced enough score to mention I can’t see where you think ND vs Amite wouldn’t be a better to watch than we what he had And being as Amite has multiple kids from HAMMOND on the team maybe y’all can see where I don’t think that’s different than our mythical five parish draw My favorite part of our five parish draw is not only that we don’t have kids from the five parishes but we don’t even have five on the team who spent a day of their life attending public school Last things first, regarding the scores all I did was go back to a pre split time, and then start working my way through consecutive years towards the present. After 4 consecutive years featuring numerous semi final (and final) blow outs, I stopped. You had mentioned that the split now "watered things down" and you said to look at semi final scores as evidence. I posted pre split semi final scores showing that perhaps you were incorrect in your statement. As far as an axe to grind, I am not sure how my using data and accurate facts during the discussion represents an agenda against you. In the last several posts, you have made comments, and I have simply replied with actual facts that may or may not refute what you posted. I am not sure how the truth is an agenda. You have been 100% correct in trying to demonstrate to other posters here that the enrollment/attendance landscape is not what most think it is. But in many other instances, your posts have just not been factual. Now, regarding that lanscape-- the fact that is that for a while, the "general" rule of thumb was that if all rules were being followed, private schools enjoyed an advanteage in that they could enroll players from anywhere, and public schools were restricted to certain zones. You are correct in pointing out that this is no longer the case for SOME public schools. In my opinion though, saying "look, see...those schools are just like privates" is not justification for unification. It is evidence that the classification system needs to be re examined.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 4, 2019 14:54:42 GMT -6
When I get home from the Lake I’ll be happy to post you MOV comparison’s
What else do I need to rebut as “not being factual?”
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 4, 2019 15:03:55 GMT -6
When I get home from the Lake I’ll be happy to post you MOV comparison’s What else do I need to rebut as “not being factual?” Don't waste your time at the lake on this site!!!! It's not like anyone typing here is actually going to come up with a solution anyway.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 4, 2019 16:45:49 GMT -6
Here is how I think my free market economy point is valid I’m stating that competition causes people to have to work harder. I’m citing the multiple people from the same districts as evidence of this. With so many inept teams out there it doesn’t drive the point to the athlete in the workouts and the practices to have a sense of urgency Here is how my point about attendance is valid I’m using it to show that the general public is aware that it’s creating a watered down product that people aren’t as interested in seeing. Thus denying kids a better experience to be a part of. The problem with this line of thinking is that it really doesn't apply. It isn't as if the semi final teams are lazy. The "watered down" product thing isn't really relevant in my opinion when discussing the Superdome Classic because all 18 teams that participate are really good teams. Keep in mind that attendance is down for football in general, both in person and television. 8 of them don't have to be as good as they used to be though. They're spread out across 9 games so that is the definition of "watered down". And the "general public" doesn't go to HS football games. It's people who care enough and have the means to go that go. You can compare the games in the Dome to the CFP or the Super Bowl, bc for high school football in Louisiana, it's our version.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 4, 2019 17:39:13 GMT -6
The problem with this line of thinking is that it really doesn't apply. It isn't as if the semi final teams are lazy. The "watered down" product thing isn't really relevant in my opinion when discussing the Superdome Classic because all 18 teams that participate are really good teams. Keep in mind that attendance is down for football in general, both in person and television. 8 of them don't have to be as good as they used to be though. They're spread out across 9 games so that is the definition of "watered down". And the "general public" doesn't go to HS football games. It's people who care enough and have the means to go that go. You can compare the games in the Dome to the CFP or the Super Bowl, bc for high school football in Louisiana, it's our version. Well, as I showed by just skimming through 4 short years of pre split brackets, there were lots of blow out semi final/final games. As far as not having to be as good, once you get to the semi finals, couldn't it be argued that : 1) One team is clearly superior and you would get a blow out regardless of the opponent 2) The two teams are evenly matched, and on some days Team A would win, some days team B. 3) One team is a better club, but not so superior that the other wouldn't win sometimes. Regarding attendance, I just don't see how one could rationally try and compare a high school football event with the CFP or Superbowl. And to try to say that the lack of interest is due to fans thinking the games are "watered down" just doesn't pass the smell test. How many people who would go to the classic prior to the split with zero attachment are going to be so discerning that they would say "nope" I think West Monroe Zachary is watered down. Or Warren Easton v Karr? I just don't think that dog will hunt.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 5, 2019 15:39:06 GMT -6
I’ll be posting mov’s tomorrow
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 5, 2019 15:47:23 GMT -6
I’ll be posting mov’s tomorrow I don't think means over variances with such a small sample set relative to the situation really would represent much evidence.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 5, 2019 15:51:35 GMT -6
Before you retired what was your job?
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 5, 2019 17:27:00 GMT -6
Before you retired what was your job? Latex salesman for Vandelay Industries.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 5, 2019 20:19:14 GMT -6
Before you retired what was your job? Latex salesman for Vandelay Industries. Are you still master of your domain?
|
|
|
Post by HSFan318 on Jul 12, 2019 6:10:04 GMT -6
8 of them don't have to be as good as they used to be though. They're spread out across 9 games so that is the definition of "watered down". And the "general public" doesn't go to HS football games. It's people who care enough and have the means to go that go. You can compare the games in the Dome to the CFP or the Super Bowl, bc for high school football in Louisiana, it's our version. Well, as I showed by just skimming through 4 short years of pre split brackets, there were lots of blow out semi final/final games. As far as not having to be as good, once you get to the semi finals, couldn't it be argued that : 1) One team is clearly superior and you would get a blow out regardless of the opponent 2) The two teams are evenly matched, and on some days Team A would win, some days team B. 3) One team is a better club, but not so superior that the other wouldn't win sometimes. Regarding attendance, I just don't see how one could rationally try and compare a high school football event with the CFP or Superbowl. And to try to say that the lack of interest is due to fans thinking the games are "watered down" just doesn't pass the smell test. How many people who would go to the classic prior to the split with zero attachment are going to be so discerning that they would say "nope" I think West Monroe Zachary is watered down. Or Warren Easton v Karr? I just don't think that dog will hunt.
|
|
|
Post by HSFan318 on Jul 12, 2019 6:23:17 GMT -6
8 of them don't have to be as good as they used to be though. They're spread out across 9 games so that is the definition of "watered down". And the "general public" doesn't go to HS football games. It's people who care enough and have the means to go that go. You can compare the games in the Dome to the CFP or the Super Bowl, bc for high school football in Louisiana, it's our version. Well, as I showed by just skimming through 4 short years of pre split brackets, there were lots of blow out semi final/final games. As far as not having to be as good, once you get to the semi finals, couldn't it be argued that : 1) One team is clearly superior and you would get a blow out regardless of the opponent 2) The two teams are evenly matched, and on some days Team A would win, some days team B. 3) One team is a better club, but not so superior that the other wouldn't win sometimes. Regarding attendance, I just don't see how one could rationally try and compare a high school football event with the CFP or Superbowl. And to try to say that the lack of interest is due to fans thinking the games are "watered down" just doesn't pass the smell test. How many people who would go to the classic prior to the split with zero attachment are going to be so discerning that they would say "nope" I think West Monroe Zachary is watered down. Or Warren Easton v Karr? I just don't think that dog will hunt. I am a long time reader and first time poster on here. Probably been reading sportsline since its existence and never really weighed in on any conversations. I am a large public school graduate with my kids at a smaller private school. We have had success in football at our smaller school since the split in being able to go deeper in the playoffs (would we have gone as far if not for split -- probably not) We also are not on the recruiting radar as we only are successful every twenty years when a special class comes through the small school. We have been beaten by those special private schools that no one can beat and when I played in high school we were beaten by those big public schools (that don't recruit in some eyes) when we were very good. Some teams do it (public and private), some teams don't. As stated earlier, the split has been good to smaller privates and those publics that would never make a second round game, is it good for all... who knows in the long run... if we do ever come back together then i feel if you are ever caught cheating or recruiting then you must play up in a special optional 6A class for the big dogs and recruiters for 3-5 years. Not a solution, but the punishment should be big enough to discourage the action. Humble Opinion. And thank you to sportsline for years of great reading and power point updates.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 12, 2019 10:35:33 GMT -6
Well, as I showed by just skimming through 4 short years of pre split brackets, there were lots of blow out semi final/final games. As far as not having to be as good, once you get to the semi finals, couldn't it be argued that : 1) One team is clearly superior and you would get a blow out regardless of the opponent 2) The two teams are evenly matched, and on some days Team A would win, some days team B. 3) One team is a better club, but not so superior that the other wouldn't win sometimes. Regarding attendance, I just don't see how one could rationally try and compare a high school football event with the CFP or Superbowl. And to try to say that the lack of interest is due to fans thinking the games are "watered down" just doesn't pass the smell test. How many people who would go to the classic prior to the split with zero attachment are going to be so discerning that they would say "nope" I think West Monroe Zachary is watered down. Or Warren Easton v Karr? I just don't think that dog will hunt. I am a long time reader and first time poster on here. Probably been reading sportsline since its existence and never really weighed in on any conversations. I am a large public school graduate with my kids at a smaller private school. We have had success in football at our smaller school since the split in being able to go deeper in the playoffs (would we have gone as far if not for split -- probably not) We also are not on the recruiting radar as we only are successful every twenty years when a special class comes through the small school. We have been beaten by those special private schools that no one can beat and when I played in high school we were beaten by those big public schools (that don't recruit in some eyes) when we were very good. Some teams do it (public and private), some teams don't. As stated earlier, the split has been good to smaller privates and those publics that would never make a second round game, is it good for all... who knows in the long run... if we do ever come back together then i feel if you are ever caught cheating or recruiting then you must play up in a special optional 6A class for the big dogs and recruiters for 3-5 years. Not a solution, but the punishment should be big enough to discourage the action. Humble Opinion. And thank you to sportsline for years of great reading and power point updates. Welcome to the chaos. Good post but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on the self serving principal run LHSAA to enforce a rule.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 15, 2019 8:55:25 GMT -6
I am a long time reader and first time poster on here. Probably been reading sportsline since its existence and never really weighed in on any conversations. I am a large public school graduate with my kids at a smaller private school. We have had success in football at our smaller school since the split in being able to go deeper in the playoffs (would we have gone as far if not for split -- probably not) We also are not on the recruiting radar as we only are successful every twenty years when a special class comes through the small school. We have been beaten by those special private schools that no one can beat and when I played in high school we were beaten by those big public schools (that don't recruit in some eyes) when we were very good. Some teams do it (public and private), some teams don't. As stated earlier, the split has been good to smaller privates and those publics that would never make a second round game, is it good for all... who knows in the long run... if we do ever come back together then i feel if you are ever caught cheating or recruiting then you must play up in a special optional 6A class for the big dogs and recruiters for 3-5 years. Not a solution, but the punishment should be big enough to discourage the action. Humble Opinion. And thank you to sportsline for years of great reading and power point updates. Welcome to the chaos. Good post but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on the self serving principal run LHSAA to enforce a rule. Indy, you use that term extremely frequently. I have to ask, how exactly are they self-serving? The principals themselves don't really derive benefit from decisions voted on at LHSAA meetings. And if you mean they are only serving their respective schools, I have to ask "isn't that how organizations are designed?" Should the principal of Pine High School be more concerned about what benefits the student athletes at Pine, or the Student athletes at ND, particularly when (as you have pointed out many times) those things can be quite different?
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 15, 2019 9:09:16 GMT -6
Welcome to the chaos. Good post but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on the self serving principal run LHSAA to enforce a rule. Indy, you use that term extremely frequently. I have to ask, how exactly are they self-serving? The principals themselves don't really derive benefit from decisions voted on at LHSAA meetings. And if you mean they are only serving their respective schools, I have to ask "isn't that how organizations are designed?" Should the principal of Pine High School be more concerned about what benefits the student athletes at Pine, or the Student athletes at ND, particularly when (as you have pointed out many times) those things can be quite different? I read the complete email chain started by Norma Booker and and Jane. Believe me, they are self serving.
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 15, 2019 13:39:44 GMT -6
Indy, you use that term extremely frequently. I have to ask, how exactly are they self-serving? The principals themselves don't really derive benefit from decisions voted on at LHSAA meetings. And if you mean they are only serving their respective schools, I have to ask "isn't that how organizations are designed?" Should the principal of Pine High School be more concerned about what benefits the student athletes at Pine, or the Student athletes at ND, particularly when (as you have pointed out many times) those things can be quite different? I read the complete email chain started by Norma Booker and and Jane. Believe me, they are self serving. So believe you ...like believing the executive director of the LHSAA unilaterally pushed JC and ECA down into 2A? Because you said that happened, and that wasn't true. Or like believing that Kenny Henderson was the LHSAA executive director when that happened? Because you said THAT was the case, and that wasn't accurate either. Or most recently when you said 4 out of 5 = 60% Because that isn't correct either But seriously, could you enlighten us a bit as to how this email chain revealed that this principals are serving THEMSELVES and not their schools?
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 15, 2019 13:47:53 GMT -6
I read the complete email chain started by Norma Booker and and Jane. Believe me, they are self serving. So believe you ...like believing the executive director of the LHSAA unilaterally pushed JC and ECA down into 2A? Because you said that happened, and that wasn't true. Or like believing that Kenny Henderson was the LHSAA executive director when that happened? Because you said THAT was the case, and that wasn't accurate either. Or most recently when you said 4 out of 5 = 60% Because that isn't correct either But seriously, could you enlighten us a bit as to how this email chain revealed that this principals are serving THEMSELVES and not their schools? I have said it numerous times so Look through old threads. Also a sportswriter from the lafayette advertiser posted a lot of it on a blog. He got it through the FOIA. Good luck
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 15, 2019 13:55:21 GMT -6
So believe you ...like believing the executive director of the LHSAA unilaterally pushed JC and ECA down into 2A? Because you said that happened, and that wasn't true. Or like believing that Kenny Henderson was the LHSAA executive director when that happened? Because you said THAT was the case, and that wasn't accurate either. Or most recently when you said 4 out of 5 = 60% Because that isn't correct either But seriously, could you enlighten us a bit as to how this email chain revealed that this principals are serving THEMSELVES and not their schools? I have said it numerous times so Look through old threads. Also a sportswriter from the lafayette advertiser posted a lot of it on a blog. He got it through the FOIA. Good luck Point me to it please? You say many things numerous times, and as I just pointed out, unfortunately they are not always accurate or factual. I know the email exists, and I am sure it isn't terribly flattering. But I am trying to figure out how many different principals out of the 100s that represent schools in the LHSAA are shown there, and what comments are made that support statements such as the ones you constantly make (that insinuate the majority of principals are self serving in some manner)
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jul 15, 2019 14:09:21 GMT -6
I have said it numerous times so Look through old threads. Also a sportswriter from the lafayette advertiser posted a lot of it on a blog. He got it through the FOIA. Good luck Point me to it please? You say many things numerous times, and as I just pointed out, unfortunately they are not always accurate or factual. I know the email exists, and I am sure it isn't terribly flattering. But I am trying to figure out how many different principals out of the 100s that represent schools in the LHSAA are shown there, and what comments are made that support statements such as the ones you constantly make (that insinuate the majority of principals are self serving in some manner) Point you? I have like 5000 post. Good luck. It wasn’t flattering. It vulgar, filled with hate and animosity. It was a planned conspiracy filled with talking points and answers for potential questions. I do tip my hat on their success.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 15, 2019 14:58:35 GMT -6
Welcome to the chaos. Good post but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on the self serving principal run LHSAA to enforce a rule. Indy, you use that term extremely frequently. I have to ask, how exactly are they self-serving? The principals themselves don't really derive benefit from decisions voted on at LHSAA meetings. And if you mean they are only serving their respective schools, I have to ask "isn't that how organizations are designed?" Should the principal of Pine High School be more concerned about what benefits the student athletes at Pine, or the Student athletes at ND, particularly when (as you have pointed out many times) those things can be quite different? the problem is they all have an equal voice and vote in the organization when their schools are not equal
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 15, 2019 16:26:04 GMT -6
Indy, you use that term extremely frequently. I have to ask, how exactly are they self-serving? The principals themselves don't really derive benefit from decisions voted on at LHSAA meetings. And if you mean they are only serving their respective schools, I have to ask "isn't that how organizations are designed?" Should the principal of Pine High School be more concerned about what benefits the student athletes at Pine, or the Student athletes at ND, particularly when (as you have pointed out many times) those things can be quite different? the problem is they all have an equal voice and vote in the organization when their schools are not equal How are they not equal?
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jul 15, 2019 17:01:31 GMT -6
the problem is they all have an equal voice and vote in the organization when their schools are not equal How are they not equal? some have 2,000 students, some have 20. Some draw 10,000 fans for a football game, some don't draw any. Literally. Some win state every year, others don't win a game. And at the convention, the interests of a system like Sabine Parish, with 7 schools who could easily consolidate like other parishes in that area have, are taken more seriously than systems where you have one bigger school and therefore one vote. Principals have bosses
|
|
|
Post by retired on Jul 15, 2019 18:05:18 GMT -6
some have 2,000 students, some have 20. Some draw 10,000 fans for a football game, some don't draw any. Literally. Some win state every year, others don't win a game. And at the convention, the interests of a system like Sabine Parish, with 7 schools who could easily consolidate like other parishes in that area have, are taken more seriously than systems where you have one bigger school and therefore one vote. Principals have bosses But the schools themselves are still equal. If you are saying that schools that exist in larger district can manipulate voting numbers and vote as a block because they all fall under the leadership of one Super... I can buy that as a true statement. Not sure how much of an impact it has, but it is a true statement.
|
|