Public vs. Private

BGSUGrad

Member
It never ceases to amaze me the number of people on this board (comprising mostly old local fans) can't see the forest for the trees.

You do realize that most school administrators - you know, the people that run the schools - don't even THINK about issues like this? Outside of maybe a few ADs and coaches (and a lot of sad old dads), nobody really cares. The school administrators are worried about educating students and their state testing/scoring data. They worry about enrollment (not from an athletic standpoint) and teachers and guidance and college admissions and things that are actually important to the education of high school kids. The kids that don't play don't care at all. The kids that play care about playing and care barely more. Do you really think a kid looks across the court at their opponent and thinks its not fair that we have to play those guys - we should be playing a closed enrollment school instead?

Seriously, you have no idea how ridiculous you sound.
Hmm don't get called old often and I am not even sure who I am a fan of?
What I would say is, yes, the top priority of a school should be educating kids! For all I care we can go full European model and have only club sports not associated with the school.
BUT if the state is going to offer sports for schools and there are going to be multiple divisions, then there needs to be a way to place schools in said divisions. I have just been spitballing ideas, because I don't believe enrollment alone is a great system and the current CB seems lacking to me.
When it comes to the kids caring, I am sure they don't, but as the adults in the room we can do try to create tournaments with evenly matched schools.
Additionally, schools may put athletics below academics (which is right), but when a levy is up for renewal will voters be more persuaded by a state championship trophy or by state test scores? Sadly, I think it is the latter. So yes, I do think schools overall care about creating athletics competition that allow the school to be successful - proof the 75 pages of conference shuffling for NWO on this site
 

L Hand

Well-known member
What I would say is, yes, the top priority of a school should be educating kids! For all I care we can go full European model and have only club sports not associated with the school.
Absolute lie. If you truly believed this, you wouldn't be here. And you certainly wouldn't be here day after day posting the long screeds you have.

BUT if the state is going to offer sports for schools and there are going to be multiple divisions, then there needs to be a way to place schools in said divisions. I have just been spitballing ideas, because I don't believe enrollment alone is a great system and the current CB seems lacking to me.
First, as you know, enrollment alone isn't the rule any more. Regardless, no matter what you do, no matter how you do it, certain schools are almost always going to be at the top, and other schools are almost always going to be at the bottom. That will never change. The only thing that changes is the division those schools do it.

When it comes to the kids caring, I am sure they don't, but as the adults in the room we can do try to create tournaments with evenly matched schools.
Another lie. As an adult who is neither involved in a school (in an official manner) or involved in the OHSAA, I have nothing to do with creating tournaments with "evenly" matched schools. And I suspect neither do you. More importantly, you don't even want "evenly matched" schools to play each other in tournaments. If that is what you wanted, you simply would play the season and then split up the teams for the tournament based SOLELY on how they did that year (based upon a computer/formula model - even the Harbins if necessary). You would have the lowest division of teams that didn't win a single game and an upper division of teams that mostly went 10-0 and 9-1. You don't want that - nobody wants that. So don't say that's what you want because it is not!

Additionally, schools may put athletics below academics (which is right), but when a levy is up for renewal will voters be more persuaded by a state championship trophy or by state test scores? Sadly, I think it is the latter. So yes, I do think schools overall care about creating athletics competition that allow the school to be successful - proof the 75 pages of conference shuffling for NWO on this site.
Lie number 3. Don't know of a single parent/taxpayer that votes or doesn't vote for a levy based upon the results of the local public school's sports teams. I suspect you don't either (unless you are one). And if you are, you are a sadder individual than I thought.
 

BGSUGrad

Member
Absolute lie. If you truly believed this, you wouldn't be here. And you certainly wouldn't be here day after day posting the long screeds you have.
Not really, I teach at a school that doesn’t doesn’t even have sports, so no skin off my back if they don’t exist at the school level. I do coach at a school in the community I live in, so really it would be no different for me if sports because community based as opposed to school based.

QUOTE="L Hand, post: 7980245, member: 19081"]
First, as you know, enrollment alone isn't the rule any more. Regardless, no matter what you do, no matter how you do it, certain schools are almost always going to be at the top, and other schools are almost always going to be at the bottom. That will never change. The only thing that changes is the division those schools do it.
[/QUOTE]
Correct, I am well aware that some schools produce better athletic products then other. All I advocated for is a discussion about the ways in which these advantages occur. If it is hard work and solid coaching good for them, if it is through open enrollment or being private and they are collecting kids from huge geographical areas, then I think these advantages have become artificial and that needs to be reflected in their divisional assignment ( yes I know that is what CB is for, I am just not sure it is working across the board)

QUOTE="L Hand, post: 7980245, member: 19081"]
Another lie. As an adult who is neither involved in a school (in an official manner) or involved in the OHSAA, I have nothing to do with creating tournaments with "evenly" matched schools. And I suspect neither do you. More importantly, you don't even want "evenly matched" schools to play each other in tournaments. If that is what you wanted, you simply would play the season and then split up the teams for the tournament based SOLELY on how they did that year (based upon a computer/formula model - even the Harbins if necessary). You would have the lowest division of teams that didn't win a single game and an upper division of teams that mostly went 10-0 and 9-1. You don't want that - nobody wants that. So don't say that's what you want because it is not!
[/QUOTE]
Clearly I didn’t think the yappi posting community was going to change the set up of state tournaments. My comment was regarding us as the adults in the state of Ohio who are clearly passionate about sports. Half of the people on here are directly related to athletic programs or claim to be BFFs with an AD. Who better to spur on change if it was warranted?
I’ll be honest I didn’t really understand the rest of what you said, it sounded exactly like what we do now for HS football in Ohio?

QUOTE="L Hand, post: 7980245, member: 19081"]
Lie number 3. Don't know of a single parent/taxpayer that votes or doesn't vote for a levy based upon the results of the local public school's sports teams. I suspect you don't either (unless you are one). And if you are, you are a sadder individual than I thought.
[/QUOTE]
Let me posse it like this, what are the top ten activities that draw crowds in a community? I speculate that in most places in Ohio, those would be athletic events. So, if a school has one chance to make an impression on the community, install pride and encourage voters to support a levy, it’s at the homecoming game and not the quiz bowl match. And if the school wins that game, the fans have a better experience and are more likely to support the school come election season.
I have no numbers to back this up, but from what I see, the schools with the biggest levy issues and the threat of cutting sports - usually arn’t the ones with winning sports teams.
 

L Hand

Well-known member
Not really, I teach at a school that doesn’t doesn’t even have sports, so no skin off my back if they don’t exist at the school level. I do coach at a school in the community I live in, so really it would be no different for me if sports because community based as opposed to school based.
Not going to go round and round, but you are clearly lying. If you didn't care about high school sports, you wouldn't be here. And sorry, certain schools (public and private) will have advantages - you can try to equalize that (which competitive balance does and which DOESN'T delineate between public and private but addresses the problems directly - both open enrollment and historical success), but you can't eliminate it. And while you are certainly free to create a "loser's bracket" of teams which are bad that get to play each other to determine who is the best of the worst - nobody (including you, but most importantly the kids who play) wants that.

That's really all that needs to be said. Feel free to continue talk yourself into circles and the rest of the board to death, I am done.
 

BGSUGrad

Member
Not going to go round and round, but you are clearly lying. If you didn't care about high school sports, you wouldn't be here. And sorry, certain schools (public and private) will have advantages - you can try to equalize that (which competitive balance does and which DOESN'T delineate between public and private but addresses the problems directly - both open enrollment and historical success), but you can't eliminate it. And while you are certainly free to create a "loser's bracket" of teams which are bad that get to play each other to determine who is the best of the worst - nobody (including you, but most importantly the kids who play) wants that.

That's really all that needs to be said. Feel free to continue talk yourself into circles and the rest of the board to death, I am done.
I have said I love sports and I think playing sports as a youth is great! You learn teamwork, winning and losing and hard work. What I said was, I didn’t care if it was played by schools. Whether kids gets grouped where they live or who they choose to play with, the life lessons will still be the same.
I have said several times that I am aware some schools are better at sports then others, I only take issue with the division they are assigned when that advantage is something that has been manipulated for an advantage. Great coach - awesome, hard working kids - perfect, drawing your student body from a 5 county radius - not so cool.
Also have said that CB does try to address that, just not sure it does the job effectively. And figured a bunch of board football fans in the off season could discuss alternatives.
I have clearly offended your delicate sensibilities, so I will leave to go back to discussing whatever it is you deem worthy. Good day
 

Raylan_Givens

Well-known member
During that crazy run Mooney had 10-15 years ago, heard an alum brag about how they were "standing up" to the bigger schools like Harding & Boardman. Then playoffs came where they played equal sized schools like Hubbard & Field and those teams' moms were fearing for their kids' safety.

Friend group that meets for breakfast (or did in a pervious era), old fart grumbles all the time about his school's team always being terrible. His brother just laughs at him "there's no talent in this town and if there was a parent would be stupid to let their kid play here."

Neither side in this discussion is without blemish. You could change the topic title to "Unions" or "Healthcare" and folks would disagree just as hard.

Frankly, if anyone is upset about the "super team" stuff at some private schools, LeBron James is to thank. His trip to Miami opened Pandora's Box for the "let's play together and get one" crowd. Go to a youth basketball league and you can hear parents, kids, fans talking about it. Doesn't matter public or private.

Y'all can keep arguing about the "fairness" of the rules, but the kids are going to find a way to play together. Might as well just enjoy it.
 

Pickeringtonsports

Active member
We are a public school district with no open enrollment. We will play anyone public or private and expect to win every game. We got smoked by St. X last year in the state championship game because they were better than us not because they are a private school. Our program is highly motivated and working very hard to redeem ourselves.
 

dhsdog06

Well-known member
No, I didn't, I wasn't much of an athlete.... As a freelance sportswriter in the Toledo area, I'm just sick of going to games and seeing private schools win state championships time and time again while playing by a different set of rules and people like you defending their recruiting and resources and pretending that public schools with open enrollment are just as guilty. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of public schools (i.e. Toledo Whitmer) that recruit, but many of them can't compete with the St. Francis de Sales and Central Catholics of the world.
"We're cheating but they get to cheat better."

That's all I heard from this. Whitmer in particular as the biggest school in NW Ohio, who a few years ago had an important player who lived in Michigan (very much against the rules) and who are now about to go to full open enrollment really needs to sack up and just play ball. They have no room to complain.
 

HardCorps

Well-known member
Absolute lie. If you truly believed this, you wouldn't be here. And you certainly wouldn't be here day after day posting the long screeds you have.


First, as you know, enrollment alone isn't the rule any more. Regardless, no matter what you do, no matter how you do it, certain schools are almost always going to be at the top, and other schools are almost always going to be at the bottom. That will never change. The only thing that changes is the division those schools do it.


Another lie. As an adult who is neither involved in a school (in an official manner) or involved in the OHSAA, I have nothing to do with creating tournaments with "evenly" matched schools. And I suspect neither do you. More importantly, you don't even want "evenly matched" schools to play each other in tournaments. If that is what you wanted, you simply would play the season and then split up the teams for the tournament based SOLELY on how they did that year (based upon a computer/formula model - even the Harbins if necessary). You would have the lowest division of teams that didn't win a single game and an upper division of teams that mostly went 10-0 and 9-1. You don't want that - nobody wants that. So don't say that's what you want because it is not!



Lie number 3. Don't know of a single parent/taxpayer that votes or doesn't vote for a levy based upon the results of the local public school's sports teams. I suspect you don't either (unless you are one). And if you are, you are a sadder individual than I thought.
lol Bwahaha
 

ayCC!

Active member
"We're cheating but they get to cheat better."

That's all I heard from this. Whitmer in particular as the biggest school in NW Ohio, who a few years ago had an important player who lived in Michigan (very much against the rules) and who are now about to go to full open enrollment really needs to sack up and just play ball. They have no room to complain.
The school district has a rule that allows children of district employees to go to WLS district schools. It’s been used with other kids, not just the player you’re describing here. Totally legal.
 

CCHS93

Active member
The school district has a rule that allows children of district employees to go to WLS district schools. It’s been used with other kids, not just the player you’re describing here. Totally legal.
Keller, yes. Holly twins, no.
 
We are a public school district with no open enrollment. We will play anyone public or private and expect to win every game. We got smoked by St. X last year in the state championship game because they were better than us not because they are a private school. Our program is highly motivated and working very hard to redeem ourselves.
You can't pretend Pickerington is your average local team playing with local home grown kids. A lot of move ins along the way. Not saying its recruiting but any legit prospect in Central Ohio knows that Pickerington is the place to be for big time high school sports. Success does the recruiting for you....just as is the case with many privates
 

The Dock

Well-known member
You can't pretend Pickerington is your average local team playing with local home grown kids. A lot of move ins along the way. Not saying its recruiting but any legit prospect in Central Ohio knows that Pickerington is the place to be for big time high school sports. Success does the recruiting for you....just as is the case with many privates
O RLY? So if one kid moves in that negates the impact of successful PYAA programs and the fact all of the NFL talent the city has claim to lived in the district the entire time?

Central is pretty close to your nonstandard definition of “average local team” anyhow. North? Nah.
 

State2013

Member
Sitting on the outside of the private high school view. I can't really say how they fully operate but I think our friend from Warren JFK has a point, and one that we should all think is justified. Catholic/Private schools often have to recruit students to keep their doors open, but we can't deny that they often give a better quality education. Catholics were the first group to really open education to the public hundreds of years ago. So yes they do recruit and a lot of times those people are good athletes, but can we really blame them? If your kid went to a failing school district such as Dayton Public Schools and was having a tough time in school and you received a voucher to get significantly cheaper private education that was better at say a Dayton Chaminade, wouldn't you want your kid to go there even though they are a stud athlete? Quality of education should be allowed to be chosen no matter if you're a good athlete or not. Free public education isn't always better. I live in Marion School District and it is a top notch, possibly top 20 district in Ohio for test scores. The district works hard to keep it that way and keep their reputation high to attract families, but sadly a lot of public districts aren't like that in bigger cities. It's a little different, but I found in college that after starting at a public university, I got a better education at a private school when I transferred. We find a lot of good athletes that were in failing school districts transfer to Catholic schools and flourish. If we want public schools to catch up to the privates then we need to change public education to make it better and change up failing districts. Improve to where they take pride in what they do and uphold values. Indirectly then that will close the athletic gap. So as a public school homer I can't say I would support splitting up Catholic and private because a lot of Catholic schools are set up in failing public school districts. If the schools were good I guarantee parents wouldn't spend a penny to send their kids to a Catholic school, then the public schools would win all the time.
 
.
Top