State (Team) predictions, Division 1

Supertramp

Active member
Really it kind of seems like the post should read "6 of the last 8 trophies in boys D1 have gone to Mason and St. X." Who absolutely been amazing in XC.
Yes. A great example of iron sharpening iron. Two programs with excellent coaches, hard working young men, unrivaled fantastic culture, and the results to prove it.
 
Last edited:

mathking

Well-known member
Yes. A great example of iron sharpening iron. Two programs with excellent coaches, hard working young men, unrivaled culture, and the results to prove it.
I am torn because I think both programs are great and they help each other with the the sustained competition level. But I get uncomfortable with terms like unrivaled culture. Take a school like Hilliard Davidson. (Full disclosure, they are the closest HS to Dublin Coffman outside of our district, and our big rival.) They have an excellent running culture and have had a ton of objective success. Including this year's individual winner for boys and the runner up position for the girls team. I do honestly think their culture rivals that of Mason and St. X. But Mason is almost twice the size of Davidson, and St. X is almost as big as Davidson with only boys. But if Davidson were double its size they would probably have a lot more state titles than they do now. Think about some of the good Davidson teams in years when Darby had some excellent runners. Or look at the Minster girls program and their success level. How many consecutive years of top 10 in the state finishes? Or Woodridge boys and girls. I think you would have to work hard to convince me that their culture doesn't rival the culture at Mason or St. X. None of this means I have anything but the highest regard for both the Mason and St. X athletic programs and coaching staffs.
 

Supertramp

Active member
I am torn because I think both programs are great and they help each other with the the sustained competition level. But I get uncomfortable with terms like unrivaled culture. Take a school like Hilliard Davidson. (Full disclosure, they are the closest HS to Dublin Coffman outside of our district, and our big rival.) They have an excellent running culture and have had a ton of objective success. Including this year's individual winner for boys and the runner up position for the girls team. I do honestly think their culture rivals that of Mason and St. X. But Mason is almost twice the size of Davidson, and St. X is almost as big as Davidson with only boys. But if Davidson were double its size they would probably have a lot more state titles than they do now. Think about some of the good Davidson teams in years when Darby had some excellent runners. Or look at the Minster girls program and their success level. How many consecutive years of top 10 in the state finishes? Or Woodridge boys and girls. I think you would have to work hard to convince me that their culture doesn't rival the culture at Mason or St. X. None of this means I have anything but the highest regard for both the Mason and St. X athletic programs and coaching staffs.
“Unrivaled” was an overstatement, they have an excellent culture as do many other great programs in the state.
 

mathking

Well-known member
“Unrivaled” was an overstatement, they have an excellent culture as do many other great programs in the state.
I think "unsurpassed" is a fine descriptor. Sorry if that came off as attacking you. I spent a little too much time yesterday at the meet with some SW Ohio friends and their friends, who spent a lot of time telling me that Mason and St. X obviously have the best coaching staffs in the state. [Note: None of these folks were actually Mason or St. X fans.] When I pushed back a little (I used the Hilliard Davidson example) I got variations on "If they were as good they'd win at least half the time." It really hurt when they asked me when the last time a team from the central was on the podium.
 

JAVMAN83

Well-known member
Congratulations to all who participated in their respective State meet this weekend. This is an honor that MOST HS athletes never get to experience.
 

Supertramp

Active member
I think "unsurpassed" is a fine descriptor. Sorry if that came off as attacking you. I spent a little too much time yesterday at the meet with some SW Ohio friends and their friends, who spent a lot of time telling me that Mason and St. X obviously have the best coaching staffs in the state. [Note: None of these folks were actually Mason or St. X fans.] When I pushed back a little (I used the Hilliard Davidson example) I got variations on "If they were as good they'd win at least half the time." It really hurt when they asked me when the last time a team from the central was on the podium.
Yeah, that's not fair, and there was a D1 team from the Central region on the podium the last two years (Hil. Davidson Girls 2022, Dub. Coffman boys 2021).

I think some of the best, if not the best, coaching staffs are probably at the D2 and D3 ranks. Minster, Woodridge, Marlington, etc., all come to mind.

There are a multitude of factors at play. By far the biggest is the young men and women actually training and racing.
 

yj_runfan

Well-known member
I am torn because I think both programs are great and they help each other with the the sustained competition level. But I get uncomfortable with terms like unrivaled culture. Take a school like Hilliard Davidson. (Full disclosure, they are the closest HS to Dublin Coffman outside of our district, and our big rival.) They have an excellent running culture and have had a ton of objective success. Including this year's individual winner for boys and the runner up position for the girls team. I do honestly think their culture rivals that of Mason and St. X. But Mason is almost twice the size of Davidson, and St. X is almost as big as Davidson with only boys. But if Davidson were double its size they would probably have a lot more state titles than they do now. Think about some of the good Davidson teams in years when Darby had some excellent runners. Or look at the Minster girls program and their success level. How many consecutive years of top 10 in the state finishes? Or Woodridge boys and girls. I think you would have to work hard to convince me that their culture doesn't rival the culture at Mason or St. X. None of this means I have anything but the highest regard for both the Mason and St. X athletic programs and coaching staffs.
The flip side of the story is people blowing off Mason’s coaching pedigree to having the largest student body in the state to work with. A little history lesson on their girls coach puts that misguided notion to rest.
 

JAVMAN83

Well-known member
The flip side of the story is people blowing off Mason’s coaching pedigree to having the largest student body in the state to work with. A little history lesson on their girls coach puts that misguided notion to rest.
I can confirm that information. His body of work speaks for itself, and Mason girls' XC history prior to his arrival confirms it.
 

VFL

Member
So what we have solved in this post is that a good coach at the biggest school will dominate?
Or stop all the complaining about big schools vs smaller schools every season and get it changed! The OHSAA is ONLY going to change things when the media make it an issue OF INEQUALITY for these smaller schools. They don’t want bad press.
 

mathking

Well-known member
A large school size is absolutely not sufficient for success. Coaching is absolutely important.

Here on Yappi, how many people really argue that Mason or St. X or Centerville are successful only because they are big? Because I have seen quite a few posts arguing that coaching is much more important than school size and then tipping over into "there coaches are obviously just better than all the rest of the coaches" rhetoric. Usually starting with something like "Louisville won a title" and that proves size doesn't matter.

I don't actually believe that coaching or school size are the most important ingredients for success. Nor is public versus private. I think it is economic resources and administrative support.

A good coach at a large school should consistently have solid teams. There will be periods of time when the teams are better than in others. That doesn't mean they will dominate.

This argument typically devolves into subtle and not so subtle jibes trying to over-simplify the points being and implying that other coaches are just jealous of the success and expressing sour grapes or are only successful because they have so many kids on their teams. If you think school size isn't really that important, consider this question: What if the suburban districts around Columbus were all single high school districts. Many of those schools would be much larger than Mason. Would Mason and St. X have won as many titles if they were running against Hilliard HS, Dublin HS, Olentangy HS, Worthington HS and Westerville HS? I think the answer is pretty clearly no.

And for the record, some of us have been working and pushing for another division for track. We really aren't that close to being able to get one for XC. And it won't really change this argument because this isn't an argument about being more fair in a competitive sense. It is about not being insulting.
 

JAVMAN83

Well-known member
So what we have solved in this post is that a good coach at the biggest school will dominate?
Yes, more times than not, yes. I think college football is a perfect example. The biggest programs hire the biggest successful coaches. Success begets success. Alabama, the Bucks, etc., etc., all reload until a coaching situation develops that ends with non-success. Nebraska is a prime example of what happens when a previously dominant program under several very successful coaches, hires coaches that fail to be successful. Pro Football is the same.

In the track world, I can point to the recent news that Olympic/World Champion 800m runner Athing Mu has left Texas to now be coached by legendary Bob Kersee...proven maker of champions & world-record holders.
 

CC Track Fan

Well-known member
Or stop all the complaining about big schools vs smaller schools every season and get it changed! The OHSAA is ONLY going to change things when the media make it an issue OF INEQUALITY for these smaller schools. They don’t want bad press.
Unless D1 is only 10-20 schools Mason will always have a huge number of students advantage over most other schools in the division. Plus with the declining number of schools able to get 5 to finish line at districts a 4th division will never happen.
 

Lancermania

Lancers lead the way!
You guys are putting too much importance on size of the school. A school district near mason is Fairfield which has 2240 students, so may 1100+ girls in the school with the same demographics as Mason. Has Fairfield's girls team ever qualified to the state meet? Have they ever even qualified to the regional. They have been 11th, 10th, and 9th at the last three district meet scoring in the 280s range.
 

mathking

Well-known member
You guys are putting too much importance on size of the school. A school district near mason is Fairfield which has 2240 students, so may 1100+ girls in the school with the same demographics as Mason. Has Fairfield's girls team ever qualified to the state meet? Have they ever even qualified to the regional. They have been 11th, 10th, and 9th at the last three district meet scoring in the 280s range.
No one is arguing that school size is the only factor, in fact just the opposite in this thread. There are a lot of factors. Good coaching and strong middle school programs and supportive administrations and places to run and kids who have transportation so they can stay after school all matter a lot. But there is actually a fair amount of “the Mason and St. X coaches are just better than other coaches“ (directly and indirectly) thrown around Yappi. Not to mention the “the southwest is just a lot better at distance running than the rest of Ohio” comments. Here is the central point, if you compare suburban schools with similar-ish demographics and resources, with at least competent coaching, then school size clearly matters quite bit. And you only have to look at the race results from D1 this weekend to see that.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
I'm sure there are challenges to being a huge school. Managing that many kids and assistant coaches. Developing that 35th kid or 61st. However, not bad problems to have. Mason and $t. X are not some underdogs overcoming adversities. They should be exactly where they are and as successful as they are.

Just a little perspective. Mason gets a decades worth of kids every year compared to a Rootstown. Larry Bailey's all decade team at Rootstown would be rather impressive. Give him those numbers every year and the championships would just stack one on top of the other. However, is his success at a small school because he can give kids more individual attention and that would get lost at a Mason? In Track and Field, he develops every event. If he has a potential 40' thrower, the kid throws 56'.

Sometimes a 3rd place finish or an 11th place finish is a great coaching job and sometimes maybe even better than what got on podium.
 
Last edited:

runs4funs

Active member
I still think the biggest factor is getting kids into the program, and coaching and culture are a big part of that. I looked at the varsity and open race at the GMC league meet, here's how Mason compared to the two Lakota schools:

Mason - 73 runners
West - 37 runners
East - 26 runners

Mason is not twice the size of those schools, but they have twice as many runners. Mason for whatever reason appears to be more effective than other large schools at getting kids interested in running cross country. The more kids you can get into the program, the more successful you're likely to be.
 
A lot of bickering over nonsensical things. Why don't we just enjoy the effort the kids put in this weekend and appreciate the great coaching all over the state. If you're a coach just focus on getting your kids better, if you're a parent or athlete just focus on your team keep your head down and keep getting better.
 

Percidae

Active member
No one is arguing that school size is the only factor, in fact just the opposite in this thread. There are a lot of factors. Good coaching and strong middle school programs and supportive administrations and places to run and kids who have transportation so they can stay after school all matter a lot. But there is actually a fair amount of “the Mason and St. X coaches are just better than other coaches“ (directly and indirectly) thrown around Yappi. Not to mention the “the southwest is just a lot better at distance running than the rest of Ohio” comments. Here is the central point, if you compare suburban schools with similar-ish demographics and resources, with at least competent coaching, then school size clearly matters quite bit. And you only have to look at the race results from D1 this weekend to see that.

From Newton's list throwing out streaks of "1" because I don't see that as a streak. Southwest Ohio teams as I have identified them are in bold and represent 8 out of 34 teams that have a streak of 2 or more visits to State. So, you could argue that Southwest Ohio has a fair share of representation at the state meet but I don't see a case where they are dominant. They seem to have an edge at the D1 level which makes sense because of the school size issue. But D2-D3 where the size factor is taken out of the equation shows that SWO performs quite poorly on average with only 3 representatives out of 22 streaking teams in D2-D3.

Division 1 Boys active streaks of top 10 finishes Dublin Coffman=2, Lancaster=2, Massillon Jackson=2, Mason=6, Hilliard Davidson=7, St. Xavier=14

Division 2 Boys active streaks of top 10 finishes Oakwood=2, Marlington=3, Carroll=4, Unioto=6, Woodridge=8

Division 3 Boys active streaks of top 10 finishes Black River=2, Botkins=2, Ottawa Hills=2, Columbus Grove=3, Mt. Gilead=7

Division 1 Girls active streaks of top 10 finishes Loveland=2, Shaker Heights=3, Perrysburg=3, Mason=5, Hilliard Davidson=6, Beavercreek=6

Division 2 Girls active streaks of top 10 finishes Salem=2, Waynesville=3, Minerva=3, Woodridge=4, Lexington=11, Granville=14

Division 3 Girls active streaks of top 10 finishes Madeira=2, Colonel Crawford=3, Liberty Center=5, Fort Loramie=6, West Liberty Salem=6, Minster=23
 
A large school size is absolutely not sufficient for success. Coaching is absolutely important.

Here on Yappi, how many people really argue that Mason or St. X or Centerville are successful only because they are big? Because I have seen quite a few posts arguing that coaching is much more important than school size and then tipping over into "there coaches are obviously just better than all the rest of the coaches" rhetoric. Usually starting with something like "Louisville won a title" and that proves size doesn't matter.

I don't actually believe that coaching or school size are the most important ingredients for success. Nor is public versus private. I think it is economic resources and administrative support.

A good coach at a large school should consistently have solid teams. There will be periods of time when the teams are better than in others. That doesn't mean they will dominate.

This argument typically devolves into subtle and not so subtle jibes trying to over-simplify the points being and implying that other coaches are just jealous of the success and expressing sour grapes or are only successful because they have so many kids on their teams. If you think school size isn't really that important, consider this question: What if the suburban districts around Columbus were all single high school districts. Many of those schools would be much larger than Mason. Would Mason and St. X have won as many titles if they were running against Hilliard HS, Dublin HS, Olentangy HS, Worthington HS and Westerville HS? I think the answer is pretty clearly no.

And for the record, some of us have been working and pushing for another division for track. We really aren't that close to being able to get one for XC. And it won't really change this argument because this isn't an argument about being more fair in a competitive sense. It is about not being insulting.
You got me thinking, Mathking. How would you feel about having Sam Richuitti, Weston Day, and Josh Razor (all Dublin kids) lining up along with Liam and Will this year? The answer... you would've crushed Mason and brought home a title. Here are my estimates of your hypothetical combined schools (Hilliard HS, Dublin HS, etc.) results in boys D1 over the last several years:

2022:
1 - Dublin 62 (Ruchuitti, Shaughnessey, Day, Razor, McGraw)
2 - Masillon 96 (Reed, Zuckett, Hill, Ilg, Ball)
3 - Mason 138
4 - St. X 151

2021:
1 - Mason 144 (adjusted due to individuals now scoring as team, wins tie break with Dublin)
2 - Dublin 144 (Shaughnessey, Frank, McGraw, Richuitti, Clemens)
3 - Massilon 148 (Reed, Zuckett, Woods, Prato, Ilg)
7 - St. X 198

2020:
1 - L. West 76 (adjusted)
2 - St X 78 (adjusted)
3 - Hilliard 138 (Davidson top 4 plus Darby's Sean Carney)
4 - Dublin 198 (Richuitti, Shaughnessey, Razor, McGraw, Frank)
11 - Mason 279

2019:
1 - St X 97 (adjusted)
2 - Mason 104
3 - Worthington 221 (TW top three plus #7 Williams and #40 Cuozzo from Kilbourne) - wins tiebreak
4 - Solon 221

2018:
No real changes... Davidson still 2nd behind Hudson

2017:
1 - Pickerington 71 (Pick North's top three, plus #3 finisher Scrape and #40 Johnson from Pick Central)
2 - Hudson 80

So yeah, looking at things this way is really interesting. We'd be talking a Dublin dynasty in the making, and one of the best ever in the 2022 squad.
 
Last edited:

mathking

Well-known member
You got me thinking, Mathking. How would you feel about having Sam Richuitti, Weston Day, and Josh Razor (all Dublin kids) lining up along with Liam and Will this year? The answer... you would've crushed Mason and brought home a title. Here are my estimates of your hypothetical combined schools (Hilliard HS, Dublin HS, etc.) results in boys D1 over the last several years:

2022:
1 - Dublin 62 (Ruchuitti, Shaughnessey, Day, Razor, McGraw
2 - Masillon 96 (Reed, Zuckett, Hill, Ilg, Ball)
3 - Mason 138
4 - St. X 151

2021:
1 - Mason 144 (adjusted due to individuals now scoring as team, wins tie break with Dublin)
2 - Dublin 144 (Shaughnessey, Frank, McGraw, Richuitti, Clemens)
3 - Massilon 148 (Reed, Zuckett, Woods, Prato, Ilg)
7 - St. X 198

2020:
1 - L. West 76 (adjusted)
2 - St X 78 (adjusted)
3 - Hilliard 138 (Davidson top 4 plus Darby's Sean Carney)
4 - Dublin 198 (Richuitti, Shaughnessey, Razor, McGraw, Frank)
11 - Mason 279

2019:
1 - St X 97 (adjusted)
2 - Mason 104
3 - Worthington 221 (TW top three plus #7 Williams and #40 Cuozzo from Kilbourne) - wins tiebreak
4 - Solon 221

2018:
No real changes... Davidson still 2nd behind Hudson

2017:
1 - Pickerington 71 (Pick North's top three, plus #3 finisher Scrape and #40 Johnson from Pick Central)
2 - Hudson 80

So yeah, looking at things this way is really interesting. We'd be talking a Dublin dynasty in the making, and one of the best ever in the 2022 squad.
This highlights why I am happy that we don't have one high school in Dublin. And why they don't in Hilliard or Olentangy. Which All-OCC/All-District kids don't get to even run in the post season? (By the way, I am pretty sure we'd have talked Sam R into not playing the soccer game before the state meet in 2021 and would have comfortably won the meet.)

If you want to talk great team, add a couple of those PN guys to the 2019 Pick Central track team. Remember the absolutely epic St. X team in 2013? Consider that Brad Davis would have been the #5 or #6 guy on a combined Dublin team that year. St. X may well still have won, but it would have been a race. Particularly since guys would have had to run a lot faster just to be on varsity.
 
Last edited:

Supertramp

Active member
I still think the biggest factor is getting kids into the program, and coaching and culture are a big part of that. I looked at the varsity and open race at the GMC league meet, here's how Mason compared to the two Lakota schools:

Mason - 73 runners
West - 37 runners
East - 26 runners

Mason is not twice the size of those schools, but they have twice as many runners. Mason for whatever reason appears to be more effective than other large schools at getting kids interested in running cross country. The more kids you can get into the program, the more successful you're likely to be.
St. Xavier had 119 runners, according to MileSplit this year.

I heard once that St. Xavier requires all their freshmen to do some sort of sport or club, but I'm not sure that is true.
 

XCFan98

Member
Numbers of the largest schools from what I could find:
Mason - 3492 - place 1st / 1st
Centerville - 2712 - place 15th / 14th
Mentor - 2664 - 16th / dnp
Lakota West - 2564 - 7th / dnp
Hamilton - 2518 dnp / dnp
Lakota East - 2426 - dnp / dnp
Kettering Fairmont - 2401 - dnp / dnp
Oak Hills - 2282 - dnp / dnp
Fairfield - 2216 - dnp / dnp
Brunswick - 2164 - dnp / dnp
Hilliard - 2nd / 5th
St. Xavier -2nd
Westlake 3rd / dnp
Perrysburg 4th / dnp
Lancaster - 3rd / dnp
Coffman - 4th / dnp
Miamisburg - 6th / dnp
Medina - 10th / 10th
 

Mr. Slippery

Well-known member
This highlights why I am happy that we don't have one high school in Dublin. And why they don't in Hilliard or Olentangy. Which All-OCC/All-District kids don't get to even run in the post season? (By the way, I am pretty sure we'd have talked Sam R into not playing the soccer game before the state meet in 2021 and would have comfortably won the meet.)

If you want to talk great team, add a couple of those PN guys to the 2019 Pick Central track team. Remember the absolutely epic St. X team in 2013? Consider that Brad Davis would have been the #5 or #6 guy on a combined Dublin team that year. St. X may well still have won, but it would have been a race. Particularly since guys would have had to run a lot faster just to be on varsity.
May require some digging up of an old school district map, but what would this year's Coffman roster look like if Jerome wasn't built? I assume there might be kids on the current Coffman team who'd be at Scioto under the old 2 HS configuration.

I've often wondered how dominant Dublin, Hilliard, and Westerville would be across a variety of sports if they had simply remained at 2 HSs. It's amazing to think that Davidson's 2nd football title came right after Bradley opened, but I know the upperclassmen in Bradley's attendance area were allowed to finish at their previous HS if they wished. Olentangy is a different situation in my eyes because the district encompasses multiple townships where the extra HSs that have been built are still taking in a lot of territory.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Slippery

Well-known member
You got me thinking, Mathking. How would you feel about having Sam Richuitti, Weston Day, and Josh Razor (all Dublin kids) lining up along with Liam and Will this year? The answer... you would've crushed Mason and brought home a title. Here are my estimates of your hypothetical combined schools (Hilliard HS, Dublin HS, etc.) results in boys D1 over the last several years:

2022:
1 - Dublin 62 (Ruchuitti, Shaughnessey, Day, Razor, McGraw)
2 - Masillon 96 (Reed, Zuckett, Hill, Ilg, Ball)
3 - Mason 138
4 - St. X 151

2021:
1 - Mason 144 (adjusted due to individuals now scoring as team, wins tie break with Dublin)
2 - Dublin 144 (Shaughnessey, Frank, McGraw, Richuitti, Clemens)
3 - Massilon 148 (Reed, Zuckett, Woods, Prato, Ilg)
7 - St. X 198

2020:
1 - L. West 76 (adjusted)
2 - St X 78 (adjusted)
3 - Hilliard 138 (Davidson top 4 plus Darby's Sean Carney)
4 - Dublin 198 (Richuitti, Shaughnessey, Razor, McGraw, Frank)
11 - Mason 279

2019:
1 - St X 97 (adjusted)
2 - Mason 104
3 - Worthington 221 (TW top three plus #7 Williams and #40 Cuozzo from Kilbourne) - wins tiebreak
4 - Solon 221

2018:
No real changes... Davidson still 2nd behind Hudson

2017:
1 - Pickerington 71 (Pick North's top three, plus #3 finisher Scrape and #40 Johnson from Pick Central)
2 - Hudson 80

So yeah, looking at things this way is really interesting. We'd be talking a Dublin dynasty in the making, and one of the best ever in the 2022 squad.
Somewhat apples to oranges here since the Dublin schools, Hilliard schools, etc. are of the same school district. Perry and Jackson are their own townships with their own school districts.

Massillon Washington is the school most commonly associated with Massillon. They're the "football school" that simply goes by Massillon. The town's running culture leaves a lot to be desired even though there are places to do it safely. From personal experience, I can say that if you go for a run in Massillon, you're more likely to be heckled by anyone who says anything to you. If you go for a run in Jackson Twp, you're more likely to be given some words of encouragement or admiration by anyone who says anything to you. If you go for a run in Perry Twp, it's a mixed bag. If you go for a run in Tuslaw, someone will "roll coal" on you if you get far enough out of the city.

Perry is the township to the east. It's primarily blue collar, and the HS is best known for wrestling and softball. The XC team is not blessed with huge numbers compared to league foes like Jackson, GlenOak, and Hoover, but the kids work hard, and they've had a few good classes come up from MS lately. Perry is an open enrollment district, but they may have a surplus of OE applicants.

Jackson is the township to the north that does well in basically every sport except football (and they're not bad at football either). Collectively, they have the best girls sports programs in the area, and their boys have a pair of state titles in both basketball and baseball since 2010. Jackson Twp. is thought of as being wealthy. Most Jackson Twp. residents are doing well, but there are plenty of people in the suburbs of the 3 Cs who would be devastated if their net worth was at the level of the avg. Jackson Twp. resident. However, with that wealth comes a certain level of expectation and impatience from the parents which can make the job more difficult than most can imagine. Jackson has terrific numbers at both the JH and HS level to keep that program operating at a high level. Honestly, I have no idea how the coaching staff manages such a large team. Jackson is a closed enrollment district.

To the west of Massillon is Tuslaw (combination of Lawrence Twp. and Tuscarawas Twp.) which is vastly more rural than the other districts that have a Massillon mailing address. Tuslaw's talent cycles are similar to other public schools of their size, but they have established some consistently competitive programs such as wrestling, and the girls' sports of softball (D3 state runner-up last spring), volleyball, and basketball. Tuslaw is open enrollment but also might not accept all who apply for OE.

There are many residents whose houses are in the city of Massillon but not in the school district. Perry probably has the largest number of said residents.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
Somewhat apples to oranges here since the Dublin schools, Hilliard schools, etc. are of the same school district. Perry and Jackson are their own townships with their own school districts.

Massillon Washington is the school most commonly associated with Massillon. They're the "football school" that simply goes by Massillon. The town's running culture leaves a lot to be desired even though there are places to do it safely. From personal experience, I can say that if you go for a run in Massillon, you're more likely to be heckled by anyone who says anything to you. If you go for a run in Jackson Twp, you're more likely to be given some words of encouragement or admiration by anyone who says anything to you. If you go for a run in Perry Twp, it's a mixed bag. If you go for a run in Tuslaw, someone will "roll coal" on you if you get far enough out of the city.

Perry is the township to the east. It's primarily blue collar, and the HS is best known for wrestling and softball. The XC team is not blessed with huge numbers compared to league foes like Jackson, GlenOak, and Hoover, but the kids work hard, and they've had a few good classes come up from MS lately. Perry is an open enrollment district, but they may have a surplus of OE applicants.

Jackson is the township to the north that does well in basically every sport except football (and they're not bad at football either). Collectively, they have the best girls sports programs in the area, and their boys have a pair of state titles in both basketball and baseball since 2010. Jackson Twp. is thought of as being wealthy. Most Jackson Twp. residents are doing well, but there are plenty of people in the suburbs of the 3 Cs who would be devastated if their net worth was at the level of the avg. Jackson Twp. resident. However, with that wealth comes a certain level of expectation and impatience from the parents which can make the job more difficult than most can imagine. Jackson has terrific numbers at both the JH and HS level to keep that program operating at a high level. Honestly, I have no idea how the coaching staff manages such a large team. Jackson is a closed enrollment district.

To the west of Massillon is Tuslaw (combination of Lawrence Twp. and Tuscarawas Twp.) which is vastly more rural than the other districts that have a Massillon mailing address. Tuslaw's talent cycles are similar to other public schools of their size, but they have established some consistently competitive programs such as wrestling, and the girls' sports of softball (D3 state runner-up last spring), volleyball, and basketball. Tuslaw is open enrollment but also might not accept all who apply for OE.

There are many residents whose houses are in the city of Massillon but not in the school district. Perry probably has the largest number of said residents.
Don't know why you are wasting your time on this, when you should be wasting your time figuring out how many podium appearances each region / district has had over the years so we can determine that NE Ohio has dominated CC since the beginning of time.
 
.
Top