This is post #145 and not a single NEW idea has surfaced.....
No new idea has been offered since 1972.
This is post #145 and not a single NEW idea has surfaced.....
Which I am aware of, thus my leaving the word “whole” out of my sentence.Vouchers do not cover the whole cost.
And the football and basketball teams at those schools are far blacker than the general student population. Post your crap on the yappi wokie threadIggy, Ed's, and Hoban beg to differ. Those schools are located in extremely diverse parts of Cleveland and Akron yet are far whiter than even the cities as a whole.
If you don't think private schools and many "local" schools were founded and continue to exist because a lot of white people want their kids going to school in the most melanin-free classroom possible, I've got about 100 years of history you could read up on.
Your comment has nothing to do with what I said. My comment is based on the premise of schools attracting players from large population areas and playing in smaller school divisions. It has nothing to do with race or why there are private schools.Iggy, Ed's, and Hoban beg to differ. Those schools are located in extremely diverse parts of Cleveland and Akron yet are far whiter than even the cities as a whole.
If you don't think private schools and many "local" schools were founded and continue to exist because a lot of white people want their kids going to school in the most melanin-free classroom possible, I've got about 100 years of history you could read up on.
And the football and basketball teams at those schools are far blacker than the general student population. Post your crap on the yappi wokie thread
No, if you have a problem with a local public district and you decide to send your kid to a private instead, you're most likely contributing to the very issues you've complained about.
Which I am aware of, thus my leaving the word “whole” out of my sentence.
I have said from the start that I wouldn’t tell someone they were wrong for having an opinion, but schools like TCC, Hoban and Lasalle which are drawing students from large urban areas (as in there are a lot of people, don’t care what color they are) and not playing D1 is absurd to many people.
I think all anyone on here would like, (aside form the guy who seemed to hate catholic schools) is to have catholic school supports say "yes we have an advantage and the numbers back that up, BUT we are simply playing by the rules the state assigned"
To which I would say, "agreed, perhaps we should look at other ways to assign divisions" Now figuring out what those ways are may be tricky, but a conversation can not happen when the other side only says "get better"
Nope. If you need context about why there are so many Toledo posters in this thread just look at the NWO realignment one. Swear we talk about this more than we actually talk about the actual subject itself, lol. Big hot topic over here.My biggest problem with all of this is that we’re really talking about what? 3 schools? Hoban, LaSalle, and SVSM in basketball?
You guys are telling me that Ashtabula St. John’s and Steubenville Catholic Central are in too low divisions?
With vouchers, tuition is a moot point and faculties might barely skew to public schools in most locations, but of course public city schools have the advantages of gang violence, higher % of students on free and reduced lunch, larger class sizes, more special needs students and of course state testing. Shoot, I am not even sure how private schools exist, people must be knocking down the down to go back to their home districtsThis is pretty much what we all have said and a few of you guys won't take, "I agree," for an answer.
They just did this. Now the onus is on programs to, yes, get better. Use the advantages they have like no tuition and better facilities.
So what’s your solution to the problem of public schools winning only 83% of the state championships in the divisions affected by competitive balance?With vouchers, tuition is a moot point and faculties might barely skew to public schools in most locations, but of course public city schools have the advantages of gang violence, higher % of students on free and reduced lunch, larger class sizes, more special needs students and of course state testing. Shoot, I am not even sure how private schools exist, people must be knocking down the down to go back to their home districts
The problem is, you are agreeing that there is an advantage, but since it is benefiting you or your loved ones, there is no reason to do something about it.
I have no connection to private schools, didn't grow up near them, never competed against them, don't currently coach against them. I just like sports and can see that there must be an advantage for the athletics teams of these schools, something you agree with. So, why not look at alternatives? You will of course tell me they already implemented CB and that is good enough. But is it? It still seems to fall short, when looking at urban publics (evidence would be the 7 straight D2 state championships in football)
Why would schools constantly want to play schools, that while enrollment wise may be similar, they have clear advantages over?
With vouchers, tuition is a moot point and faculties might barely skew to public schools in most locations
but of course public city schools have the advantages of gang violence, higher % of students on free and reduced lunch, larger class sizes, more special needs students and of course state testing.
Shoot, I am not even sure how private schools exist
The problem is, you are agreeing that there is an advantage, but since it is benefiting you or your loved ones, there is no reason to do something about it.
No one is saying the rules are being broken. I am simply saying many people around the state look at the the numbers, which tell us that catholic schools win a disproportion about of championships and wonder why. So, what are the options?
A. Catholics are simply better at sports - seems dubious
B. Jesus loves them more - possible, but also dubious
C. They have better coaches who have taught them to "get better" - possibly true
D. Because of the system we use to assign divisions, many catholic schools are being placed in divisions that don't match the resources they are able to bring in via drawing students from larger areas
I think all anyone on here would like, (aside form the guy who seemed to hate catholic schools) is to have catholic school supports say "yes we have an advantage and the numbers back that up, BUT we are simply playing by the rules the state assigned"
To which I would say, "agreed, perhaps we should look at other ways to assign divisions" Now figuring out what those ways are may be tricky, but a conversation can not happen when the other side only says "get better"
I don’t know what divisions you speak of? If you are saying everything outside of D2, since I referenced it? I would say that I am sure that CB has effected a number of divisions, I just used it as an example. But also, if public schools make up 83% of the schools in the field, I wouldn't find them winning championships at that clip odd.So what’s your solution to the problem of public schools winning only 83% of the state championships in the divisions affected by competitive balance?
I know nothing about parishes,E. [Cincy area] 43 parish teams going 8 high schools
In the distant past in Toledo the parish borders were kind of set. But now you can do whatever. The population is mobile now.I know nothing about parishes,
do they have a set border? Is it based on size or number of people that live near a church?
Are they redrawn often?
Do the students have wiggle room as far as the school they attend? Or is it tough crap, take it or leave it?
Lastly, what about child who have never attended a catholic school, they are starting freshmen year, can they pick their HS or is it still based on where they live in Cincy?
Only 1 school gets moved up to D1 every year so when talking about the results of competitive balance we should really be looking at Divisions 2-7.I don’t know what divisions you speak of? If you are saying everything outside of D2, since I referenced it? I would say that I am sure that CB has effected a number of divisions, I just used it as an example. But also, if public schools make up 83% of the schools in the field, I wouldn't find them winning championships at that clip odd.
Since vouchers don't come close to the full tuition amount, it is anything but a moot point.
*They appear to average about 6k in tuition assistance, so barely half at most schools. Now if we are being honest - if a student is an exception student or athlete, will the school find ways to have them make you the rest as opposed to turning them away? If the answer is yes, then making up the remaining 6 would be a lot easier then making up the 12 from scratch. So yes, vouchers have opened the door to catholic schools for thousands of kids who would have not had the chance.
A lot of this is a funding issue from the state. Perhaps folks could work to fix that rather than crying about La Salle and Hoban winning football titles. And the kids using vouchers, I believe, have to complete that state testing at their private schools.
*You’re preaching to the choir here. Hell even the state Supreme Court has said school funding is unconstitutional. But, again taking away caring parents and students from the local public school surely isn’t going to help them improve their state report card. And it is true that the voucher kids do have to state test, although data indicates scores don’t rise much.
A lot of them are in trouble and still more have to do quite a bit of work to remain in existence. A lot of private grade schools from when I was a kid are gone now. So, yeah, how do they still exist?
*I would have to imagine the decline in enrollment corresponded with overall church enrollment. Side note, but it probably doesn’t help that catholic families don’t have 5+ kids any more
What do you want me to do? My kid is going to be counted as more than one person when he goes to La Salle and I've never voted against a school levy in Three Rivers or Oak Hills ... and I never will. So tell me what you'd like me to do.
*I don’t know that I want you to do anything? I am sure your home district is happy you support levies, at the same time I bet they wish a parent this invested in their child would keep them in the district and help be a leader there. But, you are doing what is best for your family, no judgement.
Since you used numbers, I have to point out that you are wrong. (Had it just been your opinion, I could have chalked it up to different points of view )Only 1 school gets moved up to D1 every year so when talking about the results of competitive balance we should really be looking at Divisions 2-7.
In those divisions, private schools make up around 10% of the schools. And win around 10% of the state championships in those divisions. Seems like the competitive balance we have in place does exactly what you want it to.
Yeah but that 5th year you’re including was pre competitive balance so you shouldn’t really use it when comparing it to the present day because it’s a completely different system. (Also that’s the year where private schools won all but 1 state title was won by a private schools so naturally that’ll skew your data). In the years since CB was added, public schools win 5 out of the 6 state titles. I think we all can agree that a private school winning just 1 title a year is reasonable.Since you used numbers, I have to point out that you are wrong. (Had it just been your opinion, I could have chalked it up to different points of view )
In D2-7, since you picked them, over the last 30 state championship games (as in I went back 5 years) 37% of participants have been private and the title has been won by a private 23% of the time. Now, I have no idea how many private schools are in those divisions, but it is probably safe to say it is less then 23%
I would also have to think that the results in all other OHSAA sports are similar if not more even more skewed to privates, since there are even less divisions to spread them out over. And again I have only ever posted on here because I think CB is good, but I think there might be an even better option?
Since you used numbers, I have to point out that you are wrong. (Had it just been your opinion, I could have chalked it up to different points of view )
In D2-7, since you picked them, over the last 30 state championship games (as in I went back 5 years) 37% of participants have been private and the title has been won by a private 23% of the time. Now, I have no idea how many private schools are in those divisions, but it is probably safe to say it is less then 23%
I would also have to think that the results in all other OHSAA sports are similar if not more even more skewed to privates, since there are even less divisions to spread them out over. And again I have only ever posted on here because I think CB is good, but I think there might be an even better option?
I didn't even think about when CB started, so taking out 2016 we have numbers of 33% of state titles having a private team playing for them and the Privates winning 17%. But, since CB privates have only won in D2, so perhaps it has "worked" in the lower divisions? That is an interesting outcome!Yeah but that 5th year you’re including was pre competitive balance so you shouldn’t really use it when comparing it to the present day because it’s a completely different system. (Also that’s the year where private schools won all but 1 state title was won by a private schools so naturally that’ll skew your data). In the years since CB was added, public schools win 5 out of the 6 state titles. I think we all can agree that a private school winning just 1 title a year is reasonable.
hmm, My gut says yes, But it would depend on what that advantage is?This is hypothetical, and you’re going to have to trust me that I’m not trying to play gotcha here, but hear me out. If there were another homogeneous group that won titles at a disproportionate rate because of perceived but perhaps not provable advantages, would you consider devising a system to move them up as well?
hmm, My gut says yes, But it would depend on what that advantage is?
Open enrollment = yes I think this this falls in the same category as private schools (drawing students from a larger area )
Race = I think that would be a can of worms that no one should touch
% of student body that actually plays = might be a way to use this? My concern would be schools cutting kids to drop divisions
Free and reduced lunch enrollment? Graduation rates? I am sure there are some advantages to both, but again I don't think we want to use sociological factors because that will be a slippery slope.
So, yes I would be open to that looking at other advantages to adjust division