The OHSAA should be worried

Should schools finally stand up and leave the OHSAA?

  • Yes

    Votes: 61 51.7%

  • No

    Votes: 57 48.3%
  • Total voters
    118
Sykotyk said:
Privates make up 10% or less of the football playing members. So them winning twice as often is a notable statistic.
Click to expand...
Good point; the competitive balance formula needs tweaking. I need to do more reading up on it, but I am not sure what goes into it besides enrollment and recent football success (still a broad term). As bad as its been with the upper divisions, I see an issue with the juggernaut public schools in the lower too, the private schools have little to no shot at states in V-VII. Despite some modifications, I still believe dynasties in the divisions will still exist, the question becomes how prevalent.
 
Sykotyk said:
Privates make up 10% or less of the football playing members. So them winning twice as often is a notable statistic.
Click to expand...
I dunno. The sample size is too small to draw a meaningful conclusion. 2/7 is a lot different than 200/700. If you look at it statistically, even 1/7 would be over-achievement.

Not that privates don't have a disproportionate number of titles, but 2/7 doesn't prove it. 20 years of data probably tells a different story.
 
PolarBears92 said:
Good point; the competitive balance formula needs tweaking. I need to do more reading up on it, but I am not sure what goes into it besides enrollment and recent football success (still a broad term).
Click to expand...
Recent success has no part.

PolarBears92 said:
Despite some modifications, I still believe dynasties in the divisions will still exist, the question becomes how prevalent.
Click to expand...
"Dynasties" will exist until you legislate them out of existence. Don't want them? Make them play by different rules. Engineer outcomes.
Otherwise, the cream will always rise.
 
PolarBears92 said:
Good point; the competitive balance formula needs tweaking. I need to do more reading up on it, but I am not sure what goes into it besides enrollment and recent football success (still a broad term). As bad as its been with the upper divisions, I see an issue with the juggernaut public schools in the lower too, the private schools have little to no shot at states in V-VII. Despite some modifications, I still believe dynasties in the divisions will still exist, the question becomes how prevalent.
Click to expand...
Recent football success is not part of it.
 
Oil Filter said:
One big problem with CB is that it assumes all kids are equal. If a school has a CB of 110, there is no way that they all contribute meaningfully. And yet, OHSAA sees the third-string long snapper as the same as the starting QB.

Let me build an all-star team from the best in the county (any county). I'll take the kids that I want, have a minimal CB, and run roughshod. Meanwhile, you can have 2x or 3x the CB with kids who might be there because of logistics, girlfriends, family connections, academics, whatever, and OHSAA sees you as the larger transgressor.
Click to expand...
This is dumb. So are you saying that the OHSAA should do a combine for 9th grade boys to assign their CB “value” based on their athletic ability as a 14-15 year old? Think about that for a minute….
 
RollRedBuckeye said:
This is dumb. So are you saying that the OHSAA should do a combine for 9th grade boys to assign their CB “value” based on their athletic ability as a 14-15 year old? Think about that for a minute….
Click to expand...
Didn't say that. You did. Yeah, it is dumb. But then, it was your idea. :unsure:
 
Oil Filter said:
That completely ignores the reality of most private schools. 80 kids in the school, a CB of 100, and a playoff game against Moeller?


Does it smell just as bad when a former D6 champ drops to D7? Some of the MAC schools regularly bounce between D5 and D6 or D6 and D7.


That analysis has been done (albeit back when there were only 6 divisions). The distribution was, as expected a bell curve: D1 and D6 had the fewest schools, D3 and D4 were considerably larger. The one caveat was that strictly applying equal disparity put something like 20-25 schools in D1, so the next largest were arbitrarily added to have 72 schools in the division.
Click to expand...
1. Then push them up an extra division rather than arbitrarily pushing to D1.

2. Doesn't smell nearly as bad since the MAC schools draw from a fixed district. TCC draws from multiple states; hence the joke that Watterson would have also been Michigan State Champ had they beaten TCC.

3. So what's wrong with 20-25 in D1? So few are the size of Mason, St. Xavier or St. Ignatius, why make them everyone else's problem? Wanna be 1,400 boys, you're in a very small division. Go back to two regions, take 8 or 16. Allow the option for any D2 or lower division to voluntarily play up.
 
raising4daughters said:
TCC draws from multiple states; hence the joke that Watterson would have also been Michigan State Champ had they beaten TCC.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. OOS students may not participate. This was established (IIRC) in a suit/hearing concerning St. X and players from Kentucky.

raising4daughters said:
So what's wrong with 20-25 in D1?
Click to expand...
IDGAF about a 20-team division. Make for a lame claim of being a "state" champion, though.
 
44 seasons of results.

Overall since 1980, when divisions were introduced, across all divisions:
  • 261 Championships have been won
    • Championships won by Private = 116 (44.4%)
      • 36 private schools have won at least one championship
      • Roughly 70-75 private schools each season.
    • Championships won by Public = 145 (55.6%)
      • 74 public schools have won at least one championship
      • Roughly 630-650 public schools each season.
1701871236311.png


1701871643594.png


1701871663044.png
 
Last edited:
AllSports12 said:
Your very first post said “rumors are”. Most sensible people don’t believe rumors.

That said, let us all know when this actually happens.
Click to expand...
I used the term "rumors are" to protect who I got the information from and not guarantee that any of this was actually going to end up happening. The meetings and discussion between ADs are very much factual.
 
I didn't have time to look through TriangleMan's exhibits. However, I would imagine that CB has reduced the amount of private school state champions in football. Though some of that might be the inflated number of divisions in recent years.

The "joke" about beating TCC making you Michigan state champs in football was because TCC plays in the CHSL, which is a conference for catholic schools in Detroit metro, nothing to do with residence of players.
 
invader03 said:
Take top 15$ of each division over a 4 year average and bump up and take bottom 155 and bump down. All cheaters fight it out in top divisions. not rocket science and cant lie like on enrollment number Glenville
Click to expand...
It's not cheating if they're following the rules the OHSAA has put out there. There are a lot of loopholes that need to be closed. Private schools would close if they were all giving free tuition. They have to be subsidized somehow to keep the doors open. That said. Most likely you are paying to send your son or daughter to a private school. Do they have an advantage. Sure, they do. But it's a choice the family makes. On the other hand, publics with open enrollment. No fees are charged in most cases allowing those schools to stockpile athletes without any true pay out by the family except the time involved to get the student to the school. Many of these loopholes need to be closed if you want true competitive balance. Should all private schools play up? No. Should all public powerhouses in lower divisions play up? Yes. Is there really a way to fix all of the issues? No.
 
Oil Filter said:
My comment? It was your idea. You clearly didn't think it through.


Right. Let's have a bunch of people decide who they want to punish.


And it would hurt others, solely based on the subjective whims of those on the committee.


Name some obvious teams.


Define "improvements".
Click to expand...
Hoban, Massillon, TCC, Kirkland., Glenville. Each of these teams are yearly the top 2 teams in their division. If you don't see the value in this. Let's go back to 3 divisions, with the top 4 teams making the playoff in each division. All D-1's in the entire state. Let the media vote who goes. Like they used to. This is as bad as a team running through the playoffs & winning the state championship by an average of 30 points. It's not about punishing teams, it's not about fairness, it's about doing what's correct. It's not fool proof. It's better than what we have today.
 
TheBigRed1 said:
Over the years I've had quite a few close friends involved in athletics. I am very close with 2 ADs in the Dayton area. Rumors are that local ADs have been meeting the last several weeks to set out a plan to leave the OHSAA and start an independent organization. Supposedly there is a local congressman who is leading the effort and wants to establish a new, state led, athletic association. It's all a little fuzzy and I don't know how much is factual but it sounds like this has been an culminating event over the last few years based on the following:

1. The OHSAA has been charging outrageous gate prices for all playoff games (but especially football). Schools are very upset because this money NEVER finds its way back to the schools. Where is it all going? The OHSAA is making tens of thousands of dollars PER playoff football game while. For those of you that don't know, Ohio has 7 divisions with 64 teams making the playoffs per division....Start doing the math there. Host schools get a few thousand to host and then get to keep the concession money. The rest goes directly to the OHSAA.

2. With all that funding, the OHSAA has still not fully addressed the officiating situation. I am not one to blame officials for games, but man the officiating can be absolutely BRUTAL at times. Their is a shortage, i understand, but provide higher training and incentive for these refs to get better!

3. Going off the above, the OHSAA has done nothing to address the unruly fans. ADs are tired of having to escort people out of games which often times gets physical. They don't want the liability of that and they're sick of the OHSAA not doing anything. The "Respect the Game Program" that was recently relaunched is nothing but a way for the OHSAA to put the responsibility back into the hands of the...you guessed it...athletic directors.

4. The disparity between public and parochial schools is becoming out of control. Just take a look at the state finals for football. Division I, II, and III all dominated by private schools. Toledo Central Catholic, a school that won Division II last year, was bumped down to Division III this year and wins the finals in dominant fashion. ADs are tired of seeing their public school kids get robbed of a real chance. They want parochial and public schools separated come state tournament time.

These are the biggest reasons I was told but I know they are working on drafting an entire letter to send to the OHSAA with their demands. They want the OHSAA to provide a real plan and address these issues immediately or they are going to pull out and start a new state ran athletic association. Rumors are they have atleast 65 schools who are willing to sign onto this letter and the numbers will grow by the weeks.

Before anyone comes at me, I just want to clarify that the above words are not mine-- this is all information I have been verbally told by 2 very reliable sources. Take how you want.
Click to expand...
Well Number One wrong comment Massillon won Div 2. Catholic schools won Div 1 and 3. Div 1 doesn't really count because CB rules don't affect Div 2 schools. Which I think is ridiculous. I'm not sure but I believe public school won all the rest of the divisions. That would be privates 2 Publics 5. Maybe you should make Northern Ohio have there own tournament since 4 out of 7 division winners came from northern Ohio.
 
fr willie said:
Well Number One wrong comment Massillon won Div 2. Catholic schools won Div 1 and 3. Div 1 doesn't really count because CB rules don't affect Div 2 schools. Which I think is ridiculous. I'm not sure but I believe public school won all the rest of the divisions. That would be privates 2 Publics 5. Maybe you should make Northern Ohio have there own tournament since 4 out of 7 division winners came from northern Ohio.
Click to expand...
My bad 5 out of 7 division winners from northern Ohio and 4 from the Cleveland area.
 
It’s laughable about officials….. How do you fix officiating?? Because I can tell you there isn’t a line of folks waiting to join the ranks.
 
fr willie said:
My bad 5 out of 7 division winners from northern Ohio and 4 from the Cleveland area.
Click to expand...
You are correct Massillon won D2 state. And Cleveland area football is terrific- not sure of your point. There is years where the southern region dominates as well. Ex. 2019. You're quoting things that aren't my words they come from another source.

However, I will say this. Since 2009, Divisions I, II, III have had a collective total of 45 State Champions. 30 of which have been private schools. That is 67%. To put that in perspective for you, private schools only make up about 16% of OHSAA member schools. I think that's where the issue comes up.
 
raising4daughters said:
2. Doesn't smell nearly as bad since the MAC schools draw from a fixed district. TCC draws from multiple states; hence the joke that Watterson would have also been Michigan State Champ had they beaten TCC.
Click to expand...
All the MAC schools are open enrollment and all but two are statewide open enrollment.
 
TheBigRed1 said:
However, I will say this. Since 2009, Divisions I, II, III have had a collective total of 45 State Champions. 30 of which have been private schools. That is 67%. To put that in perspective for you, private schools only make up about 16% of OHSAA member schools. I think that's where the issue comes up.
Click to expand...
And those 30 titles since 2009 have been won by 10 teams.

The breakdown of football-playing private schools in '22 and '23.
1702224471737.png
 
raising4daughters said:
I don't know much about the MAC schools, just their record for success. Given their rural location, is it fair for me to assume they have a tougher time drawing from a wide area?
Click to expand...

No. I live in a rural area now. It is a much different culture. Our "local" is about 30 miles. We'll drive 30 miles for a chicken sandwich, lol. Easy drive, no traffic, it's nothing to us. Moving is no big deal either. Plenty of economical home options for just about every level. No way could I have this house and this property in the more populated districts I've lived in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top