ADVERTISEMENT

A better question

that doesn't make any sense.

we can use JCA...assume they made the title game last year - a real possibility and not hard to imagine. This year, they will be very competitive again...next year, we will have a hard time competing if 5a because the roster is very atypical...yet...for some reason - that is the JCA team you want in 6a?

a team should be put in its class based on its merits (if not by enrollment) not some team from 3 years ago. I mean, i would kind of get it if a team made two title games and in the third season was again undefeated - fine - at that point, push them up. But if a team 3 years from now has 40 kids on the roster and went 5-4...i don't think that is the team that should be pushed up. It's not good for anyone. Those kids' have their fate decided by kids they likely didn't really even know, some other team gets pushed down - maybe against their will; and the fans are cheated because the classes get watered down. it makes no sense.
Youre still operating under the assumption that you have a right to not get clocked. That is an incorrect assumption. Public schools are not in a class based on their merit, its simply their enrollment. We have already established that enrollment is a poor method of classifying private schools in relation to publics. We agree that usually JCA is going to be competitive regardless of class, no? Well, the times they are not they deserve to get clocked. It happens from time to time. Or do you feel The Brook should have been 5A the year they got trounced by MC so that they had a better chance of winning?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mc140
Youre still operating under the assumption that you have a right to not get clocked. That is an incorrect assumption. Public schools are not in a class based on their merit, its simply their enrollment. We have already established that enrollment is a poor method of classifying private schools in relation to publics. We agree that usually JCA is going to be competitive regardless of class, no? Well, the times they are not they deserve to get clocked. It happens from time to time. Or do you feel The Brook should have been 5A the year they got trounced by MC so that they had a better chance of winning?

No non no....you are making the same argument now, that you do for what class a team should originally be slotted into. I am not interested in that argument. you know how i feel.

This post is strictly about bumping a team up in 06 because the 04 team was good.

What i am saying now, and "the assumption" i am operating under is, that a team with a roster of 35 players, who goes 5-4 should not play up a class simply because for the last two years, the school had very competitive teams. This is something much different that just deciding what class a team should be in in the first place. Whether this is JCA or some school that is not traditionally good, but had an all-american for a few years...

JCA is in position, unfortunately, to benefit greatly from this absurd rule. JCA should be very good this year - I will pick them to make the title game. Next season, and the season after that, they will be an average 5a team. The year after that, i expect them to be very competitive again...meanwhile, quite likely their biggest competition is getting bumped up...

Again - to be clear, i am not talking about what class a team should be originally slotted in, but about the bump up rule...I have a much bigger problem with the bump up rule. Imagine if at our xmas dinner this year, the waiter is like, ah, mr. bones, because you had a good year the last two years, despite the fact that you made less money this year, your steak will be more expensive than mr. hilltopper's... You would be irate! irate damn it.


Lest us forget, for some reason, this rule applies only to privates...smh...




LOL ...you have established that enrollment is a poor method - not me...we'll continue this one later though.
 
West Suburban Cat,

If you think the game is played with 12-18 players on each team you are badly mistaken. For a playoff run to win 5 consecutive games in a row, players #15 though 32 play a very important role and those who have the best 15-32 players are those schools which have 2500-3000 actual students under their roof.

As far as SHG, you have to find a way to beat QB Gabe Green. He will run the ball all over you and if you contain him, so what, he can also pass very well. You not only have to stop Green but who I believe is one of the top coaches in IL HS football in Leonard and his system is tremendous.

I would actually like to see SHG show up at one of the Red Grange 7 on 7's to see if there is any team which can stop their passing game here in Chicagoland. That would be a big treat to see.

Wassup

I understand the importance of depth, I just think Naz had so much talent they could overcome it. There are acceptations to the rule. Sorry Im taking the team that has over 10 D1 players, with a coach with 4 rings, compared to a team that has a few next level prospects and bunch solid players who wont play at the next level.
Not only did they have talent, their players could play more than 1 position. Sorry I dont see naz losing 6-8 players in that 5 game stretch. If they did unfortunate luck.
 
No non no....you are making the same argument now, that you do for what class a team should originally be slotted into. I am not interested in that argument. you know how i feel.

This post is strictly about bumping a team up in 06 because the 04 team was good.

What i am saying now, and "the assumption" i am operating under is, that a team with a roster of 35 players, who goes 5-4 should not play up a class simply because for the last two years, the school had very competitive teams. This is something much different that just deciding what class a team should be in in the first place. Whether this is JCA or some school that is not traditionally good, but had an all-american for a few years...

JCA is in position, unfortunately, to benefit greatly from this absurd rule. JCA should be very good this year - I will pick them to make the title game. Next season, and the season after that, they will be an average 5a team. The year after that, i expect them to be very competitive again...meanwhile, quite likely their biggest competition is getting bumped up...

Again - to be clear, i am not talking about what class a team should be originally slotted in, but about the bump up rule...I have a much bigger problem with the bump up rule. Imagine if at our xmas dinner this year, the waiter is like, ah, mr. bones, because you had a good year the last two years, despite the fact that you made less money this year, your steak will be more expensive than mr. hilltopper's... You would be irate! irate damn it.


Lest us forget, for some reason, this rule applies only to privates...smh...




LOL ...you have established that enrollment is a poor method - not me...we'll continue this one later though.


JC,
I don't think it is bumping them up because the two previous teams were good, it's because the good team the two previous years were most likely in the wrong class and benefited from it for two years. Think about the conversation on this thread alone. Most here are saying PC, Naz, and SHG could possibly be the best teams in the state last year. There are some willing to put everything on the line to stand behind there belief on which team is better. Now take a look at their true enrollment. What class would they be in based on enrollment? Look at the rest of the teams with similar enrollment (public schools), will those teams ever be able to compete in 7A or 8A? That being said, just because IHSA put something in place to help navigate the obvious issue does not guarantee that their formula is/was correct. It's obvious all three of the teams mentioned could play in 8A and compete with the best of them. To be in 5A and not be challenged at all. To be in 6A and not be challenged at all tell you that they were not in the right class. That being said if they are not in the right class to begin with, its hard to look at the success factor as punishment for kids they were not a part of the winning team.
 
JC,
I don't think it is bumping them up because the two previous teams were good, it's because the good team the two previous years were most likely in the wrong class and benefited from it for two years. Think about the conversation on this thread alone. Most here are saying PC, Naz, and SHG could possibly be the best teams in the state last year. There are some willing to put everything on the line to stand behind there belief on which team is better. Now take a look at their true enrollment. What class would they be in based on enrollment? Look at the rest of the teams with similar enrollment (public schools), will those teams ever be able to compete in 7A or 8A? That being said, just because IHSA put something in place to help navigate the obvious issue does not guarantee that their formula is/was correct. It's obvious all three of the teams mentioned could play in 8A and compete with the best of them. To be in 5A and not be challenged at all. To be in 6A and not be challenged at all tell you that they were not in the right class. That being said if they are not in the right class to begin with, its hard to look at the success factor as punishment for kids they were not a part of the winning team.


Aye..you and bones...i want to clunk your heads together like moe!

Both of you basically allege...montini (just using them as an example) maybe is classified badly because they won 5a two years in a row...that actually, the Ihsa got it wrong, and their ability to stack titles is proof of this...so let's bump them up.

1. there is no way to defeat that argument objectively, so it is a fallacy. if montini does not win 6a next year, what does that mean? that does not mean the bones/LHT position was right - not at all, because essentially what you are saying is, "as long as montini is not a champion, they are in the right class." because, if they win, they are in too low of a class...

2. In this example, i will use St. Viator. Using the bones/LHT argument, Viator is appropriately classed. They don't have a 5/6a title, some years they make the playoffs, other years they do not, they are 65-61 over the last 13 years. During that time, they have made 1 5a and 3 6a appearances. No way can you say they are not in the right class. Now, suppose they get a stud transfer QB akin to Mr. Treadwell. Suppose they go to the title game in 6a the next two seasons. that kid graduates. Things return to normal. In the last 7 years, a team that has not won more than 5 games in the RS and only 1 playoff win. Because of the rule...this team has to play in 7a. How is that right? Those two years don't show anything...the rest of the history does...can't win in 5a in 6a, so let's put them in 7a. Meanwhile, WWS roles up the best 10 years in IHSA history and they are slotted appropriately.

3. In this example, I will use JCA. let's assume they get to the 5a title this year...well, in this situation you are right. the ihsa has them in the wrong class...by their own doing. the ihsa removed two of the best teams from 5a..so it is not the true 5a. Now, suppose JCA plays naz in the title game this season. next year JCA will play in a 5a sans shg, montini, and naz...Jesus. then, if by god's good will, what is expected to be a very very down year at JCA, they make the title game...which they have a much better chance of doing because shg, naz, and montini are not in 5a...they are out of 5a....and suddenly, Viator...with all their um...recent success....is a 5a power and here we go again. The thing is. this scenario is very likely to happen. Maybe not viator...but some other team is going to compete in a 5a field, that is not really a 5a field, then get bumped up because they were too good for 5a...which we all know, was not 5a.


I'm, supposed to be working.
 
Winning begets winning. Kids see all these guaranteed titles and wanna go to a school. Had Montini just stayed in 5A and no SF, seems like next year was a guaranteed title. They have already been to 6 straight title games. But now being bumped now maybe its not as attractive to go there when u see them go say 8-3 with a 2nd round exit in 7A then a Q loss in 6A.
 
JCHILL, your post is an argument that the two need a split, not that there shouldnt be a success factor. Now, I don't like the Success Factor due to the problems with implementing it (pushing schools down) and I prefer no split, but looking at it objectively...........
 
Last edited:
really curious to watch how Montini schedules non-conf with the SF and a Blue cross over. although Rita is last place in Blue this year-then again they were tied for bottom last year also and beat them 21-0.
 
Aye..you and bones...i want to clunk your heads together like moe!

Both of you basically allege...montini (just using them as an example) maybe is classified badly because they won 5a two years in a row...that actually, the Ihsa got it wrong, and their ability to stack titles is proof of this...so let's bump them up.

1. there is no way to defeat that argument objectively, so it is a fallacy. if montini does not win 6a next year, what does that mean? that does not mean the bones/LHT position was right - not at all, because essentially what you are saying is, "as long as montini is not a champion, they are in the right class." because, if they win, they are in too low of a class...

2. In this example, i will use St. Viator. Using the bones/LHT argument, Viator is appropriately classed. They don't have a 5/6a title, some years they make the playoffs, other years they do not, they are 65-61 over the last 13 years. During that time, they have made 1 5a and 3 6a appearances. No way can you say they are not in the right class. Now, suppose they get a stud transfer QB akin to Mr. Treadwell. Suppose they go to the title game in 6a the next two seasons. that kid graduates. Things return to normal. In the last 7 years, a team that has not won more than 5 games in the RS and only 1 playoff win. Because of the rule...this team has to play in 7a. How is that right? Those two years don't show anything...the rest of the history does...can't win in 5a in 6a, so let's put them in 7a. Meanwhile, WWS roles up the best 10 years in IHSA history and they are slotted appropriately.

3. In this example, I will use JCA. let's assume they get to the 5a title this year...well, in this situation you are right. the ihsa has them in the wrong class...by their own doing. the ihsa removed two of the best teams from 5a..so it is not the true 5a. Now, suppose JCA plays naz in the title game this season. next year JCA will play in a 5a sans shg, montini, and naz...Jesus. then, if by god's good will, what is expected to be a very very down year at JCA, they make the title game...which they have a much better chance of doing because shg, naz, and montini are not in 5a...they are out of 5a....and suddenly, Viator...with all their um...recent success....is a 5a power and here we go again. The thing is. this scenario is very likely to happen. Maybe not viator...but some other team is going to compete in a 5a field, that is not really a 5a field, then get bumped up because they were too good for 5a...which we all know, was not 5a.


I'm, supposed to be working.

JC,
1. Montini has been to the championship 6 straight years. I will also add their only close game was JC prior to the championship. So 1 out of 4 games every year is close and that game is to a team most can argue should most likely be 6A as well. Had Montini been in another class, up or down, JC would have been to the 5a championship 6 years in row. Can you really argue against that? The fact that can and did beat 7A and 8A teams proves that they can play in either one of those classes. Championship? maybe not but competitive absolutely. That being said, I think I am missing your point on Montini because I feel they may have won one or maybe two in 6A for sure.

2. One stud QB transfer will not make a middle of the road team great. That will never happen in football. You have to have multiple decent ball players to be a state team. Yes, you can have that one great player that can get you over the top if you are a second round exit team but, no middle of the road is all of sudden great because of ONE transfer. Multiple transfers, now we are talking.

3. JC, I go back to who's to say they are in the right class (5A). You base it solely on the ability to win a championship. Only 8 schools can win a year. That's 1%
 
JC,
1. Montini has been to the championship 6 straight years. I will also add their only close game was JC prior to the championship. So 1 out of 4 games every year is close and that game is to a team most can argue should most likely be 6A as well. Had Montini been in another class, up or down, JC would have been to the 5a championship 6 years in row. Can you really argue against that? The fact that can and did beat 7A and 8A teams proves that they can play in either one of those classes. Championship? maybe not but competitive absolutely. That being said, I think I am missing your point on Montini because I feel they may have won one or maybe two in 6A for sure.

2. One stud QB transfer will not make a middle of the road team great. That will never happen in football. You have to have multiple decent ball players to be a state team. Yes, you can have that one great player that can get you over the top if you are a second round exit team but, no middle of the road is all of sudden great because of ONE transfer. Multiple transfers, now we are talking.

3. JC, I go back to who's to say they are in the right class (5A). You base it solely on the ability to win a championship. Only 8 schools can win a year. That's 1%

Not to get too deep in the woods, but regarding your 3rd point, could i not also say...it is unfair to multiply all privates by the same number? Even though MC,Rita, and Rice are near each other, there are thousands of more high school kids in their radius than JCA's. Same for LA...thousands more in their radius than SHG...If the argument is always catholics should be in larger classes because they have access to more potential players, couldn't one private say that to another?

Still, this gets me back to your last point which is also mine. If you (well not you specifically, but one) wants to make an argument that class sizes are wrong...just fix them. Change them. Put JCA in 5a and say they have an advantage or whatever...but don't make is some arbitrary factor that can be dictated by one school having sudden success that is clearly a blip. It's easy to use JCA, PC, SHG, as examples...but they are not the whole of private success.

I am interested in your take on my point 3 above, however, just for curiosity's sake. If the argument is this school is too good for 5a (too good or whatever other reason) because they got to the title game two years in a row. yet, 5a is watered down because 4 of the best teams are removed....is that team really demonstrating they should be in 6a?
 
JC,
1. Montini has been to the championship 6 straight years. I will also add their only close game was JC prior to the championship. So 1 out of 4 games every year is close and that game is to a team most can argue should most likely be 6A as well. Had Montini been in another class, up or down, JC would have been to the 5a championship 6 years in row. Can you really argue against that? The fact that can and did beat 7A and 8A teams proves that they can play in either one of those classes. Championship? maybe not but competitive absolutely. That being said, I think I am missing your point on Montini because I feel they may have won one or maybe two in 6A for sure.

2. One stud QB transfer will not make a middle of the road team great. That will never happen in football. You have to have multiple decent ball players to be a state team. Yes, you can have that one great player that can get you over the top if you are a second round exit team but, no middle of the road is all of sudden great because of ONE transfer. Multiple transfers, now we are talking.

3. JC, I go back to who's to say they are in the right class (5A). You base it solely on the ability to win a championship. Only 8 schools can win a year. That's 1%


2. Even though he was not a transfer, Jon Budamyr he made MCC from a below average non playoff team to a state contender. I believe in 07 he missed the first 4 games with a hammy, MCC went 0-4, then once Budamyr was heathly they didnt lose a game until the state semi finals. Proving it is possible for one transfer to make a team a state contender.
 
Not to get too deep in the woods, but regarding your 3rd point, could i not also say...it is unfair to multiply all privates by the same number? Even though MC,Rita, and Rice are near each other, there are thousands of more high school kids in their radius than JCA's. Same for LA...thousands more in their radius than SHG...If the argument is always catholics should be in larger classes because they have access to more potential players, couldn't one private say that to another?

Still, this gets me back to your last point which is also mine. If you (well not you specifically, but one) wants to make an argument that class sizes are wrong...just fix them. Change them. Put JCA in 5a and say they have an advantage or whatever...but don't make is some arbitrary factor that can be dictated by one school having sudden success that is clearly a blip. It's easy to use JCA, PC, SHG, as examples...but they are not the whole of private success.

I am interested in your take on my point 3 above, however, just for curiosity's sake. If the argument is this school is too good for 5a (too good or whatever other reason) because they got to the title game two years in a row. yet, 5a is watered down because 4 of the best teams are removed....is that team really demonstrating they should be in 6a?

My thought in general is teams should want to play against good competition. If you take all of the behind the scene issues out of the way, I would much rather play the best teams to get to and possibly win a championship. If I am Montini (only my thoughts not calling anyone out) I would have petition up a long time ago to play the best. I understand that championships bring kids (which is why most private supporters speak in terms of winning one) but in the end the best should always play the best. Give me 6 classes and there is nothing else to talk about. Every class will be competitive. I understand why JC wouldn't want to be in 8A year in and year out however if they have a backfield of 3 D1 runningbacks and good O line, give me 7A for those two years. If teams did that, help IHSA out, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Not to pick on JC but public schools in 5a will NEVER have 3 D1 in the backfield. Nor will they have a combination of 3 D1 players period. Why would you want to play against teams you KNOW you are better than. I refused to play my brother in basketball until he was tall enough to make the game competitive. He is now 4 inches taller. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: flyerforlife
2. Even though he was not a transfer, Jon Budamyr he made MCC from a below average non playoff team to a state contender. I believe in 07 he missed the first 4 games with a hammy, MCC went 0-4, then once Budamyr was heathly they didnt lose a game until the state semi finals. Proving it is possible for one transfer to make a team a state contender.

What happened the year before that and the year after that? Again to get bumped up, you have to make the state FINALS two year in a row. I stand on my point that one stud transfer or player alone can not make that happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flyerforlife
Winning begets winning. Kids see all these guaranteed titles and wanna go to a school. Had Montini just stayed in 5A and no SF, seems like next year was a guaranteed title. They have already been to 6 straight title games. But now being bumped now maybe its not as attractive to go there when u see them go say 8-3 with a 2nd round exit in 7A then a Q loss in 6A.

I try and look at this from the perspective of being in a higher class draws more kids, as long as you are competitive. If a Downers kid is thinking DGN or Montini, it's better that Montini is in 7A as there is the theory of higher exposure at the higher level classes. Just my opinion, but I am good with 7A.
 
I try and look at this from the perspective of being in a higher class draws more kids, as long as you are competitive. If a Downers kid is thinking DGN or Montini, it's better that Montini is in 7A as there is the theory of higher exposure at the higher level classes. Just my opinion, but I am good with 7A.

I agree with this. I also understand the unwillingness to help the state out which is why I don't blame certain schools for not petitioning. I don't understand how any school the caliber of JC, Montini, PC etc. could ever complain about playing in 7A. The success of those schools do not match that fear IMO.
 
I agree with this. I also understand the unwillingness to help the state out which is why I don't blame certain schools for not petitioning. I don't understand how any school the caliber of JC, Montini, PC etc. could ever complain about playing in 7A. The success of those schools do not match that fear IMO.

Enrollment can be a critical issue playing up 3 classes. Montini enrollment is 4A as it stands with actual students. Not sure what the biggest 7A school is based on actual enrollment, but tripe the number of students is possible.
 
Enrollment can be a critical issue playing up 3 classes. Montini enrollment is 4A as it stands with actual students. Not sure what the biggest 7A school is based on actual enrollment, but tripe the number of students is possible.

Now you have entered the reason why I think enrollment is totally crap. How many students do IMG in Florida have? How many students do Ginn Acadamy in Ohio have? Now to bring it to Illinois, How many students do Lane Tech have? How many students do Morton have? The only thing that matters is the Football team on the numbers of kids that are on it. The rest of the student body is totally irrelevant to football. I would take a non boundary school of 400 boys over any school in the state of Illinois. I truly believe if schools like MC and Montini adjusted their offense to the players they have year in and year out, they would have more state appearances regardless of class. Now that statement is only a perspective from miles away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JCHILLTOPPERS
Now you have entered the reason why I think enrollment is totally crap. How many students do IMG in Florida have? How many students do Ginn Acadamy in Ohio have? Now to bring it to Illinois, How many students do Lane Tech have? How many students do Morton have? The only thing that matters is the Football team on the numbers of kids that are on it. The rest of the student body is totally irrelevant to football. I would take a non boundary school of 400 boys over any school in the state of Illinois. I truly believe if schools like MC and Montini adjusted their offense to the players they have year in and year out, they would have more state appearances regardless of class. Now that statement is only a perspective from miles away.

I don't disagree, I'm just saying depth can be an issue, especially when we are talking about deep playoff runs against well coached, high level public schools. You can't argue with GW, MS, WWS success, and many would take those teams just as well as taking the all boys, 400 enrollment team, and plenty would lean to the numbers as well. Comparing places like IMG and Ginn is not apples to apples.
 
I don't disagree, I'm just saying depth can be an issue, especially when we are talking about deep playoff runs against well coached, high level public schools. You can't argue with GW, MS, WWS success, and many would take those teams just as well as taking the all boys, 400 enrollment team, and plenty would lean to the numbers as well. Comparing places like IMG and Ginn is not apples to apples.

To me depth is more theory than reality. On most of the teams you mentioned, those teams could lose one player that would change the entire season. I look at the comments on depth I have never agreed with them. ESL has never lost a game due to depth and probably have the lowest number of participating players than any of the schools mentioned. When WWS beat ESL depth had absolutely nothing to do with it. In 08 they didn't win state because of depth. They didn't beat Rita and GBW to get there because of depth. There are only a hand full of teams that can get there because of depth. Non of them are public schools.
Depth to me is more of an excuse. Case in point is the diversity in 7A and 8A state championship games. Every now and then a good group can put 3 or 4 solid years together but, that is it. If depth was the case along with good coaching, we would see 5 or 6 years in a row of success. Let's now downplay the playoff format of North/ South split and the success teams were able to achieve by doing so.
 
Last edited:
My thought in general is teams should want to play against good competition. If you take all of the behind the scene issues out of the way, I would much rather play the best teams to get to and possibly win a championship. If I am Montini (only my thoughts not calling anyone out) I would have petition up a long time ago to play the best. I understand that championships bring kids (which is why most private supporters speak in terms of winning one) but in the end the best should always play the best. Give me 6 classes and there is nothing else to talk about. Every class will be competitive. I understand why JC wouldn't want to be in 8A year in and year out however if they have a backfield of 3 D1 runningbacks and good O line, give me 7A for those two years. If teams did that, help IHSA out, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Not to pick on JC but public schools in 5a will NEVER have 3 D1 in the backfield. Nor will they have a combination of 3 D1 players period. Why would you want to play against teams you KNOW you are better than. I refused to play my brother in basketball until he was tall enough to make the game competitive. He is now 4 inches taller. LOL

i agree with almost this entire post.

but wanting to play the best competition and getting maine southed in round 1 stands against simply being smart and doing what is objectively right. A light weight may want to be the heavy weight champion, but ...better not.

i know one thing, going back to 6 classes solves all of this. I'm of one who has run through this gambit: (A) 5 classes, (B) 6 classes, (C) 8 classes, (D) quads, (E) some vertical quads some horizontal quads with no explanation; (F) some quads some times, (G) multiplier, (H) success factor, (I) 1-16 for 7a and 8a but not 5a-6a....

I would much prefer the ihsa just put JCA in 8a than there be a success factor - a 100 percent serious comment. based on the above, what do you think they are trying to get at? just do it.

that is 9 ways to try and, as you and bones put it, find the proper enrollment for, let's face it, JCA, MC, PC, SHG, Rita, and Montini.
 
i agree with almost this entire post.

but wanting to play the best competition and getting maine southed in round 1 stands against simply being smart and doing what is objectively right. A light weight may want to be the heavy weight champion, but ...better not.

i know one thing, going back to 6 classes solves all of this. I'm of one who has run through this gambit: (A) 5 classes, (B) 6 classes, (C) 8 classes, (D) quads, (E) some vertical quads some horizontal quads with no explanation; (F) some quads some times, (G) multiplier, (H) success factor, (I) 1-16 for 7a and 8a but not 5a-6a....

I would much prefer the ihsa just put JCA in 8a than there be a success factor - a 100 percent serious comment. based on the above, what do you think they are trying to get at? just do it.

that is 9 ways to try and, as you and bones put it, find the proper enrollment for, let's face it, JCA, MC, PC, SHG, Rita, and Montini.


You are right, getting Maine Southed isn't a smart thing to do however, I don't think any of the schools we are talking about will get MS'ed too often. Like I said I get the reason to not do it but, in the spirit of competition, bring it on. I also agree and will always agree with your point of individual teams having to make the decision is not the right thing to do. It forces ESL to look cocky and some other teams to look scary. Not fair to either one.
 
i agree with almost this entire post.

but wanting to play the best competition and getting maine southed in round 1 stands against simply being smart and doing what is objectively right. A light weight may want to be the heavy weight champion, but ...better not.

i know one thing, going back to 6 classes solves all of this. I'm of one who has run through this gambit: (A) 5 classes, (B) 6 classes, (C) 8 classes, (D) quads, (E) some vertical quads some horizontal quads with no explanation; (F) some quads some times, (G) multiplier, (H) success factor, (I) 1-16 for 7a and 8a but not 5a-6a....

I would much prefer the ihsa just put JCA in 8a than there be a success factor - a 100 percent serious comment. based on the above, what do you think they are trying to get at? just do it.

that is 9 ways to try and, as you and bones put it, find the proper enrollment for, let's face it, JCA, MC, PC, SHG, Rita, and Montini.

i forgot (A2) Football enrolment - but i actually liked that one.
 
With SF, Does anything think that JC,Montini or SHG will ever win 7A? not even 8A but 7A.
 
With SF, Does anything think that JC,Montini or SHG will ever win 7A? not even 8A but 7A.

I think their chances are equal to all other good teams in the state. It is no longer guaranteed but, can happen at any time. Now you are talking good football. The odds for them are equal to the current odd for BB, LWE, GBW, WWS, ESL, HF, MS, etc.
 
JCHILL, how can the IHSA just say JCA is 8A? There needs to be a system that is objective, the problem as I have stated several times (and I slightly veer from LHSTigers) is not that enrollment is irrelevant, but it is irrelevant in comparing the two types of schools to each other. JCA and Montini likely has as much depth as any top contender in 7A or 8A. The year Bailey went down, so did the team, we could barely score. We can't just plug in any kid and run with it. And to me, to suggest that you should still win if that were to happen (by playing in lower classes) suggests that some may not be looking to have competitive classes.

As LHSTigers said, there will be no 5A teams with 3 D1 backs... or 3 D1 kids at the same time at all. For the schools in question, that is commonplace. And that also ignores the likely advantage at probably most other positions on the field. Now, every now and then one of those schools may have their class of a lifetime and make a competitive game with a run of the mill squad from the referenced 5A schools.
 
JCHILL, how can the IHSA just say JCA is 8A? There needs to be a system that is objective, the problem as I have stated several times (and I slightly veer from LHSTigers) is not that enrollment is irrelevant, but it is irrelevant in comparing the two types of schools to each other. JCA and Montini likely has as much depth as any top contender in 7A or 8A. The year Bailey went down, so did the team, we could barely score. We can't just plug in any kid and run with it. And to me, to suggest that you should still win if that were to happen (by playing in lower classes) suggests that some may not be looking to have competitive classes.

As LHSTigers said, there will be no 5A teams with 3 D1 backs... or 3 D1 kids at the same time at all. For the schools in question, that is commonplace. And that also ignores the likely advantage at probably most other positions on the field. Now, every now and then one of those schools may have their class of a lifetime and make a competitive game with a run of the mill squad from the referenced 5A schools.

The first row of the depth chart might look comparable, but getting to 2nd and 3rd tier it looks different. And the year Bailey went down, all shame and blame has to go to the coaching staff. All eggs in one basket. They went all in and got burned. Not a team failure, but coaching issue.
 
Winning begets winning. Kids see all these guaranteed titles and wanna go to a school. Had Montini just stayed in 5A and no SF, seems like next year was a guaranteed title. They have already been to 6 straight title games. But now being bumped now maybe its not as attractive to go there when u see them go say 8-3 with a 2nd round exit in 7A then a Q loss in 6A.
I think its the other way around. parents see how successful the program and school is, not just a championship. they see that montini is one of a very few schools whose program is so good they are selected to play well beyond their physical enrollment numbers. coaches like it. not sure all leadership at school does. I think montini schedules tough NC games because they will have to. No one in 5a or 6a in this state will play them unless they have to.
 
What happened the year before that and the year after that? Again to get bumped up, you have to make the state FINALS two year in a row. I stand on my point that one stud transfer or player alone can not make that happen.

The year before they were in the state championship... 07-08 they missed the state championship by 1 point. How could you say it is not possible? They were a favorite after too, but Budmayr had a season ending injury and the team didnt even make the playoffs.... Its rare, but to say 1 transfer cant make it happen is kind of laughable. It is possible and that was just 1 example off the top of my head. This is not the NFL, in high school if you have that special elite athlete a lot is possible.
 
I am serious does anyone think with the success factor, will even say Montini ever win 7A?
 
I try and look at this from the perspective of being in a higher class draws more kids, as long as you are competitive. If a Downers kid is thinking DGN or Montini, it's better that Montini is in 7A as there is the theory of higher exposure at the higher level classes. Just my opinion, but I am good with 7A.

I feel like kids are always looking for the easiest way to win and being in 7a will lead to kids transferring to other catholic schools still down in 5a that are looking to win as it is much easier route. Especially with Montini and SHG up. Its never happened before so I guess it could go either way. Will be interesting to see if Izzy gets his 3 or 4 yearly transfers now that they don't have a bye to the state individual series and an automatic title.
 
The first row of the depth chart might look comparable, but getting to 2nd and 3rd tier it looks different. And the year Bailey went down, all shame and blame has to go to the coaching staff. All eggs in one basket. They went all in and got burned. Not a team failure, but coaching issue.
Its not that all the eggs were in the Bailey basket, its that the backup is not Bailey. We ended up winning a few games and losing a couple. But when you lose a player like that IT SHOULD affect your team. JCA on the other hand, when Ty went down kept trucking...
 
The year before they were in the state championship... 07-08 they missed the state championship by 1 point. How could you say it is not possible? They were a favorite after too, but Budmayr had a season ending injury and the team didnt even make the playoffs.... Its rare, but to say 1 transfer cant make it happen is kind of laughable. It is possible and that was just 1 example off the top of my head. This is not the NFL, in high school if you have that special elite athlete a lot is possible.

The point of the discussion is about kids being punished based on the previous kids success. In the one example you brought up, you are not proving my point as the team did not make it to state two years in a four year period. I am not concerned with who is the favorite nor am I concerned with how close they came. This speak to the difficulty of making it to that level twice in a four year span. No one player have and will have that kind of impact. Especially in the bigger classes. JC example was saying what if. If you can prove that one player impacted a middle of the road team and took them to the championship 2 of his four years of High school then I stand corrected. I never said one kid can not impact a team, I said one player can not take a middle of the road team to the championship 2 out of four years which make his point invalid. ESL lost to Richards 7 to 6 in the semis. Not a state championship team nor did they deserve to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flyerforlife
The point of the discussion is about kids being punished based on the previous kids success. In the one example you brought up, you are not proving my point as the team did not make it to state two years in a four year period. I am not concerned with who is the favorite nor am I concerned with how close they came. This speak to the difficulty of making it to that level twice in a four year span. No one player have and will have that kind of impact. Especially in the bigger classes. JC example was saying what if. If you can prove that one player impacted a middle of the road team and took them to the championship 2 of his four years of High school then I stand corrected. I never said one kid can not impact a team, I said one player can not take a middle of the road team to the championship 2 out of four years which make his point invalid. ESL lost to Richards 7 to 6 in the semis. Not a state championship team nor did they deserve to be.

I guess your right. Its just impossible. Cant happen, wont happen. There is just no possibility at of that happening..
 
JCHILL, how can the IHSA just say JCA is 8A? .

well, the multiplier is completely arbitrary, they can increase it.

they can also use the backward logic HHS uses and say privates win a disporportinate share of titles based on percentages, and say therefore, they are all going to 8a...poof
 
an obvious yes.. that 07-08 JCA team was pretty good and this years naz team. I don't see what prevents schools like JCA or Montini from getting similar talent.


oh dean, you know the history better than i do...jca has plenty of 5a trophies when 5a was the second largest class....and of course, has beaten MC in years when MC and JC won championships...JCA in a lower class.

Truth is, JCA's rosters look nothing like what they did 10 years ago. my senior year team we had 90 players on the roster and were indistinguishable from 8a teams. until enrollments tick back up, it would be a mighty tough challenge. There would have to be an 08 looking JCA team.
 
Well that is kind of the point though on a JC 07-their best team in last 10 seasons (05-14). U might win a title every ten years not be in title every year.
 
oh dean, you know the history better than i do...jca has plenty of 5a trophies when 5a was the second largest class....and of course, has beaten MC in years when MC and JC won championships...JCA in a lower class.

Truth is, JCA's rosters look nothing like what they did 10 years ago. my senior year team we had 90 players on the roster and were indistinguishable from 8a teams. until enrollments tick back up, it would be a mighty tough challenge. There would have to be an 08 looking JCA team.
participation is way down though. plus only conference winners back in the day made playoffs,. MC wouldn't even have made the playoffs their last 3 titles 13,12,02
 
ADVERTISEMENT