Schools have a lot of comings and goings that first semester. Hard to get an accurate depiction

For a while, there was a pipeline to the Illini from the SW Conference, most specifically with ESL when Hawthorne was there. They missed three top 10 guys from that conference and five from the metro area. Mizzou seems to have locked up the Metro East better than U of I.

sac'em said:

Think of public education as a concrete foundation. Whatever you can build on top of that foundation is up to you. The gov't just makes sure that you have a foundation to build on. That is all. Want to be a doctor, good, build it. Want to be an electrician, good, build it. What I do not want is a system where K-12 administrators decide who gets a foundation and who doesn't.

Click to expand...

Sac’em,

If that concrete was a solid base I’m good with that. The problem really is that the foundation is not on bedrock but rather quicksand because of the way the students get pushed through the system. Compound that push through the system with it occurring at a higher rate in the failing districts and it points to the core of my complaint. There is no accountability and competition brings accountability into the fold. I think ultimately we both want the kids to have better, you seem to think the current system is good while I feel it tends to be good only in some places and horrible in others, and that those others tend to be in places that can least afford deficiencies or kids falling through the cracks in the system. We probably are much closer to agreement then either of us think, so I’m asking you to look, see, acknowledge, and tell me how you correct the failures in the system.

Snetsrak61 said:

I'm just a simple accountant, but I think second string goes to at least 44. So you'd even have 9 3rd stringers

(but no the original idea is very weird and bad idea).

I just peaked on Naz's max prep page out of curiosity. It's pretty messy and obviously self reported, but it seems like a normal year might be mid 60s, maybe up to low 70s in good years? But yea, don't see much benefit from cutting kid 54-70 in terms of balance. Those kids are at that school because that's where they/thier parents want an education. They aren't being held away from their local public school that needs help balancing the sports talent scales.

I *think* CCL does use football participant numbers in their own division classification though. By all means, IHSA should ask them and find out more about that concept and how it's applied.

Click to expand...

Not to mention that "you can only play one way" stipulation suggested by OP. Now you are micromanaging a players ability to demonstrate value to potential college recruiters.

Respect for throwing out your thoughts, but this ain't it Corndog

HotBeer said:

Totally agree - 60% to one school would for sure be a feeder in my mind. My read of the CC situation was that it was FAR less than that. Haven't looked at the thread, but my read was that ~90% of kids from their affiliated elementary schools attend CC, but with regards to football we are talking about a small sliver of a handful of Southwest suburban Pop Warner (etc.) programs.

Where is the CC grad when you need him!

Click to expand...

Chicago Christian school system has 2 elementary schools (in Tinley Park and Oak Lawn) and the high school (Palos Heights). Typically 75% or more of the students in the elementary schools will attend the high school.

They don't have their own specific feeder sports programs, but most of the kids played sports together and have played together since early elementary. This particular senior class has had about 20-25 boys that have been good athletes and played almost every sport together since they were 5-6 years old, so in a sense they've been looking forward to this sports year for a while and it paid off in a serious way for football, to be sure.

But there's certainly been no sports-specific recruiting going on, more than anything they typically lose their best athletes to more prestigious CCL or even public schools in the area (Brother Rice, Marist, Provi, LWE).

HRCJR said:

So LA, Mt. Carmel, Naz would basically be playing its first string the whole game regardless of the opponent?

Click to expand...

I'm just a simple accountant, but I think second string goes to at least 44. So you'd even have 9 3rd stringers

(but no the original idea is very weird and bad idea).

I just peaked on Naz's max prep page out of curiosity. It's pretty messy and obviously self reported, but it seems like a normal year might be mid 60s, maybe up to low 70s in good years? But yea, don't see much benefit from cutting kid 54-70 in terms of balance. Those kids are at that school because that's where they/thier parents want an education. They aren't being held away from their local public school that needs help balancing the sports talent scales.

I *think* CCL does use football participant numbers in their own division classification though. By all means, IHSA should ask them and find out more about that concept and how it's applied.

33corndog33 said:

Here is the new solution rather than the current success factor or enrollment multiplier. All non-boundaried schools can have no more than a 53 man varsity roster. Teams shall submit an accurate roster, including names and numbers, to the officiating crew before each contest. In addition there shall not be any 2 way players which includes any combination of Offense, Defense, and Special teams.

Click to expand...

No thanks…

33corndog33 said:

Here is the new solution rather than the current success factor or enrollment multiplier. All non-boundaried schools can have no more than a 53 man varsity roster. Teams shall submit an accurate roster, including names and numbers, to the officiating crew before each contest. In addition there shall not be any 2 way players which includes any combination of Offense, Defense, and Special teams.

Click to expand...

So LA, Mt. Carmel, Naz would basically be playing its first string the whole game regardless of the opponent?

33corndog33 said:

Here is the new solution rather than the current success factor or enrollment multiplier. All non-boundaried schools can have no more than a 53 man varsity roster. Teams shall submit an accurate roster, including names and numbers, to the officiating crew before each contest. In addition there shall not be any 2 way players which includes any combination of Offense, Defense, and Special teams.

Click to expand...

As a public school guy who got his ass handed to him in the semi-finals by private school attending Mr. Basketball in my state growing up, words cannot express how much I loathe this idea.

This seems like an overreach to me. Despite the ever-growing professionalization of high school sports, the purpose, at least ostensibly, remains for kids to grow; learn; develop in ways outside the classroom - an opportunity that should be afforded to all students at a school, whether that be public or private. Student A grows up mildly un-interested in sports, but decides he/she is missing out on something from their HS experience, senior year decides they wants to play football, they aren't a stud so they can't play with their buddies? Don't like it.

I could also see the Law of Unintended Consequences rearing its head here. What this does is ramp up the intensity for schools/coaches to recruit elite players, not tamp it down. "I can only have 53 players, I better make sure they are all upper echelon..."

33corndog33 said:

Here is the new solution rather than the current success factor or enrollment multiplier. All non-boundaried schools can have no more than a 53 man varsity roster. Teams shall submit an accurate roster, including names and numbers, to the officiating crew before each contest. In addition there shall not be any 2 way players which includes any combination of Offense, Defense, and Special teams.

Click to expand...

Do you want to limit the varsity to only Jr’s and Sr’s too? Or are you ok with Soph’s and an occasional Fr to play at the Varsity level?

Here is the new solution rather than the current success factor or enrollment multiplier. All non-boundaried schools can have no more than a 53 man varsity roster. Teams shall submit an accurate roster, including names and numbers, to the officiating crew before each contest. In addition there shall not be any 2 way players which includes any combination of Offense, Defense, and Special teams.

ISBE posts Fall Enrollment counts in January/February for the current year (2024-25).
Fall enrollments are submitted through the ISBE IWAS system. The data also has a correction window.

jha618 said:

My point being, in football specifically, the private schools have figured out a way to overcome whatever "injustices" you feel the IHSA has inflicted on you. That will continue. Just like the public schools who cant figure out a way to be a consistently good program, will find another excuse as to why they aren't good.

Click to expand...

Agree with you on both points.

ramblinman said:

Gracious is not a word I would ever use to describe how the IHSA has treated private schools over the years.

Click to expand...

The current IHSA system certainly isn't a hinderance for private schools in football.

My point being, in football specifically, the private schools have figured out a way to overcome whatever "injustices" you feel the IHSA has inflicted on you. That will continue. Just like the public schools who cant figure out a way to be a consistently good program, will find another excuse as to why they aren't good.

jha618 said:

It seems like the IHSA has been awfully gracious to the privates as the current system has allowed them to achieve a disproportionate amount of success. The system is constantly being tweaked in some ways. And yet, the "haves" seem to figure it out and the "have nots" always seem to find a way to complain. That will be the same going forward imo.

Click to expand...

Gracious is not a word I would ever use to describe how the IHSA has treated private schools over the years.

LHSTigers94 said:

How does a multiplier trash a small private school?
I have a hard time understanding that logic.

Click to expand...

I used the word trash because it was a word that another poster used to describe what would happen to smaller non-urban private schools in the NIPL.

If you really don't understand how a small private school is negatively impacted by the IHSA multiplier, let me know and I will explain it to you.

ramblinman said:

By and large, I agree that you don't see the public schools you mentioned sharing that sentiment...at least not publicly. I think the reason for that is because they are among the public school haves. It's primarily the public havenots who are doing most of the whining. They are the ones who are fine when they beat private schools but whine like babies when they lose to them. But, even Coach Z couldn't resist playing the zip code card in the media last year after losing to a private school. The Batavia coach is all about one town, one team.

I give two sh!ts because, in the IHSA, the squeaky wheel gets greased. Stated differently, the whining babies are given their pacifiers. The whiners have been conditioned BY the IHSA to whine to get their way, and there will be no stopping the whining until complete separation occurs. Let's just cut to the chase. Give me the NIPL.

Click to expand...

It seems like the IHSA has been awfully gracious to the privates as the current system has allowed them to achieve a disproportionate amount of success. The system is constantly being tweaked in some ways. And yet, the "haves" seem to figure it out and the "have nots" always seem to find a way to complain. That will be the same going forward imo.

ramblinman said:

Nobody would force them to join the NIPL.

And your IHSA multiplier scenario doesn't trash the small Chicago area private schools?

Click to expand...

How does a multiplier trash a small private school?
I have a hard time understanding that logic.

jha618 said:

It sure seems like a relatively small number. I def don't see publics like esl, rochester, ms, cg, lwe, etc sharing that sentiment. And as a fan of loyola, why would you give 2 sh*ts about what antioch folks have to say, who can't even figure out how to get past the 2nd rd of the playoffs.

Click to expand...

By and large, I agree that you don't see the public schools you mentioned sharing that sentiment...at least not publicly. I think the reason for that is because they are among the public school haves. It's primarily the public havenots who are doing most of the whining. They are the ones who are fine when they beat private schools but whine like babies when they lose to them. But, even Coach Z couldn't resist playing the zip code card in the media last year after losing to a private school. The Batavia coach is all about one town, one team.

I give two sh!ts because, in the IHSA, the squeaky wheel gets greased. Stated differently, the whining babies are given their pacifiers. The whiners have been conditioned BY the IHSA to whine to get their way, and there will be no stopping the whining until complete separation occurs. Let's just cut to the chase. Give me the NIPL.

kwamizee said:

Two issues.

Leo gets kids to come there because they are in the CCL. It's actually a big tool in getting kids to attend Leo. Kids would go from playing against former youth teammates and friends to kids from far flung suburbs and towns.

Secondly, Alumni would shoot a move down at first chance.

Click to expand...

The CCL wouldn't go away. It would be a league within the NIPL much like it is within the IHSA. The NIPL is nothing but a placeholder name for whatever the new association wants to call itself.

I hasten to add that the CCL that older Leo alumni (the donors who keep that school open) have fond memories of competing within barely exists anymore. Four of its eight charter members have closed their doors. Currently, there are 17 members in the CCL. Of those 17, only nine were in the CCL when I started following high school football in the 1970s. A baker's dozen former CCL members have closed. The Leo guys in their 80s and 90s are too old to have played against Rice, Gordon/DePaul Prep, and Laurence since those three schools didn't join until 65-70 years ago. Some former CCL schools (Holy Trinity, St. Pat's, JCA, etc) jumped ship to other conferences.

CCL comings and goings

ramblinman said:

What could go wrong? Increasing the multiplier to 2 and eliminating all waivers will make public school kids believe that private school kids really are twice as good as them and will spark an even deeper downward spiral of their competitive spirit and effectiveness relative to private schools.

Just a thought.

Click to expand...

OK mr. 86 zipcodes

mc140 said:

The state still hasn't published the fall counts to my knowledge. Plus Golf starts around end of September and Volleyball and Soccer seeds come out beginning of October.

Fall Enrollment Counts

www.isbe.net

Click to expand...

Thank you. So at best they could adjust for Winter or Spring enrollments to match sane year, but not fall.

ramblinman said:

Incorrect. If you could get all the northeastern Illinois private schools to join, there would be enough schools to make a competitive division with the likes of ACC, Christ the King, Leo, Marian Central, St Bede, Marquette, etc. Gotta believe Leo would want that instead of crossover games against the likes of St Rita and St Laurence like they had to play this year.

Click to expand...

Two issues.

Leo gets kids to come there because they are in the CCL. It's actually a big tool in getting kids to attend Leo. Kids would go from playing against former youth teammates and friends to kids from far flung suburbs and towns.

Secondly, Alumni would shoot a move down at first chance.