This is where I start to disagree with you. I 100% subscribe to the fact that private schools recruit all of their students, they have to in order to exist, but to say they do not target superior athletes is just pulling the wool over your own eyes. I'm not going to speak to any scholarships or financial aid for athletes because I don't know enough about that.
Public schools are the default option within their districts. They don't need to target ANYONE (although some do anyway) because they have close to a virtual monopoly on enrolling students within those districts.
Private schools recruiting students and student athletes absolutely goes on. HOWEVER, targeting superior athletes AND enrolling them are two different things. I get pretty fed up with the public school mindset that assumes that private schools can enroll anyone they want. How many high school kids do you know who will get up super early for anything? I'm guessing most kids wouldn't want to wake up 30, 45, 60 minutes earlier for a longer commute to attend a private school when their public school is within a five minute walk or drive. How is that not an advantage for public schools?
From Loyola's own website, "Annually, we welcome over 500 students per grade from over 92 different zip codes". How is this not an advantage over public schools? Name me any public school that has that kind of reach. Do public schools also recruit athletes? Absolutely. It's a little more difficult and takes more shenanigans though as they need to move these kids into the district or find other ways to tamper with addresses and cheat the system. Private schools however can do this free and clear.
How is enrolling 90-95% of the high school aged students in a condensed school district not an advantage for the public schools over private schools? Do not these so called advantages even out, even somewhat if not evenly? Sure, private schools and homeschooling get the other 1%-10% of a district's high school age kids, but we all know that not all those kids are athletes, much less stud athletes. Private schools CAN recruit, but it does not equate to extraordinary athletic success for ALL private schools. If it did, then ALL private schools would be equally extraordinarily successful, and we all know that also isn't the case.
What are the anti-private transfer rules? How do transfer rules differ for private schools vs. public?
Don't know if these still exist or not, but there used to be transfer rules that offered less stringent athletic eligibility to students transferring into public schools and longer waits for transferring into private ones.
Implementation of a recruiting radius is an attempt to level the playing field being that public school can take just who resides within their district and not from 92 different zip codes.
Yes, the public school can "take" 95% (or more where there aren't any private schools nearby) of the kids in their districts. And, yes, private schools CAN take kids from 92 different zip codes but ONLY if the student and his/her family wants to be at that private school and has the wherewithal to make that happen.
Multipliers and success factors are more debatable in my opinion. I have zero issue playing private schools and if you want to beat them then work hard and beat them instead of whining about losing. That being said should MC be playing in 4A because that would be what their actual enrollment dictates?
MC's doubled enrollment would put them in 5A, not 4A. But, no. They shouldn't be there, and I think they agree with that also.
Even though I may not agree what what you say I do respect what you say but you are also very narrow minded in that you think what may or may not be good for a successful, large football program in an affluent area is good for every private school in the state and applies to every sport or program.
And equally narrow minded or misguided is the mindset that takes the position that ALL private schools should be made to endure consequences because of the extraordinary athletic success of a relative handful of them. That's treating the "problem" with a hammer when a tweezers would do the trick. And equally narrow minded or misguided is the mindset that takes the position that ALL private schools can enroll anyone they want within their 30 mile radius, as if it were as simple as the private school saying "we want you" and the kids automatically enroll. And equally narrowminded or misguided is the mindset that takes the position that simply because private schools have a 30 mile radius from which they have the ability to enroll students that that equates to an athletic advantage that ALL private schools have over public schools.
It goes from people talking about how poor private schools are and if this proposal were to pass it would be devastating financially for private schools to you talking about how if they were to separate from the IHSA they could offer scholarships. So would scholarships be offered to all athletes or just football players? Would academic scholarships be offered as well? Where are ALL of these private schools going to come up with this money? Or would only the schools that can afford it be be giving out the scholarships? If so, then does your dream privates only (publics need not apply) organization further divide into scholarship schools and non scholarship schools?
IF they were to separate and IF they were to allow athletic scholarships in their newly formed organization, how the heck would I know if they would offer them to football players only? It would be my hope that they could offer them to whoever they wanted to. Some schools could use all their scholarships in ice hockey if they wanted. Some could choose to spread it out among multiple sports. Where are they going to come up with the money, you ask? In a private school of 1,000 kids, how much
money is it really
costing to give out, say, 50 athletic scholarships, some partial, some full, across all sports? Just like at the D1, D2 and NAIA levels, the cost would be absorbed through tuition, plus donations and other sources of revenue. A tiny private school like Aquin in Freeport might not be able to give out 50 scholarships, but could they afford to give out, say, 16 25% tuition discounts or four full rides?
Yes, the amendment might be devastating financially to some private schools. What we are talking about there, though, is a
decrease of students and their associated tuition
revenue. That is different from adding
expense in the form of additional students paying partial or no tuition. That additional expense can be made up, at least partially, through simply increasing class sizes, for example. How much extra does it
cost for ONE extra student to attend a school as long as the school is not hiring extra teachers/staff for that one student? Two students? Ten?
