Public School Advantages

[HotBeer]

It's amazing that we don't see more coaches leaving to take over public programs with all of these advantages

The advantages are structural for publics. They are cultural for privates.

Who is going to take better care of their vehicle:

-Someone who, when they turned 16, where gifted a brand new Mercedes SUV
-Someone who bought their first car (Toyota Corrola) at age 23 after taking the bus all through college and scrimping and saving to buy it?

Extreme example, and not meant to disparage Publics in any way. But the kids enjoying the huge scoreboard at Barrington are doing so by default. The parents of the kids practicing on that little wedge of turf out behind St. Patrick have likely had to make quite a few sacrifices for their kids to have the pleasure of commuting down Belmont Ave traffic to duke it out in the CCL.

In all facets of life, I would never underestimate the motivation of people to (often subconsciously) prove to the world their rationale in making an "inconvenient" decision.

 

[HotBeer]

JCA is 8 miles from St. Mary's and Provi 20 miles.

That's a walk down the block for plenty of southside Catholic school folks

 

[USD24]

JCA is 8 miles from St. Mary's and Provi 20 miles.

FWIW, Benet, ACC and Marmion are all 20 miles from St. Mary's as well. However, over the years, the overwhelming majority of kids end up at JCA if going Catholic. PC and Benet get a few.

 

[HotBeer]

And maybe I conflated the feeder school with "youth football". And like I said outright, they just got a new coach so they certainly aren't running a feeder to the level like you're saying about scheme implementation. The Maine South / Park Ridge is the prime example. But even York has had long standing "feeder football" programs. I believe the York coaches before Fitzgerald just weren't doing much with it. It was it's own thing. But the kids in those programs grew up playing together in middle school and onto York.

But if there's even like 60% continuity of the local youth leagues where those feeder schools flow into the HS that does probably constitute, very loosely a "feeder program". Even if the coach at CC there never tries to do top-down coaching with scheme and stuff, that's a pretty great setup and a possible asset to the school.

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!

 

[PowerI66]

The advantages are structural for publics. They are cultural for privates.

Who is going to take better care of their vehicle:

-Someone who, when they turned 16, where gifted a brand new Mercedes SUV
-Someone who bought their first car (Toyota Corrola) at age 23 after taking the bus all through college and scrimping and saving to buy it?

Extreme example, and not meant to disparage Publics in any way. But the kids enjoying the huge scoreboard at Barrington are doing so by default. The parents of the kids practicing on that little wedge of turf out behind St. Patrick have likely had to make quite a few sacrifices for their kids to have the pleasure of commuting down Belmont Ave traffic to duke it out in the CCL.

In all facets of life, I would never underestimate the motivation of people to (often subconsciously) prove to the world their rationale in making an "inconvenient" decision.

This, in a way, helps prove my point. Each side has pros and cons, but the pros are clearly larger on one side. However, for some reason, this is extremely difficult for some to comprehend or accept.

 

[HotBeer]

This, in a way, helps prove my point. Each side has pros and cons, but the pros are clearly larger on one side. However, for some reason, this is extremely difficult for some to comprehend or accept.

It may, but the "pro" that privates tend to "enjoy" is a great deal of care, focus, and effort. That is not something that should be legislated against to the perceived benefit of public schools, but rather something that public schools should attempt to replicate.

Maine South, WWS, LWE, etc. have managed to capture this at various points. Obviously small town/downstate teams have cultivated this culture as well, but less relevant to the discussion when their student populations often don't have a private option.

 

[PowerI66]

It may, but the "pro" that privates tend to "enjoy" is a great deal of care, focus, and effort. That is not something that should be legislated against to the perceived benefit of public schools, but rather something that public schools should attempt to replicate.

Maine South, WWS, LWE, etc. have managed to capture this at various points. Obviously small town/downstate teams have cultivated this culture as well, but less relevant to the discussion when their student populations often don't have a private option.

Ahhhh I see that I have misread what you are trying to say. Your argument is just that private teams have a better "culture?"

 

[Cross Bones]

It may, but the "pro" that privates tend to "enjoy" is a great deal of care, focus, and effort. That is not something that should be legislated against to the perceived benefit of public schools, but rather something that public schools should attempt to replicate.

Maine South, WWS, LWE, etc. have managed to capture this at various points. Obviously small town/downstate teams have cultivated this culture as well, but less relevant to the discussion when their student populations often don't have a private option.

Notice it's always larger schools that have this "culture", its almost like culture is a just a sub for large talent base.

 

[Snetsrak61]

This, in a way, helps prove my point. Each side has pros and cons, but the pros are clearly larger on one side. However, for some reason, this is extremely difficult for some to comprehend or accept.

I don't think "larger" is the right way to look at it. "more pronounced?" As I've often stated, there's a success divide across both types of schools. I think privates have a very clear greater discrepancy. Drop down off the top tier of both and things are competetive between school types. So I think the public pros are pretty good at baseline and staying running. Private school is more likely to drop football or close altogether than catapult to the high end. But for private and public schools who ascend, the private schools do tend to be more secure in staying there (as long as the whole school doesn't close, that is)

This public "pro" also I think presents differently at large/urban verse small/rural publics, at least for football. I think the very small school of any type had a relatively high "entry cost" to even maintain football. It's the large public districts where the cost of entry is pretty low and so there's not necessarily a lot of demand to excel. It can kind of continue indefinitely in a way small schools of any type can't really ensure. Hence starting around the level of 5A that difference suddenly becomes very obvious and pronounced.

 

[HotBeer]

Ahhhh I see that I have misread what you are trying to say. Your argument is just that private teams have a better "culture?"

No, not that they "just" have better culture. It is a result of the dynamics of private schooling, for two reasons:

• People are more invested when they pay for something vs when they get it for free. This is true across basically every domain of society. From a football perspective, on average, the families of private school football players are going to be more invested in the team/their child's success.
• Private schools do not have mandate or requirement to exist. They must constantly demonstrate their value, or cease to exist, like Holy Cross, Guerin, Driscoll, Weber, etc. etc. This is obviously much broader than football, but the effects are present in football as well. No matter how many consecutive sub-3 win season Round Lake strings together (streak has been going since 2002), there isn't any existential pressure on the administration to do anything about it.

My hypothesis is that the metro Chicago public schools that have successfully become dynastic are the ones that have actually made it a point of civic pride to play for the, say, Maine South Hawks. I played in their feeder program (but lived over the border in the city so couldn't go to MS) and remember kids being disappointed they were going to St. Pats or ND because they wanted to play for MS.

 

[HotBeer]

Notice it's always larger schools that have this "culture", its almost like culture is a just a sub for large talent base.

Did you even read the last sentence of the post? Ever heard of Lena-Winslow? Rochester? Camp Point? Byron? I would probably say the OPPOSITE is true - MOST schools with that culture tend to be small towns that care deeply about football.

You are making that observation because 1) Most public schools in the Chicago metro are large schools and 2) They are the ones that most frequently contend with private schools.

 

[Cross Bones]

Did you even read the last sentence of the post? Ever heard of Lena-Winslow? Rochester? Camp Point? Byron? I would probably say the OPPOSITE is true - MOST schools with that culture tend to be small towns that care deeply about football.

You are making that observation because 1) Most public schools in the Chicago metro are large schools and 2) They are the ones that most frequently contend with private schools. The public suburban schools in Chicago that are below 5A tend to have enrollment issues that go well beyond football and its culture.

The post I quoted mentioned Maine South, Wheaton South, and Lincoln Way East.

I watched the Loyola-Rochester game. I watched the Lena Winslow-Althoff game. How did this, now apparent small school culture, help them in those games? Because I saw schools that were completely outmatched.

 

[HotBeer]

The post I quoted mentioned Maine South, Wheaton South, and Lincoln Way East.

Which were three notable examples

I watched the Loyola-Rochester game.

Back in 2021? They are four classifications apart. A dozen 8A teams would have beaten them. Their "culture" helped them win 9 state championships in 15 years. It has "helped" them beat teams like SHG, Simeon, St. Laurence, St. Rita, etc. over that period.

I watched the Lena Winslow-Althoff game. How did this, now apparent small school culture, help them in those games? Because I saw schools that were completely outmatched.

Althoff had a generation talent this season, and congratulations to them on their first title since 1990. I would certainly give creedence to the culture at the small public schools that have beaten them in the last few years, like Camp Point (1A) and Johnson City (2A).

 

[LTHSALUM76]

Ok... If I live in Plainfield and attend St. Mary's Plainfield for grade school and want to continue my Catholic education where do I attend high school then?

That response was to someone who said "one town, one HS team." And I said Joliet and Plainfield because they are one town, but multiple teams. I was talking about public school teams.

 

[Cross Bones]

Which were three notable examples

Back in 2021? They are four classifications apart. A dozen 8A teams would have beaten them. Their "culture" helped them win 9 state championships in 15 years. It has "helped" them beat teams like SHG, Simeon, St. Laurence, St. Rita, etc. over that period.


Althoff had a generation talent this season, and congratulations to them on their first title since 1990. I would certainly give creedence to the culture at the small public schools that have beaten them in the last few years, like Camp Point (1A) and Johnson City (2A).

The 3 notables have a combined 16 state championships in football. Mt. Carmel has 16 alone. But yet, they have the same culture 🤔

Yes the same issue today existed in 2021. Loyola today has nearly 2000 students while Rochester has almost 800. Probably around a 1100 student difference and didn't look like they belonged on the same field despite having the same culture. If a dozen 8A schools (that dont have the culture) would have done that to Rochester then....it's not about the culture, it's about the talent base.

Don't know much about 1A but something tells me those publics aren't bustling with P4 players. Where just 1 can make all the difference in the world Althoff was beating 8A teams, but yes congrats to them on their first title since 1990. What's that you were saying about culture?

 

[SEHSSTORM1]

The 3 notables have a combined 16 state championships in football. Mt. Carmel has 16 alone. But yet, they have the same culture 🤔

Yes the same issue today existed in 2021. Loyola today has nearly 2000 students while Rochester has almost 800. Probably around a 1100 student difference and didn't look like they belonged on the same field despite having the same culture. If a dozen 8A schools (that dont have the culture) would have done that to Rochester then....it's not about the culture, it's about the talent base.

Don't know much about 1A but something tells me those publics aren't bustling with P4 players. Where just 1 can make all the difference in the world Althoff was beating 8A teams, but yes congrats to them on their first title since 1990. What's that you were saying about culture?

I've learned on this board that just trying harder and scheduling tough teams wins state titles. Talent is unimportant.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Anytime someone brings up factors like culture and coaching, it shouldn't be read to as throw out enrollment or recruiting, jeez. Just that if recruiting and size were that big of factors the correlation would probably be stronger than it actually appears to be (I haven't modeled any formal correlation, but my gut based on data I have evaluated is a lot of the seemingly correlated effects are anecdotal and are not statistically correlative... At least for the data we have/use).

 

[HotBeer]

The 3 notables have a combined 16 state championships in football. Mt. Carmel has 16 alone. But yet, they have the same culture 🤔

Yes the same issue today existed in 2021. Loyola today has nearly 2000 students while Rochester has almost 800. Probably around a 1100 student difference and didn't look like they belonged on the same field despite having the same culture. If a dozen 8A schools (that dont have the culture) would have done that to Rochester then....it's not about the culture, it's about the talent base.

Don't know much about 1A but something tells me those publics aren't bustling with P4 players. Where just 1 can make all the difference in the world Althoff was beating 8A teams, but yes congrats to them on their first title since 1990. What's that you were saying about culture?

Culture is not a commodity that some have more or less of.

Culture is what ACTUALLY constitutes the bogeyman of "recruiting" that gets thrown around on here. It's schools that care about football, take it seriously, invest in it, etc.

When public schools do that, football-oriented 8th graders choose their respective public school. When they stop, those kids go somewhere that takes it seriously if they have the option.

And yes, when you decline to do so for 20 years, and then look up and see that all the football kids want to go to Loyola, then it's an uphill battle.

 

[HotBeer]

Don't know much about 1A but something tells me those publics aren't bustling with P4 players. Where just 1 can make all the difference in the world Althoff was beating 8A teams, but yes congrats to them on their first title since 1990. What's that you were saying about culture?

And let me just ask: Why did Dierre Hill choose to go to Althoff instead of Belleville East or West? I highly doubt it was the facilities, the breadth of AP classes, the uniform requirements... interested in your take.

 

[Cross Bones]

Anytime someone brings up factors like culture and coaching, it shouldn't be read to as throw out enrollment or recruiting, jeez. Just that if recruiting and size were that big of factors the correlation would probably be stronger than it actually appears to be (I haven't modeled any formal correlation, but my gut based on data I have evaluated is a lot of the seemingly correlated effects are anecdotal and are not statistically correlative... At least for the data we have/use).

"Culture" just seems to be a nebulous word that's being used as a synonym for winning. I was able to attend two high schools that I think had this "culture" but we've only won 2 championships between them so maybe we didn't 🤷🏿‍♂️

Admittedly I don't buy the coaching argument as I saw a coaching staff that was accustomed to handling Bradley switch to another school and get dominated by that same Bradley school they used to dominate. What changed?

Culture is not a commodity that some have more or less of.

Culture is what ACTUALLY constitutes the bogeyman of "recruiting" that gets thrown around on here. It's schools that care about football, take it seriously, invest in it, etc.

When public schools do that, football-oriented 8th graders choose their respective public school. When they stop, those kids go somewhere that takes it seriously if they have the option.

And yes, when you decline to do so for 20 years, and then look up and see that all the football kids want to go to Loyola, then it's an uphill battle.

We are acknowledging that players go to certain private schools to play football. I don't think anyone disputes that. As a matter of fact that is THE crux of the discussion.

 

[Cross Bones]

And let me just ask: Why did Dierre Hill choose to go to Althoff instead of Belleville East or West? I highly doubt it was the facilities, the breadth of AP classes, the uniform requirements... interested in your take.

So the argument about public facilities and scoreboards being an advantage is fake news?

Far as I'm concerned he went to Althoff because he wanted to and that's his and his family's business. Why he didn't go to either of the Bellvilles, maybe he lived in East's boundary and couldn't go to West but wanted to. Or maybe vice versa, or he lived in neither.

But the point isn't why the kids choose whatever school they choose. The point is the option creates different types of enrollments that can't really be compared.

 

[Snetsrak61]

"Culture" just seems to be a nebulous word that's being used as a synonym for winning. I was able to attend two high schools that I think had this "culture" but we've only won 2 championships between them so maybe we didn't 🤷🏿‍♂️

Admittedly I don't buy the coaching argument as I saw a coaching staff that was accustomed to handling Bradley switch to another school and get dominated by that same Bradley school they used to dominate. What changed?

Yea, I mean it's never nit a multi-faceted thing. You can have a or b but not C. You can have C but not b. You can be a good coach and fail if you don't have other ingredients (I think a sport as large as football generally requires complete institutional support, at least for sustained success).

 

[Beltbuckletogoalpost]

I know it would never happen, but I’d love to see a coach like Racki take over a program like Momence or Dwight and see how he did after 6-7 years. Or better yet, a program like Plainfield Central.

Long time viewer, hardly ever post. But I have many thoughts on this topic and the apparent advantages and disadvantages of both privates and publics, but one thing I would like to contribute is we do have this example. The guy that took over for Racki at Driscoll. Mike Burzawa won 3 state titles at Driscoll going 41-1 over a 3 year stretch. He took a job at Evanston after and has not won a playoff game in 16 years. He has 8 first round exits and 8 times he missed the playoffs. After Burzawa left, Driscoll ended their state championship run, so clearly he is a good coach. He ran a top notch program. He knows all about culture and how to succeed. It has not transferred to Evanston.

 

[HotBeer]

So the argument about public facilities and scoreboards being an advantage is fake news?

No, because Althoff has worse facilities, which is the point

 

[Blacknight36]

104 posts in. Has there been any actual advantages identified yet?

 

[Snetsrak61]

104 posts in. Has there been any actual advantages identified yet?

We agree there are public schools.

 

[colin2229]

I've learned on this board that just trying harder and scheduling tough teams wins state titles. Talent is unimportant.

Date	Time	Result	Score	Opp. Score	OT	H/A	Opponent	Opp. Record	Opp. Enroll.	Other Site/Game Info
Aug 30	7:30	L	21	64		H	Barrington	8-3	2810.50
Sep 6	7:00	L	14	42		A	Batavia	12-2	1882.50
Sep 13	7:00	W	56	0		A	Elgin (Larkin)	2-7	2107.00
Sep 20	7:00	L	7	50		H	Aurora (West Aurora)	10-1	3561.00
Sep 27	7:00	W	38	21		A	West Chicago (H.S.)	6-4	1986.00
Oct 4	7:00	W	50	6		A	Streamwood	3-6	1755.50
Oct 11	7:00	W	48	25		H	Bartlett	4-5	2370.50
Oct 18	7:00	W	51	0		A	Elgin (H.S.)	2-7	2642.00
Oct 25	7:00	W	55	0		H	Aurora (East)	0-9	4050.50
Nov 1	7:00	L	13	66		A	Barrington	8-3	2810.50	Barrington

Definitely need some talent up in South Elgin 🙄

 

[doctor_d]

Public school advantage is only that they don’t have to recruit to get male students enrolled.

Any other perceived thing such as funding, facilities, and especially demographics is varied at best. Not to mention that theses things matter little. Succrssful programs get outside funding/fubdraising, facilities are what they are, and demographics clearly are not indicators because you have schools like Rochester and East St Louis as two of the best public programs who couldn’t be any more different.

I will certainly not poo poo the value of a good coaching staff. I’ve seen it first hand where a staff took a below average public program and made it into a very respectable one with multiple state championships. Coaching equals culture.

With that said, the results of that program still ebb and flow, generally with the level of incoming talent.

Talent and coaching are no doubt the two most important things. Unless there is a fairly severe discrepancy in coaching, talent will usually win out.

 

[Snetsrak61]

I think it's disengenous to say facilities and funding don't matter. Can they be overcome? Sure. But if you're competing for practice space and faciltiies, how can it not be a detriment?

Even with the recruiting "advantage", I don't think Naz's open house was too impressive for a potential athlete before. What were they recruiting them to? A shared gym for every sport? Not only in football, but in other sports Naz has recently trophied, none of them preceded the time when they had upgraded what were really lacking faciltiies. How do you train high level athletes when you hardly have practice space?

Of course not every public school facility is top notch either. And I'm sure there's small public schools in particular that share spaces and struggle with facilities, but I'd guess a lot of their competition has similar facilities. But as a general rule those tax funded facilities tend to be better, it seems. I'd say that is especially true from some of the places I've seen complaints originate from.

And some private schools swing big on facilities. But it's a lot harder to do.

 

[doctor_d]

I think it's disengenous to say facilities and funding don't matter. Can they be overcome? Sure. But if you're competing for practice space and faciltiies, how can it not be a detriment?

Even with the recruiting "advantage", I don't think Naz's open house was too impressive for a potential athlete before. What were they recruiting them to? A shared gym for every sport? Not only in football, but in other sports Naz has recently trophied, none of them preceded the time when they had upgraded what were really lacking faciltiies. How do you train high level athletes when you hardly have practice space?

Of course not every public school facility is top notch either. And I'm sure there's small public schools in particular that share spaces and struggle with facilities, but I'd guess a lot of their competition has similar facilities. But as a general rule those tax funded facilities tend to be better, it seems. I'd say that is especially true from some of the places I've seen complaints originate from.

And some private schools swing big on facilities. But it's a lot harder to do.

Where I’m from, kids go to the local school, Providence, JCA or Mac.
I don’t think facilities play a huge part, but I could see how that might be the case in the suburbs. That’s why I said it is “varied at best.”

 

[Snetsrak61]

Just as an anecdote on facilities.

As a freshman high jumper I got to practice on a true high jump pad like twice the entire season. All my other live jumps came on meet days lol. Now part of it WAS skill. My brother was much better at jumping with the same facilities as I had and stuck it out all 4 years and actually held the school record for a long time (though I did manage to score at one varsity meet yay 😅).

But damn if that wasn't discouraging factor, when I decided to give it up to focus on football. I had a better high jump practice setup at my grade school. No surprise that they didn't "just recruit" someone who could jump at a higher level. In fact there were kids walking the halls that I'm sure could have, but sometimes you just need facilties to even recruit the talent already walking your halls.

So out of curiosity, what percentage of public schools have a full track and field facility? At least around Chicago burbs it seems like most do, along with several with indoor field houses.

Those things matter on some level. Not even on a state finalist level, but there are cost of entry barriers that keep private school participation under invested to the point of even competing. Thus the ones that do compete are selected only for one's who've gotten over that hump (compared to public schools which will almost always be over that cost barrier - at least after a certain size where scale is favorable). Its deeper than just "recruiting". Recruiting is probably a trailing factor.

 

[MS4EVER]

The advantages are structural for publics. They are cultural for privates.

Who is going to take better care of their vehicle:

-Someone who, when they turned 16, where gifted a brand new Mercedes SUV
-Someone who bought their first car (Toyota Corrola) at age 23 after taking the bus all through college and scrimping and saving to buy it?

Extreme example, and not meant to disparage Publics in any way. But the kids enjoying the huge scoreboard at Barrington are doing so by default. The parents of the kids practicing on that little wedge of turf out behind St. Patrick have likely had to make quite a few sacrifices for their kids to have the pleasure of commuting down Belmont Ave traffic to duke it out in the CCL.

In all facets of life, I would never underestimate the motivation of people to (often subconsciously) prove to the world their rationale in making an "inconvenient" decision.

My ADHD just kicked in! I learned to swim at St. Pat’s.

 

[SouthofI80FootballFan]

One aspect I have not seen mentioned, and I agree with the culture, good coaching, and talent being the drovers of good programs, but recruiting help for college has not been mentioned.

A private school coach has more time than a public coach, who typically teaches, to spend more time helping his kids get recruited. If a kid has aspirations to play college ball, it's probably a better move to go to a large and successful private school. I think that adds to the talent level being higher than some publics.

About facilities, go south of I80.and you will see some solid programs with really bad facilities, and some terrible programs with great facilities.

 

[SEHSSTORM1]

Date	Time	Result	Score	Opp. Score	OT	H/A	Opponent	Opp. Record	Opp. Enroll.	Other Site/Game Info
Aug 30	7:30	L	21	64		H	Barrington	8-3	2810.50
Sep 6	7:00	L	14	42		A	Batavia	12-2	1882.50
Sep 13	7:00	W	56	0		A	Elgin (Larkin)	2-7	2107.00
Sep 20	7:00	L	7	50		H	Aurora (West Aurora)	10-1	3561.00
Sep 27	7:00	W	38	21		A	West Chicago (H.S.)	6-4	1986.00
Oct 4	7:00	W	50	6		A	Streamwood	3-6	1755.50
Oct 11	7:00	W	48	25		H	Bartlett	4-5	2370.50
Oct 18	7:00	W	51	0		A	Elgin (H.S.)	2-7	2642.00
Oct 25	7:00	W	55	0		H	Aurora (East)	0-9	4050.50
Nov 1	7:00	L	13	66		A	Barrington	8-3	2810.50	Barrington

Definitely need some talent up in South Elgin 🙄

Exactly. Not very talented by college player standards. Went out and scheduled the two toughest we could considering how bad the conference is (or did you miss my sarcasm?)

 

[LHSTigers94]

Oh it was definitely a shot, just one you apparently feel justified making because of other perceived shots made.

But it's asinine. Even coaches who don't have to move between classifications will have relatively up or down years. Let's not ponder coaching ability under the hypothetical of a team who moves up and fails to replicate success (since that already happens year over year to great coaches even when there isn't a classification move)

It’s not a shot. You have to have talent to win championship. Everybody knows that except the individuals who try to down play talent disparity by crediting culture and coaching.

There was no coaching or culture that would help Lewin compete with this years version of Althoff. Last year version yes, this years, no way in hell. Althoff had the ability to go get what they didn’t have to be successful. NO public school in 1a can do that. It has nothing to do with money, culture and coaching. They simply can get kids to come there from up to 30 miles. Very cut and dry.

My post was simply for the people that try to pretend that the competitive balance is equal and the success is coaching or culture.
If success is coaching and culture, no matter what class you move to (up or down) the results should be similar. Well, we know that’s not the case because the talent pool plays a huge role in the success or failure. That reality is why the multiplier exist in the first place. People should call it like it is.

Here is reality, there are a lot of great coaching staffs in Illinois. I respect and love them all. It’s just disappointing when some try to pretend like all teams are equal when they aren’t. Talent or lack there of separates most teams.

 

[eireog]

And let me just ask: Why did Dierre Hill choose to go to Althoff instead of Belleville East or West? I highly doubt it was the facilities, the breadth of AP classes, the uniform requirements... interested in your take.

So the argument about public facilities and scoreboards being an advantage is fake news?

Far as I'm concerned he went to Althoff because he wanted to and that's his and his family's business. Why he didn't go to either of the Bellvilles, maybe he lived in East's boundary and couldn't go to West but wanted to. Or maybe vice versa, or he lived in neither.

But the point isn't why the kids choose whatever school they choose. The point is the option creates different types of enrollments that can't really be compared.

I believe he’s from Centralia.

 

[Snetsrak61]

It’s not a shot. You have to have talent to win championship. Everybody knows that except the individuals who try to down play talent disparity by crediting culture and coaching.

There was no coaching or culture that would help Lewin compete with this years version of Althoff. Last year version yes, this years, no way in hell. Althoff had the ability to go get what they didn’t have to be successful. NO public school in 1a can do that. It has nothing to do with money, culture and coaching. They simply can get kids to come there from up to 30 miles. Very cut and dry.

My post was simply for the people that try to pretend that the competitive balance is equal and the success is coaching or culture.
If success is coaching and culture, no matter what class you move to (up or down) the results should be similar. Well, we know that’s not the case because the talent pool plays a huge role in the success or failure. That reality is why the multiplier exist in the first place. People should call it like it is.

Here is reality, there are a lot of great coaching staffs in Illinois. I respect and love them all. It’s just disappointing when some try to pretend like all teams are equal when they aren’t. Talent or lack there of separates most teams.

There isn't a person who doesn't think talent doesn't matter. What's happening is they're saying (not always explicitly) is that there is a ton of talent walking the halls already at many of these underperforming public school programs. Coaching (and culture which largely is just a part of coaching, but I guess there can be some institutional level culture) is what highlights and develops that talent level into team returns. Obviously that is an argument best laid at larger schools. There aren't many small public school supporters here so I'm pretty skeptical that those suggestions are being lobbed their way. Its almost always large well funded public school supporters here with complaints and then other fans suggesting there are things in their control they can do. And they are almost certainly right! I can't think of a time a supporter here told a school of 100 or 300 to just lift up their proverbial bootstraps and overcome the size and demographic challenges. And it is largely the same thing for private schools at that size. Every school of that size has inherent challenges and there are some staffs out there that do incredible things (mostly public) at those lower classes.

I don't think there's a person out there who wouldn't acknowledge the talent discrepancy of an Althoff this year. But that is also really a pretty rare occurrence that they or any private school are that much bigger/more talneted than the class they're in. And at least part of that is them being in the mis-classed is due to a new multiplier waiver that many private school supporters here agree was too lax and should have never been in place. I truly don't know who was arguing for the current version and it put 1A and 3A in easier spots the past 2 years. 4A you can argue is also a really unique anomaly just because they are so rapidly growing that the IHSAs rolling enrollment was too slow to capture a team that actually is much larger in 2024 than they're being classified.

So you're left with 2A. They would have also been multiplied in v1 of waiver but not v2 or v3. So maybe thats a argument to make waiver go back to v1 or gone altogether BUT this is not some traditional power program and their supporters here have said they are all a "homegrown" type program and not some recruiting haven. Which I'm inclined to believe. So they had a great 25/26 class. Good for them.

It all just feels very disengenous. I have a hard time thinking "improve culture and coaching" can be taken as you are portraying it. And the attempt to turn it into a "that's all that ever matters argument" is tilting at windmills.

 

[LHSTigers94]

There isn't a person who doesn't think talent doesn't matter. What's happening is they're saying (not always explicitly) is that there is a ton of talent walking the halls already at many of these underperforming public school programs. Coaching (and culture which largely is just a part of coaching, but I guess there can be some institutional level culture) is what highlights and develops that talent level into team returns. Obviously that is an argument best laid at larger schools. There aren't many small public school supporters here so I'm pretty skeptical that those suggestions are being lobbed their way. Its almost always large well funded public school supporters here with complaints and then other fans suggesting there are things in their control they can do. And they are almost certainly right! I can't think of a time a supporter here told a school of 100 or 300 to just lift up their proverbial bootstraps and overcome the size and demographic challenges. And it is largely the same thing for private schools at that size. Every school of that size has inherent challenges and there are some staffs out there that do incredible things (mostly public) at those lower classes.

I don't think there's a person out there who wouldn't acknowledge the talent discrepancy of an Althoff this year. But that is also really a pretty rare occurrence that they or any private school are that much bigger/more talneted than the class they're in. And at least part of that is them being in the mis-classed is due to a new multiplier waiver that many private school supporters here agree was too lax and should have never been in place. I truly don't know who was arguing for the current version and it put 1A and 3A in easier spots the past 2 years. 4A you can argue is also a really unique anomaly just because they are so rapidly growing that the IHSAs rolling enrollment was too slow to capture a team that actually is much larger in 2024 than they're being classified.

So you're left with 2A. They would have also been multiplied in v1 of waiver but not v2 or v3. So maybe thats a argument to make waiver go back to v1 or gone altogether BUT this is not some traditional power program and their supporters here have said they are all a "homegrown" type program and not some recruiting haven. Which I'm inclined to believe. So they had a great 25/26 class. Good for them.

It all just feels very disengenous. I have a hard time thinking "improve culture and coaching" can be taken as you are portraying it. And the attempt to turn it into a "that's all that ever matters argument" is tilting at windmills.

The only way people believe there is a lot of talent walking the hallways is simply because they have the ability to go and acquire talent. If you didn’t have the ability to approach the best player on a team of 30 and you had to take the bottom three because that is who lives in your district, then you would understand what’s in the hallways.

If it were so simple, Auburn would have made it to a state game by now considering how the same coach had Boylan rocking. Isn’t Evanston coach a successful private school coach? Why haven’t Evanston made noise in football. I’m sure that coach created the same culture that landed success.

Let’s be clear, there is nothing wrong with being successful and I welcome it. I just don’t agree with down playing the advantage to make yourself feel better about it. Everyone should be proud of winning as it takes a lot to capture a State Title regardless of class. That’s not the issue. Trying to pretend like the field is level in all cases is the problem.

If you only have one game that challenges you throughout your championship run, chances are you should be competing in a higher class. That doesn’t mean you wont win. It just mean games will be more competitive and that’s not due to coaching and culture.

 

[corey90]

Culture is not a commodity that some have more or less of.

Culture is what ACTUALLY constitutes the bogeyman of "recruiting" that gets thrown around on here. It's schools that care about football, take it seriously, invest in it, etc.

When public schools do that, football-oriented 8th graders choose their respective public school. When they stop, those kids go somewhere that takes it seriously if they have the option.

And yes, when you decline to do so for 20 years, and then look up and see that all the football kids want to go to Loyola, then it's an uphill battle.

Public school kids don’t choose there respective public school. They go to the public school in there district where they live. Only way they can choose is if the parents move them.

 

[Snetsrak61]

The only way people believe there is a talent walking the hallways is simply because they have the ability to go and acquire talent. If you didn’t have the ability to approach the best player on a team of 30 and you had to take the bottom three because that is who lives in your district, then you would understand what’s in the hallways.

If it were so simple, Auburn would have made it to a state game by now considering how the same coach had Boylan rocking. Isn’t Evanston coach a successful private school coach? Why haven’t Evanston made noise in football. I’m sure that coach created the same culture to landed success.

Let’s be clear, there is nothing wrong with being successful and I welcome it. I just don’t agree with down playing the advantage to make yourself feel better about it. Everyone should be proud of winning as it takes a lot to capture a State Title regardless of class. That’s not the issue. Trying to pretend like the field is level in all cases is the problem.

If you only have one game the challenges you throughout your championship run, chances are you should be competing in a higher class. That doesn’t mean you want win. It just mean games will be more competitive and that’s not due to coaching and culture.

The best team in ever class, every year often will not be challenged much. If they are it ls usually once or twice and because of the objective/basic seeding metrics it may happen in finals or may be quarters. This is often true of the best, public or private, year in and year out. By this measurement the winner is almost never in the right class. They almost always should have been catapulted up a class until what? They win state by a smaller margin? Don't win state? Get routed? Results basis is silly. There's never a definition that can make sense that isn't effectively punitive. That's whether it's private only or includes publics.

This issue is often not even about state Champs either. York has 1 2nd place trophy in the past 3 years and 2 other semis appearances because they took the steps and had some talent. That's awesome to me. I don't think they failed at anything, but maybe that's not enough to some?

By the way, Naz did pretty decent on a close margin metric their first title of this 3 peat. So right class or wrong class? And even their second title run, they played 1 route. On a worse day they probably lose to Praire Ridge or Carmel in 23 or Sycamore in 22, and definitely a coin flip to Peoria in 22. Or to St Francis 2x (who they lost to in regular season 2x). Naz, St Francis, Sycamore, Praire Ridge (who was 6A 1 of the past 3 years and made finals)... All have played each other close in 5A north. Could throw in Kanakee who was 5A N one of those recent years and has been splitting regular season series with Naz in one score games for each of the past 3 years. All these schools should get classed out of 5A right? Pretty much everyone they play who isn't each other they consistently wipe in recent years and each other they all play close.