Public School Advantages

[Snetsrak61]

By the way I would say each of Prairie Ridge, Kankakee, and Naz (at minimum) all probably should be in 6A for forseesable future. They've all been at that level naturally by enrollment at some point in recent history and fairly small enrollment changes and year to year variance have dropped them to 5A. But all recently have competed well in 6A.

I think absent severe enrollement changes the goal should be to stabilize classifications over as long of periods as possible. Should be slow moving and less subject to variance/luck for the border teams, especially if they've proved any recent level of competetiveness in the higher class.

 

[daveje]

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.

Or if you are a really good QB.

 

[corey90]

Or if you are a really good QB.

Of course then you have to move into there district. You can’t just pay a tuition and stay where you are and commute. 😜

 

[PowerI66]

Of course then you have to move into there district. You can’t just pay a tuition and stay where you are and commute. 😜

Wellllllllll...where there's a will, there's a way

 

[corey90]

Wellllllllll...where there's a will, there's a way

Move! Try recruiting telling the parents they have to move. 😂

 

[Dave Brody]

Move! Try recruiting telling the parents they have to move. 😂

If IL had school choice, this would not be an issue

 

[corey90]

If IL had school choice, this would not be an issue

Unfortunately you pay taxes for the school district you’re in weather you want to or not. This is something that will not change IMO. Especially for HS football.

 

[Dave Brody]

Unfortunately you pay taxes for the school district you’re in weather you want to or not. This is something that will not change IMO. Especially for HS football.

Agreed. Other states mange to do offer it and do fine

 

[PowerI66]

Move! Try recruiting telling the parents they have to move. 😂

You may be surprised how many people don't sell their houses but have transferred to new schools. Apartments play a key role

 

[corey90]

You may be surprised how many people don't sell their houses but have transferred to new schools. Apartments play a key role

Sure call the IHSA

 

[PowerI66]

To point out loopholes exist? No point

 

[corey90]

To point out loopholes exist? No point

This is a dumb conversation
You know the rules for publics. I will use the private excuse. Prove any wrong doing. Lol

 

[PowerI66]

I'm not going to put anybody, but this is a useful website. https://blockshopper.com/

 

[4Afan]

This is a dumb conversation
You know the rules for publics. I will use the private excuse. Prove any wrong doing. Lol

Don't be so naive Corey. If you think public schools don't try to recruit players and find loopholes to get them into school you need to remove the wool from your eyes.

Here's proof from Plainfield North and Dan Darlington in 2006. There's a Trib article as well, but I don't have a paid subscription to read all of it. If you do I urge you to read that one too.

Plainfield North hit with sanctions

Personal notes: Dan Darlington is the former head football coach at Morris, where two of my cousins played football (and one still does); the older cousin quit the team after his junior season because of disagreements with the coaching staff. Peter Pasteris was a former principal and a former…

26376.livejournal.com

 

[ramblinman]

I will use the private excuse. Prove any wrong doing. Lol

Innocent until proven guilty. We shouldn't have to prove our innocence.

 

[sporthog9er]

Don't be so naive Corey. If you think public schools don't try to recruit players and find loopholes to get them into school you need to remove the wool from your eyes.

Here's proof from Plainfield North and Dan Darlington in 2006. There's a Trib article as well, but I don't have a paid subscription to read all of it. If you do I urge you to read that one too.

Plainfield North hit with sanctions

Personal notes: Dan Darlington is the former head football coach at Morris, where two of my cousins played football (and one still does); the older cousin quit the team after his junior season because of disagreements with the coaching staff. Peter Pasteris was a former principal and a former…

26376.livejournal.com

Comical reading that story now. That's exactly what schools should be doing. Getting in with feeder programs, connect with community, promote your program.

 

[SEHSSTORM1]

Comical reading that story now. That's exactly what schools should be doing. Getting in with feeder programs, connect with community, promote your program.

Comical is right. Naperville Central and Maine South were caught doing more and got slaps in the wrist. Money talks.

 

[sac'em]

Unfortunately you pay taxes for the school district you’re in weather you want to or not. This is something that will not change IMO. Especially for HS football.

Everyone pays taxes whether they want to or not. Why try to punish the public school?

 

[HotBeer]

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.

I agree with all of this. My question is WHY did Dierre Hill (or literally any student in the building) choose to go to Althoff? Sure, they "went out and got him" - how?

Private schools cannot "simply" get kids to come from up to 30 miles. So my questions is what would entice Dierre Hill to go to Althoff?

This seems to be the missing link in this entire conversation. People like to cry foul of the ability of private schools to go "get" talent. And they do! They also have to "get" every other student in the building. So what factor drives these athletes to go to private schools?

It obviously varies by situation. Most athletes are not getting scholarships, some certainly are. But even then, you are now on par with the public option from a cost standpoint. Is it facilities or proximity to home? Almost always no to both, at least in the Chicagoland area and likely Belleville as well. Academic opportunities? Public schools almost always have a broader course catalog, more advanced programs, etc.

So what is it? My opinion, as I have posited numerous times in this thread, is that if you asked most football players, they would tell you its because they want to be 1) coached by great coaches 2) play at a school that takes football seriously at an institutional level (they might word it differently) and 3) Play great competition (perhaps a CCL-specific reason).

These are all the exact advantages that get dismissed by the "it's unfair" crew, who will just say they go "get" players, presumably with big sacks of cash.

 

[HotBeer]

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.

Yes, they "choose" their respective public school in lieu of their private options, when and where those options exists.

Obviously parents have a huge hand in this. But yes, the best football players at, for example, LWE, are choosing not to attend Providence. The best football players in Westmont are "choosing" to attend literally an Catholic school instead of Westmont High. Etc. Etc.

 

[ramblinman]

I agree with all of this. My question is WHY did Dierre Hill (or literally any student in the building) choose to go to Althoff? Sure, they "went out and got him" - how?

Private schools cannot "simply" get kids to come from up to 30 miles. So my questions is what would entice Dierre Hill to go to Althoff?

This seems to be the missing link in this entire conversation. People like to cry foul of the ability of private schools to go "get" talent. And they do! They also have to "get" every other student in the building. So what factor drives these athletes to go to private schools?

It obviously varies by situation. Most athletes are not getting scholarships, some certainly are. But even then, you are now on par with the public option from a cost standpoint. Is it facilities or proximity to home? Almost always no to both, at least in the Chicagoland area and likely Belleville as well. Academic opportunities? Public schools almost always have a broader course catalog, more advanced programs, etc.

So what is it? My opinion, as I have posited numerous times in this thread, is that if you asked most football players, they would tell you its because they want to be 1) coached by great coaches 2) play at a school that takes football seriously at an institutional level (they might word it differently) and 3) Play great competition (perhaps a CCL-specific reason).

These are all the exact advantages that get dismissed by the "it's unfair" crew, who will just say they go "get" players, presumably with big sacks of cash.

All good points.

Additionally, people seem to have very short memories around here. Althoff got bounced in the quarters in 1A and 2A the previous two years, both times by public schools. Prior to that, they failed to qualify for the playoffs for three consecutive years. Prior to that, they made the finals in 2012 and 2015 where they were beaten both times by public schools. You have to go all the way back to 1989 for the last time Althoff won a title game over a public school prior to this past Thanksgiving weekend.

This once in a blue moon title that Althoff just won is unacceptable to public school fans. They are quick to discount it because it galls them so much that a private school won 1A for the first time after the last 17 straight titles being won by public schools.

Pathetic.

 

[ignazio]

Private schools have not finished first or second in either boys or girls bowling in IHSA history.

 

[ramblinman]

Private schools have not finished first or second in either boys or girls bowling in IHSA history.

Shameful.

Level the bowling alley!

 

[Beltbuckletogoalpost]

This once in a blue moon title that Althoff just won is unacceptable to public school fans. They are quick to discount it because it galls them so much that a private school won 1A for the first time after the last 17 straight titles being won by public schools.

Pathetic.

It is truly outstanding that you constructed a straw man arguments with many assumptions and completely disregarding many of the factors and nuance for why people are upset about the private/public debate and then end your post with "pathetic" even though you are arguing against no one and didn't make a good point.

That is pathetic in my opinion.

 

[Beltbuckletogoalpost]

I agree with all of this. My question is WHY did Dierre Hill (or literally any student in the building) choose to go to Althoff? Sure, they "went out and got him" - how?

Private schools cannot "simply" get kids to come from up to 30 miles. So my questions is what would entice Dierre Hill to go to Althoff?

I think this was a very good and thought out post. It certainly explores the nuance and how it is not as reductive as privates "recruiting" a player by paying for their tuition. I think it begs the question of creating a culture at a private school vs creating a culture at a public school. Are there differences? I think the answer is yes. Do these differences equate to an advantage? That is the question of the last 20 or so years.

I was thinking about one difference after watching the state championship games. Coach Lynch talked about how he knew Jack Elliot was going to be the next Mt. Carmel QB when he saw him in 7th grade. I can't remember the exact quote, but that was the gist of what he said. I thought about how he had a great QB that won state titles, and then he found the heir apparent when he was in 7th grade effectively bridging the gap with two straight state title winning QB's. A public school cannot look for potential gaps in their roster and fill it by looking for the heir apparent. They have to coach whoever is in their community. This is not to detract from the phenomenal work ethic of Elliot or the development he undoubtedly received by a heisman finalist coach. It is just acknowledging that Mt. Carmel already had a plan to replace their state caliber QB when he was a junior with a 7th grader who would bridge the gap once the current QB graduated. Which is not a feasible strategy for public schools

 

[HotBeer]

I think this was a very good and thought out post. It certainly explores the nuance and how it is not as reductive as privates "recruiting" a player by paying for their tuition. I think it begs the question of creating a culture at a private school vs creating a culture at a public school. Are there differences? I think the answer is yes. Do these differences equate to an advantage? That is the question of the last 20 or so years.

I agree with this. I have elaborated on it in one way or another many times on here. At the end of the day, public school coaches and administrators are employees of an essential public services that exists no matter what happens on the football field or elsewhere. Private school coaches and administrators are employed by an entity that exists in a competitive marketplace at the whim of their "customer" base.

This doesn't cheapen the good work that hundreds of public school employees do every day, but a culture of focus and excellence is more or less a requirement at private schools, or kids start going elsewhere. For all the talk about Loyola and Mt. Carmel, there is very little talk on here of Leo, St. Patrick, De La Salle, Christ the King, Marmion, Aurora Central Catholic, etc. etc., despite them enjoying the same freedom to "get" players. So yes, I suppose it's "easier" to build a winning culture there, but it's also simply a requirement to avoid trending towards becoming the next [Insert your favorite defunct private school here].

 

[ramblinman]

It is truly outstanding that you constructed a straw man arguments with many assumptions and completely disregarding many of the factors and nuance for why people are upset about the private/public debate and then end your post with "pathetic" even though you are arguing against no one and didn't make a good point.

That is pathetic in my opinion.

What "many assumptions" am I making? Be specific. Far from making assumptions, I'm providing facts. Facts that refute the "many factors and nuance for why people are upset about the public/private debate."

I am responding to those people who are upset. I'm pointing out to them, through the use of facts, that their "factors and nuance" are either overblown and/or simply ungrounded in reality.

You want to talk about assumptions? The biggest assumption of all is the one made by public school apologists who assume that the private schools' ability to enroll students from within 30 miles is the only reason or the main reason why some private schools are successful over multiple years...as if private schools can't possibly be as successful as some boundaried public schools (Rochester, Le-Win, LWE, MS, WWS, ESL, etc.) are over multiple years for the exact same reasons. It's an assumption that assumes that public school success is pure and genuine while private school success is tainted and achieved through less than legitimate means.

 

[colin2229]

I was thinking about one difference after watching the state championship games. Coach Lynch talked about how he knew Jack Elliot was going to be the next Mt. Carmel QB when he saw him in 7th grade. I can't remember the exact quote, but that was the gist of what he said. I thought about how he had a great QB that won state titles, and then he found the heir apparent when he was in 7th grade effectively bridging the gap with two straight state title winning QB's. A public school cannot look for potential gaps in their roster and fill it by looking for the heir apparent. They have to coach whoever is in their community. This is not to detract from the phenomenal work ethic of Elliot or the development he undoubtedly received by a Heisman finalist coach. It is just acknowledging that Mt. Carmel already had a plan to replace their state caliber QB when he was a junior with a 7th grader who would bridge the gap once the current QB graduated. Which is not a feasible strategy for public schools

Every coach says "we knew he was going to be special when he was a youngster".

Every good coach knows they need to develop specific positions before they are varsity players.

They played Batavia is the title game. I'm sure Batavia's head coach has a good idea who the QB's in their district are all the way down to 5th grade. And if one of the teams doesn't have a decent QB, I'm sure they are all aware and are making a point to start training an athletic kid on one of those teams into a QB.

This is actually an area that public schools have a huge advantage in. Derrick Leonard said last year that he has kindergarten photos of every QB that has gone through Rochester.

 

[HRCJR]

I found these lines interesting in Beltbuckletogoalpost's post: A public school cannot look for potential gaps in their roster and fill it by looking for the heir apparent. They have to coach whoever is in their community.

That may be true but the coach can do everything ha can to make sure he enrolls at his government run school. My son grew up in Riverside and played school football at St. Mary. His team practiced at Riverside Brookfield HS, the RB coach talked to the team several times about playing at RB, had the team to games on Friday nights.

Not one kid in my son's 8th grade class played football at RB. But roughly 10 played at Fenwick, Ignatius, Mt. Carmel or Nazareth. Like many Catholic kids in the Chicago area most were destined to attend a Catholic High School, while others destine to attend a certain Catholic high school. My son chose between Fenwick and Ignatius. He chose Ignatius.

My parents went from grade school through college at Catholic schools. All four of their kids went to Catholic grade schools and high schools. 3 of 4 went to Catholic colleges. The one who did not went to Notre Dame for graduate school.

All 9 of my parents' grand children went to Catholic grade schools. 8 went to Loyola Academy and 1 to Ignatius. Of the 7 out of high school 6 went to Catholic colleges. Odds are the other two will as well.

My wife and her brother (who married his Catholic grade school classmate) are very similar. Her brother is in the Bay Area has 4 kids who all who attended Catholic Grade schools. The 2 boys went to Serra in San Mateo and the girls are at St. Ignatius in San Francisco.

I think many have believe that kids choose a Catholic High School based on recruiting. Many times the recruiting is between two Catholic Schools. I would say the number of kids who choose a Catholic school over a public school based on recruiting is much lower than Thor thinks. For many, public schools re not even a consideration.

Just the way it is.

AMDG

 

[ramblinman]

I found these lines interesting in Beltbuckletogoalpost's post: A public school cannot look for potential gaps in their roster and fill it by looking for the heir apparent. They have to coach whoever is in their community.

That may be true but the coach can do everything ha can to make sure he enrolls at his government run school. My son grew up in Riverside and played school football at St. Mary. His team practiced at Riverside Brookfield HS, the RB coach talked to the team several times about playing at RB, had the team to games on Friday nights.

Not one kid in my son's 8th grade class played football at RB. But roughly 10 played at Fenwick, Ignatius, Mt. Carmel or Nazareth. Like many Catholic kids in the Chicago area most were destined to attend a Catholic High School, while others destine to attend a certain Catholic high school. My son chose between Fenwick and Ignatius. He chose Ignatius.

My parents went from grade school through college at Catholic schools. All four of their kids went to Catholic grade schools and high schools. 3 of 4 went to Catholic colleges. The one who did not went to Notre Dame for graduate school.

All 9 of my parents' grand children went to Catholic grade schools. 8 went to Loyola Academy and 1 to Ignatius. Of the 7 out of high school 6 went to Catholic colleges. Odds are the other two will as well.

My wife and her brother (who married his Catholic grade school classmate) are very similar. Her brother is in the Bay Area has 4 kids who all who attended Catholic Grade schools. The 2 boys went to Serra in San Mateo and the girls are at St. Ignatius in San Francisco.

I think many have believe that kids choose a Catholic High School based on recruiting. Many times the recruiting is between two Catholic Schools. I would say the number of kids who choose a Catholic school over a public school based on recruiting is much lower than Thor thinks. For many, public schools re not even a consideration.

Just the way it is.

AMDG

Amen.

16 years of Catholic education here from 1st grade through college. 16 years each for two of my kids and 12 for one of them who we failed to stop from going over to the dark side in college. Two of them went on to get their masters from private institutions (one of them faith based). As much as I like to imagine what I could have done with all that tuition money and had my kids belly up to the public education trough instead, it's the best investment we ever made.

A long time ago either here or on the old Tribune message board, back when I was even feistier than I am now, I posted something along the following lines: The dislike and distrust that public school apologists have for private schools run way deeper than just athletics. Could it be that many public school apologists dislike private schools so much because they suffer from an inferiority complex? Could they be lashing out at private schools because that's how they subconsciously cope with whatever nagging doubt they might feel that either they or their parents didn't value their or their kids' education enough to pay extra for it? It's sort of along the lines of public school families asking themselves, "What do private school families know that we don't such that they are willing to sacrifice and pay extra for schooling and we aren't? What does that say about me as a parent who proudly wants to give my kids the best of everything? Am I shortchanging my kids?" I imagine this is how the neighbors feel about the Joneses with whom they cannot keep up. Is it a money thing? With some public school families, I think it very well could be. It could also be tradition, distrust of the unknown, and an aversion to any type of organized religion or some combination of the four things.

Are the above assumptions? You betcha. I contend, however, that if they really get under public school folks' skin and stick in their craw, then perhaps there is more than just a grain of truth to them.

 

[HRCJR]

Amen.

16 years of Catholic education here from 1st grade through college. 16 years each for two of my kids and 12 for one of them who we failed to stop from going over to the dark side in college. Two of them went on to get their masters from private institutions (one of them faith based). As much as I like to imagine what I could have done with all that tuition money and had my kids belly up to the public education trough instead, it's the best investment we ever made.

Completely agree the investment was worth it. Best part was that going from Jesuit HS to Jesuit College with well earned scholarships made college tuition less than Ignatius. He also said he was extremely well prepared for college, especially when it came to writing. Something many of his college classmates struggled with. Some who may have not had grammar, and clear and concise writing beaten into them (mostly figuratively).

My dad said never total up the tuition payments you have made. Just enjoy the fruits of money well spent.

 

[corey90]

Yes, they "choose" their respective public school in lieu of their private options, when and where those options exists.

Obviously parents have a huge hand in this. But yes, the best football players at, for example, LWE, are choosing not to attend Providence. The best football players in Westmont are "choosing" to attend literally a Catholic school instead of Westmont High. Etc. Etc.

Let’s not kid ourselves the parents are the entire hand. They are the ones paying. You are correct in kids go to LWE my kids included. Great school great coaching and nice town/community. In my case it was an easy decision and believe me the taxes in Frankfort is like paying tuition. Now depending where you live it may make sense to go private. I mean if the public school in your district isn’t up to par well as a parent you may want to pay a tuition. Some parents that have money may decide to live in a nice area and pay high taxes but still send their kids to a private. Many different reasons.

 

[HotBeer]

Let’s not kid ourselves the parents are the entire hand. They are the ones paying. You are correct in kids go to LWE my kids included. Great school great coaching and nice town/community. In my case it was an easy decision and believe me the taxes in Frankfort is like paying tuition. Now depending where you live it may make sense to go private. I mean if the public school in your district isn’t up to par well as a parent you may want to pay a tuition. Some parents that have money may decide to live in a nice area and pay high taxes but still send their kids to a private. Many different reasons.

Uhh... yes. Obviously? For the vast majority of society, the choice of high school is purely one of cost, convenience, demographics, and religion.

But when we are talking about the small sliver of society that is highly-football oriented 8th grade males, there is absolutely choice involved.

There are plenty of kids in Glenview or LaGrange who want to go to Loyola or Naz to play football instead of GBS or Lyons Township, and their parents, who might otherwise be happy to send them to GBS/LT, either agree or oblige them.

There are, similarly, kids in Park Ridge or Downers Grove who's parents would happily (or planned to) send them to ND or Pats, Benet or Fenwick, but who want to stay at MS or DGN because of football.

And to revisit my Westmont example, I almost assure you that every one of the best players on that team would choose to go to Montini if they had the option.

I realize that these options do not apply to EVERYONE, but my initial point was that successful public school football programs convince talented 8th grade football players to regularly "choose" them over the multitude of private options that exist.

 

[forlouann]

ramblinman AND HRCJR
It appears to me that one of your biggest financial investments ( paying private school tuition ) has also payed you one of the largest and most satisfying dividends in life. Well done !

 

[corey90]

Uhh... yes. Obviously? For the vast majority of society, the choice of high school is purely one of cost, convenience, demographics, and religion.

But when we are talking about the small sliver of society that is highly-football oriented 8th grade males, there is absolutely choice involved.

There are plenty of kids in Glenview or LaGrange who want to go to Loyola or Naz to play football instead of GBS or Lyons Township, and their parents, who might otherwise be happy to send them to GBS/LT, either agree or oblige them.

There are, similarly, kids in Park Ridge or Downers Grove who's parents would happily (or planned to) send them to ND or Pats, Benet or Fenwick, but who want to stay at MS or DGN because of football.

And to revisit my Westmont example, I almost assure you that every one of the best players on that team would choose to go to Montini if they had the option.

I realize that these options do not apply to EVERYONE, but my initial point was that successful public school football programs convince talented 8th grade football players to regularly "choose" them over the multitude of private options that exist.

In there district you are absolutely correct. The youth programs are in there district yes they will talk to those kids. They will most likely attend their school. A handful will go private for various reasons. I understand the private recruiting and the need to bring in kids. I also understand when coaches from private schools attend these youth games they are recruiting them to come play for them. It’s totally legal and I have no problem with it. You can look at my posts and I don’t whine about losing to a private. It happens and the next year maybe not. The issue at hand is trying to come up with a system that allows both Privates and publics to be competitive and fair.

 

[Piotyr]

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!

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).

 

[kwamizee]

Who?

Even New Trier, probably the most well funded public high school in the state (if not the country) needs to go to booster club for very basic football supplies.

Head Coach Salary, asst coaches salary(var, soph/jv, frosh) equipment(Helmets, that need to get reconditioned, field maintenance, jerseys practice and game day. I can keep going.

 

[Beltbuckletogoalpost]

Amen.

16 years of Catholic education here from 1st grade through college. 16 years each for two of my kids and 12 for one of them who we failed to stop from going over to the dark side in college. Two of them went on to get their masters from private institutions (one of them faith based). As much as I like to imagine what I could have done with all that tuition money and had my kids belly up to the public education trough instead, it's the best investment we ever made.

A long time ago either here or on the old Tribune message board, back when I was even feistier than I am now, I posted something along the following lines: The dislike and distrust that public school apologists have for private schools run way deeper than just athletics. Could it be that many public school apologists dislike private schools so much because they suffer from an inferiority complex? Could they be lashing out at private schools because that's how they subconsciously cope with whatever nagging doubt they might feel that either they or their parents didn't value their or their kids' education enough to pay extra for it? It's sort of along the lines of public school families asking themselves, "What do private school families know that we don't such that they are willing to sacrifice and pay extra for schooling and we aren't? What does that say about me as a parent who proudly wants to give my kids the best of everything? Am I shortchanging my kids?" I imagine this is how the neighbors feel about the Joneses with whom they cannot keep up. Is it a money thing? With some public school families, I think it very well could be. It could also be tradition, distrust of the unknown, and an aversion to any type of organized religion or some combination of the four things.

Are the above assumptions? You betcha. I contend, however, that if they really get under public school folks' skin and stick in their craw, then perhaps there is more than just a grain of truth to them.

This is a wildly inappropriate response on so many levels. First of all, you admit right away that you and your kids went to 16 years of private schools. Which is great. But that means you have literally zero experience with public schools. So it almost invalidates the rest of your points by trying to act like you have insight into public school parents.

Then you go on to completely make up unfound opinions about public school parents. I can assure you that no public school parents are having nagging thoughts about not valuing their kids education because they did not pay a private tuition. Especially in the suburbs of Chicago where the public schools often score higher than the private schools.

You accuse public school supporters as having an "inferiority complex", as "lashing out", as needing to "cope", or as having an "aversion to any type of organized religion". Literally no poster on this site has ever given an inkling to any of the above. I can assure that there are many families, both well off and not well off, that are extremely happy with their choice of school and their kids are getting a phenomenal education and they do not have pay tuition. We are lucky and privileged to live in an area where our public schools offer great educational experiences. Once again you created a straw man argument to justify YOUR anger and resentment toward public schools.

I too can make broad generalizations and make claims with little to no evidence. In the beginning you said " I like to imagine what I could have done with all the tuition money if I had my kids belly up and go to the public education trough" and that makes me wonder is it in fact YOUR resentment and your nagging thoughts that maybe instead of paying thousands of dollars for the same education as a public school do you feel that you did not value your kid's childhood enough to give them more experiences? Now I'm not actually accusing you of this because it would be unfair to you and it would even more unfair to generalize and accuse large swaths of private education parents of this as well.

Also why do you feel the need to insult the public education by using terms like "belly up to the public education trough"? Do you actually feel superior to the public education clientele? If it is a money thing as you mentioned, does it make you feel good to insult the education? Often times public schools have significantly more supports (such as math labs, writing labs, IA's, support classes) and broader range of classes (such as more AP classes and Dual credit classes). Not sure why you feel the need to tear down public education on a forum designed to talk about athletics.

 

[HotBeer]

Especially in the suburbs of Chicago where the public schools often score higher than the private schools.

Often times public schools have significantly more supports (such as math labs, writing labs, IA's, support classes) and broader range of classes (such as more AP classes and Dual credit classes). Not sure why you feel the need to tear down public education on a forum designed to talk about athletics.

[No issue with your post whatsoever and no dog in the fight in this particular exchange]

But hijacking a few very valid points made here as it relates to my prior comments on "culture", "recruiting", "getting" players, etc. If you are going to convince me to pay money to go to a school with potentially worse facilities, infrastructure, and academic outcomes and options, and I'm not making my decision based on religion... there had better be a compelling reason for me to do so.

And for many football players, the culture, focus, and emphasis on quality coaching and football success is that reason. And it is a flywheel that attracts other football players. It is a "muscle" that has been developed by the Catholic schools that are currently thriving, and one that has atrophied at those that are not. For some who feel it is unfair, they will say the school went out and "got" a player. For others, it's a concerted institutional effort to overcome the disadvantages quoted above and still succeed, by creating a "quality" in their program that is difficult to replicate when the rest of the school is not necessarily aligned.

Whether or not it is a "good" thing is up for debate. A regular student might have a much richer experience at Glenbrook South than Notre Dame.

And just to reiterate, I take no issue with your post and agree that neither public or private education is inherently superior, both are necessary, and an individual choice is totally situational.

 

[USD24]

Completely agree the investment was worth it. Best part was that going from Jesuit HS to Jesuit College with well earned scholarships made college tuition less than Ignatius. He also said he was extremely well prepared for college, especially when it came to writing. Something many of his college classmates struggled with. Some who may have not had grammar, and clear and concise writing beaten into them (mostly figuratively).

My dad said never total up the tuition payments you have made. Just enjoy the fruits of money well spent.

Couldn't agree with you more. Both my wife and I received 16 years of Catholic education. Our five kids all received 12 years of Catholic education before deciding on attending large state universities for college. Their Catholic education more than prepared them for success in college. All of our kids played varsity sports and none of our choices regarding education had anything to do with athletics. I will always believe it was money well spent!