Public School Advantages

[Alexander32]

I would like to see some of the top-tier private school coaches take over a mid to low-tier public program and see how long it takes to create their "culture" of winning.

To my knowledge it has only been done successfully one time in recent history. It took five years.

Mike Fitzgerald had a two-year run as head coach of St. Francis for the 2014 and 2015 seasons. He compiled a 15-7 record and took the 2014 Spartans to the 6A semifinals.

After two years of not being a head coach he took over the York program for the 2018 season. The prior season, 2017, York had a 1-8 record. Their only win was over Proviso West, I think by nine points. They pretty much got pounded by every other team they played.

Mike Fitzgerald's six-year tenure at York went as follows:
2018 (4-5)
2019 (4-5)
2020 (4-2)
2021 (8-2)
2022 (12-1)
2023 (11-2)

So it was in his fifth season at York that he matched his success at St. Francis by reaching the semifinal round of the playoffs, in this case in 8A.

I raise this example merely to be fair. It was done once. Your point still remains valid. Such a transition is almost unheard of.

Mike Fitzgerald is, of course, now at Marist. He certainly qualifies as a "top-tier private school coach".

 

[Snetsrak61]

So it was in his fifth season at York that he matched his success at St. Francis by reaching the semifinal round of the playoffs, in this case in 8A.

Not equivalent programs he took over either. Purnell had obviously established a strong program that he took over at St Francis. 5 years to reach semis (and repeat so it wasn't a fluke) is pretty impressive given where he took the program and being in a deep 8A.

 

[HotBeer]

I would like to see some of the top-tier private school coaches take over a mid to low-tier public program and see how long it takes to create their "culture" of winning.

It would probably take quite a while. The head coach is a small slice of an institution's football culture. You need administrators that are giving the thumbs up for camps in the summer for middle schoolers and not punishing their coaches for insisting on mandatory winter lifting sessions. You need alumni and parents that volunteer their time. You need teachers in the building that don't have an adversarial bend toward the football program (it happens). Etc. Etc. So no, a simple coach swap would no doubt help a "mid to low-tier public program" if they came from a "top-tier private school", but changing out one single person in an institution does not a culture create. And in the real world, good coaches are drawn to places with a "culture" that supports their mission (like any job).

And some more food for thought - there's a bunch of anecdotes being thrown around as if it's a "gotcha" statement that most legendary private school coaches haven't replicated their success at a public school. Why would they? How many examples are their of a truly successful coach who is winning titles at a private school leaving to go to a public school? It rarely happens, I'm sure in part due to what I described in the paragraph above. Coach Buzz is the favorite example, I don't know too many others. And Buzz didn't exactly perform any miracles at Driscoll - he inherited a machine, stayed the course for 3 years, broke the streak, and then the school failed.

 

[cornerrat]

Dan Sharp was 24-18 with 3 playoff appearances in 4 seasons at Minooka before he left for JCA. At JCA, he was 199-51 with 6 titles in 20 years.

All.... Defeated the Cyclones one year in the postseason while at Minooka.


How about the reverse. It was only four seasons at tiny Gridley before Ken Leonard took over at Griffin. While GHS had a successful program at the time he took it to a much higher level. Below is a past article from 2018. Ratsy

SHG's Ken Leonard exactly where he was meant to be

If you’ve ever spoken to Sacred Heart-Griffin football coach Ken Leonard, you might have heard how he wound up in Springfield. He was 30 years old and had just ended his fourth season as coach at t…

www.sj-r.com

 

[sac'em]

I would like to see some of the top-tier private school coaches take over a mid to low-tier public program and see how long it takes to create their "culture" of winning.

A previous HFC at STL had a pretty good successful run (best win % since late 80's). Since, not so much. Can barely hold a job.

 

[doctor_d]

It wasn't too long ago that JCA and MC both failed to make the playoffs in the same year. Remember when JCA couldn't get past Mascoutah in the quarters a few years back? I can remember a few pretty lean years for Loyola post-Hoerster, and a lot of them pre-Hoerster. Remember when Montini was good, and then they failed to qualify for two straight years, and now they are good again? In recent years, lots of folks were bemoaning IC as one of those private juggernauts of which you speak. In the five playoffs held since 2019, however, they have won it all just once. They were quarterfinal knockouts three times, and they failed to qualify this year. Naz is on a great run, but I'm old enough to remember when they either didn't qualify or were perennial first round playoff knockouts.

Totally agree as long as all schools are balanced equally.

It is flawed and discriminatory. I'd rather see a different approach that treats all schools equally.

To your point about Montini and IC not qualifying, I absolutely agree that it shows a lack of success, but it doesn’t demonstrate a lack of ability for the level that they get placed in by current waiver standards.
Obviously it is hypothetical, but I’d venture that even those years that Montini went 3-6 in the CCL, if they’d have been allowed into the 3A bracket, they would have been favored over all but maybe a couple teams. On the flip side, the number of 3A teams that would have made the playoffs given the Broncos schedule would be near zero.

Similar situation for IC. One year knocked out by a fellow CCL team and the next year miss out at 4-5. They would likely running clock every 2A team, but that’s where they will be assigned next year if they can get to 5 wins. Maybe it’s a good thing for Chicago Christian to get the multiplier.

I absolutely agree with your premise to level the playing field for all. I happen to possess the quality of empathy and can certainly see how the private schools are feeling attacked. I also know that a suburban private school of approximately 500 has a much higher ceiling than a public one of the same size. Montini in their heyday was winning titles at the 6A level. Not even Byron could do that.

I remember really liking stonedlizard’s idea, but if I remember correctly it placed almost no emphasis on enrollment. What I don’t want to see is a 1A and 2A bracket that is watered down with mediocre (for lack of a better term) teams. I think it’s ok if the 4A champ could beat 95% of the 5A field, but at the same time it should be very abnormal or nonexistent for a team to running clock their way through an entire bracket, public or private.

 

[ramblinman]

Obviously it is hypothetical, but I’d venture that even those years that Montini went 3-6 in the CCL, if they’d have been allowed into the 3A bracket, they would have been favored over all but maybe a couple teams.

Would that be wrong? It's not like they were Rochester winning 5 straight 4A titles.

On the flip side, the number of 3A teams that would have made the playoffs given the Broncos schedule would be near zero.

Including the Broncos themselves.

Similar situation for IC. One year knocked out by a fellow CCL team and the next year miss out at 4-5. They would likely running clock every 2A team,

So, like Byron did in 3A in 2022, with the exception of their 6 point win over Montini. Here were Byron's playoff scores: 72-0, 56-7, 63-15, 26-20, 69-7 (title game).

but that’s where they will be assigned next year if they can get to 5 wins.

Maybe, maybe not. Do you know who they have coming back and what their schedule is? Can you predict injuries that may or may not happen? Why jump to what, in your case, is a worst case scenario?

I absolutely agree with your premise to level the playing field for all. I happen to possess the quality of empathy and can certainly see how the private schools are feeling attacked. I also know that a suburban private school of approximately 500 has a much higher ceiling than a public one of the same size. Montini in their heyday was winning titles at the 6A level. Not even Byron could do that.

Montini won ONE 6A title. That year, they had 685 kids (41% larger than they are now), and they had a great team. That same year, St. Francis, a similarly sized private school in basically the same suburban market as Montini, went 5-4 and failed to qualify for the playoffs. My point is that, the ability of a private school to enroll students from within its 30 mile radius does not guarantee athletic success

I remember really liking stonedlizard’s idea, but if I remember correctly it placed almost no emphasis on enrollment.

I believe that, to start off, the system he proposed was influenced by enrollment.

What I don’t want to see is a 1A and 2A bracket that is watered down with mediocre (for lack of a better term) teams.

If they are mediocre, what are they doing in the playoffs to begin with? Isn't that the bigger issue here?

I also think that @stonedlizard's system was designed to put a cap on how far a team could move up or down from their original enrollment influenced class. I thought it was two classes. That would eliminate the possibility of a much larger, albeit uncompetitive, 5A team, for example, playing below 3A.

I think it’s ok if the 4A champ could beat 95% of the 5A field, but at the same time it should be very abnormal or nonexistent for a team to running clock their way through an entire bracket, public or private.

I think that could be problematic in the sense that you can only tinker so much before you get into a situation where you are responding with new rules to prevent every single type of occurrence that you find distasteful.

There are going to be years that schools handily run the table. It happens, and I think our first reaction should be to celebrate it, and not in great haste figure out how to prevent it from happening again. There could also be years when public or private schools are good enough to win their class and the class above it. Again, same response. Celebrate the achievement and the uniqueness of it. Be happy for the excellence.

I, for one, enjoy when public or private schools experience extraordinary success. I like witnessing excellence. But, when it happens year after year after year after year, it gets old and I start wanting to see that school be challenged. It has proven what it can do in one class, now let's try the next one up. The success factor addresses that. However, since it is applied only with private schools, it is discriminatory. Do it for everyone or not at all.

 

[Snetsrak61]

To your point about Montini and IC not qualifying, I absolutely agree that it shows a lack of success, but it doesn’t demonstrate a lack of ability for the level that they get placed in by current waiver standards.
Obviously it is hypothetical, but I’d venture that even those years that Montini went 3-6 in the CCL, if they’d have been allowed into the 3A bracket, they would have been favored over all but maybe a couple teams. On the flip side, the number of 3A teams that would have made the playoffs given the Broncos schedule would be near zero.

Similar situation for IC. One year knocked out by a fellow CCL team and the next year miss out at 4-5. They would likely running clock every 2A team, but that’s where they will be assigned next year if they can get to 5 wins. Maybe it’s a good thing for Chicago Christian to get the multiplier.

I absolutely agree with your premise to level the playing field for all. I happen to possess the quality of empathy and can certainly see how the private schools are feeling attacked. I also know that a suburban private school of approximately 500 has a much higher ceiling than a public one of the same size. Montini in their heyday was winning titles at the 6A level. Not even Byron could do that.

I remember really liking stonedlizard’s idea, but if I remember correctly it placed almost no emphasis on enrollment. What I don’t want to see is a 1A and 2A bracket that is watered down with mediocre (for lack of a better term) teams. I think it’s ok if the 4A champ could beat 95% of the 5A field, but at the same time it should be very abnormal or nonexistent for a team to running clock their way through an entire bracket, public or private.

Yep there is too much talent disparity in HS. Finding the balance between competetive balance and not "watering down" classes, especially across 8 is really tough. Promoting close matchup ensures that you have to water down pretty much.

Occasionally I think the solution is a longer season with a regional format. 6 or 7 regular season games and 4 or 5 games of district/regional play. Everyone gets more games, you compete for regional bragging rights. District or regional champion is the end goal for 90% of schools. The last 3 weeks culminate with only two classes (an open class and a small public / ultra small private class). Best 8 of each. Saturday of Thanksgiving doubleheader that makes "state play" rare and competetive.

 

[doctor_d]

Would that be wrong? It's not like they were Rochester winning 5 straight 4A titles.



Including the Broncos themselves.



So, like Byron did in 3A in 2022, with the exception of their 6 point win over Montini. Here were Byron's playoff scores: 72-0, 56-7, 63-15, 26-20, 69-7 (title game).



Maybe, maybe not. Do you know who they have coming back and what their schedule is? Can you predict injuries that may or may not happen? Why jump to what, in your case, is a worst case scenario?



Montini won ONE 6A title. That year, they had 685 kids (41% larger than they are now), and they had a great team. That same year, St. Francis, a similarly sized private school in basically the same suburban market as Montini, went 5-4 and failed to qualify for the playoffs. My point is that, the ability of a private school to enroll students from within its 30 mile radius does not guarantee athletic success



I believe that, to start off, the system he proposed was influenced by enrollment.



If they are mediocre, what are they doing in the playoffs to begin with? Isn't that the bigger issue here?

I also think that @stonedlizard's system was designed to put a cap on how far a team could move up or down from their original enrollment influenced class. I thought it was two classes. That would eliminate the possibility of a much larger, albeit uncompetitive, 5A team, for example, playing below 3A.



I think that could be problematic in the sense that you can only tinker so much before you get into a situation where you are responding with new rules to prevent every single type of occurrence that you find distasteful.

There are going to be years that schools handily run the table. It happens, and I think our first reaction should be to celebrate it, and not in great haste figure out how to prevent it from happening again. There could also be years when public or private schools are good enough to win their class and the class above it. Again, same response. Celebrate the achievement and the uniqueness of it. Be happy for the excellence.

I, for one, enjoy when public or private schools experience extraordinary success. I like witnessing excellence. But, when it happens year after year after year after year, it gets old and I start wanting to see that school be challenged. It has proven what it can do in one class, now let's try the next one up. The success factor addresses that. However, since it is applied only with private schools, it is discriminatory. Do it for everyone or not at all.

I don’t have to know anything about IC’s roster to know that if they can go 5-4 (or better) with their schedule, they will immediately be favorites in 2A.

My ideas/desires for having brackets that display a general level of competitiveness, even only past the first or second rounds are probably a pipe dream, but that doesn’t mean I can’t still want for it.

I agree wholeheartedly that public schools should be included in any attempt to “level” the field.

There have been numerous decent ideas thrown out on the subject (and some laughably bad ones).

I think my favorite is some type of a return to football enrollment. It’s relatively easy to figure out, i.e. it doesn’t involve complicated formulas and/or maxpreps rankings which is a turn off to some. It doesn’t have to be exactly what we used to have, but something of that ilk. In general, the small and mid size enrollment teams that have developed into dynasty situations, whether public or private, had a schedule that contained many larger enrollments and/or generally tougher competition than they faced throughout most of all of the playoffs. I can’t remember exactly when it was exchanged for the multiplier, but I have a feeling it was scrapped because it affected some public schools negatively.

 

[Snetsrak61]

I think my favorite is some type of a return to football enrollment. It’s relatively easy to figure out, i.e. it doesn’t involve complicated formulas and/or maxpreps rankings which is a turn off to some. It doesn’t have to be exactly what we used to have, but something of that ilk. In general, the small and mid size enrollment teams that have developed into dynasty situations, whether public or private, had a schedule that contained many larger enrollments and/or generally tougher competition than they faced throughout most of all of the playoffs. I can’t remember exactly when it was exchanged for the multiplier, but I have a feeling it was scrapped because it affected some public schools negatively.

Keep pushing the narrative! The movement grows. It's one of the most realistic alternatives to change. It does a lot without being overly complex. And it can be modeled for everyone day 1 it's proposed so it's not like districts where no one knew what really they were voting on and was like "IHSA will figure it out! It's fine!"