We attended a lot of homecoming games.
Q of the Week: So what's the fix?
- Thread starter EdgyTim
- Start date
It is a good system. However, it seems as if it would mostly accomplish the same thing that a good multiplier system used in conjunction with a good success factor would accomplish.
You will find, though, that there are many contributors to this message board (private school supporters) who are unwilling to make even tiny concessions for the purpose of finding agreement. They are unmoved by the fact that 14 of the last 18 state championships (78%) at the 8A, 7A and 5A class levels have been won by CCL/ESCC members. Those are the three classes in which that conference mostly competes, although Montini and IC Catholic also frequently win championships at the 3A level. "Snetsrak61" is a thoughtful individual, but far more often you will encounter individuals like "ramblinman", of whom it can be said they are unwilling to give an inch because it never crosses their minds that possibly (even to a very small degree) that 78% winning percentage might be the result of advantageous enrollment rules. To them, any difference in rules (between privates and publics) that might reduce the number of championships their favored private-school teams win is blatant discrimination. And yet, to them, the difference in enrollment rules (between privates and publics) that might contribute to the distorted 78% figure cited above... is simply the natural order of things.
Your system is solid and you can count me in as a supporter. But, you probably won't gather much support from the private-school crowd. At some point the public schools may need to force the issue. If that results in the departure of the CCL/ESCC schools from the IHSA playoffs, so be it. "ramblinman" has assured us the private schools will enjoy their little 8-team playoffs each year, playing the same teams they played during the regular season, and being won by Loyola or Mt. Carmel 90% of the time.
Kids at Morton are playing a different type of football. Ones with talent in American football are ending up at a private school.
OPRF is also in an area that feeds multiple private schools. That being said most of the WSSC has had success in waves. OPRF made the playoffs in 7 seasons from 2012-2019. York hadn’t been to the playoffs in 10 years before 2021, HC has missed a bunch of years in a row, GW was great in the 80’s before taking a dip for a decade in the mid-90’s. DGN and LT have had some off years. OPRF will be back. And all of these schools would make the playoffs every year if they were in the WSGC, Upstate 8 or some of the other conferences out there.
You have made an excellent!!! point here. The internal structure of the two different types of schools can, under certain circumstances, be a huge advantage in building up a football program. Not all private schools are positioned to take advantage of it, but for those that are, they have a much greater capacity to focus resources into a football program than public schools do. For one thing, they have fewer stakeholders. For another, they do not have teachers' unions. And finally, utilizing their resources in that manner can be a big assistance in keeping enrollment numbers up (and therefore be a big incentive in allocating resources that way).
Public schools have a much wider array of stakeholders throughout the community, making it more difficult to obtain consensus. They have teachers' unions, which, for the most part, are going to find it objectionable to focus resources on football rather than education (which, to many of them, means teachers' salaries). And finally, the existence of the public schools is in no way dependent on the success of their football programs. Their sustainability and success are almost entirely based on their taxbase.
In the end, though, it doesn't really matter why the differences between the two types of schools create an opportunity for certain private schools to be more successful in football. It only matters that the data indicates the differences do, in fact, create that opportunity. It is probably some combination of enrollment latitude and decision-making consensus building (and maybe even other factors). Given that the opportunity for that increased success exists, it is reasonable for the IHSA to implement certain bylaws that act as a restraint on that concentration of football power. At the same time, it must be understood not all (in fact maybe not even most) private schools are positioned to take advantage of these opportunities. Consequently, those schools should have the multiplier waived if the available information shows they have not experienced football success.
Or maybe they did have great coaches.
It's laughable that you imply that private schools are recruiting 11th graders from D1 schools when an Oregon recruit transferred into LWE as a second semester soph from a public school that was going nowhere in terms of football. Just coincidence that he transferred into perhaps the most competitive and successful public school in Illinois, huh?
You think that that all an urban private school has to do is open its doors and the athletes will come flooding in? You smugly say that they should recruit better, turning a blind eye to the fact that students in those schools have to pay TUITION and comply with things like dress codes and behavior standards and consequences and religious studies -- realities that simply don't exist in public schools, urban or otherwise. There's a reason why Hales closed. Remember Mendel Catholic and St. Martin de Porres? Closed. Seton? Closed. St. Benedict and St. Gregory? Both closed. There's a reason why DeLaSalle had to forfeit the season. You conveniently turn a blind eye to those reasons.
You don't remember anyone complaining about the schools you mentioned, but I sure as hell remember plenty of complaints about St T (some as recently as a couple years ago), Bloomington CC, and perhaps Alleman back when they were winning more than their "fair share" of titles.
Yep. At least part of the imbalance of % of IHSA population and % of trophies discrepancy with private schools is a devaluation of the first numerator over time as schools close. Even occassionally powerful football ones. But it's apparently oh so easy to just recruit and win.Or maybe they did have great coaches.
It's laughable that you imply that private schools are recruiting 11th graders from D1 schools when an Oregon recruit transferred into LWE as a second semester soph from a public school that was going nowhere in terms of football. Just coincidence that he transferred into perhaps the most competitive and successful public school in Illinois, huh?
You think that that all an urban private school has to do is open its doors and the athletes will come flooding in? You smugly say that they should recruit better, turning a blind eye to the fact that students in those schools have to pay TUITION and comply with things like dress codes and behavior standards and consequences and religious studies -- realities that simply don't exist in public schools, urban or otherwise. There's a reason why Hales closed. Remember Mendel Catholic and St. Martin de Porres? Closed. Seton? Closed. St. Benedict and St. Gregory? Both closed. There's a reason why DeLaSalle had to forfeit the season. You conveniently turn a blind eye to those reasons.
You don't remember anyone complaining about the schools you mentioned, but I sure as hell remember plenty of complaints about St T (some as recently as a couple years ago), Bloomington CC, and perhaps Alleman back when they were winning more than their "fair share" of titles.
Last edited:
Seriously, who hurt you? To which team did you or your children lose a state title to?
Last edited:
No, it doesn't. No matter how hard you try, you cannot empirically correlate with data the private schools' ability to enroll student athletes from within a 30 mile radius with sustained success in football by private schools. It simply isn't possible. There are too many factors (you called them differences) at play here, and those factors do matter.
For every Loyola or Mt Carmel or JCA you bring up, I have a Leo or a St Pat's or a DeLaSalle.
And for every Rochester, there is a Pontiac, Pittsfield, Stillman Valley, and any number of once-successful public school teams who could not sustain their success even not having to deal with all of the realities you mentioned.
You are CHOOSING to pay tuition, you are CHOOSING to comply with dress codes, which by the way all schools have, just not required uniforms. You are CHOOSING to comply with behavior standards and consequences, which all public schools have rules and consequences. You are also CHOOSING to take those religious studies classes by attending the school. These realities are in no way a substantial disadvantage for private schools.
Not turning a blind eye at all, I am not from the area but could assume they closed due to lack of donors and students. I hope you aern't turning a blind eye to the many public school programs that had to forfeit seasons. They have all the advantages (no tuition, no religious classes, no discipline) that privates don't have, and they still can't field competitive teams or teams at all.
I live in the area of St. T., and the gripe with them was their recruiting practices and talking to kids after their freshman year at public schools in the area. There are other public schools in the same area that have some questionable practices as well, and I don't agree with those either.You don't remember anyone complaining about the schools you mentioned, but I sure as hell remember plenty of complaints about St T (some as recently as a couple years ago), Bloomington CC, and perhaps Alleman back when they were winning more than their "fair share" of titles.
Don't flatter yourself. Do you think public education in this state is SO GOOD that it causes 95% of families to flock to it in droves? Do you think that private education is SO BAD that only 5% of families wind up "CHOOSING" it? Those numbers are what they are for the realities that I stated. Period.
Last edited:
You can't correlate it because you can't have access to that information. Religious institutions are notorious for not reporting stuff.
That's not why you can't correlate it empirically. Exactly what "stuff" would you think you need from religious institutions in order to correlate the data to prove the so called "point" that the private schools' ability to enroll student athletes from within a 30 mile radius is causally the reason for their athletic success? Be specific. I won't hold my breath for your answer because you can't correlate it empirically for the simple reason that it cannot be correlated at all.
Nice try to blame it on religion, though. You got some knee jerk likes for that. Always a crowd pleaser to blame religion, whether it's deserved or not.
Hey, I have an idea. Go get whatever "stuff" you think you need from the secular private schools like Latin, Parker, U High, North Shore Country Day, etc. I'm sure they would make it readily available to you because they are apparently so much more thorough than religious institutions in their reporting of "stuff."
Last edited:
It seems you’re missing the point about the difficulty in empirically correlating factors like geographic enrollment with athletic success. The issue isn’t just the “stuff” from religious institutions or secular schools; it’s about transparency, consistency, and access to data that would allow for valid analysis.That's not why you can't correlate it empirically. Exactly what "stuff" would you think you need from religious institutions in order to correlate the data to prove the so called "point" that the private schools' ability to enroll student athletes from within a 30 mile radius is causally the reason for their athletic success? Be specific. I won't hold my breath for your answer because you can't correlate it empirically for the simple reason that it cannot be correlated at all.
Nice try to blame it on religion, though. You got some knee jerk likes for that. Always a crowd pleaser to blame religion, whether it's deserved or not.
Hey, I have an idea. Go get whatever "stuff" you think you need from the secular private schools like Latin, Parker, U High, North Shore Country Day, etc. I'm sure they would make it readily available to you because they are apparently so much more thorough than religious institutions in their reporting of "stuff."
What we would need to correlate such a theory empirically are things like:
1. Enrollment Data: A clear breakdown of student-athlete origins, particularly for private schools, to see if a significant portion is coming from outside a reasonable geographic radius (e.g., 30 miles).
2. Recruitment Practices: Documentation or data showing how schools recruit athletes and whether they selectively target athletes based on geographical proximity or competitive advantage.
3. Financial and Resource Allocation: A comprehensive look at how schools fund and prioritize their athletic programs, which often plays a key role in success.
4. Athletic Performance Metrics: A long-term dataset on athletic success across different types of schools (boundary vs. non-boundary) to analyze patterns.
Now, in response to your comment about secular schools like Latin, Parker, or North Shore Country Day: while these schools might indeed be more open to sharing data, the reality is that access to consistent, detailed information from any school-whether secular or religious-remains a challenge. It’s not just about “blaming religion”; it’s about a systemic lack of transparency in how certain institutions operate, especially when it comes to factors that might give them a competitive edge.
You’re right that correlating it empirically is difficult—because we don’t have access to the right data across the board. It’s about creating the right conditions for analysis, not just pointing fingers at religious institutions. If we had access to the data, we could have a more informed discussion, but until then, we’re working with a significant information gap.
Finally, the point isn’t to blame or oversimplify but to foster a better understanding of how these dynamics play out, especially in high school athletics, where the fairness of competition is a key concern.
No matter how you spin it, you aren't going to be able to correlate it empirically even if you had all the data you want. The best you could do is make a claim and have supporting data, but there simply will be no proof. There's enough hard data out there in the form of public school success against private schools that will render moot any claim you make.
Look, here is what we are dealing with: Right or wrong, the mindset in this state is that public schools are the model/standard/norm against which all other schools are compared. Public schools are insiders and private schools are nothing more than buzzkill interlopers crashing the public school IHSA party. 'Twas ever thus.
When public schools are extraordinarily successful, there are no demands by other schools (public or private) to find out why. It's OKAY that they are successful because they are the norm. When private schools are extraordinarily successful, especially against public schools, the public schools whine and/or demand to know why, and they self-righteously claim without proof that private schools are successful for no other reason than the fact that they are different from public schools in the way they enroll students. They assume this despite evidence to the contrary that shows that public schools can be successful against private schools. It CAN be done. In the minds of public schools and their apologists, private school success, especially against other public schools, is tainted or suspicious and those public school apologists feel like they have every right to whine and/or demand to know why because, for them, it's NOT OKAY for private schools to be successful since private schools are not the norm. For most public school communities, private schools are not treated as part of the family. They are the equivalent of stranger danger and must always be suspect and kept at arm's length.
The above is never going to change regardless of whatever field levelers are employed. As I said in my first post in this thread, there is no fix.
Let's do ourselves a favor and end this ongoing nightmare. Give me the NIPL.
Last edited:
Then it seems we need to define what makes a school successful. Is it just the end result of academics and athletics? Highest test scores with the most championships? Or is a school successful based on the growth of the students? Or could it be how well the students do after they leave said school?
To say a school is successful because they win in Athletics is like saying a person is successful because they drive an expensive car. Surface shine does not equate to internal glory.
You are probably right, things will never change. Change requires uncomfortableness. People do not want to be uncomfortable. That's why districts failed. People were to scared of the unknown and ran back to the system they hated but knew what the outcomes were going to be. Comfort level decision making is killing progress.
Leo being open is incredible. The alumni base they have is incredible and is fully committed to keeping the tradition of Leo alive.
Alumni who graduated before the 1970s-80s, yes, I would agree with you based on the few Leo grads I know and what they tell me. But most of them have outwitted the grim reaper and actuarial tables thus far and are living on even less borrowed time than most of us. They need to start leaving endowment gifts to Leo in their estate plans so that their annual support will continue long after they meet their eternal rewards. Hope Leo is pushing that. Not as sure how committed and generous the guys are from more recent classes up to the 80s/90s.
Word I’m hearing is that a proposal to separate the Public and Non Boundary schools is currently being written by some pretty large public high schools in the Chicago area. 6 public classes and 2 non boundary classes is the proposal. To be implemented for the 25-26 school year. Not sharing names but it’s coming.
“although Montini and IC Catholic also frequently win championships at the 3A level.” Montini has never won at the 3A level outside of this year and IC has won 3A Once in the last 7 years…. Come on you’re better than that
Leo was supposed to move to Orland Park so what happened tomorrow that? I think the property they owned was sold or the people who run Leo sold it? I know they were traveling vagabonds. They damaged Gately & stold from STL so those 2 places discontinued letting them play home games there so Rita took them in. I was told this at a Leo game by their alum years ago
Last edited:
Morton after the 2 schools 1 team went 6-3 in its first year 1985 & was a pretty good team barely missing the playoffs but haven’t been good since. For majority of the year Morton East was never good in football & outside of 83 special season Morton West not good either
If they separate those schools should leave IHSA
And for every Rochester, there is a Pontiac, Pittsfield, Stillman Valley, and any number of once-successful public school teams who could not sustain their success even not having to deal with all of the realities you mentioned.
You are CHOOSING to pay tuition, you are CHOOSING to comply with dress codes, which by the way all schools have, just not required uniforms. You are CHOOSING to comply with behavior standards and consequences, which all public schools have rules and consequences. You are also CHOOSING to take those religious studies classes by attending the school. These realities are in no way a substantial disadvantage for private schools.
Not turning a blind eye at all, I am not from the area but could assume they closed due to lack of donors and students. I hope you aern't turning a blind eye to the many public school programs that had to forfeit seasons. They have all the advantages (no tuition, no religious classes, no discipline) that privates don't have, and they still can't field competitive teams or teams at all.
I live in the area of St. T., and the gripe with them was their recruiting practices and talking to kids after their freshman year at public schools in the area. There are other public schools in the same area that have some questionable practices as well, and I don't agree with those either. Gone too are Quigley South,Luther South & Luther North,Weber,Holy Cross/Guerin & SFDS now what 10 years without football
If the separation proposal is being done for just football that's way easier said than done. Lots of other sports to consider.
What does two classes even look like for football? It basically has to be 16 team format. They throwing in a bye or is championship week the week before Thanksgiving now?
Haven't ever thought about it too much, but on the spot...
Top 6-10 as voted on by a committee (need to decide exact format) in a double knock out 5 week tourney.
Remaining schools (whatever number) to Prep Bowl to compete against public champ.
Thats assuming my czar abilities allow me to bring all non CCL private schools into the Prep Bowl exemption.
Edit I guess your few non CPS non-boundaried publics like University High also go to the public bracket of prep bowl in this scenario
Edit 2 -really there are quite a lot of CPS non-boundaried. How those are handled in any separation proposal will, I think, be quite telling. They like many of their private school counterparts have the supposed competetive advantage of recruitment yet have failed to utilize it ever with one exception (Phillips, who did so for a relatively short run).
Last edited:
I like the committee idea. That's what I proposed. But you bring up a good point, the Prep Bowl is already a thing, so maybe nothing has to be done... except cancel that game against the CPL champ. That would be a disaster.
If you did top 8 private into one class the first out, per Massey ratings is Montini. Go to 10 and first out is Providence.
The private schools would for sure have an edge, but I think many years your best CPS open enrollment (like a Simeon) could put up a compelling game. Seemed like most of the good open CPS seemed like they were down a bit this year though.
But yea, not ideal.
Maybe institute a second small class private, as long as you're gonna have 2 (also a 8-10 similar format, would be mostly your tiny suburban Christian schools) and then keep Prep Bowl as is since the exemption exists already, adds opportunity for some schools.
I brought this up in some other thread, but you're right and I think it's very important. I don't think anything is going to happen unless all these proposals, theories, etc are written and address all sports (or at least a few more major ones). IHSA/School Admin would probably feel more comfortable with a blanket policy than having to deal with public outcry for each additional sport once something is done for football only.
Your carefully crafted response is true, as far as it goes. However, given that there were no playoffs in 2020 due to COVID, and given that IC Catholic won the 3A championship in 2016 and 2017 (in addition to the 2022 championship you referred to), that means those two schools have won four of the last eight 3A championships. That seems fairly frequent to me.
Additionally, when considering the substance of my statement, as most fair-minded individuals would do, it should also be observed that the primary reason the two schools did not win more 3A championships during that time span is the fact that IC Catholic was busy winning the 4A title in 2018; and Montini was busy finishing second to Joliet Catholic in the 2018 5A championship game.
I stand by the statement I made.
So lets say the "fix" ends up being separation.
- Do we see less non-conference private/public games? Publics schools it doesn't really matter but with only so many private schools if public schools choose not to play them it could lead to a ton of out of state games.
- Do public schools see a separation as a way to keep kids in district?
- Does this just make the gap between the two even larger in the longer term?
- Do enough Admins actually care to get something passed like separation?
- Why separate when some of these school already call themselves the "3A public state champion." I used 3A as an example.
Just some thoughts.
- Do we see less non-conference private/public games? Publics schools it doesn't really matter but with only so many private schools if public schools choose not to play them it could lead to a ton of out of state games.
- Do public schools see a separation as a way to keep kids in district?
- Does this just make the gap between the two even larger in the longer term?
- Do enough Admins actually care to get something passed like separation?
- Why separate when some of these school already call themselves the "3A public state champion." I used 3A as an example.
Just some thoughts.
I think a lot less will change than people proposing hope for. We'll get some "new" champions crowned, but I think they'll still look pretty familiar.
I'm gonna have to go run though my enrollment data, but I suspect East St. Louis, without an ability to opt up due to their conference rule would end up in the new 4A which would be the 3rd largest public class.... Have fun with that, if so. Can we extend them private school status? (and anyone else who wants it 😂)
If they separate then screw the public schools. The private school leave IHSA & start their own association & public schools can’t play privates any more in any sport sadly no more Prep Bowl then
All..... Cash is still king for the Ihsa. Now it's darn near impossible to get the Ihsa to open up their books on how much revenue they bring in (he%$ can't even find attendance figures easily or at all ) but 6 and 2 I think drops the cash considerably.
And those small school publics (1A and 2A) aren't going to like playing larger publics. I would assume the same thought for some low enrollment privates as well. Ratsy
And those small school publics (1A and 2A) aren't going to like playing larger publics. I would assume the same thought for some low enrollment privates as well. Ratsy
Last edited:
If I was the Czar, for the two private schools classes I would just use their straight up enrollment (doubled if still single gender). Of the total amount of privates or non boundary schools, the 32 with the best records make the playoffs (same IHSA playoff points system to break time breakers) and the split is purely enrollment based. Biggest 16 in the Large bracket, the smallest 16 in the Small bracket.
