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:
