SF 10 Syc 0 F

[ramblinman]

While creative, his proposal is DOA. It’s just another scheme the public’s have to make up to prevent the privates from winning. And if the plan doesn’t work after implementation, they’ll come up with something else to ensure a public gets a trophy.

Tired. Old. Argument.

Exactly right.

Just more proof how loath public most school fans are to lose to private schools in the playoffs. It sticks in their craw, and they can't let it go.

Instead of getting better like some public schools have done over the years (it CAN be and HAS been done), they would rather give in to expediency and mediocrity by discriminating against a group of schools that experience more success than they do. Basically, they don't want to do the work. It's like C students resenting A students and pushing for grade inflation so that they can be A students without having to put in the work.

 

[SiuCubFan8]

Exactly right.

Just more proof how loath public most school fans are to lose to private schools in the playoffs. It sticks in their craw, and they can't let it go.

Instead of getting better like some public schools have done over the years (it CAN be and HAS been done), they would rather give in to expediency and mediocrity by discriminating against a group of schools that experience more success than they do. Basically, they don't want to do the work. It's like C students resenting A students and pushing for grade inflation so that they can be A students without having to put in the work.

I just like now how it switched from privates to one conference now when two other privates, not in said conference, are in final 4.

 

[Alexander32]

Exactly right.

Just more proof how loath public most school fans are to lose to private schools in the playoffs. It sticks in their craw, and they can't let it go.

Instead of getting better like some public schools have done over the years (it CAN be and HAS been done), they would rather give in to expediency and mediocrity by discriminating against a group of schools that experience more success than they do. Basically, they don't want to do the work. It's like C students resenting A students and pushing for grade inflation so that they can be A students without having to put in the work.

Your explanation might have more credibility except for the fact, as I explained to you last year, I'm not a public-school fan. My views are based on where the evidence leads me with the ultimate objectives of being fair and trying to save the private schools' integration into the IHSA playoffs. My daughter taught at St. Francis for 13 years and I have attended more St. Francis games than the games of any other high school over the last 20 years. Second place would go to Nazareth Academy because I worked in La Grange Park and it was therefore convenient, plus the fact one of my co-worker/friend's kids played for the Roadrunners (so we would sometimes attend a game together).

My daughter currently teaches at a Lutheran elementary/middle school in Batavia, where my wife and I subsidize the cost of our three granddaughters' attendance. [Since my daughter teaches part-time, they do not attend for free.] Clearly, I have nothing against private schools. Nevertheless, having attended Lyons Township my freshman and sophomore years, and Maine East my junior and senior years, I am also familiar with the public-school experience. Having been a fan of Illinois high school football for many years, I am probably as close as you are going to get to an unbiased observer of the public/private debate.

Turning briefly to the comment of SiuCubFan8, the playoff success of the Chicagoland Christian Conference (as currently comprised) is not even close to the success of the CCL/ESCC, and therefore the evidence indicates no new arrangement is needed. I could not tell you the last time Chicago Christian made the semifinals, if ever. In the case of Althoff, they are an independent (which precludes the same remedy) and I don't think they have won a state football championship in at least 20 years.

Finally, as I have mentioned numerous times in the past, and I have proposed in the past, if a success factor for individual schools is to be used (which, of course, it currently is for private schools), then a similar success factor should be applied to public schools as well. The plan I've proposed in this thread would eliminate the need for a separate success factor to be applied to CCL/ESCC schools.

I do find it amusing, though, that the second someone proposes a plan that might make it more difficult for a private school to win a state football championship, the private school supporters turn into the same whiners and complainers they accuse the fans of Antioch and Sycamore to be. To those particular private-school supporters, I say, "just get better".

 

[jwarigaku]

Your explanation might have more credibility except for the fact, as I explained to you last year, I'm not a public-school fan. My views are based on where the evidence leads me with the ultimate objectives of being fair and trying to save the private schools' integration into the IHSA playoffs. My daughter taught at St. Francis for 13 years and I have attended more St. Francis games than the games of any other high school over the last 20 years. Second place would go to Nazareth Academy because I worked in La Grange Park and it was therefore convenient, plus the fact one of my co-worker/friend's kids played for the Roadrunners (so we would sometimes attend a game together).

My daughter currently teaches at a Lutheran elementary/middle school in Batavia, where my wife and I subsidize the cost of our three granddaughters' attendance. [Since my daughter teaches part-time, they do not attend for free.] Clearly, I have nothing against private schools. Nevertheless, having attended Lyons Township my freshman and sophomore years, and Maine East my junior and senior years, I am also familiar with the public-school experience. Having been a fan of Illinois high school football for many years, I am probably as close as you are going to get to an unbiased observer of the public/private debate.

Turning briefly to the comment of SiuCubFan8, the playoff success of the Chicagoland Christian Conference (as currently comprised) is not even close to the success of the CCL/ESCC, and therefore the evidence indicates no new arrangement is needed. I could not tell you the last time Chicago Christian made the semifinals, if ever. In the case of Althoff, they are an independent (which precludes the same remedy) and I don't think they have won a state football championship in at least 20 years.

Finally, as I have mentioned numerous times in the past, and I have proposed in the past, if a success factor for individual schools is to be used (which, of course, it currently is for private schools), then a similar success factor should be applied to public schools as well. The plan I've proposed in this thread would eliminate the need for a separate success factor to be applied to CCL/ESCC schools.

I do find it amusing, though, that the second someone proposes a plan that might make it more difficult for a private school to win a state football championship, the private school supporters turn into the same whiners and complainers they accuse the fans of Antioch and Sycamore to be. To those particular private-school supporters, I say, "just get better".

Alexander,

I too have been on both sides of the public/private education/sports equation for my boys and must say I completely disagree with you because I’m a fan of merit being rewarded. Both sets of programs had success in multiple states with similar debate about separation of public/private schools. To equate this to a business competitive landscape, should the best manufacturer or provider of a service etc… be subject to an additional tax because they provide a better product? I am a fan of everyone being treated equally, but the outcomes measurements should be based on providing the best product or service.

 

[PowerI66]

Alexander,

I too have been on both sides of the public/private education/sports equation for my boys and must say I completely disagree with you because I’m a fan of merit being rewarded. Both sets of programs had success in multiple states with similar debate about separation of public/private schools. To equate this to a business competitive landscape, should the best manufacturer or provider of a service etc… be subject to an additional tax because they provide a better product? I am a fan of everyone being treated equally, but the outcomes measurements should be based on providing the best product or service.

Before I say what I'm going to say, I'm at peace with public/private thing. It is what it is. However, this analogy doesn't work unless you acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of each side. For example, business A only gets to use local resources, but business B gets to use resources from surrounding areas. Business A gets taxed at a lower rate than business B. You get the idea.

 

[Green Knights 17]

I'm glad you asked. I would separate them only until the semifinal round.

1) All CCL/ESCC teams make the playoffs regardless of record.
2) Divide the 24 teams into three groups of eight teams each. This can be done based on student enrollment or team ability.
3) Each group of eight teams plays three rounds of playoffs among themselves to produce one winner.
4) The winner of Group A advances to the semifinals of the IHSA 8A playoffs.
5) The winner of Group B advances to the semifinals of the IHSA 7A playoffs.
6) The winner of Group C advances to the semifinal round of the IHSA 6A playoffs.
7) The other 24 teams (three quadrants of eight teams) in those three class levels will be teams that are not in the CCL/ESCC.
8) Any CCL/ESCC playoff group (A, B or C) that does not win a state championship for five consecutive years will drop down one class level for the playoffs the following year.

If CCL/ESCC member schools do not like the new arrangement, then, as they like to say, they should "just get better".

We are in the age where everyone gets a trophy, so let’s make sure all the public schools get to the semi final first before having to play any competition. Great idea.

 

[Green Knights 17]

Before I say what I'm going to say, I'm at peace with public/private thing. It is what it is. However, this analogy doesn't work unless you acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of each side. For example, business A only gets to use local resources, but business B gets to use resources from surrounding areas. Business A gets taxed at a lower rate than business B. You get the idea.

Private schools might pull from multiple towns, but you are still talking small enrollments for most of them. Private school coaches are probably making half the money a public school coach is getting. Nothing is fair in life, end of the day, compete and find a way.

 

[jwarigaku]

Before I say what I'm going to say, I'm at peace with public/private thing. It is what it is. However, this analogy doesn't work unless you acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of each side. For example, business A only gets to use local resources, but business B gets to use resources from surrounding areas. Business A gets taxed at a lower rate than business B. You get the idea.

Yes but business A gets the resources for Free! While business B has to find someone willing to pay the tax for business A and business B!

 

[corey90]

Yes but business A gets the resources for Free! While business B has to find someone willing to pay the tax for business A and business B!

Trust me nothing is free. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[PowerI66]

Private schools might pull from multiple towns, but you are still talking small enrollments for most of them. Private school coaches are probably making half the money a public school coach is getting. Nothing is fair in life, end of the day, compete and find a way.

I think you would be very surprised about paydays. Also, in a lot of districts half the amount of money a public school coach is making is well below the poverty line

 

[PowerI66]

Yes but business A gets the resources for Free! While business B has to find someone willing to pay the tax for business A and business B!

Like I said, pros and cons. One thing is for sure, transfers don't matter anymore as long as you dot your i's

 

[CoachPap]

One issue I see is that some of these schools do not schedule tough enough opponents early in the year. A school that routinely wins their conference should be trying to schedule some of the CCL / ESCC schools for their non cons early in the year.

As of right now for next year, I think there are 5 or 6 CCL / ESCC schools looking for games Week 1 and 2. Play them early so your kids know what the level of competition is. Some schools do a really good job of scheduling tougher non cons, but there are opportunities to understand the competition better come playoff time.

 

[CoachPap]

Also, having been on both sides of the public vs private as a coach. The biggest difference (and also the biggest indicator of both private and public school consistent success) is the coaching staffs. Many private schools only have 1 or 2 internal staff members as coaches. They get to hire external coaches that stay with the program and might be a little better overall as coaches. Public schools are often saddled with the requirement to give the math teacher and science teacher a coaching job. Sometimes those guys are great, but too often, they are there to collect the extra stipend.

The public schools that have the most consistent success have been lead by a great head coach with consistent and quality assistants. (Batavia, LWE, Maine South, ESL, etc)

 

[Alexander32]

Alexander,

I too have been on both sides of the public/private education/sports equation for my boys and must say I completely disagree with you because I’m a fan of merit being rewarded. Both sets of programs had success in multiple states with similar debate about separation of public/private schools. To equate this to a business competitive landscape, should the best manufacturer or provider of a service etc… be subject to an additional tax because they provide a better product? I am a fan of everyone being treated equally, but the outcomes measurements should be based on providing the best product or service.

Truthfully, it sounds like you and I would agree on many things in life. Still, there is something to be said about Aristotle's golden mean; that is, the pursuit of a proper balance with respect to every issue in life. That is why in economic matters (or the business example you gave above) most countries have adopted antitrust laws. There is a general understanding that power, including economic power, tends to concentrate over a period of time if no exterior force restrains it. When monopolies develop, often because originally a company had a better product, the company with the monopoly is frequently able to drive competitors from the market place and competition is actually reduced.

Anyway, sorry for the tedious explanation. When it comes to football, my goal is not to promote equal outcomes but, rather, to promote excellence through the promotion of a more competitive environment. I won't go into an explanation of all the mechanisms the NFL uses to promote a competitive environment, in part because you may be more knowledgeable about them than I am. However, I will say that if any one high school conference dominates the playoffs to an extreme degree, it can drive other football programs from the scene (i.e. Rock Island Alleman) or make it impossible for other programs to compete (i.e. De La Salle, Walther Christian, Maine East) and in a broad sense reduce the pursuit for football excellence in Illinois. The number of programs will get smaller, the number of players (and therefore the size of rosters) gets smaller, and many programs adopt 8-man football in an effort to survive.

Anyway, it is okay that we disagree, and I certainly do not propose to tell you what to think. It seems we are both committed to the pursuit of excellence and we both would be saddened if 30 years down the road football had largely become a thing of the past. It seems, in our own way, we both would like to see a vibrant high school football landscape.