Until you see the advantages the open enrollment schools have, you will never understand the problem the IHSA is dealing with.
Shouldn't schools other than Rochester get bashed about the success factor?
- Thread starter PanthersWildcats86
- Start date
Until you see the advantages the open enrollment schools have, you will never understand the problem the IHSA is dealing with.
Don’t bother with me, I would rather beat my head against the wall then engage with you.
In his defense, i believe he is stating this as a proposal for future implementation not stating what currently is....
Of course, you don't want to admit to logic, rather keep your head in the sand and expect to dominate schools you have an advantage over..
Yup - the sole goal of the private schools is to keep Herscher down and beaten like a rag doll each and every playoff season.
Well they aren’t doing a very good job of that, now are they? Top 5 in 4A last two years..
Correct. They are protected by the multiplier and success factors. We all know the insidious goal of the privates is to play in the standard enrollment level with their current student enrollment numbers and hence the evil plot to beat Herscher like a rag doll. It’s a conspiracy at the same level as Roswell (I bet they have the aliens in Hanger 18 as well). The next Herscher project is to jump ICCP past 4A with the 2.0 super multiplier -
The entire process is a joke and should be addressed legally. The worst high school association in the United States.
not sure what you ALL have not noticed. but in the last 2years, they have figured out where all of these schools need to be playing. and this year has proven just that. all of the games this year were premier games played at the best competition level of these schools.
phillips need to be 7a/8a
just makes sense. naz, mchs, shg, stl need to be in 6a, they just fit and even in an up or down year for them they will be able to compete every year.
rochester needs to be 5a/6a school, they will compete year in and year out very nicely.
the privates are not going anywhere they had semi's/finalist in each division basically, and the publics should be feeling good about the competition level of play..
phillips need to be 7a/8a
just makes sense. naz, mchs, shg, stl need to be in 6a, they just fit and even in an up or down year for them they will be able to compete every year.
rochester needs to be 5a/6a school, they will compete year in and year out very nicely.
the privates are not going anywhere they had semi's/finalist in each division basically, and the publics should be feeling good about the competition level of play..
That's great, but a team like naz isn't staying in 6a they are now being bumped again to 7a even as the losing team. They don't want parody, they want publics to have overwhelming success.
Next year ICCP could go have an epic even match up with Rochester and lose or even get run over in a blow out loss and guess what they will be headed up to 5a just because they made the championship game.
ya i get it. but a naz team with all jrs making the finals they could compete next year in 7a. but, honestly i understand what you are saying.
this sf should have been only a few year thing to get the teams in the right divisions because the coaches and schools admins would not do it by themselves..iccp 4a/5a, rochester, 5a/6a, phillips 7a/8a.
and you can not get any better than what we just had. 6 of the 8 games were outstanding to watch.
iccp v dunlap would have been a hell of a game. but sometimes you get a 16seed that blows away the competition and makes the finals. it was good for 2 1/2 qtrs then they tired out.
rochester /morris was epic and they are a 5a/6a program.
It's not stupid - it's discriminatory. As I stated previously, to punish a bunch of 15-17 year old kids because of them having success is just plain WRONG!!
I'll go ahead and throw something else in the mix here to indeed address the public/private issue. I agree that there is an advantage, so why not consider this: reduce the 30-mile radius now allowed for non-boundaried school participation. To what? - That would be for the IHSA to decide. Say you reduce it to 15-miles. Even in the Chicago area, that may result in a more even playing field. If a reduction in the non-boundaried radius does result in equality, you could maybe even get rid of the multiplier and for sure the punishment adjustment (I will not give it the recognition to call it the "success" adjustment - what a crock!!). So that there is no misunderstanding: I don't think ANY football program should be punishment adjusted, public or private - do not do that to the kids and punish their hard work. Shame on ANYONE who supports that!!
If, as you say, it's a case of being challenged to see how good they can be, doesn't that also go for public school programs? Would you deny those kids this opportunity? If so, that's not very thoughtful of you!
I have said that before.. keep multiplier at 1.65 for all open enrollment schools and reduce the radius to 15 miles.. a school like Naz is already a load with a big edge, they don't need to get kids from Oswego East to contend for a title..
Or base the multiplier for each school on the radius they can draw from
Good points dogz, but Naz next year will NOT be in 6A but 7A, and if SHG would happen to be in the 6a championship game next year (although not likely), they aslo will not be in 6A, but rather 7A.
Unless ALL, and I mean ALL, schools are put in or gravitate to their TRUE class, you still have a discriminatory punishment exclusively applied to private schools, which obviously in just fine with the IHSA. Do not expect them to do the sensible thing you may be suggesting.
So now a family in Herscher who wishes to send their child to a private catholic high school can't. Because the closest is Bmac which is 16 miles.
haha you are assuming that is hardwork. getting 6 or 7d1 athletes to play on a team and have 6 or 7more as their backups for next year. that is not hard work, that is finding talent and putting it on the field. you just had the greatest coach racki with an all junior team of what??? what??? 2'sor 3's get real and open your eyes. when you stack a team as a phillips and run them in a 4a conference it just ridiculous. - you can call it whatever you want. but if your coach/admin is a p$$y and does not move themselves up, then guess what, ihsa is going to move them up.. and rochester should be moved up also. they just showed they can compete with a storied 5a/6a program. and do every year with shg.
but, if yur like the cry babies and feel they should be able to win a title every single year so they can get those 6 or 7 d1 recruits every year. oh well. but, i do agree with you 100% it should be 10/15miles not 30mile radius. i mean lets face it, you are not getting to many doctors or lawyers of these kids after college, a bunch of tradesmen, salesmen, and hardworking providing for their families. and that is what it is all about.
teaching kids how to compete in an unfair world of cutthroat jagbags. and able to see the fact that doing the right thing and being accountable for yourselves is how to make it in life...
People are always talking about the 30 mile radius like it's gospel.... just want to make sure that everyone gets that the 30 mile radius only applies to students who are for the first time moving from public education to private education for HS.... if you did 7/8th grade at a private or at least any 4 years at a private during your k-8 years you can go as far as you want. Here is the exact language:
"...have attended private schools on a continuous basis for the last two consecutive school years before entering high school or for a total of not less than four school years from kindergarten through eighth grade..." Rule - 3.032.2
So if you are a Catholic/private grade school kid you could drive from Gurnee to Sacred Heart Griffin every day if you wanted to.
IMO, the success factor needs two tweaks:
1. Apply it to all schools, public included.
2. It should only be applied to those schools who win their class. Merely making the championship game in football or the final 4 in other sports should not invoke the success factor.
1. Apply it to all schools, public included.
2. It should only be applied to those schools who win their class. Merely making the championship game in football or the final 4 in other sports should not invoke the success factor.
I think the overarching discussion that is not talked about is the natural cyclical nature of high school football success for both public and private schools.... ICCP was a semi-finalist 3 years ago then went back-to-back..... before that there was a long period where they were not the power team. They lost to Bishop Mac 3 years ago and BMac won the title... where have they been the past few seasons? What was Naz's history of success before 2014??? Even after Montini's long run they have now been "down." Providence went from state title to 2 season without playoffs. St. Francis was not that long ago a state champion and semi-finalist now look where they are.... The same thing happens with public teams. It may be 3 years or 10 years but Rochester will slump down to average at some point even in 4a due to a cycle of less talented kids coming through.... it always happens... always. We see one significantly long run by a private like a Montini a few years ago and we over-correct. What happens if a team gets moved up 2-3 classes and then graduate a huge group of kids and a bunch of average kids who would be 5-4/6-3 and a 2nd round out in their "real class" now has to get butchered 2-3 classes up and may be stuck there for two seasons and their entire playing career (jr-sr seasons) was dismal for no reason. Just let the ebbs and flows occur and forget success factors for all. Stick with a base multiplier for the un-boundaried schools and let it be.
I have said before I can see a one class bump but that should be the cap... never above that.
I have said before I can see a one class bump but that should be the cap... never above that.
One additional thought on the SF rule problem.... even if I agreed with the SF and why it is needed to off-set private school advantages it would only be fine when the private is playing a public. So a 5a private is bumped to 7a and they now have to play 7a privates in the playoff as well. Theoretically those 7a privates have the same "advantages" as the smaller school correct? So putting a 5a private against a 7a private is patently unfair based on the idea that it's being done to off-set private school advantages.
absolutely correct.
and to bias - i agree every team goes thru cycles that is why should be 2yrs. if you are not successful(making playoffs) then should be moved down. all teams every division public or private. and yes, i get the fact that 5a private would play a 7a private but, in the same manner (if they changed it to all teams pub or pri) a public 5a would play a 7a public.
the whole point is to get to a competition level. not seeing the same team dominate a division for whatever bias pub or private. and if left up to the schools themselves you know as well as i do, it would never happen.
but, how do you get the ihsa to see it as it is? first they applied the sf now it has shown to be working and now they just need to tweek to accompany all schools.
Maybe DL is going to rack up titles and make a mockery of the system to make a point for dear old Dad.
No ebb and flow for Rochester for 9 years. Check out their record from 2009 through this year!!
Then find an ihsa violation such as non-district students or recruiting and get them sanctioned if something exists. If their success is all above board then good for them. But I don't want the SF for anyone. Now if it is going to be left in place for privates regardless then I am for adding it to the publics.
I just can’t see the IHSA leaning on a school from a rural town of 3,000 people. It’s easier to come down on an urban school that has more resources.
13 of the 16 teams that played in championships have been there within the last 5 years.
So BWM, he defined your definition of parody within the framework of the threads topic. Please comment on the threads topic and how your parody comment applies if you're going to be a smarta$$.
I never said he defined it correctly.
“Jwar, having an opinion on almost every topic is sometimes like a parody account.”
Sorry to cause a spat over my typo.... Parity not Parody (usually using phone to type).
No spat from me I knew what you were saying and why I was giving BWM a hard time as was the other board poster...I guess I should have used quotes or italics. And honestly with Rochester winning 7 of 8 I'm not sure it wasn't accurate all the way around "with tongue in cheek"
