The p/p hegemony continues unabated

[Rodney]

An attempt to call me a 6 year old is literally doing what you just said I was doing....

 

 

Despite the fact that you called both of the people in the argument 6 year olds, effectively nullifying your "you're stupid" argument

 

[JQWL]

4 minutes ago, Rodney said:

An attempt to call me a 6 year old is literally doing what you just said I was doing....

 

 

Despite the fact that you called both of the people in the argument 6 year olds, effectively nullifying your "you're stupid" argument

 

Glad I didn't take them up on the private school education now.

[tango]

1 hour ago, JQWL said:

It was very clear the purpose of the transfer was for athletic purposes. My son is a good student. I didn't want to short change him.

Then your email was apparently more clear than your post. 

For whatever reason, this reminds me of a funny incident I had with a fellow parent the summer before my oldest son's freshman year (2009). The wrestling coaches were running a camp or workouts and a kid who had attended a public school was there. He was a pretty good wrestler, but nothing too special. The dads were all in the back of the room and the kid's dad was letting everyone know his son had "been given a scholarship" to attend Memorial (this was pre-voucher era). I was on the school's Board of Trustees at that time and knew damn good and well there was no such thing as an athletic scholarship. The other dads had been in feeder program and we all knew this guy was blowing smoke. So, I said "Wow! Congratulations! How much?" and then asked the head coach (who is a good friend) why that guy's son was getting a scholarship and my kid wasn't. The coach, very quickly, said "Sir, if you go around telling lies like that, you and your son won't be around here very long." And he was right, they weren't.     

Edited November 30, 2023 by tango

[Rodney]

I was not educated at a private school actually, and have no current affiliation with one

 

I simply find people who whine on the internet because they cant win football games amusing

 

[Titan32]

1 hour ago, FastpacedO said:

I have yet to see a game where a population type at a P/P school forced little johnny from a Public school to fumble, throw an interception, miss a tackle, or miss a gap assignment. So again how are they getting "screwed" exactly? 

You want to know why there are so many attempts to fix this issue, it is because of the incessant moaning and groaning, 99% of the time for things that don't exist that there is some sort of cheating.

Chatard (which I have no affiliation with) has received a lot of grief over this for years. The talk about boundaries and feeder schools, they post their roster with what elementary school they went to. Guess what all but maybe a couple went to P/P elementary school in their feeder system. There have been plenty of Public schools right there with the talent to beat them. I bet you can go back and look at the game film or statistics and the big difference is they did not turn the ball over or didn't turn it over as much. The RB Kinnett that was a struggle to stop at 5'7" 165 lbs (in a cast) went to St. Pius X literally 7 minutes from Chatard. The DB Guy that had 3 Int's (6 Int's in the last two State Championship games) went to St. Matthew's 7 minutes from Chatard (about halfway between Cathedral and Chatard). They are good hard working football kids too, yet you have no problem saying they have an advantage. I could go on and on naming players.

I know from first hand experience there are teams that are beat mentally before some of these P/P even get off the bus to play them.

I look back over the impressive job Coach Moore has done at Center Grove since he arrived. What he did was instill his philosophy in every aspect of Center Grove and it started with the Bantham Football. They play disciplined, they make very little mistakes. They hit the weight room hard and he has put a major focus on building speed (having been the track coach too). He has built them into a dynasty. all something any team can do starting in their youth program. and filtering it into everything they do. 

Again...I haven't argued about where they get their kids or really even transfers.  The nature of paying for a service results in a greater percentage of like minded quality student athletes period end of story.  What Chatard does is phenomenal...but wouldn't be quite as phenomenal if they had a bunch of special needs kids or 30%of their enrollment only there because the law says they have to be, effectively pushing them into 4A or 5A.

Many publics have all the things some of you guys like to point out make a program successful.  The difference is when you have such a higher percentage of quality student athletes it magnifies the success of the privates schools who also have those things and do them right.

And with regard to Center Grove....the issue basically takes care of itself due to economies of scale at probably 4A and above but definitely 5A.  At that point even with the dead weight they can muster enough dudes to load the football team.  This is mostly a 1-3A problem.

Are you saying that ever state in the US is wrong....that literally almost every HS association in the county is unfairly looking for solutions for a problem that doesn't exist.  That he only cause to the issue is excellent youth, feeder, admin, Coaching etc. some schools have?  If you are....that is really a simple point of view.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Titan32

[tango]

I enjoy the discussion. I have no problem admitting that overall, our student population at Memorial has a much higher percentage of motivated students than the typical public school our size. But the larger percentage of those motivated kids participate in extra-curriculars other than football too. I think we had 23 on the freshman team this season. We usually have decent retention from year to year, so a combined V/JV roster of 60 or so is about the norm. To me, the difference between a Chatard and others is that Chatard has a deep football culture. Much in the way Mater Dei has a deep wrestling culture. 

I have no problem with a system that could accurately account for the differences between public and p/p schools, but I have little confidence it can be done objectively and accurately, and even less confidence it could be implemented by the IHSAA. I can't speak for any other areas of the state, but Memorial and MD are not pulling kids from a large geographic area. Most of our kids are products of the feeder schools, with a few kids sprinkled in whose parents want more than what our neighboring public schools can provide and the voucher makes it attainable. But it isn't a big number.  

Edited November 30, 2023 by tango

[Titan32]

28 minutes ago, Rodney said:

I was not educated at a private school actually, and have no current affiliation with one

 

I simply find people who whine on the internet because they cant win football games amusing

 

 

https://www.almanacsports.com/football/schedule.php?team=IND_BRBJ&season=2021

Edited November 30, 2023 by Titan32

[Titan32]

10 minutes ago, tango said:

I enjoy the discussion. I have no problem admitting that overall, our student population at Memorial has a much higher percentage of motivated students than the typical public school our size. But the larger percentage of those motivated kids participate in extra-curriculars other than football too. I think we had 23 on the freshman team this season. We usually have decent retention from year to year, so a combined V/JV roster of 60 or so is about the norm. To me, the difference between a Chatard and others is that Chatard has a deep football culture. Much in the way Mater Dei has a deep wrestling culture. 

I have no problem with a system that could accurately account for the differences between public and p/p schools, but I have little confidence it can be done objectively and accurately, and even less confidence it could be implemented by the IHSAA. I can't speak for any other areas of the state, but Memorial and MD are not pulling kids from a large geographic area. Most of our kids are products of the feeder schools, with a few kids sprinkled in whose parents want more than what our neighboring public schools can provide and the voucher makes it attainable. But it isn't a big number.  

This entire statement is fair except for the roster count part.  Rosters follow the general student population to a large extent.  Said another way, those 23 freshman are still going to have a significantly different makeup than 23 at Southridge.  It's nobody's fault, just the nature of the business to to speak.

1 hour ago, JQWL said:

I feel like you're the 6 year old losing an argument and you just yelled, "You're stupid." at the other 6 year old.

The only guy as thick as this dude on here was Cody.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Titan32

[US31]

On 11/29/2023 at 4:12 PM, FastpacedO said:

 

A student that doesn't want to complete the essay required, the placement test required. More than likely a parent isn't going to fork out $16,000 (less with Financial Aid) if their child can't make the grades. Any student who won't abide by the code of conduct, most likely a parent isn't going to fork out the money if they are at risk of not aboding by the code of conduct.

By the term "risk" I mean a parent isn't going to fork out money for their child to attend a Private or Parochial school if they are at risk or in danger/capable of failing or disobeying the code of conduct. 

It’s shocking a person can type this and still claim there is no difference in the student population between p/p and public schools.

[US31]

3 hours ago, Just a dad said:

Now email the same guy and tell him your kid has a SAT score of 1500 and wants to get into Harvard but isn’t good at sports. I bet he tells you the same thing. Not quite the “gotcha” you were hoping for.

Now email the private school guy and tell him your kid is habitually truant…fails most his classes….doesn’t do any sports or extracurriculars….and was suspended twice last year for discipline issues…and you have so little money you can barely keep the lights on at home as a single parent.   

I bet my house you won’t get the same response from the p/p that a public school is REQUIRED BY LAW to give.

Edited November 30, 2023 by US31

[tango]

14 minutes ago, US31 said:

Now email the private school guy and tell him your kid is habitually truant…fails most his classes….doesn’t do any sports or extracurriculars….and was suspended twice last year for discipline issues…and you have so little money you can barely keep the lights on at home as a single parent.   

I bet my house you won’t get the same response from the p/p that a public school is REQUIRED BY LAW to give.

To the contrary, I think if the single parent said "my child needs the discipline, structure and accountability your school requires and I am willing to support the administrators, faculty and staff" then that to me is the exact kind of kid we can set on a higher trajectory. Right or wrong, the ease at which most families can become voucher eligible makes lack of financial resources an non-issue. 

[jets]

3 hours ago, Titan32 said:

This always turns into a ....I have to win this argument kind of discussion.  Any good decent human being who really "cares about the kids" etc. knows there is an advantage in population type that skews enrollment.  Why would someone fight to screw over so many good hard working football kids?  Because it's always been that way?  Why are there so many attempts to fix this issue in every state in the union?  Seems like a lot of effort going into a problem that isn't real.  I would just rather you guys man up and say....we like our advantage, we paid for it therefore we deserve it.  I could live with that.

Me too…I honestly don’t understand how anyone can look at the results and NOT understand the inherent advantage 

3 hours ago, FastpacedO said:

I have yet to see a game where a population type at a P/P school forced little johnny from a Public school to fumble, throw an interception, miss a tackle, or miss a gap assignment. So again how are they getting "screwed" exactly? 

You want to know why there are so many attempts to fix this issue, it is because of the incessant moaning and groaning, 99% of the time for things that don't exist that there is some sort of cheating.

Chatard (which I have no affiliation with) has received a lot of grief over this for years. The talk about boundaries and feeder schools, they post their roster with what elementary school they went to. Guess what all but maybe a couple went to P/P elementary school in their feeder system. There have been plenty of Public schools right there with the talent to beat them. I bet you can go back and look at the game film or statistics and the big difference is they did not turn the ball over or didn't turn it over as much. The RB Kinnett that was a struggle to stop at 5'7" 165 lbs (in a cast) went to St. Pius X literally 7 minutes from Chatard. The DB Guy that had 3 Int's (6 Int's in the last two State Championship games) went to St. Matthew's 7 minutes from Chatard (about halfway between Cathedral and Chatard). They are good hard working football kids too, yet you have no problem saying they have an advantage. I could go on and on naming players.

I know from first hand experience there are teams that are beat mentally before some of these P/P even get off the bus to play them.

I look back over the impressive job Coach Moore has done at Center Grove since he arrived. What he did was instill his philosophy in every aspect of Center Grove and it started with the Bantham Football. They play disciplined, they make very little mistakes. They hit the weight room hard and he has put a major focus on building speed (having been the track coach too). He has built them into a dynasty. all something any team can do starting in their youth program. and filtering it into everything they do. 

Lol…the ol “we have CYO feeder league and tradition- that’s why we’re successful “ argument lol

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

This entire statement is fair except for the roster count part.  Rosters follow the general student population to a large extent.  Said another way, those 23 freshman are still going to have a significantly different makeup than 23 at Southridge.  It's nobody's fault, just the nature of the business to to speak.

The only guy as thick as this dude on here was Cody.

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

This entire statement is fair except for the roster count part.  Rosters follow the general student population to a large extent.  Said another way, those 23 freshman are still going to have a significantly different makeup than 23 at Southridge.  It's nobody's fault, just the nature of the business to to speak.

The only guy as thick as this dude on here was Cody.

MUCH DIFFERENT LOL

[foxbat]

3 hours ago, First_Backer_Inside said:

I just want someone to tell me how p/p's, if there is no unfair advantage, continue to dominate the classes 1A-3A. That's all I want. And don't tell me they don't because since the SF there have been 33 state title games in those three classes. p/p's have won 18. They make up 10% or somewhere around that of the teams in those three classes. If there isn't an advantage, how do those numbers make sense. I don't want to hear they have a great weight lifting program. Public schools have that. Don't tell me its coaching. Public schools have that. Don't tell me its the youth program. Public schools have that. Don't tell me its a combination of the three. Some public schools have that. So what is it? I wanna hear a private guy explain it to me. You public guys don't win enough state championships, I want someone that knows football to speak on the matter.

Also don't tell me it's the same public schools winning because it isn't. Of the remaining 15 state championships, 12 different public schools won those.

So I'm not sure I qualify as the guy you are looking to answer.  My parents both had Catholic education all of their life with my mom finishing from a Catholic college and my dad leaving Catholic college for the military and then finishing from a public university.  I went to Catholic school through 6th grade and then did public school for everything else through college.  Two of my kids have attended Catholic school, but all have also been homeschooled and attended public schools ... my three girls from Jeff and my oldest son finishing at Harrison this year and the youngest probably attending Harrison part-time for high school.  Nonetheless, I've been thinking about this issue for a bit and frankly, haven't yet been able to come up with a set of items that works for the argument as to why p/ps, in general win, that can then be applied across the board.  What I have been leaning toward though is something akin to the idea that it's less categories and more programs.  When I look at the issue in short timeframes, like this thread does every season, it's fairly easy to generalize.  Even when several short-terms are pieced together, that generalization is easy, but some things don't seem to specifically match up with the general premise.  With that said, I'm coming at this very much so from an Indiana perspective with some additional insights from Texas and Louisiana; but mainly Indiana.

The premise has often been, if there isn't some advantage, then how does x percentage win y percent of the time?  @Bobref has pretty much trademarked on GID that correlation doesn't necessarily indicate causation.  That got me to thinking through some things that, rather than focusing on the generalities and trying to make an all-encompassing theory, I'd look at some case studies and try to work from there.  Also, and I don't recall who it was that asked the question in another thread, but what got me thinking about this was a general question that was asked about 6A ... which was never really fully answered or even really solidified.  The question was, and is very similar to the question first posited in the thread, "Why is it that only four teams/programs have ever won 6A?"  It went on to, and rightly so, point out that there weren't similarities between the schools as there are differences in size, FRL items, communities, offenses/defenses, etc. It just kind of ended up as a mystery.  Four teams out of roughly 40 teams that have been in and out of 6A since its inception 11 years ago, roughly 10%, have not only won SOME of the titles, but ALL of the titles in that class.  What is the categorization that defines that four programs that you could "bottle" or is it something much more complex that can't fit on a bumper sticker?

So let me start and see if the idea can perhaps be expanded by others with some real discussion on things.  The program that I'm most familiar with is LCC.  A couple of my kids attended Catholic school until the 3rd and 5th grade, but I coached in a youth program there for 18 seasons.  LCC first started playing ball back in 1958.  As seen in a couple of other threads currently in play, while LCC has a mystique about it that has it mentioned as a storied p/p powerhouse, it's really been about the last 15 years or so that LCC has probably earned that mystique.  It entered into a storied four-peat era back in 2009-2012, but prior to that, it was pretty much feast or famine according to season outcomes on Harrell's.  So I'll ask the first question that catches my eye with LCC and the statements often made about p/p in general.  If p/p have the automatic advantage, why did LCC have such gaps between its pre-four-peat timeframe?  Starting from 1976, until 2009 ... a 34-year period ... LCC got out of sectionals four times with gaps of 13, 10, and 6 years between each.  Incidentally, in every season for LCC, until 2021, when their season ended without a state title, it came at the hands of public schools ... only the last three seasons, in 2A, has LCC's season been ended by another p/p.  BTW, not just one p/p-killer public school, although Pioneer has a storied tradition for jousting with LCC, but over a dozen public schools have delivered deathblows to LCC's post season.  So if the idea that there's an inherent p/p advantage that LCC has, then why was it not there in force in the 34-year period and, probably more importantly, what were the MANY public schools doing that was causing LCC seasons to end really early in that timeframe?

Of course, Noll is always mentioned.  Noll has a very storied past in that it never seemed to have any p/p mojo outside of 1989 when it won 3A.  Outside of that, according to Harrell's, Noll made it to a sectional championship only three times, never making it out of the sectional, and has been ousted in the first game of sectionals for the last decade ... all by public teams.  

Ritter has an amazing past.  Five state titles with three in 1A and two in 2A.  For a long time, they were one of the poster children for p/p dominance, but now, closing in on a decade, no one whispers their name anymore.  Their last state title was in 2016; however, since then, they haven't made it out of a sectional.  They've also not even been close oustings.  The closest they got was this year's 23-point second sectional game loss to Eastern Hancock.  Maybe they have a string of "bad classes" ... the opposite of those "good classes" that public school lament might SF them unfairly into the next higher class ... but, for all of the talk about p/p mojo, four losing seasons in the last seven and three of the last four would seem to indicate that reloading, which is fairly automatic for p/p schools as I've been told, would seem worrisome and not in line with the meme.

Heritage Christian ... an often forgotten p/p ... maybe because they aren't Catholic.  Only has around a two-decade history history according to Harrell's.  Has back-to-back state appearances in 2007-2008 with one blue ring.  Outside of that, two sectional titles in 2019-2020.  Has a mix of being ousted by both public and private schools.  Fairly good records, but not really drawing any of the p/p ire directed at the categorization as a whole.

Culver Academy has been around since the mid-1980s, yet only has a pair of sectional titles spaced a decade and a half apart ... 2000 and 2015.  Again, almost never referred to or draws the ire of the p/p category and I've NEVER in over two decades of being in Indiana ever once heard anyone talk about the unfair advantage that Culver Academy has, not only as a p/p, but a p/p that has had students on its rosters from foreign countries!  Wanna talk about recruiting or being outside of a youth program circle?  Also, Culver Academy used to be Culver Military Academies, so I'm pretty sure that their lack of state titles wasn't due to not being competitive.

Again, I don't have a specific answer to your question because the general answer that folks hope is given doesn't fit with all of the categorization.  Just the subset above actually refutes the generalized statements that tend to be made.  Also, I see the issue as being more complex than many of the bumper-sticker takes that have been bantered around.  I think there's something to be said for focused, driven groups in a school, but similarly, I would contend that Noll, LCC, and others have been equally focused, driven, etc., if the narratives are to be fully-embraced, but the outcomes don't seem similar.  With that said, what I think MAY be an issue is that there may be advantages that come from said make-ups, but that they aren't uniformly autonomous and that what's actually happening, which dovetails back into the 6A questions is that programs, and not necessarily categories, have figured out how to wield/harness the power as opposed to demographics.  I also believe that, and Ritter and LCC look like interesting cases for this, that while a program may be able to leverage some type of advantage, it isn't necessarily something that's inherent and automatic by birthright of categorization and, for example in the case of Ritter, it may be something that isn't eternal.

[WCGrad92]

Our conference is about to go back to 4 private schools, 4 public schools.  We dont have time to complain about any advantages there may be against us. We play who is in front of us. The names on the front of they jersey mean absolutely nothing on the football field. It is still 11 on 11 football.

Our schedule this coming year... Greencastle and Linton  OOC,  and then Ritter/Scecina/Covenant Christan/Lutheran as well as Triton Central/Speedway and Beech Grove.

We believe this schedule gets us ready to play anyone in our tournament. 

[WWFan]

11 minutes ago, foxbat said:

So I'm not sure I qualify as the guy you are looking to answer.  My parents both had Catholic education all of their life with my mom finishing from a Catholic college and my dad leaving Catholic college for the military and then finishing from a public university.  I went to Catholic school through 6th grade and then did public school for everything else through college.  Two of my kids have attended Catholic school, but all have also been homeschooled and attended public schools ... my three girls from Jeff and my oldest son finishing at Harrison this year and the youngest probably attending Harrison part-time for high school.  Nonetheless, I've been thinking about this issue for a bit and frankly, haven't yet been able to come up with a set of items that works for the argument as to why p/ps, in general win, that can then be applied across the board.  What I have been leaning toward though is something akin to the idea that it's less categories and more programs.  When I look at the issue in short timeframes, like this thread does every season, it's fairly easy to generalize.  Even when several short-terms are pieced together, that generalization is easy, but some things don't seem to specifically match up with the general premise.  With that said, I'm coming at this very much so from an Indiana perspective with some additional insights from Texas and Louisiana; but mainly Indiana.

The premise has often been, if there isn't some advantage, then how does x percentage win y percent of the time?  @Bobref has pretty much trademarked on GID that correlation doesn't necessarily indicate causation.  That got me to thinking through some things that, rather than focusing on the generalities and trying to make an all-encompassing theory, I'd look at some case studies and try to work from there.  Also, and I don't recall who it was that asked the question in another thread, but what got me thinking about this was a general question that was asked about 6A ... which was never really fully answered or even really solidified.  The question was, and is very similar to the question first posited in the thread, "Why is it that only four teams/programs have ever won 6A?"  It went on to, and rightly so, point out that there weren't similarities between the schools as there are differences in size, FRL items, communities, offenses/defenses, etc. It just kind of ended up as a mystery.  Four teams out of roughly 40 teams that have been in and out of 6A since its inception 11 years ago, roughly 10%, have not only won SOME of the titles, but ALL of the titles in that class.  What is the categorization that defines that four programs that you could "bottle" or is it something much more complex that can't fit on a bumper sticker?

So let me start and see if the idea can perhaps be expanded by others with some real discussion on things.  The program that I'm most familiar with is LCC.  A couple of my kids attended Catholic school until the 3rd and 5th grade, but I coached in a youth program there for 18 seasons.  LCC first started playing ball back in 1958.  As seen in a couple of other threads currently in play, while LCC has a mystique about it that has it mentioned as a storied p/p powerhouse, it's really been about the last 15 years or so that LCC has probably earned that mystique.  It entered into a storied four-peat era back in 2009-2012, but prior to that, it was pretty much feast or famine according to season outcomes on Harrell's.  So I'll ask the first question that catches my eye with LCC and the statements often made about p/p in general.  If p/p have the automatic advantage, why did LCC have such gaps between its pre-four-peat timeframe?  Starting from 1976, until 2009 ... a 34-year period ... LCC got out of sectionals four times with gaps of 13, 10, and 6 years between each.  Incidentally, in every season for LCC, until 2021, when their season ended without a state title, it came at the hands of public schools ... only the last three seasons, in 2A, has LCC's season been ended by another p/p.  BTW, not just one p/p-killer public school, although Pioneer has a storied tradition for jousting with LCC, but over a dozen public schools have delivered deathblows to LCC's post season.  So if the idea that there's an inherent p/p advantage that LCC has, then why was it not there in force in the 34-year period and, probably more importantly, what were the MANY public schools doing that was causing LCC seasons to end really early in that timeframe?

Of course, Noll is always mentioned.  Noll has a very storied past in that it never seemed to have any p/p mojo outside of 1989 when it won 3A.  Outside of that, according to Harrell's, Noll made it to a sectional championship only three times, never making it out of the sectional, and has been ousted in the first game of sectionals for the last decade ... all by public teams.  

Ritter has an amazing past.  Five state titles with three in 1A and two in 2A.  For a long time, they were one of the poster children for p/p dominance, but now, closing in on a decade, no one whispers their name anymore.  Their last state title was in 2016; however, since then, they haven't made it out of a sectional.  They've also not even been close oustings.  The closest they got was this year's 23-point second sectional game loss to Eastern Hancock.  Maybe they have a string of "bad classes" ... the opposite of those "good classes" that public school lament might SF them unfairly into the next higher class ... but, for all of the talk about p/p mojo, four losing seasons in the last seven and three of the last four would seem to indicate that reloading, which is fairly automatic for p/p schools as I've been told, would seem worrisome and not in line with the meme.

Heritage Christian ... an often forgotten p/p ... maybe because they aren't Catholic.  Only has around a two-decade history history according to Harrell's.  Has back-to-back state appearances in 2007-2008 with one blue ring.  Outside of that, two sectional titles in 2019-2020.  Has a mix of being ousted by both public and private schools.  Fairly good records, but not really drawing any of the p/p ire directed at the categorization as a whole.

Culver Academy has been around since the mid-1980s, yet only has a pair of sectional titles spaced a decade and a half apart ... 2000 and 2015.  Again, almost never referred to or draws the ire of the p/p category and I've NEVER in over two decades of being in Indiana ever once heard anyone talk about the unfair advantage that Culver Academy has, not only as a p/p, but a p/p that has had students on its rosters from foreign countries!  Wanna talk about recruiting or being outside of a youth program circle?  Also, Culver Academy used to be Culver Military Academies, so I'm pretty sure that their lack of state titles wasn't due to not being competitive.

Again, I don't have a specific answer to your question because the general answer that folks hope is given doesn't fit with all of the categorization.  Just the subset above actually refutes the generalized statements that tend to be made.  Also, I see the issue as being more complex than many of the bumper-sticker takes that have been bantered around.  I think there's something to be said for focused, driven groups in a school, but similarly, I would contend that Noll, LCC, and others have been equally focused, driven, etc., if the narratives are to be fully-embraced, but the outcomes don't seem similar.  With that said, what I think MAY be an issue is that there may be advantages that come from said make-ups, but that they aren't uniformly autonomous and that what's actually happening, which dovetails back into the 6A questions is that programs, and not necessarily categories, have figured out how to wield/harness the power as opposed to demographics.  I also believe that, and Ritter and LCC look like interesting cases for this, that while a program may be able to leverage some type of advantage, it isn't necessarily something that's inherent and automatic by birthright of categorization and, for example in the case of Ritter, it may be something that isn't eternal.

If Linton and LCC ever play again you and @Miner_Pride will put up 10 pages alone. I do enjoy your prespective on PPs and Lafayette area. Just incase you wondered if anyone ever read it all. Now go ice those fingers....they probably bleeding

[foxbat]

4 minutes ago, WWFan said:

If Linton and LCC ever play again you and @Miner_Pride will put up 10 pages alone. I do enjoy your prespective on PPs and Lafayette area. Just incase you wondered if anyone ever read it all. Now go ice those fingers....they probably bleeding

Appreciate it!

[Bobref]

42 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Nonetheless, I've been thinking about this issue for a bit and frankly, haven't yet been able to come up with a set of items that works for the argument as to why p/ps, in general win, that can then be applied across the board.

That’s because there is no “across the board.” That’s why the success factor is the best solution. A multiplier or a class bump treats all P/Ps the same, and that does not reflect reality. In what universe are Chatard and Bishop Noll to be treated alike in order to level the playing field? The success factor (at least, conceptually) identifies those programs that traditionally punch above their weight class and moves them into the class where history says they belong.

[BendNotBreak]

48 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Appreciate it!

Why am I picturing Sheldon Cooper at his chalkboard attempting to solve String Theory??  Darn ole Intangibles.. 😄

[foxbat]

19 minutes ago, BendNotBreak said:

Why am I picturing Sheldon Cooper at his chalkboard attempting to solve String Theory??  Darn ole Intangibles.. 😄

 

[BendNotBreak]

WoW... IDK ther was film of the ISHAA  meeting wher the SFactor was adopted!!!  

[JQWL]

4 hours ago, tango said:

Then your email was apparently more clear than your post. 

For whatever reason, this reminds me of a funny incident I had with a fellow parent the summer before my oldest son's freshman year (2009). The wrestling coaches were running a camp or workouts and a kid who had attended a public school was there. He was a pretty good wrestler, but nothing too special. The dads were all in the back of the room and the kid's dad was letting everyone know his son had "been given a scholarship" to attend Memorial (this was pre-voucher era). I was on the school's Board of Trustees at that time and knew damn good and well there was no such thing as an athletic scholarship. The other dads had been in feeder program and we all knew this guy was blowing smoke. So, I said "Wow! Congratulations! How much?" and then asked the head coach (who is a good friend) why that guy's son was getting a scholarship and my kid wasn't. The coach, very quickly, said "Sir, if you go around telling lies like that, you and your son won't be around here very long." And he was right, they weren't.     

Your story reminds me of a funny story too. About a month ago, we played our 6th grade in the Titan Clash. It is a youth tournament Gibson Southern hosts every year. They do a great job with it. Sunday we were playing Memorial. Before the game the coach and I were talking about how the youth programs are set up in the Evansville area. I didn't know how it was done in the area and as far as Memorial, they have like 3 different teams from the feeder schools he said then they picked that group to play in the Titan Clash. They probably had 22-25 kids there. Late in the game, we are kneeling the clock out. I was talking to the official, who is an Evansville area official, about how small physically their kids were and I was surprised with 3 teams, they didn't have some kids that had more size. He basically said, You know when these kids get older, they will all play for Memorial but they won't be the kids that they win with. He said, they will get the dudes that they win with in the next few years. It won't be these kids. I thought that was funny.

[Just a dad]

4 hours ago, foxbat said:

So I'm not sure I qualify as the guy you are looking to answer.  My parents both had Catholic education all of their life with my mom finishing from a Catholic college and my dad leaving Catholic college for the military and then finishing from a public university.  I went to Catholic school through 6th grade and then did public school for everything else through college.  Two of my kids have attended Catholic school, but all have also been homeschooled and attended public schools ... my three girls from Jeff and my oldest son finishing at Harrison this year and the youngest probably attending Harrison part-time for high school.  Nonetheless, I've been thinking about this issue for a bit and frankly, haven't yet been able to come up with a set of items that works for the argument as to why p/ps, in general win, that can then be applied across the board.  What I have been leaning toward though is something akin to the idea that it's less categories and more programs.  When I look at the issue in short timeframes, like this thread does every season, it's fairly easy to generalize.  Even when several short-terms are pieced together, that generalization is easy, but some things don't seem to specifically match up with the general premise.  With that said, I'm coming at this very much so from an Indiana perspective with some additional insights from Texas and Louisiana; but mainly Indiana.

The premise has often been, if there isn't some advantage, then how does x percentage win y percent of the time?  @Bobref has pretty much trademarked on GID that correlation doesn't necessarily indicate causation.  That got me to thinking through some things that, rather than focusing on the generalities and trying to make an all-encompassing theory, I'd look at some case studies and try to work from there.  Also, and I don't recall who it was that asked the question in another thread, but what got me thinking about this was a general question that was asked about 6A ... which was never really fully answered or even really solidified.  The question was, and is very similar to the question first posited in the thread, "Why is it that only four teams/programs have ever won 6A?"  It went on to, and rightly so, point out that there weren't similarities between the schools as there are differences in size, FRL items, communities, offenses/defenses, etc. It just kind of ended up as a mystery.  Four teams out of roughly 40 teams that have been in and out of 6A since its inception 11 years ago, roughly 10%, have not only won SOME of the titles, but ALL of the titles in that class.  What is the categorization that defines that four programs that you could "bottle" or is it something much more complex that can't fit on a bumper sticker?

So let me start and see if the idea can perhaps be expanded by others with some real discussion on things.  The program that I'm most familiar with is LCC.  A couple of my kids attended Catholic school until the 3rd and 5th grade, but I coached in a youth program there for 18 seasons.  LCC first started playing ball back in 1958.  As seen in a couple of other threads currently in play, while LCC has a mystique about it that has it mentioned as a storied p/p powerhouse, it's really been about the last 15 years or so that LCC has probably earned that mystique.  It entered into a storied four-peat era back in 2009-2012, but prior to that, it was pretty much feast or famine according to season outcomes on Harrell's.  So I'll ask the first question that catches my eye with LCC and the statements often made about p/p in general.  If p/p have the automatic advantage, why did LCC have such gaps between its pre-four-peat timeframe?  Starting from 1976, until 2009 ... a 34-year period ... LCC got out of sectionals four times with gaps of 13, 10, and 6 years between each.  Incidentally, in every season for LCC, until 2021, when their season ended without a state title, it came at the hands of public schools ... only the last three seasons, in 2A, has LCC's season been ended by another p/p.  BTW, not just one p/p-killer public school, although Pioneer has a storied tradition for jousting with LCC, but over a dozen public schools have delivered deathblows to LCC's post season.  So if the idea that there's an inherent p/p advantage that LCC has, then why was it not there in force in the 34-year period and, probably more importantly, what were the MANY public schools doing that was causing LCC seasons to end really early in that timeframe?

Of course, Noll is always mentioned.  Noll has a very storied past in that it never seemed to have any p/p mojo outside of 1989 when it won 3A.  Outside of that, according to Harrell's, Noll made it to a sectional championship only three times, never making it out of the sectional, and has been ousted in the first game of sectionals for the last decade ... all by public teams.  

Ritter has an amazing past.  Five state titles with three in 1A and two in 2A.  For a long time, they were one of the poster children for p/p dominance, but now, closing in on a decade, no one whispers their name anymore.  Their last state title was in 2016; however, since then, they haven't made it out of a sectional.  They've also not even been close oustings.  The closest they got was this year's 23-point second sectional game loss to Eastern Hancock.  Maybe they have a string of "bad classes" ... the opposite of those "good classes" that public school lament might SF them unfairly into the next higher class ... but, for all of the talk about p/p mojo, four losing seasons in the last seven and three of the last four would seem to indicate that reloading, which is fairly automatic for p/p schools as I've been told, would seem worrisome and not in line with the meme.

Heritage Christian ... an often forgotten p/p ... maybe because they aren't Catholic.  Only has around a two-decade history history according to Harrell's.  Has back-to-back state appearances in 2007-2008 with one blue ring.  Outside of that, two sectional titles in 2019-2020.  Has a mix of being ousted by both public and private schools.  Fairly good records, but not really drawing any of the p/p ire directed at the categorization as a whole.

Culver Academy has been around since the mid-1980s, yet only has a pair of sectional titles spaced a decade and a half apart ... 2000 and 2015.  Again, almost never referred to or draws the ire of the p/p category and I've NEVER in over two decades of being in Indiana ever once heard anyone talk about the unfair advantage that Culver Academy has, not only as a p/p, but a p/p that has had students on its rosters from foreign countries!  Wanna talk about recruiting or being outside of a youth program circle?  Also, Culver Academy used to be Culver Military Academies, so I'm pretty sure that their lack of state titles wasn't due to not being competitive.

Again, I don't have a specific answer to your question because the general answer that folks hope is given doesn't fit with all of the categorization.  Just the subset above actually refutes the generalized statements that tend to be made.  Also, I see the issue as being more complex than many of the bumper-sticker takes that have been bantered around.  I think there's something to be said for focused, driven groups in a school, but similarly, I would contend that Noll, LCC, and others have been equally focused, driven, etc., if the narratives are to be fully-embraced, but the outcomes don't seem similar.  With that said, what I think MAY be an issue is that there may be advantages that come from said make-ups, but that they aren't uniformly autonomous and that what's actually happening, which dovetails back into the 6A questions is that programs, and not necessarily categories, have figured out how to wield/harness the power as opposed to demographics.  I also believe that, and Ritter and LCC look like interesting cases for this, that while a program may be able to leverage some type of advantage, it isn't necessarily something that's inherent and automatic by birthright of categorization and, for example in the case of Ritter, it may be something that isn't eternal.

I have learned in a very short time on the GID that some of the people are so attached to their narrative that it has become a defining part of who they are. To admit that there might even be the slightest chance that their chosen narrative might not be 100% correct causes them so much cognitive dissonance that they won’t even give credence to a differing perspective. They have chosen to go all in on the “it’s not fair” argument and that is all it will ever be. You choosing to supply facts and data will never counter their preferred explanation. After all, if they admit that “it’s not fair” is wrong then they are suddenly forced to face the fact that it comes down to something else. Maybe personal accountability. Their egos are too fragile to deal with that. Nice post though. Don’t be surprised if you get blasted by the fairness brigade. 

[FastpacedO]

14 hours ago, Titan32 said:

Again...I haven't argued about where they get their kids or really even transfers.  The nature of paying for a service results in a greater percentage of like minded quality student athletes period end of story.  

Many publics have all the things some of you guys like to point out make a program successful.  The difference is when you have such a higher percentage of quality student athletes it magnifies the success of the privates schools who also have those things and do them right.

Are you saying that ever state in the US is wrong....that literally almost every HS association in the county is unfairly looking for solutions for a problem that doesn't exist.  That he only cause to the issue is excellent youth, feeder, admin, Coaching etc. some schools have?  If you are....that is really a simple point of view.

I get that and you are in the minority on this. Most complain about other things without a clue and it spreads like wild fire. I can tell you I have been around my fair share of youth football tournaments where a dad from a public youth football program sees a kid that looks to be a stud and states "He is being recruited by  Insert P/P " only for a few years down the road he isn't even playing High School football or is on the local Public school football team. A majority of them speak nothing but transfers, recruiting, and where they get kids from. The water cooler talk can get pretty comical from an outside perspective. 

No I am saying that every State in the US athletic association gets incessant griping about it (mostly not for the advantages you speak of) that they have no choice but to look for solutions. Most of them come up with off the cuff solutions that do nothing to combat what they are trying to do. But hey they have tried to do something to wane the constant bickering to them. The success factor (although was adjusted from its initial proposal) was a more thought out way of combating it without using a multiplier. Also no I am not saying that only admin, coaching, youth, feeder are the only cause. There are other factor (including location to metropolitan etc. Also sometimes it simply comes down to mistakes made by one team and not the other in a game. To state in better terms there are times a Public team perfectly capable of taking down a P/P team just simply goofed up multiple times in the game. It wasn't that they weren't capable and the score wasn't indicative of the game, they just made mistakes and the other team didn't. They are teenagers after all and turnovers can be very critical in a game.

13 hours ago, US31 said:

It’s shocking a person can type this and still claim there is no difference in the student population between p/p and public schools.

Absolutely not my claim. My claim is there are many factors. Yet in large part regardless of those factors the majority of complaint is the same old transfer, recruit, etc complaint with very little support to their argument. While you think I feel there isn't inherent advantages that is far from the truth because there is. There are inherent advantages not just to P/P but also location to major city's and large populations. More so in some states than others. I would bet you could go through each state and some of the top teams are near large population metropolitan areas. There is more to the inherent advantages than gets discussed in large part. Yet most of the complaints come down to recruiting and transfer.

Edited December 1, 2023 by FastpacedO

[BTF]

At the end of the day, the recruiting claim is losing ground, although one would be naive to believe it doesn't exist. The question becomes, who's more guilty, publics or privates? I would say they are equally guilty depending on the program and coach. I would think, though, that it's probably easier to get a kid from out of district to a private than it is a public. Just my opinion, don't know that for a fact. 

I still see socioeconomics as an advantage that some schools have over others. It's an advantage schools like Center Grove and Carroll have, similarly to that of a Cathedral or Chatard. It's just something that a good coaching staff at an inner city school will have to strive to overcome. Because we all know there will never be a multiplier handed down to privates or one based on socioeconomic factors. 

[oldtimeqb]

11 hours ago, JQWL said:

Your story reminds me of a funny story too. About a month ago, we played our 6th grade in the Titan Clash. It is a youth tournament Gibson Southern hosts every year. They do a great job with it. Sunday we were playing Memorial. Before the game the coach and I were talking about how the youth programs are set up in the Evansville area. I didn't know how it was done in the area and as far as Memorial, they have like 3 different teams from the feeder schools he said then they picked that group to play in the Titan Clash. They probably had 22-25 kids there. Late in the game, we are kneeling the clock out. I was talking to the official, who is an Evansville area official, about how small physically their kids were and I was surprised with 3 teams, they didn't have some kids that had more size. He basically said, You know when these kids get older, they will all play for Memorial but they won't be the kids that they win with. He said, they will get the dudes that they win with in the next few years. It won't be these kids. I thought that was funny.

That is funny. Comical, in fact.  But I'm glad you heard what you wanted to hear.