• Announcements

    • Coach Nowlin

      HEAD COACH OPENING 2018   10/28/2017

      CONFIRMED HEAD COACH CHANGES IN 2018 Lafayette Central Catholic;  Don Collier  Kankakee Valley:  Zack Prairie  Valparaiso:  Dave Coyle Steven Mueller Hired Evansville North:  Brett Szabo  Hamilton Southeastern:  Scott May  Adam Morris Hired  Peru:  Bob Prescott Romaine Saint-Louis Hired North Daviees:  Scott Helms  Evansville Central:  Andy Owens  River Forest: Austen Robison  Shelbyville:  Pat Parks Mike Clevenger Hired from Clinton Prairie Rushville:  Scott McMurray  Cathedral: Rick Strieff:  Bill Peebles Hired from Lawrence Central  South Spencer:  Tom Packer  Bishop Dwenger:  Chris Svarczkopf Maconaquah: Mark Hartman  Anderson High School:  Robert Brown  Highland:  Trent Grinder  Southern Wells:  Steve Yencer  Warsaw:  Phil Jenson Lawrence Central:  Bill Peebles  Eastern Hancock:  Jim O'hara  Tri-Central:  George Gilbert  Shane Arnold Promoted Franklin County:  Kirk Kennedy  Hobart:  Ryan Turley  Craig Osika Promoted Anderson Prep Academy Randy Albano  Clarksville:  Joby Turner New Haven  Jim Rowland S.B. Clay:  Will Porter Mt. Vernon (Fortville) Neil Kazmierczak  Central Noble  Greg Moe  Trevor Tipton Promoted  Clinton Prairie:  Mike Clevenger Ben Davis:  Mike Kirschner  Parke Heritage :  ????    Brian Moore Hired Mishawaka Marian:  Reggie Glon  Michael Davidson Promoted Hamilton Heights:  Mitch Street
Sign in to follow this  
Titan32

Numbers guy has alternative to IHSAA's 'success factor'

Recommended Posts

But... I didn't see the exact formula lol.  I'd love to see how all those categories are ranked.  I completely agree, while the success factor is better than nothing, I truly wish we constructed our classes in a better way than just the number of bodies in the school building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love how he crowbar LCC into an Evansville news article.    

Didn't Tecumseh have quite a bit of success vs LCC in a different sport???     

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly he's  a math major and not a history major. Several things mentioned in the article show a clear lack of understanding of how we got to the current formula. 

 

I happen to to believe Indiana is on the cutting edge for classification. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can not see any major changes coming anytime soon.  i read an article during the basketball sectional about seeding, it seems to many many coaches are fed up with the tinkering with the system.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Coach Nowlin said:

Love how he crowbar LCC into an Evansville news article.    

Didn't Tecumseh have quite a bit of success vs LCC in a different sport???     

You are correct sir.  Tecumseh dropped a state championship baseball game in 2010 to LCC 4-2.  That was LCC's fourth title win and Tecumseh's 4th visit to the state finals.  Of course, LCC and Tecumseh both made it to the state finals before, in 2003, but LCC's history only shows them as a state finalist, there were four state finalists that year, while Tecumseh took state that year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In North Carolina where I'm from, the public schools simply refuse to allow the private schools membership in their league. There was a proposal a few years ago that got a lot of support to forcibly kick out the 3 private schools that were members. (It's a state that also doesn't do the large private school thing near as much as Indiana, a lot less Catholics for starters.)

Part of the reason why is the best prep basketball teams in the state are schools that have maybe 40 students total (most famous is Mt. Zion Academy in Durham). The only reason the school exists is to be an AAU extension basketball program.

Basing classes on enrollment and enrollment only I find flawed. It's led to nothing more than the ballooning of state championships so more coaches can get their "participation trophy" they can retire on by minimizing the amount of their competition. 

Edited by rj1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Coach_G said:

I happen to to believe Indiana is on the cutting edge for classification. 

Really?  The yo-yo factor,  err success factor, is "cutting edge"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Really?  The yo-yo factor,  err success factor, is "cutting edge"?

Compared to every other State, yes.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Really?  The yo-yo factor,  err success factor, is "cutting edge"?

 

If the IFCA formula had been adopted over the Cox modified formula the yo-yoing would be less frequent.

With that said the current set up is significantly progressive in the "competitive balance" category compared to other states around the country.  So yes compared to counterparts I think cutting edge is an accurate term.  

Edited by Coach_G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And speaking with other folks I know personally and listening to others in my profession talk about how Indiana structures our sport, the consensus is they are in love with our system.   I am not talking the tournament series, I'm saying the success factor, summer access, competition days, and in season structure of how many days to hit, etc.   We are very much 'cutting edge' when compared to others in our nation.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Really?  The yo-yo factor,  err success factor, is "cutting edge"?

One of the rare times I happen to agree with @Muda69

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2017 at 5:48 PM, Coach_G said:

Clearly he's  a math major and not a history major. Several things mentioned in the article show a clear lack of understanding of how we got to the current formula. 

 

I happen to to believe Indiana is on the cutting edge for classification. 

I think Illinois is a bit more cutting-edge. Success factor spread out over 4 years, nonpublic multiplier with automatic waivers & fewer schools in Class 4A than in the other three classes in non-football sports. 

Multiple linear regression would be interesting, but it would take Jeff Sagarin to classify schools. It's way too complex for the average fan to figure out, and as a result, would lead to cries of conspiracy. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to respectfully disagree.  I think the beauty of the Indiana system is that it doesn't treat schools differently based on some specifically targeted demographic or item to reach a desired result.  Each school is treated exactly the same, and only the play on the field is a factor that changes allotment.  The goal of any class sport is to achieve competitive balance.  Since this change a noticeable increase in the number of teams playing for and winning sectional championships has occurred.  It wasn't about having everyone win state titles, it's about increasing the number of kids that have a shot to be on competitive teams in the playoffs.  Today there are more kids that step on the field for two-a-days that have a shot to play in a sectional final game than ever before.  Playoff attendance is up, state finals attendance is extremely healthy.  In comparison Michigan a state with 50% greater population, with an indoor NFL stadium in a major metropolitan area drew less fans to their state finals with 8 games than Indiana did with 5.  

Speaking to Illinois and any state that uses a simple multiplier to target private schools is far from cutting edge 1) it's been happening for over two decades in some states and 2) it smacks of the same mindset of the Jim Crow era, it doesn't promote increased competitiveness it promotes reduced competition, and separates not based on accomplishment, but based purely on the distinction of type.  

Speaking to your 4 year comment I remind you that a four year timeline was part of our plan, Bobby Cox changed it with improper thought behind it IMO.  (The two class drop amendment points to how he didn't think long term)  A longer window of time would potentially be even more advantageous.  

I know I'm quite biased on this topic, I offer that up easily, but I'm also quite confident our plan is significantly simple, well thought out and effective in practice.  Coach May and the rest of our IFCA committee and leadership group got it right big time.  

Edited by Coach_G
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.