Titan32

If I were a P/P....I would say something like....just shut up, accept the system no matter how broken and just "compete". Give me a break. Only P#ssys shut up and take it up the caboose....be a man, call out injustice and fight it at every opportunity and point out hypocrisy when you can! Glad some of you guys weren't our founding fathers....ya'll are probably descendants of Canadians. Make no mistake, the IHSAA reads our rantings on this platform, maybe someday logic will sink in.

Yes...I Know.

I guess my funny post was deleted by one of our fine admins. 🤦‍♂️

No doubt…people will complain about a free meal lol. Such is human nature, but I’m not going to let that stop me from doing what’s right.

For the record, I don't think there is an issue at a certain enrollment point (larger schools). At critical mass, the economies of scale overcome the P/P advantage. Said another way...once a school gets big enough they can round up 30 success-driven studs pretty easily.

The end goal is to have schools classified in a manner which actually reflects the potential student athletes in the building which is kind of like playing chess (not easy to find a way that works). Using enrollment alone is more akin to playing checkers.

The tournament disproportionality isn't solved yet, SF has helped a little. I have never supported a flat multiplier. The Iowa system is better (not perfect but might work well combined with some sort of improved success factor). I value students on what they provide personally, not based on an association athletics-based enrollment modification system. I can't hardly believe anyone would, especially an educator. I know Indiana HS football, I don't perceive advantages but I do point out real ones. The only lack of perception in this debate is from the guys lining their trophy cases.

It's full-stop silly not to see the record of disproportionality in the tournament success of the P/P schools in this state or any state in the county for that matter. It's why we have the success factor in the first place, because it was the only way to slow down the P/Ps and try and stay away from the alternative, which is likely a law suit from the P/Ps if any other solution was proposed that could be viewed as punitive. There is nothing in Iowa's enrollment adjustment classification system based on FRL that "devalues" anyone. I'm sure there aren't any FRL kids getting up in the morning feeling bad their football team was lowered a class in Iowa because half of the school was on FRL. Give me a break. Essentially what you are saying is...."If I pay for an exclusive experience then I deserve a massively unfair advantage in athletics", I think I could respect your position more if you just came out and said it. It's borderline insanity to believe that enrollment homogeneity isn't the issue between a business and a public school. I'll boil it down: There is a kind of success-based disciplined student-athlete that makes all small school athletics successful. This is just a simple fact that based on how many of these type of kids you have (regardless of facility perks) will lead to success. Publics have a substantially smaller percentage of this type of student per capita. Why? Because the most basic foundational reason parents send their kids to a P/P is for the exclusive experience of only being exposed to like-minded families. These kids happen to be the kind of kids that make small school athletic programs successful. This is why every state in the union has the same issue with enrollment....it will NEVER EVER work in terms of being an equitable measure for sports classification if you are going to allow businesses and public schools in the same tournament.

I didn't say there aren't any P/Ps with these programs. I said that with an enrollment adjustment program, there should be a mechanism to adjust for them.

I think Memorial is very unique....will have to pull up that FRL doc to be sure with regard to having ANY FRL. If I recall Mater Dei had 0% on FRL...don't quote me. I think there should also be a provision for schools that have programs for students who are unable to participate in athletics due to physical and mental disabilities. GS has a large program for these students so that would drive our number even lower. Wouldn't that show that in some cases one class isn't enough?

I don't have the numbers handy.....on my cell....but check out sectional, regional and semi-state win's pre inception of the SF and post inception by our P/P friends. I saw this someplace on a post here but the results were clear.

This multiplier (below) doesn't seem so arbitrary....and it gets to the heart of the issue. Enrollment alone doesn't work for classification because the enrollment types are so catastrophically different. In addition....having to drive ones child to school....or a school having a newer squat rack than you doesn't give the publics any advantage, this is just silly. It's beyond comical to watch you guys try and defend such an unfair system. I just wonder how some of these "legend" P/P coaches around our state would have fared at ANY equally enrolled public in our state. I know the answer and you guys do too. It's not the coaches....it's not tradition....it's not feeder schools....it's not recruiting...it's not hard-working Catholic ancestry. It is and always has been about quality, coachable, success-driven student-athletes per capita in the building (as is the nature of a pay-for-play enterprise). Enrollment alone won't work....why do you think every state in the union struggles with this and there are all kinds of solutions across our country. Some are better than others but ours isn't enough.

Whatever you do don't P!55 off the Indiana Catholics by suggesting the KY Catholics have out Catholiced them. Baha haha ha!

How many more posts before this bad boy gets shut down? Any takers?

Some of my coaching friends in the conference don't agree with me, but I would have liked to see VL in the PAC. I also think it would have done a lot to help their program.

Huge miscalculation

Option A would be great for the SIAC....everyone would get a non-conference game and maybe the Catholics could then quit b!t@hing about Sagarin....LOL.

Here's an idea...Bring Vincennes into the Big School and let Princeton go to the small until they get back on their feet. Vincennes was on a great trajectory starting a few years ago, but IMHO, joining the SIAC damaged their momentum. Very hard for a 3A public to survive in that conference. I know the Principals all voted NO last time....but who knows!

It was funny for sure....Lysander and I are still buds....even after that night. It took me a while though. There are a few really good dudes on this board.

He was the only one in the stands on the Chartard side 30 minutes prior to the game...with an army of maroon and gold on the other side LOL. The irony that is was like 70 degrees on Friday night.

I've never seen a GS fan complain about playing any team. If you are referring to the fact that I continually beat the drum on this forum that P/Ps are not equal based on enrollment alone, I will proudly own that (and most of them, at least the ones that don't breathe through their mouths, will admit it here as well).

What does this have to do with 5A? One thing we know...Merriville won't make the dance. With regard to your ignorance showing again, Wilkerson and Hart started coaching the same year (2012), in that time GS and HH have played 20 times. GS leads the series 12-8 and won a 3A state championship in 2021. Oh and in case you have forgotten: In that same period the only program in any class that has won more games than Gibson Southern is NewPal.