Titan32

THIS. Isn't the purpose of the IHSAA to solve problems for their membership, what they perceive to be the greater good? Surely some of our P/P friends are tired of reaping the unfair advantages associated with disparities in enrollment type.

Fair enough, I see where you stand and respect your position. But we will never agree at least with respect to high school football. I support some competitive balance in team sports for children and it really has nothing to do with getting anyone "out of the way". Amazingly I've done a considerable amount of winning with this philosophy......go figure (must be my protestant work ethic). Enrollment type disparities are huge and shouldn't be ignored. Winning on an even playing field is much more rewarding in my view than winning when the deck is clearly stacked in one's favor, but then again maybe we poor publics can keep hoping we are the Hickory Huskers and embrace the joy that the "journey" brings.

Perceived “unlawfulness” aside....is that all that would hold you back? Let’s pretend for a moment the IHSAA would take that bet, what other objection would you have? I think you’re too smart not to see the enrollment type disparities, so what’s left? I mean the public’s can only bend over the table with Vaseline in hand for so long.

This week in the PAC:

It’s beyond question that enrollment only classification is discriminatory. Public’s shouldn’t be forced into membership with such dissimilar institutions. Nothing in high school athletics are going meet “compelling stare interest”. Really? Rich kids? This isn’t about class warfare for me? You probably wouldn’t want to compare my income to the average Memorial parent. Oh, and I’m a republican town councilman...go figure. Enrollment only based classification is unjust.

I think it will be easy to show that schools and pay institutions are so dissimilar that any class bumps are far from discriminatory. What is discriminatory is enrollment only based classification.

Someone gets it!

Although football teaches a lot about life, I still feel this life lesson talk regarding our economy, equality of outcomes, other people will always have advantages over you, is a bit of a stretch. No one is talking about equality of outcomes, we are talking about rules in sports. Let the outcomes fall where they may, but we need to fix our broken system in Indiana High School Football. What I have taught my kids is that, along with hard work...life isn't fair etc. is to not sit back and allow injustice....be the person with the courage to affect change. That is what we are talking about here. Not just sit back and suck it up because the "rules are the rules" when they are clearly broken. I would certainly hope we agree that sports need rules right? Or do we? One could conclude from your comments above that the class system itself isn't needed and football in Indiana shouldn't worry about trying to alight the classes as best as possible because...well life isn't fair so why should Indiana football be right? We are talking about a sport played by children (channeling my inner Muda there lol) and if you would read my comments a little more closely you might see I am making a counter point that continually gets glossed over when P/P guys read my posts. You may not be taking about advantages, but I am as part of my counterpoint. The same thing happens when this is brought up, trust me your response wasn't unique (neigher was my friends from CG) in that multiple folks will go into lengthy diatribes spouting what it takes to be a quality program in our state, or pointing out to me what GS, Jasper, HH, SR does well etc. That really has little to do with this. I am pulling these numbers out of my @ss, but you will get the point. Let's just say that the top third of all football schools in Indiana have all the attributes these lengthy responses mention: Coaching, work ethic (either community based or common purposed based), feeder systems, pool of athletes (community based or common purpose based), community support, admin support, etc. This top third has many public and private schools in it. GS, Memorial, Mater Dei, Jasper, CG....all of these schools have these things, so from now on let's just throw that out the window. Everyone just STOP talking about those things in these discussions. These are not the inherent advantages I am calling out. Here is the part all you P/P guys (or Publics "just need to work harder guys") need to read twice and don't respond to any other part of my post but this: You are not even the same institution type as a Public School, people pay for a service at your institution and expect a result for their 7k+ fee. You get a higher quality customer when a premium is paid, particularly vs a free service. Your enrollment make up is NOT THE SAME...it can't be...it never will be....it is simply an advantage that can't be ignored. My four kids believe that there are at least 200 kids at GS who just take up space and probably aren't concerned much with extracurriculars or in many cases even too focused on academic endeavors either. Many are only there because the law says they have to be. A subset of those might even have behavior or other issues. Another subset just wants to get that degree, get out and get that job. Additionally many publics house wonderful programs for the disabled that can affect enrollment as well. Let's do an experiment.....let's ship those 200 kids to Memorial next week. How will that affect the hallways do you think? Will the classroom environment/lesson planning/teacher focus change at all? How will the day in the life of an administrator change? And don't look now but Memorials enrollment will come in at 809, probably pushing them into 4A. How about GS, now that those 200 kids are gone how will things change do you think? How will life change for the GS administrators? One change is that the enrollment would now be 503, squarely in 2A and look at that...so similar to the enrollment of Mater Dei 497. We at GS have known for years we are much more analogous to MD than Memorial athletically. Honestly how intelligent people can sit on this forum and say that enrollment ONLY based classification is fair is mind boggling. The data is clear on the P/P dominance and what I have pointed out above is the reason. Life might not be fair but a game played by children should be. About the only thing in common in the top third schools I mention above between Publics and Privates (other than doing football well) is that they both play sports and both have books. These differences should be accounted for if we are going to play in the same tournament.

GS had 11 offensive starters and 11 defensive starters play the first 8 plays of the scrimmage. Not a single one of those kids took another snap the entire night. Central looked good at times against GS 3s and 4s. The GS JV moved the ball really well against the Central D who could have been also subbing heavil (I don't know). I think think the Central QB can throw a nice ball and will have some weapons...Central will spread it out in contrast to last years team. But there could be some concern with the Defense at this early juncture in the season.

This is a fantastic post in that at it's core tugs at our heart strings and at what all people worth their salt try to teach their kids. Unfortunately it doesn't apply in this case...not even in the slightest. I still can't wrap my head around intelligent people on this forum pretending they don't know what the P/P inherent advantages are. DT's article maybe didn't go down the best path to illustrate that, but neither does, "the rules are the rules", and you guys know that....all of you know that. It has nothing to do with "trying harder" or "government being in the way"....you guys all know that too. It's so simple at it's core and I'll say it again for the newbies: Given decent tradition, coaching etc. a P/P has more athletes per capita/enrollment just by nature of their institution type. That's it...that is all there is to it. I get it, it's nice to get that advantage along with tuition, but don't tell me I'm sending any kind of incorrect message to anyone (especially my kids) to call out that disparity.

True. This article references that: https://www.courierpress.com/story/sports/high-school/2019/06/22/how-southern-indiana-ads-made-decisions-joining-siac-pac/1531269001/

Well done sir.

Is there a reason I might not be thinking of that the SIAC wanted a two team package other than ease of scheduling?

The Bash 89.1 WVJC is the Home of Gibson Southern Titan Football. Streaming at http://www.bashradio.com/ or via their app.

This is just the humble option of a fan not associated with Gibson Southern High School, but I think that our Coach and Admin enjoy the flexibility that some might consider more of a burden.

By signing up I meant filling out the prospect profile. https://inpreps.com/prospect-questionnaire/

Heritage Hills: https://www.wevv.com/templates/AMP2?contentID=575044421&__twitter_impression=true

So are you saying that Indiana Preps finds every deserving player throughout the state (not just talking your top 22 list, I think you guys do many lists)....particularly those who don't go to your site and fill out a profile? You have two guys that cover Indiana right? Not arguing just trying to understand the methodology.

That said, I think it could be possible that the SIAC is enjoying not having the headache of working on non-conference games every year. Obviously there is a lot of effort involved.

Move Vincennes to the PAC problem solved. SIAC would then have 1 non-conference game to work with and the PAC teams would only have to deal with two. From a football perspective moving to the PAC might be a better fit for the Alices.

I can tell you that coaches don't have to play their varsity players during the varsity segments and some do not...at least not for the whole designated segment.

Fan experience aside, you think most coaches would vote to keep them in place in their current format? I think in some cases starters are getting so few reps it has become an exercise in developing younger players, which indeed has value to your point. I think the risk of injury for a practice game might give some coaches more pause than others. Some value for sure....how much is the question.

I always look forward to these as they are at least some form of Friday night football. That said, is it me or are more and more coaches playing these so conservatively that they really have just turned into a JV football game? Have they outlived their usefulness? Does the risk of injury outweigh the value of the competition? Perhaps the way these are played varies depending on what part of the state you are in. Would we be better off with another real game or doing away with these all together? Thoughts?

Any list created by a these prospect agencies has to be taken with a grain of salt to a certain extent. If a player didn't sign up on their site and pump them camp video....they won't make their list. Which is certainly fine.

Digital Scout is popular with an easy upload feature to Maxpreps I'm told.