Footballking16

Just now, DT said:

Right, I'm a joke.  And once again, you're hanging like a thread to every word I write, ready with a thoughtful response.  Continue on lad. 

I’ll go all day calling out your BS. Happy to do it.

5 minutes ago, DT said:

Absolutely not.  The staff has been a revolving door.  That negatively impacts home state recruiting and relationship building.    

Purdue has 4 first year coaches this year and 2 second year coaches. That’s more than IU. 
 

“This hurts recruiting, especially when Purdue has maintained good staff continuity under Brohm”.

Again, you’re a joke.

Just now, DT said:

Absolutely not.  The staff has been a revolving door.  That negatively impacts home state recruiting and relationship building.    

And Purdue’s hasn’t???

Three defensive coordinators in three years isn’t a revolving door? Explain please.

Just now, DT said:

I dont hate TA.  Terrific guy.  Lousy D1 HC.  2-10/0-9 is what drives my judgement.  

Ok.

So are you going to walk back your comment about coaching turnover?

2 minutes ago, DT said:

I dont hate TA.  Terrific guy.  Lousy D1 HC.  2-10/0-9 is what drives my judgement.  

IU had almost 30 guys go out with season ending injuries last year. That type of record should be expected when you play that tough of a schedule.

4 hours ago, DT said:

4. IU staff turnover is the worst in the Big Ten and probably near the bottom in the Power 5 conferences.  This hurts recruiting, especially when Purdue has maintained good staff continuity under Brohm.

Lol.

Purdue went 4-8 and 2-4 the two years prior to last years breakout season. Purdue is on their 3rd defensive coordinator in 4 years and this offseason was the first time since 2019 where they haven’t fired the position. Purdue has gutted its position coaches on the defensive side of the ball multiple times in the last few years.

IU’s had two coordinators take head coaching positions elsewhere two of the last three years. That’s a good thing. IU fired OC Sheridan (thank God) and Charlton leaving for UNC allows Allen to go back to calling plays on the defensive side of the ball. McCullough left Notre Dame which isn’t surprising at all. Allen just plucked the defensive line coach from your savior PJ Fleck and hired RB and WR coaches who were coaching in the NFL last year.

Per usual, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Your blind hatred for Allen in favor of Brohm has clouded your judgement.

21 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

* Legt Standards für die Teilnahmeberechtigung, den Wettbewerb und den Sportsgeist fest und bietet gleichzeitig Schutz vor Ausbeutung von Schulen oder Schülern.

Arguably your best post of the year. Nobody has to take their time out to read it.

We all win.
 

5 minutes ago, tango said:

Chatard was in 3A in 2017 & 2018. We like to think they won 3A in 2019 because we were in 4A.. 
Just kidding. I have great respect for BC.

All kidding aside, it furthers my point. It’s a revolving door. One team benefits when the other is up and vice versa. There’s a handful of teams each year who benefit from the Success Factor. It doesn’t move the needle in terms of achieving competitive balance in the least. That still seems to be falling of deaf ears.

5 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

• Establishes standards for eligibility, competition and sportsmanship while providing protection against exploitation of schools or students.

Still failing to see where it says “promotes fair and competitive balance”…help me out.

1 hour ago, scarab527 said:

Read the thread again. You’ve been making claims that the same 2-3 teams have kept winning every year. I showed you that wasn’t the case. Then you said the same 4-5 teams. Even though 3A/4A have each been won by 7 different teams in 9 years. 3A had 11 different teams appear in a title game and 4A had 14. Previous 9 years before SF 3A had 5 different winners (4 for Chatard) and 10 different teams appearing. 4A had 4 different winners (5 for Cathedral, 2 for Reitz) and 9 different teams appearing. That’s pretty straightforward evidence that it’s balanced things out a bit. No one ever said it was going to balance every team in the state out. That would impossible. It probably needs tweaking. But in the aggregate it’s accomplishing what it set out to do, which was competitive balance. I know you’re a cathedral guy, but winning 4A every year until eternity would’ve gotten old at some point. 

Of the 7 teams to win 3A/4A, how many weren’t perennial winners prior to the SF? Roncalli/Dwenger winning 4A (because Cathedral is in 5A) and Memorial/West Lafayette winning 3A (because Chatard is in 4A) doesn’t enhance competitive balance you knob. 
 

Competitive balance doesn’t exist in high school football, as it has been repeatedly stated. There are haves and have-nots. Haves make up 10-15% of each class, yet win nearly 100% of the titles. Removing Cathedral from the 4A equation does nothing to dismiss the fact there are still 60 teams who have virtually a zero shot of winning a title.

Again, bring me some kind of concrete evidence that the Success Factor has improved competitive balance. I’m still waiting.

3 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

Look through the thread again, I refuted your points as you made them, had you backtracking and everything. Judging by your debate skills I’d be shocked if you even have a complete grasp on the English language, let alone another…

You’ve yet to provide a single ounce of articulate evidence that shows an implementation of a rule that leaves 99% of the status quo unchanged as successful.

12 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

I showed you all the evidence you need. I’ve seen you refuse to accept losing an argument on other threads. I hope you overcome your desperate need to be right in the face of all information provided. 

You’ve yet to provide a single ounce of articulate evidence that shows an implementation of a rule that leaves 99% of the status quo unchanged as successful.

I’ll call you wrong starting in a different language going forward and I’d still be right.

Just now, crimsonace1 said:

Cathedral was likely the main target of the Success Factor and will be used as proof its implementation has been successful (there are a few others - Muncie Burris volleyball & Heritage Christian girls hoops, but they've regressed to the mean since they lost their coaches with the, um, "good club sports connections"). While the LCC/Luers/Chatard dominance of their respective classes had a lot to do with it, Cathedral was a top-5 program bulldozing its way through 4A every year. Every time they've tweaked the SF, they've done it to prevent Cathedral from dropping back to 4A. 

You’re not wrong but I would love for @scarab527to make a rational argument as to how a rule that was targeted for 3 specific programs (the ones you mentioned) out of the 350+ schools between 20 or so IHSAA offered sports improves competitive balance? 
 

And it’s not like it has prevented those schools from continually winning state titles in additional classes. Cathedral will never be in 4A again so if that was the goal of the Success Factor I guess it worked, but 4A is still going to be dominated by primarily 3-4 teams year after year depending on who is bumped up. Cathedral no longer being in 4A is irrelevant to all but 61 or 62 4A teams. 

4 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

You went from the same 2-3 teams winning every year to the same 4-5 teams winning every year in a couple posts. Keep backtracking. 

You’ve yet to make an argument how the same handful of teams winning the state title year after year has improved competitive balance?

You outed yourself when you said the Success Factor doesn’t apply to 99% of the IHSAA member schools. When an implementation of a new rule doesn’t affect 99% of the target audience…well I would hope you get the picture.

55 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

3A and 4A have had 7 different winners since the SF lol. I don't know how you can get that from the actual state championship results but sure. 

They’re all the same teams!!!!

With the exception of Tri-West 8 years ago and Gibson Southern this last year, it’s the same damn group of 4-5 teams shuffling titles and runner-ups between them. Dwenger, Chatard, Memorial, West Lafayette, Roncalli, Andrean, etc

All those programs have multiple appearances at LOS right up into the implementation of the Success Factor and current era. The Success Factor does nothing but change the fortunes of 2-3 programs for a 2 year cycle. Then it’s rinse, wash, repeat.

Competitive balance isn’t being achieved. Like at all.

You have 3 multi-millionaires at an auction bidding on priceless art in room of a hundred people common folk. One of them gets up to take a 15 minute bathroom break. 15 minutes the third guy comes back in the room. None of the common folk bought anything.

Thats the Success Factor. It doesn’t change a damn thing.

12 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

When has that happened? 

It's pretty much the de-facto 3A/4A cycle between Chatard/Memorial/Roncalli. 

The same teams are winning essentially every year, just replacing the winner from the years prior.

Rinse, wash, repeat. It's not improving competitive balance.

1 minute ago, scarab527 said:

During the SF, has any team replicated the sustained dominance of LCC, Luers, Chatard, and Cathedral all had simultaneously in the immediate years prior to the SF's implementation? All those teams have had success, but not nearly the complete domination they had been having. Out of those teams, only Cathedral has moved into a higher class than they had been previously and won state. I think the proof is in the pudding. 

The same 2-3 teams are winning every year. When one team wins they get bumped up a class. Team #2 then wins and bumps up a class only to have the original team come back and win...only to be bumped back up a second time. Rinse, wash, repeat. This isn't improving competitive balance. 

Just now, scarab527 said:

Of course there is. Just said it's not perfect. But I'm guessing you don't remember how it was before the success factor was implemented. You said name one thing the IHSAA has done to promote competitive balance, and I did. Don't know why you're getting so salty about it lol. 

Because the same culprits winning in the pre-success factor era are still winning in the current era albeit a class up.

I fail to see how an improvement in competitive balance has been achieved?

1 minute ago, scarab527 said:

You just answered your own question. I still think you don't understand what competitive balance means. There's always gonna be just a handful of teams that can realistically win a state title. The SF is to prevent bull in a china shop situations where one team is clearly better than all the rest in its class. That makes things pretty boring. 5A will be a lot more interesting this year due to the success factor, for example. Since it's implementation, it's made many classes in many years more interesting than they otherwise would've been. 

You don't think there's still bull in china shop situations in the Success Factor era?

I got some land to sell you....

Just now, scarab527 said:

Most of the teams in that 350+ are irrelevant. You only have to move around a few to see a noticeable difference. SF isn't perfect but I think it has at least partially accomplished its goal (which I would say is competitive balance) and I believe most coaches around the state would agree. 

Lol. How does the Success Factor improve competitive balance when 99% of the schools are irrelevant?

The Success Factor benefits all of 3-4 teams every two years in a given class. 

Given that competitive balance has never existed in high school sports (nor will it), I fail to see how the success factor has truly moved the needle? Before the success factor was implemented, realistically there was 5-6 teams a class that had a realistic shot of winning a state title. The same logic applies today with the Success Factor.

4 minutes ago, crimsonace1 said:

And to further the initial argument, the IHSAA does not rule on transfers with an eye toward "competitive balance." They're not going, "you know, if this kid transfers, it's going to really hurt this school's team that's struggling and make this other team much better and we can't have that." 

Basically, the transfer rules are pretty simple. 

If the two ADs/principals sign off on it, it's good. 

If someone doesn't sign off on it, the questions are - was the transfer was for athletic reasons, it's likely going to be reviewed and limited eligibility granted. 

Generally, the "athletic reasons" involve going to a school where you have a past link (translation: if you're transferring to be with your former AAU basketball or travel baseball coach) and/or your move did not involve a change of address, then some red flags get raised. Sometimes, the move was without a change of address and *appeared* to be an athletic move even though it was for other reasons (the Jayden Brewer case being the most obvious, but we broadcast Hamilton Heights games a few years ago where they had a WR - who ended up going to Oregon - transfer from Noblesville, we were told because of the FFA program, who had limited eligibility for one year and couldn't play until the sectional).

Agreed.

The IHSAA has to keep a precedent set. If the IHSAA starts granting immediately eligibility for non move-ins/address changes to any and all students, it's going to end up being the wild west. 

4 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

Improving competitive balance doesn't mean making every program equal, thought that was obvious. 

I fail to see how bumping 3-5 teams up a class every 2 years (out of 350+ member schools) improves competitive balance?

8 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

The success factor?

How does bumping a single team (or two) every two years improve competitive balance? I will assure you moving Cathedral from 4A to 5A didn't magically make Frankfort or Gary West a better football team. The Success Factor benefits a handful of teams every 2 years.

Just now, Muda69 said:

• Establishes standards for eligibility, competition and sportsmanship while providing protection against exploitation of schools or students.

Standards of competition promote fair and competitive balance.  Really, this statement by the IHSAA is so vague, it is like the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution, which the federal government abuses to force all kind of regulations upon the populace and business.

 

 

Then the IHSAA has done the absolute worst job imaginable in creating "fair and competitive balance" because it has never existed in high school sports nor will it ever. The IHSAA doesn't exists nor strive for all 360 something member schools to be on equal footing because it is literally an impossible feat.

Show me one single thing the IHSAA has done or implemented that has improved fair and competitive balance?

"Establishes standards for competition" doesn't mean what you think it means, as I previously stated. I already told you what it means and how it relates to their mission. 

1 minute ago, DumfriesYMCA said:

Not jumping in this argument but taking a tangent off of it.

 

i fail to see how a school would be exploited….and currently feel that students being forced to stay at a school by the ihsaa is schools exploiting the students. 

The only ones being treated unfairly for benefit/benefitting from restricting the free will of a student is the student. 
 

in no way is a school being exploited if a student of theirs chooses to attend another school on their own free will for any reasons they deem worthy. 
 

that’s my 2¢ Lol

The IHSAA can't restrict a student from transferring from school A to school B.

The IHSAA however can restrict varsity eligibility from a student transferring from school A to school B.

Big difference.

4 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Thank you, Mr. IHSAA Board Member.

• Establishes standards for eligibility, competition and sportsmanship while providing protection against exploitation of schools or students.

Please interpret how that relates to promoting fair and competitive balance? 

10 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

• Establishes standards for eligibility, competition and sportsmanship while providing protection against exploitation of schools or students.

Lol.

That doesn't mean what you think it means. It means the IHSAA has the power to decide who plays who and when/where ie the "300 mile rule" which they just amended because you know, they have the power too. 

12 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Competitive balance <> "hand out trophies to everyone".  Please stop with that tired old canard.

 

Straight from the horses mouth...Show me where it says anything about promoting fair and competitive balance? I'll hang up and listen.

https://www.ihsaa.org/About-IHSAA/Current-Information/Purpose

PURPOSE OF THE INDIANA HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION

Organized in 1903, the Indiana High School Athletic Association is a voluntary, not-for-profit organization that is self-supporting without the use of tax monies.

Any high school in the state, or any junior high school offering ninth grade, whether public, private, parochial, or institutional, if accredited by the Indiana Department of Education, may become a member of the Association by making a formal application that is authorized by its board of education and by subscribing to the rules and By-Laws of the Association. Membership, once attained, is renewable annually provided requirements are met. The purpose of the IHSAA is to encourage and direct wholesome amateur athletics in the high schools of Indiana. In keeping with this mission, the Association:

• Regulates, supervises and administers interschool athletic activities among its member high schools as an integral part of the secondary education program. A tournament series is sanctioned in 22 sports, 10 for girls, 10 for boys and two co-ed (unified flag football and unified track and field). This school year, more than 160,000 students will compete in IHSAA-sanctioned tournaments.
• Cooperates with all agencies vitally concerned with the health and educational welfare of secondary school students.
• Determines qualifications of individual contestants, coaches and officials.
• Provides written communications to facilitate athletic relations among member schools.
• Establishes standards for eligibility, competition and sportsmanship while providing protection against exploitation of schools or students.

The IHSAA is governed by its legislative body, the Board of Directors. Composed of 19 members who are elected by member school principals from three IHSAA legislative districts, the directors serve staggered three-year terms. The Board of Directors meets annually with the responsibility of establishing the Association’s rules and regulations.

The same 19 members of the Board also comprise the IHSAA Executive Committee. The Committee meets monthly and is responsible for organizing and directing state tournaments and meets, interpreting the Association's By-Laws, determining penalties for rules violations, establishing the Association's state office and employing a commissioner and staff to administer the daily functions of the Association.