Footballking16

The way I constantly "poo poo the plight of schools less fortunate"???? Are you off your meds? You have me confused with the old man constantly telling this board what poor and less fortunate schools need to do with their football programs. Watching you become unhinged has been a treat.

And you know that how? You don't know one damn thing about me. Keep your stupid and uninformed opinions to your GD self.

Please, I beg you, to show me where I ever called co-op football a bad idea? Literally the only person who has argued or suggested co-op football was a bad idea was DT citing unnecessary travel to practice 4 days a week. He then proceeded to commemorate the idea 30 minutes later in the same exact thread. It's fascinating to watch this guy walk in circles.

LOL wtf? I grasp the concept of co-op football, haven't ever disagreed with it? Aren't you the same dummy who in this same thread 30 minutes suggested it was a bad idea because kids might have to travel 30+ minutes to practice 4x a week? Now you're on board with it?? Like I said, you seemingly talk in circles and don't have an ounce of a clue as to what you're talking about. You've literally contradicted yourself and flipped your entirely on co-op football in a matter of 30 minutes simply so you could hear yourself talk. I find it fascinating. It's truly mesmerizing.

Yeah and I bet that lasts as long as your bi-monthly retreat from here.

Perfect. You talk in circles and don't make an ounce of sense. Why would a kid in Ripley County be driving 30 minutes to practice 4 days a week in the event his school district consolidated? No one is talking about the 3 Ripley County schools forming one football team, the OP is suggesting the 3 Ripley County schools consolidate into one high school and subsequently offer a football program. If you can coherently read to form any semblance of an argument, that's on you.

A farm kid in Ripley County wouldn't have to drive 30 minutes a week to practice if his school district consolidated. He'd be practicing 500 feet from the building he attended school all day in. Don't make this harder than it needs to be.

Didn't you just say it was a bad idea because students would have to potentially drive 30+ minutes to practice 4x a week? Pick a side Of course it's going to be based on a financial reasons, doesn't mean athletics can benefit in the process.

No one is talking about consolidating football teams for competitive reasons. The OP is talking about consolidating school districts that would in turn be able to offer more competitive athletic programs. Combing two or three rural high schools with 300-400 students isn't a novel idea and in fact has been happening for 50-60 years. It's more than practical.

Right. So if two or three schools consolidated into one, they'd all be practicing at the same location. Problem solved.

Wouldn't team consolidation present the same travel issues you ascribed above? Wouldn't that actually cause a bigger problem?

He's being pedantic. He wants schools to shut down their programs. That should have been your first sign. I'd imagine the same way they currently get home from practice...

Will defer to you, but is there anything written in a contract that states the IHSAA can selectively manipulate member institutions enrollments for their own purpose? Wouldn't selectively choosing a handful of schools to artificially inflate their enrollment numbers be some form of discrimination? I could be way off base but isn't that a plausible reason why the IHSAA went with the success factor as it could be applied to all schools rather than the multiplier that theoretically discriminates only against a handful of schools? Or is to gray of an area that the IHSAA rather avoid altogether. I know other states have multipliers, but not familiar with the route taken as to how they were implemented and what kind of leg P/P's had to stand on.

Guess it would depend. What were the participation #'s for the two Elkhart schools prior to consolidation? Have to think with consolidation you're really able to set up a freshman and JV squad and really look to develop players for the future. A lot of opportunities out there to grow a program with the right amount of numbers.

Thanks. All those programs I would categorize as either historically good to currently good. Sheridan is probably the only team of that bunch who can't rebuild or retool in the event they were bumped to 2A nowadays but I'm willing to concede Sheridan would absolutely live through a grace period in which they were forced to play in 2A if it meant winning a state title. I'm guessing that would be the case for just about any 1A school.

I could definitely get on board with consolidation especially if it provides not only opportunity but a more competitive environment. I imagine this could potentially add some logistical and economic nightmares but it's not the end of the world. Elkhart recently did this and sounds like it is already paying off in the athletic department.

Why would the Catholic Church sue the IHSAA over artificially inflating school enrollments? You realize that not every P/P is a catholic school correct?

Well yeah, why wouldn't they?

Is there any examples of a 1A school where a team has ridden a good group of sophomores and juniors to a sectional and regional title and then won it all the following year only to completely fall off a cliff? Not saying it hasn't or couldn't happen but that I think that is an absolute extreme scenario. Honestly haven't tracked the SF in the lower classes, is there any example(s) of teams with little to no football history bumping up a class due to a one and a lifetime class? Just going off memory, the teams that have bumped up were all usual suspects and the ones that weren't New Pal have completely elevated their level of play.

I think the Success Factor should be moved from a 2 year cycle to a 4 year cycle. Accrue anything less than 4 points and you bump back to your original class, accrue anywhere from 4 to 6 points you remain in your current class and anything over 7 you're bumped another class.

Which is exactly why the Success Factor was implemented instead of a multiplier. Having heavy extracurricular participation numbers doesn't automatically equate to success; see my point about Park Tudor football. What kind of participation numbers do you think a school like Hammond Noll enjoys? why should their enrollment be doubled? Bump up the individual team, not entire school, for the programs who show success. Seems rather simple to me.

LOL. There's going to be haves and have nots regardless of what you do to the P/P's. Multiplying the P/P's by however many students isn't going to address the issue of competitive balance. The purpose of the SF wasn't to prevent the P/P's from ever winning a state title again. Multiply the P/P enrollments by 2 and now you're just going to have the same one or two public schools win in class 1A and 2A every year, how does that address competitive balance. If you don't want the P/P's to ever win a state title again, then put them in their own division. However, the IHSAA knows that'll never hold up. Who is mentioning Park Tudor as a state title contender other than you?

Lol. The reason Park Tudor has 1 winning season in the last 16 years has nothing to do with their facilities by the way.

What isn't working? The purpose of the success factor wasn't to prevent private schools from ever winning state titles by the way.

Not every p/p has a good football program regardless the percentage of students competing in extracurriculars. That's why the success factor, not multiplier, makes more sense. Park Tudor has always been one of the largest 1A schools and on a per capita basis is the wealthiest school in Indiana with the exception of maybe Culver Military and they haven't won a sectional since 2005. Hell, until last year, they hadn't had a winning season in over a decade. By @temptationmetrics, Park Tudor should be running away with state titles on the gridiron given their high enrollment number and extremely low SES numbers. Silly to just start multiplying non-existent students to a school's enrollment because of perceived advantages that may not actually take place. The thought of Park Tudor playing 3A football because they have a bunch of students who play golf, lacrosse, and tennis is laughable. Let's let Park Tudor have some success in 1A and bump them up in the event of it happening rather than just adding nearly 400 mythical students to their enrollment. Seems practical, no?