Jump to content

Impact of the Success Factor on Indiana HS Football


Impact of the Success Factor on Indiana HS Football  

66 members have voted

  1. 1. Has the Success Factor benefitted INHSFB as a whole?

    • Yes
      35
    • No
      23
    • No change
      8


Recommended Posts

On 8/1/2022 at 2:10 PM, Titan32 said:

GS will be in 4A soon enough due to enrollment.  Memorial is where they belong due to the "effective enrollment" ie essentially the number of quality success driven student athletes in the halls.  Enrollment alone doesn't work for privates and it's easy to see (unless you're the one collecting the trophies).  GS has an effective enrollment very similar to Mater Dei.  I hope I coined the phase "effective enrollment".....it's sexy.

I tried to use a multiplier to factor in all schools' effective enrollment at least 10 years ago. For example, you would look at what percentage of a school is on free or reduced lunch and I believe special education could also be factored.

Additionally, I believe the success factor should look at the previous four years for the next two year cycle and then only include the median two years to determine success factor points. 

We had spreadsheets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hhpatriot04 said:

I tried to use a multiplier to factor in all schools' effective enrollment at least 10 years ago. For example, you would look at what percentage of a school is on free or reduced lunch and I believe special education could also be factored.

Additionally, I believe the success factor should look at the previous four years for the next two year cycle and then only include the median two years to determine success factor points. 

We had spreadsheets.

I think free and reduced lunch + special ED is a start, but it really doesn't cover all the student types P/Ps don't have to content with.  What about those kids who show up and don't participate in anything?  They are only there because the law says they have to be and quite possibly aren't  enrolled in any free/assisted lunch program and aren't in special ED.  Its' likely this group of students is on the Core 40 path.  Don't get me wrong ...many of these kids will go on to be very productive members of society...BUT...how many of these types of students do you have at a P/P?  The enrollment types vary significantly and it has a huge impact when trying to classify schools on enrollment alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Titan32 said:

I think free and reduced lunch + special ED is a start, but it really doesn't cover all the student types P/Ps don't have to content with.  What about those kids who show up and don't participate in anything?  They are only there because the law says they have to be and quite possibly aren't  enrolled in any free/assisted lunch program and aren't in special ED.  Its' likely this group of students is on the Core 40 path.  Don't get me wrong ...many of these kids will go on to be very productive members of society...BUT...how many of these types of students do you have at a P/P?  The enrollment types vary significantly and it has a huge impact when trying to classify schools on enrollment alone.

The private and parochial schools are "content" with any student that can pay their tuition.  Plus you don't know near as much about private and parochial schools as you think you do.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, PHJIrish said:

The private and parochial schools are "content" with any student that can pay their tuition.  Plus you don't know near as much about private and parochial schools as you think you do.

It's no secret the participation numbers are greater at p/ps than public schools (and the former AD at Cathedral has pointed that out to me in conversation more than once) and that's largely due to the fact that because your pool of students is people who are willing to pay tuition, they've already self-screened and are from the population of students/families that is *much* more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities (whether sports, band, choir, theater, clubs ...). The kids who just show up, go to class and then go home at the end of the day aren't as likely to have families who seek out a private-school alternative. 

In a system where schools are classified by enrollment, having a higher percentage of your student body available to play football (or any other sport) *is* an advantage. It's difficult to quantify how much of one it is, but it definitely is one. And once that advantage leads to a few titles, now the program sells itself to eighth-graders and their parents (which happens not just at p/p but also some public schools with strong programs). 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, crimsonace1 said:

It's no secret the participation numbers are greater at p/ps than public schools (and the former AD at Cathedral has pointed that out to me in conversation more than once) and that's largely due to the fact that because your pool of students is people who are willing to pay tuition, they've already self-screened and are from the population of students/families that is *much* more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities (whether sports, band, choir, theater, clubs ...). The kids who just show up, go to class and then go home at the end of the day aren't as likely to have families who seek out a private-school alternative. 

In a system where schools are classified by enrollment, having a higher percentage of your student body available to play football (or any other sport) *is* an advantage. It's difficult to quantify how much of one it is, but it definitely is one. And once that advantage leads to a few titles, now the program sells itself to eighth-graders and their parents (which happens not just at p/p but also some public schools with strong programs). 

Do you think there is a 9-12 enrollment or average class enrollment of limiting returns? What is the single best statistical determiner of football athletic program success -- besides past success and enrollment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I very much like the success factor. If you can compete out of your class and still win two sectionals or a regional in a two-year cycle, you should stay up.

My one criticism is that I think moving up in the first place should be based on a four-year performance cycle, not a two-year cycle. Any school can have a once-in-a-lifetime class that accumulates six points in two years, but that doesn't necessarily mean they should get bumped up. However, if you're dominating your class over a four-year cycle, that indicates a consistent program level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 11:01 PM, PHJIrish said:

The private and parochial schools are "content" with any student that can pay their tuition.  Plus you don't know near as much about private and parochial schools as you think you do.

So you are telling me ever kids that goes to a private school can pay the full tuition to go their.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Trojanmp52 said:

So you are telling me ever kids that goes to a private school can pay the full tuition to go their.

Most pay the full tuition, or are granted a reduced tuition, as are students who are non athletes.

And they are there, not their.

Edited by hhpatriot04
Missing period on grammar-shaming post.
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, roaringthunderdlr said:

Need to make it so schools like Cathedral are never in 5A again and are a permanent fixture in 6A. Memorial is another good example; they should never be in 3A.

You do realize that Plainfield has double the enrollment of Cathedral?  Cathedral has enrollment of approximately 1100 students, and about half of those are young ladies, just to refresh your memory.  Not all male students are all state caliber football players.  In fact, a small percentage of Irish football players ae recruited to high D1 colleges.  Hard work pays off at most private and parochial schools, both in the classroom and on the field of play.

The Irish will play wherever they're placed1

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, PHJIrish said:

Most pay the full tuition, or are granted a reduced tuition, as are students who are non athletes.

And they are there, not their.

Thanks for the editing, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PHJIrish said:

You do realize that Plainfield has double the enrollment of Cathedral?  Cathedral has enrollment of approximately 1100 students, and about half of those are young ladies, just to refresh your memory.  Not all male students are all state caliber football players.  In fact, a small percentage of Irish football players ae recruited to high D1 colleges.  Hard work pays off at most private and parochial schools, both in the classroom and on the field of play.

The Irish will play wherever they're placed1

Saw Cathedral's enrollment is under 1100 for the first time in awhile. It was pushing 1300 almost a decade ago. Heard Chatard is hurting as well, had less than 30 freshman football players last year if what I was told is true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, hhpatriot04 said:

Do you think there is a 9-12 enrollment or average class enrollment of limiting returns? What is the single best statistical determiner of football athletic program success -- besides past success and enrollment?

I think when you ask this question, we will get into the stuff we all know and understand that can occur at both Privates and Publics that do football well.  Tradition (meaning some measurable stretch of success that makes footballs sexy), quality youth and feeder teams/leagues, adequate facilities for weights, S&A and practice, supportive admin and community.  And then guys will jump in and talk about the CYO in Indy....who gets what kids...yada yada yada.  Those are all things any school can have that wants to do the work.  What public's can't have is more quality kids per capita....less "dead weight".  Our private friends want us to ignore what they know their tuition dollars get them and the biggest most statistically significant thing it gets them is into a club with a larger pool of like minded peers.  It's a great thing that I too would have paid for if I didn't have other options.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

Our private friends want us to ignore what they know their tuition dollars get them and the biggest most statistically significant thing it gets them is into a club with a larger pool of like minded peers.  It's a great thing that I too would have paid for if I didn't have other options.  

It's not ignored. It's why the Success Factor exists. Here to tell you that not all private schools are created equally either. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Footballking16 said:

It's not ignored. It's why the Success Factor exists. Here to tell you that not all private schools are created equally either. 

Agree....and neither are all publics.  Any of us can have the pieces to be successful if we choose to put in the work.  The question is what's the starting point for classification regardless of those things.  One thing is for certain, enrollment alone doesn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

Agree....and neither are all publics.  Any of us can have the pieces to be successful if we choose to put in the work.  The question is what's the starting point for classification regardless of those things.  One thing is for certain, enrollment alone doesn't work.

But enrollment is the most practical way to start. And with the Success Factor, teams can move from there. 

There's never going to be a perfect system and there's no logical way to ever achieve fair and competitive balance in high school athletics, nor is it the job of the IHSAA. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

But enrollment is the most practical way to start. And with the Success Factor, teams can move from there. 

There's never going to be a perfect system and there's no logical way to ever achieve fair and competitive balance in high school athletics, nor is it the job of the IHSAA. 

@Titan32how else would you propose the IHSAA classify teams as a base guideline if not for enrollment? I'd love to hear a more practical or feasible alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

@Titan32how else would you propose the IHSAA classify teams as a base guideline if not for enrollment? I'd love to hear a more practical or feasible alternative.

I support a multiplier to account for the difference in enrollment type.  People at the IHSAA get paid to do the math.  For the record SF has helped some and it keeps the IHSAA out of potential litigation.   Most of us agree that it also needs tweeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

I support a multiplier to account for the difference in enrollment type.  People at the IHSAA get paid to do the math.  For the record SF has helped some and it keeps the IHSAA out of potential litigation.   Most of us agree that it also needs tweeks.

That isn't practical or feasible in my opinion. 

Either bump all P/P's up a class and be done with it or stick with the current success factor that bumps certain programs(not schools as a whole) up for actual on field success. High % participation rates in EC and/or low SES numbers doesn't automatically guarantee success.

8 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Also not practical or feasible in high school athletics.

  • Disdain 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

That isn't practical or feasible in my opinion. 

Either bump all P/P's up a class and be done with it or stick with the current success factor that bumps certain programs(not schools as a whole) up for actual on field success. High % participation rates in EC and/or low SES numbers doesn't automatically guarantee success.

Also not practical or feasible in high school athletics.

No...but it changes effective enrollment.  I don't have the answer...but enrollment is absolutely horrible at determining similar institutions.  The square footage of the building might as well be used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

No...but it changes effective enrollment.  I don't have the answer...but enrollment is absolutely horrible at determining similar institutions.  The square footage of the building might as well be used.

How is it horrible? 

Most schools (and I said most not all) are likely on a similar level  playing field with other schools with like-sized enrollments. On average, a school with 900 kids is going to kill a school with 300 kids and are going to get killed by a school with 3,000 kids. And I don't really think I'm re-inventing the wheel by suggesting this. 

Enrollment is by far and away the easiest and most practical way to classify schools and it's really irrelevant if there's a handful of schools in each class that punch way above their weight. It's why the Success Factor exists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

How is it horrible? 

Most schools (and I said most not all) are likely on a similar level  playing field with other schools with like-sized enrollments. On average, a school with 900 kids is going to kill a school with 300 kids and are going to get killed by a school with 3,000 kids. And I don't really think I'm re-inventing the wheel by suggesting this. 

Enrollment is by far and away the easiest and most practical way to classify schools and it's really irrelevant if there's a handful of schools in each class that punch way above their weight. It's why the Success Factor exists. 

It's been stated on this thread many times.  Crimsonace stated it well like this " Participation numbers are greater at p/ps than public schools and that's largely due to the fact that because your pool of students is people who are willing to pay tuition, they've already self-screened and are from the population of students/families that is *much* more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities (whether sports, band, choir, theater, clubs ...). The kids who just show up, go to class and then go home at the end of the day aren't as likely to have families who seek out a private-school alternative. "

Even the highest quality publics aren't going to have as many quality success driven kids to choose from.  It's a major factor.  Privates shouldn't be rewarded for having less dead weight.  For that reason enrollment alone doesn't work....never has, never will.  SF has helped some and is certainly better than nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

It's been stated on this thread many times.  Crimsonace stated it well like this " Participation numbers are greater at p/ps than public schools and that's largely due to the fact that because your pool of students is people who are willing to pay tuition, they've already self-screened and are from the population of students/families that is *much* more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities (whether sports, band, choir, theater, clubs ...). The kids who just show up, go to class and then go home at the end of the day aren't as likely to have families who seek out a private-school alternative. "

Even the highest quality publics aren't going to have as many quality success driven kids to choose from.  It's a major factor.  Privates shouldn't be rewarded for having less dead weight.  For that reason enrollment alone doesn't work....never has, never will.  SF has helped some and is certainly better than nothing.

Lol.

P/P’s make up a fraction of the IHSAA member schools and it’s even a lesser percent when you break it down by each individual class. Using Chatard and Memorial (who make up 2% of 3A) as a reason why classifying schools by enrollment is a horrible idea is about the biggest bad faith argument I’ve heard on here. Most 3A schools have a similar athletic profile across the board and that’s because they’re all liked-sized. It’s why the IHSAA classifies schools by enrollment and why the success factor exists. 

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Lol.

P/P’s make up a fraction of the IHSAA member schools and it’s even a lesser percent when you break it down by each individual class. Using Chatard and Memorial (who make up 2% of 3A) as a reason why classifying schools by enrollment is a horrible idea is about the biggest bad faith argument I’ve heard on here. Most 3A schools have a similar athletic profile across the board and that’s because they’re all liked-sized. It’s why the IHSAA classifies schools by enrollment and why the success factor exists. 

Lol. I shouldn't get into this, but if they make up such a small fraction, then why do they win so much? Maybe because a purely enrollment-based classification benefits the schools with less dead weight? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...