Is it time for private schools to have theyre own playoffs in football

• sherm03

  

  skank;581092 wrote: Despite overwhelming numbers in favor of the publics as far as participation goes.

  
  22 different Public Schools (18.3% of the total number of D1 schools) have been to the state semis in D1.
  9 different Private Schools (7.5% of the total number of D1 schools) have been to the state semis in D1.
  
  That means that out of the total number of D1 schools...only about 26% have been to the state semi-finals.
  
  You make it like there is some great parity in D1 among the public schools and that a small number of private schools keep beating them. The fact is...there is a small number of good programs in D1 that continue to do well year in and year out. A majority of schools...both private and public...have not even made the state semis in D1 because the good PROGRAMS...both private and public...dominate year in and year out.
• Dean Wormer

  sherm03;581124 wrote:22 different Public Schools (18.3% of the total number of D1 schools) have been to the state semis in D1.
  9 different Private Schools (7.5% of the total number of D1 schools) have been to the state semis in D1.
  
  That means that out of the total number of D1 schools...only about 26% have been to the state semi-finals.
  
  You make it like there is some great parity in D1 among the public schools and that a small number of private schools keep beating them. The fact is...there is a small number of good programs in D1 that continue to do well year in and year out. A majority of schools...both private and public...have not even made the state semis in D1 because the good PROGRAMS...both private and public...dominate year in and year out.

  
  
  Sherm
  
  Again I have to chastise you in your futile effort to convince the iron headed Skank. Give the man (or woman) credit though, you can bring up any number of facts and they just get ignored. Until every public school is handed a championship trophy he will not be deterred in his quest. Hell, I may have just hit on the solution. Any team, public or private, that has won a championship should be ineligible until everyone gets one. Then the moronic soccer mom mentality will be appeased.
• skank

  

  Dean Wormer;581175 wrote:Sherm
  
  Again I have to chastise you in your futile effort to convince the iron headed Skank. Give the man (or woman) credit though, you can bring up any number of facts and they just get ignored. Until every public school is handed a championship trophy he will not be deterred in his quest. Hell, I may have just hit on the solution. Any team, public or private, that has won a championship should be ineligible until everyone gets one. Then the moronic soccer mom mentality will be appeased.

  
  
  Question, what is it that makes you pro Paroch fellas go with the name calling? I mean, doesn't your superior education and upbringing make you better than that?
  
  On to your post, All I want is fairness....across the board. That's all....Nothin more, nothin less. Call it what you want, (you will anyway).
  
  The subject of where the State Championship games should be held....Despite the fact that I live in Massillon, and attend MANY of the Championship games....In Massillon AND Canton, I am on record as being in favor of the games being held in Columbus. Why you ask? Well, let me tell ya, in the spirit of fairness, more centrally located. More centrally located equals fair. So, before you say that I want an unfair advantage, think about that. The OHSAA has taken steps to fix the location problem, now, let's hope the same is done for the 'PA" problem.
• Rocket08

  Maybe after they fix the Massillon advantage
• skank

  

  Rocket08;581235 wrote:Maybe after they fix the Massillon advantage

  
  Coming from a Mooney guy....Nice....Just....Nice.
• rmolin73

  

  Then I'll say it. Maybe after they fix the Massillon advantage
• Heretic

  

  sherm03;581103 wrote:Ah yes...those terrible cheating privates in D4-D6!
  
  Those powerhouse killers like Cuyahoga Falls Christian Academy (#13, 6-4 record), Cincinnati Purcell Marian (#30, 1-9 record), Louisville St. Thomas Aquinas (#12, 5-5 record), Cleveland VASJ (#15, 4-6 record), Dayton Christian (#20, 6-4 record), Columbus Bishop Ready (#21, 4-6 record), Warren JFK (#11, 4-6 record), Bedford St. Peter Chanel (#21, 2-7 record), Cleveland Heights Lutheran East (#22, 3-6 record), St. Mary Central Catholic (#26, 1-9 record), Youngstown Christian (#26, 1-9 record), Cardinal Stritch (#18, 4-6 record), Tuscarawas Central Catholic (#16, 4-6 record), Bishop Rosecrans (#23, 3-7 record), Grove City Christian (#23, 3-7 record), St. John Central (#28, 2-8), Steubenville Central Catholic (#27, 1-9 record), Fisher Catholic (#29, 1-9 record), Troy Christian (#14, 4-6 record), and Cincinnati Christian (#29, 1-9 record).
  
  I hate those guys and how they dominate the lower divisions and STEAL all the championships from those hard-working small town teams, like Coldwater, Versailles, St. Henry, and Maria Stein. If those cheating privates weren't in the division those teams could have won WAY MORE than their 17 combined State Championships.
  
  Look at the list my friend. It's the SAME teams year in and year out that make the title game in D4-D6. It's not just the private schools. There's 4 or 5 dominate public schools in those divisions.
  
  So spare me this sob story about the poor little small towns that are getting cheated out of a title because of the big bad private schools. That argument won't fly here.

  
  Precisely. Successful programs are successful and, therefore, get all sort of allegations about recruiting. If you're in north central Ohio paying attention to small-town football, you've probably heard accusations that PUBLIC school Marion Pleasant "recruits" because until recently, they dominated their league on a yearly basis.
  
  Heck, a person could even wonder why a certain former Orrville QB's family decided that a move to a certain Division I school (that has at least one supporter that seems to really dislike private schools because they "recruit") would be beneficial to their son. Was it to ensure getting a scholarship to a big-time school like Ohio State? This dealie with quotes by him (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:a5sszt8RJVcJ:www.acenturyofheroes.com/documents/Zwick%2520teaser.pdf+justin+zwick+orrville+massillon&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgJX4ApW_wXZ5k98zTFx8BdMQYG4K8U7zSp6lx03P9T0I7svehLeDH5yCiWGsOZ4HGWnKX5Ut7s9zJIvLLPIQW0_WBdQ-YyPsWF0Aia1gvRcwri36FxCpAUnJDyo3-_3T9oOmuo&sig=AHIEtbTHdUqM5h-N24Fm3xSeyZmdlJ0YIA) seems to directly say that moving to a bigger school was beneficial to him being ready to play for a big-time college. But then...it'd be foolish to even suggest that public schools with tradition and respect gain any number of move-ins or transfers based on said reputation.
  
  Hypocrisy and hilarious have more in common than the letter "H". "We'll take your kids with pride because we're a great program!!!! But, by jove, they better not go to a private school because that's cheating us out of them!!!!" It'd be one thing if it was fans of perennial weaklings complaining...but when you have fans of perennial powers Steuby and Massy crying about privates, it just reeks of this whole "kids we used to obtain are now going to private schools, so THIS IS CRAP!!!!!" sort of thing.
• fish82

  

  sherm03;581103 wrote:Ah yes...those terrible cheating privates in D4-D6!
  
  Those powerhouse killers like Cuyahoga Falls Christian Academy (#13, 6-4 record), Cincinnati Purcell Marian (#30, 1-9 record), Louisville St. Thomas Aquinas (#12, 5-5 record), Cleveland VASJ (#15, 4-6 record), Dayton Christian (#20, 6-4 record), Columbus Bishop Ready (#21, 4-6 record), Warren JFK (#11, 4-6 record), Bedford St. Peter Chanel (#21, 2-7 record), Cleveland Heights Lutheran East (#22, 3-6 record), St. Mary Central Catholic (#26, 1-9 record), Youngstown Christian (#26, 1-9 record), Cardinal Stritch (#18, 4-6 record), Tuscarawas Central Catholic (#16, 4-6 record), Bishop Rosecrans (#23, 3-7 record), Grove City Christian (#23, 3-7 record), St. John Central (#28, 2-8), Steubenville Central Catholic (#27, 1-9 record), Fisher Catholic (#29, 1-9 record), Troy Christian (#14, 4-6 record), and Cincinnati Christian (#29, 1-9 record).
  
  I hate those guys and how they dominate the lower divisions and STEAL all the championships from those hard-working small town teams, like Coldwater, Versailles, St. Henry, and Maria Stein. If those cheating privates weren't in the division those teams could have won WAY MORE than their 17 combined State Championships.
  
  Look at the list my friend. It's the SAME teams year in and year out that make the title game in D4-D6. It's not just the private schools. There's 4 or 5 dominate public schools in those divisions.
  
  So spare me this sob story about the poor little small towns that are getting cheated out of a title because of the big bad private schools. That argument won't fly here.

  
  Class dismissed.
• Thinthickbigred

  class reopened
• holdingout

  sherm03;581103 wrote:Ah yes...those terrible cheating privates in D4-D6!
  
  Those powerhouse killers like Cuyahoga Falls Christian Academy (#13, 6-4 record), Cincinnati Purcell Marian (#30, 1-9 record), Louisville St. Thomas Aquinas (#12, 5-5 record), Cleveland VASJ (#15, 4-6 record), Dayton Christian (#20, 6-4 record), Columbus Bishop Ready (#21, 4-6 record), Warren JFK (#11, 4-6 record), Bedford St. Peter Chanel (#21, 2-7 record), Cleveland Heights Lutheran East (#22, 3-6 record), St. Mary Central Catholic (#26, 1-9 record), Youngstown Christian (#26, 1-9 record), Cardinal Stritch (#18, 4-6 record), Tuscarawas Central Catholic (#16, 4-6 record), Bishop Rosecrans (#23, 3-7 record), Grove City Christian (#23, 3-7 record), St. John Central (#28, 2-8), Steubenville Central Catholic (#27, 1-9 record), Fisher Catholic (#29, 1-9 record), Troy Christian (#14, 4-6 record), and Cincinnati Christian (#29, 1-9 record).
  
  I hate those guys and how they dominate the lower divisions and STEAL all the championships from those hard-working small town teams, like Coldwater, Versailles, St. Henry, and Maria Stein. If those cheating privates weren't in the division those teams could have won WAY MORE than their 17 combined State Champions
  Look at the list my friend. It's the SAME teams year in and year out that make the title game in D4-D6. It's not just the private schools. There's 4 or 5 dominate public schools in those divisions.
  
  So spare me this sob story about the poor little small towns that are getting cheated out of a title because of the big bad private schools. That argument won't fly here.

  Great post...Let them all cry.
• Alma_Parker

  As long as the effort is to maximize how many people feel good, rather than recognize the top programs and give the kids the chance to play the other best teams, this almost makes sense. Not sure that the 'whole town celebrates' test is a good one. Does all of Cleveland really get jacked up when Glenville wins? Or is it actually coaches and team parents and a few beyond that? Is it really a public / private issue, therefore? The community pride in Mogadore and St. Henry and Ironton is undeniable. And when they go to the playoffs again but don't win it all they get to put another sign on their stadium but not another sign on the highway exit, but, mostly, they go back to work and watch tapes and plan for next year. They get over it, the teams that win 8 or 9 or 10 games every season. It probably would feel more-different to Hillsdale or Norwayne, but the same could be said for Portsmouth Notre Dame and Oregon Cardinal Stritch. The bigger problem is one of knowing where to stop with this logic. Why not extend it to all sports? Why not let teams who went 5-5 or worse in the prior year but go 7-3 or better in a given year have extra computer points or "play down" by a division? Why not do like the UK Premiership soccer and move the top few teams in each division up (and the bottom few teams down) a division at the end of each year? And while we're at it, why not do this with academics? Cincinnati Xavier problem has a lot of debate team and science fair winner, too, so why not limit that and assure that schools that focus less on academics get an equal share of winners. And instead of letting places like Shaker Heights and New Albany and Bishop Watterson have all the National Merit Scholars, why not assure that the smartest kid in each town is a winner. When these playoffs started 12 teams qualified in all divisions. In the days before big expansion of this system, lots of teams went 'unrecognized' in good years. I know Ironton best, and they stayed home despite undefeated seasons in '78, '81, and '83 (Partially why they've only made the playoffs 28 times so far.) But with the current system, 192 teams get recognized for their excellence and get a playoff berth, and extra game for themselves and the fans, a chance to represent their league or region. Giving a clear path to the state championship for teams that wouldn't otherwise make it through from 192 to 6 seems a bit forced.
• tsst_fballfan

  

  Oy vay!
  
  Let's evade the fact that the guidelines governing publics vs privates are different period. Instead let's use the MAC schools winning history as pseudo rationalization to leave the guideline differences intact. Wow what an excellent idea. Hell why have any guidelines at all for any school?!?!
  
  Massillon should be able to tell all the kids making below a B to find another school. That way they too can claim to graduate most or all their students to college. Steubenville should be able to tell any athlete that can't run a 4.3 40 to find another school. That way they could have as many football titles as Newark Catholic or the Y-town privates. Can't imagine how good those schools would be academically and how dominant they would be athletically if they could pick and choose EVERY SINGLE STUDENT they accept based solely on criteria they set forth without any state control. No need to imagine, private schools are the real life example.
  
  Silly me. Then who would teach all those extra students. Silly me. Who would give all those extra kids life lessons about being part of a team playing in an association based on equivalent guidelines for competition. After all it's only the education of our youth we are talking about. Seemingly the predominant lesson to be learned is if you have enough money or ability you can begin your socio/athletic elitism earlier in life. At the same time you can continually proclaim your fairness because financial aid is 'available' and some public schools do win titles.
  
  Maybe privates do have their agenda in order. That is the way the world works right. Abuse the loopholes to your fullest advantage while convincing those that can make corrections not to. Got it! Make yourself feel better about it by pointing out the anomalous MAC schools as justification for NOT using the same guidelines. Got it!
  
  I am a Browns fan. I don't like it when we lose. I don't however complain that it was unfair to lose to Denver back in the day. I don't complain that it's unfair when we lose to the Steelers or Ravens today. Why is that? Because winning or losing in the NFL is part of a game in which ALL teams share the same guidelines. Go figure what a novel philosophy. Teams belonging to the same association, playing the same sport, governed by the same guidelines wow who woulda thunk it!
• sherm03

  

  tsst_fballfan;581826 wrote:Oy vay!
  
  Let's evade the fact that the guidelines governing publics vs privates are different period. Instead let's use the MAC schools winning history as pseudo rationalization to leave the guideline differences intact. Wow what an excellent idea. Hell why have any guidelines at all for any school?!?!
  
  Massillon should be able to tell all the kids making below a B to find another school. That way they too can claim to graduate most or all their students to college. Steubenville should be able to tell any athlete that can't run a 4.3 40 to find another school. That way they could have as many football titles as Newark Catholic or the Y-town privates. Can't imagine how good those schools would be academically and how dominant they would be athletically if they could pick and choose EVERY SINGLE STUDENT they accept based solely on criteria they set forth without any state control. No need to imagine, private schools are the real life example.
  
  Silly me. Then who would teach all those extra students. Silly me. Who would give all those extra kids life lessons about being part of a team playing in an association based on equivalent guidelines for competition. After all it's only the education of our youth we are talking about. Seemingly the predominant lesson to be learned is if you have enough money or ability you can begin your socio/athletic elitism earlier in life. At the same time you can continually proclaim your fairness because financial aid is 'available' and some public schools do win titles.
  
  Maybe privates do have their agenda in order. That is the way the world works right. Abuse the loopholes to your fullest advantage while convincing those that can make corrections not to. Got it! Make yourself feel better about it by pointing out the anomalous MAC schools as justification for NOT using the same guidelines. Got it!
  
  I am a Browns fan. I don't like it when we lose. I don't however complain that it was unfair to lose to Denver back in the day. I don't complain that it's unfair when we lose to the Steelers or Ravens today. Why is that? Because winning or losing in the NFL is part of a game in which ALL teams share the same guidelines. Go figure what a novel philosophy. Teams belonging to the same association, playing the same sport, governed by the same guidelines wow who woulda thunk it!

  
  I hear ya. I understand what you are saying. I really do. Catholic schools do not have to take any student, while public schools are required to take every student. It's a give-take. Catholic schools don't have to take all students...but they also don't get much help financially from the state or from property taxes. Public schools do.
  
  As I said before, yes, that is an advantage of private schools. A winning tradition, combined with not having a school district, does give the private schools an advantage.
  
  But like I pointed out before...there is quite a few advantages just between public schools. So if we have to level out the advantage that private schools have over publics...we have to level out the public advantages over other public schools as well. The example I gave earlier was Canfield and Chaney. Both are D2, non-open enrollment, schools in the Youngstown area. But Canfield consistently performs better than Chaney. Could it be that property taxes are much higher in Canfield? Maybe because more people go to Canfield's games and not Chaney's? That extra revenue helps Canfield pay a better coach, have a better weight room, and give their players better facilities overall. IMO, that's a huge advantage that Canfield has over Chaney. So we need to level out that advantage! After all, it's not fair if one school has an advantage over another and does better than that school every year.
  
  So let's fix that issue while we're at it as well. All property tax revenue gets sent in and divided evenly among all schools. All gate proceeds from every game gets sent in and then divided evenly among all the schools. We wouldn't want anyone to have an unfair advantage right?!
  
  Better yet, let's just let the schools that are in a richer district play up a division so that schools in a poorer district have a fair shot at reaching the title game!
• Rocket08

  tsst_fballfan;581826 wrote:Oy vay!
  
  Let's evade the fact that the guidelines governing publics vs privates are different period. Instead let's use the MAC schools winning history as pseudo rationalization to leave the guideline differences intact. Wow what an excellent idea. Hell why have any guidelines at all for any school?!?!
  
  Massillon should be able to tell all the kids making below a B to find another school. That way they too can claim to graduate most or all their students to college.

  
  First things first, denying the success of the MAC is a weakness on your part, period
  
  Second, including Massillon in any discussion that includes academics, no matter what, is a nonstarter
• tsst_fballfan

  

  sherm03;581848 wrote:I hear ya. I understand what you are saying. I really do. Catholic schools do not have to take any student, while public schools are required to take every student. It's a give-take. Catholic schools don't have to take all students...but they also don't get much help financially from the state or from property taxes. Public schools do.
  
  As I said before, yes, that is an advantage of private schools. A winning tradition, combined with not having a school district, does give the private schools an advantage.
  
  But like I pointed out before...there is quite a few advantages just between public schools. So if we have to level out the advantage that private schools have over publics...we have to level out the public advantages over other public schools as well. The example I gave earlier was Canfield and Chaney. Both are D2, non-open enrollment, schools in the Youngstown area. But Canfield consistently performs better than Chaney. Could it be that property taxes are much higher in Canfield? Maybe because more people go to Canfield's games and not Chaney's? That extra revenue helps Canfield pay a better coach, have a better weight room, and give their players better facilities overall. IMO, that's a huge advantage that Canfield has over Chaney. So we need to level out that advantage! After all, it's not fair if one school has an advantage over another and does better than that school every year.
  
  So let's fix that issue while we're at it as well. All property tax revenue gets sent in and divided evenly among all schools. All gate proceeds from every game gets sent in and then divided evenly among all the schools. We wouldn't want anyone to have an unfair advantage right?!
  
  Better yet, let's just let the schools that are in a richer district play up a division so that schools in a poorer district have a fair shot at reaching the title game!

  I understand your logic or perception there of.
  
  Allow me first to apologize. I didn't realize there were D2 schools with no weight room. We should get them a set of weights for sure. The state, however, already does redistribute tax dollars to assist schools with facility needs. Jefferson Area, for example, recently used part of their state facility money for a turf field.
  
  Attendance revenue seems fair the way it is. The more people at a game the more services are needed, more seating, more facilities, more maintenance, etc. Smithville does not need a stadium the size of Massillon nor restrooms for 30,000 people, nor a maintenance crew for a stadium that size, etc. So they don't need the revenue to support that.
  
  As far as taxes, better yet set a state wide flat rate tax so the revenue is even per capita.
• tsst_fballfan

  

  Rocket08;581864 wrote:First things first, denying the success of the MAC is a weakness on your part, period
  
  Second, including Massillon in any discussion that includes academics, no matter what, is a nonstarter

  Uggghhh really?!?!
  
  'first things first', I never denied the MACs success. I love MAC football. '07 was a wondrous year. Errrr I give up trying to explain the English language. Your failure to understand the words in the sentence structure presented to you to establish a point of reason or contention is weakness on your part period! Did you just misinterpret the part about using their success as spurious proof that inequities don't exist? Or was it conscious omission?
  
  'second', Your utter incapacity to cognize the point being portrayed, about how academics are also controlled differently by the guideline difference, makes discussing academics with you a nonstarter.
• Rocket08

  Seriously, if you want to criticize someone's grammar, you might want to learn to speak English first
• tsst_fballfan

  

  tsst_fballfan;581826 wrote:Oy vay!
  
  Let's evade the fact that the guidelines governing publics vs privates are different period. Instead let's use the MAC schools winning history as pseudo rationalization to leave the guideline differences intact. Wow what an excellent idea. Hell why have any guidelines at all for any school?!?! ...

  Rocket08;581864 wrote:First things first, denying the success of the MAC is a weakness on your part, period ...

  By all means please point out where I was in denial of the MACs success.
  
  

  tsst_fballfan;581826 wrote:... Massillon should be able to tell all the kids making below a B to find another school. That way they too can claim to graduate most or all their students to college. ...

  Rocket08;581864 wrote:... Second, including Massillon in any discussion that includes academics, no matter what, is a nonstarter

  And while you're at it please identify the error in my hyperbole that precludes using Massillon as an example. Controlling admittance using academic levels as one of the criteria would increase Massillon's academic success in the same manner as it has for private schools.
  
  

  Rocket08;582076 wrote:Seriously, if you want to criticize someone's grammar, you might want to learn to speak English first

  Thanks for the advice.
• etak

  tsst_fballfan;581959 wrote:Uggghhh really?!?!
  
  'first things first', I never denied the MACs success. I love MAC football. '07 was a wondrous year. Errrr I give up trying to explain the English language. Your failure to understand the words in the sentence structure presented to you to establish a point of reason or contention is weakness on your part period! Did you just misinterpret the part about using their success as spurious proof that inequities don't exist? Or was it conscious omission?
  
  'second', Your utter incapacity to cognize the point being portrayed, about how academics are also controlled differently by the guideline difference, makes discussing academics with you a nonstarter.

  
  In that response, it sounds like you began your socio/athletic elitism early in life.
• tsst_fballfan

  

  etak;582280 wrote:In that response, it sounds like you began your socio/athletic elitism early in life.

  I can accept that criticism. I was being a bit sarcastic and condescending.
• etak

  Excellent. Then I'll admit to being hypersensitive to the pervasive, persistent notion so many on this blogsite seem to have that private and parochial school attendees are elitist, and that all private and parochial school programs are fraught with cheaters and scammers. I came from a middle class family, and I had to work enough hours through my high school career to pay for half my tuition each year because my folks didn't have it. My social worker brother and his part-time employed wife have taken out a home equity loan to cover the tuition costs for their sons.They are not rich and they are not elitist. They have simply made a choice. Please consider these kinds of folks when making your prejudgements about private/parochial school patrons.
• skank

  

  Rocket08;581864 wrote:First things first, denying the success of the MAC is a weakness on your part, period
  
  Second, including Massillon in any discussion that includes academics, no matter what, is a nonstarter

  
  And including Mooney in any discussion involving fair play play is what got this thread started in the first place.
• skank

  

  etak;582280 wrote:In that response, it sounds like you began your socio/athletic elitism early in life.

  
  A parochial school supporter directing the word elitism at anyone but himself or his parochial pals is quite the funny. (at least based on what I've read on this site.)
• Sykotyk

  

  To everyone pointing out the MAC as exhibit A in the defense of the status quo should heed the phrase, "The exception proves the rule".
  
  Only theoretical arguments can be consistent. Real life has variables, vagaries, exceptions, peaks and valleys, ups and downs. By pointing out the rare exception to the standard average, proves the standard average exists. And that is private schools win far greater on average (key word) than public schools based on percentage. Rationalize it. Defend it. Accept it. Begrudge it. Whatever.
  
  The truth is the truth. The question is WHY. If we can answer that, we can then begin to discuss how, if at all, we can address it.
  
  I find it humorous those that tilt at windmills.
• skank

  

  Heretic;581648 wrote:Precisely. Successful programs are successful and, therefore, get all sort of allegations about recruiting. If you're in north central Ohio paying attention to small-town football, you've probably heard accusations that PUBLIC school Marion Pleasant "recruits" because until recently, they dominated their league on a yearly basis.
  
  Heck, a person could even wonder why a certain former Orrville QB's family decided that a move to a certain Division I school (that has at least one supporter that seems to really dislike private schools because they "recruit") would be beneficial to their son. Was it to ensure getting a scholarship to a big-time school like Ohio State? This dealie with quotes by him (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:a5sszt8RJVcJ:www.acenturyofheroes.com/documents/Zwick%2520teaser.pdf+justin+zwick+orrville+massillon&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgJX4ApW_wXZ5k98zTFx8BdMQYG4K8U7zSp6lx03P9T0I7svehLeDH5yCiWGsOZ4HGWnKX5Ut7s9zJIvLLPIQW0_WBdQ-YyPsWF0Aia1gvRcwri36FxCpAUnJDyo3-_3T9oOmuo&sig=AHIEtbTHdUqM5h-N24Fm3xSeyZmdlJ0YIA) seems to directly say that moving to a bigger school was beneficial to him being ready to play for a big-time college. But then...it'd be foolish to even suggest that public schools with tradition and respect gain any number of move-ins or transfers based on said reputation.
  
  Hypocrisy and hilarious have more in common than the letter "H". "We'll take your kids with pride because we're a great program!!!! But, by jove, they better not go to a private school because that's cheating us out of them!!!!" It'd be one thing if it was fans of perennial weaklings complaining...but when you have fans of perennial powers Steuby and Massy crying about privates, it just reeks of this whole "kids we used to obtain are now going to private schools, so THIS IS CRAP!!!!!" sort of thing.

  
  As I've said countless times on this very thread, it's not that kids choose privates, it's the lengths that the OHSAA allows them to go to attract these kids.