Ohio Chatter DEV

skank

rmolin73;692587 wrote:Isn't it a charter school?

Wrong.

skank

Hiawatha and D'juan Francisco moved within the diocese and....Get this....Rented a home owned by....Ready for this? You sure? GERRY FAUST.

Furthermore, is it a coincidence that Moeller dominated from 74-85, then, when an Archdiocesan rule said that students could no longer attend an Archdiocesan school and live outside the Parish Geographical boundries took effect in....1986....Moeller hasn't been the same?

sherm03

Anyone else find it hilarious that skank is talking about someone's credibility when he can't answer questions directed right at him on this thread?

Al Bundy

skank;692806 wrote:Hiawatha and D'juan Francisco moved within the diocese and....Get this....Rented a home owned by....Ready for this? You sure? GERRY FAUST.

Furthermore, is it a coincidence that Moeller dominated from 74-85, then, when an Archdiocesan rule said that students could no longer attend an Archdiocesan school and live outside the Parish Geographical boundries took effect in....1986....Moeller hasn't been the same?

He should have just given a good job to their parents. It is ok to bring out of state kids that way, right skank?

skank

Al Bundy;692890 wrote:He should have just given a good job to their parents. It is ok to bring out of state kids that way, right skank?

Mr. Kempt already has a job, as a matter of fact, that's why he's here. Now, on the other hand, if Jason Hall owned a piece of property, with a house on it, and he rented it to Mr. Kempt, wouldn't that raise some red flags?

Just be careful as to how your parochial school of choice conducts business, it seems Dr. Ross doesn't just look the other way in favor of parochials in the manner that Mr. Muscaro did.

Al Bundy

skank;692897 wrote:Mr. Kempt already has a job, as a matter of fact, that's why he's here. Now, on the other hand, if Jason Hall owned a piece of property, with a house on it, and he rented it to Mr. Kempt, wouldn't that raise some red flags?

Just be careful as to how your parochial school of choice conducts business, it seems Dr. Ross doesn't just look the other way in favor of parochials in the manner that Mr. Muscaro did.

For the hundredth time, I'm a public school guy. I just see you as a hyprocrite for criticizing one school for a behavior that you excuse when your school does it. If you think it is wrong to bring in kids from other states, take a stand against any school who does it (including your own).

skank

Al Bundy;692901 wrote:For the hundredth time, I'm a public school guy. I just see you as a hyprocrite for criticizing one school for a behavior that you excuse when your school does it. If you think it is wrong to bring in kids from other states, take a stand against any school who does it (including your own).

My bad, maybe I'll remember about the time that you remember that Mr. Kempt works for Diebold.

skank

Here's a telling tale.

The Archdiocese ruled that, starting in 1986, students could no longer attend an Archdiocesan school and live outside Parish geographical boundries. The rule was enforced from 1986 through 1999, in 2000, it was back to the way it was pre 1986.

Check this out

AAA and Division I parochial schools from 72 to 85----Seven (7) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 86 to 99----Zero (0) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 00 to 10----Four (4) State Championships

So, in the 14 years before the rule they win 50% of the championships, DURING the enforcement of the rule, (14 years), they win 0%, and after the rule is lifted, (11 years), they win 36%.

I should have made it more clear in my post, but obviously, this covers only Cincinnati parochials.

skank

fish82;692753 wrote:I was talking about your getting your titty all twisted over the spelling of Francisco. For a guy all caught up with "credibility," you have the reading skills of a third grader.

And where did I say I knew every player? Please show the quote where I said that. Thanks.

Finally, I picked those players because they were amongst the 5 out of state players that you have such a stiffy for. Their notability is irrelevant.

Carry on the good fight, Capt. Credibility! I'll keep coming to you when I need entertainment.

No, their notability is NOT irrelevant....EVERYBODY who follows HS football in Ohio knows about MARK Brooks and the FranCisco bros. Who were the other two guys?

fish82

skank;692767 wrote:You don't know who the players were, sizes, speed, athletic abilities....but you know that they would have won?

I was at both games, Sparky. To anyone who attended, it was painfully obvious.

skank;693169 wrote:No, their notability is NOT irrelevant....EVERYBODY who follows HS football in Ohio knows about MARK Brooks and the FranCisco bros. Who were the other two guys?

LOL....how about everyone who follows HS football in Ohio and is tragically obsessed with all things Moeller knows about MARK Brooks and the FranCisco brothers.

I'm sure you have their dossiers tucked under your pillow...and can provide their full backgrounds at the drop of a hat. Impress us with your obsessive-compulsive knowledge base? Pretty please?

fish82

Sounds like Faust should have been hit with some pretty severe penalties for such shenanigans.

http://cincinnati.com/preps/2002/01/18/pre_ohsaa_cleared.html

Oops. Maybe not.

Sounds like one of a 100 stories at Massillon in the 40s-60s, but that's probably just me. :rolleyes:

skank

fish82;693257 wrote:Sounds like Faust should have been hit with some pretty severe penalties for such shenanigans.

http://cincinnati.com/preps/2002/01/18/pre_ohsaa_cleared.html

Oops. Maybe not.

Sounds like one of a 100 stories at Massillon in the 40s-60s, but that's probably just me. :rolleyes:

Yeah, the new folks in town, rent a house from the head coach. Nothing fishy there. Also, why not share one of those stories that you're so familiar with from the '40s, '50s or '60s? You have no idea why Massillon was so dominant during that time.

skank

fish82;693251 wrote:I was at both games, Sparky. To anyone who attended, it was painfully obvious.

LOL....how about everyone who follows HS football in Ohio and is tragically obsessed with all things Moeller knows about MARK Brooks and the FranCisco brothers.

I'm sure you have their dossiers tucked under your pillow...and can provide their full backgrounds at the drop of a hat. Impress us with your obsessive-compulsive knowledge base? Pretty please?

You're right, I guess not everybody is familiar with those people, some people probably think his name was 'Mike Brooks'.

skank

skank;693015 wrote:Here's a telling tale.

The Archdiocese ruled that, starting in 1986, students could no longer attend an Archdiocesan school and live outside Parish geographical boundries. The rule was enforced from 1986 through 1999, in 2000, it was back to the way it was pre 1986.

Check this out

AAA and Division I parochial schools from 72 to 85----Seven (7) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 86 to 99----Zero (0) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 00 to 10----Four (4) State Championships

So, in the 14 years before the rule they win 50% of the championships, DURING the enforcement of the rule, (14 years), they win 0%, and after the rule is lifted, (11 years), they win 36%.

I should have made it more clear in my post, but obviously, this covers only Cincinnati parochials.

No comment about this though huh? It was probably just a coincidence....Right?

fish82

skank;693279 wrote:Yeah, the new folks in town, rent a house from the head coach. Nothing fishy there. Also, why not share one of those stories that you're so familiar with from the '40s, '50s or '60s? You have no idea why Massillon was so dominant during that time.

Precisely my point. There are only dozens of old stories/urban legends, but since you so clearly subscribe the to the "smoke/fire" school of investigation, I assume you'd be smart enough to know you have to stipulate to their truth as well.

Quiz time, Counselor!

Which of these schools have been put on probation by the OHSAA for violation of the recruiting bylaws in football??

Iggy
X
Moeller
Elder
Ursuline
Mooney
St. Ed
Massillon

Take your time.

skank

fish82;693300 wrote:Precisely my point. There are only dozens of old stories/urban legends, but since you so clearly subscribe the to the "smoke/fire" school of investigation, I assume you'd be smart enough to know you have to stipulate to their truth as well.

Quiz time, Counselor!

Which of these schools have been put on probation by the OHSAA for violation of the recruiting bylaws in football??

Iggy
X
Moeller
Elder
Ursuline
Mooney
St. Ed
Massillon

Take your time.

You know the sad thing is that your answer is Massillon, despite the combines, and the house rentals, and the 173 boys vs the 1059 boys, and the 4 state all star team, and the 7 county all star team, and the giving financial aid on the basis of athletic prowess, and the fact that between 86 and 99 there were ZERO (0) big parochial school state championships out of Cincinnati, despite the fact that pre rule and post rule Cincinnati big school parochials won 44% of the championships. Pretty sad isn't it? Was Mr. Muscaro Catholic? Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

skank

skank;693015 wrote:Here's a telling tale.

The Archdiocese ruled that, starting in 1986, students could no longer attend an Archdiocesan school and live outside Parish geographical boundries. The rule was enforced from 1986 through 1999, in 2000, it was back to the way it was pre 1986.

Check this out

AAA and Division I parochial schools from 72 to 85----Seven (7) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 86 to 99----Zero (0) State Championships

Division I parochial schools from 00 to 10----Four (4) State Championships

So, in the 14 years before the rule they win 50% of the championships, DURING the enforcement of the rule, (14 years), they win 0%, and after the rule is lifted, (11 years), they win 36%.

I should have made it more clear in my post, but obviously, this covers only Cincinnati parochials.

Thoughts?

Al Bundy

skank;693315 wrote:You know the sad thing is that your answer is Massillon, despite the combines

Massillon had their combine 2 weeks ago.

skank;693315 wrote: and the house rentals

They should just hook the parents up with jobs

skank;693315 wrote: and the 173 boys vs the 1059 boys

Ursuline would not win the D1 tite if that is what you mean by this

genghis dong

skank;693288 wrote:No comment about this though huh? It was probably just a coincidence....Right?

Call it what you want. Maybe there were just better teams those years. I know a team that won 22 state titles before the playoffs began in 72. They haven't won one since coincidence?

Rocket08

Ouch

skank

Al Bundy;693328 wrote:Massillon had their combine 2 weeks ago. They should just hook the parents up with jobs Ursuline would not win the D1 tite if that is what you mean by this

#1) No, Nike had their combine 2 weeks ago, and every athlete involved should appreciate Massillons involvement.

#2) Or...."give scholarships and/or financial aid based on a students athletic ability".

#3) That's not what alot of people are thinking, especially the Ursuline throng. Just the fact that a school with 173 boys would think they can compete enough with a school over six (6) times their size, that they schedule the game is a testimony to the efforts of Ursulines recruiting coordinator.

Al Bundy

skank;693646 wrote:#1) No, Nike had their combine 2 weeks ago, and every athlete involved should appreciate Massillons involvement.

#2) Or...."give scholarships and/or financial aid based on a students athletic ability".

#3) That's not what alot of people are thinking, especially the Ursuline throng. Just the fact that a school with 173 boys would think they can compete enough with a school over six (6) times their size, that they schedule the game is a testimony to the efforts of Ursulines recruiting coordinator.

1) So if the Cleveland Diocese had a corporate sponsor, you'd be ok with them having a combine? (Please explain the current rules because they always seem to change in your world to best meet the needs of Massillon)

2) How many kids on the Massillon team are paying tuition? I think all of them are getting a free ride.

3) I don't know anyone who know understands that game of football that thinks Ursuline could win the D1 tournament.

skank

genghis dong;693421 wrote:Call it what you want. Maybe there were just better teams those years. I know a team that won 22 state titles before the playoffs began in 72. They haven't won one since coincidence?

Hahahaha. Yeah, there were definately better teams during the "dark era" of Cincinnati parochial school football, IE, 1986-99. Look at it this way, if they played by the rules from 72 through 85, and again 2000 through present day, there would have been better teams all along.

It ain't no coincidence, Cincy parochials have free reign over all of Ohio, (Kentucky, Indiana and others for that matter), and rule hs football, THEN, they stop for a period of 14 years, which just happens to be the time frame of the "rule", the rule is dropped, and they start winning championships again?

sherm03

skank;693666 wrote:Hahahaha. Yeah, there were definately better teams during the "dark era" of Cincinnati parochial school football, IE, 1986-99. Look at it this way, if they played by the rules from 72 through 85, and again 2000 through present day, there would have been better teams all along.

It ain't no coincidence, Cincy parochials have free reign over all of Ohio, (Kentucky, Indiana and others for that matter), and rule hs football, THEN, they stop for a period of 14 years, which just happens to be the time frame of the "rule", the rule is dropped, and they start winning championships again?

I love that you make it like the parochials in Cincinnati just disappeared from 86-99. St. X lost in the title game twice during that time frame...and Moeller lost in the title game three times during that time. Three of the five losses were to Iggy as that time frame is right about when Iggy started to dominate.

So don't make it like this rule got put into place and Cincinnati parochial schools fell off the map. They were still very good. They just ran into a steam roller named Iggy, and two very good McKinley teams.

skank

sherm03;693716 wrote:I love that you make it like the parochials in Cincinnati just disappeared from 86-99. St. X lost in the title game twice during that time frame...and Moeller lost in the title game three times during that time. Three of the five losses were to Iggy as that time frame is right about when Iggy started to dominate.

So don't make it like this rule got put into place and Cincinnati parochial schools fell off the map. They were still very good. They just ran into a steam roller named Iggy, and two very good McKinley teams.

I didn't make it look like anything that it wasn't, show me where I said they disappeared, or they sucked, I simply stated facts, they won 7 in 14 yrs. before, 4 in 11 years after, and 0 in the 14 years during, that's all.

They coincidently ran into another dominate parichial school.

I can say the same thing, '77 Mckinley, '80 Massillon, '82 Massillon, 85 McKinley, '02WGH, '05 Massillon, all pretty damn good teams that ran into parochial steam rollers.

Archive

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