Competitive Balance fails by close vote

• Rocket08

  rmolin73;776203 wrote:You need to give it up no one takes you serious. Most felt that the proposal was too strong with the tradition factor punishing successful programs. If there was a simple multiplier it would have passed. There won't be separate playoffs ever in Ohio that's something you can "embrace".

  
  EXACTLY!!!!
• Sonofanump

  thePITman;772663 wrote:The last thing I want to happen, personally, is have the OHSAA create separate tournaments for public and private schools. If that were to happen, who knows what else would follow suit - the OHSAA loses money and tries to change it back, but it's too late; the private schools leave the OHSAA to form their own organization, leaving OHSAA member schools trying to pick up the pieces and after-effects; public school kids leave to participate in private school athletics for higher levels of exposure for college athletics; and any other possible outcomes. If we open this can of worms, who knows what else might come crawling out.

  Yep.
• Rocket08

  skank;776329 wrote:Agreed, the tournament is one of the best, but, if you included the Green Bay Packers, into the tournament, they would obviously roll everybody, the tournament would still be set up good, but....You see where I'm going here?

  
  Maybe you should go to Freshman English Mr period police
  
  That's a horrible attempt a a sentence
• skank

  

  Rocket08;776590 wrote:Ya, you're frustrated
  
  Your team has never won a championship, and you're jealous You can't admit someone's better than you, even though it's pretty obvious

  
  Said the man whose team benefits from the unbalance.
• skank

  

  Rocket08;776601 wrote:Maybe you should go to Freshman English Mr period police
  
  That's a horrible attempt a a sentence

  
  You know the sad thing? I was once an English Major. No wait, that was you, right?
• skank

  

  Rocket08;776590 wrote:Ya, you're frustrated
  
  Your team has never won a championship, and you're jealous You can't admit someone's better than you, even though it's pretty obvious

  
  Yes I can. In '80 & '81, those Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana & Michigan teams were better than us, no doubt. Well, I say teams, but I mean Moeller.
  
  In '89, '91 & '01, the Ignatius, Westlake, Rocky River, Solon, Berea....Etc, were better than us.
  
  In 2005? Cincitucky St. X was better.
• skank

  

  Al Bundy;776171 wrote:Which rule(s) give any advantage to private schools?

  
  So, the OHSAA was tinkering with "competative balance"....Because?
• fish82

  

  skank;776329 wrote:Agreed, the tournament is one of the best, but, if you included the Green Bay Packers, into the tournament, they would obviously roll everybody, the tournament would still be set up good, but....You see where I'm going here?

  
  I do, and you're going the wrong way. The tournament is considered strong because the best teams play each other, resulting in a true champion.
  

  skank;776782 wrote:So, the OHSAA was tinkering with "competative balance"....Because?

  I dunno...25 years of crying by those who can't get the job done?
• skank

  

  fish82;777018 wrote:I do, and you're going the wrong way. The tournament is considered strong because the best teams play each other, resulting in a true champion.
  
  
  
  I dunno...25 years of crying by those who can't get the job done?

  
  What don't you get? I mean, please explain it to me and I'll try and do a better job of explaining it to you. My goodness, I have no problem with the best teams playing each other....It's how they get to be the best teams is where the problem is.
  
  If you truly believe that the OHSAA actually went to all the trouble of coming up with a CBR, due to "25 years of crying", I guess I just don't know what to tell you.
• skank

  

  I've never seen a group of guys sweat like you and the rest of the parochial 7. Don't worry, I doubt that the OHSAA will ever change anything, and you fellas can go on with the antics.
• aged jock

  skank;777034 wrote:What don't you get? I mean, please explain it to me and I'll try and do a better job of explaining it to you. My goodness, I have no problem with the best teams playing each other....It's how they get to be the best teams is where the problem is.
  
  If you truly believe that the OHSAA actually went to all the trouble of coming up with a CBR, due to "25 years of crying", I guess I just don't know what to tell you.

  
  It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.
• sherm03

  

  aged jock;777063 wrote:It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.

  
  Great post. Too bad it will fall on deaf ears.
• fish82

  

  skank;777034 wrote:What don't you get? I mean, please explain it to me and I'll try and do a better job of explaining it to you. My goodness, I have no problem with the best teams playing each other....It's how they get to be the best teams is where the problem is.

  Glad you agree. So when you responded to rocket's assertion about the tournament being the nation's best with this response:
  

  Sure they do....If you're a parochial school backer.
  
  They WOULD, if the rules for public and parochial were at least SOMEWHAT even, but nah....NAH.

  You're clearly insinuating that your issues with the privates somehow lessen the tournament. That, or your written communication skills could use a little spit & polish.
  
  

  skank;777034 wrote:If you truly believe that the OHSAA actually went to all the trouble of coming up with a CBR, due to "25 years of crying", I guess I just don't know what to tell you.

  If the issues were that egregious, they would have done CBP 25 years ago...or 15 years ago...or 10 years ago....get it?
  
  And "all the trouble?" Seriously? Are you somehow under the impression this turd took more than 90 minutes to come up with? Please.
• Dean Wormer

  aged jock;777063 wrote:It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.

  This is one of the best posts on this subject I have read. Of course Skank will now make you "parochial #8". Thank you for adding your voice to private education.
• Bigdogg

  aged jock;777063 wrote:It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.

  
  It is interesting that you note (correctly) that compensation for teachers and administrators are lower at private schools. Notice I left out coaches because I know for a fact of at least one highly successful private school that supplemented their coaches by giving their spouses higher paying jobs then they were qualified for. Since private schools do not have open records, I suspect there are lots of ways to compensate coaches that are not available for public schools.
  
  Why do you think a teacher or an administrator would want to work somewhere for less pay? I think every public school employee knows this answer has to do mainly with the quality of students and parents you deal with. This is a good reason why the current system of classification of schools by the number of body's walking the halls is a joke. It is just like taking a random sample to measure an opinion or test a theory. The population represented would not be a valid sample. If you know anything about sampling a population you would understand this clearly.
• Dean Wormer

  Bigdogg;777467 wrote:It is interesting that you note (correctly) that compensation for teachers and administrators are lower at private schools. Notice I left out coaches because I know for a fact of at least one highly successful private school that supplemented their coaches by giving their spouses higher paying jobs then they were qualified for. Since private schools do not have open records, I suspect there are lots of ways to compensate coaches that are not available for public schools.
  
  Why do you think a teacher or an administrator would want to work somewhere for less pay? I think every public school employee knows this answer has to do mainly with the quality of students and parents you deal with. This is a good reason why the current system of classification of schools by the number of body's walking the halls is a joke. It is just like taking a random sample to measure an opinion or test a theory. The population represented would not be a valid sample. If you know anything about sampling a population you would understand this clearly.

  Let's ask Skank about the compensation of coaches? A friend of mine was the head coach of Massillon a few years ago and I know for a fact what kind of compensation he and his wife received. You act like this happens only at private schools. I can't speak for other private schools but I personally know that not one coach at Mooney makes anything close to their public school counterparts, in any sport.
• Al Bundy

  skank;776776 wrote:Yes I can. In '80 & '81, those Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana & Michigan teams were better than us, no doubt. Well, I say teams, but I mean Moeller.
  
  In '89, '91 & '01, the Ignatius, Westlake, Rocky River, Solon, Berea....Etc, were better than us.
  
  In 2005? Cincitucky St. X was better.

  
  Just curious, if your Tigers were to ever win a championship, would you discredit the title because they use kids from other states and other districts? This public school guy is interested if you want to treat publics the same as privates or not.
• Bigdogg

  Dean Wormer;777578 wrote:Let's ask Skank about the compensation of coaches? A friend of mine was the head coach of Massillon a few years ago and I know for a fact what kind of compensation he and his wife received. You act like this happens only at private schools. I can't speak for other private schools but I personally know that not one coach at Mooney makes anything close to their public school counterparts, in any sport.

  
  Your non responsive to the post. 100% of all public school coaching contracts are public information and you can look them up on the web. 0% of all private school contracts are public information and booster clubs can make special arrangements under the table and nothing can be done or tracked back.
  
  Why would people take less money for the same job? Don't give me the B.S. about believing in the mission. Everyone knows the answer.
• Al Bundy

  Bigdogg;777654 wrote:Your non responsive to the post. 100% of all public school coaching contracts are public information and you can look them up on the web. 0% of all private school contracts are public information and booster clubs can make special arrangements under the table and nothing can be done or tracked back.
  
  Why would people take less money for the same job? Don't give me the B.S. about believing in the mission. Everyone knows the answer.

  
  The pockets of big public schools are much deeper than those of any private schools. When McDaniels was coaching at Harding, he made around 90,000.
• skank

  

  aged jock;777063 wrote:It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.

  
  Well....You have it all figured out don't ya.
• skank

  

  aged jock;777063 wrote:It's impossible to change a closed mind, but I'll try one more time.
  Let's limit our discussion to football. Of all sports, football's the one that least depends on having a stable of studs enter your school as freshmen. Especially at the lower levels. A couple of stars can make a difference, but most private schools don't have just a couple of stars. What they have is 11 guys who have prepared themselves, mentally, physically, spiritually and emotionally to compete, doing what they're supposed to do every play, as a team, with attitude. Honestly, how many teams lose because the coaches have chosen their "stars" before the season even starts, play favorites, discourage a lot of potential players, give indicators to the team that certain players are better than others, belittle those who they don't like, allow politics (parents) to interfere, rely on pure physical ability rather than teamwork, etc., etc.
  
  Coldwater, Steubenville and Kenton all beat my Alter Knights in the last several years, because they all had a few offensive stars who were taller and/or better than the Alter guys who were playing against them, but also because they had confidence, poise, teamwork, discipline and preparation. But Alter also beat those teams, not because of Alter's stars, but because of Alter's confidence, poise, teamwork,
  etc. These teams all were from similar sized schools, and all have won state championships recently. Why would you choose Alter to boost to a higher level? For that matter, why would you boost the others to a higher level?
  
  Your reasons are all specious. Basically, you don't like private schools. It's really that simple. You like that the publics divide the state up and give everyone a full scholarship. Then you argue until you're blue that somehow anybody who doesn't play by those rules is getting an advantage, despite charging families $8,000 a year per kid or more, despite inferior facilities, despite compensation packages for teachers, administrators and coaches that are often 40 to 50 percent below what the public schools pay. In addition, public high schools take way more kids from private grade schools than private high schools take from public grade schools every year, and that's just fine with you. But have one or two or even ten kids go from public grade schools to private high schools and play sports, and you scream bloody murder. And if they get any financial aid - even if they still pay thousands and even though at the public school they get a free ride - and you cry foul. When we say we've had enough of your crap, you start yelling about all the "cheating".
  
  There now, are you starting to see another side to the story? I didn't think so.

  
  So, you think that public school kids don't prepare themselves, Mentally? Physically? Spiritually? Emotionally? What's all this "choose their stars" bs that someone from the newly formed parochial 8 came up with and everybody seems to be running with? You do realize that to keep your job, you have to win, regardless of public or private right?
• skank

  

  Dean Wormer;777578 wrote:Let's ask Skank about the compensation of coaches? A friend of mine was the head coach of Massillon a few years ago and I know for a fact what kind of compensation he and his wife received. You act like this happens only at private schools. I can't speak for other private schools but I personally know that not one coach at Mooney makes anything close to their public school counterparts, in any sport.

  
  So then Reardon turned down an opportunity to make "big bucks" at a DI school, to remain at Ursuline, because the "draw" was much greater at Ursuline?
• aged jock

  skank;777797 wrote:So, you think that public school kids don't prepare themselves, Mentally? Physically? Spiritually? Emotionally? What's all this "choose their stars" bs that someone from the newly formed parochial 8 came up with and everybody seems to be running with? You do realize that to keep your job, you have to win, regardless of public or private right?

  
  Some do, some don't.
  
  Just an observation about picking "stars". I know about Alter. They usually don't have their D line formed until about a week before the first game. It's always built for speed and aggressiveness, and often from guys who were never D linemen. As for every position, they fill in spots and whoever fits, fits. I've seen some publics (and a couple of privates) actively promote some kids and actively demote others, for political or whatever other reasons. That's not a good way to build a program. You may think it's about getting great athletes to go to your school. It's not. It's about making what you have better players on a better team.
  
  Some schools announce that their sophomores, if they're equal, will play before seniors. That's not a great way to build a program. Alter lost a "star" a few years back because they don't "feature" a running back (but he was also being very heavily recruited by a public school, where he eventually went, although he didn't live in the district). They don't "feature" anybody - except the team.
  
  During a playoff game recently, I was sitting in the Alter stands, discussing the game with some coaches from a public school that narrowly missed the playoffs. The coaches marvelled that ALL the Alter kids were still playing hard every play, flying to the ball on D and opening holes on O, although they were winning by a comfortable margin. I told the coaches that they're taught not to get "comfortable". We call it the Coldwater rule, after Coldwater beat us in three OT's when Alter had them down by three TD's twice in the game. Coldwater played like a champion that year, and it taught Alter to play like one since. That's Alter's "secret sauce". I have no idea whether any other school prepares themselves in all those ways, but when you learn from mistakes you get to higher levels. I say that more teams, public and private, should learn from their mistakes, instead of bellyaching about supposed and imagined "advantages" other schools may have.
• aged jock

  skank;777805 wrote:So then Reardon turned down an opportunity to make "big bucks" at a DI school, to remain at Ursuline, because the "draw" was much greater at Ursuline?

  
  I know coaches who stayed at private programs their whole careers, rather than moving to publics. Politics, parents, mix of kids, whatever, causes some guys to give up the big bucks and retirement programs to stay at places where they can build consistently winning programs. Coaches at small town or suburban public schools sometimes get both and stay there for their whole careers.
• fish82

  

  skank;777805 wrote:So then Reardon turned down an opportunity to make "big bucks" at a DI school, to remain at Ursuline, because the "draw" was much greater at Ursuline?

  Maybe Harding just sucks that badly.