New Competitive Balance Proposal

• queencitybuckeye

  Bigdogg;1005410 wrote:If true why has the OHSAA already stated they will go back to the drawing board?

  Because they're listening to the nittering nitwits while the silent majority goes about their day to day business, having better things to do than worry about the "fairness" issues of children running up and down a field.
• Bigdogg

  queencitybuckeye;1005478 wrote:Because they're listening to the nittering nitwits while the silent majority goes about their day to day business, having better things to do than worry about the "fairness" issues of children running up and down a field.

  Actually what they listened to was the very vocal group of administrators threatening to referendum a separation of public and private school tournaments, which I would hate to see. But nice try with the smart ass comments.
• queencitybuckeye

  Bigdogg;1005594 wrote:Actually what they listened to was the very vocal group of administrators threatening to referendum a separation of public and private school tournaments, which I would hate to see. But nice try with the smart ass comments.

  At least that approach would be honest, when what they've currently wanted to date has not been a level field, but one tilted in their direction.
• Bigdogg

  Mooney44Cards;1005417 wrote:con·jec·ture [kuhn-jek-cher]
  
  
  noun 1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
  
  2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.

  
  You can wish in one hand and crap in another and see which fills up sooner, but try as you may this issue is not going away. Here is my proof.
  

  Statement from Commissioner Ross regarding the Competitive Balance Proposal
  Dr. Dan Ross, OHSAA Commissioner, has issued the following statement on the future of the Competitive Balance Proposal, which was voted down by the member schools during the annual referendum voting period in May. The proposal, which would have allowed the OHSAA to use a formula for determining athletic count numbers used in assigning schools to divisions, was defeated 332-303.
  
  “This fall, the OHSAA will conduct a survey of our membership to gather feedback on the Competitive Balance issue. The Competitive Balance Committee will then meet to study the survey results and determine if a new proposal should be forwarded to the Board of Directors for consideration of a new referendum issue next May. It remains the goal of the OHSAA to keep public and non-public schools together in the same tournaments. The Competitive Balance Committee’s goal is to do that, but also to create a more balanced method for how schools are placed into divisions. We appreciate all of the feedback from our member schools thus far and expect to receive even more when the survey is completed.”

  
  
  http://www.ohsaa.org/news/board/060911.htm
  
  
  
• Mooney44Cards

  

  Bigdogg;1005606 wrote:You can wish in one hand and crap in another and see which fills up sooner, but try as you may this issue is not going away. Here is my proof.
  
  
  
  http://www.ohsaa.org/news/board/060911.htm
  
  
  [/SIZE][/FONT]

  Oh that's right, this was the proposal that would have had absolutely no effect on which division Mooney plays in. Yep, really seems to be solving the "problem".
• Rocket08

  Bigdogg;1005594 wrote:Actually what they listened to was the very vocal group of administrators threatening to referendum a separation of public and private school tournaments, which I would hate to see. But nice try with the smart ass comments.

  2 totally separate conversations. A proposal to add multipliers, etc failed. FACT
  
  A proposal for separate playoffs won't even get 15% of the vote if it even is ever officially proposed OPINION
• Bigdogg

  Rocket08;1006920 wrote:2 totally separate conversations. A proposal to add multipliers, etc failed. FACT
  
  A proposal for separate playoffs won't even get 15% of the vote if it even is ever officially proposed OPINION

  Fact OHSAA will continue to explore competitive balance proposals. Fact the OHSAA is very concerned of the results the next time a split is proposed. FACT you have no idea how a vote would turn out NOW
• Rocket08

  FACT: You're completely biased and have an agenda
  
  It gets more obvious with every post you make
  
  
  
  There will NEVER be a split PERIOD
• Al Bundy

  Rocket08;1007417 wrote:FACT: You're completely biased and have an agenda
  
  It gets more obvious with every post you make
  
  
  
  There will NEVER be a split PERIOD

  Why not have a spilt? We could follow the lead of the Big Ten and name the new groups as the Winner and Whiners?
• Summa

  Bigdogg;1007167 wrote:Fact OHSAA will continue to explore competitive balance proposals. Fact the OHSAA is very concerned of the results the next time a split is proposed. FACT you have no idea how a vote would turn out NOW

  FACT: Most people, both public and private supporters, are sick to death of talking about this issue right now. Public schools won 4 of 6 divisions this year. 80% of public schools are open enrollment and most of the public schools in the state finals were statewide open enrollement. We all need a break from this right now despite you apparently being unemployed and having way too much time on your hands since you have posted your personal proposal on three different ohio high school sports sites that I saw.
• skank

  

  Rocket08;1007417 wrote:FACT: You're completely biased and have an agenda
  
  It gets more obvious with every post you make
  
  
  
  There will NEVER be a split PERIOD

  
  
  And you DON'T have an agenda? Damn right we have an agenda, it's called fairness.
• skank

  

  Al Bundy;1007418 wrote:Why not have a spilt? We could follow the lead of the Big Ten and name the new groups as the Winner and Whiners?

  
  
  Or, we could call it, cheaters and.... ....Publics.
• Summa

  skank;1007504 wrote:And you DON'T have an agenda? Damn right we have an agenda, it's called fairness.

  And you skank (very fitting screen name btw) are a Massillon supporter and have zero credibility on this issue since Massillon is statewide open enrollment, has had too many big time starters from outside of Massillon on their teams over the years for me to even count, and has been in trouble with the OHSAA for recruiting in the past. Also, the school that built a big time college indoor football facility for what purpose, the purpose of recruiting, I mean, "attracting" outside of the district kids to come play football for Massillon. Massillon schools better seriously start to worry a lot more about academics than their football team. Out of 20 high schools in the Canton area (Stark County) that play football, Massillon ranked a lowly 17th on the 2010 OGT barely ahead of McKinley and Alliance with Timken bringing up the rear. While about 90% of those "cheating" private schools ranked from the top 1% to the top 25% on the OGT in 2010. They must be recruiting smart athletes.
• skank

  

  sherm03;999810 wrote:But if the private schools recruit all the best players...wouldn't there be more than just 5 Mr. Ohio's to come out private schools? It just doesn't make sense, skankers.

  
  
  But if the parochial schools DON'T recruit all the best players....Wouldn't there be more than just 5 public schools winning head to head matchups vs parochials in the finals? It just doesn't make sense, shermer.
• skank

  

  Summa;1007512 wrote:And you skank (very fitting screen name btw) are a Massillon supporter and have zero credibility on this issue since Massillon is statewide open enrollment has had many big time starters from outside of Massillon on their teams over the years and has been in trouble with the OHSAA for recruiting in the past.

  
  
  I should care about credibility, from you people because?
  
  You all are the ones with no credibility, everytime someone calls for change, they're called whiners, cry babies, said to have agendas, we all know that the parochial school backers don't want a thing to change, and more importantly, we know why.
  
  BTW, the things Massillon did was no worse than what Moeller did, yet we sit out the playoffs for three years, they get a $1,000 fine and get scolded in public....Yeah, real fair.
• Bigdogg

  Summa;1007477 wrote:FACT: Most people, both public and private supporters, are sick to death of talking about this issue right now. Public schools won 4 of 6 divisions this year. 80% of public schools are open enrollment and most of the public schools in the state finals were statewide open enrollement. We all need a break from this right now despite you apparently being unemployed and having way too much time on your hands since you have posted your personal proposal on three different sports sites that I saw.

  Nope gainfully employed for the last 30 years. If you need a break, I suggest you stop reading posts on this subject.
  
  The discussion is, 1) Has anything changed since the way the OHSAA decided to break schools into classes by numbers of students walking the halls 9-11. 2) Is the system currently meeting the stated OHSAA Mission of to "regulate and administer interscholastic athletic competition in a fair and equitable manner while promoting the values of participation in interscholastic athletics as an integral part of a student's educational experience." 3) What are the changes that can be made to make it better.
  
  I understand that there are some people that want no changes. Why don't you start your own thread and provide all the reasons why everything should stay the same other then this is the way we have always done it. In the business world this philosophy would bankrupt you.
• skank

  

  Summa;1007512 wrote:And you skank (very fitting screen name btw) are a Massillon supporter and have zero credibility on this issue since Massillon is statewide open enrollment, has had too many big time starters from outside of Massillon to count on their teams over the years, and has been in trouble with the OHSAA for recruiting in the past. Also the school that built a big time college indoor facility for what purpose, the purpose of recruiting, I mean, "attracting" outside of the district kids to come play football for Massillon. Massillon schools better seriously start to worry a lot more about academics than their football team. Out of 20 high schools in the Canton area/Stark County that play football, Massillon ranked 17th on the 2010 OGT barely ahead of McKinley and Alliance with Timken bringing up the rear. While about 90% of those "cheating" private schools ranked from the top 1% to the top 25% on the OGT in 2010. They must be recruiting smart athletes.

  
  
  You know the purpose for the building of the indoor?
  Exactly, they're definately recruiting smart athletes, THANK YOU, I've been saying that for a while now.
  Btw, what does Massillons academics have to do with this? Nice try.
• sherm03

  

  skank;1007538 wrote: BTW, the things Massillon did was no worse than what Moeller did, yet we sit out the playoffs for three years, they get a $1,000 fine and get scolded in public....Yeah, real fair.

  According to the article I found (on a Massillon site no less), you did not have to sit out of the playoffs. You received a $2,500 fine (only $500 dollars in actual monetary penalties) and a probation. The only reason you would have had to sit out of the playoffs is because you just didn't make them.
  
  At least, according to the article I found.
• Summa

  Bigdogg;1007539 wrote:Nope gainfully employed for the last 30 years. If you need a break, I suggest you stop reading posts on this subject.
  
  The discussion is, 1) Has anything changed since the way the OHSAA decided to break schools into classes by numbers of students walking the halls 9-11. 2) Is the system currently meeting the stated OHSAA Mission of to "regulate and administer interscholastic athletic competition in a fair and equitable manner while promoting the values of participation in interscholastic athletics as an integral part of a student's educational experience." 3) What are the changes that can be made to make it better.
  
  I understand that there are some people that want no changes. Why don't you start your own thread and provide all the reasons why everything should stay the same other then this is the way we have always done it. In the business world this philosophy would bankrupt you.

  You must be really busy at work in whatever public school district you are the AD or coach. Why would I start a tired thread on a issue that is going nowhere anytime soon. You can pretty much take that to the bank.
• Summa

  sherm03;1007553 wrote:According to the article I found (on a Massillon site no less), you did not have to sit out of the playoffs. You received a $2,500 fine (only $500 dollars in actual monetary penalties) and a probation. The only reason you would have had to sit out of the playoffs is because you just didn't make them.
  
  At least, according to the article I found.

  At least the he admitted that Massillon is a big "cheater" and he never denied the fact that they have had tons of stud football players from outside of Massillon for years upon years. He has ZERO and I mean ZERO credibility on the issue.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  So, lets make this clear again......what are the private schools doing that the public schools cannot do?
• sherm03

  

  Mooney44Cards;1007567 wrote:So, lets make this clear again......what are the private schools doing that the public schools cannot do?

  Winning.
• coyotes22

  

  Summa;1007566 wrote:At least the he admitted that Massillon is a big "cheater" and he never denied the fact that they have had tons of stud football players from outside of Massillon for years upon years. He has ZERO and I mean ZERO credibility on the issue.

  #1- If Massillon is such a crappy school, why would ANY good athletes come here?
  
  #2- If we do get, as you say. "tons of stud football players from outside of Massillon for years upon years",wouldnt we be playing for a championship or at least the region, every year?
• coyotes22

  

  Summa;1007512 wrote:And you skank (very fitting screen name btw) are a Massillon supporter and have zero credibility on this issue since Massillon is statewide open enrollment, has had too many big time starters from outside of Massillon on their teams over the years for me to even count, and has been in trouble with the OHSAA for recruiting in the past. Also, the school that built a big time college indoor football facility for what purpose, the purpose of recruiting, I mean, "attracting" outside of the district kids to come play football for Massillon. Massillon schools better seriously start to worry a lot more about academics than their football team. Out of 20 high schools in the Canton area (Stark County) that play football, Massillon ranked a lowly 17th on the 2010 OGT barely ahead of McKinley and Alliance with Timken bringing up the rear. While about 90% of those "cheating" private schools ranked from the top 1% to the top 25% on the OGT in 2010. They must be recruiting smart athletes.

  And Massillon people continue to live in the past? SMH
• Summa

  skank;1007549 wrote:
  Btw, what does Massillons academics have to do with this? Nice try.

  LOL, we are talking about high schools right. Considering the pitiful state Massillon's academic's are in it is good to know where their priorities are? You are right Academics should never be brought up when talking about "schools".