Archive

Wayne Co. superintendents take on private vs. public debate

  • Al Bundy
    redstreak one wrote: ^^^^^^^But the public cant deny enrollment based on ability to pay. That public school has to take the crackhead baby who cant read who is living with grandma on assisted living. Once again, you private school supporters cant understand simple math.

    A private school will take every student who can afford to pay, and pick and choose who they let in on either scholarship or other forms of payment. That is controlling your enrollment.

    Here simple analogy, 2 schools and there are only 10 students in the area that want to attend.

    School A Public

    School B Private

    Student 1 Smart, athletic and parents can afford tuition. Can go to either school

    Student 2 Smart, athletic and parents would have to skimp and scrape to afford tuiton. Could go to either.

    Student 3 Smart, athletic and parents cant afford tuition. Private would offer help, so could go to either.

    Student 4 average grades, average athletic parent can afford, could go either.

    Student 5 average grades, average athletic parents would have to skimp, could go either.

    Student 6 average grades average athletics parents cant afford, probably not a scholarship but maybe other means to afford tuition such as loans or work program so could go to either.

    Student 7 below average grades, not athletic parents can afford tuition. Could go either.

    Student 8 below average grades, not athletic parents would have to skimp, probably not a scholarship student. Probably not getting help to go to private, but still could find a way so both.

    Student 9 same as 8 except definately couldnt afford tuition, once again not getting a scholarship but may find a way.

    Student 10 delinquent, poor family definately no scholarship or any help. Public only.

    So, out of those 10 students how many walking the hallways of the privates, top number 9 and that is a giant stretch. More like 6 or 7 out of 10 that would be at the private school.

    Now here is the easy math, how many would be in public, yep you got it all 10 would be in that school if they wanted.

    So, where is the number discrepancy, why do some want a multiplier, because private schools do not represent the entire population of the area they cover while publics do. Simple huh!

    An open enrollment school could add some that may not be able to afford to go to the private school. If you want to have a multiplier for private schools that is fine, but you have to include the open enrollment schools into that multiplier because they can also draw more students. Simple huh!
  • Al Bundy
    skank wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Hey, get all worked up if you want "rocket man", all I'm saying is that if you think the system is fair like it is now, you're crazy. having the advantages that parochials have, and being open enrollment are two different animals, open enrollment allows you to accept kids that want to attend your school, NOT actually target "certain kids".
    Private schools can only accept kids that want to attend the school. No one is being forced to attend a private school or an open enrollment school. Both schools can accept kids that want to go there.
    Dance around it if you want, but a public school coach had better not get caught going to an 8th grade practice across town, holding a clipboard.
    Is someone with his location as "50 yard line at PBTS" really saying that public schools don't get kids from other districts?
  • skank
    Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
  • fossywriter8
    catchr22 wrote: If they would lose money and you do not think it would happen, what is the relevance of the point? You can throw out all these possibilities you want, but why not deal with reality and discuss what is pertinent to the issue?
    The point is relevant and pertinent because it deals with one option available to private schools for dealing with the possibility of a fundamental change in how divisions are determined for post-season play.
    It may not be a good option, but it is an available one.
    As for reality, I don't see the OHSAA using a multiplier. For an organization constantly criticized for being slow to change, such a shift in policy would dramatically alter football in Ohio.
  • fossywriter8
    Al Bundy wrote: An open enrollment school could add some that may not be able to afford to go to the private school. If you want to have a multiplier for private schools that is fine, but you have to include the open enrollment schools into that multiplier because they can also draw more students. Simple huh!
    If the OHSAA ever instituted a multiplier for private schools, the next logical step would be to include one for public schools with open enrollment students. The private schools would clamor for this, and why not, since it would level the playing field — any school which accepts just one open enrollment student must have an advantage over any school its same size which does not, regardless of whether that kid plays sports or not.

    NOTE: The sarcastic blue font is not intented as a criticism or dig on Al Bundy, just those who judge all private schools by the actions, or supposed actions, of a few.
  • Al Bundy
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many or more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn them into OHSAA.
  • Rocket08
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
  • skank
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
  • catchr22
    I do not think anyone can say that any system is TOTALLY fair. I can cite abuses on both sides of the issue. My point is that if you cannot come up with a solution that addresses ALL the issues, this discussion is nothing more than a venting by those who feel the most abused!!!
  • Rocket08
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    First of all, questioning my educational background and being from the Massillon school system is absolutely ludicrous. Your school system is horrible (ask the state ratings) what did you get 2 out of 27? that's abysmal


    2nd, it's interesting that a kid can transfer to Massillon and that his choice, but a kid chooses a private school and that's recruiting.

    That's why you're a hypocrite.

    P.S. learn how to spell parochial, and an article in a Cleveland paper about a small number of schools doesn't mean every private school is an offender.
  • Al Bundy
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    OHSAA has the same rules for its members whether they be public or private. I am sure many kids go to Massillon because they have built a good program over the years. Many kids go to private schools for the same reason. Your writing makes it sound like OHSAA has one set of rules for public schools and another set for private schools. That simply is not true. The only difference in the rules is a rule that is put in there to benefit the public schools, and it says that a student can transfer to their home public school district without sitting a out a year. Once again, if you have a proof that a school has cheated (private or public), turn them into OHSAA.
  • Preacher
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    If you think Massillon or someone connected (alumni) is not recruiting these kids then you need to put down the pipe. What multiplier do you give to DI. Unless they add a super-division then nothing can happen.
  • skank
    Preacher wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    If you think Massillon or someone connected (alumni) is not recruiting these kids then you need to put down the pipe. What multiplier do you give to DI. Unless they add a super-division then nothing can happen.
    So a kid can't transfer to Massillon without being recruited? You may be a preacher, but your sermon is a load of crap, as Bundy said, if you have any proof that Massillon is recruiting kids turn em in with proof. As a matter of fact, let us know right now.
  • Al Bundy
    skank wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    If you think Massillon or someone connected (alumni) is not recruiting these kids then you need to put down the pipe. What multiplier do you give to DI. Unless they add a super-division then nothing can happen.
    So a kid can't transfer to Massillon without being recruited? You may be a preacher, but your sermon is a load of crap, as Bundy said, if you have any proof that Massillon is recruiting kids turn em in with proof. As a matter of fact, let us know right now.
    And you need to do the same thing with regarding private schools of breaking the rules. If you have proof, turn the schools in.
  • skank
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    If you think Massillon or someone connected (alumni) is not recruiting these kids then you need to put down the pipe. What multiplier do you give to DI. Unless they add a super-division then nothing can happen.
    So a kid can't transfer to Massillon without being recruited? You may be a preacher, but your sermon is a load of crap, as Bundy said, if you have any proof that Massillon is recruiting kids turn em in with proof. As a matter of fact, let us know right now.
    And you need to do the same thing with regarding private schools of breaking the rules. If you have proof, turn the schools in.
    All due respect Mr. Bundy, but if the PD series of articles didn't spark a series of OHSAA investigations, I believe nothing will.
  • Al Bundy
    skank wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    skank wrote:
    Rocket08 wrote:
    Al Bundy wrote:
    skank wrote: Show me where I said anything of the sort. If you read any part of the series that the Plain Dealer had this fall on the 4 8th grade football players that the Cleveland area parochials were standing in line just to have the opportunity to drool over, you would have understood what I meant. But, I guess certain fan bases have their heads buried so deep you didn't get the message. If everything in the articles were true, and I'm sure they were, it is actually a pretty disgusting display of cheating. But, I guess when there are two sets of rules, in hindsight, there were no in fractions.
    Do you have a link to the article that are you referring to? If you look at the Cleveland area, how does Glenville usually have as many more D1 college players than the private schools if the private schools are "recruiting" and Glenville is not. I still find it funny that you as a Massillon fan (a school that has been on probation) can accuse any other schools of breaking rules without proof. If you have any proof that any schools (private or public) broke any rules, I am all for them being punished. Turn then into OHSAA.
    Meanwhile a soph QB from Akron St V's is transferring to poor, poor Massillon

    Skank = hypocrite
    How am I a hypocrite? If Massillon had went out and actually "recruited" him, THAT, would make me a hypocrite. I don't think you understand what I am saying, "rocket man", so....I'll explain one more time, and try to put it in laymans terms for you since that private school education obviously didn't cover the simple act of carrying on a conversation.

    Massillon gets open enrollment students, as does most schools in the state of Ohio, Massillon and their "public school brethren" can accept them, but they CAN NOT, actively pursue them. Still with me? Ok. A parochial school CAN actively pursue a kid, and according to the PD articles this past fall, they take full advantage of the opportunities afforded them, at least the Cleveland area parichials do. So, instead of calling me a hypocrite, you had better go back to the drawing board and think of more excuses as to why the current set up is fair.
    If you think Massillon or someone connected (alumni) is not recruiting these kids then you need to put down the pipe. What multiplier do you give to DI. Unless they add a super-division then nothing can happen.
    So a kid can't transfer to Massillon without being recruited? You may be a preacher, but your sermon is a load of crap, as Bundy said, if you have any proof that Massillon is recruiting kids turn em in with proof. As a matter of fact, let us know right now.
    And you need to do the same thing with regarding private schools of breaking the rules. If you have proof, turn the schools in.
    All due respect Mr. Bundy, but if the PD series of articles didn't spark a series of OHSAA investigations, I believe nothing will.
    You still haven't provided a link to any articles. What rules are you claiming were broken? Your claim was that a coach attended a practice. Were these open practices that anyone could attend? I often see people watching football practices that are open to the public.
  • Dean Wormer
    I wish that the OHSAA would institute the multiplier so whiners like Al Bundy and Skank could find another reason why their teams can't win state titles.
  • Al Bundy
    Dean Wormer wrote: I wish that the OHSAA would institute the multiplier so whiners like Al Bundy and Skank could find another reason why their teams can't win state titles.
    I am whining? I support a private school. I just said if they institute a multiplier that open enrollment schools should also be included.
  • Dean Wormer
    My bad Al. It's getting harder to follow all of the replies as the thread goes on.
  • Al Bundy
    Dean Wormer wrote: My bad Al. It's getting harder to follow all of the replies as the thread goes on.
    I understand. Once we get far into the playoffs, I root for Mahoning Valley teams rather than public or private. I'd actually like to see the state go to less divisions so that state titles are harder to get. I think 4 would be a good number of divisions.
  • Dean Wormer
    We all know that the state is only thinking about the money. I think that less divisions or fewer teams in each region is an excellent idea.
  • Al Bundy
    Dean Wormer wrote: We all know that the state is only thinking about the money. I think that less divisions or fewer teams in each region is an excellent idea.
    I think we miss out on some great potential matchups in the playoffs because we have too many divisions. I see two big advantages to going to less teams per region 1) The championship could always be played in Nov. 2) It would force teams to at least play a couple of good teams during the season (no more going 9-1, play no one all year and sneak in withe the 7 or 8 seed)
  • fossywriter8
    A few pages back, Al Bundy asked which private schools had won how many state titles.
    Here's the list (I don't have divisions, just titles won):
    10 Cleveland St. Ignatius
    8 Newark Catholic
    7 Cincinnati Archbishop Moeller
    7 Youngstown Cardinal Mooney
    6 Cleveland Benedictine
    5 Delphos St. John's
    4 Akron St. Vincent-St. Mary
    3 Columbus St. Francis DeSales
    3 Elyria Catholic
    3 Mentor Lake Catholic
    3 Youngstown Ursuline
    2 Canton Central Catholic
    2 Cincinnati Elder
    2 Cincinnati Xavier
    2 Kettering Bishop Alter
    2 Middletown Bishop Fenwick
    2 Tiffin Calvert
    2 Toledo St. Francis
    1 Bedford St. Peter Chanel
    1 Cincinnati Purcell Marian
    1 Cleveland St. Joseph
    1 Columbus Bishop Hartley
    1 Columbus Bishop Ready
    1 Columbus Bishop Watterson
    1 Cuyahoga Falls Walsh Jesuit
    1 Dayton Chaminade-Julienne
    1 Garfield Heights Trinity
    1 Hamilton Badin
    1 Louisville St. Thomas Aqunias
    1 Norwalk St. Paul
    1 Parma Heights Holy Name
    1 Steubenville Central Catholic
    1 Toledo Central Catholic
    1 Warren John F. Kennedy
  • catchr22
    I know the answer--Take all the private schools that have won a state title and confine them to their own state tournament. Now all the public schools will have a chance and each private school that wins hereafter will be removed from participation in the state tournament. Now the public schools can gradually reduce the competition until all the privates are removed. Then who will be blamed when a school does not compete well in the tournament? There is more to the problem than whether the school is public or private!!!!
  • rrfan
    I am glad somebody is doing something about this topic. It is long over due in my opinion.