Heretic;638527 wrote:It'll be good for Shadyside, as St. John's won't be around to crush them.
queencitybuckeye;638479 wrote:The Hilliard City School District will be casting three votes against the measure. I would suspect that the vast majority of the fellow OCC schools will as well, but don't know that for a fact.
sherm03;638565 wrote:What the hell?!?! What have I been embracing all this time?!?! I thought the votes were there?!?!?!
I'll bet you that the schools that did all the whining and brought about this rule will still not be able to win a state title.Viking;638580 wrote:The votes are there. Does anybody want to make a friendly wager?
Delphosfan;638940 wrote:I'll bet you that the schools that did all the whining and brought about this rule will still not be able to win a state title.
Only because those ruran and urban schools won't have to face other rural and urban schools who work harder than they do.Viking;639099 wrote: The proposal is only going to give many rural and urban schools a greater opportunity to be successful.
Viking;639206 wrote:Will somebody please explain to me how this proposal will negatively effect privte schools? Since there isn't an automatic multiplier schools like Lutheran East will be left alone or perhaps even drop a division.
rmolin73;639229 wrote:But wait I thought that you were aware of the changes viking and had embraced them?
The OHSAA commissioner was on a local radio sports talk show last week. According to what he said, there will be automatic multipliers although we don't know what those exact numbers are yet. In the Geographical Boundaries category you have: unboundaried private schools, boundaried private schools, statewide open enrollment publics, adjacent OE publics and non-OE publics. Each of these will have a multiplier and I'd be willing to bet the highest starts with unboundaried private schools. All school will have a multiplier although the lowest will likely be 1. Unless I totally misunderstood him I believe this to be the case.Viking;639206 wrote:Will somebody please explain to me how this proposal will negatively effect privte schools? Since there isn't an automatic multiplier schools like Lutheran East will be left alone or perhaps even drop a division.
Delphosfan;639262 wrote:The OHSAA commissioner was on a local radio sports talk show last week. According to what he said, there will be automatic multipliers although we don't know what those exact numbers are yet. In the Geographical Boundaries category you have: unboundaried private schools, boundaried private schools, statewide open enrollment publics, adjacent OE publics and non-OE publics. Each of these will have a multiplier and I'd be willing to bet the highest starts with unboundaried private schools. All school will have a multiplier although the lowest will likely be 1. Unless I totally misunderstood him I believe this to be the case.
Be Nice;639311 wrote:...and change is a com'in for the better.
How is it going to give rural and urban schools with open-enrollment and that are on the higher end numbers wise of their division now a greater chance to succeed? They'll be moving up to. The whole thing is stupid. How in the world did little Hardin Northern ever beat 3 private schools (Cincy Country Day, Springfield Catholic, Norwalk St. Paul) in 2004 to win a title?Viking;639099 wrote:You miss the whole point of the proposal. The proposal is a recognition of the vast inequities that exist in the current system. The proposal is only going to give many rural and urban schools a greater opportunity to be successful.
because no one receiving free lunches can be a good football playerViking;640083 wrote:^^^
It depends what type of open enrollment the district has. There are 3 different categories for the open enrollment part of the equation, plus the "free lunch" factor will act as a divider.
That might be the dumbest part of the proposal. The NFL is full of guys who have come from extremely poor backgrounds.
Viking;640083 wrote:^^^
It depends what type of open enrollment the district has. There are 3 different categories for the open enrollment part of the equation, plus the "free lunch" factor will act as a divider.
Viking;640137 wrote:^^^
Poverty adveresly affects the number of kids available. I'd explain it, but I can tell that you don't really care. You obviously don't have a clue about urban districts or poor rural districts.