Private Sherm, explain to me this, do Kids attend private schools for a better education? Or for an athletic career?

BuckCrazy;591637 wrote:Private Sherm, explain to me this, do Kids attend private schools for a better education? Or for an athletic career?

I don't know why kids attend any school, public or private. For my family, my parents chose to send me, my brother, and my three sisters to a private grade school and a private high school based on the educational opportunities that those schools offered.

However, I'm sure there are some families out there that feel that their son's best chance at higher education is to get a football scholarship. They may base the high school that they send their child to on that factor. I can't speak for every family. But I also am not in a position to judge anyone's parenting. If two parents feel that their son is going to get the best chance at higher education by sending their son to a private school that is good at football, that is their decision. I do not necessarily agree with that...and I feel that if the primary reason you decide the high school your child attends based on the football program then there is something very wrong with you.

Bottom line is that parents have the right to send their child to whatever school they want for whatever reason they want.

Is there a point to the question?

St. John's (Delphos, Ohio) set a state football tournament record with a resounding 77-6 rout of Shadyside (Ohio) in the Division VI title game. The previous record of 76 points was shared by St. John's and Columbus Academy (Gahanna, Ohio).

http://www.maxpreps.com/news/AhXjqQDTEeCi4gAcxJSkrA/st-johns-(ohio)-scores-record-77-points-in-title-football-game.htm

skank;590409 wrote:Or this?

Wait, are you trying to say that I spelled a word wrong or what?

You're a detective in the real world, aren't you?

The point of the question, is when I brought up sending all the privates up two divisions, you threw a pity party for the privates that don't win. That's why I asked, what's the reasoning for going to a private school, education or athletics? This is a major difference between privates and publics, in some public schools, if it wasn't for sports these kids would be out on the streets. Privates don't have that issue unless they are the great athletes going to schools like St. V on scholly and playing with their boys and winning state and national titles. When's the last time you saw 4 or 5 kids get together and decide hey that's a great public basketball school let's go to that one. The answer would be never, but when is the last time we have seen this in a private school, St. V, North College Hill, I could go on. Also the big significance with those two teams, division 3 beating up on the small hometown boys

BuckCrazy;593391 wrote:The point of the question, is when I brought up sending all the privates up two divisions, you threw a pity party for the privates that don't win. That's why I asked, what's the reasoning for going to a private school, education or athletics? This is a major difference between privates and publics, in some public schools, if it wasn't for sports these kids would be out on the streets. Privates don't have that issue unless they are the great athletes going to schools like St. V on scholly and playing with their boys and winning state and national titles. When's the last time you saw 4 or 5 kids get together and decide hey that's a great public basketball school let's go to that one. The answer would be never, but when is the last time we have seen this in a private school, St. V, North College Hill, I could go on. Also the big significance with those two teams, division 3 beating up on the small hometown boys

OK...I guess I have to explain this again. I don't care where you put the schools. I have no kids playing, and I am out of high school. It doesn't affect me in the least. And if you move the private schools up...I think the ones that continually do well will still do well. And the ones that always suck will continue to suck. My distaste for the idea of a multiplier for all schools is because people throw that idea out as a way to be "fair" and "level the playing field." The very idea of a multiplier is not fair to the private schools that are terrible. But people want to throw it around, saying that it will make things fair and balanced. In actuality, it will move up the good private schools (who will remain good)...and allow the good public schools (read: the MAC) win every championship. If people would call the multiplier what it really is...a way to move out Mooney, Ursuline, DSJ, and Newark Catholic...then at least I would have respect for them. But don't act like the whole reason for doing it is to promote fair play when the idea itself is not fair.

My idea for a multiplier was at least fair to all schools...both private and public. If a student goes from a private grade school to a private high school, that student counts as 1. If a student goes from a public grade school to a private high school, that student counts for 1.5 or 2 or whatever the multiplier is. Likewise, if a student goes from a public grade school to a public high school, that student counts as 1. If a student goes from a private grade school to a public high school, that student counts for 1.5 or 2 or whatever. At least THAT multiplier option is fair to all schools. Then if a private school is bringing in a lot of kids from other areas (as a lot of people want to say they are)...then it will be reflected in the multiplier. And if those schools are just getting all of the kids from their feeder schools...they aren't being hurt by it.

Lets face it, what we really need to be teaching our kids is that life is always fair, and if its not, all you have to do is complain until somebody caves to your demands instead of, you know, working harder to become better until YOU are the one that everyone is complaining about.

skank;593215 wrote:You're a detective in the real world, aren't you?

So now you are nitpicking completely irrelevant things? Wow, this simply adds to your already credible opinion.

Mooney44Cards;593490 wrote:Lets face it, what we really need to be teaching our kids is that life is always fair, and if its not, all you have to do is complain until somebody caves to your demands instead of, you know, working harder to become better until YOU are the one that everyone is complaining about.

This is the attitude of someone who is currently reaping the benefits of the system. What is wrong with teaching our kids, that life isn't always fair, and because of that, you need to stand up for yourself when you are being wronged?

This "work harder until you get better" argument isn't holding water with me, I mean, if you're a body builder, and you work your tail off only to see the guys on steroids take home all the hardware, wouldn't that yank your chain? What do we tell these body builders, Lift harder? Work harder? Try harder?

sirclovis;593527 wrote:So now you are nitpicking completely irrelevant things? Wow, this simply adds to your already credible opinion.

No, I just thought I'd point out that you "better people" may be better, but you're still not perfect.

skank;594463 wrote:This is the attitude of someone who is currently reaping the benefits of the system. What is wrong with teaching our kids, that life isn't always fair, and because of that, you need to stand up for yourself when you are being wronged?

This "work harder until you get better" argument isn't holding water with me, I mean, if you're a body builder, and you work your tail off only to see the guys on steroids take home all the hardware, wouldn't that yank your chain? What do we tell these body builders, Lift harder? Work harder? Try harder?

This is the attitude of someone who supports some terrible public school that probably gets their ass handed to them by everyone (including private schools) and wants to whine about how the playing field isn't level.

Anyways, this is a terrible analogy. Someone on steroids is breaking the rules, no one is breaking any rules in high school football that I know of, but if you have some proof, please feel free to contact the OHSAA. Now, in your completely AWFUL analogy, are the open enrollment public high schools the steroid takers as well? I hope so, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

Also, will these open enrollment public schools be held to the same "multiplier" as the private schools?

Mooney44Cards;594920 wrote:This is the attitude of someone who supports some terrible public school that probably gets their ass handed to them by everyone (including private schools) and wants to whine about how the playing field isn't level.

Anyways, this is a terrible analogy. Someone on steroids is breaking the rules, no one is breaking any rules in high school football that I know of, but if you have some proof, please feel free to contact the OHSAA. Now, in your completely AWFUL analogy, are the open enrollment public high schools the steroid takers as well? I hope so, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

Also, will these open enrollment public schools be held to the same "multiplier" as the private schools?

Hey Mooney...I found the best way to shut these guys up is to offer a solution where public high schools are subject to a multiplier for every student that comes from a private grade school. I've said it on a bunch of threads so far...and these guys won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

See...in their eyes...it's perfectly acceptable for a parent who has sent their kids to a private grade school to then choose a public high school for their child. But if it goes the other way, the private school is guilty of recruiting and taking advantage of a much larger area to draw students from. Then they have the audacity to say that the private school supporters talk out of both sides of their mouth and present nothing but smoke and mirror arguments.

If you ask me...it sounds like they don't like the idea because they know there are just as many kids that go from private grade school to public high schools as there are kids that go from public grade schools to private high schools. They want to penalize the private schools, but still "work the system" in their favor. It's a crock...and most of them just keep making themselves look absolutely stupid.

Go ahead and add that multiplier for every student that an open enrollment school gets from another school district and you've got yourself a fair-and-square system Mr. sherm!

Mooney44Cards;594931 wrote:Go ahead and add that multiplier for every student that an open enrollment school gets from another school district and you've got yourself a fair-and-square system Mr. sherm!

That would get taken into account. Basically, the OHSAA identifies a grade school as a feeder school into a specific high school. You get a student from a school that is not one of your feeder schools, that student counts as 1.5 or 2. So an open enrollment school, who gets a student from a different district, would get hit with the multiplier because the student is not from their feeder school.

Fair across the board. EVERYONE...public/private/OE/non-OE...would all get hit with multipliers if they have students that don't come from their feeder system.

Here, how about this,,,,,,,,,,,

Take sports out of schools completely, and make going to high school about education,,,,,,,, Play sports in college if you want.

Maybe if all kids had at HS was studies, graduation rates would go up.

Just end all sports, then no adults arguing about HS sports!!!!!!

Cheese and rice!!!

BuckCrazy;593391 wrote: When's the last time you saw 4 or 5 kids get together and decide hey that's a great public basketball school let's go to that one. The answer would be never, but when is the last time we have seen this in a private school, St. V, North College Hill, I could go on. Also the big significance with those two teams, division 3 beating up on the small hometown boys

I don't disagree with you, I think that privates do have a built-in advantage. But, North College Hill is a public school. For basketball, you hear all the time in Northeast Ohio (and I'm sure all over the state) of kids "transferring" to a different city school, or another neighboring school district to play hoops.

sherm03;594927 wrote:Hey Mooney...I found the best way to shut these guys up is to offer a solution where public high schools are subject to a multiplier for every student that comes from a private grade school. I've said it on a bunch of threads so far...and these guys won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

See...in their eyes...it's perfectly acceptable for a parent who has sent their kids to a private grade school to then choose a public high school for their child. But if it goes the other way, the private school is guilty of recruiting and taking advantage of a much larger area to draw students from. Then they have the audacity to say that the private school supporters talk out of both sides of their mouth and present nothing but smoke and mirror arguments.

If you ask me...it sounds like they don't like the idea because they know there are just as many kids that go from private grade school to public high schools as there are kids that go from public grade schools to private high schools. They want to penalize the private schools, but still "work the system" in their favor. It's a crock...and most of them just keep making themselves look absolutely stupid.

What you would find is that the big D1 schools would have HUGE numbers, because the smaller privates lose more kids to the big D1 public schools than to the smaller public schools. That's because the privates tend to be located in larger population areas, where the public schools are huge. For example, the MAC public schools don't have privates in their area. Clinton Massie, Jonathon Alder, Kenton and a lot of the great small public schools don't have Catholic schools in their areas, so they wouldn't be affected. But Alter, which is in the Kettering, Centerville, Bellbrook, Springboro, West Carrollton and Miamisburg areas, would be bumped up, even though only a few kids go from public grade schools to Alter. Those other schools, excepting Bellbrook, would not be bumped up because they're already D1, even though they take many times the number of Catholic grade school kids than the other way around.

Face it - Catholic schools tend to do better, top to bottom, than publics - in sports and academics. But the top folks at the publics are just as good at everything as most of those at Catholic schools, but Catholic schools don't have the same percentage of lower achievers dragging them down. That may be the entire source of the differences in sports championships between publics and privates, I don't know. But to create upheaval because some publics have a number of low achievers doesn't indicate to me that the rules should be changed. The only "rule" that is different, it seems to me, is that the publics have decided to take everyone because they tax everyone, and the privates don't have to take or keep everyone because everyone who goes there pays his or her own freight.

Bottom line: Work to change the publics - don't break the system because some have a hard time overcoming their own mission to succeed. Accept that privates are going to do pretty well. I would bet that in D1 you still have disparity of privates winning a disproportionate number of championships. It has to do with differences in mission, not a lot of other ridiculous things people make up to reinforce their prejudices.

aged jock;595693 wrote:What you would find is that the big D1 schools would have HUGE numbers, because the smaller privates lose more kids to the big D1 public schools than to the smaller public schools. That's because the privates tend to be located in larger population areas, where the public schools are huge. For example, the MAC public schools don't have privates in their area. Clinton Massie, Jonathon Alder, Kenton and a lot of the great small public schools don't have Catholic schools in their areas, so they wouldn't be affected. But Alter, which is in the Kettering, Centerville, Bellbrook, Springboro, West Carrollton and Miamisburg areas, would be bumped up, even though only a few kids go from public grade schools to Alter. Those other schools, excepting Bellbrook, would not be bumped up because they're already D1, even though they take many times the number of Catholic grade school kids than the other way around.

Face it - Catholic schools tend to do better, top to bottom, than publics - in sports and academics. But the top folks at the publics are just as good at everything as most of those at Catholic schools, but Catholic schools don't have the same percentage of lower achievers dragging them down. That may be the entire source of the differences in sports championships between publics and privates, I don't know. But to create upheaval because some publics have a number of low achievers doesn't indicate to me that the rules should be changed. The only "rule" that is different, it seems to me, is that the publics have decided to take everyone because they tax everyone, and the privates don't have to take or keep everyone because everyone who goes there pays his or her own freight.

Bottom line: Work to change the publics - don't break the system because some have a hard time overcoming their own mission to succeed. Accept that privates are going to do pretty well. I would bet that in D1 you still have disparity of privates winning a disproportionate number of championships. It has to do with differences in mission, not a lot of other ridiculous things people make up to reinforce their prejudices.

That's the point. The people who say that the private schools have such an advantage claim that the private schools pull from a large area. But the fact is that a majority of kids that go to private schools come from private grade schools. If the multiplier were enacted this way, most schools would stay in their same divisions. Even if Mooney or Alter or Ursuline got 20 kids from outside of their feeder schools...if the multiplier is 2...that means that those 20 kids would count as 40. Now I don't know exactly how close to the line Alter is...but even with those extra counts, Mooney and Ursuline would still be in the same division.

My whole point of offering that system was to show that public schools get students from private grade schools just as often...if not more often...than private schools getting students from public grade schools.

If you have statistics to back up your claim about which schools get more kids. I.E...........more going to private from public, or more going from public to private...........................Show me them. If not, your opinion is just that, an opinion. We are all allowed to have opinions. People cant argue against someone else's opinion, because opinions arent right or wrong!! They are opinions.

september63;595725 wrote:If you have statistics to back up your claim about which schools get more kids. I.E...........more going to private from public, or more going from public to private...........................Show me them. If not, your opinion is just that, an opinion. We are all allowed to have opinions. People cant argue against someone else's opinion, because opinions arent right or wrong!! They are opinions.

I can tell you from my personal experience. I went to a private grade school. We had 25 kids in my 8th grade class. Of those 25...16 went to Cardinal Mooney. The others went to Boardman, or the Youngstown City Schools...depending on where they lived.

I don't have any actual numbers...but neither do the people who say that private schools "steal" kids from surrounding areas. So even though they have no figures to back it up...they use that as the basis for why a multiplier is needed in high school football. You going to chastise them, too?

Yes, I would. Im a public school guy but I dont wanna see them be divided up. Its always been this way and it should stay the way it is. IMO...............You dont see MLB teams asking to divide the NYY, Boston, or any of the other big money teams from the lower market teams. Its just the way it is, all things are not always going to seem equal. Lets keep it the way it is now!! I think you and I agree on that point?

september63;595735 wrote:Yes, I would. Im a public school guy but I dont wanna see them be divided up. Its always been this way and it should stay the way it is. IMO...............You dont see MLB teams asking to divide the NYY, Boston, or any of the other big money teams from the lower market teams. Its just the way it is, all things are not always going to seem equal. Lets keep it the way it is now!! I think you and I agree on that point?

Absolutely. I don't think things need to change at all. I am a firm believer that no matter what...good programs are going to continue to do well.

I just feel that IF the OHSAA decides that they want to enact a multiplier. The fair way to do it would be to have the public schools be subject to a multiplier for kids they get from a private grade school or kids they get through open enrollment.

Well I am not going to argue your numbers because they are sound, but anyone who believes that the bigger catholic schools don't recruit is a complete moron. It is a fact, I know kids who were recruited. So excuse me but that is wrong. Not quite the same as a small public school coach who must make and field a team with what he is given.So yes I personally enjoy it when a public school beats a bigger catholic school.

sherm03;587842 wrote:Wow...someone else who just likes to present a skewed side of the facts.

OK...one more time, just for ~U~...

Now that St. Ed and Maple Heights won, we have two new state champions. Now, 35 private schools have won 97 titles. And now, 66 public schools have now won 100 titles. There are 715 teams in Ohio that field football teams. I'll just go ahead and do the math for you.

35/715 teams have won 97/197 titles. So that means that 4.9% of the schools account for 49.24% of the titles. When you hear that stat by itself...it sure seems staggering. That is, until you look at the other side of the coin...
66/715 teams have won 100/197 titles. So that means that 9.2% of all the schools account for 50.76% of the titles. That stat sounds bad too right. If I were to sit here and say, "Wow, when you look at the public champions....9.2% of all the teams have won OVER half the titles." it would sound really bad and shed a bad light on the public schools. But I don't do that because that would be skewing the facts...as you tried to do in that first post there.

So let's look at the big picture. We have 101 teams...both private and public...that have won state championships. That means that 14.13% of all Ohio football playing schools have won 100% of the titles!

So how about those 'numbers' for you? Kind of doesn't seem so bad when you actually look at the whole picture and not just one skewed stat.

But I've been here long enough. I know what's going to happen. These stats will be completely ignored by those that hate private schools. And we'll have 100+ posts about how the privates have an unfair advantage and how they cheat and recruit.

I did my part...cue skank and thinthick...

Falcon;596097 wrote:Well I am not going to argue your numbers because they are sound, but anyone who believes that the bigger catholic schools don't recruit is a complete moron. It is a fact, I know kids who were recruited. So excuse me but that is wrong. Not quite the same as a small public school coach who must make and field a team with what he is given.So yes I personally enjoy it when a public school beats a bigger catholic school.

Then maybe you should contact the OHSAA instead of whining about it on a message board.