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!

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.

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?

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!

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Dean Wormer wrote: My bad Al. It's getting harder to follow all of the replies as the thread goes on.

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.