Voting for competitive balance
The IHSA approved a proposal yesterday which now goes to all 751 member high schools for a vote. The proposal asks that the enrollment for all private schools be multiplied by 1.65 in the hope that athletic competition will be more balanced. Since private schools are not bound by school district borders they are able to "recruit" so to speak and thus field stronger teams. This has been a bone in the craw of public schools so long even my parents who are in their 80's relate stories of Chicago private school football success in the 1930's.
A quick look at this fall's state champions other than football shows 2 private schools out of 9 winning titles. In football the number is 3 of 9. Last winter's state basketball champion in class AA was Glenbrook North a public school and in class A -Hales Francisan, a Catholic school. 2004 had a similar ending, the AA champion was public, A was private. If approximately 20 percent of high schools in Illinois are private then if these schools are winning more than their share of state titles the numbers should reflect that. It does appear as though this is true in the two major sports, football and basketball, but private school titles are few on the ground in other sports.
Voting on the proposal heads to the schools today and ballots are due on December 28. If it passes the new rules will apply for this year's state basketball tournament. The question is will it be the big guys who are affected or the little guys like Breese Mater Dei and Edwardsville's Metro East Lutheran? Somehow I doubt that schools like Joliet Catholic or Springfield Sacred Heart Griffin or Chicago Catholic league schools will miss a beat.
11 comments:
Perhaps the IHSA can also mandate a .6 multiplier on SAT Scores for private school students to give public school students a more balanced shot at college admission.
JBP
The multiplier is not the major factor although it will have some impact. The bottom line is that private schools do not play by the same rules as public schools. In discipline, resorces and several other aspects the public schools are at a huge disadvantage.
Okay, maybe I don't completely understand what is going on here. 2 of 9 is 22%, 3 of 9 is 33%. Is that really egregiously out of proportion? And how will multiplying the enrollment really make up for the ability of private schools to enroll students who self-select their schools/teams? Isn’t this simply a way to artificially create some sort of quota for private/public championships by making the lower enrollment classes virtually public-only (at the expense of making the higher enrollment classes packed with private schools?)?
And what about magnate schools? Would they by subject to the same rules as private schools, seeing as how their enrollment crosses school district lines as well?
I've never understood why the IHSA doesn't just have separate championships for private schools. For most sports- AA, A and Private- for football consolidate classes to 1-6A and 2 private divisions...something like that.
Even adding a multiplier won't assure balance is achieved in high school sports. Regardless of the multiplier imposed, schools like Joliet Central Catholic and Springfield's Sacred Heart-Griffin are always going to be a factor in the play-offs (and for Angry Jolietan, Hales-Franciscan, too). Will it be more difficult? Yes, but these schools have been recruiting the best players for years and will continue to do so for years to come.
A multiplier? It just doesn't matter.
This is much ado about nothing, and Diane unwittingly proved it in her post.
With a multiplier in place for fall sports only this year, including football, 3 of 9 football championships were still won by private schools!
Does that indicate that the competition was still "unfair" even with a multiplier? Or were those 3 teams just "better?"
Maybe we just need more classes so everyone can be a "champion."
Thanks for the correction, AJ...
SHG had an line that averaged 5-10 190, if we are recruiting, the recruiter should be fired! The facilities are small, old and do not compare to some of the public schools in the state
The problem is the Public schools for the most part have higher turnover in coaches, and their kids simply do not work as hard in the off season
For starters, SHG's offensive front goes 215, 205, 217, 218, 242 which averages out to 219...not bad.
The argument though is not the size - rather the talent level.
SHG is able to "recruit" any gifted football player out Springfield's public schools with the lure of exposure from college coaches and a chance to win a state title.
I don't blame the kids for taking the opportunity but it's unfair to the schools whose districts they reside in.
Plus, the CS8 is becoming horribly uncompetetive.
I will say the major offensive contributors on this year's championship team were products of catholic schools (Brenneisen, Reavy, and Sanders).
I totally agree that something need to be done to level the playing field in HS football.
Addison-Driscal doesn't win five state championships in a row with two different coaches without having benifited from recruiting. Period.(they even brag on their web site about pulling students from 30 different towns)
However, I question the effectiveness of the multiplier. The private schools will just limit their enrollements and only play small schools to keep their football enrollments down. Besides what about the large schools say in Class 8A - where are they going to get bumped too?
I say a seperate championship for the private schools.
Tell Kevin Garnett about recruiting boundaries.
Post a Comment