The Schwab wrote:magic man wrote:The Schwab wrote:magic man wrote:Did anyone even say a thing about Oak Grove being in a championship? Grasping for straws now.
Bottom line is that if you or anyone else wants to complain about private schools having some kind of unfair advantage, while not talking about the advantages that is given to public schools, then you yourself are being biased.
Just one more thing on this.... So poor Oak Grove is not a State Champion in Football every few years so we need to feel bad for them That is what class B deals with all the time. Second... you know many kids get scholarships to go to private school.. when they are 6'5 and can play basketball.
I myself don't have any problem with the private schools of Fargo Shanley or Bismarck St. Mary's when it comes to any sports or even for Dickinson Trinity, Fargo Oak Grove or Minot Bishop Ryan when it comes to football, or any private school that doesn't compete in the smallest class for their sport. What advantages do public class B schools have over private class B schools?
IMO, the biggest thing that comes to mind is the reduction of the class size based free & reduced lunch. I'm of the opinion that a kid is a kid.. Just because he gets a discounted/free lunch, does not mean he can't play football. Why do I say this is an advantage to the public schools vs private? Just look at the numbers. Generally speaking, the percentage of reduction for public vs private isn't even close. This was seemingly set up to go against private schools, because it sure doesn't help give them any help. It becomes even more of an advantage when you don't take a deeper look at the numbers (speaking from a private school perspective).
How many of those male students are foreign exchange/international students? If anything, those kids should be looked at like the free/reduced lunch kids are. More than likely, those kids aren't playing football (which is what I have heard regarding the free/reduced lunch kids).
How many other sports are drawing these kids away from football in the fall? I know of a few class B/public schools that don't have any other fall sports that can pull kids away from playing football. So if a kid wants to play a sport in the fall, they only have one choice, and having that kid on the roster, helps.. Practice, drills, etc..
You don't have to pay for public school. I've heard some comment, "rich families can send their kids to camps, etc to get better." Yes, that is true, but the part that most are failing to realize is that there are some so called, "rich kids" that don't have that drive to want to do that, so even if they have that opportunity to do so, there are some that won't take advantage of it. Also, because they could be a little more financially "well off" than others, they pick up other interests. Theater, arts, etc.
If you really think about it, football is not a "rich kids" sport. Not saying that kids with money can't play football, but I'd guess there is a higher percentage of kids that come from low income, "free/reduced" lunch families, than there are kids that are well off.
I don't feel that school population should be the only factor in determining football classification. You're thinking that a "kid is a kid" doesn't really hold water to me, sorry. I have been around public school education for my entire life and I hate to say it but more often then not a free and reduced kid isn't going to be active in extra curricular activities if any transportation, fees or extra costs are involved. Most of those students don't know where their next meal is coming from let alone how they're going to come up with the 5 dollars to have something to eat on the road trip or buy those 75+ dollar cleats. I would also like to say that more often than not the public schools free and reduced percentage should actually be double what it is, because a lot of families are too proud to fill out the paperwork.
Don't be sorry about your feelings in the "kid isn't a kid" topic.. As a product of a public school system, my experience was that a kid was a kid, so you saying that they aren't, doesn't hold water with me either.
Let me ask you this, since you seem to be able to have a conversation without getting all sensitive.
In this scenario, would you say that a foreign exchange/international student (China, Ethiopia, etc) or a kid from a free and reduced lunch program, are more than likely to participate in football?
If there should be a reduction for free/reduced lunch, then there should be one for foreign exchange/international students.
We agree on the population factor comment.
I've never seen a kid not play because he didn't have $5.00 for a meal for the bus ride home. The $75.00 shoes? I can see that being a deterrent, but if the coach is about anything, he'd reach out in the community to help the kid(s) out. That's just my experience. Most of the kids I played with in HS, had neither the 5.00 or the 75.00 cleats, but our coaches made sure we had something on our feet to play. Hand me downs, or whatever.
My experience from most of the class B towns, is that a good majority of them will feed the opposing teams after the games. Which is a great gesture, that helps both teams.