Hinsa wrote:ClassB4ever: I don't think you are putting ALL my thoughts together. I'm assuming this thought is why you have your undies in a bunch:
"Leave it at two classes. Teach kids about hard work."
The very next thought says: "Let them learn how rewarding over-achieving can be. Let them learn that no matter how much they work and overachieve, it doesn't always work out."
Where in those thoughts do I say that a kid is not working hard enough? My two main thoughts there are "Over-achieving is awesome" and "Sometimes it just isn't going to work out no matter how hard you work." To me, that mirrors what happens in the real world.
I want our kids to learn that you work hard to improve your chances and options in life. And sometimes it just isn't going to happen for you. I DO NOT want them to learn that if they complain enough about their lot in life someone is going to swoop in and fix things for them.
I've been on both sides of the fence you speak of. We were not the biggest school in our class. Not in our region. Not even in our district. And I was the little guy competing against the "big boys" of the system when trying to move up the employment ladder. I can identify with both sides of the fence.
classB4ever wrote:Well, if every thing you wrote above is true, then having a system with with 18 AA schools (after new ones come on), 32 A schools and 78 B schools would be acceptable. Use a 1.8 multiplier on any private schools located inside our big towns, as well as the free and reduced meal multiplier on the other end. Split A and B schools up into four regions, each. They can cross schedule during the year to help with travel. At the end of the year, they play in super regionals. The 8 winners of each of those regions, 4 from A and 4 from B, go on to play in the same tournament as we know today. The coaches seed top 4 and draw from hat just like today. Looks to me like the same amount of trophies, so it won't be watered down one bit. In fact, it even brings in tougher competition so it will give the schools in A even more chances at life lessons. You should certainly be for that, correct?
Hinsa wrote:Again, I'm just stating my thoughts and opinions on this subject. I'm not trying to prove I'm right. As a matter of fact, I don't think anyone can "prove" their idea is the correct one.
By the way, what is wrong about using past events as analogies that help in explaining an opinion? If the analogies are applicable, who cares how old they are? I merely used those analogies because they are events that every sports fan in the state can recognize and relate to.
Hinsa wrote:Would they have made a movie (Hoosiers) out of French Lick vs. Hanover in the state single A tournament (Indiana now has 4 classes up to four A) instead of Hickory (town of less than 1000) vs. Muncie Central (11th largest city in the state)? Of course not.
Hinsa wrote:
Well dammit, that ain't the way life works! You hit the work world you are NOT competing on a level playing field. You do NOT have a close to equal chance to get the business job against an Ivy League grad. You do NOT have a close to equal chance to get an on air radio job if you have a nasal cavity that makes you sound like Peter Griffin from Family Guy. You will NOT become a professional gambler if you get major pits whenever you are trying to run a bluff.
winner-within wrote:
another reason to just put privates in class A is that most of them have plenty of room for more students and they are already in the big citys of ND so it would instantly give opportunity for evening the plain with some students electing to go to a different school.........
Hinsa wrote:Again, I'm just stating my thoughts and opinions on this subject. I'm not trying to prove I'm right. As a matter of fact, I don't think anyone can "prove" their idea is the correct one.
Indy5 wrote:winner-within wrote:
another reason to just put privates in class A is that most of them have plenty of room for more students and they are already in the big citys of ND so it would instantly give opportunity for evening the plain with some students electing to go to a different school.........
So what you're saying is by moving them up a class where they'll have much less success, that will attract more students to come to these schools? You're also saying that these schools that are shrinking by the day will magically start adding kids by losing more games.
I tell you what. If you showed these schools proof that they could, double or increase their enrollment by 1.5 by moving up a class, they would do it in a heartbeat even if it meant rarely ever winning a game.
classB4ever wrote:My point is this, you choose to use examples like the above and the Hillsboro/Epping game from 1977 to debate this topic, but refuse to consider data actually attained from our existing system. The landscape of ND class b basketball in 1977 is not what it is today. The most common arguments used against the 3-class system on this site are:
1. Watering down the competition.
2. Handing out awards to everyone.
3. Hillsboro/Epping.
4. If it's not broke, don't fix it.
That's all fine and dandy. But when data is available showing a big picture of what is actually happening in our current system and you by-pass that to use the "Hickory" story. Well, is that really relevant? 2 cents.
winner-within wrote:Indy5 wrote:winner-within wrote:
another reason to just put privates in class A is that most of them have plenty of room for more students and they are already in the big citys of ND so it would instantly give opportunity for evening the plain with some students electing to go to a different school.........
So what you're saying is by moving them up a class where they'll have much less success, that will attract more students to come to these schools? You're also saying that these schools that are shrinking by the day will magically start adding kids by losing more games.
I tell you what. If you showed these schools proof that they could, double or increase their enrollment by 1.5 by moving up a class, they would do it in a heartbeat even if it meant rarely ever winning a game.
How many Privates are Class in A as we speak?
leroybla wrote:When was the last year that there wasn't a private school competing the Boys Class B in ND?
Indy5 wrote:winner-within wrote:Indy5 wrote:winner-within wrote:
another reason to just put privates in class A is that most of them have plenty of room for more students and they are already in the big citys of ND so it would instantly give opportunity for evening the plain with some students electing to go to a different school.........
So what you're saying is by moving them up a class where they'll have much less success, that will attract more students to come to these schools? You're also saying that these schools that are shrinking by the day will magically start adding kids by losing more games.
I tell you what. If you showed these schools proof that they could, double or increase their enrollment by 1.5 by moving up a class, they would do it in a heartbeat even if it meant rarely ever winning a game.
How many Privates are Class in A as we speak?
As HammerTime said, 2. They are also in cities with double the population of Minot, and I don't even know how many times Dickinson/Williston. Yes, these towns are growing, but that hasn't led to any increase in enrollment for the private schools. Then there's Shiloh and Oak Grove. They're in those two biggest cities, but they're the third school (counting all publics as one), so they also are nowhere near class A. These schools have no business being blindly thrown in with the big city publics. St. Marys and Shanley compete, and if they ever drop below the line, I believe they'll still opt up. This is because they're both big and self-sustaining.
baloncesto wrote:Since when does being from a private school automatically make you a better player or a better team? Some people act like that this is an automatic advantage over everyone else and they discredit the hard work the kids put in. I understand they have a better opportunity to bring in transfers because of big schools being in the same town but at the end of the day its still 9-12 graders against 9-12 graders and its still schools with similar enrollment numbers playing against each other.
uspsrt wrote:baloncesto wrote:Since when does being from a private school automatically make you a better player or a better team? Some people act like that this is an automatic advantage over everyone else and they discredit the hard work the kids put in. I understand they have a better opportunity to bring in transfers because of big schools being in the same town but at the end of the day its still 9-12 graders against 9-12 graders and its still schools with similar enrollment numbers playing against each other.
You just answered your own question. Privates are not restricted by district boundaries and have an opportunity to accept transfers from anywhere. Of course other schools get transfers from time to time too, but not to the extent that privates do. I guess I just accept this as it is, but do not try to say that it is not an advantage to have unlimited access to talent. More good players have an advantage over less good players every time. Somewhere on this forum there is a post that documents how other states handle this situation. You should read it. A lot of them apply some type of multiplier to the privates to try to even the playing field by having them move up in class despite having a lower enrollment. In others states they simply do not compete against each other. I think there are 8 privates in North Dakota now and it might be useful to take a look at getting them all into class A or at least apply a multiplier. I think another advantage they have over rural publics is in retaining a quality coaching staff. If you are a young, talented coach fresh out of college seeking a basketball coaching position would you rather coach in a city where there is entertainment and restaurants or in a community that has much less to offer.
uspsrt wrote:Private schools by definition accept students from anywhere in or outside the state, while public schools are pretty much restricted by school district boundaries. At least that is my understanding. I'm not affiliated with any school and don't pretend to fully understand the open enrollment guidelines, but if you feel that being a Private does not give you an advantage in athletics please explain why other states have taken the steps that they have to address the issue.
Indy5 wrote:uspsrt wrote:baloncesto wrote:Since when does being from a private school automatically make you a better player or a better team? Some people act like that this is an automatic advantage over everyone else and they discredit the hard work the kids put in. I understand they have a better opportunity to bring in transfers because of big schools being in the same town but at the end of the day its still 9-12 graders against 9-12 graders and its still schools with similar enrollment numbers playing against each other.
You just answered your own question. Privates are not restricted by district boundaries and have an opportunity to accept transfers from anywhere. Of course other schools get transfers from time to time too, but not to the extent that privates do. I guess I just accept this as it is, but do not try to say that it is not an advantage to have unlimited access to talent. More good players have an advantage over less good players every time. Somewhere on this forum there is a post that documents how other states handle this situation. You should read it. A lot of them apply some type of multiplier to the privates to try to even the playing field by having them move up in class despite having a lower enrollment. In others states they simply do not compete against each other. I think there are 8 privates in North Dakota now and it might be useful to take a look at getting them all into class A or at least apply a multiplier. I think another advantage they have over rural publics is in retaining a quality coaching staff. If you are a young, talented coach fresh out of college seeking a basketball coaching position would you rather coach in a city where there is entertainment and restaurants or in a community that has much less to offer.
Their advantage has not one thing to do with with getting transfers from across town. Those kids would still have to sit out the 180 days just like if they went from one public to another. Shiloh has been the only private to be getting any amount of transfers really, and theirs aren't coming from Bismarck schools.
I'll give you the coaches point. Naturally, most people would rather live in, say, Bismarck than live in or commute daily to Steele.
winner-within wrote:why would a St. Marys beat a Shiloh? or lets say a Shanley beat an Oak Grove?...because of a few more students?....)
winner-within wrote:...and to say nearly every school has had a transfer in the last 2 decades....I would say many many havent
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests