The Schwab wrote:The difference between perceived good coaches and great coaches is talent.
It takes a certain talent to tell the difference too..
The Schwab wrote:The difference between perceived good coaches and great coaches is talent.
The Schwab wrote:In response to your post, not once have I ever said that grinsteinner, dwyer, card etc... aren't good coaches and if anyone says they aren't that person doesn't understand basketball. They are great coaches who have built awesome programs. Just because a school has 30 kids in a class doesn't mean they are the same as another school who has 30 kids in a class. There are numerous advantages to not having defined school district lines, it changes every aspect of your school, right down to the kids who attend. My support of the 3 class system is based on equality, giving schools of like size and makeup a chance to compete against each other in the postseason.
Mandan wrote:Here is Dickinson Trinity's last 6 seasons in Class A:
........WDA....WDA Tourney
Year Record Record
------ --------- ----------------
85-86..4-10....1-2
86-87..3-11....0-2
87-88..1-13....0-2
88-89..2-12....1-2
89-90..4-10....0-2
90-91..4-14....0-2
I very vividly remember sitting in the stands watching the boys get beat by Minot something like 100-60. 20 to 30 point losses against Minot and the Bismarck schools was pretty common. We were still a little over 200 students at that time. If you force Shiloh and the smaller private schools into class A, you would get this result or even worse for each of those schools, except when they played each other. I just don't see that as being right to force them to play that far above what their enrollment is.
In the spring of 1990 a three-class vote failed by five votes. That is when Trinity and most of the remaining North Star Conference schools declared that they were moving to class B by the fall of 1991. If that vote had passed, these schools would have all been in the middle class and we never would be talking about this now.
Flip wrote:why was Trinity playing class A?
anyone know the years Grafton was class A?
Scheeby wrote: If you don't want to see them, then beat them. Copy what they do and you might have a chance. Hire their coaches - they'd probably double their salary going to a public school. Right now we're in the midst of some great coaches that just happen to coach at private schools. Let's appreciate and enjoy it. Dwyer leaves for one season and a talented Shiloh squad doesn't make the R5 final. Give these schools and coaches some credit.
The Schwab wrote:Most public schools do not have one kid that moves in after they start school, let alone 6.
Sportsrube wrote:
Excellent point and that is one of the biggest issues with privates. I would also question how many parents see these kids at tournaments, traveling teams, etc... when they are in Elementary and start talking about "if our kids were together in JH and HS that would really be something" but you are in "North's" district and we are in "South's" district so we need to go to a school that has no district boundaries.
classB4ever wrote:IMHO, the real advantage of schools located in the big towns (and towns located near) is at the elementary level. A number of schools have campuses located in various locations throughout these large towns. This gives them the ability to have a much larger reach for students. I also believe private/parochial schools recruit at this age. Why? Because that's what you do to sustain your school enrollment. You are going to recruit the best students you can find whether it be for academics, sports or any other program offered.
It is not difficult to see talent at this early age and build strong athletic programs year in and year out with the ability to reach out and acquire students from throughout these larger towns. With the tournaments, traveling teams, YMCA, etc. today's kids are afforded, along with genetics, talent is very easy to spot.
With that said, I don't think these smaller private/parochial schools should automatically be thrown into the top class if changes are made. You are simply moving a problem from the bottom to the top. I do think a multiplier should be used. The advantages noted above are real and do make a big difference.
Flip wrote:why was Trinity playing class A?
The Schwab wrote:Mandan wrote:Here is Dickinson Trinity's last 6 seasons in Class A:
........WDA....WDA Tourney
Year Record Record
------ --------- ----------------
85-86..4-10....1-2
86-87..3-11....0-2
87-88..1-13....0-2
88-89..2-12....1-2
89-90..4-10....0-2
90-91..4-14....0-2
I very vividly remember sitting in the stands watching the boys get beat by Minot something like 100-60. 20 to 30 point losses against Minot and the Bismarck schools was pretty common. We were still a little over 200 students at that time. If you force Shiloh and the smaller private schools into class A, you would get this result or even worse for each of those schools, except when they played each other. I just don't see that as being right to force them to play that far above what their enrollment is.
In the spring of 1990 a three-class vote failed by five votes. That is when Trinity and most of the remaining North Star Conference schools declared that they were moving to class B by the fall of 1991. If that vote had passed, these schools would have all been in the middle class and we never would be talking about this now.
But it's better for Trinity to beat teams in region 7 by 25+ points? I bet if they had their current coach back then they would have been very competitive.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests