Should be interesting to see what comes of this.
What could go wrong?
- Thread starter 4Afan
- Start date
What could go wrong? Increasing the multiplier to 2 and eliminating all waivers will make public school kids believe that private school kids really are twice as good as them and will spark an even deeper downward spiral of their competitive spirit and effectiveness relative to private schools.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
I think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves here. I cant remember the last time I heard a public school kid say that private school kid is 1.65x better than me.
That's just his schtick, he's convinced everyone whoever attended a public school is against privates and their success rather than a small number that are the most vocal.
The difference between a whole number and 65% of one. Twice as good just has such a nice ring to it.
It sure seems like a relatively small number. I def don't see publics like esl, rochester, ms, cg, lwe, etc sharing that sentiment. And as a fan of loyola, why would you give 2 sh*ts about what antioch folks have to say, who can't even figure out how to get past the 2nd rd of the playoffs.
Last edited:
Ramblinman
Love you! If for no other reason you fight right or wrong you stay the course.
@ramblinman is definitely the resident blaster.
Plenty of other private school supporters are on record on this very message board saying that the waiver was too weak.
I’m not sure if the multiplier should be increased, but if it is, I definitely think that consideration should be given to distinguish schools like Ottawa Marquette from schools from the Chicago suburbs.
Plenty of other private school supporters are on record on this very message board saying that the waiver was too weak.
I’m not sure if the multiplier should be increased, but if it is, I definitely think that consideration should be given to distinguish schools like Ottawa Marquette from schools from the Chicago suburbs.
Because you never know when suburban private schools like St Ed's, ACC, and Marmion are gonna have a once in a blue moon successful year and pee in the public school corn flakes. Gotta guard against that!
I appreciate your passion, I really do. I just think that in your NIPL scenario you trash the small rural private schools more than any IHSA “sanctions” ever would.Because you never know when suburban private schools like St Ed's, ACC, and Marmion are gonna have a once in a blue moon successful year and pee in the public school corn flakes. Gotta guard against that!
Because you never know when suburban private schools like St Ed's, ACC, and Marmion are gonna have a once in a blue moon successful year and pee in the public school corn flakes. Gotta guard against that!
What chance would those schools have for titles in the NIPL?
Right.
He is the champion of poorly performing and small private schools, but in his scenario, all those schools like Leo, ACC, St.Eds, etc would be absolute crash test dummy cannon fodder against teams like Montini and IC, not to mention whatever other teams are in the small division of the NIPL.
After the state games and the farmer ball conferences were up in arms, I had to eff with them some. Oftentimes, I found myself thinking, "What would Ramblinman say here?"
On a side note, I have never seen as many mullets and seemingly permanent leg limps as the Camp Point kin leaving the Althoff campus.
On a side note, I have never seen as many mullets and seemingly permanent leg limps as the Camp Point kin leaving the Althoff campus.
But they can take students from a larger areola than presently.
Nobody would force them to join the NIPL.
And your IHSA multiplier scenario doesn't trash the small Chicago area private schools?
Last edited:
It’s not “mine” and you seem to admit my point.
My scenario allows them to compete with schools of equal ability where they might actually advance against teams from the HOIC or NUIC. Ottawa Marquette would get routed by a running clock against pretty much every CCL team
Incorrect. If you could get all the northeastern Illinois private schools to join, there would be enough schools to make a competitive division with the likes of ACC, Christ the King, Leo, Marian Central, St Bede, Marquette, etc. Gotta believe Leo would want that instead of crossover games against the likes of St Rita and St Laurence like they had to play this year.
Yeah sure, but those teams still would have no chance of making any headway in a playoff scenario. They are better off playing vs a 3A Peotone or Manteno than they are against IC or Montini or Marian. Let alone SHG or JCA if your hard enrollment is enforced
But in a NIPL division with teams like ACC, Leo, St Bede, Christ the King, etc, they would be much more competitive.
Oh please. They have little to no chance now, and much less if they are multiplied up to Peotone's and Manteno's class in the IHSA.
That’s kind of my point. None of the referenced schools have much chance of winning a title, the publics mentioned included. If you just want them to have a chance to win a playoff game or maybe two, then the NIPL will probably be too daunting and quite a bit more difficult than the current set up, and that goes against your championing of their cause.
Quite the contrary.
I want them to feel like they belong to an interscholastic athletic association where there is no double standard, where their success is rewarded and not discounted, and where they aren't treated as second class citizens. And, having them win a NIPL playoff game or two is basically a game or two more playoff games than they are winning now. Again, if you get all the private schools to join, it becomes easier for the small privates to win.
Equality of chance of winning a title is gonna be pretty hard to do without watering down certain classes.
Put another way, Benet doesn't look poised to be a very serious football team and Naz doesn't look poised to be a serious boys basketball team (and to be fair to Benet, Naz is much worse at bball that Benet is at football, they were just the first school i thought of as ESCC bball standard bearer).
That doesn't mean relative to their size, private status, and any other factors you want to consider (outside of just direct wins) that both shouldnt be measured/classified equally at both sports. It's okay that Naz doesn't have a shot at winning a basketball title (or even sectional - I think they maybe had one regional run maybe in past 20 years?). A regional title appearance is just a good season for them in the same way a quarterfinals appearance one a decade might be a good football season for others. It's not that Naz is incapable of doing better at boys basketball. They just haven't. Goes for every sport that way.
So if you can create a compelling regular season division for smaller schools / less accomplished schools that's probably about as good as you can hope. Because neither a split system or combined system likely means much come playoff time until the schools change something about the way they're doing it (if they even want to).
Put another way, Benet doesn't look poised to be a very serious football team and Naz doesn't look poised to be a serious boys basketball team (and to be fair to Benet, Naz is much worse at bball that Benet is at football, they were just the first school i thought of as ESCC bball standard bearer).
That doesn't mean relative to their size, private status, and any other factors you want to consider (outside of just direct wins) that both shouldnt be measured/classified equally at both sports. It's okay that Naz doesn't have a shot at winning a basketball title (or even sectional - I think they maybe had one regional run maybe in past 20 years?). A regional title appearance is just a good season for them in the same way a quarterfinals appearance one a decade might be a good football season for others. It's not that Naz is incapable of doing better at boys basketball. They just haven't. Goes for every sport that way.
So if you can create a compelling regular season division for smaller schools / less accomplished schools that's probably about as good as you can hope. Because neither a split system or combined system likely means much come playoff time until the schools change something about the way they're doing it (if they even want to).
Two issues.
Leo gets kids to come there because they are in the CCL. It's actually a big tool in getting kids to attend Leo. Kids would go from playing against former youth teammates and friends to kids from far flung suburbs and towns.
Secondly, Alumni would shoot a move down at first chance.
The CCL wouldn't go away. It would be a league within the NIPL much like it is within the IHSA. The NIPL is nothing but a placeholder name for whatever the new association wants to call itself.
I hasten to add that the CCL that older Leo alumni (the donors who keep that school open) have fond memories of competing within barely exists anymore. Four of its eight charter members have closed their doors. Currently, there are 17 members in the CCL. Of those 17, only nine were in the CCL when I started following high school football in the 1970s. A baker's dozen former CCL members have closed. The Leo guys in their 80s and 90s are too old to have played against Rice, Gordon/DePaul Prep, and Laurence since those three schools didn't join until 65-70 years ago. Some former CCL schools (Holy Trinity, St. Pat's, JCA, etc) jumped ship to other conferences.
CCL comings and goings
By and large, I agree that you don't see the public schools you mentioned sharing that sentiment...at least not publicly. I think the reason for that is because they are among the public school haves. It's primarily the public havenots who are doing most of the whining. They are the ones who are fine when they beat private schools but whine like babies when they lose to them. But, even Coach Z couldn't resist playing the zip code card in the media last year after losing to a private school. The Batavia coach is all about one town, one team.
I give two sh!ts because, in the IHSA, the squeaky wheel gets greased. Stated differently, the whining babies are given their pacifiers. The whiners have been conditioned BY the IHSA to whine to get their way, and there will be no stopping the whining until complete separation occurs. Let's just cut to the chase. Give me the NIPL.
Last edited:
How does a multiplier trash a small private school?
I have a hard time understanding that logic.
It seems like the IHSA has been awfully gracious to the privates as the current system has allowed them to achieve a disproportionate amount of success. The system is constantly being tweaked in some ways. And yet, the "haves" seem to figure it out and the "have nots" always seem to find a way to complain. That will be the same going forward imo.
I used the word trash because it was a word that another poster used to describe what would happen to smaller non-urban private schools in the NIPL.
If you really don't understand how a small private school is negatively impacted by the IHSA multiplier, let me know and I will explain it to you.
Gracious is not a word I would ever use to describe how the IHSA has treated private schools over the years.
The current IHSA system certainly isn't a hinderance for private schools in football.
My point being, in football specifically, the private schools have figured out a way to overcome whatever "injustices" you feel the IHSA has inflicted on you. That will continue. Just like the public schools who cant figure out a way to be a consistently good program, will find another excuse as to why they aren't good.
Adults arguing over high school sports. I've seen this at the bars a few times.
Let the coaches come up with the solution.
Let the coaches come up with the solution.
My idea was to find representation from both the public and privates, from lower, middle, and upper enrollment, and schools from all around the state. I'm not talking about 256 HCs voting. I'm talking about 6.
There's always going to be some give and take.