I disagree with y'all. I do have a son who goes to Male & is on the team, but kids outside of Jefferson County are not going to public schools. That doesn't wash... But will go to X & T. Like I said I don't want to see a change, but the field is not level. "The stats don't lie".

I disagree with y'all. I do have a son who goes to Male & is on the team, but kids outside of Jefferson County are not going to public schools. That doesn't wash... But will go to X & T. Like I said I don't want to see a change, but the field is not level. "The stats don't lie".

 

For many years Male could accept students county wide while their public bretheren in Jefferson County were restricted to a feeder area. Male dominated their public peers. Did this raise your hackles? Or do you complain only when X and T have a larger area? BTW, as earlier stated, public students can cross county lines, but they must pay a nominal tuition. In the case of X and T out of county students have to pay about $8200 yearly.

 

Finally, as to all-star teams, X has never had a Mr. Football. Has Male?

I disagree with y'all. I do have a son who goes to Male & is on the team, but kids outside of Jefferson County are not going to public schools. That doesn't wash... But will go to X & T. Like I said I don't want to see a change, but the field is not level. "The stats don't lie".

 

How level is the field between Male and the other schools in Jefferson County particularly the ones you mentioned?

 

The stats don't lie.

How level is the field between Male and the other schools in Jefferson County particularly the ones you mentioned?

 

The stats don't lie.

 

 

Good one All Tell :ylsuper:

I used to be affiliated with the football team at one of the schools Larry mentioned. I can assure you that there was more of an issue there of students that lived in their district going to Male and playing for them then there was of studenst going to private schools.

I don't know who said the quote, "The dominance of St. Xavier and Trinity in Class 4A football is one of the driving forces behind the public-private debate. So the board will look at altering the playoff bracket so the powers would meet earlier in the post-season, rather than in the state finals" but whoever it was really needs to consider the ignorance behind it.

 

The only way teams are going to be able to compete with the St. Xavier's, Trinity's, Boyle Co.'s, Danville's, Fort Thomas's, etc. is to flat out get better!

There is no way around it! I'm sick and tired of people - sadly they are mostly adults - trying to find ways to "win" a championship. Championships are won in the weight room, film room and on the practice field - and that's just the minimum. Championships are not won by tweeking a playoff system or adding more classes.

 

Maybe I'm a little biased because I went to St. X; however, maybe I'm a little mad because I, my team, we paid a price which resulted in two state titles during my four years. We, and every team that has won a championship in any sport, know what it takes and that's why we compete and train at the highest level. We sacrifice social lives and "the best years of our lives" as some people like to call high school for the blood, sweat, and tears that goes into building a championship program.

 

Think about this: What are we really teaching our leaders of tomorrow if we change everything so more schools can win a championship? What will happen when their education lives are over and they are out trying to survive in the real world?

 

You have to pay a price to wear these - and it's not tuition! :fight:

 

:thumb:

Dio...Alabama has never had a Heisman award winner. And we have done OK. Its a team game. And why was the Private vs Public very first brought up? It wasn't my idea. Again, I'll say this. There has to be a "level playing field". For the public schools things changed back when busing started. I played at Iroquois back in 69-70-71 and we had over 90 kids on just the varsity. Atherton the same. We were known as the " county beaters" because we handled those schools but lost to the city schools. There were "neighborhoods schools". You went to the school in your area.

So now we are blaming all of the ills on busing? Not that I disagree that it had a lot to do with it. As I recall just after busing started Male's football was pretty terrible and they in fact tried to drop to a JV only program for a year How were they able to rebound so well?

 

I'll ask again how exactly is the playing field "level" between Male and Iroquois of does the "tilt" only happen when it is between public and private?

Everyone knows X, T and H are top 5 teams every season, forcing them to play in round 3 instead of 5 is a joke.

We could always go 5 classes:

5A Trinity vs St X

4A-1A keep the same:lol:

WIN/WIN my friends. St X and Trinity still get to compete for the state championships and the playing field is now level. Trinity and St X can now expand in a hunt for a National Championship. I'm not being serious but sadly that is about the only way I ever see both sides getting what they want. It's just not going to be a perfect system.

All... Remember I was there at Iroquois with 90 varsity kids. After busing 45 max. And I'm the only one who brought up busing. I've gone to the Raiders games all thru the 70s-80s-90s. The stats don't lie. Dead horse?

Are you saying it was a 45 minute bus ride to school?

All... Remember I was there at Iroquois with 90 varsity kids. After busing 45 max. And I'm the only one who brought up busing. I've gone to the Raiders games all thru the 70s-80s-90s. The stats don't lie. Dead horse?

Was there a Coaching change near that time? New Admin? You're painting a very poor picture, and showing a lot of bias as it stands...

No, I'm not. Its just the way things went. Kids were bused out of their neighborhood schools. I'm not complaining, but I was involved. And seeing the numbers for football almost cut in half had to hurt. The year after the Rocks won state in 1968 we played them in a scrimmage and beat them soundly. We had as many kids as the Rocks. Again its about the numbers for the whole point.

Dio...Alabama has never had a Heisman award winner. And we have done OK. Its a team game. And why was the Private vs Public very first brought up? It wasn't my idea. Again, I'll say this. There has to be a "level playing field". For the public schools things changed back when busing started. I played at Iroquois back in 69-70-71 and we had over 90 kids on just the varsity. Atherton the same. We were known as the " county beaters" because we handled those schools but lost to the city schools. There were "neighborhoods schools". You went to the school in your area.

 

Alabama...You posted "And it doesn't matter how hard you practice....When you play against the private schools your playing against allstar teams." I noted that "X has never had a Mr. Football." You replied "Alabama has never had a Heisman award winner. And we have done OK. Its a team game." That was my point. Male, with superior talent most years, does not dominate X.

 

The main area the playing field is tilted toward privates is 4A, and that is due to the numbers disparity with X and T. Guru has posted this truism a number of times: "you can't self impose restrictions on your own school district and then complain that others won't do the same. " I have yet to read a response to this by the group that denounces schools that accept enrollments from other counties. I have found your posts thoughtful in the past. How would you respond to Guru's point?