So, swamp rat, are you saying that Divine Intervention is to blame for privates' soccer success?

 

On the girls side the private schools have won 3 of 14 state titles. Boys side 12 of 31.

Agreed, it doesn't sound much like a private/public thing does it??

Agreed, it doesn't sound much like a private/public thing does it??

 

:thumb:

So, swamp rat, are you saying that Divine Intervention is to blame for privates' soccer success?

What is that supposed to mean? :confused:

 

On the girls side the private schools have won 3 of 14 state titles. Boys side 12 of 31.

Privates have won 39% of all boy soccer championships (12 of 31). Privates have won 22% of all football championships sanctioned by the state since 1959 (38 of 172) and that is with at least 3 chances to win one each year (4 chances per year since '75). If 22% is dominance then 39% is dominance as well. I stand by my post.

What is that supposed to mean? :confused:

 

Privates have won 39% of all boy soccer championships (12 of 31). Privates have won 22% of all football championships sanctioned by the state since 1959 (38 of 172) and that is with at least 3 chances to win one each year (4 chances per year since '75). If 22% is dominance then 39% is dominance as well. I stand by my post.

 

This has been my argument as well. 4A in football is the only class that has been "dominated" by the non-publics. The real dominance has been in girls volleyball. 19 of 19 have been won by a non-public school. Recently girls basketball has been dominated by a few non-publics schools also.

The interest in football in this state is dropping, I don't know where you see kids wanting to play football over soccer. Soccer is so much more attracive, you don't get hurt as easily and so much cheaper to put on games.

 

You're way of base there. As a matter of fact the number of college prospects in the state has never been higher. Name the last big-time basketball player out of this state, for every one you name I can give you 3 big time football players. The thing is most of them come from the public high schools, and this is coming from an alumni of "the great Satan" Somerset. I do think that private schools have some inherent advantages. (in our county the county school system sets a limit on the number of county kids that can attend the city school) I think we should all play together, it is too small of a state to segregate. Maybe 5 classes where only the biggest play together but 6 is too many.

You're way of base there. As a matter of fact the number of college prospects in the state has never been higher. Name the last big-time basketball player out of this state, for every one you name I can give you 3 big time football players. The thing is most of them come from the public high schools, and this is coming from an alumni of "the great Satan" Somerset. I do think that private schools have some inherent advantages. (in our county the county school system sets a limit on the number of county kids that can attend the city school) I think we should all play together, it is too small of a state to segregate. Maybe 5 classes where only the biggest play together but 6 is too many.

 

Big time college prospects? D-I prospects?? We may turn out 4 or 5, that doesn't put us in the top college state by no means.

Big time college prospects? D-I prospects?? We may turn out 4 or 5, that doesn't put us in the top college state by no means.

 

 

Red, just looking at Scout.com real quick, I had the following totals of signed D-1 prospects:

02 15

03 22

04 24

05 25

06 25

 

Just from looking at those numbers, it seems to me that the trend is that football is getting better in the state and more talented kids are taking up the sport. While this doesn't consider how much impact the kids have at the next level, I think it's important to look at the number that are being signed out of high school. In my opinion, football in the Commonwealth has never been better.

Only because your board decides that, not because you have to. I could go build a school that primarily focuses on athletics and education is a secondary thing, just get the students by with whatever grade they need to play ball. You don't think we would attract all the best athletes if this school existed? I am not sure what the guidelines are that the KHSAA sets forth for student/athletes, but I am sure that the big issue is the grades they maintain and if this school was formed up that was basically a talent pool of athletes was allowed in the KHSAA, would that be fair to the rest of the schools?

 

Chris Burke, Paul Byrd, Brian Brohm, Scott Padgett, and Trevor Miller would never go to your school...

Couple points of interest..

 

1. A lot has been said about the gross numbers of kids at X and T vs. public schools.... What if all 4A teams were limited to 65 kids, 3A 55 kids, 2A 45 kids and a 25 kids. Do you think this would level the playing field???

In St. X's case, they would take the best 65, out of 110.... Just how hard do you think those kids are going to work to make that team...... OK, St. X typically beats you with 40 - 45 players anyway..... so I just dont think that would have much of an impact....

 

2. Stop playing the St. X's and Trinity's of the state of KY.... What happens to your Athletic budget after not playing St.X for 5 years when there was at least 8,000 at each game, home and away.... By the way, you might need new uniforms for the ladies field hockey team too..... I think this is real and it would effect all the teams that have average to below average fan attendance at games.....

 

To answer your question, Athletic competition is a great experience and teacher for the youth of our society. We should not segregate the kids whos parents pay for public education and privite education....

To answer your question, Athletic competition is a great experience and teacher for the youth of our society. We should not segregate the kids whos parents pay for public education and privite education....

 

Yeah, but isn't putting your child in a school that costs more than a lot of poorer families can afford a type of segregation? Aren't these families basically saying that their kids are too good for a public education?

Yeah, but isn't putting your child in a school that costs more than a lot of poorer families can afford a type of segregation? Aren't these families basically saying that their kids are too good for a public education?

No. There are a lot of reasons for a family to choose a school and those reasons are nobody's business. Regarding payment, you are right. That is why some private schools work very hard to provide financial aid. We never want finances to be the deciding factor.

We never want finances to be the deciding factor.

 

And isn't it funny that the public school supporters are trying to force this segregation...

Yeah, but isn't putting your child in a school that costs more than a lot of poorer families can afford a type of segregation? Aren't these families basically saying that their kids are too good for a public education?

 

We all live in America. We have choices for our families. We all are empowered to make those decisions. However, those that choose to send their kids to private schools, pay that turition plus the taxes to send your child to public school as well.... so I dont see it as a segregation. If some children were forced [/b]to go to one school or another, then I see this as segregation. When a parent sends their child to a private school, they are giving their child the best education possible. The decision says nothing about the public system. It speaks volumes of what the parent values for their child and their willlingness to sacrafice to see that the child gets a private education.

We all live in America. We have choices for our families. We all are empowered to make those decisions. However, those that choose to send their kids to private schools, pay that turition plus the taxes to send your child to public school as well.... so I dont see it as a segregation. If some children were forced [/b]to go to one school or another, then I see this as segregation. When a parent sends their child to a private school, they are giving their child the best education possible. The decision says nothing about the public system. It speaks volumes of what the parent values for their child and their willlingness to sacrafice to see that the child gets a private education.

 

I don't know where you live, but we don't all have choices when it comes to where we send our kids to school. You and I may have the ability to send our child to a private school, we could sacrifice some things and make that happen, or we just have piles of money and that isn't a factor. But you take some of these city kids, even with financial aid, it is either tuition or putting food on the table, and most parents are gonna choose to put food on the table and send their kid to the public school. And I have argued that just because you send your child to a private school doesn't mean they are going to get a guaranteed better education than a public education, it is totally up to the child to see that happens and I would put the public school teachers up against the private school teachers anyday.