The Public vs. Private Finals

[colonel-fan]

The more this keeps coming up, the more I agree it is more a urban/rural issue than a private/public issue. I know the Somersets, Henry Clays, and Johnson Central's (just using them as the most recent defeated teams) may think that if NewCath, Trinity, or CovCath weren't there they could be in the state finals, but there is a good chance that these teams would have lost to Beechwood, Male, or Highlands as well. The common denominator is the urban schools seem to beat the rural schools more often than not.

 

 

Aren't Russell, Bowling Green, and Danville all independent school districts? If the privates go, then the independents won't be far behind.

[BrewDog]

Money isn't an advantage for some private schools. The private school in the 1A finals has no home field and I think you would be hard-pressed to find a team in the state with a worse practice field. And the coaching staff is probably the lowest paid.

 

They do have a lot of support from parents, boosters, students, and fans.

 

Wow, didn't know all of that. Good luck NewCath, you've come a long way since Belfry. Didn't mean to suggest anything negative about money, but just the opposite.

[Andy Dufrain]

The more this keeps coming up, the more I agree it is more a urban/rural issue than a private/public issue. I know the Somersets, Henry Clays, and Johnson Central's (just using them as the most recent defeated teams) may think that if NewCath, Trinity, or CovCath weren't there they could be in the state finals, but there is a good chance that these teams would have lost to Beechwood, Male, or Highlands as well. The common denominator is the urban schools seem to beat the rural schools more often than not.

 

 

Aren't Russell, Bowling Green, and Danville all independent school districts? If the privates go, then the independents won't be far behind.

 

 

Good sensible posts!!:thumb: That is why I ask if posters from these schools have a negative thought to the Public vs. Private debate.

There are some in our area that think if we had 1 consolidated school system that Pulaski Co. could compete on a state level against all schools, I disagree with that notion due to what you just pointed out that the rural sector has fewer real athletes to draw from. I believe our 3 schools combined would no way compete for a 4a title and would be competitive but not dominate in 3a when we would have a much larger area base to choose from.

[scooterbob]

Good luck to Trinity, CCH, and NCC. Keep winning and let them whine.

[ladiesbballcoach]

You don't have to go private. Nothing is stopping you from accepting students from surrounding areas except yourselves. See public independent schools districts, see public Kenton Co (Dixie, Scott, Simon Kenton) open enrollment.

As we have discussed before, great in theory for urban schools, but does nothing but widen the gap with rural schools.

[Landshark]

To some extent I think it is also more an urban/rural issue than public/private anyway. Kentucky's more urban areas can use open enrollment much more effectively on account of the size of the population in a given area. Allowing for more magnet programs and educational diversity by giving some schools areas in which to specialize. The athletic benefits are merely a side effect.

Excellent point, PepRock. I don't think that most people from the metro areas of Kentucky really understand Kentucky's rural schools and the role that population density, geography, and demographics play in fielding a competitive football team. It is easy to criticize schools for placing enrollment "restrictions upon themselves," but open enrollment in an urban or suburban area is an entirely different animal than it is at a school like Beechwood.

 

Most rural school districts do not have the same kind of tax base that schools like Beechwood and Highlands have, and in many cases 60 percent or more of their students in rural county school dstricts qualify for free or reduced lunches. Absent a reciprocity agreement with adjacent school districts, passing the state's portion of the cost for educating out of district students to parents is cost prohibitive in most cases.

 

Transportation from adjoining districts is also a much bigger consideration in a district like Johnson County, for example, than it is for schools in the Louisville or NKY areas. There are areas within Johnson County that are a 45 minute drive from Paintsville and the county has a population of approximately 23,000 people. If you draw a circle with a 10 mile radius from JC, you will encompass approximately 1/10 the number that the same circle would capture in Kenton County.

 

I am fully in favor of open enrollment and I also support giving parents the right to transfer their kids to any school system with no residence change. (Athletes transferring during a school year would be ineligible until the following year unless there was a bona fide change of address.)

 

People who believe that the difficulty most rural schools have competing consistently with the urban private schools is simply because of bad decisions by district school boards are simply poorly informed. I am glad to see that some metro residents understand the advantages that urban schools have over rural schools, whether they are private or public. BTW, I am not in favor of doing anything to "level the playing field." Life isn't always fair, nor should it be. Rural living has certain advantages, just as city living does.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Most rural school districts do not have the same kind of tax base that schools like Beechwood and Highlands have, and in many cases 60 percent or more of their students in rural county school dstricts qualify for free or reduced lunches. Absent a reciprocity agreement with adjacent school districts, passing the state's portion of the cost for educating out of district students to parents is cost prohibitive in most cases.

 

.

Wanted to point out that according to the NKY newspapers and the superintendent at Beechwood, what you say actually hurts them. Because of the funds they draw from a local standpoint, the money they draw from the state is reduced. If they need more money and wish to raise taxes locally to gather those funds, then the money they receive from the state is even further reduced.

 

Fred Bassett, Superintendent at Beechwood, as been a VOCAL critic of the funding formula and explaining many times how Beechwood is being hampered in the funding they have because they are a "rich" district.

 

 

As far as the idea of charging tuition and that putting you on an equal basis with privates. No it does not. If I am not mistaken, (and don't believe I am because LC just got in trouble for it), scholarships, financial aid, etc can be provided to those students that can't afford it. Those same scholarships, etc will not be an option for a student through open enrollment to attend a school out of district.

 

So, where the private school would receive the money from some fund, the public school would receive $0.

 

As far as the "life isn't fair" garbage that has consistently been thrown out there, life in the USA is all about leveling the playing field. We have minority hiring practices all over the place. You can't hire a MLB manager without interviewing a minority first. The Big 3 automakers just had a meeting with the President and according to the news report, "Seeked his help in 'leveling the playing field' with foreign automakers."

 

The Electoral College that gave us President Bush in 2000 can be seen as "leveling the playing field." How about our tax code of taxing the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor?

 

The USA consistently and constantly "levels the playing field." People don't believe that then they need to take off their rose-colored glasses and look at our society again.

[Landshark]

Wanted to point out that according to the NKY newspapers and the superintendent at Beechwood, what you say actually hurts them. Because of the funds they draw from a local standpoint, the money they draw from the state is reduced. If they need more money and wish to raise taxes locally to gather those funds, then the money they receive from the state is even further reduced.

 

Fred Bassett, Superintendent at Beechwood, as been a VOCAL critic of the funding formula and explaining many times how Beechwood is being hampered in the funding they have because they are a "rich" district.

 

 

As far as the idea of charging tuition and that putting you on an equal basis with privates. No it does not. If I am not mistaken, (and don't believe I am because LC just got in trouble for it), scholarships, financial aid, etc can be provided to those students that can't afford it. Those same scholarships, etc will not be an option for a student through open enrollment to attend a school out of district.

 

So, where the private school would receive the money from some fund, the public school would receive $0.

 

As far as the "life isn't fair" garbage that has consistently been thrown out there, life in the USA is all about leveling the playing field. We have minority hiring practices all over the place. You can't hire a MLB manager without interviewing a minority first. The Big 3 automakers just had a meeting with the President and according to the news report, "Seeked his help in 'leveling the playing field' with foreign automakers."

 

The Electoral College that gave us President Bush in 2000 can be seen as "leveling the playing field." How about our tax code of taxing the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor?

 

The USA consistently and constantly "levels the playing field." People don't believe that then they need to take off their rose-colored glasses and look at our society again.

Sorry, but the "life isn't fair" phrase is not garbage. Being an American is all about taking advantage of opportunities and overcoming adversity. The same goes for creating a good football program. Metropolitan areas do enjoy certain advantages over rural districts, but that just makes state championships by teams like Belfry and Bourbon County all the more sweet.

 

I don't like and don't support the federal and state's involvement in local school district any more than absolutely necessary and I certainly don't support the KHSAA trying to level the playing field between the haves and have nots. Obviously, there are many examples of the government attempting to impose their vision of "fairness" on schools and invidividuals. My post was not about what is - but what should be. PepRock pointed out some of the reasons that open enrollment is not a panacea for rural Kentucky school disricts and I appreciate the fact that somebody from an urban background understands the tangible differences between urban and rural schools when it comes to building strong football programs.

 

Rural schools need to deal the hands that they were dealt, but (to paraphrase Ann Richards), supporters of certain strong urban programs, who find themselves on third base should not think that they just hit a triple.

[All Play No Work]

As we have discussed before, great in theory for urban schools, but does nothing but widen the gap with rural schools.

 

I agree that it does nothing but widen the gap with rural schools but until we start seeing KHSAA proposals for separate championships for Urban and Rural schools I'll address the current proposals of Private versus Public. Once that is out of the way, I'll be right here to address the Urban versus Rural unlevel playing field.

[doubledeuce]

Wanted to point out that according to the NKY newspapers and the superintendent at Beechwood, what you say actually hurts them. Because of the funds they draw from a local standpoint, the money they draw from the state is reduced. If they need more money and wish to raise taxes locally to gather those funds, then the money they receive from the state is even further reduced.

 

Fred Bassett, Superintendent at Beechwood, as been a VOCAL critic of the funding formula and explaining many times how Beechwood is being hampered in the funding they have because they are a "rich" district.

 

 

As far as the idea of charging tuition and that putting you on an equal basis with privates. No it does not. If I am not mistaken, (and don't believe I am because LC just got in trouble for it), scholarships, financial aid, etc can be provided to those students that can't afford it. Those same scholarships, etc will not be an option for a student through open enrollment to attend a school out of district.

 

So, where the private school would receive the money from some fund, the public school would receive $0.

 

As far as the "life isn't fair" garbage that has consistently been thrown out there, life in the USA is all about leveling the playing field. We have minority hiring practices all over the place. You can't hire a MLB manager without interviewing a minority first. The Big 3 automakers just had a meeting with the President and according to the news report, "Seeked his help in 'leveling the playing field' with foreign automakers."

 

The Electoral College that gave us President Bush in 2000 can be seen as "leveling the playing field." How about our tax code of taxing the wealthy and redistributing it to the poor?

 

The USA consistently and constantly "levels the playing field." People don't believe that then they need to take off their rose-colored glasses and look at our society again.

 

Boone County faces the excact same funding issue. Raise our taxes locally get less money from the state. That is one reason the funds for the new high school are no longer available. The new school opening is being pished back. So, now we have every high school in the county busting at the seams but no funds to build a new one. Our state tax money gets redistributed to other districts while our students classrooms are in moduals(double wide trailers).

[BGGreen]

I think another overlooked factor in the rural/urban differences is the amount of quality competition kids get to play as they grow and develop in many sports. Take AAU basketball for example, while many rural areas field some very good teams; chances are they are "area all-star" teams who need to travel quite a bit to find quality competition. The urban schools normally have many teams available, allowing a far greater number of kids to participate; as well as the opportunity for quality competition night in, night out. This is particularly helpful at the younger ages, as kids are still "weeding themselves out" and late blooming kids are getting an opportunity to gain experience, even though they might not be chosen to play on the "better teams". Just another contributing factor IMO.

[tcjkbt]

I attended the Henry Clay-Trinity game last Friday at Henry Clay. What a beautiful facility HC has! Football field, softball/baseball field, etc. And it's all for free. Trinity would die and go to heaven for those types of facilites at no cost..........to say nothing of the school building (at least as it appeared from the outside). Is HC representative of most public schools outside Jefferson County? If so, then the playing field (literally) is pretty darn level right now.

[scooterbob]

You must realize what is meant by those who continually cite a need to "level the playing field". They only use the phrase when they and/or their favorites need a little "boast" to compete- whether it be in athletics, academics, business, finances, or any other area of life. If, by chance, they happen to be on the side of "advantage", then no leveling is needed.

 

The need to "level the playing field" is merely a new excuse for grown ups to use instead of the transparent excuses used by them as children to justify their own shortcomings.

 

I would suggest that maybe they should strive to reach the level of, for example, Trinity instead of trying to bring Trinity down to their level. This suggestion is not popular with many in present day America but It would have struck a positive note with earlier and more motivated generations.

 

The idea of equality (level playing field) in this country was never meant guarantee that all would have exactly the same advantages. That won't happen, athletically or otherwise, in a reasonably free (though hedging somewhat in recent years) society.

[BrewDog]

I attended the Henry Clay-Trinity game last Friday at Henry Clay. What a beautiful facility HC has! Football field, softball/baseball field, etc. And it's all for free. Trinity would die and go to heaven for those types of facilites at no cost..........to say nothing of the school building (at least as it appeared from the outside). Is HC representative of most public schools outside Jefferson County? If so, then the playing field (literally) is pretty darn level right now.

 

I don't quite understand. Why don't the Trinity parents just send their kids to nicer schools and facilities like Henry Clay and save their money? If that was sarcasm in your post, I apologize, but it sounded sincere.

[kissinger]

Sorry, but you are wrong there. In my county for instance, the county schools limit the number of students that can attend our independent school. If they could they would eliminate it. We don't have free choice in Kentucky. Until our legislature agrees to let our tax monies follow the child, and let the parents decide on a school, we won't have this option. Some do , granted, but many do not.

You do have the RIGHT as do all public school districts. The money does follow the child when the districts work together on an agreement. Your district has CHOSEN OF ITS OWN VOLITION not to exercise that right. Big difference. That means clearly that local politics has entered into the equation and now to solve it, you seek a state wide issue. Look locally, there's the answer!!