Good post leatherneck. One of your statements about teams of the same size getting beat year in and year out, struck my attention. Take Montgomery Co and Paris in the same district. Paris will never matchup with GRC and Montgomery Co. therefore never make it out of the district. Knowing that what is to keep the parents from taking their average joe soccer player to clark co. where they already drive everyday to work. In a class system, that family may likely keep their kid their if he has to compete in a district with nicholas co., bath co, and st pat. then in a region with the same size schools and then ultimately against the best say 6-8 teams in the state of that size. I think it would work if people would just open their minds to it.

Khsaa can run a pilot on it or something?

Before this run of seven straight private school championships, there were only three private school championships in the previous 26 years. My question is what has changed in the past seven years than would warrant these championships now when they alludded the privates previously?

Where's the thread about the 15-1 ratio of public to private in the Boy's Sweet Sixteen? Now we have an all-public Elite Eight. Where is the outrage?

Where's the thread about the 15-1 ratio of public to private in the Boy's Sweet Sixteen? Now we have an all-public Elite Eight. Where is the outrage?

 

As far as those posters are concerned, all is right with the world. :creepy: No outrage if the evil private schools get put in their place by the entitled public schools.

Where's the thread about the 15-1 ratio of public to private in the Boy's Sweet Sixteen? Now we have an all-public Elite Eight. Where is the outrage?

 

I have longed held the opinion that if what is going on on the girls' side was going on on the boys' side, this would be an even bigger issue. Domination by one side in volleyball, soccer, basketball, softball over the past 5 years.

 

 

On another note......

Interesting in the Tubby discussion it is all about the last few years trend. But in this argument, it is not just about the last few years trend.

As far as those posters are concerned, all is right with the world. :creepy: No outrage if the evil private schools get put in their place by the entitled public schools.

FOR SOME, this is not different of a point than taxing the wealthy.:sssh:

FOR SOME, this is not different of a point than taxing the wealthy.:sssh:

 

 

Now you got me started on taxing the wealthy. The top 1% of taxpayers pay approx 35% of the taxes. I'm sorry, but that is just wrong. People are wealthy because they work hard and take huge financial risks (many millionaires have had to file bankruptcy in the past due to past failures, but God bless them, they kept taking risks) or because their parents or grandparents did so. There is no good reason why they should be taxed more. I'm obviously not a fan of the progressive income tax. Sorry for the hi jack.

Now you got me started on taxing the wealthy. The top 1% of taxpayers pay approx 35% of the taxes. I'm sorry, but that is just wrong. People are wealthy because they work hard and take huge financial risks (many millionaires have had to file bankruptcy in the past due to past failures, but God bless them, they kept taking risks) or because their parents or grandparents did so. There is no good reason why they should be taxed more. I'm obviously not a fan of the progressive income tax. Sorry for the hi jack.

Bill Gates kid work hard?

Paris Hilton work hard?

Great topic to take to P & R but we probably need to stop here with the actual discussion.

 

My point, and I have been enlightened by posters like RM that THIS IS NOT TRUE, is that some see attending a private school is a wealthy thing to do and it is nothing but those born with a silver spoon in their mouth getting the break once again.

 

I once held that view but as I said, BGPers have helped change my view on that.

Where's the thread about the 15-1 ratio of public to private in the Boy's Sweet Sixteen? Now we have an all-public Elite Eight. Where is the outrage?

If you have a problem with it or something constructive to say about it, then start one ...

FOR SOME, this is not different of a point than taxing the wealthy.:sssh:

 

Except.....that the wealthy in this case are the public schools. Look at the facts:

 

 

Look at the vast majority of private schools. What finances do privates have that outweigh public finances? Would your school trade its situation with Louisville DeSales, a private school? Compare DeSales with the advantages of your public school. Your public school has the initial multimillion dollar head start when it was built for you by tax revenues paid in part by the parents of DeSales students. Athletic facilities? DeSales has no football stadium. Your local public high school probably has a stadium. Throw a couple more million on the ledger in your favor. Those same DeSales kids’ parents paid in part for your stadium. Still believe DeSales is the wealthy school vis-a-vis your public school? Don’t forget teachers’ salaries. Every year the tab comes due for this bill. DeSales' supporters pay this entirely out of their pockets. The government pays all of this bill for your institution. Did we discuss furnishing that empty multimillion dollar school facility you were given? Desks, labs, lockers…. You may have taken these for granted, something the blue collar parents of DeSales students, located in a blue collar neighborhood, are acutely aware of. We still haven’t discussed support staff. Somebody has to keep the physical plant operational and clean. Set aside another huge block of money-every day. Is your desire to trade with DeSales for their hypothetical "wealth" waning? It just gets worse. We haven’t discussed medical benefits, pensions and vacation pay for teachers and support staff. And don’t forget building upkeep, expansion, legal expenses and myriad other expenses that go into providing a first class education to young people. Now substitute Covington Catholic, St. Henry, Mercy, Pres, Christian Academy,Lexington Christian or most other privates. If you are honest, you will admit that the financial playing field is not level, but it tilts in a direction that many do not want to admit, and this exists whether rural or urban.

My intent with this post is not to criticize, but to clear up a misstatement.

Except.....that the wealthy in this case are the public schools. Look at the facts:

 

 

Look at the vast majority of private schools. What finances do privates have that outweigh public finances? Would your school trade its situation with Louisville DeSales, a private school? Compare DeSales with the advantages of your public school. Your public school has the initial multimillion dollar head start when it was built for you by tax revenues paid in part by the parents of DeSales students. Athletic facilities? DeSales has no football stadium. Your local public high school probably has a stadium. Throw a couple more million on the ledger in your favor. Those same DeSales kids’ parents paid in part for your stadium. Still believe DeSales is the wealthy school vis-a-vis your public school? Don’t forget teachers’ salaries. Every year the tab comes due for this bill. DeSales' supporters pay this entirely out of their pockets. The government pays all of this bill for your institution. Did we discuss furnishing that empty multimillion dollar school facility you were given? Desks, labs, lockers…. You may have taken these for granted, something the blue collar parents of DeSales students, located in a blue collar neighborhood, are acutely aware of. We still haven’t discussed support staff. Somebody has to keep the physical plant operational and clean. Set aside another huge block of money-every day. Is your desire to trade with DeSales for their hypothetical "wealth" waning? It just gets worse. We haven’t discussed medical benefits, pensions and vacation pay for teachers and support staff. And don’t forget building upkeep, expansion, legal expenses and myriad other expenses that go into providing a first class education to young people. Now substitute Covington Catholic, St. Henry, Mercy, Pres, Christian Academy,Lexington Christian or most other privates. If you are honest, you will admit that the financial playing field is not level, but it tilts in a direction that many do not want to admit, and this exists whether rural or urban.

My intent with this post is not to criticize, but to clear up a misstatement.

Missing my point that some have.

 

The weathly is the people SENDING their kids to the private schools. Not necessarily the schools themselves.

 

REMEMBER for those that start reading here, I said that BGP posters have changed my view and I realize that this is not true, but some still hold that view. Now I have no problem of you guys posting on it to prove this wrong, just don't attack me about it.:thumb:

Missing my point that some have.

 

The weathly is the people SENDING their kids to the private schools. Not necessarily the schools themselves.

:lol: :lol: :lol: It all depends on one's definition of wealth I suppose.

 

What people think, and what is actually the truth are not always aligned. Money, although handy to have, is nothing but an excuse.

 

I cannot speak for all the big boys, but I do know for a fact that the finances of families who send their kids to Rose Hill in Ashland do not vary all that much from those of families in surrounding public schools. The difference is simply to be found in priorities and philosophy. Although RH's tuition and fees are substantially lower than those of larger private schools elsewhere in the state, many families sacrifice certain wants and some needs to send their kids to the Hill. Many could have a bigger house, a better boat, a Harley, a four-wheeler or a nicer car with what they choose to invest in their kid's schooling.

 

Diogenes makes some excellent points. Every public school in the 16th Region has superior academic and athletic facilities to those of Rose Hill, as well as a significantly deeper financial well from which to draw. In this regard it is fair to say that many private schools have to do more with less.

 

It is unfair, but then, very few things in life are truly fair.

 

If the public proponents were to truly "level the playing field" in every actual area of inequity, private schools would gain an even larger edge... at least until they grew complacent from not having to work as hard. :lol:

Missing my point that some have.

 

The weathly is the people SENDING their kids to the private schools. Not necessarily the schools themselves.

 

REMEMBER for those that start reading here, I said that BGP posters have changed my view and I realize that this is not true, but some still hold that view. Now I have no problem of you guys posting on it to prove this wrong, just don't attack me about it.:thumb:

 

You are correct, I misunderstood your point. However, now that I understand your point I still disagree with your point. It really is not "The weathly is the people SENDING their kids to the private schools." We can use my earlier post as a useful analogy for this point. DeSales is located in a blue-collar neighborhood. Virtually all of their students come from blue-collar families. Compare the demographics of their school with, for example, Atherton, Wagner, Oldham County, Fort Thomas, Eastern or Ballard. You would find that each of those schools has proportionally a much greater percentage of "wealthy" families than does DeSales. On the other hand, you could compare the proportion of "wealthy" families from St. X or Trinity to Shawnee or Western and find that the private schools in that analysis had a higher percentage of "wealthy" families.

BTW, I did not mean to "attack" you in my earlier post and apologize if it seemed strident. Your posts are generally well thought out and your tone is calm and rational. These boards would be better off if all posters were as rational and calm as you.:thumb:

If you have a problem with it or something constructive to say about it, then start one ...

 

Having something constructive to say has never been a prerequisite for many of those that favor a split.