At what point do teams like Naz and JC move up like Montini and Sacred Heart and face some tougher competition? Same with Rochester.
Playoff football
- Thread starter Ndrfootball1132
- Start date
All.... Haven't heard one Rocket fan yet in favor of that. As for my Catholic brothers in arm the latest discrimination the "success factor" or as I call it the Catholic Success Tax (CST) will force their hand when they meet the criteria. Ratsy
SF is applied after a team wins or makes title game twice every 4 years, LA actually would be SF'd this year for making 8A title game in '11 and '13 but there is no 9A. It must be same class as well. JC would be bumped to 6A in 2017 if they get to 5A title in Nov and next season. Naz would have to get to 5A title game this year and in 1 of next 2 seasons get back to 5A or 6A title games.
This is why I am of the belief that JC and Naz are on opposite sides of the 1-16 groupings. Cannot have them knocking each other out before title game so they can get them in 6A. Easiest thing to accomplish that would be FE though.
This is why I am of the belief that JC and Naz are on opposite sides of the 1-16 groupings. Cannot have them knocking each other out before title game so they can get them in 6A. Easiest thing to accomplish that would be FE though.
Last edited:
Where would you like them to move? Last year Nazareth was 6A this year most likely 5A. Your assumption that the competition isn't tough is based on success against the competition they played. If either loses to someone other than Naz/JCA does that make the competion tough enough?
The Success Factor was designed to do exactly what you are proposing (for Non-Boundry schools only)
The Success Factor was designed to do exactly what you are proposing (for Non-Boundry schools only)
Exactly last year Naz wins 6A and this year they drop down to 5A? I understand the SF rule but why wouldn't Rochester want to move up??
You do understand that classes are designated by enrollment. Naz isn't choosing to play in 5A this year, they are playing in the class based on their multiplied enrollment.
Yes I do understand. The enrollment numbers for each class is a moving number each year. Given they won 6A last year they should have the option to play in 6A and defend their Championship. Naz and JCA look to be the cream of the crop in 5A.
USD,
That is true but when you petition to play up it carries a minimum 2 year commitment to that level. If the SF kicks in it may then require you to move up again. With the rules for non-boundried schools in a constant state of flux it's difficult to risk the request without a clearcut rule that can't be changed.
That is true but when you petition to play up it carries a minimum 2 year commitment to that level. If the SF kicks in it may then require you to move up again. With the rules for non-boundried schools in a constant state of flux it's difficult to risk the request without a clearcut rule that can't be changed.
I agree with you, I was just stating they have the option. I would say Naz belongs in 5A this year. If someone has a problem with them playing 5A, just point to the two loses they have already suffered to 5A teams during the regular season.
I hope someone can explain something to me which I still do not understand: Why is there a "Success Factor" for non-boundaried schools when the multiplier was supposed to have been the equalizing factor between them and the boundaried schools? For the time being, I put the "Success Factor" in quotes on purpose, since until and unless it applies to ALL schools, it seems more appropriate to call it the Punishment for Non-Boundaried Schools Success Factor.
Because guys like ramblin lobbied for it, they felt that not all open boundary schools should be treated equally..
I thought because it is called a "success factor" and they clearly have been the most successful team in the state in relation to their class.
When the IHSA committee made up of both public and private people made the recommendation for this, it was very clearly for the open boundary schools..
All.... N
All.... Not equal numbers representing the two sides. (go figure) And yes it was clearly aimed for open boundary (let's get real Catholic) schools. Ratsy
All.... Not equal numbers representing the two sides. (go figure) And yes it was clearly aimed for open boundary (let's get real Catholic) schools. Ratsy
I'm aware of that, my point is after 5 state championships in a row, wouldn't they want to see what they can do against other schools? They have built a fantastic program, seems they need to a bigger test?
All.... Stack the deck all you want. What I want is the discrimination to end. Ratsy
Maybe representation could be proportioned based on the number of zip codes represented within each school's enrollment
You have the rules advantages... how are you possibly being discriminated against???? You seem to have a serious problem with the IHSA trying to at least partially take away that advantage, I get that...
All....You are entitled to your opinion and shall I say parochial conclusions. Ratsy
The cornerat has a "problem" with it because when the multiplier was adopted teh IHSA went out of its way to document its analysis of the situation and that the multiplier of 1.65 was justified based on the studies they conducted. The "Success Factor" now being implemented is viewed by many as moving the goal posts to yet again punish certain, but not all teams. I for one hope Rochester keeps on rolling up the championships to show that having success is not all about being a non-boundary school . The fact that some coaches and administrators obviously can't get their minds around this or will not admit it says volumes!!
your new inquiry to a 18 month old topic is timely. Your innocent question speaks to heart of the discrimination in the ruling. I believe the IHSA has moved away from calling it an out right "success factor" due to Rochester being the most successful football program in its class, and NOT being subjected to the rule because it is publicly funded. I think anyone who knows anything about high school sports knows that boundaried schools are not really boundary when they have people recently move to the HS district and then move out of the district when certain kids no longer play sports. the whole notion that public schools have no advantages over private schools is truly senseless and has been widely debated on this site.
All.... Actually you have it backwards. They did not do a comprehensive study but attached an artificial number (1.65) without an in depth study. It would of been easy by the all powerful OZ (the IHSA) to demand from private schools to submit lists every year from students that attended those respective schools from what would be considered outside their school districts and determine the relative impact of just that. I think they would be surprised from what they would of found. Then determine what discriminatory "tax" would be relative. Ratsy P.S. Hinterland give you a call Thursday, state workers misbehaving (lol) have to run,(
Two fair things to do...
1. Place all open enrollment schools in separate classes..
2. Open up athletic boundaries in all districts, not just private/certain CPS schooll..
1. Place all open enrollment schools in separate classes..
2. Open up athletic boundaries in all districts, not just private/certain CPS schooll..