At the risk of appearing stupid, I knew about this success business but I thought it applied to all schools, not just "non boundary" schools. However I noticed tonight that Rochester who won 5 in a row in 4a coming into this year was still in 4a again this year. You mean the 1.65 multiplier wasn't enough for the IHSA, gimme a break already, unless their is another reason for this that I'm unaware of. Someone educate me.
Question? Sucess Factor
- Thread starter king murph
- Start date
I wonder how they are going to feel when 5 private schools bring home state championship trophies next weekend.
I'm beginning to think separation is inevitable. It's done in many other states. Not sure what more tinkering can be done.
easiest thing would be to keep the classes, and get rid of the multiplier. You guarantee a 8A & 7A public champ, I know the IHSA doesn't want to run the risk of private schools dominating 4A-6A, but is having 5 potential private state champs much better? Look no matter what rules, obstacles the IHSA puts in front of private schools, The Haves of the private schools will always find a way to compete. Guarantee yourself at least 2 champions in the highest class and do what you do best and lump all the privates into one bracket and hope somehow a public comes out of 4A-6A.
Is this what I agree with? No. But the IHSA's goal is to have the fewest amount of private schools win championships, this is the best solution other than separating them both completely. Teams Like MC, Montini, and LA will always find a way to compete, adding more rules only hurts bottom tier private schools.
Is this what I agree with? No. But the IHSA's goal is to have the fewest amount of private schools win championships, this is the best solution other than separating them both completely. Teams Like MC, Montini, and LA will always find a way to compete, adding more rules only hurts bottom tier private schools.
The trouble with separation is their is not enough private/non boundary schools to field 2 classes.
For instance in this years playoffs there are 32 p/nb schools total in class 1-8. Also I only count a total of 57 for the whole state (could have missed a few). Best I can figure you would have to split into 4 classes of 8 teams (based on enrollment) this would result in 3 rounds instead of 5. Alot of logistics would have to be worked out. The public schools would contract to 7 classes.
For instance in this years playoffs there are 32 p/nb schools total in class 1-8. Also I only count a total of 57 for the whole state (could have missed a few). Best I can figure you would have to split into 4 classes of 8 teams (based on enrollment) this would result in 3 rounds instead of 5. Alot of logistics would have to be worked out. The public schools would contract to 7 classes.
All.... Tim from the IHSA. "A sport or activity program at a non-boundaried school shall be subject to the success adjustment over the course of the last four school terms, the program has won at least two trophies in the same class one of which must have been within the last two school years. In such a case the school will be moved up one class from the highest class in which the school has won two trophies."
If this is correct does Montini meet the criteria? Ratsy
@cornerrat, I believe they consider a trophy 1st or 2nd place, so yes, 7A next year, and by virtue of a trip to the finals again, 8A in 2017, if I'm not mistaken.
but what if Montini actually wins 7A then 8A, it would be the IHSA (and even other private schools) worse nightmare haha. but it isn't that far fetch at all
All.... But the Broncos were 5A last year. Doesn't the language suggest the bump up will occur only if within the same class? Ratsy
It doesn't suggest it, it says it.
Montini has to win two 6A trophies to get bumped to 7A. That's what the IHSA Policy #17 says.
They would have to change that language, or violate their own policy to move Montini up.
Montini has to win two 6A trophies to get bumped to 7A. That's what the IHSA Policy #17 says.
They would have to change that language, or violate their own policy to move Montini up.
It wouldn't surprise me if they changed the language....I would be surprised if they violated the policy they have right in their governing documents.
8A was 2339 and above. Loyola is 2069 without any multiplier.
I guess if 270 kids is pretty close, they were pretty close.
I guess if 270 kids is pretty close, they were pretty close.
So Montini would have to finish first or second TWO TIMES in 6A before they could be moved to 7A. This is the first year they have ever played in 6A.
At least that is what the IHSA says in Policy #17.
Without looking, I bet open boundary schools are winning a percentage of championships that the numbers suggest they "should" be winning..
What does that mean, "Should" be winning? Joliet Central is not wining the number of games it "should" be winning, so why don't we let them play with 14 players. Why can't some programs or schools just be better than others? Joliet Catholic has had one winning season in basketball in the last 30 years. I don't think that is fair. They "should" win more. I think we need to penalize other schools so JCA has a better chance to win some basketball games.
Last edited:
Thats why should was in quotation marks.. not an excact science, but when two groups of schools play under difference umbrella of rules yet in the same classification, the numbers should balance over the long term.. so when 15% of the schools win 40% of the championships, tells me things arent balanced.. If those same 15% are winning 20% of the basketball titles, the system is probably good enough..
The problem with using just percentages for who "should" win titles is that it's thrown off by any success.
If Simeon wins a state title in basketball, but the other 3 classes are won by schools with boundaries you still have non-boundary schools winning 25% of the titles. If over 2 years you have Simeon and MP win titles in 3A & 4A it now becomes 4 of 8 available (50%) but only won by 2 schools.
Use the multiplier, and if the IHSA wants to have a bump up system for teams that are showing consistent domination in a certain class, apply it to all teams. I don't think back to back title game appearances is dominating a class. Success factor shouldn't take effect until a 3rd title game in 4 seasons. That way the kids who get bumped up will at least had something to do with the success that caused the bump.
While not intending to take this down the usual public vs. private rat hole (particularly just before the greatest weekend of the year), it’s the somewhat arbitrary or convenient use of “winning at a higher percentage than the participation rate” that might be the most frustrating.
35 private schools have made at least one finals appearance. They account for 155 appearances (28%) and 98 titles (37%).
By the same token, there are 35 public schools that account for 182 finals appearances (33%) and 105 titles (39%). Those 35 schools win at a higher percentage that their participation rate, just like the privates, and all have the same thing in common – they have boundaries. So why doesn’t the IHSA multiply and apply the success factor to all of the boundary schools? Because it doesn’t fit their narrative, IMHO.