HAIL TO THE PRIVATE SCHOOLS!!!

[OLDSCHOOL82]

I believe by the 2016 season kickoff.... you lads may have a solution figured out to all this.

[ReddieKnightTrojan]

I believe by the 2016 season kickoff.... you lads may have a solution figured out to all this.

Don't hold your breath...private schools want to be accepted, and public schools want to beat private schools but can't. 

[ReddieKnightTrojan]

When a potential playoff bracket could consist of:

29 teams that have 3,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 30,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 60,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 300,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,

the POTENTIAL for abuse exists.

But zero evidence that it has occurred.

By the way, there are only 2 private schools in 3A, who is the the public school in the above list with the potential for abuse.

Incidentally, neither ESC nor HA draws their students (and student-athletes) from the the population at large within a certain distance of their campuses, but from a smaller subset of those populations.

ECS draws its students from the lower number of potential students who can/are willing to meet its rigorous academic standards.

HA draws almost all its students from members of a particular conservative religious group. Those not a part of that group must be willing to adhere to their strict behavioral guidelines. That excludes much of the population cited in the quoted post.

None of us are really concerned with where they draw their students from...we're concerned with where they draw their football players from. Like sons of college and NFL players. They can also provide their coaches with "perks" that public schools boosters can't afford.

*no proof, just rambling

[CoolBreeze]

There has been a good debate going on about the private schools on the 5A board this season. If you want to read it, you are welcome to. But to deny any advantages is ludicrous.

Yet another bald assertion. Has no more validity than for me to say to deny that private schools are a t a disadvantage is ludicrous.

[cdelaney]

I believe by the 2016 season kickoff.... you lads may have a solution figured out to all this.

Optimist!

[CoolBreeze]

When a potential playoff bracket could consist of:

29 teams that have 3,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 30,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 60,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 300,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,

the POTENTIAL for abuse exists.

But zero evidence that it has occurred.

By the way, there are only 2 private schools in 3A, who is the the public school in the above list with the potential for abuse.

Incidentally, neither ESC nor HA draws their students (and student-athletes) from the the population at large within a certain distance of their campuses, but from a smaller subset of those populations.

ECS draws its students from the lower number of potential students who can/are willing to meet its rigorous academic standards.

HA draws almost all its students from members of a particular conservative religious group. Those not a part of that group must be willing to adhere to their strict behavioral guidelines. That excludes much of the population cited in the quoted post.

None of us are really concerned with where they draw their students from...we're concerned with where they draw their football players from. Like sons of college and NFL players. They can also provide their coaches with "perks" that public schools boosters can't afford.

*no proof, just rambling

I agree that you provided no proof, just rambling.

In case you haven't figured it out, all schools get their football players from their student bodies, public or private. I would assume that the Ty Mote's father, for example is a former college football player at some level, because he is the head football coach at HA. Should he be disallowed to play at HA because his father played college football. I'd be willing to wager that most public school coaches played college football. Should their sons be required to play elsewhere? 

Moreover, this just is another generic allegation of "perks" for private school coaches.

What are these perks? Who receives them? It would be nice if someone could do a study which identified the total compensation packages of all 3A coaches. I think it would surprise you who is highest paid and who is lowest. Expand it to all AAA schools and, with few exceptions, private school coaches would still be near the bottom.

[Longfellow]

When a potential playoff bracket could consist of:

29 teams that have 3,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 30,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 60,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 300,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,

the POTENTIAL for abuse exists.

But zero evidence that it has occurred.

By the way, there are only 2 private schools in 3A, who is the the public school in the above list with the potential for abuse.

Incidentally, neither ESC nor HA draws their students (and student-athletes) from the the population at large within a certain distance of their campuses, but from a smaller subset of those populations.

ECS draws its students from the lower number of potential students who can/are willing to meet its rigorous academic standards.

HA draws almost all its students from members of a particular conservative religious group. Those not a part of that group must be willing to adhere to their strict behavioral guidelines. That excludes much of the population cited in the quoted post.

None of us are really concerned with where they draw their students from...we're concerned with where they draw their football players from. Like sons of college and NFL players. They can also provide their coaches with "perks" that public schools boosters can't afford.

*no proof, just rambling

I agree that you provided no proof, just rambling.

In case you haven't figured it out, all schools get their football players from their student bodies, public or private. I would assume that the Ty Mote's father, for example is a former college football player at some level, because he is the head football coach at HA. Should he be disallowed to play at HA because his father played college football. I'd be willing to wager that most public school coaches played college football. Should their sons be required to play elsewhere? 

Moreover, this just is another generic allegation of "perks" for private school coaches.

What are these perks? Who receives them? It would be nice if someone could do a study which identified the total compensation packages of all 3A coaches. I think it would surprise you who is highest paid and who is lowest. Expand it to all AAA schools and, with few exceptions, private school coaches would still be near the bottom.

I highly doubt that the majority of coaches played college football

[HorseFeathers]

When a potential playoff bracket could consist of:

29 teams that have 3,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 30,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 60,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,
  1 team that has 300,000 people living within a 15-20 mile radius of campus,

the POTENTIAL for abuse exists.

But zero evidence that it has occurred.

By the way, there are only 2 private schools in 3A, who is the the public school in the above list with the potential for abuse.

Incidentally, neither ESC nor HA draws their students (and student-athletes) from the the population at large within a certain distance of their campuses, but from a smaller subset of those populations.

ECS draws its students from the lower number of potential students who can/are willing to meet its rigorous academic standards.

HA draws almost all its students from members of a particular conservative religious group. Those not a part of that group must be willing to adhere to their strict behavioral guidelines. That excludes much of the population cited in the quoted post.

None of us are really concerned with where they draw their students from...we're concerned with where they draw their football players from. Like sons of college and NFL players. They can also provide their coaches with "perks" that public schools boosters can't afford.

*no proof, just rambling

I agree that you provided no proof, just rambling.

In case you haven't figured it out, all schools get their football players from their student bodies, public or private. I would assume that the Ty Mote's father, for example is a former college football player at some level, because he is the head football coach at HA. Should he be disallowed to play at HA because his father played college football. I'd be willing to wager that most public school coaches played college football. Should their sons be required to play elsewhere? 

Moreover, this just is another generic allegation of "perks" for private school coaches.

What are these perks? Who receives them? It would be nice if someone could do a study which identified the total compensation packages of all 3A coaches. I think it would surprise you who is highest paid and who is lowest. Expand it to all AAA schools and, with few exceptions, private school coaches would still be near the bottom.

One problem...private schooljs don't make their salaried public information

[Black and Gold]

Lol you people seem to forget that Ozark JV would stomp every private school in AR

[cdelaney]

Lol you people seem to forget that Ozark JV would stomp every private school in AR

Glad they're not on EC$ schedule for sure.

[Pokey03]

No other state allows private schools to play with public schools its common sense they can recruit by just waiving the admission fee for a good player. Needs to be done away with.

If you're going to make a statement of fact, back it up with proof.  No private school is allowed to waive fees or tuition for athletes.  That are allowed to award scholarships based on need, but the school doesn't make that determination- a third party does for all students, not just athletes.

PA Dad,

Thanks for providing factual information to refute an oft repeated allegation as to why it's not fair to require public schools to compete with private schools.

However, you omitted the other statement of alleged fact in the cited post: That no other state allows private schools to play with public schools.

The fact that a couple of adjacent states separate public and private schools does not establish that all other states do so. In fact, just a few years ago, I watched Valle High, a Catholic school from Perryville, play for a Missouri state championship on Fox Sports Midwest. I don't remember what class it was, but they played a public school.

Valle Catholic is a private school in St. Gen., MO about 50 miles south of St. Louis, they compete in the 2A which would be 3A in Arkansas due to size difference in Missouri schools, but they are in a conference with other private school and public. They completely dominate that class and have for years.

[CoolBreeze]

No other state allows private schools to play with public schools its common sense they can recruit by just waiving the admission fee for a good player. Needs to be done away with.

If you're going to make a statement of fact, back it up with proof.  No private school is allowed to waive fees or tuition for athletes.  That are allowed to award scholarships based on need, but the school doesn't make that determination- a third party does for all students, not just athletes.

PA Dad,

Thanks for providing factual information to refute an oft repeated allegation as to why it's not fair to require public schools to compete with private schools.

However, you omitted the other statement of alleged fact in the cited post: That no other state allows private schools to play with public schools.

The fact that a couple of adjacent states separate public and private schools does not establish that all other states do so. In fact, just a few years ago, I watched Valle High, a Catholic school from Perryville, play for a Missouri state championship on Fox Sports Midwest. I don't remember what class it was, but they played a public school.

Valle Catholic is a private school in St. Gen., MO about 50 miles south of St. Louis, they compete in the 2A which would be 3A in Arkansas due to size difference in Missouri schools, but they are in a conference with other private school and public. They completely dominate that class and have for years.

Thanks for the correction. It has been over 30 years since I lived in SE MO.

[gameoflife]

No other state allows private schools to play with public schools its common sense they can recruit by just waiving the admission fee for a good player. Needs to be done away with.

If you're going to make a statement of fact, back it up with proof.  No private school is allowed to waive fees or tuition for athletes.  That are allowed to award scholarships based on need, but the school doesn't make that determination- a third party does for all students, not just athletes.

I'm curious.  What keeps the private schools from waiving fees or tuition?   In as far as having an advantage? Why do parents send their children to private school?  Are there entrance requirements? Can students be denied admittance at a private school? 

[PA Dad]

No other state allows private schools to play with public schools its common sense they can recruit by just waiving the admission fee for a good player. Needs to be done away with.

If you're going to make a statement of fact, back it up with proof.  No private school is allowed to waive fees or tuition for athletes.  That are allowed to award scholarships based on need, but the school doesn't make that determination- a third party does for all students, not just athletes.

I'm curious.  What keeps the private schools from waiving fees or tuition?   In as far as having an advantage? Why do parents send their children to private school?  Are there entrance requirements? Can students be denied admittance at a private school?

Please see the thread on the 5A board.  I've addressed all of these questions and posted the regulations.

[freethrow]

No other state allows private schools to play with public schools its common sense they can recruit by just waiving the admission fee for a good player. Needs to be done away with.

If you're going to make a statement of fact, back it up with proof.  No private school is allowed to waive fees or tuition for athletes.  That are allowed to award scholarships based on need, but the school doesn't make that determination- a third party does for all students, not just athletes.

I'm curious.  What keeps the private schools from waiving fees or tuition?   In as far as having an advantage? Why do parents send their children to private school?  Are there entrance requirements? Can students be denied admittance at a private school?

AAA Handbook - page 45 - http://members.ahsaa.org/public/userfiles/Admin/2015-16_AAA_Handbook.pdf

[gameoflife]

And as for having an advantage? Or, why parents send their children to private school.  What are the requirements for admission and can a student be denied admittance?

[PA Dad]

And as for having an advantage? Or, why parents send their children to private school.  What are the requirements for admission and can a student be denied admittance?

I have a child at PA.  I put her there because I think it's the school that will give her the best education.

Each school sets its own admission requirements.  At PA, you have to take a standardized test and score at a specified level,  submit a writing sample and have good grades at any prior school.

Students can be denied admittance.  Many are.

[gameoflife]

Ok, so there is a pretty clear advantage for private school athletic programs.  Entrance exams, admission standards.  That likely results in smarter students, smarter athletes.  That just isn't fair to the public schools who have to take every lazy, non intellectual that wants to move into the public school district. Parents willing to spend the extra money to help their child achieve at a higher level?

[cdelaney]

Ok, so there is a pretty clear advantage for private school athletic programs.  Entrance exams, admission standards.  That likely results in smarter students, smarter athletes.  That just isn't fair to the public schools who have to take every lazy, non intellectual that wants to move into the public school district. Parents willing to spend the extra money to help their child achieve at a higher level?

Smart athletes good; athletic athletes better. I can assure that ECS has lost more athletes by their admission and retention standards than they have gained.
And I'll ignore your insult to public school kids.

[gameoflife]

Insult?  Just the truth regarding some students. Not all but some.  Same students are better athletes.

[PA Dad]

Ok, so there is a pretty clear advantage for private school athletic programs.  Entrance exams, admission standards.  That likely results in smarter students, smarter athletes.  That just isn't fair to the public schools who have to take every lazy, non intellectual that wants to move into the public school district. Parents willing to spend the extra money to help their child achieve at a higher level?

I am certainly willing to spend extra money to help my child achieve at a higher level.  I think nearly every parent who can afford to do so would agree.

I agree that, as a rule, private schools have better students and smarter athletes.  But, they have to play up a classification which means they are at a disadvantage when it comes to numbers.

And, while some private schools have done well at football, many have not.  Most of the successful football programs are public (JC, PB, GW, Fayetteville, Bentonville, Charlestown, Warren, Nashville, etc.)

[gameoflife]

I think if you check the numbers you will find participation at private schools tend to be elevated when compared to public schools concerning extra curricular activities, i.e. athletics. This is due to the closer monitoring of parents from private schools.  so private have several advantages. Also, there are lots and lots of public schools who do not do well at football.  Eligibility issues, apathy, parents who are not involved.  Private school success, PA, Shiloh, ECS, Harding, Catholic. not all of these right now but in their own time.   So given all this I'd say private are not at  a disadvantage.

[gameoflife]

The only people who think private are at a disadvantage are private folks.

[PA Dad]

The only people who think private are at a disadvantage are private folks.

I, for one, have never said privates are at a disadvantage.  There are advantages to private schools.  The AAA has attempted to even out the playing field by making privates play up a classification.  If you look at the numbers, that has worked pretty well.

[cdelaney]

The only people who think private are at a disadvantage are private folks.

I guess my main issue is that none of the public school advocates/private school haters ever seem to consider the things that do have a negative effect on the private schools. The specific things that have made PA so successful don't apply at the 3A pvt schools.

[gameoflife]

So maybe you would list the many disadvantages of attending a private school. 

[MDXPHD]

So maybe you would list the many disadvantages of attending a private school.

They have to meet strict academic standards that prepare those poor kids for the future. This means they can't get the best athletes because the best athletes are dumb. They also have to excel in the classroom, so this limits the number of good athletes as well. It's a tough life, I know. The hardship of picking whether to eat at Copeland's or Arthur's is too much for some.

[cdelaney]

So maybe you would list the many disadvantages of attending a private school.

They have to meet strict academic standards that prepare those poor kids for the future. This means they can't get the best athletes because the best athletes are dumb. They also have to excel in the classroom, so this limits the number of good athletes as well. It's a tough life, I know. The hardship of picking whether to eat at Copeland's or Arthur's is too much for some.

Ignoring your sarcasm, it is true there are many good athletes who cannot meet the academic standards of some private schools. Overall, the academic requirements prevent some kids who are good athletes from either getting into or staying in private schools. You can accept this or not, it is true.
The main disadvantages private schools face in sports are the playing up a level, and the different impact on kids who want to transfer into private schools: sitting out a year.
I have never brought up anything about privates being at a disadvantage; only respond when someone has said privates have a huge advantage without pointing out the other side. I personally think the academic opportunity makes it worth it.

[CoolBreeze]

So maybe you would list the many disadvantages of attending a private school.

They have to meet strict academic standards that prepare those poor kids for the future. This means they can't get the best athletes because the best athletes are dumb. They also have to excel in the classroom, so this limits the number of good athletes as well. It's a tough life, I know. The hardship of picking whether to eat at Copeland's or Arthur's is too much for some.

As you well know, not all athletes are dumb. To go back quite a few years, Bill Bradley who played for the NY Knicks was a Rhodes scholar. I can think of other ]professional athletes who are or were quite intelligent. That said, you are also well aware that not all talented athletes are equally talented in the classroom. Some people who are physically gifted are not intellectually gifted. Others lack the motivation to do well academically. Yet many of these less successful students are among the most successful on the football field and/or the basketball court.

[Jimbo Morphis]

So maybe you would list the many disadvantages of attending a private school.

They have to meet strict academic standards that prepare those poor kids for the future. This means they can't get the best athletes because the best athletes are dumb. They also have to excel in the classroom, so this limits the number of good athletes as well. It's a tough life, I know. The hardship of picking whether to eat at Copeland's or Arthur's is too much for some.

As you well know, not all athletes are dumb. To go back quite a few years, Bill Bradley who played for the NY Knicks was a Rhodes scholar. I can think of other ]professional athletes who are or were quite intelligent. That said, you are also well aware that not all talented athletes are equally talented in the classroom. Some people who are physically gifted are not intellectually gifted. Others lack the motivation to do well academically. Yet many of these less successful students are among the most successful on the football field and/or the basketball court.

and many are broke 2 years after finishing their career.

[OLDSCHOOL82]

What percentage of male students per grade in a private school participate in, lets say, football versus the number of male students in a public school? 

[cdelaney]

What percentage of male students per grade in a private school participate in, lets say, football versus the number of male students in a public school?

Can only speak for ECS and the past 10 years or so. There are usually ~50-55 students per grade level, roughly equal male/female. So out of 25-28 male students, there are usually 10 or so on the FB team per grade level; up until the past 3 years, there were usually only 2-4 seniors per year because the kids got tired of getting their brains beat out so they quit FB. We've had 6, 13, and 13 Seniors the past three years.
Out of the 10 or so per grade, there are probably 2-3 who would not even try to play at a public school; no real athletic ability at all, just doing it to be part of the team, and not much playing time.
Another quirk at ECS, we have virtually no off season program in FB, as most of the kids are playing other sports and the coaches are coaching other sports or are teaching classes. We try to squeeze in a couple of weeks of Spring practice after baseball is over; just don't have enough to make it worthwhile until then. Those of you who have followed a successful 3A or 4A program over the years would be shocked if you compared your program to ours. Night and day different.

[OLDSCHOOL82]

Thanks cd.  Anyone know the numbers for Harding or PA?  If not,  I'll do some digging tomorrow and see if it's public.

[PA Dad]

What percentage of male students per grade in a private school participate in, lets say, football versus the number of male students in a public school?

PA has about 100 students per grade, roughly half male/female. This year, there were 58 players on the football roster for grades 10-12.    So, out of 50 boys per grade, about 20 play football.

I have no idea about the numbers for public schools.

[freethrow]

Thanks cd.  Anyone know the numbers for Harding or PA?  If not,  I'll do some digging tomorrow and see if it's public.

2016-17

3A Numbers
Largest - Rivercrest 294
Smallest - Harding 166 (ECS - 167) (Smallest Public - Junction City 186)

5A Numbers
Largest - Maumelle 823
Smallest - PA 301 (LRC - 406) (Smallest Public - Morrilton 502)

[Black and Gold]

Did you mean ECS in your post, freethrow?

[OLDSCHOOL82]

The reason I asked.  PA has roughly 40% of the males in each grade that participate?  So the quality may be better and more come out?  I'm am not against privates by any means.  Just looking at all the angles.  What percentage of the public schools on average play? 

[bleudog]

Here's how the court systems in Missouri and Arkansas saw the advantages private schools have when the Activities Associations in those states were sued and had to defend their multipliers:

"MSHSAA responded in its brief with 10 possible advantages: private schools have higher percentages of athletic participation, larger attendance areas, are in more densely populated regions, have greater opportunities for skill development, have the opportunity for students to selectively attend their schools, control enrollments, have selective admissions, do not admit 21-year-olds, do not have alternative education students, and have lower drop-out rates (Mayse, 2002)."

"The Pulaski County Circuit Court denied the motion after citing 12 differences between public and private schools in its findings of fact: private schools have higher participation rates (citing the Alabama study), are not required to educate handicapped and developmentally disabled students, have higher parental involvement rates, have the ability to attract foreign students under different conditions, are not required to limit extracurricular activities to only one period per day, do not have boundaries, do not have salary limits on coaches and are not required to publish the salaries, have no budget restraints on facilities, have won state championships at a higher percentage rate, do not have English as a second language students who are less likely to participate, have the ability to cap enrollment, and have the ability of their students to practice at summer workouts while public schools could not because they have jobs (Associated Press, 2006)"

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005884.pdf

[PA Dad]

Here's how the court systems in Missouri and Arkansas saw the advantages private schools have when the Activities Associations in those states were sued and had to defend their multipliers:

"MSHSAA responded in its brief with 10 possible advantages: private schools have higher percentages of athletic participation, larger attendance areas, are in more densely populated regions, have greater opportunities for skill development, have the opportunity for students to selectively attend their schools, control enrollments, have selective admissions, do not admit 21-year-olds, do not have alternative education students, and have lower drop-out rates (Mayse, 2002)."

"The Pulaski County Circuit Court denied the motion after citing 12 differences between public and private schools in its findings of fact: private schools have higher participation rates (citing the Alabama study), are not required to educate handicapped and developmentally disabled students, have higher parental involvement rates, have the ability to attract foreign students under different conditions, are not required to limit extracurricular activities to only one period per day, do not have boundaries, do not have salary limits on coaches and are not required to publish the salaries, have no budget restraints on facilities, have won state championships at a higher percentage rate, do not have English as a second language students who are less likely to participate, have the ability to cap enrollment, and have the ability of their students to practice at summer workouts while public schools could not because they have jobs (Associated Press, 2006)"

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005884.pdf

That is the best, most comprehensive explanation of the advantages that private schools have that I have seen.

[MDXPHD]

That does pretty much sum up the advantages. Now, what can we do to level the playing field? It's obvious that playing up a classification doesn't impact certain privates, so why don't we go to a success advancement system?

[Black and Gold]

If we go with that success advancement, how long will they stay in their classification? Or would it be until the next cycle?

[MDXPHD]

If we go with that success advancement, how long will they stay in their classification? Or would it be until the next cycle?

I would predict the school stay until the next cycle, or even every 4 years.

[Black and Gold]

If we go with that success advancement, how long will they stay in their classification? Or would it be until the next cycle?

I would predict the school stay until the next cycle, or even every 4 years.

In your system, what would determine moving up? State championship? Deep run in the playoffs?

[MDXPHD]

If we go with that success advancement, how long will they stay in their classification? Or would it be until the next cycle?

I would predict the school stay until the next cycle, or even every 4 years.

In your system, what would determine moving up? State championship? Deep run in the playoffs?

Possibly 2 championships in 4 years (if we do a 4 year system) or 3 appearances in the finals in those 4 years. But, i haven't thought about it in great detail. I plan on researching this and seeing what other states criteria are. I really need to see how they do it and then think about it a little more. I think that a team like PA or even Harding could play up a class from where they currently play and be just fine.

[Black and Gold]

Sounds good. Let us know what you come up with!

[CoolBreeze]

I don't suppose you will include success advancement for public schools who have even greater success than the private schools. If you are really looking for balance, it would seem that such an approach would be required.

[CoolBreeze]

Here's how the court systems in Missouri and Arkansas saw the advantages private schools have when the Activities Associations in those states were sued and had to defend their multipliers:

"MSHSAA responded in its brief with 10 possible advantages: private schools have higher percentages of athletic participation, larger attendance areas, are in more densely populated regions, have greater opportunities for skill development, have the opportunity for students to selectively attend their schools, control enrollments, have selective admissions, do not admit 21-year-olds, do not have alternative education students, and have lower drop-out rates (Mayse, 2002)."

"The Pulaski County Circuit Court denied the motion after citing 12 differences between public and private schools in its findings of fact: private schools have higher participation rates (citing the Alabama study), are not required to educate handicapped and developmentally disabled students, have higher parental involvement rates, have the ability to attract foreign students under different conditions, are not required to limit extracurricular activities to only one period per day, do not have boundaries, do not have salary limits on coaches and are not required to publish the salaries, have no budget restraints on facilities, have won state championships at a higher percentage rate, do not have English as a second language students who are less likely to participate, have the ability to cap enrollment, and have the ability of their students to practice at summer workouts while public schools could not because they have jobs (Associated Press, 2006)"

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005884.pdf

That is the best, most comprehensive explanation of the advantages that private schools have that I have seen.

I agree. It's a pleasant surprise to see someone on that side of the issue actually present evidence.

That said, the MSHAA brief is the argument presented by one side of the lawsuit. It would only be fair to see what the other side said as well. It would have as much evidentiary force.

The decision by the Arkansas court is another issue. However, it has not been shown how most of those cited advantages affect sports (for example, greater parental participation and lack of developmentally disabled students). Such facts may provide advantages to the school, but it is not clear how that translates to a corresponding advantage on the field or court.

Moreover, with the exception of PA, it has not been shown that the advantages such as they are are not  counterbalanced by forcing private schools to play up a division.

[MDXPHD]

I don't suppose you will include success advancement for public schools who have even greater success than the private schools. If you are really looking for balance, it would seem that such an approach would be required.

It would definitely include public schools. I don't believe I said otherwise. I think that a school like PB, who has won the last two years at 6A, should play in 7A for the next two years. I think it would be good for PB and the 7A.

[MDXPHD]

Here's how the court systems in Missouri and Arkansas saw the advantages private schools have when the Activities Associations in those states were sued and had to defend their multipliers:

"MSHSAA responded in its brief with 10 possible advantages: private schools have higher percentages of athletic participation, larger attendance areas, are in more densely populated regions, have greater opportunities for skill development, have the opportunity for students to selectively attend their schools, control enrollments, have selective admissions, do not admit 21-year-olds, do not have alternative education students, and have lower drop-out rates (Mayse, 2002)."

"The Pulaski County Circuit Court denied the motion after citing 12 differences between public and private schools in its findings of fact: private schools have higher participation rates (citing the Alabama study), are not required to educate handicapped and developmentally disabled students, have higher parental involvement rates, have the ability to attract foreign students under different conditions, are not required to limit extracurricular activities to only one period per day, do not have boundaries, do not have salary limits on coaches and are not required to publish the salaries, have no budget restraints on facilities, have won state championships at a higher percentage rate, do not have English as a second language students who are less likely to participate, have the ability to cap enrollment, and have the ability of their students to practice at summer workouts while public schools could not because they have jobs (Associated Press, 2006)"

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1005884.pdf

That is the best, most comprehensive explanation of the advantages that private schools have that I have seen.

I agree. It's a pleasant surprise to see someone on that side of the issue actually present evidence.

That said, the MSHAA brief is the argument presented by one side of the lawsuit. It would only be fair to see what the other side said as well. It would have as much evidentiary force.

The decision by the Arkansas court is another issue. However, it has not been shown how most of those cited advantages affect sports (for example, greater parental participation and lack of developmentally disabled students). Such facts may provide advantages to the school, but it is not clear how that translates to a corresponding advantage on the field or court.

Moreover, with the exception of PA, it has not been shown that the advantages such as they are are not  counterbalanced by forcing private schools to play up a division.

It doesn't have to show they are counterbalanced. They just need a rational basis as to why they are treating the privates different, and they succeed in meeting that requirement

The opposing party might not have a very good argument or enough evidence, which is why the court didn't rule in their favor.

[gameoflife]

I think you need the state champion winners in all sports over the last 20-30 years, to see how much private impacts the winner/losers in sport.  The only real solution, which private will not like, is to have the public and private play in their own divisions.  This is done in a lot of places.  Arkansas is unlikely to do this because the state is small and not that many private schools at all differenct sizes. Private want to play in public leagues, its' better for them in attracting student/atletes.  In state where private and public play for their own championship it has influenced some athletes and they choose to stay in public school.  Let the private and public only play in the first part of the nonconference season and not at all for the state championships and you would see athletes stay in public schools.