Does the proposal address the problem?

[johnharrison]

Is the problem that Shiloh is too good or is it they are playing in the wrong class?

"Too good" is an odd concept.  I think everyone on this board would agree that a team, any team, should try to be the best that it can within the rules.  They should train hard, practice hard and field the best personel that they can.  That's true whether you are Shiloh or Blevins.


So you can't be too good.  Period.

Are they in the wrong class?  Well clearly enrollment number is not a good way to determine their class.

What if they build a dorm, pay prospects $500/month and give them Mercedes.  It makes a stronger team, but being a strong team is good.

What is bad is to play teams that can't compete.  FOR ANY REASON.  It falls to the AAA to set rules for determining class.  It isn't working.

Ideally the whole goal of a rule change should have been to give the AAA a mechanism where teams could be placed fairly.

Restricting the recruiting of 7th graders misses the whole problem.  It IS NOT going to make Shiloh easier to beat.

[Bayou Bully]

You seem to miss the point as well...
It will be hard to get many 7th graders to come if they know they will not get to play.
Imagine how hard it will be to get a 10-11 grader to come in knowing they have to sit out a year.
There is usually a dominate team (too good)at the lower classifications, but you don't hear much about kicking Nashville, Charleston, or Junction City out of the AAA...
Wonder why?

BTW Did'nt 114 schools vote to have the private schools have their own playoffs?
Either way if it is broken into percentages...1/3 voted them to stay, 1/3 voted them out, and 1/3 abstained...

ALOT closer vote than you might think huh Eddie?

I guess there's alot of childish schools out there.

[AAAspectator]

I've said it before. All signs point to one game, one coach, one team at one school. The main reason this went to the AAA is because everyone in NWA knows that the coach is untouchable.
The principal can't touch him, no one. It all depends on this guy realizing he could change Arkansas sports for the worse and possibly shut down his school.

If they pull the same stunts this season, look for them to be voted out of the AAA. The state of Arkansas will not allow shiloh to become like Shreveport Evangel.

[DARK HORSE]

As stated by another poster on another thread - If you can pick the cards that want from the deck to play poker with you can up your win % considerably - I have no problem playing with fairly delt cards - win some lose some - Winning programs will be critisized by a few every time - but at some locations there appears to more than just smoke - there appears to be fire and it may just get put out if enough people get fed up with it - even if it is only the perception of people - that perception becomes their reality - right wrong or indifferent!

[benchball]

You seem to miss the point as well...
It will be hard to get many 7th graders to come if they know they will not get to play.
Imagine how hard it will be to get a 10-11 grader to come in knowing they have to sit out a year.
There is usually a dominate team (too good)at the lower classifications, but you don't hear much about kicking Nashville, Charleston, or Junction City out of the AAA...
Wonder why?

BTW Did'nt 114 schools vote to have the private schools have their own playoffs?
Either way if it is broken into percentages...1/3 voted them to stay, 1/3 voted them out, and 1/3 abstained...

ALOT closer vote than you might think huh Eddie?

I guess there's alot of childish schools out there.

114 voted to keep it the same, i believe

[QPWFB]

Is the problem that Shiloh is too good or is it they are playing in the wrong class?

"Too good" is an odd concept.  I think everyone on this board would agree that a team, any team, should try to be the best that it can within the rules.  They should train hard, practice hard and field the best personel that they can.  That's true whether you are Shiloh or Blevins.


So you can't be too good.  Period.

Are they in the wrong class?  Well clearly enrollment number is not a good way to determine their class.

What if they build a dorm, pay prospects $500/month and give them Mercedes.  It makes a stronger team, but being a strong team is good.

What is bad is to play teams that can't compete.  FOR ANY REASON.  It falls to the AAA to set rules for determining class.  It isn't working.

Ideally the whole goal of a rule change should have been to give the AAA a mechanism where teams could be placed fairly.

Restricting the recruiting of 7th graders misses the whole problem.  It IS NOT going to make Shiloh easier to beat.

Nice post John, and I agree, I don't think this rule will change much of anything, the problem seems to be with the classification process,enrollment should not be the only consideration for placing private schools in the public school conferences. I will give you a couple of examples other than SC. Abundant Life and CWSJ were playing at the 3A level two years ago in BB, they were going deep into the 3A state tournament, seem to be matched up quite well as far as competition, so what happens AAA changes the rules, they get moved down to 2A to play even smaller schools than they were playing? Wheres the logic in that? When we played them they had twice as many kids on there team as we had on ours. PA would be another fine example of a flawed system,they just won 5A state title in FB,so what happens next,they get moved to a lower classification to play even  smaller schools.Unlike the school above, they don't want to move down and they have asked to stay in 5A,but the "system" places them in the lower division,proof that the system is failing.

[QPWFB]

Is the problem that Shiloh is too good or is it they are playing in the wrong class?

"Too good" is an odd concept.  I think everyone on this board would agree that a team, any team, should try to be the best that it can within the rules.  They should train hard, practice hard and field the best personel that they can.  That's true whether you are Shiloh or Blevins.


So you can't be too good.  Period.

Are they in the wrong class?  Well clearly enrollment number is not a good way to determine their class.

What if they build a dorm, pay prospects $500/month and give them Mercedes.  It makes a stronger team, but being a strong team is good.

What is bad is to play teams that can't compete.  FOR ANY REASON.  It falls to the AAA to set rules for determining class.  It isn't working.

Ideally the whole goal of a rule change should have been to give the AAA a mechanism where teams could be placed fairly.

Restricting the recruiting of 7th graders misses the whole problem.  It IS NOT going to make Shiloh easier to beat.

[Rabhog]

My idea is to put a school in the class their enrollment requires, with the option on the school to be in top classification(now 7a).

[rammer]

QPWFB,

You have brought basketball into this, specifically CWSJ and Abundant Life in 2A. You are correct, they did compete very well in 3A and domintated their conference last year. No other team in the conference was able to beat either of these teams and most of the games weren't even close. I know both of these teams have long tenure coaches with a system in place and it is going to be hard for the other conference teams to compete with them again this year. Although, I believe WCC and Quitman will probably be better with new coaches.

I believe what makes these 2 teams better than their conference competition is that neither have football teams. That is why they have more players than some of the football schools. Basketball is THE sport and more time and attention is given to it. Maybe teams without football should be looked at differently, and maybe change the multiplier for them. I agree with you, they are better suited for 3A with the talent they have now, but I also believe that talent level will probably fluctuate year to year, and they will have down years also.

[Coach DePriest, Sheridan]

You seem to miss the point as well...
It will be hard to get many 7th graders to come if they know they will not get to play.
Imagine how hard it will be to get a 10-11 grader to come in knowing they have to sit out a year.
There is usually a dominate team (too good)at the lower classifications, but you don't hear much about kicking Nashville, Charleston, or Junction City out of the AAA...
Wonder why?

BTW Did'nt 114 schools vote to have the private schools have their own playoffs?
Either way if it is broken into percentages...1/3 voted them to stay, 1/3 voted them out, and 1/3 abstained...

ALOT closer vote than you might think huh Eddie?

I guess there's alot of childish schools out there.

It is obvious that a lot of people, including media members such as Wally Hall, severely misunderstand who can vote on each of these proposals.  No one (or hardly anyone) at the meeting abstained from voting on proposal 7.  By rule, only high schools could vote on proposals #2, #4, #6, and #7.  206 voted on 2 and 4, 202 voted on 6, and 207 voted on 7.  Since proposal #8 affected grades 7-12, all schools were allowed to vote, so middle schools accounted for the extra 65 votes.

I just wanted to clear that up.  Had I not known how the system worked, I would have thought the same thing.

[QPWFB]

QPWFB,

You have brought basketball into this, specifically CWSJ and Abundant Life in 2A. You are correct, they did compete very well in 3A and domintated their conference last year. No other team in the conference was able to beat either of these teams and most of the games weren't even close. I know both of these teams have long tenure coaches with a system in place and it is going to be hard for the other conference teams to compete with them again this year. Although, I believe WCC and Quitman will probably be better with new coaches.

I believe what makes these 2 teams better than their conference competition is that neither have football teams. That is why they have more players than some of the football schools. Basketball is THE sport and more time and attention is given to it. Maybe teams without football should be looked at differently, and maybe change the multiplier for them. I agree with you, they are better suited for 3A with the talent they have now, but I also believe that talent level will probably fluctuate year to year, and they will have down years also.

Nothing against the schools mentioned just using them for reference to make my point.Don't know that not having football is that much of an advantage for BB maybe for the first few games of the season,our kids do both thru the summer. Did the girls dominate the conf. as well? And if so how did football play into that?

[Bayou Bully]

You seem to miss the point as well...
It will be hard to get many 7th graders to come if they know they will not get to play.
Imagine how hard it will be to get a 10-11 grader to come in knowing they have to sit out a year.
There is usually a dominate team (too good)at the lower classifications, but you don't hear much about kicking Nashville, Charleston, or Junction City out of the AAA...
Wonder why?

BTW Did'nt 114 schools vote to have the private schools have their own playoffs?
Either way if it is broken into percentages...1/3 voted them to stay, 1/3 voted them out, and 1/3 abstained...

ALOT closer vote than you might think huh Eddie?

I guess there's alot of childish schools out there.

It is obvious that a lot of people, including media members such as Wally Hall, severely misunderstand who can vote on each of these proposals.  No one (or hardly anyone) at the meeting abstained from voting on proposal 7.  By rule, only high schools could vote on proposals #2, #4, #6, and #7.  206 voted on 2 and 4, 202 voted on 6, and 207 voted on 7.  Since proposal #8 affected grades 7-12, all schools were allowed to vote, so middle schools accounted for the extra 65 votes.

I just wanted to clear that up.  Had I not known how the system worked, I would have thought the same thing.

307 high schools...look it up on the AAA web site. Not just football schools were allowed to vote.

[rammer]

QPWFB,

You have brought basketball into this, specifically CWSJ and Abundant Life in 2A. You are correct, they did compete very well in 3A and domintated their conference last year. No other team in the conference was able to beat either of these teams and most of the games weren't even close. I know both of these teams have long tenure coaches with a system in place and it is going to be hard for the other conference teams to compete with them again this year. Although, I believe WCC and Quitman will probably be better with new coaches.

I believe what makes these 2 teams better than their conference competition is that neither have football teams. That is why they have more players than some of the football schools. Basketball is THE sport and more time and attention is given to it. Maybe teams without football should be looked at differently, and maybe change the multiplier for them. I agree with you, they are better suited for 3A with the talent they have now, but I also believe that talent level will probably fluctuate year to year, and they will have down years also.

Nothing against the schools mentioned just using them for reference to make my point.Don't know that not having football is that much of an advantage for BB maybe for the first few games of the season,our kids do both thru the summer. Did the girls dominate the conf. as well? And if so how did football play into that?



Yes, Conway St. Joseph girls did dominate. I believe AL finished 4th. Football may not have anything to do with it, but these 2 teams definitely take basketball seriously. They both had a great player last year that helped them tremendously, and both of those guys graduated, so maybe the playing field will be more even this year.

[benchball]

catch em cheating or giving illegal scholarships and kick em out for a year. thats the only way things will ever change.

[Coach DePriest, Sheridan]

307 high schools...look it up on the AAA web site. Not just football schools were allowed to vote.

You are correct. So apparently, almost 100 schools did not attend the meeting.  I guess that, technically, they abstained from voting on all of the proposals, not just #7.

[Quite Frankly]

289 voted on Proposal #1.

[Coach DePriest, Sheridan]

289 voted on Proposal #1.

That includes Middle Schools.  Only High Schools could vote on Proposal 7.

[Quite Frankly]

Define middle school.  There are 307 high schools listed and as you alluded to #7 it says all high schools can vote with the wording being 'all schools' on #8.

How did you determine your statement?  Just asking.

Voting is blind correct?  I think the difference is noteable and not excused by the difference.

[True Fan]

It is obvious that a lot of people, including media members such as Wally Hall, severely misunderstand who can vote on each of these proposals.  No one (or hardly anyone) at the meeting abstained from voting on proposal 7.  By rule, only high schools could vote on proposals #2, #4, #6, and #7.  206 voted on 2 and 4, 202 voted on 6, and 207 voted on 7.  Since proposal #8 affected grades 7-12, all schools were allowed to vote, so middle schools accounted for the extra 65 votes.

I just wanted to clear that up.  Had I not known how the system worked, I would have thought the same thing.

Thanks for the clear, concise post. It's interesting to see that, when comparing apples to apples, (only high schools may vote) Prop 7 actually received the most votes. I guess that could also be noted as the least abstaining.

[Coach DePriest, Sheridan]

Define middle school.  There are 307 high schools listed and as you alluded to #7 it says all high schools can vote with the wording being 'all schools' on #8.

How did you determine your statement?  Just asking.

Voting is blind correct?  I think the difference is noteable and not excused by the difference.

On each of the proposals, it states who is able to vote. 

Proposal 1 - All Schools
Proposal 2 - All High Schools
Proposal 3 - All Golf High Schools
Proposal 4 - All High Schools
Proposal 5 - All Baseball and Softball High Schools
Proposal 6 - All High Schools
Proposal 7 - All High Schools
Proposal 8 - All Schools

The way I understand it, each of the separate middle schools / junior highs (i.e. Fuller, Northwood, Forest Heights, Dunbar (LR and Pulaski County), Ramay, Woodland (Fayetteville), etc.) have a vote when it states "All Schools."  It may even include single feeder middle schools such as Mena Middle School, Beebe Junior High, Pulaski Academy Middle School, etc. since they are technically separate members of the AAA.  However, I would think their would be more votes if that were the case. 

[Bayou Bully]

307 allowed to vote....
Vote was counted 114-93... 100 did not vote.
100 seems hardly anyone, maybe 100 of 300 is not alot by PA math but in SW AR it seems like alot. I would guess the majority of these unaccounted for votes were by those that choose not to attend, or by schools that it did not affect-6A-7A.
1/3 for
1/3 against
1/3 could care less

This proposal had to have 2/3 majority to pass. There's a split among the AAA on how to deal with this problem.

Jr High schools do not have playoffs, so they don't have to play anyone they choose not to. No need for them to vote, but I would guess they would vote much the same as their Sr. High.

If a Sr. High team chooses not to play a conference game they will not be eligible for the playoffs.(Ruling in favor for Shiloh by AAA when their conference teams chose not to play them a few years back.)

I will not rant on about whats the best way to fix it, I ain't that smart. But there is a problem, and will continue to be a problem as long as there are no boundaries for some, whether those boundaries are on a map, or by unlimited "attracters". I think the proposal that passed is a step in the right direction.

[Quite Frankly]

How about you have to vote to be a member?  Your vote is a default 'no' or 'yes' and if you don't change it then you in affect voted.  No more hiding. 

[Bayou Bully]

Why not just let the "crybaby-whiners" not play the privates? And those that "work-harder" play them.

Then we will see how the majority really feels about it!

[HA_Fan]

Restricting the recruiting of 7th graders misses the whole problem.

The problem is, "recruited" 7th graders aren't the only ones affected here.  If parents decide to move their 7th grader to a private school for academic, spiritual or a hundred other non-athletic reasons, that student is penalized.  It doesn't matter if he's the D-1 prospect or a guy who will only leave the bench in the 4th quarter of a blowout.

This once again proves that these rules have nothing to do with the interests of KIDS and everything to do with adults who cannot handle private schools winning more than 3 games a year (unless one of those 3 is against their team, then 2 games a year).

Absolutely, ridiculously sad.  We're penalizing TWELVE YEAR OLDS.  Grow up, people.

[Bayou Bully]

If they are moving for academic, spiritual, or a hundred other non-athletic reasons....whats the big deal about sitting out?

[True Fan]

How about you have to vote to be a member?  Your vote is a default 'no' or 'yes' and if you don't change it then you in affect voted.  No more hiding. 

Great idea. We can do it in all other elections too. Anybody eligible to vote is automatically registered and votes for the incumbent party unless they go to the trouble and vote for "change". 

[HA_Fan]

If they are moving for academic, spiritual, or a hundred other non-athletic reasons....whats the big deal about sitting out?

Athletics, choir, band, etc. are all part of the school experience.  There is no reason to exclude a child who has done nothing wrong.

I have known several families who have moved their kids from public to private or vice versa.  NONE of them did it for primarily athletic reasons.

[HA_Fan]

If they are moving for academic, spiritual, or a hundred other non-athletic reasons....whats the big deal about sitting out?

A specific example:  A few years ago, a student enrolled in a private school for his senior year after attending public schools for grades 1-11.  He played football at the public school, where he rode the bench until 4 minutes were left in the fourth quarter of blowouts.  At the private school, he rode the bench until 4 minutes were left in the THIRD quarter of blowouts.

I guess he might have thought there would be more opportunity in football at the private school, but I know for a fact that athletics were not the primary reason (if they even played a role at all) in the decision to change schools.

Additionally, parents will frequently move kids to private schools in Jr. High or Senior High for any number of non-athletic reasons, because it's time for a school change anyway.  It seems like a good time for transition.

There will be far more kids like that penalized than anyone else.

[arthurhawgerelli]

Just to clear the voting discrepancy up.

I believe there are 495 total member schools in the AAA.  This includes high schools, middle schools, junior high schools, public and private.

There are 245 public school districts.  There is something like 25 Private schools with high schools (this number is probably incorrect, because there really is no "official" way to recognize private school charters, if you google private schools in Arkansas you will find out there are 174 private schools in Arkansas, but this counts Montesorri schools that may only have a pre-school and kindergarten, and many other "private" type schools.

The 495 number is the number of schools who have joined the AAA.  Of the 245 public school districts, many have multiple middle schools and jr. highs, and of those 245 there are a few districts (Fort Smith, Rogers, Springdale, Pulaski County have multiple high schools).

It just kind of depends on who you talk to, but if going strictly by the 2/3 of 495, it would have taken 327 votes to pass proposal 7, or it would have taken 2/3 of the total number of schools voting to pass.  It would have been interesting if 2/3 of the total number voting  had passed, because the AAA clearly was campaigning to defeat the proposal.  Not saying that is good or bad, because, honestly, the proposal had way too many holes in it for both sides to scratch their heads about.

[BIGpapaU]

I guess the only thing wrong with #8 is it that the transfer rule should have been for both  private & public.

but after some weak public school gets beat by a couple touchdowns we'll have a #9 were you have to sit out for two years

Or maybe will have a public apology saying were sorry we score a touchdown in front of your mommies and daddy's.

[Bayou Bully]

I guess the only thing wrong with #8 is it that the transfer rule should have been for both  private & public.

but after some weak public school gets beat by a couple touchdowns we'll have a #9 were you have to sit out for two years

Or maybe will have a public apology saying were sorry we score a touchdown in front of your mommies and daddy's.

Reason #438 to pass this proposal....
What a classic example of the private "we're better than you so live with it" school mentallity that people have grown so tired of. Then they do crazy things to ban them from playing with the lesser people.

[Bayou Bully]

If they are moving for academic, spiritual, or a hundred other non-athletic reasons....whats the big deal about sitting out?

A specific example:  A few years ago, a student enrolled in a private school for his senior year after attending public schools for grades 1-11.  He played football at the public school, where he rode the bench until 4 minutes were left in the fourth quarter of blowouts.  At the private school, he rode the bench until 4 minutes were left in the THIRD quarter of blowouts.

I guess he might have thought there would be more opportunity in football at the private school, but I know for a fact that athletics were not the primary reason (if they even played a role at all) in the decision to change schools.

Additionally, parents will frequently move kids to private schools in Jr. High or Senior High for any number of non-athletic reasons, because it's time for a school change anyway.  It seems like a good time for transition.

There will be far more kids like that penalized than anyone else.

Great arguement for your cause...You kinda switched gears with the 12th grader. For 7th-9th grades if the move is NOT athletic related what difference does it make to have to sit out a year? No need for a CSAP form to toot a horn or sing.
It may or may not be fair, but thats the rule now...
I don't like that we have a law making us wear seatbelts when I see people riding motorcycles without helmets all the time. I can't go into court with that arguement...same thing here.

[HA_Fan]

what difference does it make to have to sit out a year? No need for a CSAP form to toot a horn or sing.

It makes a difference to a kid who would like to play.

They're the ones the grown ups are supposed to be looking out for, after all.

[Bayou Bully]

There are 245 public school districts.  There is something like 25 Private schools with high schools

AAA web site...2008-2010 reclassification numbers...307 HIGH schools that participate in some conference in some sport. Thats 307 voting reps.
LRSD has many schools in its system, but each of them has a voting rep.
307 HIGH schools had a chance to vote...no confusion here JJ.

[Bayou Bully]

It makes a difference to a kid who would like to play.

But you said the move was NOT for athletic purposes

[HA_Fan]

But you said the move was NOT for athletic purposes

A person can want to play a sport without switching schools for athletic purposes.

[JJ]

...no confusion here JJ.    Thanks Bully Bob for bringing me into your debate. Yes, the one way transfer rule is unfair, but who said the Private-Public debate is fair. I am glad kids never go to a Public school for athletic reasons.

[benchball]

are they allowed to transfer without sitting out any ,if they live within the 25 mile radius?

[fbfan20]

Nice post John, and I agree, I don't think this rule will change much of anything, the problem seems to be with the classification process,enrollment should not be the only consideration for placing private schools in the public school conferences. I will give you a couple of examples other than SC. Abundant Life and CWSJ were playing at the 3A level two years ago in BB, they were going deep into the 3A state tournament, seem to be matched up quite well as far as competition, so what happens AAA changes the rules, they get moved down to 2A to play even smaller schools than they were playing? Wheres the logic in that? When we played them they had twice as many kids on there team as we had on ours. PA would be another fine example of a flawed system,they just won 5A state title in FB,so what happens next,they get moved to a lower classification to play even  smaller schools.Unlike the school above, they don't want to move down and they have asked to stay in 5A,but the "system" places them in the lower division,proof that the system is failing.
[/quote]

What conferences are the "public school" conferences? Also, you failed to mention that Sylvan Hills baseball team won the 6A basball state championship in 2008. They were moved down to 5A for the 2009 season.

I believe that state championship team had several transfers
on it also.

[rammer]

Yes, that Sylvan Hills team had 3 players that were with Abundant Life the year before. One of them the  kid that will be playing for the Razorbacks next year.

[Bayou Bully]

Didnt those 3 transfer to Abundant Life from SH...then back to SH when the AL coach left?

[rammer]

 I believe Baxendale was only at AL for 1 year, but I don't think he came there from Sylvan Hills. The other 2 had been at AL for several years. They did transfer after the AL coach resigned.

[Cajun Hog]

This proposal just make the Shiloh's of the world, start recruiting the 5th and 6th now.  So they will have them before 7th grade.  That's the loophole in proposal 8. 

[QPWFB]

Nice post John, and I agree, I don't think this rule will change much of anything, the problem seems to be with the classification process,enrollment should not be the only consideration for placing private schools in the public school conferences. I will give you a couple of examples other than SC. Abundant Life and CWSJ were playing at the 3A level two years ago in BB, they were going deep into the 3A state tournament, seem to be matched up quite well as far as competition, so what happens AAA changes the rules, they get moved down to 2A to play even smaller schools than they were playing? Wheres the logic in that? When we played them they had twice as many kids on there team as we had on ours. PA would be another fine example of a flawed system,they just won 5A state title in FB,so what happens next,they get moved to a lower classification to play even  smaller schools.Unlike the school above, they don't want to move down and they have asked to stay in 5A,but the "system" places them in the lower division,proof that the system is failing.

[/quote]
What conferences are the "public school" conferences?
All of them!

[HA_Fan]

This proposal just make the Shiloh's of the world, start recruiting the 5th and 6th now.  So they will have them before 7th grade.  That's the loophole in proposal 8. 

And as long as that kind of mentality still exists on the other side, this issue will NEVER be solved.

What conferences are the "public school" conferences?

All of them!

No.  They're all SCHOOL conferences.

[QPWFB]

This proposal just make the Shiloh's of the world, start recruiting the 5th and 6th now.  So they will have them before 7th grade.  That's the loophole in proposal 8. 

And as long as that kind of mentality still exists on the other side, this issue will NEVER be solved.

What conferences are the "public school" conferences?

All of them!

No.  They're all SCHOOL conferences.

Yes, but the classification by enrollment size system was set up for public schools. There have been several attempts at trying to "blend" the private schools into that system. I think they need to go back to the drawing board,and let some other factors influence a schools classification. It should apply too everyone.

[johnharrison]

Great idea.  I agree 100%.  Enrollment is not all.

[Cajun Hog]

This proposal just make the Shiloh's of the world, start recruiting the 5th and 6th now.  So they will have them before 7th grade.  That's the loophole in proposal 8. 

And as long as that kind of mentality still exists on the other side, this issue will NEVER be solved.

Until the AAA grow a set and come up with a REAL solution, this will not be solved.

School (A) pull from there school district, school (B Shiloh) any area.  That's level?

[johnharrison]

Public schools use "choice", "magnets", and fake moves to do the same.

[BIGpapaU]

it is obvious that public schools want to play private or they would have voted for prop #7. i think the private schools will be alright even though the number of transfer will tail off. i think  the private school work ethics is going to keep them competitive. there will still be kids transfer and sit out a year  because of academics, classroom environment, attitude, and a chance to play sports at a smaller school that would never play if they were in a big public school. i don't think people really realize the revolving door at private school. we have kids come in for all kinds of reason and leave for the same. most of the private schools i know have kids who graduate that went to that school from day one.