lol wonder if it will be like basketball with 2 exchange students each year
This guy hates Parkview Christian as much as Ukraine hates Russia! If you look at returning production its hard not to have Parkview there.
Thing about Parkview(at least in basketball) they will have 7 new players not even on their roster last year, each and every year, with at least two exchange students that just happen to be real good basketball players every year LOL
You just don't understand how hard it is for a small D2 school to manage to find players in a city of 300k people....
I would love to see anyone but Parkview, but they return more than anyone and just as stated above, if the NSAA is going to allow a school in a city of 300,000 that blatantly recruits to compete in the states smallest class, Im forced to pick them.
Parkview is an outlier no question. Not defending them but if they were that actively recruiting, they should be bigger than D2 right?
So are they turning away kids (and tuition money) just to play D2 football? Or are they recruiting kids? Because I bet they will take the tuition money.
I get that. How many of these foreign exchange students are playing football?
C'mon northeast - you know how those "scholarships" work. Just takes a couple wealthy donors to support the private school athlete-students
So basically the parochial school enrollment times 1.5 and classify from there. All kids in parochial schools are coming from outside the home district. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. I would have no problem with your proposal. I believe parochial schools should have a multiplier.
No one hates, just figured this is how the post would go, private 6 man school that recruits openly in large city and abroad, nothing wrong I guess, keep the numbers right and keep winning
I’ll never understand the multiplier. It’s basically admitting your kids at your school can’t compete.
If parochial schools should have it, so should Adams Central, Battle Creek, Amherst, Omaha Westside, Norris, Waverly, Freeman, Elm Creek, Hershey, ScoBlo, Ogallala I could go on and on.
Sure, but if you think that’s happening on a regular basis, how do they only have 24 boys 9-11 grade? If they are just handing money out (which they aren’t) why wouldn’t they want more athletes to at least be D1?C'mon northeast - you know how those "scholarships" work. Just takes a couple wealthy donors to support the private school athlete-students
I am not against private schools but i am against scholarships or reduce tuition for any student playing a NSAA sport I like the idea of 1.5 for all schools So if you excepts a transfer from another district that kid counts as 1.5 for each kid transferring from another district Private schools would count anyone outside the district their school is in.
Private schools don’t have districts. Are you saying the kids that live in Norfolk (example) won’t count against the 1.5 at Norfolk Catholic? But if a kid lives in Stanton and wants to go to NC, he counts as 1.5?
Private schools choose who they accept and public schools don’t have that option, every kid counts the same, private schools have higher participation rates in activities because that is a key reason why parents choose to pay.
I a saying exactly what I said. The private school will use the borders of the district they are in.
I agree, they should have it. Each public school in Nebraska has an geographic district. That district exists for purposes of tax dollar allocation. Schools like Adams Central and Lakeview (2 arbitrary examples) still have a geographic district. When a student comes from outside the borders of that geographic area, that student would be subject to that multiplier. I just happen to believe the district that student leaves should also get a -1.5 for that student.
Omaha Skutt, Prep, Marian, Roncalli do this because they have placement exams.
I don't think any posts here are really suggesting that participation rates be factored in. I may have missed something. I agree with you, we can't penalize schools that do a good job at getting their students to participate.
I will agree with that 100%. social economics has way more to do with winning and losing than anyone wants to admit
That seems fairly reasonable at first glance.
That simply isn't true. I know of several cases where option students are allowed in and "non- athletic" option students have been denied.
What % of D1 football and basketball players were free and reduced types during their school years?
A public school doesn't have to accept any option students.....but if a student resides within the district boundaries, the school must accept them.
Why? Trying to equate poverty and athletic success means all data needs to be considered, right? It's very simple to "prove" a point, such as it is, when you can cherry pick data.
