|
Post by ostrya on Mar 4, 2004 18:55:40 GMT -6
"and mckinley had plenty, and well..." McK won the first game of the playoffs. How many select players do D-town, Lee, etc. have?
|
|
|
Post by defencerules on Mar 4, 2004 19:03:14 GMT -6
for franklin, i think at least 8 players (not all of them starters) play on select teams @ carrolton and nosa. maybe more, but i'm not sure
|
|
|
Post by Twerk19 on Mar 5, 2004 10:15:32 GMT -6
Public .Vs. Private is great..it's a motivation for public schools beacause in some cases they know they are playing a better team and it really motivates them to win to show that they can hold their own against the private schools....
|
|
|
Post by defencerules on Mar 5, 2004 13:38:54 GMT -6
since my last post on this topic, found out that at least 2 more for sure, possibly a 3rd at franklin are on select teams. that's 11 of a 22 man roster, and as stated before, could be more.
|
|
|
Post by Hooligan on Mar 5, 2004 13:56:06 GMT -6
Vandebilt's team started 7 current premier players (2 of which were seniors) and had maybe 11 of the14 on the bench are playing premier. Of the 7 or so who aren't playing premier, 5 are seniors. And all but 2 have played premier at one time or another.
|
|
|
Post by McScruff on Mar 5, 2004 14:47:57 GMT -6
It is completely irrelevant the number of select players on each team. You guys are wasting your time trying to figure out how many select players each team has. Lafayette's entire starting lineup is made up of select players. Most of Acadiana's starting lineup is select players. Both are PUBLIC SCHOOLS. It just doesn't matter. Both Lafayette and Acadiana can beat the crap out of STM on a regular basis. Fishbish said that St. Louis has like 3 select players, but they won state. It just doesn't matter. The number of select players is not directly linked to Public/Private on a statewide level. The only areas where it even matters is New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Also, Baton Rouge's youth soccer program is so crappy that it barely even matters there. And none of the NOLA public schools hardly even care about soccer.
Separating the schools based on the number of select players that they have is just ridiculous. I mean come on, think about it.
|
|
|
Post by lasocrfan on Mar 5, 2004 16:40:58 GMT -6
Totally agree with McScruff on this. This is not relevant to the private/public school debate.
Something worth noting: so far, at the highest classification, the football and soccer state champions are from public schools. It'll be interesting to see if the trend continues in basketball and baseball this year. Being from a private school, I have to ask if the public schools are starting to recruit? Just kidding! LOL
|
|
|
Post by McScruff on Mar 5, 2004 16:57:32 GMT -6
I know Lafayette High recruits for soccer. A couple of their players didn't live inside the school zone, so the school bought their families houses that were within the school zone a few years ago. You have to recruit the lower grades, though. I heard they just landed a fourth grader from the northside of town. Lafayette is definitely going to be strong in 2011!
|
|
|
Post by squarepeg on Mar 5, 2004 16:58:00 GMT -6
The Public vs. Private debate has more to do with where a player is able to go to school than it does with what a player does in terms of club participation outside of school. Both affect the quality of teams, and is driven by economic and social factors, including race. The premise behind all of this debate is that some private schools draw the best athelets and milk public pool participation to the extent that many public schools are no longer competative, no matter what the sport. This is particularly evident in the Shreveport and New Orleans areas, but there are many small town examples, as well, Opelousas, for one. As a matter of economics, generally speaking, private school student participation in club sports is way higher than it is for public schools students. Both contribute to a large disparity in talent. Acadiana and Lafayette High Schools are the exception, as well as West Monore in football, but if one takes the demographics of those schools into account, it all makes sense. There are anomalies, however, ie Carencro in football and soccer. There are many more public schools who just cannot compete because they've lost the best athelets and most of those that remain do not participate in club activities because they simply can't afford to, even if they wanted. I think the best public and private high schools will always be the same, but if one compares competition outside of this select group, the disparity of talent is very evident and is caused by the social and econmic factors I've discussed.
In my opinion, there is little difference in the reasoning behind prohibiting professional athelets from competing in college and limiting or regulating the participation of club players on high school teams. Its just no fair competition.
|
|
|
Post by McScruff on Mar 5, 2004 17:19:43 GMT -6
Look, why don't the public schools stop wasting so much time, energy and money on separating the athletic programs? I mean, I am a public school guy all the way. I went to both public and private schools and I loved public school and hated private school. But we are talking about SPORTS! Why don't the public schools spend half of that time, energy and money on IMPROVING THE STATE'S PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. Now, there's a novel idea. I mean what does this say about our society. Public schools can't comptete in athletics because good athletes can't get a good education or feel safe in public school. Oh, I got a solution. Forget trying to improve public schools, let's just split the state championships. Jeez.
Um, so select high school soccer players are professionals? Yeah, ok. Whatever. Good to know. What kind of jack do they make?
|
|
|
Post by ostrya on Mar 5, 2004 17:25:29 GMT -6
I'm just saying that parity in soccer depends more on the number of select players each team has than the size of the total student population. The private schools in general have an edge here. If you want games that are exciting, if you want games that are not a lopsided embarrassment, I think you should make the districts according to the number of select players on the team. Sure that varies, but the districts around Baton Rouge are always getting shaken up by changing student demographics, and soccer still goes on.
|
|
|
Post by lasocrfan on Mar 5, 2004 17:56:45 GMT -6
The success of most schools, public and private, whether its athletics or academics, is the amount of parental involvement in the schools and in their kids' lives. People speak of economics, social factors, etc. ..... Want to see successful schools, look at the involvement of the parents. Everything else then begins to fall into place.
|
|
|
Post by Hooligan on Mar 5, 2004 18:01:17 GMT -6
It ranges, but I'll have more to tell you when the signing bonus is worked out...hehehe....
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy on Mar 5, 2004 20:05:11 GMT -6
The success of most schools, public and private, whether its athletics or academics, is the amount of parental involvement in the schools and in their kids' lives. People speak of economics, social factors, etc. ..... Want to see successful schools, look at the involvement of the parents. Everything else then begins to fall into place. Well said. Speaking from personal experience, I totally agree with this. Kids going to private school with parents involved is probably close to 100% where kid's with parents involved in public school is probably somewhere around 50%. One major reason private schools play at or above public schools level in soccer is that the private schools tend to treat soccer as an equal sport to the " big 3" (football, baseball, and basketball) as opposed to treating them as a "step sport". My oldest son played soccer in public school and the treatment from the principal on down to the AD and football coach was atrocious. They treated the soccer program as if they all had leprosy. Football players were forbidden from tying out for the soccer team. The soccer team could not play any games (home or away) until the football team finished up the year. Any games affected by this rule could not be made up. And other crazy rules, which in my opinion, were designed to discourage soccer. This type of treatment for any serious soccer player almost forces parents who are involved with their kids to send them to private school. I know I learned my lesson. My youngest son is a freshman at St. Louis this year. And I'm not even going to touch the number of select players on a team argument. That's crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Footy365 on Mar 5, 2004 21:13:28 GMT -6
Private schools will even treat their soccer as their most important, just look at the crowds of the Jesuit and St. Pauls home games.
|
|
LOS
All-District
Posts: 141
|
Post by LOS on Mar 7, 2004 11:14:26 GMT -6
i love playing private school it starts up a huge rivalry b/t the two and it is awesome.it presents a even better drive to the players to say they are the best i go to a public school (lafayette) and i think the public schools showed they are just as good. to me this whole thing is disrespectful to public schools . almost saying we can't hang with them and we cna we prooved this.
|
|