Making Single A Fun Again

[Realityhits02]

When someone has an advantage that's not allowed for the competitor, yet they compete in the same class, that's called an unfair advantage.

All other things being equal: coaching, practice intensity, etc. If the team who doesn't have to follow that one rule that their competitor does, if they use that benefit to their advantage well enough,  they will always win every time.

Talent may not be equal, public or private, so is that an unfair advantage too? What if all other things aren’t equal? Who’s measuring that? So if public school A has a better coach that public school B you’re saying that all things aren’t equal and that’s an unfair advantage..they are using that better coach to their advantage and now are unfairly winning according to that argument. Because all things aren’t equal-public vs public, private vs private, public vs private

[12HankQB]

So you’d be great with consolidating all the schools into one “super team”? Just curious if you’re saying eliminating borders and bringing together an all star team is such a huge advantage, then why not do it on a large scale and give all these area kids some major exposure? No need to get defensive, not claiming to be a “genius”, but I share your frustration on not understanding how someone doesn’t see the point-I’m just on the other side of it-so maybe there are two sides, and neither is a 100% right or wrong? For the record, I’m not “afraid” of not winning, just trying to see both sides...try it sometime

Let's do it, but we'll play in single A. I don't mean to come off so stern, but there's no justification for playing A. 
To go off of your response to the mythical creature, not all things are equal...coaches, fields, equipment, fans, concessions, field houses, buses....but all of this doesn't have the influence on the outcome of a game like pure talent. These aren't the same thing. This is a poor excuse. Your argument is getting worse.

[sasquatch260]

When someone has an advantage that's not allowed for the competitor, yet they compete in the same class, that's called an unfair advantage.

All other things being equal: coaching, practice intensity, etc. If the team who doesn't have to follow that one rule that their competitor does, if they use that benefit to their advantage well enough,  they will always win every time.

Talent may not be equal, public or private, so is that an unfair advantage too? What if all other things aren’t equal? Who’s measuring that? So if public school A has a better coach that public school B you’re saying that all things aren’t equal and that’s an unfair advantage..they are using that better coach to their advantage and now are unfairly winning according to that argument. Because all things aren’t equal-public vs public, private vs private, public vs private

Nobody here is arguing for a rule change based on player or coaching talent. Besides, all teams have an equal opportunity for that. They can hire and fire coaches as they please. We're not advocating for participation trophies. 

[Realityhits02]

So you’d be great with consolidating all the schools into one “super team”? Just curious if you’re saying eliminating borders and bringing together an all star team is such a huge advantage, then why not do it on a large scale and give all these area kids some major exposure? No need to get defensive, not claiming to be a “genius”, but I share your frustration on not understanding how someone doesn’t see the point-I’m just on the other side of it-so maybe there are two sides, and neither is a 100% right or wrong? For the record, I’m not “afraid” of not winning, just trying to see both sides...try it sometime

Let's do it, but we'll play in single A. I don't mean to come off so stern, but there's no justification for playing A. 
To go off of your response to the mythical creature, not all things are equal...coaches, fields, equipment, fans, concessions, field houses, buses....but all of this doesn't have the influence on the outcome of a game like pure talent. These aren't the same thing. This is a poor excuse. Your argument is getting worse.

The mythical creature was not mine-I was responding to a post-The point is they aren’t all equal..nothing is...you are reiterating what I’m saying so there is no “argument”

[Realityhits02]

When someone has an advantage that's not allowed for the competitor, yet they compete in the same class, that's called an unfair advantage.

All other things being equal: coaching, practice intensity, etc. If the team who doesn't have to follow that one rule that their competitor does, if they use that benefit to their advantage well enough,  they will always win every time.

Talent may not be equal, public or private, so is that an unfair advantage too? What if all other things aren’t equal? Who’s measuring that? So if public school A has a better coach that public school B you’re saying that all things aren’t equal and that’s an unfair advantage..they are using that better coach to their advantage and now are unfairly winning according to that argument. Because all things aren’t equal-public vs public, private vs private, public vs private

Nobody here is arguing for a rule change based on player or coaching talent. Besides, all teams have an equal opportunity for that. They can hire and fire coaches as they please. We're not advocating for participation trophies. 

Thank you! Exactly-all teams have an equal opportunity for player and coaching talent.

[12HankQB]

Well this would be true, but it's not. They don't have equal opportunity for player talent. That's the point in the entire 5 threads of arguing. Private schools and public A schools are not on the same field for talent that comes in.

[sasquatch260]

Realityhits: I think you are misunderstanding. I didn't say "talented players". I said "player talent". There's a big difference between bringing in talented players from outside your boundaries and teams having differing talent within their own boundaries. You're missing the main point.

[Realityhits02]

These threads should be titled “Agree to Disagree”-I think both sides have valid points, it’s just finding to best solution to benefit ALL the kids-not just private and not just public-luckily we aren’t the ones having to decide these things. Great discussion though! But at this point I will agree to disagree.

[Realityhits02]

Realityhits: I think you are misunderstanding. I didn't say "talented players". I
"player talent". There's a big difference
between bringing in talented players from outside your boundaries and teams having differing talent within their own boundaries. You're missing the main point.

I have to respond lol people don’t “grow” like trees places! We move! We get New jobs, lose jobs, get divorced, married etc etc! If your school district can’t attract new people “or talent” I’m sorry about that, but either do something about it, move, stay there and complain, or take your family elsewhere-like a private school if you want to pay tuition-whatever YOU think is best for your family then DO IT! I don’t know you, but hope whatever you do, people don’t judge your motives for doing it and are happy for whatever success you or your children realize:) I don’t know about you, but I am genuinely happy to see local kids succeed-private or public, regardless or school district!

[DCor50]

Then let the private schools "succeed" against each other in the playoffs. What's wrong with that? They shouldn't be playing in the same playoffs as public. Especially in the lower classifications.