Todd Porter's dollars and sense article.....

[painlessPaulus@aol.com]

Which Federal League team turned downed down the Tigers for the opening game this year? According to Porter they lost $30,000. If that was Jackson, no wonder voters are not renewing their levy.... Perry and McKinley had 16,000 at their game last night. Nothing like Massillon Canton game to get a crowd... LOL

[Die Hard Eric]

It was Jackson!

-dhe

[obie7661]

Apparently they didn't need the money. Wait a minute ... don't they pay to play?

Nothin' better than thinking about the kids.

[Al.]

Sometimes egoism gets in the way of common business sense.:scratchchin:

[Purple Hayes]

Which Federal League team turned downed down the Tigers for the opening game this year? According to Porter they lost $30,000. If that was Jackson, no wonder voters are not renewing their levy.... Perry and McKinley had 16,000 at their game last night. Nothing like Massillon Canton game to get a crowd... LOL

Exactly! And as a Jackson resident, I'm really torqued about this and will continue voting "No". We need a person with business savvy running the district, not some educator who happens to have an advanced degree but no experience managing a $50 million budget. What prudent business person would say "no" to this? Instead, we bring up Westerville South (who is a pretty darn good team, BTW) for a home-and-home which resulted in a) fewer fans and b) major expenses next year when we travel to C-Bus.

[CATS44]

Every school district in Stark County puts levies on the ballot....including Massillon. When they do, everyone of them put out statements that they are doing everything they can to cut costs and increase what revenue sources they have.

And if they are playing out of county non league teams home and home, they are not telling the truth....including Massillon.

In fact, the only school that does maximize its athletic net revenues is McKinley.

The amount of money that Massillon, Lake, Glen Oak, Jackson, Perry, and Hoover are leaving on the table every year is enormous.

[Dr Strangemind]

So exactly why WOULD Jackson refuse to play Massillon opening week? That makes no sense. No sense at all!

[painlessPaulus@aol.com]

Every school district in Stark County puts levies on the ballot....including Massillon. When they do, everyone of them put out statements that they are doing everything they can to cut costs and increase what revenue sources they have.

And if they are playing out of county non league teams home and home, they are not telling the truth....including Massillon.

In fact, the only school that does maximize its athletic net revenues is McKinley.

The amount of money that Massillon, Lake, Glen Oak, Jackson, Perry, and Hoover are leaving on the table every year is enormous.


Seems Massillon is in the best shape, moneywise, of all Stark County school. How much money does Canton get from the NFL??

[PurpleArmy]

Which Federal League team turned downed down the Tigers for the opening game this year? According to Porter they lost $30,000. If that was Jackson, no wonder voters are not renewing their levy.... Perry and McKinley had 16,000 at their game last night. Nothing like Massillon Canton game to get a crowd... LOLDo you have a link to the article?

Also, I don't think the fact that Jackson didn't want to play Massillon in football is the main reason voters didn't pass the school levies. It's more about unecessary spending.

[Obie Wan]

Do you have a link to the article?
Check it out (http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=312154&Category=17&fromSearch=yes&subCategoryID=0).

Also, I don't think the fact that Jackson didn't want to play Massillon in football is the main reason voters didn't pass the school levies.
It might be a contributing factor this time.

It's more about unecessary spending.
You mean like the money that parents are unnecessarily spending for their kids to play football?

[tiger#22]

Every school district in Stark County puts levies on the ballot....including Massillon. When they do, everyone of them put out statements that they are doing everything they can to cut costs and increase what revenue sources they have.

And if they are playing out of county non league teams home and home, they are not telling the truth....including Massillon.

In fact, the only school that does maximize its athletic net revenues is McKinley.

The amount of money that Massillon, Lake, Glen Oak, Jackson, Perry, and Hoover are leaving on the table every year is enormous.

I might be mistaken but you cant FORCE a County team to play, Massillon has been turned down on an almost yearly basis by a Fed team and they have been turned down by the whole league to join it. If your not wanted then you have to take your $$$ and go elsewhere.

[CATS44]

1) If you are sending your kids out of county for athletic events that could be played in the county for much more revenue and much lower costs, you ARE spending money unnecessarily.

2) If you are adding teams to your league that are ninety minutes away while refusing to play one that is ten minutes away...one which will enrich your coffers...you ARE spending money unnecessarily.

2) If Massillon is willing to go home and home with teams two hours away but not with local schools, it, too, is spending money foolishly.

[Obie Wan]

1) If you are sending your kids out of county for athletic events that could be played in the county for much more revenue and much lower costs, you ARE spending money unnecessarily.

2) If you are adding teams to your league that are ninety minutes away while refusing to play one that is ten minutes away...one which will enrich your coffers...you ARE spending money unnecessarily.
Personally, I don't give a crap how Jackson spends their money. However, I bet the Jackson voters do.

This is exactly the kind of thing that can turn an election. I hope Joe Larson is proud of his legacy.

2) If Massillon is willing to go home and home with teams two hours away but not with local schools, it, too, is spending money foolishly.
I don't see any evidence of that. Massillon has offered a home-and-home to every other DI school in Stark County. Only McKinley accepted. You can't fault Massillon for that.

[PurpleArmy]

Check it out (http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=312154&Category=17&fromSearch=yes&subCategoryID=0).


It might be a contributing factor this time.


You mean like the money that parents are unnecessarily spending for their kids to play football?Thanks for the link.

Also, I really don't think it's a contributing factor at this time. The majority of people I heard speaking out against the levies were senior citizens and people without children in the school system right now.

I doubt very highly that many of those people knew about, or cared about, the fact that Massillon wanted to play Jackson in football this year. The only people that keep up with that type of information are those who read sites like Yappi or this one, or those who are directly involved with the football program.

I know for a fact that both of my retired grandmothers voted against the levies and their decision had absolutely nothing to do with our football schedule. The same goes for my neighbors that are retired. They could care less who Jackson plays in football.

And when I was referring to unecessary spending, I meant the spending done by our aministration on things like our school lunch program, where we lost a lot of money over the past couple years. Also, I think a lot of people were concerned over how much the administration staff's salaries are. Those are the types of things I was referring to when I mentioned unecessary spending.

[longtimefirsttime]

What is Jackson's athletic budget for a school year? The district listed pay to play as an option long before the levy request was defeated. Wouldn't the amount offered by Massillon (if indeed that is the team mentioned in the article) have made an impact on their football pay to play status?

[giant lugey]

McKinley won't even play any of the elite Ohio teams since they joined the Fed, even though they have dominated the league since they joined. They insist on a cupcake non league schedule.
I don't expect any of the Fed teams to play us as part of their non league schedule, at least not until McKinley grows some stones and plays a high profile team, other than Massillon.

[monte81]

Exactly! And as a Jackson resident, I'm really torqued about this and will continue voting "No". We need a person with business savvy running the district, not some educator who happens to have an advanced degree but no experience managing a $50 million budget. What prudent business person would say "no" to this? Instead, we bring up Westerville South (who is a pretty darn good team, BTW) for a home-and-home which resulted in a) fewer fans and b) major expenses next year when we travel to C-Bus.


Should of played the two game series from Massillon and the games would of made Jackson over $50,000 in the 2 games!-- anyway that is a long way to travel to take a "L"-- Westerville South will be just as good next year with a talented freshman ans soph classes getting alot of varsity action this year!!

[PurpleArmy]

What is Jackson's athletic budget for a school year? The district listed pay to play as an option long before the levy request was defeated. Wouldn't the amount offered by Massillon (if indeed that is the team mentioned in the article) have made an impact on their football pay to play status?I have read that it costs Jackson approximately $1 million per year to operate all of the sports programs. I think that covers 7th grade through high school. So $30,000 wouldn't have made very much of a dent in the total cost to keep the sports programs running without including pay to play.

Also, the school would not have decided to play Massillon and use that $30,000 just so the football players wouldn't have to pay to play. For example, the soccer boosters wanted to pay the fees for all the soccer team members, and they were not permitted to do so, as it would not have been fair to the rest of the teams who didn't have boosters offer to pay their way.

I would assume the same would go for football. They would not have been permitted to take that $30,000 and pay the fees for the football players, as it would not have been fair to other sports teams' members. You can't have PTP for some sports teams and not others. It's pretty much an all or nothing type of thing. Jackson would have had a lot of angry parents of soccer, volleyball, basketball, and other teams' players if the football team had their fees paid and no one else got theirs paid for them.

And yes, the district DID list pay to play as one of the options it would more than likely have to put into effect if the levies did not pass. I'm sure they wanted parents and voters to know some of the changes that would be made if they voted down the levies. They have also already listed some additional changes that will be made if the upcoming November attempt at passing the levy fails.

[monte81]

You will lose AGAIN this week to Warren and finish the year 5 & 5 no playoffs.
Ha Ha Ha

Dont count on that! We will be deep in the playoffs when Novenber comes around! We are the best team in Stark County!

[Obie Wan]

For example, the soccer boosters wanted to pay the fees for all the soccer team members, and they were not permitted to do so, as it would not have been fair to the rest of the teams who didn't have boosters offer to pay their way.
I'd be real interested in the rationale behind that position. How could they not be "permitted" to do so? How could that be prevented? Unless there's a law (or an OHSAA bylaw) against such a payment, it would seem that it is none of the school system's business where the money comes from.

[obie7661]

I'd be real interested in the rationale behind that position. How could they not be "permitted" to do so? How could that be prevented? Unless there's a law (or an OHSAA bylaw) against such a payment, it would seem that it is none of the school system's business where the money comes from.

Maybe the school administration wants the pain equally distributed.

[CATS44]

What Massillon's AD (whoever is running the show over here) should do is come out publicly and offer to play any Fed school home and home with 3000 tix going both ways...each school keeps all its ticket sales, no expenses or guarantees either way.

List every open date we have over the next four years.

Make it an invitation and not a challenge.

Both papers would be on it in a flash....and so would the supporters of every team in the Fed, excepting maybe Lake.

[tiger#22]

What Massillon's AD (whoever is running the show over here) should do is come out publicly and offer to play any Fed school home and home with 3000 tix going both ways...each school keeps all its ticket sales, no expenses or guarantees either way.

List every open date we have over the next four years.

Make it an invitation and not a challenge.

Both papers would be on it in a flash....and so would the supporters of every team in the Fed, excepting maybe Lake.

2 Fed schools have already turned down a similar offer within the last 4 years, they know how to find us if one of them has an open date. Why should Massillon continue to offer, not to mention the Tigers were already denied entry into the league.
:TIG2:

[Obie Wan]

The reason that we should do this (or something like it) is because it is in our best interest to do so. Look at the games that we have had or will have in weeks 1-3 this year and next: North Park, Woodson, Moeller, Middletown, Herbie, and Normandy. That's a Canadian team, a DC team, a game in Cincinnati, a SWO team, a game in Canton, and a game in Cleveland.

There are a couple of factors to be considered:
- Attendance/financial: That's 3 home games that didn't/won't draw and 3 road games that didn't/won't draw. Ticket sales are a very good barometer of interest - and the games that we're playing aren't selling tickets. How many people do you think care about Middletown? How many care about whomever we draw in the Herbie next year? Who gives a crap about Normandy? How many people are willing to go to Cincinnati or Cleveland? How much money do we make off tickets that aren't sold?
- Competitive: Can anyone really make a case for playing DC and/or Canadian teams? Do you really want to support the parochials by continuing to give them games? Do you really want to risk missing the playoffs because we play some Ohio elite or an OOS juggernaut just to fill the schedule?

I think it's far better to play winnable, but contested games against local schools that draw interest than it is to play cupcakes or a meatgrinder when neither approach will sell tickets or help us in the big picture.

We are, for the time being, somewhat stuck in the later weeks of the season because of our status as an independent. However, there's no reason at all that we can't be proactive towards creating a schedule in the early part of the year that a) provides decent competition, b) provides sufficient Harbins points to boost us towards the playoffs, and c) sells more tickets.

The local schools may well say "no". They may well ignore the offer. But there's also a chance that one of them (Perry? Hoover? GlenOak?) will go for it. And if that happens, I submit it would be a better two games than any home/road pair from this year or next.

[tiger#22]

The reason that we should do this (or something like it) is because it is in our best interest to do so. Look at the games that we have had or will have in weeks 1-3 this year and next: North Park, Woodson, Moeller, Middletown, Herbie, and Normandy. That's a Canadian team, a DC team, a game in Cincinnati, a SWO team, a game in Canton, and a game in Cleveland.

There are a couple of factors to be considered:
- Attendance/financial: That's 3 home games that didn't/won't draw and 3 road games that didn't/won't draw. Ticket sales are a very good barometer of interest - and the games that we're playing aren't selling tickets. How many people do you think care about Middletown? How many care about whomever we draw in the Herbie next year? Who gives a crap about Normandy? How many people are willing to go to Cincinnati or Cleveland? How much money do we make off tickets that aren't sold?
- Competitive: Can anyone really make a case for playing DC and/or Canadian teams? Do you really want to support the parochials by continuing to give them games? Do you really want to risk missing the playoffs because we play some Ohio elite or an OOS juggernaut just to fill the schedule?

I think it's far better to play winnable, but contested games against local schools that draw interest than it is to play cupcakes or a meatgrinder when neither approach will sell tickets or help us in the big picture.

We are, for the time being, somewhat stuck in the later weeks of the season because of our status as an independent. However, there's no reason at all that we can't be proactive towards creating a schedule in the early part of the year that a) provides decent competition, b) provides sufficient Harbins points to boost us towards the playoffs, and c) sells more tickets.

The local schools may well say "no". They may well ignore the offer. But there's also a chance that one of them (Perry? Hoover? GlenOak?) will go for it. And if that happens, I submit it would be a better two games than any home/road pair from this year or next.

All are great ideas and I agree with most of what you said but as I said before we cant force the local schools to play us, 2 have turned down offers in the last 4 years to play home and home, only to go and play schools 2 hours away. I wouldnt want to be in the position to put a schedule together for Massillon on a yearly basis but we can only play teams who call us and want to schedule or beg teams to play from out of State or Country.

[longtimefirsttime]

I wouldnt want to be in the position to put a schedule together for Massillon on a yearly basis but we can only play teams who call us and want to schedule or beg teams to play from out of State or Country.

It's apparent Jackson wants no part of Massillon. Not a big deal. There's a better chance of putting Perry on the schedule and I suspect it would be a better game anyway.

[painlessPaulus@aol.com]

What Massillon's AD (whoever is running the show over here) should do is come out publicly and offer to play any Fed school home and home with 3000 tix going both ways...each school keeps all its ticket sales, no expenses or guarantees either way.

List every open date we have over the next four years.

Make it an invitation and not a challenge.

Both papers would be on it in a flash....and so would the supporters of every team in the Fed, excepting maybe Lake.


Cat,

That is a great idea. Plus, I would make it more political. If Jackson's levy fails again, I would "gently" suggest to the newspaper that it would be additional income to these schools... It is tough to be on these BOEs. But those are the people who make the final decisions. We could really get the best of both worlds. Play the Feds in open dates, to both schools advantage, but not be in the Fed.

Then put in Tiger Don's new playoff system and away we go.


You guys are my new heros and real geniuses. WOW..

doug

[Red50Go]

I agree w/ CATS44 but I also agree w/ tiger#22.

A home & away w/ 3000 tickets ea sounds fair & nice but these Fed schools know darn well they dont have to give us 3000 tics. We have ZERO leverage in the amount of tics we need in THEIR stadium, while they know they can ALL get into PBTS. Hoover already turned an offer like that down. If it were up to them, and it mostly is, you "might" get them to agree to ZERO tickets home/away just so they can have as much advantage as possible at home, and still get to send 4000-5000 fans to PBTS.

I was in favor of joining, and still strongly favor scheduling a couple/year, but there comes a time when you must face reality - and that is playing Massillon & Mckinley is too much for them.

I do agree though we could pressure them more in the media & make them squirm a little bit. But I guess we are too nice for that. I know AH & MF eat out of their hands but maybe Blosser will be tougher.

[PurpleArmy]

I'd be real interested in the rationale behind that position. How could they not be "permitted" to do so? How could that be prevented? Unless there's a law (or an OHSAA bylaw) against such a payment, it would seem that it is none of the school system's business where the money comes from.
I could be wrong, but have heard that things like that are not permitted by the OHSAA.

Also, it really wouldn't be fair to kids on other sports teams if one sport had their fees paid for and the others did not. Why should the volleyball or track team or basketball team players have to shell out $350.00 if the football team doesn't?

[Obie Wan]

I could be wrong, but have heard that things like that are not permitted by the OHSAA.
I don't know why it wouldn't be. It's clear that support organizations are allowed to provide financial assistance to specific teams. It's also clear that their is no mandate that the schools themselves must provide equal financial support to all sports. Look at private schools: they're even allowed to pay the entire tuition for select kids for reasons that are basically self-determined.

Also, it really wouldn't be fair to kids on other sports teams if one sport had their fees paid for and the others did not. Why should the volleyball or track team or basketball team players have to shell out $350.00 if the football team doesn't?
What's unfair about it? Massillon just solicited $30,000 from the community for new football uni's. Is that unfair to the baseball team? We just got a $500,000+ football scoreboard thanks to the efforts of the Booster Club. Is that unfair to the basketball team?

And where do you think this money comes from anyway? It's the families and the players who are generating most of it to begin with. The other sports don't like it? Start their own booster clubs.

It seems to me that this may well be the Jackson administration flexing their muscle and trying to make it as hard as possible on the families.

[MR EMPTY PANTS]

as i said before, we need to get steubenville on the schedule. that game would draw massive ticket sales and intrest from all-over ohio. try and get glenville too then dump iggy and canada.

with warren and steubenville on the schedule along with mckinley u have 3 games of serious ticket sales and tons of intrest from all 3 communities.

[longtimefirsttime]

try and get glenville too then dump iggy and canada.

with warren and steubenville on the schedule along with mckinley u have 3 games of serious ticket sales and tons of intrest from all 3 communities.

If they went that route, I'd support that decision.

[tiger#22]

as i said before, we need to get steubenville on the schedule. that game would draw massive ticket sales and intrest from all-over ohio. try and get glenville too then dump iggy and canada.

with warren and steubenville on the schedule along with mckinley u have 3 games of serious ticket sales and tons of intrest from all 3 communities.
Steubenville would be a great week 1 or 2 matchup, Glenville I would say no just because of how Ginn Sr is running things up there, not to mention if your looking for attendance they would bring about as much as Buchtel did.

[PurpleArmy]

I don't know why it wouldn't be. It's clear that support organizations are allowed to provide financial assistance to specific teams. It's also clear that their is no mandate that the schools themselves must provide equal financial support to all sports. Look at private schools: they're even allowed to pay the entire tuition for select kids for reasons that are basically self-determined.


What's unfair about it? Massillon just solicited $30,000 from the community for new football uni's. Is that unfair to the baseball team? We just got a $500,000+ football scoreboard thanks to the efforts of the Booster Club. Is that unfair to the basketball team?

And where do you think this money comes from anyway? It's the families and the players who are generating most of it to begin with. The other sports don't like it? Start their own booster clubs.

It seems to me that this may well be the Jackson administration flexing their muscle and trying to make it as hard as possible on the families.The difference with the imaginary $30,000 Jackson would get from playing Massillon is that that money would go towards the general atheltic fund. It cannot be earmarked for paying the playing fees for the football players. The administration made it very clear before the voting began for the failed levies that all fees would have to be paid by the students' parents. Period.

And actually, why are we still discussing a game that didn't happen, that would have been in week 1 of the season, when we're now in week 8?

It's a dead issue.

[ChronicTiger]

The difference with the imaginary $30,000 Jackson would get from playing Massillon is that that money would go towards the general atheltic fund. It cannot be earmarked for paying the playing fees for the football players. The administration made it very clear before the voting began for the failed levies that all fees would have to be paid by the students' parents. Period.

And actually, why are we still discussing a game that didn't happen, that would have been in week 1 of the season, when we're now in week 8?

It's a dead issue.

wouldnt the addition of 30k to the general fund be a good thing? the money could then go towards paying fees for kids in every sport......

[Obie Wan]

The difference with the imaginary $30,000 Jackosn would get from playing Massillon is that that money would go towards the general atheltic fund. It cannot be earmarked for paying the playing fees for the football players.
Yer missing the point. In terms of the upcoming levy, this will be seen as evidence that the administration has not explored all available options for funding extra-curricular activities. So what if it doesn't go directly to the football players. It could be allocated equally to knock $30 off of the fees for 1000 kids, could it not? That sounds like a fair number of potentially PO'd parents, does it not?

The administration made it very clear before the voting began for the failed levies that all fees would have to be paid by the students' parents. Period.
Are you telling me that if I give your daughter $350 (or whatever it is) to pay her fee that the administration will refuse to let her participate? By what authority can they make that diktat? I don't believe that the administration has the power to enforce such a ruling. This looks like a political power play rather than a legitimate policy. I'd love to see someone challenge this.

Sounds like Jackson is still a farming community, because I see a lot of sheep there.

It's a dead issue.
Tell that to the voters.

[PurpleArmy]

Look....I have no decision making authority for Jackson Local Schools.

Since you guys are chock full of money making ideas, maybe you should be sending letters to Jackson's administration and discuss Jackson not scheduling Massillon with them.

I'm sure they'd love to hear your thoughts and ideas, but I'm out of this dicussion from now on. Week 1 is over and this is all pretty much a moot point at this time.

[Obie Wan]

Look....I have no decision making authority for Jackson Local Schools.
What, you don't vote?

Week 1 is over and this is all pretty much a moot point at this time.
The crux of the unrest in the Jackson district is the financial mechanations of the administration. Based on your outlook, none of that matters - because it was all in the past.