When I posted the

However, some people are concerned about my possible biases, so here they are:

1) I feel that private schools do have some advantage. I don't believe that it is from some sinister source such as recruiting. I believe that a larger potential pool of students is largely responsible for this advantage. Over time, the best football players within this enrollment pool will gravitate to the perennial powerhouses if possible.

2) In the same way that larger enrollment pools help private schools, open enrollment helps mute this advantage. However, I don't think that open enrollment has been entirely embraced by Ohio students and their families. I must admit that I am not aware of all the rules surrounding open enrollment, but I was under the impression that often the schools had to be contiguous. If that is true, the enrollment pool is still significantly restricted for open enrollment schools.

3) Even if an advantage is evident, I am not certain that we should level the playing field unless it is EXTREMELY difficult for a public school to win. I don't believe this time has come. After all, if one of the major goals of HS sports is to prepare student/athletes for their future lives then we shouldn't pretend that everything in life is fair, and therefore, worry about achieving perfect parity between publics and non-publics.

4) Furthermore, adjusting the system at this time, based on historical data, may be unfair for private schools. Unless we are certain that we are correcting only for the difference in school organizational differences (public or private) and not for independent factors (special focus on sport, better coaching, facilities, simple cyclical effects, etc) we will be handicapping those schools that have done well recently. In effect they will be forced to continue to overperform simply to maintain the status quo.