Idiotic change to postseason basketball seeding

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

I have extremely good knowledge in that area, with pages of stats backing it up.

Name the private schools who dominate on a regular basis.

Then list all the private schools in the state.

Now, 2 questions.

Of those private schools that dominate. How many would still be highly successful moving up a class? Most if not all.

Of those who are not currently dominating, what do you think their chances of ever being competitive in the tournament series would be?

As far as the big schools being pretty competitive you might want to look at 4A football where I believe 10 titles have been won by private schools (or Bettendorf who many argue recruit pretty hard in football) in the last 16 years.

Wait, your argument is that the private schools would still be highly successful moving up a class? So you are making an argument FOR a multiplier.....

And I've already said, 4A isn't really effected because they're already in the top class. 4A results are a moot point in this argument.

Bottom line is private schools make up like 6% of the schools in the state, yet they dominate athletics in classes 1A, 2A and 3A. You have to have some major cognitive dissonance to not understand how teams of recruited all-stars have an advantage against regular public schools.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

It's worked for years in Illinois with hardly ever a controversy. In fact, I can't recall one single seed controversy in all my years of following IL basketball. If the parents/fans publicly outcry before seeing how this will actually work, then the parents/fans are complete idiots.

I guess I'm crazy, but my only real point is I'm willing to see how this actually works before making an assumption that the coaches will do a bad job with it. I guess I'm not sure how that assumption can be made.

Illinois doesn't have the same problems with the private schools because they have a multiplier. So they don't have big private schools that play in the top class all year and then move down to beat up on the public schools. So naturally, they wouldn't have a problem with this seeding format.

If it wasn't for the private school domination, this wouldn't be as big of a deal. I'll try and explain my point...

Right now, Xavier and Wahlert (who, as I can't stress enough should not be in 3A) are consistently getting average to low seeds in the state tournament because of their record. That is the ONLY thing keeping the 3A bracket interesting. With the new system, they will naturally get higher seeds than their records would give them. That means easier first round opponents. That means an even easier road to yet another championship.

I've mentioned this plenty of times before, but since Wahlert and Xavier went down to 3A, they've been undefeated in postseason play (only losing to each other).

 

[cidhawkeye]

Illinois doesn't have the same problems with the private schools because they have a multiplier. So they don't have big private schools that play in the top class all year and then move down to beat up on the public schools. So naturally, they wouldn't have a problem with this seeding format.

If it wasn't for the private school domination, this wouldn't be as big of a deal. I'll try and explain my point...

Right now, Xavier and Wahlert (who, as I can't stress enough should not be in 3A) are consistently getting average to low seeds in the state tournament because of their record. That is the ONLY thing keeping the 3A bracket interesting. With the new system, they will naturally get higher seeds than their records would give them. That means easier first round opponents. That means an even easier road to yet another championship.

I've mentioned this plenty of times before, but since Wahlert and Xavier went down to 3A, they've been undefeated in postseason play (only losing to each other).

So you want the same multiplier system that Illinois has?

 

[wolverine55]

Illinois doesn't have the same problems with the private schools because they have a multiplier. So they don't have big private schools that play in the top class all year and then move down to beat up on the public schools. So naturally, they wouldn't have a problem with this seeding format.

If it wasn't for the private school domination, this wouldn't be as big of a deal. I'll try and explain my point...

Right now, Xavier and Wahlert (who, as I can't stress enough should not be in 3A) are consistently getting average to low seeds in the state tournament because of their record. That is the ONLY thing keeping the 3A bracket interesting. With the new system, they will naturally get higher seeds than their records would give them. That means easier first round opponents. That means an even easier road to yet another championship.

I've mentioned this plenty of times before, but since Wahlert and Xavier went down to 3A, they've been undefeated in postseason play (only losing to each other).

I honestly do have a much better understanding of your position now. Maybe I just wasn't comprehending it well enough early. I still think a system without taking competition into account at all is inherently flawed and this format is much better than simply looking at an 11 game sample to determine the district and sub-state seedings.

 

[4cyt]

I was involved coaching in another state that had this procedure. The only problem we had was when the coaches played politics to get themselves a higher seed. Meaning I know my team and team B will be competing for the same seed (for arguments sake say the 2nd seed) so I will vote team B as 5th or 6th instead of 2nd or 3rd so that I have a better chance at the 2nd seed when all of the votes are counted.

It did not happen much but I did see this happen a couple times.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

So you want the same multiplier system that Illinois has?

I want a multiplier system, not necessarily the one that Illinois has. They do it better than us. Of course, they also have a tougher time, having the Chicago schools to deal with. I think it would be extremely easy for Iowa to fix the problems given how few private schools we have and how few big cities we have for the local private schools to pull from.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

I honestly do have a much better understanding of your position now. Maybe I just wasn't comprehending it well enough early. I still think a system without taking competition into account at all is inherently flawed and this format is much better than simply looking at an 11 game sample to determine the district and sub-state seedings.

OK, I'll give you that, but this system doesn't take competition into account or wins and losses into account. It's just how the coaches "feel" they should vote.

I think the way baseball does it is excellent. Give teams extra points for higher class wins. But if we just had a multiplier and didn't have the same schools dominating every year, both ways would work (I still wouldn't like the voting idea though).

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

I was involved coaching in another state that had this procedure. The only problem we had was when the coaches played politics to get themselves a higher seed. Meaning I know my team and team B will be competing for the same seed (for arguments sake say the 2nd seed) so I will vote team B as 5th or 6th instead of 2nd or 3rd so that I have a better chance at the 2nd seed when all of the votes are counted.

It did not happen much but I did see this happen a couple times.

Exactly. And it benefits the dishonest coaches. I know most coaches won't take advantage and cheat their way to a higher seed, but some coaches will. It's especially bad for districts because that effects hosting.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I want a multiplier system, not necessarily the one that Illinois has. They do it better than us. Of course, they also have a tougher time, having the Chicago schools to deal with. I think it would be extremely easy for Iowa to fix the problems given how few private schools we have and how few big cities we have for the local private schools to pull from.

Well let's hear your multiplier suggestion. If you put in the Illinois multiplier what class Wahlert and Xavier would be in?

 

[wolverine55]

OK, I'll give you that, but this system doesn't take competition into account or wins and losses into account. It's just how the coaches "feel" they should vote.

I think the way baseball does it is excellent. Give teams extra points for higher class wins. But if we just had a multiplier and didn't have the same schools dominating every year, both ways would work (I still wouldn't like the voting idea though).

I think that is simply semantics, because wins and losses and competition are going to influence how the coaches "feel", no? I also think one point of our differences is we are emphasizing different things. I'm more concerned with how this effects district and substate and you are more concerned with how this effects the state tournament. No big deal, just one reason for our differences, I think.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Well let's hear your multiplier suggestion. If you put in the Illinois multiplier what class Wahlert and Xavier would be in?

Xavier would be solidly 4A and Wahlert would be right at the top of 3A or bottom of 4A. That's just with the multiplier and not with the successful school bump thing.

My multiplier suggestion would probably be somewhere between 1.5 and 2. Illinois has a 1.65. I wouldn't do the success bump thing. I would like to see what percent of private school kids are athletes compared to public school kids (in Iowa). That would help decide a number.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

I think that is simply semantics, because wins and losses and competition are going to influence how the coaches "feel", no? I also think one point of our differences is we are emphasizing different things. I'm more concerned with how this effects district and substate and you are more concerned with how this effects the state tournament. No big deal, just one reason for our differences, I think.

Well, wins and losses don't seem to influence some AP voters in the eastern Iowa area that consistently vote the private schools at the top no matter what their record is. I would assume coaches would do the same.

And actually, I agree with you about being more concerned with district and substate. I would be more fine with this rule if it did not effect district and substate tournaments because then you get into home court advantage and stuff like that.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Xavier would be solidly 4A and Wahlert would be right at the top of 3A or bottom of 4A. That's just with the multiplier and not with the successful school bump thing.

My multiplier suggestion would probably be somewhere between 1.5 and 2. Illinois has a 1.65. I wouldn't do the success bump thing. I would like to see what percent of private school kids are athletes compared to public school kids (in Iowa). That would help decide a number.

If you put in the Illinois multiplier both of those schools would still be 3A. You are incorrect on your answer. Good effort though.

 

[WSC72]

Now the drama queen willl ask for a 2.0 multiplier so Westetn moves up a class and her team still gets thumped by a private school.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

If you put in the Illinois multiplier both of those schools would still be 3A. You are incorrect on your answer. Good effort though.

510 X 1.65 = 841.5.

I thought private school kids were good at math. Guess not.

 

[WSC72]

Thoughts on the reverse multiplier from all? Basically reducing enrollment count based on % of kids living in poverty in district?

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Now the drama queen willl ask for a 2.0 multiplier so Westetn moves up a class and her team still gets thumped by a private school.

Western Christian: 192 X 1.65 = 316.8. Again, you private school kids seem to have below high school level class skills. Don't the ritzy schools use some of that money for calculators or does it all go to athletics?

And I don't care that the private schools would still thump the public schools. As I said, naturally, all-star groups of recruited kids should beat public schools even if the multiplier is in place.

 

[WSC72]

Serious question. A couple actually.

Which schools are you specifically referring to that are a recruited all star team. While I cannot speak for all public or private schools I can say that 99% of Western kids attend Christian schools from kindergarten on, very few kids go from public to private at Western or Unity. Heelan is a bit different. Sioux City East tends to get a lot more athletic transfers in than any private school in NW Iowa.

Two you do realize enrollment varies over time so just because a school might not bump up this year does not mean they won't in future. Plus I said a 2.0 multiplier would move them up not 1.65.

By the way I have been a public school guy all my life. No affiliation with private schools.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Thoughts on the reverse multiplier from all? Basically reducing enrollment count based on % of kids living in poverty in district?

Serious question. A couple actually.

Which schools are you specifically referring to that are a recruited all star team. While I cannot speak for all public or private schools I can say that 99% of Western kids attend Christian schools from kindergarten on, very few kids go from public to private at Western or Unity. Heelan is a bit different. Sioux City East tends to get a lot more athletic transfers in than any private school in NW Iowa.

Two you do realize enrollment varies over time so just because a school might not bump up this year does not mean they won't in future. Plus I said a 2.0 multiplier would move them up not 1.65.

By the way I have been a public school guy all my life. No affiliation with private schools.

After the other guy made a false claim that the Illinois multiplier wouldn't bump Xavier, you chimed in with "now the drama queen will ask for a 2.0 multiplier" blah blah blah. Obviously indicating the Illinois multiplier wouldn't bump Western. Again, terrible math on both of your parts and it is hilarious how pompous you both were about it even though you were dead wrong.

Also, I find it funny that you said 99% Western Christian kids attend Christian schools from Kindergarten on. I don't care what school they transferred from. I care that they transferred to make a super team. I honestly don't know much about the western schools. I just know here in eastern Iowa, the private schools recruit. A LOT. (They have to, obviously because no kids are forced to go to their school based on where they live).

I don't understand why these super teams even want to play at the lower classes like Western and Regina do. Is it really all that much of an accomplishment to beat up on these small public schools? Why wouldn't you want more of a challenge?

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Again (and we've gotten way off topic here), nobody that is proposing a multiplier is trying to keep the private schools from winning. I agree that the private schools would win a disproportionate number of titles in the higher classes to. That would be a GOOD THING. If Western Christian wins the 3A title, that means they in all likelyhood would have won the 2A title by a ton. That's an argument FOR a multiplier.

And yes, we understand that not all private schools will get bumped by a 1.65 (or whatever number) multiplier. The multiplier is put in to make up for the fact the public schools have a ton of kids who can't play sports (for whatever reason; special needs, poverty, whatever) and it still counts on their enrollment.

 

[WSC72]

Which is why I asked about the reverse multiplier.

Also how about public schools who have high open enrollment numbers and those open enrollees participate on athletics?

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Which is why I asked about the reverse multiplier.

Also how about public schools who have high open enrollment numbers and those open enrollees participate on athletics?

Reverse multiplier would probably be a little harder for them to keep track of and explain but I'm cool with that too.

I personally don't like the open enrollment laws as a whole, first off. I don't think it's cool that when kids open enroll, the school they are open enrolling from actually has to pay the school they are going to.

I think it's a fair argument about the schools with high open enrollment numbers, but I think the main issue with that is they should enforce the recruiting rules better, because a good number of those open enrollment kids do it because of sports. I'm all for school choice, but that's a huge issue where a school with good athletic teams basically drains out the schools around it when their coaches start recruiting form around the area.

If a coach gets caught recruiting he should be suspended for at least one season, IMO.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Reverse multiplier would probably be a little harder for them to keep track of and explain but I'm cool with that too.

I personally don't like the open enrollment laws as a whole, first off. I don't think it's cool that when kids open enroll, the school they are open enrolling from actually has to pay the school they are going to.

I think it's a fair argument about the schools with high open enrollment numbers, but I think the main issue with that is they should enforce the recruiting rules better, because a good number of those open enrollment kids do it because of sports. I'm all for school choice, but that's a huge issue where a school with good athletic teams basically drains out the schools around it when their coaches start recruiting form around the area.

If a coach gets caught recruiting he should be suspended for at least one season, IMO.

But classification wise, I don't know. Maybe open-enrollment kids count as 1.5 on the enrollment numbers or something? I'm just spit-balling on that one.

 

[WSC72]

Thanks for the thought out response. I appreciate that. Speaking as someone (from a public school who has benefitted both academically and athletically from open enrollment) who has spent many hours debating the issue with public, private and state employees I can tell you that the issue of a multiplier has been discussed at length. There is not an easy answer.

Implementing a multiplier affects very few schools. Most would not move up with a 1.65, but that is going to vary with enrollment. Moving all privates up a class punishes a large number when the issue is only a half dozen or so schools who are constantly winning.

A reverse multiplier at one time had DM Hoover dropping to 2A.

The "success" multiplier is typically put into place after the highly successful group graduates.

Do we really want HS kids to be told they are only worth half of what a private school kid is worth?

Just so many other issues come into play with any "answer' to the issue.

As mentioned above schools like Bettendorf, Valley, Denver, WSR who had multiple move ins or OE kids during their highly successful runs in respective sports.

It's a LOT bigger than just a private school issue.

 

[WSC72]

By the way. The drama queen comment was uncalled for. My apologies.

 

[cidhawkeye]

510 X 1.65 = 841.5.

I thought private school kids were good at math. Guess not.

A very nice calculation, now put in the Ilinois multiplier for all non boundary schools in Iowa which is all of them so every school in Iowa gets multiplied, so everybody stays where they are. Illinois doesn't have a private school multiplier. The field leveling action of open enrollment does that. Close open enrollment and maybe a multiplier makes sense. Can you let me know your goals in your quest? Any examples of a multiplier accomplishing that goal? One would think there would be a majority of states putting these things in.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Thanks for the thought out response. I appreciate that. Speaking as someone (from a public school who has benefitted both academically and athletically from open enrollment) who has spent many hours debating the issue with public, private and state employees I can tell you that the issue of a multiplier has been discussed at length. There is not an easy answer.

Implementing a multiplier affects very few schools. Most would not move up with a 1.65, but that is going to vary with enrollment. Moving all privates up a class punishes a large number when the issue is only a half dozen or so schools who are constantly winning.

A reverse multiplier at one time had DM Hoover dropping to 2A.

The "success" multiplier is typically put into place after the highly successful group graduates.

Do we really want HS kids to be told they are only worth half of what a private school kid is worth?

Just so many other issues come into play with any "answer' to the issue.

As mentioned above schools like Bettendorf, Valley, Denver, WSR who had multiple move ins or OE kids during their highly successful runs in respective sports.

It's a LOT bigger than just a private school issue.

No prob on the drama queen thing.

Nobody is being told they are only worth half of what private school kids are worth. The reason for the multiplier is just simply because private schools have a higher percentage of kids who are actually eligible to play sports. They don't have nearly as big of a problem with mentally disabled kids, free and reduced lunch kids who can't afford to play a sports, etc...

If you want every private school to bump up one, you can just make the multiplier plus one class. But I don't necessarily think the multiplier should bump all private schools up a class. Once again, the multiplier is just to make up for the higher percentage of kids who can play sports at the private schools. It has nothing to do with punishing success or telling kids they aren't as good as private school kids.

Nobody is as effected by the private school advantages as public school kids who have to play the privates in postseason play. How would you feel if you had this great class, who win every game in 7th grade, 8th grade, whatever. But then when you finally have the chance to get to state, you get knocked out by a team of all-stars from a bunch of different schools? That is what it's like for the public school kids on the east coast.

Totally agree with the success multiplier thing. That would just mess things up for students who are a grade or two below a stacked class that might move them up. Especially in basketball, one or two great players make a big difference (which is another reason the privates are able to dominate when they scoop a couple of players from the 4A schools in their city).

The bottom line is, if they don't put in some sort of a solution, the private schools are going to keep recruiting heavily and keep dominating.

And back to the original discussion, I will bet my yearly salary that at least one of the superstar teams in 3A (Xavier, Wahlert) will be bumped a couple of seeds by the new format when the state tournament rolls around, making it that much easier for them to win again.

 

[cidhawkeye]

No prob on the drama queen thing.

Nobody is being told they are only worth half of what private school kids are worth. The reason for the multiplier is just simply because private schools have a higher percentage of kids who are actually eligible to play sports. They don't have nearly as big of a problem with mentally disabled kids, free and reduced lunch kids who can't afford to play a sports, etc...

If you want every private school to bump up one, you can just make the multiplier plus one class. But I don't necessarily think the multiplier should bump all private schools up a class. Once again, the multiplier is just to make up for the higher percentage of kids who can play sports at the private schools. It has nothing to do with punishing success or telling kids they aren't as good as private school kids.

Nobody is as effected by the private school advantages as public school kids who have to play the privates in postseason play. How would you feel if you had this great class, who win every game in 7th grade, 8th grade, whatever. But then when you finally have the chance to get to state, you get knocked out by a team of all-stars from a bunch of different schools? That is what it's like for the public school kids on the east coast.

Totally agree with the success multiplier thing. That would just mess things up for students who are a grade or two below a stacked class that might move them up. Especially in basketball, one or two great players make a big difference (which is another reason the privates are able to dominate when they scoop a couple of players from the 4A schools in their city).

The bottom line is, if they don't put in some sort of a solution, the private schools are going to keep recruiting heavily and keep dominating.

And back to the original discussion, I will bet my yearly salary that at least one of the superstar teams in 3A (Xavier, Wahlert) will be bumped a couple of seeds by the new format when the state tournament rolls around, making it that much easier for them to win again.

"But then when you finally have the chance to get to state, you get knocked out by a team of all-stars from a bunch of different schools?"

You continue to mention these all-stars from a bunch of different schools. It must be pretty prevalent, can you share some specific incidents, teams, players etc. that have shown up at private schools late in their career to make this claim? Then maybe we can start looking at public schools and whether they are equally benefited by some open enrollment kids. It would be interesting to gain some knowledge on the Wahlert and Xavier situations to see how prevalent it is. I know the Regina situation fairly well and they have a limited amount of those situations occurring, far less than they kids who leave the school.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

"But then when you finally have the chance to get to state, you get knocked out by a team of all-stars from a bunch of different schools?"

You continue to mention these all-stars from a bunch of different schools. It must be pretty prevalent, can you share some specific incidents, teams, players etc. that have shown up at private schools late in their career to make this claim? Then maybe we can start looking at public schools and whether they are equally benefited by some open enrollment kids. It would be interesting to gain some knowledge on the Wahlert and Xavier situations to see how prevalent it is. I know the Regina situation fairly well and they have a limited amount of those situations occurring, far less than they kids who leave the school.

Ooh yeah right, "they have limited amount of those situations occuring." Sure, the Regina kids are just reeeeally really talented. That has to be it. It's all the same kids who grew up together and they all attend Mass every Sunday, right?

Let's check in on the reigning 3A champions: http://www.thegazette.com/subject/sports/transfers-hope-to-have-big-impact-on-xavier-basketball-20151202


"Techau, along with Matt Mims, said they transferred primarily to play basketball"

 

[cidhawkeye]

Ooh yeah right, "they have limited amount of those situations occuring." Sure, the Regina kids are just reeeeally really talented. That has to be it. It's all the same kids who grew up together and they all attend Mass every Sunday, right?

Let's check in on the reigning 3A champions: http://www.thegazette.com/subject/s...have-big-impact-on-xavier-basketball-20151202


"Techau, along with Matt Mims, said they transferred primarily to play basketball"

Wow, you really blew us out of the water with that, 2 kids! Breaking news, stop the presses. Heck West Branch had 2 all state players this year that transferred in. Feel free to break down Regina football for me, show me all of the late transfers into the program since their title run. I will patiently wait.

This is where you have the opportunity to back up your claims and provide either statistics or actual names or situations.

 

[S.E.iowahardwood]

All private schools should have to go up one class. They get to play the same game with different rules.

 

[cidhawkeye]

All private schools should have to go up one class. They get to play the same game with different rules.

What are the different rules the private schools get to use?

 

[wolverine55]

That's what I was thinking. I've said it before, but I still think the fact Iowa is an open enrollment state makes this a moot point. Illinois has a multiplier for non-boundary schools, but it's not an open enrollment state either. There school districts actually have boundaries students must reside inside of.

 

[S.E.iowahardwood]

What are the different rules the private schools get to use?

Do they have to follow the March 21st enrollment rule? I know of a state championship team that had players from Illinois and another that drove 50 miles one way to get to school. There is just to much gray area for private schools.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Do they have to follow the March 21st enrollment rule? I know of a state championship team that had players from Illinois and another that drove 50 miles one way to get to school. There is just to much gray area for private schools.

They follow the same enrollment dates and rules. I know of a school that had all state players transfer in with the same address. It happens far more at public schools. The school receives money for OE where at a private school the family has to pay tuition.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

Wow, you really blew us out of the water with that, 2 kids! Breaking news, stop the presses. Heck West Branch had 2 all state players this year that transferred in. Feel free to break down Regina football for me, show me all of the late transfers into the program since their title run. I will patiently wait.

This is where you have the opportunity to back up your claims and provide either statistics or actual names or situations.

Did you read the story? Obviously not since it says 5 transfers in like the first paragraph of the story.

I'm not going to publicly call out every kid who transfered to a private school. Everyone knows the private schools are good because of transfers. You have to either be an idiot or an extremely biased parent/alumni (which you obviously are) to not understand that.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

All private schools should have to go up one class. They get to play the same game with different rules.

I'd be perfectly fine with all privates going up one class. That would solve a lot of issues and most of the teams that dominate regularly would still be one of the favorites in their new class.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Did you read the story? Obviously not since it says 5 transfers in like the first paragraph of the story.

I'm not going to publicly call out every kid who transfered to a private school. Everyone knows the private schools are good because of transfers. You have to either be an idiot or an extremely biased parent/alumni (which you obviously are) to not understand that.

You directing the word 'idiot' at anyone is an interesting tactic. Especially following your 'everyone knows' perspective. I hope you are getting some compensation for your ill informed posts designed to drive responses. You are thankfully one of a kind or one of few who look at a limited sample and decide that is how it works everywhere. Keep up the quest, your posts are at least entertaining.

 

[NeverReadTheTermsOfService]

You directing the word 'idiot' at anyone is an interesting tactic. Especially following your 'everyone knows' perspective. I hope you are getting some compensation for your ill informed posts designed to drive responses. You are thankfully one of a kind or one of few who look at a limited sample and decide that is how it works everywhere. Keep up the quest, your posts are at least entertaining.

Oh yeah, I'm working for IowaPreps to drive up posts. In the basketball section, during football preseason. Solid conspiracy theory. Everything seems to check out.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Did you read the story? Obviously not since it says 5 transfers in like the first paragraph of the story.

I'm not going to publicly call out every kid who transfered to a private school. Everyone knows the private schools are good because of transfers. You have to either be an idiot or an extremely biased parent/alumni (which you obviously are) to not understand that.

Well we have learned that the Cedar Rapids All Stars were better than the Iowa City All Stars on Friday. At least one of the All Star teams emerged victorious. I do have a question for you there terms, have you linked any stories about any of the OE kids who have been mentioned in articles? I am fairly certain there have been some and I don't recall reading those linked by you.