|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Feb 1, 2021 8:49:25 GMT -6
There has been a proposal to our HSL office to change how we create our classification system. Our current system revolves around 1st classification by student population, THEN by geographic local.... basic stuff. We have 5 classifications: A all the way up to AAAAA. Again pretty standard. And with anything there are going to be group members that feels like they get the short end of the stick. And being a fairly rural state, squaring the school size with geographic proximity means there is always somebody that has to travel. Added to that there are some schools that complain that size disparity between the largest member of a particular classification and the smallest member makes for 'competition disparity' come playoff time (and for that matter in region play). Now there is a proposal suggesting we increase the classification from 5 to 6 (which we don't have enough school for 5 in my opinion) as well as a "promotion/relegation model" similar to what is done in Indiana. I haven't seen the proposal to dig through it but an article from the local paper did a story on it recently. I'll post a the entire article HERE but it is a pay site so I don't know if the entire article will post, so here is an excerpt: The promotion/relegation model would be applied on a sport-by-sport basis. Upon the conclusion of a two-year realignment and reclassification cycle, schools competing below the state’s largest classification (AAAAAA or AAAAA under the proposal) in a specific sport achieving eight or more points in the playoffs would move up to the next-largest enrollment classification. As many as four teams could qualify for promotion in each sport and in each cycle.I just want to get your guys experience before I make an assessment of the proposal. But here are a couple of questions: 1- Even if it does fix the supposed problems, wouldn't it create others? Mostly regions base the region schedule for ALL sports off of the common region opponents. Now the girls softball might be in a totally different size classification and region than the baseball, track, basketball, etc... 2- Especially for small schools, wouldn't that punish a team when they got a good run of athletes and did well? When you studs graduate the ones left behind are the ones playing in the tougher region/playoffs. I appreciate your replies. |
|
|
|
Post by cwaltsmith on Feb 1, 2021 9:53:19 GMT -6
You said 8 points in the playoffs... How are points earned??? I am sure it has to do with winning games but how many  I think a merit type system is good in some ways. For instance... here in Tennessee, 3A football is decided preseason... A school has now won 6 straight and 8 out of last 11 with other 3 won by Private schools that have since been moved to D2. In this case this team could have probably won or finished 2nd in the largest class most years. However, I dont think you should be moved after 1 good year, but then you get into where do you draw the line... Good Topic |
|
|
|
Post by Defcord on Feb 1, 2021 9:58:13 GMT -6
Indiana did it because the private schools were dominating state championships in all classes. I think since it was enacted more public schools have won state titles so it has been somewhat successful in that regard.
It was implemented right after I left the state so I never coached under the rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Feb 1, 2021 10:07:59 GMT -6
You said 8 points in the playoffs... How are points earned??? I am sure it has to do with winning games but how many I think a merit type system is good in some ways. For instance... here in Tennessee, 3A football is decided preseason... A school has now won 6 straight and 8 out of last 11 with other 3 won by Private schools that have since been moved to D2. In this case this team could have probably won or finished 2nd in the largest class most years. However, I dont think you should be moved after 1 good year, but then you get into where do you draw the line... Good Topic Again I haven't read the actual proposal but basically you win round 1 of the playoffs you get 1 point, round 2 = 2 points, etc... |
|
|
|
Post by cwaltsmith on Feb 1, 2021 10:14:47 GMT -6
You said 8 points in the playoffs... How are points earned??? I am sure it has to do with winning games but how many I think a merit type system is good in some ways. For instance... here in Tennessee, 3A football is decided preseason... A school has now won 6 straight and 8 out of last 11 with other 3 won by Private schools that have since been moved to D2. In this case this team could have probably won or finished 2nd in the largest class most years. However, I dont think you should be moved after 1 good year, but then you get into where do you draw the line... Good Topic Again I haven't read the actual proposal but basically you win round 1 of the playoffs you get 1 point, round 2 = 2 points, etc... Man thats tough... So if my school has the best class in school history and goes to the semis and gets beat 50 pts, then next 2 years we have to play up??? Dang thats tough |
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Feb 1, 2021 10:25:13 GMT -6
The relegation model is awful. Really punishes small schools.
In CA I was at a school of 1000. Had a great Senior Class, won state championship.
We got moved up. The next smallest HS in our class had twice as many kids. And we lost all of our seniors... we got smoked.
Another place I was at where we struggled had 2500 kids. They got moved down until they were in a super small classification. Ended up in a "state championship" game against a school with like 600 kids... it's absurd.
Best organization IMO:
- Split the playoff groupings and chsmpionships by size... this is your level playing field (or as close as it can get at least)
- Create different class(es) for private schools. Its not wrong. They're just playing with a different set of rules. i've coached in a private school. I fully support this.
- Organize your leagues by competition and geography. Allows you to keep rivalries while still remaining competitive in games. It's ok to play a bigger or smaller school.
- Use a points based system for seeding.
Perhaps the biggest thing though - instead of relegating big schools until they have success, allow struggling teams to be independent. They can make their own schedules but are ineligible for the playoffs. Allows teams to build but doesn't punish small schools. They call it the "Ovy League" in NJ (which... I do think is unfair to real Ivy league universities and the perception about their quality of football but whatever)
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Feb 1, 2021 11:58:19 GMT -6
I’m in Indiana.
Our playoffs go:
8 team sectional
Regional
Semi state
State
Sectional championship gets you 1 point
Regional 2
Semi-state 3
State 4
We reclassify our 6 classes every 2 years.
6 points during that 2 year cycle and you moved up to the next classification.
Earn 2 points in that higher classification and you stay there.
What it has done is leveled out the playing field for 2A-6A, as the teams dominating those classes (privates) are good enough to move up and still get two points.
1A, however, has the highest percentage of private schools. Half of them suck, but the ones in Indy and Lafayette will have high school enrollment numbers of 200 kids, but they are almost all athletes.
The 1A school that won this years state title started playing football in 2015.
Know any 5 year programs taking state?
I’m not a “oh they can recruit” guy, but the advantage of access to a big population, coupled with the ability to cap enrollment makes for a huge advantage.
And, there are enough of them that the keep screwing up the success factor for each other.
Outside of that, it’s been good for football in our state.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Feb 1, 2021 12:18:49 GMT -6
I’m in Indiana. Our playoffs go: 8 team sectional Regional Semi state State Sectional championship gets you 1 point Regional 2 Semi-state 3 State 4 We reclassify our 6 classes every 2 years. 6 points during that 2 year cycle and you moved up to the next classification. Earn 2 points in that higher classification and you stay there. What it has done is leveled out the playing field for 2A-6A, as the teams dominating those classes (privates) are good enough to move up and still get two points. 1A, however, has the highest percentage of private schools. Half of them suck, but the ones in Indy and Lafayette will have high school enrollment numbers of 200 kids, but they are almost all athletes. The 1A school that won this years state title started playing football in 2015. Know any 5 year programs taking state?I’m not a “oh they can recruit” guy, but the advantage of access to a big population, coupled with the ability to cap enrollment makes for a huge advantage. And, there are enough of them that the keep screwing up the success factor for each other. Outside of that, it’s been good for football in our state.-Yeah, we have a school that did that and better. And it wasn't in the smallest classification. It is a public school that split off of 2 other schools because of growth (south of Charlotte) and played in the upper divisions... won in the 3rd year and in the last 13 years has won it/played for it 6 times. - would you say that your assessment is the general consensus of coaches around the state? And do y'all do this for all sports? or just football? |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Feb 1, 2021 12:31:50 GMT -6
The relegation model is awful. Really punishes small schools. In CA I was at a school of 1000. Had a great Senior Class, won state championship. We got moved up. The next smallest HS in our class had twice as many kids. (1)And we lost all of our seniors... we got smoked. Another place I was at where we struggled had 2500 kids. They got moved down until they were in a super small classification. Ended up in a "state championship" game against a school with like 600 kids... it's absurd. Best organization IMO: - Split the (2)playoff groupings and chsmpionships by size... this is your level playing field (or as close as it can get at least) - Create different class(es) for (3)private schools. Its not wrong. They're just playing with a different set of rules. i've coached in a private school. I fully support this. - Organize your leagues by (4)competition and geography. Allows you to keep rivalries while still remaining competitive in games. It's ok to play a bigger or smaller school. - Use a points based system for seeding. Perhaps the biggest thing though - (5)instead of relegating big schools until they have success, allow struggling teams to be independent. They can make their own schedules but are ineligible for the playoffs. Allows teams to build but doesn't punish small schools. They call it the "Ovy League" in NJ (which... I do think is unfair to real Ivy league universities and the perception about their quality of football but whatever) 1-that's kind of what I was supposing at. 2- we did that... kind of. before the most recent restructure, we had 4 classifications. Then 3 of the 4 split for the playoffs with an upper and lower division for 7 total champions. Football was the only sport that did that. 'They' wanted some uniformity so we went to 5 classifications (which we don't have enough school to really make this work well). I'd like to see up go DOWN to 3 classifications and then split for the playoffs (for all sports). This would solve all the complaints different schools have -- travel, size, competitiveness, etc... 3- that's the sticky thing. SC has 2 school leagues; 1 that is completely private and 1 that is MOSTLY public. There are a handful of privates in our league, but all are in the lower classification. The charter schools are the ones that are actually creating this situation more than the privates.... at least for football. 4- that is the 1st criteria now -- size and geography 5- mostly that wasn't SOP for the league, but recently allowed 1 school to play down in football but not be eligible for playoffs/championships. Most of the time this type of request was denied. sorry for errors trying to finish before lunch is over thx |
|
|
|
Post by fkaboneyard on Feb 1, 2021 12:40:07 GMT -6
At least in California, high school sports has become an arms race where the schools willing to spend the most money and/or bend/break the most rules will win. I coached at a public school and our best athletes were poached by private schools. I coached at private schools where some were willing to write fat checks for kids and some only offered sports as an extracurricular (read: scholarships were based on academics/financial need only). CIF has basically said, "Have at it, boys" and, in my opinion, has ruined what high school sports were.
It's tough because size and/or being a private school doesn't necessarily mean that a team will be good or bad. We've got two private schools within 7 miles of each other. Similar size and demographics. One plays for state titles year after year, the other is a division 11 school that plays for crappy league championships and then gets rocked in the first round of playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by spartan on Feb 1, 2021 14:35:26 GMT -6
No system works or is fair. Trying to manipulate or reclassify just leads to unattended consequences. IE Play well get moved up until you can't compete. If you are the top it just puts in schools for you to pad your win total.
|
|
|
|
Post by macdiiddy on Feb 1, 2021 18:12:48 GMT -6
As a private school coach in Indiana, I think this is a fair system. We fell just short of getting enough points to move up this year, but we would have accepted the challenge moving up in classification.
Our team this year is going to be younger and presumably have lesser athletes. But I still feel we would be competitive in one class higher.
There are absolutely some teams that get screwed from having a talented junior and senior class in the wrong two year cycle but it has done a good job moving the top dogs up to a higher classification, while giving stellar public school programs the chance to compete for higher levels of competition.
People or fans That look at this as a punishment Are not doing it right. It's an opportunity To take your program to the next level and compete against better competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Feb 1, 2021 18:56:46 GMT -6
I don't understand why people have to overcomplicate things. In Virginia classifications are set up strictly by enrollment and that's all (Privates have their own association). There may be people who find a reason to think that's unfair but that's true in any system so why make it harder than it needs to be?
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Feb 1, 2021 19:04:41 GMT -6
As a private school coach in Indiana, I think this is a fair system. We fell just short of getting enough points to move up this year, but we would have accepted the challenge moving up in classification. Our team this year is going to be younger and presumably have lesser athletes. But I still feel we would be competitive in one class higher. There are absolutely some teams that get screwed from having a talented junior and senior class in the wrong two year cycle but it has done a good job moving the top dogs up to a higher classification, while giving stellar public school programs the chance to compete for higher levels of competition. People or fans That look at this as a punishment Are not doing it right. It's an opportunity To take your program to the next level and compete against better competition. Yeah, it works pretty well. I would say seeing the Cathedrals, etc play up has been good overall. |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Feb 1, 2021 19:14:12 GMT -6
I’m in Indiana. Our playoffs go: 8 team sectional Regional Semi state State Sectional championship gets you 1 point Regional 2 Semi-state 3 State 4 We reclassify our 6 classes every 2 years. 6 points during that 2 year cycle and you moved up to the next classification. Earn 2 points in that higher classification and you stay there. What it has done is leveled out the playing field for 2A-6A, as the teams dominating those classes (privates) are good enough to move up and still get two points. 1A, however, has the highest percentage of private schools. Half of them suck, but the ones in Indy and Lafayette will have high school enrollment numbers of 200 kids, but they are almost all athletes. The 1A school that won this years state title started playing football in 2015. Know any 5 year programs taking state?I’m not a “oh they can recruit” guy, but the advantage of access to a big population, coupled with the ability to cap enrollment makes for a huge advantage. And, there are enough of them that the keep screwing up the success factor for each other. Outside of that, it’s been good for football in our state.-Yeah, we have a school that did that and better. And it wasn't in the smallest classification. It is a public school that split off of 2 other schools because of growth (south of Charlotte) and played in the upper divisions... won in the 3rd year and in the last 13 years has won it/played for it 6 times. - would you say that your assessment is the general consensus of coaches around the state? And do y'all do this for all sports? or just football? Most public school coaches in my state dislike private schools.....especially at the 1A level. Most public 1A schools struggle to get 40 players, and usually 15-20 of those are varsity caliber. You do everything right, overcome 50% free reduced lunch, etc......and your most talented team in 30 years gets destroyed by a school whose running back was second string on a 6A team the season before.... Yes, the success factor is for all sports |
|
|
|
Post by canesfan on Feb 2, 2021 8:33:06 GMT -6
I’ve always felt that success should be a factor in classification. I also think roster size should be in the formula. I know many states use a multiplier for private schools. They are playing with a different set of rules but honestly you could say that about all situations. Inner city jobs in our state are not as good (usually) as suburban jobs, independent schools have an advantage on county schools, etc. Hard lines to draw so I feel School size, roster size, & success should all be factors in deciding where someone plays classification wise.
|
|
|
|
Post by gamecock303 on Feb 3, 2021 3:08:58 GMT -6
The relegation model is awful. Really punishes small schools. In CA I was at a school of 1000. Had a great Senior Class, won state championship. We got moved up. The next smallest HS in our class had twice as many kids. (1)And we lost all of our seniors... we got smoked. Another place I was at where we struggled had 2500 kids. They got moved down until they were in a super small classification. Ended up in a "state championship" game against a school with like 600 kids... it's absurd. Best organization IMO: - Split the (2)playoff groupings and chsmpionships by size... this is your level playing field (or as close as it can get at least) - Create different class(es) for (3)private schools. Its not wrong. They're just playing with a different set of rules. i've coached in a private school. I fully support this. - Organize your leagues by (4)competition and geography. Allows you to keep rivalries while still remaining competitive in games. It's ok to play a bigger or smaller school. - Use a points based system for seeding. Perhaps the biggest thing though - (5)instead of relegating big schools until they have success, allow struggling teams to be independent. They can make their own schedules but are ineligible for the playoffs. Allows teams to build but doesn't punish small schools. They call it the "Ovy League" in NJ (which... I do think is unfair to real Ivy league universities and the perception about their quality of football but whatever) 1-that's kind of what I was supposing at. 2- we did that... kind of. before the most recent restructure, we had 4 classifications. Then 3 of the 4 split for the playoffs with an upper and lower division for 7 total champions. Football was the only sport that did that. 'They' wanted some uniformity so we went to 5 classifications (which we don't have enough school to really make this work well). I'd like to see up go DOWN to 3 classifications and then split for the playoffs (for all sports). This would solve all the complaints different schools have -- travel, size, competitiveness, etc... 3- that's the sticky thing. SC has 2 school leagues; 1 that is completely private and 1 that is MOSTLY public. There are a handful of privates in our league, but all are in the lower classification. The charter schools are the ones that are actually creating this situation more than the privates.... at least for football. 4- that is the 1st criteria now -- size and geography 5- mostly that wasn't SOP for the league, but recently allowed 1 school to play down in football but not be eligible for playoffs/championships. Most of the time this type of request was denied. sorry for errors trying to finish before lunch is over thx The charter schools are like 99% of the issue. No one really cared about the private schools until Bishop England and Christ Church both began having some success in football and even then only a few cared. I don't know about in the upstate but BE has been pretty dominant down here in a lot of the other sports for as long as I can remember, but it wasn't really an issue for most people. Since the charter schools have come onto the scene (3 or 4 in particular) it has become a big issue. The school that I coach baseball at was in the region with one of them prior to the last realignment and outside of football we flat out did not stand a chance against them in most sports. Never mind the demographic differences in the schools (poor rural school vs wealthy suburban school where the kids have much easy access to a variety of different club sports and private trainers), from my understanding the kids at the charter school were only in class for about half of the school day and as a result had more time to practice/lift vs us trying to squeeze in a couple hours of practice after getting out at 4 and getting kids home in time to eat do homework and go to sleep. I'm not sure what the answer is (at least one that won't get all of the pro school choice at any cost politicians all riled up) but something needs to be done. Adding another class can't be the answer, in our current region we are already looking at a minimum of a 45 minute drive to the nearest school. |
|
|
|
Post by coachwoodall on Feb 3, 2021 8:02:02 GMT -6
gamecock303oh I know about the privates... When BE had their little run and it starting ruffling everyone's feathers, a buddy of mine asked, "Where was all this while BE was winning 18 straight volleyball champions?" And yes we surely don't need another class, as I said in fact 5 is too many. I have no idea why people didn't get on Chuck Jordan's idea of having 3 classifications, then splitting each for the playoffs. I guess it made too much sense to solve the size disparity AND geography issue at the same time..... I fully understand the frustration that schools have, but the privates and charters were accepted into the HSL. And now the member schools want to change the rules so to affect just those certain members. I don't know the answer either. I'm just trying to get as many perspectives as I can. I guess it's been like that for a long time. Back in the day all the big boys got tired of Big John down in Summerville winning so much that they created the Big 16.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldman61 on Feb 3, 2021 8:27:31 GMT -6
Coach from Indiana, as others have stated above, the reclassification system was meant more as an answer for people wanting a multiplier system.
Indiana is a little unique in that we only have around 300 high schools playing football, and because of that everyone makes the playoffs.
The reclassification every 2 years helps the smaller schools that have 1 great class come through. For example, the 19 and 20 football seasons were a 2 year period. A team would have to go to state championships in those 2 consecutive seasons, or win 1 state title and in the other year make it to the final 4. Does it happen, of course, but not as often as you would think.
In the scenario above, if a school;
17: lost first round
18: won state title = 4 points
That was a classification they didn’t get 6 points they stay
19: won state title with that great class of JRs. = 4 points
20: made to final 8= 1 point
This classification they didn’t get 6 points either so they stay
So even though that great class won back to back state titles they don’t bump up because of it. Does it happen where that “class” wins big in years that are classification? Of course, but again not as often as you would think.
That part of it is what makes it good, only teams that are seeing continued success as a PROGRAM rather than a class.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Feb 3, 2021 8:47:13 GMT -6
make the private schools play only themselves
I am still Texas UIL allowed in two private schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by fcboiler87 on Feb 6, 2021 20:38:04 GMT -6
Also from Indiana..
I will say as a whole I think it has been a good thing for not just football, but all sports.
Although, here is my one issue. I think the two year cycle is too short. Just one example here, but I am sure there are more. This was girls basketball... team had some generational classes coming through. They won a sectional with freshmen/sophomores. Then went to state with that class the next year and lost. But as a result, they were bumped up to a higher class the next year. There was no way they were going to make state in that class, though they were very good and competed. Had the cycle been every 4 years, this school would have likely won a state title, which would have been first in school history.
It is examples like that in which I think it hurts public schools that have a few really good classes in a row. If the cycle were 4 years instead of two, I think it'd be more representative of the success of that school/program.
|
|
|
|
Post by realdawg on Feb 7, 2021 6:11:59 GMT -6
Its simple IF YOU FORCE ALL PRIVATES to play in their own league. Then you use size and geography.....charters may be an issue for some, but here, in most sports they are not. In NC we are very similar to SC. Most privates play on their own....however, some play public schools. Charlotte Catholic at times has dominated 2a and 3a playoffs. We are in the process of realignment which we do every 4 years. The state has come up with some kind of formula that uses enrollment (which is the only factor used in the past), Wells Fargo Cup Points (How well your athletic department has done as a whole), and % of free and reduced lunch students. We have 4 classes. The state wanted to go to 5 but needed the school approval, when they sent out the vote, most schools voted for 5 classes, HOWEVER, not enough schools voted for the vote to count!. So we are stuck with 4. With this new formula in 4a school size ranges from 1600-3600. Thats crazy in my opinion. We also subdivide the playoffs and would have 8 state champions, which is too many probably in NC. This is part of the reason the state wanted to go to 5 classes. However, since not enough schools voted, it didnt happen, so now the state has decided that starting in the fall we will not subdivide the playoffs anymore. 4 state champs and half as many teams making the playoffs. In my opinion.....its the states way of punishing schools for not voting.
|
|
I think a merit type system is good in some ways. For instance... here in Tennessee, 3A football is decided preseason... A school has now won 6 straight and 8 out of last 11 with other 3 won by Private schools that have since been moved to D2. In this case this team could have probably won or finished 2nd in the largest class most years. However, I dont think you should be moved after 1 good year, but then you get into where do you draw the line... Good Topic
