I've heard that the possibility of 7 classes is being thrown around by MSHSAA. Does anyone else know anything about this? What's your opinion on it?
7 Classes?
- Thread starter NikeFootball59
- Start date
I believe the idea of 7 classes is to eliminate one game from the season and allow for football to start a little later. This doesn't seem like a bad idea. Again if we are making decisions that are truly to benefit kids then I am all for it!
- #34
- #34
They didn't subtract a class when they added a week. Why add a class if they subtract a week?
I think they should have 28 classes of 12 teams apiece. And have double-elimination playoffs.
Then, if you don't win your class, you should get to keep playing smaller schools until you do.
If it means moving the season back I'm all for it. With 8 6-team districts. the top two teams in each district would get a bye - I'm OK with that. But even better is that you wouldn't have the lowest seed having to play the top seed. Take the current eight-team district - #1 seed plays #8. #1 would often be 9-0 team playing a 0-9 team. with a 6-team district now the #3 seed might be 5-4 and playing a 0-9 team. Wouldn't be quite as bad of a matchup.
If the 0-9 team would win a couple more games during the season, they wouldn't have such a bad match up either..
first off, seven classes is a terrible idea, it will allow another team to get a state championship, which may keep a couple of coaches their jobs, but do we really need another class, they do not want to shorten the season they want to push starting time back would be my guess, the weekend after thanks giving is the set championship, instead of adding a class how about take out the jamboree or make it a 9 game season instead of a 10, just take out a game, iowa has a 9 game regular season, in Idaho we had a 8 game season, we don't have to have a 10 game season and a jam, don't tell me about conferences,
I wake up every day of my life wondering why we can't be more like Iowa and Idaho.
In all reality how many 5-8 seeds have made it to the district championship since the new system was put in place. Just a thought, have the top 4 seeds play for the district title, have the bottom 4 seeds play a week 10 game that is winnable. That eliminates the extra, often times meaningless week, it saves the 1-8 match-ups that are blowouts and minimizes changes. Thoughts?
We has this same conversation last week on here. Personally don't like the idea. Figueroa it will water things down more.
We played for the district title this year as a 5 seed. And the 8 seed beat the 1 seed in our district, so it does happen.
I think I stated this before, maybe a couple of years ago, I don't see the state that worried about shortening the season, they moved up the season a week so that we could have a full week in between playoff games, they did not get rid of the jamboree, they want the game the weekend after thanksgiving, just make the season 9 games instead of 10, or get rid of the jamboree and start the first game when we would have had the jam, they like to put restrictions on the coaches to make it look like they are doing something but they really don't care, so to add, we don't need 7 classes and 8 man which would be 8 classes, there are ways to start the season later without adding another class
Last edited:
We can blame MSHSAA all we want but the vote of schools is what dictates things.
MSHSAA puts on the annual ballot what schools tell them too. If 7 classes happens it will be by a vote of the schools.
MSHSAA puts on the annual ballot what schools tell them too. If 7 classes happens it will be by a vote of the schools.
Ae
Arkansas has had 7 classes in football for while and they seem to be pretty happy with it.
Do you happen to know what their breakdown of classes is? I thought they forced all schools with a population under 400
I do not know how they break it down. They force all schools under 400 to do what?
Sorry. Hit post too soon. I believe all schools under 400 were forced to consolidate. I believe that is K-12.
Are you talking about schools with football? I know there are a bunch of very small schools in northeast Ark. that play basketball that have not consolidated.
Arkansas has a law that once a school district gets under 350 for two years in a row it must consolidate. That is 350 for grades k-12. Missouri has a lot more small school districts than Arkansas. The smallest schools in NEA are Armorel, Bay, and Rector. All three of these schools would be class AA in Mo.
Has somebody consolidated with Marmaduke? They were playing in the Paragould tourney a couple of weeks ago and they were still Marmaduke? If they pass that law in Missouri we'll have a bunch of schools gettin together and a bunch of unhappy parents, kids and coaches.
Going to 7 classes will not shorten the season. Where are you people getting that idea? It would give byes to 2 teams, but there would have to be games that week for the other teams.
Second, the season is already 9 games. The 10th game is the first round of the playoffs.
Third, any argument about watering down the playoffs is silly. It is one more champion, not 10 more. And the benefit of having 6 team divisions where 1 and 2 get byes greatly outweighs any negatives of "watering down".
Also, it closes the gap between the largest and smallest schools in the class.
Second, the season is already 9 games. The 10th game is the first round of the playoffs.
Third, any argument about watering down the playoffs is silly. It is one more champion, not 10 more. And the benefit of having 6 team divisions where 1 and 2 get byes greatly outweighs any negatives of "watering down".
Also, it closes the gap between the largest and smallest schools in the class.
The shortening would come from the 6 team district week 10 schedule being 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3, and 5 vs. 6, with 5/6 not advancing. Then week 11 is district championship, week 12 quarter finals, week 13 semi finals, week 14 championship.
This would also allow the season to start a week later (and would be the first thing MSHSAA did that actually showed any regards to player safety in the heat)
Arkansas class 7 only has 16 teams in it. I'm not sure how the rest works but as someone else mentioned they have fewer very small schools that missouri does.
I would still like to to turn our week 1-3 games be played against anyone we wish and then play a district schedule weeks 4-10. Top 4 teams get in the playoff. It seems like a no brainer. The conference enthusiasts don't want it but it makes sense for football IMO. This is how Oklahoma and Texas do it.
I would still like to to turn our week 1-3 games be played against anyone we wish and then play a district schedule weeks 4-10. Top 4 teams get in the playoff. It seems like a no brainer. The conference enthusiasts don't want it but it makes sense for football IMO. This is how Oklahoma and Texas do it.
I think there is talk of having district games sprinkled throughout the season. For instance saying saying weeks 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 are district weeks. This would most likely get rid of conference play.
The 7th class could be for private schools. Then you would see how the numbers would increase at Valle if they had to compete with Rockhurst
You really don't know much about Valle do you? They would love to see their numbers increase. Not gonna happen, but it would tickle their pickle if it did.
Missouri having seven classes is a joke. Missouri doesn't even have a need for six classes. This state could easily get by with five really competitive classes with really entertaining games week in and week out, and a highly entertaining postseason. Of course, you'd need to get rid of this ridiculous seeding system that's in place, and then, you may have to play after Thanksgiving, which I understand is an unforgivable sin. You'd also need to get rid of conferences, which would be a brilliant step in the right direction, in my opinion. But again, I understand how this is blasphemy for most Missourians, so pull the wool and carry on.
Watering down.
And creating revenue.
It's all it is.
What other states do is irrelevant.
And creating revenue.
It's all it is.
What other states do is irrelevant.
I always thought a good way to do it would be to let every school determine 1 game to be their state championship game. for example Staley's championship game could be against Oak Park. Oak Parks could be against NKC. NKC could decide to have theirs against Northeast. etc, etc.
I would think the all would choose to have their state championship game against weak opponents. I may be giving too much credit to high school administrators tho. If by chance a team loses and their precious student athletes get their feelings hurt, they could ask for a week 10 do-over.
as a kid, we used to use this method in wiffle ball. at the end of the day everyone was a world champion.
I would think the all would choose to have their state championship game against weak opponents. I may be giving too much credit to high school administrators tho. If by chance a team loses and their precious student athletes get their feelings hurt, they could ask for a week 10 do-over.
as a kid, we used to use this method in wiffle ball. at the end of the day everyone was a world champion.
Why don't we just go to one big class, then? I feel like having any more than one class waters down the competition. Same argument.
7 classes make the classes more equitable in terms of student numbers. It reduces the number of playoff games, so we go back to a 14 games if you complete the playoff run. This year if nothing changes, the first day of practice will be Aug 1. That is unheard of, especially in times when heat illness is such a factor.
Sounds good to me. I would rather go to the opposite extreme, though, and make about 115 classes with 3 teams each. Also, start the season in March, and play 36 games. That way, the players can get acclimated to the heat a little more gradually. And NFL tickets average about $100 apiece, so we might as well raise ticket prices to around that level. That way, MSHSAA doesn't always have to be running short. It's damn expensive to run a not-for-profit organization these days.
"Strawman" argument would include me attempting to refute points that you weren't actually making. I wasn't attempting to do that. I wasn't refuting your argument at all. I was giving other alternatives.
I was also using exaggeration to prove my point, which is that 1) more games, 2) more "champions," and 3) more revenue, are the ONLY things that have been driving most decisions regarding football classifications and playoff system in Missouri for years now. The adding of a 15th week (while taking safety measures to reduce injuries, especially concussions) was not made in the interest of players. Moving the beginning of the season up toward the middle of the summer (while implementing a strict heat acclimatization policy) was not, either. Adding more classes isn't necessarily, either- unless the goal is to make sure more people are considered "champions." Where is the limit? Exactly how many state "champions" is enough? And what exactly is the goal? Improving the experience of the student-athletes, or making more money for our "not-for-profit?"
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Facebook settles Trump lawsuit for $25 Million- Latest: blindedbythelight
-
-
