Class 1 Catch All

[bhunt95]

Have a big class and small class bracket. They play each at end. That way only one true champion in state.

That float your boat? for people wanting success multiplier.

Get real... teams are cyclic all have good and bad teams over time.

 

[USArmyMike]

Who's opinion do you think you're going to change? By all means, keep pissing into the wind and being unnecessarily agressive toward anyone who disagrees or questions you, let me know how it works out for you.

I didn't act aggressive at all until others started taking shots. Pot meet kettle. Get over yourself man. I like to post, I like to debate, and I will get aggressive when other do especially when they start questioning peoples intelligence and start name calling. If you have problem with that, I honestly DO NOT CARE. So, by all means, take your own advice and let me know how that works out for you. Well don't let me know, I really don't care.

Hey you know what you can take credit for? Misdirected this thread because you don't like the way I debated a topic on an f'n message board.

 

[LHSTiger81]

I asked "It just sounds like entitlement mentality to me. Maybe I'm out of line. Am I just being a jerk?" In the spirit of true debate.
You responded,
"To me it sounds like you have the entitlement mentality. Why is being challenged a bad thing. It sounds to me like you are ok sitting in a smaller class, building up as many trophies as you can, the easiest way possible. Notice it's always the dominate ones that bitch when this is brought up."
This would be considered aggressive and accusatory.

I responded, in kind. If you want it friendly, then keep it friendly. You also have to, sometimes, consider that you could be wrong. Your scenario is punishing the strong for being strong and giving a handout to the weak for being weak.

 

[Gubbba Bump Shrimp]

I didn't act aggressive at all until others started taking shots. Pot meet kettle. Get over yourself man. I like to post, I like to debate, and I will get aggressive when other do especially when they start questioning peoples intelligence and start name calling. If you have problem with that, I honestly DO NOT CARE. So, by all means, take your own advice and let me know how that works out for you. Well don't let me know, I really don't care.

Hey you know what you can take credit for? Misdirected this thread because you don't like the way I debated a topic on an f'n message board.

You're ridiculous. Get a job at MSHSAA or get on the competition committee if you want to make a difference.

Should Class 1 be the Catch-all, yes. Does that really fix the problem? Not really.

If you look at Class 4 (as an example) the largest team's enrollment is 1314 and the smallest is 734.

That's the most extreme example, but from a competitive standpoint how is a school with roughly 300 boys supposed to compete with a school that has roughly 650 boys in it? Not saying it can't be done, but if you look at yearly playoff results it typically isn't done.

How do you fix that? Not entirely sure, 7 Classes would cut the deficit down considerably, but is that a real fix or diluting the product? Hard to say.

 

[O line wins games]

I like this ArmyMike guy. He makes me laugh. Doesn't make much sense, but it is entertaining...

 

[Tanman65]

1. you should have read the entire thread.
2. I think you are comparing apples to oranges. Your response is an overreaction. I am also going to say, as I have already done, no one should be forced to move up a class. However, the option to do so should be there. The choice should solely be on the schools AD and HC. They know what they have waiting in the wings.

Should all the schools who can't compete in their class be allowed to choose to move down a class? Why not? If schools have the option to move up for better competition then you have to let the bad teams move to a class where they can compete also. This is why people think that all this argument is about is punishing success. this is why the "sake of competition" argument doesn't work. If you want to change the rules for successful teams to choose classes you have to let the truly unsuccessful teams choose also. And I think that's just crazy.

 

[bhunt95]

You're ridiculous. Get a job at MSHSAA or get on the competition committee if you want to make a difference.

Should Class 1 be the Catch-all, yes. Does that really fix the problem? Not really.

If you look at Class 4 (as an example) the largest team's enrollment is 1314 and the smallest is 734.

That's the most extreme example, but from a competitive standpoint how is a school with roughly 300 boys supposed to compete with a school that has roughly 650 boys in it? Not saying it can't be done, but if you look at yearly playoff results it typically isn't done.

How do you fix that? Not entirely sure, 7 Classes would cut the deficit down considerably, but is that a real fix or diluting the product? Hard to say.

The smallest schools in a class can be just as good as the biggest in a class. Maryville one of the smallest class 3 teams yet they are a very good team.

 

[Mike*Honcho]

Nice job dogpiling on ArmyMike. If you think he is being the aggressive or disrespectful person in this thread then you should try reading through it again.

What he said was simple ... any team that wants to voluntarily move up a class should be allowed to do so. What's wrong with that?

Nobody is suggesting that any team be "punished" ... or given a "handout" ... and it isn't "ridiculous".

MSHSAA isn't discussing an option for teams to move down a class so if you want to discuss that then start a new thread and quit harassing people having a different conversation.

And this board is exactly the place for people to discuss potential changes to the rules.

 

[USArmyMike]

Should all the schools who can't compete in their class be allowed to choose to move down a class? Why not? If schools have the option to move up for better competition then you have to let the bad teams move to a class where they can compete also. This is why people think that all this argument is about is punishing success. this is why the "sake of competition" argument doesn't work. If you want to change the rules for successful teams to choose classes you have to let the truly unsuccessful teams choose also. And I think that's just crazy.

That's not a legit argument. We are talking about raising the ceiling, not lowering it

 

[Tanman65]

That's not a legit argument. We are talking about raising the ceiling, not lowering it

I'm talking about the result Some people say they're looking for, making things more competitive. My point is that the reasons for raising the ceiling could also be used for lowering it on the other end. I am curious if any body feels the same about both. Both would make sure more teams play comparable competition, isn't that what people want. Why is it a legit argument for one end and not the other. Because you disagree with it? I guess then my question is if you're goal isn't to create better competitiveness, then what's the point of raising the bar for successful teams. If that is you're goal then my point is legit, even though I think it is absolutely an everybody gets a better chance to be winners/ everyone gets a trophy mentality if you lower it for uncompetitive teams. I don't think there should be special rules for specific teams, wether it be in the top end or the bottom.

 

[Tanman65]

*"Success multiplier" is a strange concept. MSHSAA should attempt to create classes of similar-size schools, not the most competitive. Same with the playoff brackets. Stop trying to create parity for the sake of giving crappy teams a better chance. These teams/coaches that don't ever win anything should try to do a better job, as opposed to finding creative ways to tweak the system so that they have something to be proud of.

**The "Lamar would have won Class 3 some years," "Valle would have won Class 2 (edit)," "Webb would have won Class 6," etc. gets very old. People around the state that are knowledgeable respect what those, and other successful programs, do and have done. It is pointless and annoying for some fans to make exaggerated (and conveniently un-provable) assumptions like these. Just because a team beat the bigger school down the road does not at all mean they would have won the bigger class. Faulty logic. And pointless, whether it is true or not.

**This observation is not directed at any single fan-base, so Lamar people no need to go in attack-mode. I have noticed, over the years, an odd phenomenon: when a team has success, especially extended success, members and supporters of that program become consumed with making sure they are the center of every conversation. What's wrong with saying, "We were the best team in our Class this year?" Our conference is the best, our region of the state is the best, our program is the best regardless of class, this team is one of the best in state history, our fans are the most sportsmanlike, our coaches are the most noble, our concessions are the best, we play the game the right way, other teams don't understand what it takes like we do, etc., etc. Ugh. Gag me. All of us should enjoy our successes. But stop make asses out of yourselves.

I'm sure it does get old to people who root for teams who never get to say that. It's not odd though, People are proud of their teams, towns, and schools and like to talk about their success. I wish more people got to experience it. The people who brought up Lamar and Webb city in this conversation are not Webb or Lamar supporters or fans. People get tired of those teams being the center of attention and just assume Lamar and webb fans try to make it that way, but that's not always the case.

 

[Tanman65]

Nice job dogpiling on ArmyMike. If you think he is being the aggressive or disrespectful person in this thread then you should try reading through it again.

What he said was simple ... any team that wants to voluntarily move up a class should be allowed to do so. What's wrong with that?

Nobody is suggesting that any team be "punished" ... or given a "handout" ... and it isn't "ridiculous".

MSHSAA isn't discussing an option for teams to move down a class so if you want to discuss that then start a new thread and quit harassing people having a different conversation.

And this board is exactly the place for people to discuss potential changes to the rules.

mshsaa isn't discussing options for teams to move down when they are uncompetitive because it is stupid to do that. But the argument to move down to create more competitive matchups is exactly the same as teams moving up because of success to creste more competitive matchups. What's the difference? Why is one a good idea and the other not? The theory behind doing either is the same, I think I'll go ahead and put in this thread.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

I'm sure it does get old to people who root for teams who never get to say that. It's not odd though, People are proud of their teams, towns, and schools and like to talk about their success. I wish more people got to experience it. The people who brought up Lamar and Webb city in this conversation are not Webb or Lamar supporters or fans. People get tired of those teams being the center of attention and just assume Lamar and webb fans try to make it that way, but that's not always the case.

"...people who root for teams that never get to say that."
"I wish more people got to experience it."
Precisely what I'm talking about. Thanks for helping exemplify my points.
I definitely was not categorizing all fans of ANY program. Many of us have had civil, objective discussions on here for a couple of decades. From many programs, in many areas of the state. And yes (gasp!), some of us have gotten to experience it. We just don't feel the need to carry on as if we invented winning, or have the market cornered on it.

 

[Tanman65]

"...people who root for teams that never get to say that."
"I wish more people got to experience it."
Precisely what I'm talking about. Thanks for helping exemplify my points. I definitely was not categorizing all fans of ANY program. Many of us have had civil, objective discussions on here for a couple of decades. From many programs, in many areas of the state. And yes (gasp!), some of us have gotten to experience it. We just don't feel the need to carry on as if we invented winning, or have the market cornered on it.

You used 3 examples by name. Pretty sure you were making them the center of attention by doing that. Again, giving yourself yet another reason to argue when someone defends a team you spefically called out. My point is talking about your teams success is not odd. Especially when they've had a long streak of it. You really think it odd that a long streak of success gets talked about by supporters? And I really do wish more people got to experience it. It really is community wide, which probably is more of a smaller community thing. If that offends you then you're just bitter.

 

[Tanman65]

"...people who root for teams that never get to say that."
"I wish more people got to experience it."
Precisely what I'm talking about. Thanks for helping exemplify my points.
I definitely was not categorizing all fans of ANY program. Many of us have had civil, objective discussions on here for a couple of decades. From many programs, in many areas of the state. And yes (gasp!), some of us have gotten to experience it. We just don't feel the need to carry on as if we invented winning, or have the market cornered on it.

And I'm sure when you experienced it there were sad bitter people from somewhere else that were tired of hearing about it from other people too.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

You used 3 examples by name. Pretty sure you were making them the center of attention by doing that. Again, giving yourself yet another reason to argue when someone defends a team you spefically called out. My point is talking about your teams success is not odd. Especially when they've had a long streak of it. You really think it odd that a long streak of success gets talked about by supporters? And I really do wish more people got to experience it. It really is community wide, which probably is more of a smaller community thing. If that offends you then you're just bitter.

You have a habit of re-framing someone's point to defend yours. That's annoying. I won't debate anything with you from here on because of it. You have no idea what I'm talking about, because you don't want to.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

And I'm sure when you experienced it there were sad bitter people from somewhere else that were tired of hearing about it from other people too.

Later, dude.

 

[Tanman65]

Later, dude.

I have a habit of showing that you are full of sh#*. I can't help that you contradicted yourself in your own statements and I pointed it out.

 

[Tanman65]

You have a habit of re-framing someone's point to defend yours. That's annoying. I won't debate anything with you from here on because of it. You have no idea what I'm talking about, because you don't want to.

It's annoying because then you'd be arguing with yourself when the holes in your own opinion are turned back on you. That's the nature of debate, and the reason you are now refraining from it. Because you don't have a leg to stand on other than you don't like it when others think they're the best. I can make you a "punching bag" with off topic, smart mouthed remarks too. How do you like your own medicine?

 

[Skinslvr26]

Thats it !! I'm taking my ball And going home !!

 

[Mike*Honcho]

The argument to move down to create more competitive matchups is exactly the same as teams moving up because of success to creste more competitive matchups. What's the difference? Why is one a good idea and the other not? The theory behind doing either is the same.

What is the difference you ask ... I will explain ... again.

One idea is currently being considered by MSHSAA and the other one is not. So there is no "theory" behind the idea of teams moving down. Again, it is not under consideration.

 

[Tanman65]

What is the difference you ask ... I will explain ... again.

One idea is currently being considered by MSHSAA and the other one is not. So there is no "theory" behind the idea of teams moving down. Again, it is not under consideration.

I get that. Neither should be, because the argument for either is the same. I think changing the rule for top teams just opens the door to the bottom teams to want the same rule for them.

 

[Tanman65]

What is the difference you ask ... I will explain ... again.

One idea is currently being considered by MSHSAA and the other one is not. So there is no "theory" behind the idea of teams moving down. Again, it is not under consideration.

It creates a much bigger issue than what is actually just being considered. I think you can't just consider things one issue at a time. It has to be looked at as a whole. Otherwise it is punishing success. If the goal is to create a higher number of competitive matchups, there are other ways to do it than just moving good teams up.

 

[Mike*Honcho]

Giving teams the option to move up and play better competition is a horrible idea. That's why all the top programs don't try to schedule tough nonconference opponents in higher classes. Wait, maybe I have that backwards.

 

[Tanman65]

Giving teams the option to move up and play better competition is a horrible idea. That's why all the top programs don't try to schedule tough nonconference opponents in higher classes.

Never said that. The "giving top teams the option" came in later. And I still think it's a bad idea though. What do you do with class 6 teams if they win it all every year? If it's not the same rule for every team then I don't think it's right.

 

[Mike*Honcho]

What do you do with class 6 teams if they win it all every year? If it's not the same rule for every team then I don't think it's right.

So all-boys schools shouldn't have their enrollment doubled and there should not be a 1.35 private school multiplier because Class 6 schools aren't affected?

 

[Tanman65]

So all-boys schools shouldn't have their enrollment doubled and there should not be a 1.35 private school multiplier because Class 6 schools aren't affected?

good point. So if a team decides they want to move up one year, we should just draw up new districts to accomodate them? What if they move up and continue to dominate then everyone is crying that it isn't fair because they shouldn't be in their class. I think it just opens a can of worms that would be more problematic than helpful.

 

[Tanman65]

Giving teams the option to move up and play better competition is a horrible idea. That's why all the top programs don't try to schedule tough nonconference opponents in higher classes. Wait, maybe I have that backwards.

Even if the rule is brought about, I would be shocked if any team ever chose the opportunity to move up.

 

[Tanman65]

So all-boys schools shouldn't have their enrollment doubled and there should not be a 1.35 private school multiplier because Class 6 schools aren't affected?

I do disagree with that rule too. I believe all private schools should be in their own class regardless of size. Lump them all together and put them over there. forget the multiplier

 

[mosofan]

good point. So if a team decides they want to move up one year, we should just draw up new districts to accomodate them? What if they move up and continue to dominate then everyone is crying that it isn't fair because they shouldn't be in their class. I think it just opens a can of worms that would be more problematic than helpful.

Let those people cry. If rules can't be passed when we're afraid of one or two people crying ... then there will be no rules. people should quit crying and figure out how to compete in the situation they are presented.

 

[MOFB]

You're ridiculous. Get a job at MSHSAA or get on the competition committee if you want to make a difference.

Should Class 1 be the Catch-all, yes. Does that really fix the problem? Not really.

If you look at Class 4 (as an example) the largest team's enrollment is 1314 and the smallest is 734.

That's the most extreme example, but from a competitive standpoint how is a school with roughly 300 boys supposed to compete with a school that has roughly 650 boys in it? Not saying it can't be done, but if you look at yearly playoff results it typically isn't done.

How do you fix that? Not entirely sure, 7 Classes would cut the deficit down considerably, but is that a real fix or diluting the product? Hard to say.

Same thing for a class one school. If you have 110 and the top is 245.

50 boys versus 120.

 

[blue and white pride]

There is no system that can be implemented that is equal to all participants. The purpose of the playoff system in 1968 was to provide a playoff and state champion in 4 classes with school's of similar size enrollments, not exact enrollments. IMO things need to be tweaked from time to time to shake things up a little, but not overhauled at every little whim.

 

[Mike*Honcho]

Let those people cry. If rules can't be passed when we're afraid of one or two people crying ... then there will be no rules. people should quit crying and figure out how to compete in the situation they are presented.

Maybe all the people opposed to the top teams voluntarily deciding to play tougher competition should quit their crying.

You could try to set an example by not whining.

 

[wcfanfourever]

[QUOTE="hangmanbobbyjaggers, post: 233352, member: 3776"Why should Lamar have to move up just because they won state? That makes no sense at all?.That is what all this debate is about. Personally, I do not see the problem. Other teams need to get better. There is no settling. Every season is harder each year. Seems to me world has become a place of handouts instead of working for what you get. Lamar has earned that right to be atop until someone knocks them off or their numbers they have to move up. No different than the Webb City run.]

Its not like they have only won a state title. They have built a dynasty. Now consider the fact they are winning these games by 2+ scores. Funny part is I don't completely agree to being mandated to move up a class. I believe it should be voluntary. Now I don't if Lamar or Webb City would have done or do that. I personally would, but that's just me. I am not the kind that just settles.[/QUOTE]
Settles???? How many state championships have you won?? You couldn't possibly have any significant input unless you have won a half dozen and raised hell with MSHSAA to let you move up

 

[Bleeding Red and Black]

Moving up a class doesn't necessarily mean tougher competition. I feel like the top teams that people are talking about are already scheduling tougher competition and honestly probably could care less if they HAD to move up a class or not. They are building programs. There's a reason why they are winning multiple state titles and I'm sure things would still be ran the same way no matter if they moved up or not. It's not the 'moving up' part up that gets me, it's people's argument on why it should become a rule.

 

[knockemofftheball]

There should be no movement from one class to another because of success. You are playing with the cards that are given. Teams in class 4 should go into every off season with a purpose to do everything to beat Webb and Kearney, or class 2 with Lamar. The problem is that some coaches in multiple sports are thrilled to death to win that conference title. Hell they even get T-Shirts (see Grain Valley), if teams like Lamar, Webb, Kearney, Valle, printed shirts for every conference or district title, the would go broke. You are in a class, go compete, live with the results, and work harder the next year to better those results. . As for coaches, either compete for the ultimate prize or find someone who will.

 

[USArmyMike]

Its not like they have only won a state title. They have built a dynasty. Now consider the fact they are winning these games by 2+ scores. Funny part is I don't completely agree to being mandated to move up a class. I believe it should be voluntary. Now I don't if Lamar or Webb City would have done or do that. I personally would, but that's just me. I am not the kind that just settles.

Settles???? How many state championships have you won?? You couldn't possibly have any significant input unless you have won a half dozen and raised hell with MSHSAA to let you move up[/QUOTE]
It's more than just football allstar.

 

[red & black brotherhood]

There should be no movement from one class to another because of success. You are playing with the cards that are given. Teams in class 4 should go into every off season with a purpose to do everything to beat Webb and Kearney, or class 2 with Lamar. The problem is that some coaches in multiple sports are thrilled to death to win that conference title. Hell they even get T-Shirts (see Grain Valley), if teams like Lamar, Webb, Kearney, Valle, printed shirts for every conference or district title, the would go broke. You are in a class, go compete, live with the results, and work harder the next year to better those results. . As for coaches, either compete for the ultimate prize or find someone who will.

On my facebook memories from early november 2010 i was excited that we were 3 peat district champs. Its amazing how far we have come

 

[Bleeding Red and Black]

Teams in class 4 should go into every off season with a purpose to do everything to beat Webb and Kearney, or class 2 with Lamar. The problem is that some coaches in multiple sports are thrilled to death to win that conference title. Hell they even get T-Shirts (see Grain Valley), if teams like Lamar, Webb, Kearney, Valle, printed shirts for every conference or district title, the would go broke.

Well....ummm....we get shirts for about everything but it makes for fantastic booster club sales!! I know, I know.... off topic!!

 

[Frototheheadhunter]

Everyone seems to forget when Lamar was the underdog. How about a little refresher course in that prior to 2011 Lamar didn't have a state title in any sport. How about he fact that we often were beat in the class 3 and 4 dominant Big 8 to the point that it was considered to leave the conference for injury sake. I am so tired of the everyone wins liberal/progressive whimps who constantly cry foul due to not being able to develop a program that is successful. There are countless programs in Class 2 that could develop, however you have to push weights, condition, practice in the environments, and let the coaches COACH. I have watched every type of parent there is who complain their kid isn't getting played enough, or who get on their school boards to screw things up, or complain that their kid has bruises, or threw up from being pushed to hard. I can attest that a large number of the boys playing for Lamar (who already have a conditioning and weight program enviable by some colleges) return home and run more, hit the weights more, concern over proper nutrition and take care of their bodies, and to top that off many are 4.0 students as well. However, in the greater scheme of things, have your way and make your changes...it will only ensure that Lamar holds the title for 6 consecutive state football titles for the rest of eternity. That is good enough for me, however it takes away from other generations of kids who might want to challenge this title. Some of the people on here are truly wastes of air. Stop living through your kids, start living for your kids and do not purposefully stack the deck against future classes to protect your kids who maybe should consider chess club anyway.