Coaches association rumors
- Thread starter kaching
- Start date
Heard it was tabled, to talk about later. Something about a concern of having football with more classes than the the other sports. So MSHSAA is wanting to look at it. I think the version that was close to being passed, was having 32 in class 6 and even the rest of the way down. But basketball and such have been petitioning to have 6 classes also so MSHSAA wanted to table the football decision. Why one decision has anything to do with the other is a mystery to me. But many things down at M$H$AA are mysterious.
Board tabled discussion of classes to look at all the petitions to add classes across all sports. They have been getting so many requests that they feel the old system might need to be redone. That doesn't mean they are adding classes ... I know some of you posters will write a doctoral thesis on this subject. They will give football teams there district assignments the 2nd week of practice in August to make sure what teams will be playing in districts and lessen the byes in district play outside of odd numbered teams within the classification.
There is a meeting at the MSHSAA office of an Ad Hoc committee on December 14 to discuss reclassification in ALL sports/activities. Part of this is in response in the basketball petition but there are many problems in most sports.
I had heard this was going to happen about a week ago and for got to post it. Also learned that districts for football will not be announced about the second week of practice. This is being done to ensure programs that have committed to fielding a team actually do.
I believe that will be universal to all sports. Basketball won't know until practice has started and spring sports that used to know by this Friday will not know until early March. Thirty years ago, when we last reclassified every year, classifications were done by enrollment numbers and not by a set number of schools per class. In those days you at least knew what class you were in by the previous March.
It does seem strange but it makes sense and I don't know what difference the "late" notice will make. For most teams it probably isn't going to matter unless there are radical changes, like adding or removing an entire classification, or putting 64 teams in C5. Something that would potentially move the likes of Webb City and Kearney up but not CJ. Might give them and others some enthusiasm going into the season seeing a more achievable path to a championship in C4.
The only problem I see is that I liked this information coming out in the winter or spring because it gave us something to debate and discuss during the dry season.
The only problem I see is that I liked this information coming out in the winter or spring because it gave us something to debate and discuss during the dry season.
The difference it makes is that schools will decide whether to go 8-man, co-op or not field a team. If they want the smallest 64 in Class 1, this has an impact on every class.
I think class numbers will be decided on well before the season but not districts until August. I believe they are trying to eliminate as many bye weeks in districts as they can.
Honestly I think schools that have less than 200 students should have to play in 8 man unless then can show good participation numbers yearly. Take a Schools like Louisiana. They had maybe 17 kids come out.
Honestly I think schools that have less than 200 students should have to play in 8 man unless then can show good participation numbers yearly. Take a Schools like Louisiana. They had maybe 17 kids come out.
Obviously Orrick isn't a great example nowadays, but in 07 and 08, when they won back to back championships, they were well below 200 students. I'm fine with how they do it now: give those schools below 200 the option to play 11 or 8 man, don't force them.
I agree to some extent about allowing schools to choose 11 or 8 man, but I think we have to look at this from a growth and classification standpoint.
1. We/State want more students participating in football.
2. We/State would like more schools to play football
You are not going to grow football at schools with 300 plus students. Most likely they will have football. You have to grow it in the smaller rural areas. I believe some of these schools don't play because if the choose 8 man they will have to travel long distances. I believe the state needs to evaluate the schools under 200 that don't do well in Class 1 and get them thinking about going 8 man. It is easier to field a team, opportunity to win some games, more of your students come out, less travel if more play, and schools that have never played might think about playing. Look at North Shelby . . . last year of 11 man had like 15 players. First year of 8 man they had 35 players.
Then if schools start going 8 man it will start dropping other schools down in classification and maybe get a little more balance.
The wrestling know it alls complained when they voted for 4 classes. I understand the water down philosophy and I wrestled with only 3 classes so I understand. But the growth in wrestling has come from smaller schools competing in Class 1.
Just my .02 cents
1. We/State want more students participating in football.
2. We/State would like more schools to play football
You are not going to grow football at schools with 300 plus students. Most likely they will have football. You have to grow it in the smaller rural areas. I believe some of these schools don't play because if the choose 8 man they will have to travel long distances. I believe the state needs to evaluate the schools under 200 that don't do well in Class 1 and get them thinking about going 8 man. It is easier to field a team, opportunity to win some games, more of your students come out, less travel if more play, and schools that have never played might think about playing. Look at North Shelby . . . last year of 11 man had like 15 players. First year of 8 man they had 35 players.
Then if schools start going 8 man it will start dropping other schools down in classification and maybe get a little more balance.
The wrestling know it alls complained when they voted for 4 classes. I understand the water down philosophy and I wrestled with only 3 classes so I understand. But the growth in wrestling has come from smaller schools competing in Class 1.
Just my .02 cents
Why do more players come out when schools switch to 8 man? If North Shelby had 35 guys out after they moved to 8 man, why didn't they have 35 guys out in 11 man? And if they had, they wouldn't have needed to go to 8 man.
I think you are missing the point. North Shelby had increased participation because kids figured they could compete. I am surprised more small schools doesn’t try this. Drop to 8 man, build the program back up and go back to 11 man.
According to the MSHSAA website, North Shelby only had 20 out this year.
Yes, a 120 pound freshman will go out on a 8-man program when they know they will only be practice fodder and not for and an 11 man where they could well be game fodder.
DON"T THEY KNOW...FOOTBALL is WAY more important than the lessor sports...? JEEEEZZZ
I don't understand this statement. How does deciding class numbers earlier than districts eliminate byes. It is the total number of schools in a class that determines the number of byes, not the assignment of them into districts.
I seriously hope they don't add more classes for any of the sports. Things are watered down enough already. Do we really want to become Kansas?
District titles used to mean something. In a lot of sports, winning two games gives you a district title, which is kind of a joke.
Wrestling and soccer should reduce classes as Class 1 in both is about as watered down as you can get. And don't even get me started on track.
District titles used to mean something. In a lot of sports, winning two games gives you a district title, which is kind of a joke.
Wrestling and soccer should reduce classes as Class 1 in both is about as watered down as you can get. And don't even get me started on track.
In the old football district system it took two wins and a tiebreaker to win a district title. Now it takes three wins and there are no point system tiebreakers. District championships are determined on the field. This system is far superior to the old one.
I have no problem with the current district system, but 14 games was sufficient to determine a champion.
I agree.
Let's not water anything down any further.
Kansas feels like "Class 4 Division 2 Level 5 Layer 9 Region B Odd Year... Champ".
Let's not water anything down any further.
Kansas feels like "Class 4 Division 2 Level 5 Layer 9 Region B Odd Year... Champ".
You have to remember that Kansas, like Iowa, is a foreign country.
So make it an 8 game regular season. Week 9 starts districts. Week 10 could be used as a sort of "bowl game" for those who want a 10th game with whoever lost in district. Could be a matchup from district, or could be something else.
Or just play the 8 team tourney out starting with week 8. Losers play the loser, winners play the winners. Then play for 7th, consolation, 3rd and championship. Half of the teams end the season on a win.
Kansas has so many classifications, its like handing out participation awards at the end of every sport when they get to state.
They have a bunch more 8 man schools, but don't they have the same number of 11 man divisions as Missouri with six?
6A
5A
4A div I
4A div II
3A
1A-2A--this is one division
Was referring to other sports.
In basketball, softball, soccer and baseball in some classes (mainly bigger), you win two games and you are a district champ.
They could fix this by mandating the state playoffs start in the quarterfinals, like most football classes.
You could do that but you'd have to reduce the number of districts in each sport to 8. Right?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Trump selling gold cards to immigrants for 5 million- Latest: blindedbythelight
-
-
