3 Class System for Basketball

[The Schwab]

This is my proposal for a 3 class system for basketball. I am using the same multiplier used for the football:
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage less than 10 your number is multiplied by 1.4
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 10-19 your number is multiplied by 1.25
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 20-39 your number is multiplied by 1
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 40-49 your number is multiplied by .75
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage greater than 49 your number is multiplied by .6


I realize that not every school has an equal number of boys and girls, but for this case I'm assuming they do. I am also going to use some common sense when it comes to teams not co-oped the same for football as basketball.

I realize that I probably missed some teams as I did this pretty quickly

Class AA (Adjusted enrollments 800 and up): Not much changes for this class. They still have the WDA and EDC.

West:
Minot
Williston
Bismarck
Bismarck Century
Bismarck Legacy
Mandan
Dickinson
Jamestown
Bismarck St. Mary's (opt up)

East:
Fargo Davies
West Fargo Sheyenne
West Fargo
Grand Forks Central
Fargo North
GF Red River
Fargo South
Fargo Shanley (Opt Up)
Horace (Opt Up)

Class A (180-799): I have this divided up into 2 regions. Could either do a situation where the top 4 teams automatically make it into the West and East Regional tournaments and then do a play in game for the rest. Or (and I probably would like this a little better) split the west and east both into 2 regions and play down to the top 4 from each sub region before going to a western and eastern tournament (that would be conducted the same as the current class A regional with 4 teams advancing to state)

West:
Watford City
Turtle Mountain
DLB
Velva
Beulah
Dickinson Trinity
Stanley
Hazen
Minot Ryan
Surrey
Heart River
Killdeer
Bowman
Tioga
Bottineau
Standing Rock
Rugby
New Town

East:
Valley City
Central Cass
Devils Lake
Kindred
Wahpeton
Thompson
Fargo Oak Grove
Lisbon
Northern Cass
PRFL
HCV
Carrington
Linton HMB
Grafton
Four Winds Minnewaukan (Opt up)
Bismarck Shiloh

Class B: (179 and under): This is where I feel our state can really get creative, so I tried to do that as well. There are 5 regions with roughly the same amount of teams, again I did this quickly so if teams need to be moved around due to geography that's fine with me. Each region would play a super region tournament down to the final two teams left (that would give us 10 teams). The next 6 highest rated teams would make it into the sweet 16 as well. All seeding is done via the new RPI system: 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 and so on. All games would be played at neutral sites and as close to equal distance if possible. If an equal distance venue isn't possible, the better seed would have to travel the shortest distance.

North West: 14
Ray
Powers Lake
Kenmare
Burke County/Bowbells
Berthold
Plaza
Divide County
Alexander
Parshall
Drake Anamoose
Trenton
Williston Trinity Christian
MLS
White Shield

Central: 16
South Prairie
Max
Nedrose
TGU
Westhope Newburg
Glenburn
Our Reedemers
Drake Anamoose
GCC/Midkota
Kidder County
Harvey/WC
Rolla
Rolette
Garrison
MPB
BCN


North East: 16
Langdon
MPCG/FS
Hatton/Northwood
Dakota Prairie
Lakota
Larimore
Dunseith
Cavalier
North Star
North Border
New Rockford/Sheyenne
St. John
Midway/Minto
Benson County
Drayton Valley Edinburg
Warwick

South West: 14
Hettinger-Scranton
Richardton Taylor
Glen Ullin/Hebron
New Salem
Central McClean
Flasher
New England
Mott Regent/GC
Beach
Center Stanton
Mandaree
Wilton-Wing
Washburn
Solen

South East: 14
Ellendale
EKM
Oakes
Sargent County
Wyndmere/Lidgerwood
LaMoure/LM
Enderlin
Richland
Fairmount/CT/R
Maple River
South Border
Hankinson
Napoleon GS
Strasburg Zeeland

State tournaments can still be held over 3 weekends with Class A and B girls, Class AA boys and girls and Class A and B boys being played over the same weekends.

[The Schwab]

The RPI system would be done in the same manner as South Dakotas system where points increase (for winning and losing) based on the opponents record. A bonus point would be added for a game against a higher division (no penalty for playing a team in the division below you). There would also be no requirement for playing every team in your region, so your AD can have control over how far their teams travel during the regular season. This will also allow rivalries to stay intact if one team is in the A division and one team is in the B division.

[stir the pot]

Is Garrison on your list I may have just missed it. I don't think there is a Southern McLean for BB (Washburn & Wilton) yet.

[The Schwab]

Is Garrison on your list I may have just missed it. I don't think there is a Southern McLean for BB (Washburn & Wilton) yet.

Thank you! I knew I'd miss something. I will fix it

[WalkingStick]

I got zero problems with it...maybe work on the regions for middle and lowest class to get to 4 & 8 (if possible) but that's it. I agree with scc, I like this one more than the one WF Sheyenne is pushing.

[Big Blue]

Is Our Redeemer's on this? I'm probably just missing them, but didn't see them on first few glances.

[defensewinsgames]

So I just tried to peak at records and see where I thought the teams that wouldn't be competitive are at those levels and here is a few that stick out to me: Carrington, PRFL, Killdeer, Lisbon are the ones that stick out to me in that middle division. Enrollment might put them there but I don't think they would do well consistently.

[The Schwab]

Is Our Redeemer's on this? I'm probably just missing them, but didn't see them on first few glances.

I'll add them to the list. I don't know their enrollment and F/R percentage but I'm assuming they would be in class B

[Sportsrube]

Is Garrison on your list I may have just missed it. I don't think there is a Southern McLean for BB (Washburn & Wilton) yet.

Thank you! I knew I'd miss something. I will fix it

I think you missed Strasburg-Zeeland as well. I like this proposal. I don't want to hear any whining about travel either. A lot of schools travel all across the state looking for competition in basketball and football travels all across the state to play Region games. The only thing holding this proposal back is the NDHSAA.

[The Schwab]

Is Garrison on your list I may have just missed it. I don't think there is a Southern McLean for BB (Washburn & Wilton) yet.

Thank you! I knew I'd miss something. I will fix it

I think you missed Strasburg-Zeeland as well. I like this proposal. I don't want to hear any whining about travel either. A lot of schools travel all across the state looking for competition in basketball and football travels all across the state to play Region games. The only thing holding this proposal back is the NDHSAA.

Added SZ to the list. The only real additional travel that would be added would be for the regional tournament games. Schools can choose to play the same schools they are already playing. Schools could also play home and home games with their closest rivals, limiting travel even more. This plan would give everyone a lot more scheduling flexibility.

[WalkingStick]

New Town?

[The Schwab]

New Town?

Added them to the list

[WalkingStick]

New Town?

Added them to the list

Wouldn't New Town be in the Middle Class - West not Top Class - West?

[The Schwab]

New Town?

Added them to the list

Wouldn't New Town be in the Middle Class - West not Top Class - West?

Fixed

[WalkingStick]

Also knowing how Shanley likes to be in the Top Class...they'd opt up to Class AA...they are listed in AA & A

[WalkingStick]

Medina/Pingree-Buchanan, Barnes County North, Solen, White SHield & Warwick seems to be missing as well

[The Schwab]

Medina/Pingree-Buchanan, Barnes County North, Solen, White SHield & Warwick seems to be missing as well

I believe I have everything fixed now

[UNDSiouxfan]

Schwab, thanks for posting this. All it takes is for a few NDHSAA people to see this and maybe it'll encourage some discussion. A change like this is what North Dakota high school basketball has needed for years.

[packers21]

Schwab, thanks for posting this. All it takes is for a few NDHSAA people to see this and maybe it'll encourage some discussion. A change like this is what North Dakota high school basketball has needed for years.

I actually think its to late for this change, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something happen. Considering where a few of the members live and where that town is currently headed enrollment wise.

[Flip]

Schwab, thanks for posting this. All it takes is for a few NDHSAA people to see this and maybe it'll encourage some discussion. A change like this is what North Dakota high school basketball has needed for years.

I saw the Sheyenne boys coach tweeted he was going to have his 3-class proposal voted on in March. I really don't know what that means. I'm not sure who is voting either.

[classB4ever]

This is my proposal for a 3 class system for basketball. I am using the same multiplier used for the football:
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage less than 10 your number is multiplied by 1.4
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 10-19 your number is multiplied by 1.25
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 20-39 your number is multiplied by 1
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 40-49 your number is multiplied by .75
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage greater than 49 your number is multiplied by .6


I realize that not every school has an equal number of boys and girls, but for this case I'm assuming they do. I am also going to use some common sense when it comes to teams not co-oped the same for football as basketball.

State tournaments can still be held over 3 weekends with Class A and B girls, Class AA boys and girls and Class A and B boys being played over the same weekends.

This is a solid plan. The teams you show opting up would be a very important piece to the puzzle. With that said, this would be a money generating cash cow. Imagine the region and state tourneys. Most important, participation numbers would increase immediately and with the right scheduling, a semblance of parity could be brought back into regular season games. Job well done.

[The Schwab]

This is my proposal for a 3 class system for basketball. I am using the same multiplier used for the football:
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage less than 10 your number is multiplied by 1.4
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 10-19 your number is multiplied by 1.25
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 20-39 your number is multiplied by 1
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage between 40-49 your number is multiplied by .75
If your school has a Free and Reduced percentage greater than 49 your number is multiplied by .6


I realize that not every school has an equal number of boys and girls, but for this case I'm assuming they do. I am also going to use some common sense when it comes to teams not co-oped the same for football as basketball.

State tournaments can still be held over 3 weekends with Class A and B girls, Class AA boys and girls and Class A and B boys being played over the same weekends.

This is a solid plan. The teams you show opting up would be a very important piece to the puzzle. With that said, this would be a money generating cash cow. Imagine the region and state tourneys. Most important, participation numbers would increase immediately and with the right scheduling, a semblance of parity could be brought back into regular season games. Job well done.

Thank you! Believe me, I have some questions about a couple of them opting up as well. I think that the plan numbers could be changed compared to the football plan, could probably get rid of the 49% and up percentage multiplier. I added that one to help the reservation schools that have trouble fielding a football team, but never seem to have the same problems fielding a basketball team. Again, this is a very rough draft, but it's something that I am very passionate about and I feel it would absolutely be the best thing for our state.

IMO what I feel are the biggest pieces to the puzzle and making it a widely acceptable option are the use of an RPI formula and not having to schedule everyone in your region. The state should love it because it gives them the revenue from more tournaments and could bring in a lot more money to have them all televised. It would also give some of the middle class teams a chance to schedule a top class team if they decided to. The top class team would have nothing to lose and would actually gain more points in my RPI by playing a top middle class team than a bottom top class team twice.

[classB4ever]

I think that the plan numbers could be changed compared to the football plan, could probably get rid of the 49% and up percentage multiplier. I added that one to help the reservation schools that have trouble fielding a football team, but never seem to have the same problems fielding a basketball team.

I think that would be justifiable and would help.

The state should love it because it gives them the revenue from more tournaments and could bring in a lot more money to have them all televised.

Honestly believe the regional tournaments in the middle and lower classes would be something everyone would want to see.

IMO what I feel are the biggest pieces to the puzzle and making it a widely acceptable option are the use of an RPI formula and not having to schedule everyone in your region. It would also give some of the middle class teams a chance to schedule a top class team if they decided to. The top class team would have nothing to lose and would actually gain more points in my RPI by playing a top middle class team than a bottom top class team twice.

Really think this would open up scheduling. Have not always been a fan of RPI, but it would certainly aid in scheduling. I can only hope the "powers that be" will take a strong look at this.

[The Schwab]

I have never been a fan of RPI, but the system I would use would be cut and dry and everyone would know the formula.

[classB4ever]

I have never been a fan of RPI, but the system I would use would be cut and dry and everyone would know the formula.

Talking RPI and why I don't always like it, especially when it's used for seeding, etc., is both the RPI and Computer rankings as of today (KMAV- and I love their work and site) have Enderlin in front of FW/M. IMHO, that just isn't accurate. But, if it would get your plan talked about and voted on, I wouldn't care what formula was used.