2019-2020 Football Plan

North Dakota High School Football
Forum rules
Please do not post just to complain about players, coaches, teams, officials, fans, or anyone else. Lets all try to demonstrate the spirit of good sportsmanship. Posts may be edited or deleted that do not comply.

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby magic man » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:44 pm

I expect to see some co-op's go away, namely central Dakota, pushing kindred back into 2A.
magic man
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:02 am

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:07 pm

The Schwab wrote:Quite the interesting plan to say the least. I agree with most of Ryan's points. Interesting to see Dickinson Trinity moving down to 9 man, considering they were in the AA state playoffs in 2016.

edit* I realize that New England was with Dickinson Trinity in 2016


I'd still hope Trinity and Ryan opt up and stay in A. Both have strong programs and would guess both could easily compete at that level.
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby Flying Wallenda » Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:28 am

magic man wrote:I expect to see some co-op's go away, namely central Dakota, pushing kindred back into 2A.

Rumor is grafton may be considering dissolving from St. Thomas and Drayton as well.
Flying Wallenda
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:39 pm

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:07 am

I wonder what will shake out with New Town, Four Winds, Dunseith, and Standing Rock. No way can NT compete in AA or FW and Dunseith in 11man. Dunseith was just starting to see some success in 9man. Standing Rock was playing a JV schedule, will they continue that or go into 11man? That would push FW back down to 9man. Or do any look to compete in 6man to help build a football program? From my understanding there are no enrollment limits in that class.
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby Mandan » Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:22 pm

The Schwab wrote:Quite the interesting plan to say the least. I agree with most of Ryan's points. Interesting to see Dickinson Trinity moving down to 9 man, considering they were in the AA state playoffs in 2016.

edit* I realize that New England was with Dickinson Trinity in 2016


Yes, but Trinity had 90 boys by themselves in the previous plan and have 30 less now. That seems like a huge drop to me. I need to see if I can find out what that is about.
Mandan
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:07 am
Location: Mandan, ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Thu Apr 12, 2018 2:58 pm

Went in and looked at the plan today and a lot has changed. Most opt ups and coop dissolutions added a lot of movement of teams.
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby The Schwab » Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:04 pm

So what will happen with BCN/Midkota? Will they join another co-op
The Schwab
User avatar
The Schwab
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:38 am
Location: The Peace Garden State

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:31 pm

In the agenda, the letter from BCN said they were looking at going with VC. Not sure on Midkota
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby magic man » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:44 am

Where are you seeing the meeting notes?
magic man
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:02 am

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:21 am

NDHSAA website under the tab for the board. Then you can go to the meeting agendas and in each one there are links to documents
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:50 pm

After writing my blog, I sat down and tried to take all of the information shared with me over the years, and also my personal observations, and put it into one formula for classification of football.

Some of the things I've heard over the years, and you have probably heard these things as well:

1) The disparity of 1000 and 500 is harder to overcome than 500 to 250, and 250 to 125, and so on. Some have proposed a 2 to 1 rule and let the numbers fall where they may.

2) Enrollment is not the only variable that should be accounted for.
A) Population centers with more tax revenue and resources can attract participation and produce athetes
B) co-ops can have poorer participation than one-center schools

3) Private schools get blue-chippers at a better rate.

I tried to account for everything, from enrollment to population to participation, and put together the best route of classification based on the numbers. I took some numbers from past plans, current plans, theories, all of it. Here's what I came up with:

2021-23 Football Classification Plan

1. The plan will be a three-year term.

2. The plan will utilize a top-down approach to classification, favoring like-schools in a division over number of teams in a division, to produce the best overall games and best overall post-season tournaments.

3. The largest remaining school will set the baseline for that classification of competition.

4. For schools with no defined district, their adjusted male enrollment in grades 7-10 will use a multiplier of 1.4 to determine classification.

5. For the largest two classifications, all schools with a grades 7-10 male enrollment that is equal to, or higher than, 60% of the grades 7-10 male enrollment of the classification’s largest school will compete in that classification. (I took 60% from the old "free and reduced meals" plan, where if more than 60% of your enrollment was on free and reduced meals, your enrollment counted for 60%)

6. In addition, schools with a total enrollment equal to, or above, the current Class A enrollment cutoff in the NDHSAA constitution, in cities with a population equal to, or greater than, the average population of the cities that are represented in (4) shall compete in the classification identified in (4) above.

7. For the remaining divisions, the largest remaining school will continue to establish the baseline, and the enrollment spread will expand to 50% of the baseline for classification.

8. Pertaining to (7), schools in cities with a population equal to, or greater than, the average population of the cities represented in (7) and having a total enrollment of 50% of the current Class A enrollment number in the current NDHSAA constitution will participate in the class defined by 7 (this affected no one, would be a factor if Shiloh grows)

9. Low participation waiver: All schools will report their pre-cut, opening day participation to the NDHSAA office at the end of the opening day of practice in year one of the plan. Schools with pre-cut, opening day participation less than 60% of the average participation reported by the remaining schools in the class may request a waiver to be reduced one classification for the remaining years of the plan with the NDHSAA Board of Directors. At the end of the plan, schools granted the waiver will again be placed in the classification their enrollment would qualify them for. Schools may not be reduced more than one level of competition by way of waiver.

10. Scheduling:. Teams will be allowed to play 10 contests. Divisions of 10-12 teams will play a statewide schedule. In a 12-team division, with 10 games annually and 11 opponents, you'd not schedule one opponent each year. Less than that, it works out. I'm assuming that the divisions would use this to negate travel. In divisions with less than 10 teams, teams may play each other twice on a statewide basis (home and home scheduling.

Obviously, I have no idea the number of teams that would take the waiver. Without that information, here's how the numbers broke out:

4A: (897.87 to 538.72) Minot, West Fargo, Sheyenne, Legacy, Century, Davies (on enrollment), South, North, Bismarck, Shanley, St. Marys (population). 11 teams, statewide schedule with rotator, 6 team playoff.

3A: (524.56 to 314.74) Williston, Central, Mandan, Dickinson, Red River, Jamestown (on enrollment) 6 teams, statewide schedule, home and home, 4 team playoff.

2A: (210.7 to 105.35) Devils Lake, Watford City, Wahpeton, Turtle Mountain, Valley City, Central Cass, Grafton, Beulah, New Town, H-CV (enrollment), Oak Grove (enrollment with multiplier). 11 teams, statewide schedule

9AA: (103.44 to 51.72) Kindred, Stanley, E-E-K, Hazen, Lisbon, Garrison-Max, Heart River, Washburn-Wilton-Wing, Des Lacs-Burlington, Rugby, PRFLVE, Carrington, Langdon Area, Northern Cass, Killdeer, Thompson, Nedrose, Sargent County, H-N, Oakes, Velva, Larimore, Bottineau, New Salem/Glen Ullin, Wells County, Shiloh, Richardton-Taylor-Hebron, Four Winds, Westhope-Newberg-Glenburn, Trinity, South Prairie, Minot Ryan, Bowman County, Kenmare-Bowbells-Burke Central, Tioga, Underwood-Turtle Lake-Mercer-McClusky, Ray-Powers Lake, May-Port-C-G, Mott-Regent/New England, Surrey, Enderlin-Maple Valley, Lakota-Dakota Prairie, Trenton-Trinity Christian, Dunseith, Wyndmere-Lidgerwood, Berthold-Our Redeemers, Linton-HMB. 48 teams, six regions of 8, 24 team playoff.

9A: The rest. 25 teams at present. Would likely pick up a couple from 6-man or new co-ops. Four regions, 16 team playoff.

Now, I know the 9AA division wouldn't stay in it's present form. You'd likely see some co-ops dissolve to take advantage of the new cutoffs. Isn't that the point. A six team 3A may pi$$ you off. Why? Those teams would play quality games against each other all year, with parity, as would the top division and likely the third division.

This plan does one thing: It needs a fifth state championship game. That's the only change. Play the 4A game by itself on Saturday, play the rest on Friday. The TV crews will find a way to squeeze in a Saturday game at noon, or 3, or 11 AM, or 10:30, or whatever.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby magic man » Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:53 pm

So you have kindred, with no other boys sports in the fall, with one of the highest participation numbers in 1A now (60 kids?), in a class below schools with lower numbers, that you chose to add "multipliers" to for justification in bumping them up a class?

I don't get that logic.

No need to explain it, this is your baby, so it makes sense to you.

That's just one glaring issue that I have.
magic man
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:02 am

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 12:07 am

Must be a Grover, as they are the only team that fits your description, and the only team affected by the multiplier, and in the largest city in North Dakota.

Ill let the non-defined district in a city of 120,000 speak for itself. Kindreds enrollment fell where it fell. Even with the current plan, the only thing that moved them to AA was the dissolution of Central Dakota. They were 1A before that.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby d_fense » Mon Apr 16, 2018 12:10 am

heimer wrote:After writing my blog, I sat down and tried to take all of the information shared with me over the years, and also my personal observations, and put it into one formula for classification of football.

Some of the things I've heard over the years, and you have probably heard these things as well:

1) The disparity of 1000 and 500 is harder to overcome than 500 to 250, and 250 to 125, and so on. Some have proposed a 2 to 1 rule and let the numbers fall where they may.

2) Enrollment is not the only variable that should be accounted for.
A) Population centers with more tax revenue and resources can attract participation and produce athetes
B) co-ops can have poorer participation than one-center schools

3) Private schools get blue-chippers at a better rate.

I tried to account for everything, from enrollment to population to participation, and put together the best route of classification based on the numbers. I took some numbers from past plans, current plans, theories, all of it. Here's what I came up with:

2021-23 Football Classification Plan

1. The plan will be a three-year term.

2. The plan will utilize a top-down approach to classification, favoring like-schools in a division over number of teams in a division, to produce the best overall games and best overall post-season tournaments.

3. The largest remaining school will set the baseline for that classification of competition.

4. For schools with no defined district, their adjusted male enrollment in grades 7-10 will use a multiplier of 1.4 to determine classification.

5. For the largest two classifications, all schools with a grades 7-10 male enrollment that is equal to, or higher than, 60% of the grades 7-10 male enrollment of the classification’s largest school will compete in that classification. (I took 60% from the old "free and reduced meals" plan, where if more than 60% of your enrollment was on free and reduced meals, your enrollment counted for 60%)

6. In addition, schools with a total enrollment equal to, or above, the current Class A enrollment cutoff in the NDHSAA constitution, in cities with a population equal to, or greater than, the average population of the cities that are represented in (4) shall compete in the classification identified in (4) above.

7. For the remaining divisions, the largest remaining school will continue to establish the baseline, and the enrollment spread will expand to 50% of the baseline for classification.

8. Pertaining to (7), schools in cities with a population equal to, or greater than, the average population of the cities represented in (7) and having a total enrollment of 50% of the current Class A enrollment number in the current NDHSAA constitution will participate in the class defined by 7 (this affected no one, would be a factor if Shiloh grows)

9. Low participation waiver: All schools will report their pre-cut, opening day participation to the NDHSAA office at the end of the opening day of practice in year one of the plan. Schools with pre-cut, opening day participation less than 60% of the average participation reported by the remaining schools in the class may request a waiver to be reduced one classification for the remaining years of the plan with the NDHSAA Board of Directors. At the end of the plan, schools granted the waiver will again be placed in the classification their enrollment would qualify them for. Schools may not be reduced more than one level of competition by way of waiver.

10. Scheduling:. Teams will be allowed to play 10 contests. Divisions of 10-12 teams will play a statewide schedule. In a 12-team division, with 10 games annually and 11 opponents, you'd not schedule one opponent each year. Less than that, it works out. I'm assuming that the divisions would use this to negate travel. In divisions with less than 10 teams, teams may play each other twice on a statewide basis (home and home scheduling.

Obviously, I have no idea the number of teams that would take the waiver. Without that information, here's how the numbers broke out:

4A: (897.87 to 538.72) Minot, West Fargo, Sheyenne, Legacy, Century, Davies (on enrollment), South, North, Bismarck, Shanley, St. Marys (population). 11 teams, statewide schedule with rotator, 6 team playoff.

3A: (524.56 to 314.74) Williston, Central, Mandan, Dickinson, Red River, Jamestown (on enrollment) 6 teams, statewide schedule, home and home, 4 team playoff.

2A: (210.7 to 105.35) Devils Lake, Watford City, Wahpeton, Turtle Mountain, Valley City, Central Cass, Grafton, Beulah, New Town, H-CV (enrollment), Oak Grove (enrollment with multiplier). 11 teams, statewide schedule

9AA: (103.44 to 51.72) Kindred, Stanley, E-E-K, Hazen, Lisbon, Garrison-Max, Heart River, Washburn-Wilton-Wing, Des Lacs-Burlington, Rugby, PRFLVE, Carrington, Langdon Area, Northern Cass, Killdeer, Thompson, Nedrose, Sargent County, H-N, Oakes, Velva, Larimore, Bottineau, New Salem/Glen Ullin, Wells County, Shiloh, Richardton-Taylor-Hebron, Four Winds, Westhope-Newberg-Glenburn, Trinity, South Prairie, Minot Ryan, Bowman County, Kenmare-Bowbells-Burke Central, Tioga, Underwood-Turtle Lake-Mercer-McClusky, Ray-Powers Lake, May-Port-C-G, Mott-Regent/New England, Surrey, Enderlin-Maple Valley, Lakota-Dakota Prairie, Trenton-Trinity Christian, Dunseith, Wyndmere-Lidgerwood, Berthold-Our Redeemers, Linton-HMB. 48 teams, six regions of 8, 24 team playoff.

9A: The rest. 25 teams at present. Would likely pick up a couple from 6-man or new co-ops. Four regions, 16 team playoff.

Now, I know the 9AA division wouldn't stay in it's present form. You'd likely see some co-ops dissolve to take advantage of the new cutoffs. Isn't that the point. A six team 3A may pi$$ you off. Why? Those teams would play quality games against each other all year, with parity, as would the top division and likely the third division.

This plan does one thing: It needs a fifth state championship game. That's the only change. Play the 4A game by itself on Saturday, play the rest on Friday. The TV crews will find a way to squeeze in a Saturday game at noon, or 3, or 11 AM, or 10:30, or whatever.



This is ridiculously bad. You obviously spent some time on this. Why would you put together something so much poorer than what we have currently? You have a huge nine man upper division, consisting of many teams that would never choose to play 9 Man. You have Grand Forks schools playing out of the top enrollment class, which makes no sense. You mentioned that teams in a division should have an enrollment no less than 1/2 of the top and rolled division member. Minot is an outlier and should not be considered the top in their division. If I'm recalling correctly the top of the big schools, when disregarding Minot, has a enrollment of 617. Half that and schools over 309 should be top division teams. Red river is about 423 (if I recall). Why wouldn't you put them up? Kindred is playing 9man in your plan. They will have more boys playing then many of their opponents will have in high school. Makes no sense. I don't think the NDHSAA would ever come up with such a nonsensical plan.
d_fense
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 835
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 7:13 am
Location: Small town eastern ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby magic man » Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:47 am

Yeah, they were the largest team in 1A, yet you have them in 9 man, with a 60 player roster?

The number of kids a school has is what they have.

I commend you for putting together something that was based on some kind of logic, it's just flawed logic.

Some of your other proposals on here, make more sense.



heimer wrote:Must be a Grover, as they are the only team that fits your description, and the only team affected by the multiplier, and in the largest city in North Dakota.

Ill let the non-defined district in a city of 120,000 speak for itself. Kindreds enrollment fell where it fell. Even with the current plan, the only thing that moved them to AA was the dissolution of Central Dakota. They were 1A before that.
magic man
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:02 am

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 5:49 am

So, we ignore Minots enrollment because its too big.

So, we ignore Kindreds enrollment because they dont have any other fall sport.

But please ignore Oak Grove, despite their private status in a city with a population over 120K.

I threw this together to show that one guy at a computer with an hour to kill can actually come up with a formula that accounts for more variables than just enrollment. Could it be tweaked? Of course it could.

I dont like the size of that 9A class either. Take those 75 teams, split it in half, have the top class play 11 man. Add a by law that only the 9-man class will have more than 32 teams.

Drop the enrollment multiplier (for football). It only affected Oak Grove.

But nonsensical? Ive spent 17 years covering football at the level of the top three classes in this plan. They are the right size with the right variables. Those classes would actually have regular seasons that matter every week, not 6 weeks with blowouts the other 3.

The early reactions confirm what i already knew: when trying to classify any sport, this state will choose comfort over evidence and round numbers over competitive groups everytime. That approach will kill football.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby magic man » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:31 am

Minot - They have what they have, so other than putting them in a class all by themselves, what other solution would there be? They need a 2nd school, but they are fighting against it.

Kindred's enrollment - What went into your decision to cut it off right at a place that they wouldn't be up in an 11 man class? I would guess that they would at least play 11 man football. It makes no sense whatsoever to put them in a 9 man division.

Oak Grove Enrollment - No one says ignore their enrollment, but to "penalize" them because they are in a large city is full of bias undertones. I would guess that in your 17 years of coverage, you know the make up of most of the parochial schools, with the foreign exchange students.
I would guess that the only reason you didn't add a multiplier to Shanley, was due to the fact that they opted to move to that higher class, or they would have been hit with the same multiplier that Oak Grove received, no?
Regardless of the population of the area in Fargo, they still have the numbers that they have. The private schools are already hit with a biased "free lunch" number reduction, which we know usually has very little affect in private schools. If a kid is at the school, he should be counted whether or not he qualifies for a free or reduced lunch.

There is no need to add a multiplier that only affects one school. Just call it what you mean.

I'm all for revamping the classes, but let's eliminate the biases and add in things that are actually taking place.

To ignore the affects of other fall sports, is shortsighted.
For example: A school has 50 Male students.. and you have 4 fall sports.. You don't think the numbers will be affected for a particular sport?

I heard that there was a fair & unbiased proposal presented by one of the HS coaches this past year, but it wasn't even given a 2nd look.

I'm all for 4 classes and a 9 & possibly 6 man division. It just seems we differ on how to get there
magic man
NDPreps Starter
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:02 am

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:56 am

The difference is that I want, and authored, a system that does some crucial things:

1) Used more than just base enrollment as a factor. We know enrollment in a multi-school co-op does not equal the same participation as the same enrollment in one city, one point of practice, etc. We need a formula that accounts for that.

2) I used city tax base as a concern. Tax base leads to facilities, and facilities lead to participation. Furthermore, access to collegiate camps right in your town, or being a suburb of one of those towns, matters, and matters a lot.

3) I put a human element in the equation. When the numbers lie to us, we need a way to fix that. All enrollments are are numbers. Some districts have socio-economic issues that lead to poor participation. Sports are increasingly unattainable in large population bases due to cost. So, athletes specialize. Human beings need to not be bound by cold, black numbers that only tell one story.

4) I worked top-down. As soon as you suggest a system where the top 16 enrollments are 3A, you lose me. Sorry, I won't read any further. That is bottom-up classification. The top number no longer matters, only the bottom number. You tackle a problem from the top, not the bottom.

So, if you don't like this, fine. I'm told all the time to suggest something different, and be a part of the process. Show me what you've come up with that takes into account enrollment, population resources, tax base, co-ops, low participation exceptions, and the economics of athletics.

My point in this: I did it in an hour. If this was my job, and I had a committee of people, we could get this done in a day. My guess is you, me two other guys here, and anyone but Bisonguy or someone from a private school could actually fix this. Why can't the NDHSAA? This isn't THE plan. Its A plan, and it's not that dammmmm hard.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby ndlionsfan » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:11 am

heimer wrote:The difference is that I want, and authored, a system that does some crucial things:

1) Used more than just base enrollment as a factor. We know enrollment in a multi-school co-op does not equal the same participation as the same enrollment in one city, one point of practice, etc. We need a formula that accounts for that.


This is something I definitely agree with you on. A Central Dakota co-op of 100 students (I know this is dissolved now but still a good example) is not the same as a Kindred of 100 students. There should be something in each football plan that addresses this. If a co-op of two smaller schools is around the same or even slightly higher than an enrollment of a single school team, the co-op should be in the lower class.

I think the host school should count 100%, but then maybe each additional school 75% for classification purposes.
"There is only one thing in which a person can start at the top - digging a hole"
User avatar
ndlionsfan
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:36 am
Location: Central ND

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby The Schwab » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:32 am

Heimer,

I agree with you on 99 percent of this. It makes sense to use more than just the enrollment number when determining classification. The only thing I have trouble wrapping my head around is the class with 6 teams. Doing that, in my opinion, "rewards" the teams that haven't been competitive. My idea, and I'm sure I'll hear a lot of push back from this, move all schools without defined district lines that aren't part of a co-op into class 3 A.
The Schwab
User avatar
The Schwab
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:38 am
Location: The Peace Garden State

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:38 am

I know a six-team class not cool. But it's what the numbers suggest works. Further, I think the top class in SD is 7 teams. Why, because SD thinks classes that look the same work the same.

Also, who does it affect? No one. They are only playing each other. The plan doesn't make them play anyone else. It's one extra game.

Finally, check the waiver system. Does a Fargo North request a waiver? I bet they'd get one. Would Devils Lake opt up into that class? This system allows for movement to fit.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby The Schwab » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:53 am

heimer wrote:I know a six-team class not cool. But it's what the numbers suggest works. Further, I think the top class in SD is 7 teams. Why, because SD thinks classes that look the same work the same.

Also, who does it affect? No one. They are only playing each other. The plan doesn't make them play anyone else. It's one extra game.

Finally, check the waiver system. Does a Fargo North request a waiver? I bet they'd get one. Would Devils Lake opt up into that class? This system allows for movement to fit.


Those are very good points. I moved up those other four schools because I fully believe they could compete for titles with those 6 teams in class 3A. Other states have rules pertaining to schools without defined district borders being moved up. I think ND needs to take a step in that direction.
The Schwab
User avatar
The Schwab
NDPreps Legend
 
Posts: 3564
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:38 am
Location: The Peace Garden State

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby classB4ever » Mon Apr 16, 2018 11:25 am

heimer wrote:
1) The disparity of 1000 and 500 is harder to overcome than 500 to 250, and 250 to 125, and so on. Some have proposed a 2 to 1 rule and let the numbers fall where they may.


Not sure I agree with this, but won't let it be a stickler.

heimer wrote:
2) Enrollment is not the only variable that should be accounted for.
A) Population centers with more tax revenue and resources can attract participation and produce athetes
B) co-ops can have poorer participation than one-center schools

3) Private schools get blue-chippers at a better rate.


Agree with all of this. My only input to this subject is your plan will increase participation, period. That's what needs to get started. Once these kids start coming out and are playing in meaningful games and start producing winning programs, the movement amongst divisions will naturally happen again. It might take 5 - 6 years to accomplish, but it will happen. 2 cents.
classB4ever
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby heimer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 1:57 pm

classB4ever wrote:
Agree with all of this. My only input to this subject is your plan will increase participation, period. That's what needs to get started. Once these kids start coming out and are playing in meaningful games and start producing winning programs, the movement amongst divisions will naturally happen again. It might take 5 - 6 years to accomplish, but it will happen. 2 cents.


In order to have meaningful games, you have to fix classification, and perhaps more aggressively than you'd like.
God is bigger than football.
heimer
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:11 pm
Location: Rupert's Land

Re: 2019-2020 Football Plan

Postby classB4ever » Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:52 pm

heimer wrote:
classB4ever wrote:
Agree with all of this. My only input to this subject is your plan will increase participation, period. That's what needs to get started. Once these kids start coming out and are playing in meaningful games and start producing winning programs, the movement amongst divisions will naturally happen again. It might take 5 - 6 years to accomplish, but it will happen. 2 cents.


In order to have meaningful games, you have to fix classification, and perhaps more aggressively than you'd like.


Was agreeing, but didn't come across quite right.
classB4ever
NDPreps All-State
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:20 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests