Ashland played up in class for many years until the state mandated schools have to play in their appropriate class

 

Woody

Possibly 1A, definitely not 4A.

Look, if you don't think there is a year in year out difference when one team has 550 and the other has 1400 than OK, I'll let you believe it. But let me point out, it doesn't make sense to have your position about 1A and not the same about 4A where the disparity is larger.

But how does this plan make it any tougher for them than it already is?

It doesn't, but that is what prop 20 was all about was it not, seperating themselves from T and X?

Five classes with 16 in 5A and 16 in 1A and the rest divided up in 2A, 3A, and 4A will not be popular with the majority of schools.

 

The 16 teams in 5A haven't really gotten an easier task because of X and T.

 

The teams in 2A, 3A, and 4A all have gotten a harder task because of the additional teams in their gruop.

 

The 16 1A teams would be the only ones to directly benefit.

Five classes with 16 in 5A and 16 in 1A and the rest divided up in 2A, 3A, and 4A will not be popular with the majority of schools.

 

The 16 teams in 5A haven't really gotten an easier task because of X and T.

 

The teams in 2A, 3A, and 4A all have gotten a harder task because of the additional teams in their gruop.

 

The 16 1A teams would be the only ones to directly benefit.

Actually, 2A would be smaller, 4A would be smaller, and 3A unaffected according to the original proposal.

Actually, 2A would be smaller, 4A would be smaller, and 3A unaffected according to the original proposal.

 

I thought CoachJ's plan would be like this...

 

16 teams in 1A

61 teams in 2A (185/3)

62 teams in 3A (185/3)

62 teams in 4A (185/3)

16 teams in 5A

---

217

I thought CoachJ's plan would be like this...

 

16 teams in 1A

61 teams in 2A (185/3)

62 teams in 3A (185/3)

62 teams in 4A (185/3)

16 teams in 5A

---

217

I guess I misunderstood.

I thought CoachJ's plan would be like this...

 

16 teams in 1A

61 teams in 2A (185/3)

62 teams in 3A (185/3)

62 teams in 4A (185/3)

16 teams in 5A

---

217

 

 

Exactly.

 

Why would the any of the 185 teams that is going from 54 teams in their class to 62 be excited about this?

Exactly.

 

Why would the any of the 185 teams that is going from 54 teams in their class to 62 be excited about this?

In 4A, they would.

 

They remove the biggest obstacles to competition.

In 4A, they would.

 

They remove the biggest obstacles to competition.

Yeah, but it still ain't a cake walk, but it is doable moreso, I would agree.

Five classes with 16 in 5A and 16 in 1A and the rest divided up in 2A, 3A, and 4A will not be popular with the majority of schools.

 

The 16 teams in 5A haven't really gotten an easier task because of X and T.

 

The teams in 2A, 3A, and 4A all have gotten a harder task because of the additional teams in their gruop.

 

The 16 1A teams would be the only ones to directly benefit.

 

Also (and the ones that are most penalized by the current LARGE 4A class) all those current 4A teams from 1100 to 1500 students that must compete with schools with 1500 to 3000 overall students.

 

By the way, I appreciate all the constructive criticism. I really just want the most EQUITABLE, but not "watered-down" system possible. Talking through -- and breaking down weaknesses in -- MANY alternatives is the only way to reach the BEST possible system.

 

I AM afraid that going to 6 classes is too many...and I know some wouldn't LIKE being in classes with more schools. But when you put that up against what I feel is the WORST inequity (making schools with 550 boys compete for the same championship as one school with 1500 boys and another with 1100+ boys), I think it pales in comparison.

 

But, that's just my opinion...that and 75-cents will get you an Appalachian News-Express at the Speedway down the street.

Five classes with 16 in 5A and 16 in 1A and the rest divided up in 2A, 3A, and 4A will not be popular with the majority of schools.

 

The 16 teams in 5A haven't really gotten an easier task because of X and T.

 

The teams in 2A, 3A, and 4A all have gotten a harder task because of the additional teams in their gruop.

 

The 16 1A teams would be the only ones to directly benefit.

 

What is POPULAR is not always what is best (though I realize it would probably have to be "popular" to pass).

 

The 16 teams in 5A would have the same teams to compete with as they do now...this is not intended to make things "easier" for all teams...just to work out the inequities present within a system MEANT to equal things based on enrollment (mainly at the current 4A level).

For the record, CoachJ, I wasn't trying to pick at your idea. Actually the opposite, I liked the idea and I was kicking it around in my head and brainstorming about the possibilities. Some of what I typed I'm sure could be easily dismissed, and some may be worth looking at. Either way, I think the idea of looking at new solutions to a problem can only bring positive results, even if it just makes more people think about it.

 

Watusi, I hope it didn't come off this way, but my response NEVER meant to imply I thought you were being negative toward my idea...just trying to answer your well-reasoned questions about it.

 

I really appreciate the Socratic approach of coming to solutions through asking GOOD questions...you ALWAYS do that on these boards and coaches like me appreciate people that have REASONED passion for the game that is our profession!

 

Keep up the good work, and good luck to your team tonight and the rest of the way.

Thanks Coach, you have a lot of respect on here and your posts in this thread are a good example of why.

 

I didn't read anything in your post that made me think you were offended, I just re-read my own post and thought I'd clarify for you and anyone else who might think I was just nitpicking.

 

Good luck to you guys the rest of the way, too. :thumb:

Also (and the ones that are most penalized by the current LARGE 4A class) all those current 4A teams from 1100 to 1500 students that must compete with schools with 1500 to 3000 overall students.

 

By the way, I appreciate all the constructive criticism. I really just want the most EQUITABLE, but not "watered-down" system possible. Talking through -- and breaking down weaknesses in -- MANY alternatives is the only way to reach the BEST possible system.

 

I AM afraid that going to 6 classes is too many...and I know some wouldn't LIKE being in classes with more schools. But when you put that up against what I feel is the WORST inequity (making schools with 550 boys compete for the same championship as one school with 1500 boys and another with 1100+ boys), I think it pales in comparison.

 

But, that's just my opinion...that and 75-cents will get you an Appalachian News-Express at the Speedway down the street.

 

CoachJ - it seems like a large number of your colleagues think 6 classes is the way to go. Are you fighting an uphill battle?