View Full Version : OHSAA proposal...step in the right direction IMHO
08-18-2011, 09:50 AM
Other than the fact that a Cleveland area all-star team like Glenville could end up in DII (or DI-classic), instead of the to-be-develiped Super DI, I like it.
I give it a much better chance of passing than the Competitive Balance proposal.
08-18-2011, 10:06 AM
Not sure where you draw the line, some have suggested "top 10%". That seems somewhat arbitrary to me. I've plotted the enrollment numbers on a graph and the curve is very smooth and gradual until you hit around 620 (Marysville/Westland territory). The curve moves up again more gradually from there until you hit around 760. There, if blows out, meaning that schools above that point have rapidly inclining enrollment numbers. From a "statistical" point of view, you would call these the "outliers". The problem is, that would only include about 22 schools, so (only Gahanna, Grove City, and Springfield would be above that in R3).
If they did the cut at 10%, that would put them back nearer the old cut-off for DI, upper 500's. This would be around 80 schools. Probably too many and still too much disparity. This would push teams like Orange, Oly, Jerome, and Scioto down to DII where arguably they belong.
If they did the cutoff at around Top 5%, it would put the cuttoff at around 700. This would push Davidson, Coffman, Pick North, and the "Burg into the Upper division with Gahanna, Springfield, and Grove City. That cutoff would be right above Groveport and UA. Sounds a little more reasonable to me.
08-18-2011, 11:20 AM
That's why the proposal failed...
They haven't come up with a new proposal
that article says the OHSAA said they were looking into it
then the article author went over the one they did before (not sure why)
there is no proposal
just the OHSAA saying they'll look at it and make one
08-18-2011, 11:50 AM
dan: My point is that, IMO, it is a good sign that OHSAA is at least talking about doing something about DI and possibly D6 enrollment disparity. I think it is a good sign and is a huge improvement over discussions about free lunches and success factors.
08-18-2011, 03:35 PM
I can't believe that playoff ratios were the whole issue. That's easily addressed -- just halve the number of DI playoff slots (or take it down to 8).
In one of the threads around the time of the competitive proposal division alignment was talked about a lot. At the I suggested another restriction -- for the 'super-division' schools, then can only play each other (or out of state). The benefit there is with so few schools, there would be little likelihood of teams that don't make cut not playing some of the teams that do during the season (no North Royalton scenarios). And super-division can be open enrollment -- teams above a certain number have to be in it, and it can be elective on a two year basis for all lower division teams that want in.
I don't know that expanding DVI is needed. The number of smaller schools that field uncompetitive teams can't really be addressed in a way that seems both fair and efficient.
In my opinion, it will not make the divisions more competitive. There will always be certain teams at the top of a division on an annual basis. It will never change in high school sports, regardless of the sport played.
08-18-2011, 04:26 PM
... beatin' that dead horse still, huh? Bless your heart....
08-18-2011, 07:11 PM
Does size really matter in D1? Look at the biggest schools in the OCC... Gahanna, Reynoldsburg & Groveport. Gahanna is by far the biggest and they haven't really been a powerhouse for several years. Reynoldsburg has had one winning season since 2000 I believe. Groveport has never really had a blockbuster team. I can see the issue at the bottom of D1, where D2 teams flutuate up and down, but isn't the bigger issue the ability of private schools to somewhat recruit? (especially in the lower divisions.)
Freak On A Leash
08-18-2011, 08:59 PM
This is so stupid. D1's should be 1000 kids plus and then Division 2-3-4-5-6 would be split up proportionately.
08-19-2011, 07:03 AM
I think you'll find a huge success difference between a school graduating 500 boys AND 500 girls versus a school graduating 1000 boys and no girls.I'd like to see a set-up that forces play-off qualifiers to schedule another play-off qualifier the following year.It may not be fair to a once-in-a-twenty year team but it would force schools hiding behind patsy schedules to belly up to the bar.
08-19-2011, 07:09 AM
Well - my point is that the OHSAA may do somthing good or they may do something real bad... just counting on them to make the right decisions is not often a good thing IMHO
but there is obviously a desire for some sort of change given how close the last proposal was to passing despite almost universal belief it was flawed big time...
the "beat a dead horse" thing is kinda funny... if you are following along the winds of change are blowing and it's not if... but what... change happens... and likly this year in terms of having a proposal(s) and a vote
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.