Bisonguy06 wrote:Steve, if we agree that 12 is better than 10 and agree to allow opt ups, you are a reasonable guy and my work here is done. Amen.
steve34 wrote:Again, all theory, all numbers, no realism. You can't explain away Lisbon being competitive with every former AAA school that moved down. You can't explain away the fact that those teams would have barely made the AAA playoffs, if that, this year.
steve34 wrote:Again, all theory.
Fact is that four teams moved down from 3A, and all were tested by 2A competition. That is not theory, that is fact, period. Your assertion that Carrington would not be competitive with Jamestown has no merit, because there were assertions that Lisbon, coming up from 1A would not be competitive with teams that were coming down from 3A. That assertion was proven incorrect on the field. Your claims that the ratios do not match up was proven wrong on the field. My assertions that the ratios were more destructive in the larger class was proven right on the field, both last year and this year.
Johnny versus Steve and Devin versus Johnny is not applicable. Lisbon vs. Shanley is. This year proved the ratios are more destructive in the top class than the next one or any after that.
NDplayin wrote:FACT: You could DOUBLE Belcourt (164)) and they still would still fall 72 boys SHORTof the male enrollment of ONE Williston(400).
steve34 wrote:Again, all theory, all numbers, no realism. You can't explain away Lisbon being competitive with every former AAA school that moved down. You can't explain away the fact that those teams would have barely made the AAA playoffs, if that, this year.
Ratios are great, when the totals work with them. But a 3-1 ratio is much more fair if the total numbers are 60-20 then a 2-1 ratio if the numbers are 5000-2500. There are obviously higher odds at finding outstanding athletes in 2500 additional players than in an additional 40. Your ratios take no total numbers into play.
All theory, no realism.
steve34 wrote:Again, I favor a 12 team AAA division, meaning Dickinson does NOT move down.
If we stay with a 12 team AAA division, I believe Williston should be moved down, unless they want to move up. We don't craft 12 team divisions just so we can have 13 teams up there. That really doesn't make any sense. If we're gonna start doing that, the whole thing will have nothing but chaos. Then every class would a "base number + this team or that team" scenario.
steve34 wrote:Playin, you have made no compelling argument that Williston should remain a AAA school. Your argument centers on the premise that the whole division will be destroyed if Williston joins AA. You've thrown out nothing but theories based on math without even considering the evidence on the field.....
Enrollment plus playing evidence equals Williston will not kill AA, nor make it hard for any team in AA to compete. The smallest had no problems competing with the biggest the past season.
steve34 wrote:This is precisely why target numbers of teams is better than enrollment cutoffs. We shouldn't make 12 a 13 just because Williston scares someone. 12 is 12 unless Williston wants in.
steve34 wrote:Playin, you have made no compelling argument that Williston should remain a AAA school.
steve34 wrote:You can talk all about how Williston is more comparable with AAA than AA by the "1.5 or 2 times bigger/smaller" ratio. You fail to mention that there is a much better chance of finding substantial athletes in an extra 500 or 600 than there is in an extra 200.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests