winner-within wrote:"or allow 5 schools to co-op with Grafton for softball (Cavalier, Drayton, St. Thomas, Valley, Park River, are there any others, isn't North Border involved there"
this Basketball Team would beat the Big A's....you said this was Bball thread...although I agree, thats why No sports co-ops for me....lets consolidate..
"It's hilarious that a couple of B schools approach A class, and now we're open to dialogue. But Heaven forbid we take care of this 10 years ago"
this is truly why your upset Heimer.......a person cant generate despise in 6 months............changing it now is simply to late in your eyes and many
ndlionsfan wrote:winner-within wrote:"or allow 5 schools to co-op with Grafton for softball (Cavalier, Drayton, St. Thomas, Valley, Park River, are there any others, isn't North Border involved there"
this Basketball Team would beat the Big A's....you said this was Bball thread...although I agree, thats why No sports co-ops for me....lets consolidate..
"It's hilarious that a couple of B schools approach A class, and now we're open to dialogue. But Heaven forbid we take care of this 10 years ago"
this is truly why your upset Heimer.......a person cant generate despise in 6 months............changing it now is simply to late in your eyes and many
The Schwab wrote:When you change class B basketball to "division b basketball" for the sole purpose of allowing 2 schools to stay under the cap (and I know for certain that one school had a member on that board, I'm not sure if the other did) I call that having a hidden agenda. Like I've said over and over it is easier for a school of 300 to compete with a school of 1200 than it is for a school of 75 to compete with a school of 300.
ndlionsfan wrote:You never cease to amaze me winner. There are entire counties in the state (maybe even putting two together) where if you built one school right in the middle you would still not have 75 in high school. But no, lets have them sit on a bus for 4 hours a day so they can go to a school large enough for your standards.
heimer wrote:Exactly what clouds do you see on the horizon. As a fan of the current system, you shouldn't see any. Your B friends have rigged the bylaws directly in your favor. As long as there is a two-division system, the enrollment number used for classification is 325. No exceptions.NDplayin wrote: I also don't think our system is perfect, and I too see some clouds on the horizon. However, I also recognize that no system will ever be perfect.
So, you have your number. Period. The state has made it clear there are no "clouds" for the state. There may be clouds for the individual school, but, based on bylaws you fully support, they are not the state's problem.
heimer wrote:Furthermore, I guess you're a typical small town North Dakotan: Rather do the wrong thing the right way than deal with a right thing done a wrong way. Enjoy the oil.
The Schwab wrote:Winner you are seriously so out of whack it is unbelievable. So basically you want to destroy all but like 15 towns in North Dakota, because when you lose a school your town will slowly die. Where should the kids from Marmarth go to school? They should drive for over 90 miles one way to school? How about the kids who live in northeastern Harding County (SD yes I know) but who go to school currently in North Dakota, should they get up at 6 and drive to school? If you think that schools with under 75 are a drain on our states economy I offer you the opportunity to come to the school I teach at and observe for a day.
EHS1998 wrote:It's kind of ironic, we have had to compete against VC in Babe Ruth for years now and they trot out their 30-40+ kids and typically dominate the likes of Ellendale and Edgeley with their 9 total players each (when we are lucky) and no one from VC seems to have any problem with it, in fact they seem to revel in it. (This is why I have a hard time pitying them). But when you turn it around and its Valley that has to compete against opponents that are significantly larger, its a travesty of justice. How do you reconcile such hypocrisy?
Indy5 wrote:EHS1998 wrote:It's kind of ironic, we have had to compete against VC in Babe Ruth for years now and they trot out their 30-40+ kids and typically dominate the likes of Ellendale and Edgeley with their 9 total players each (when we are lucky) and no one from VC seems to have any problem with it, in fact they seem to revel in it. (This is why I have a hard time pitying them). But when you turn it around and its Valley that has to compete against opponents that are significantly larger, its a travesty of justice. How do you reconcile such hypocrisy?
I'll play devil's advocate here. Valley City is a permanent class B legion team now because it was a joke when they played class A. Maybe they don't have a problem with them being the big dog cause they're so sick of getting whooped.
winner-within wrote:Play the Class A North Dakota Champs against
MN
A
2A
3A
4A
Champs...chances are we win 1 ............there are 3A, 4A players now and then that come thru ND
but there are never 3A, 4A teams, and everyone with a brain knows why....
I am for 1 class before 3, lets implement 1 class after we get some practical consolidations going and dissolve the "super co-ops" of B
EHS1998 wrote:How do you reconcile such hypocrisy?
classB4ever wrote:winner-within wrote:Play the Class A North Dakota Champs against
MN
A
2A
3A
4A
Champs...chances are we win 1 ............there are 3A, 4A players now and then that come thru ND
but there are never 3A, 4A teams, and everyone with a brain knows why....
I am for 1 class before 3, lets implement 1 class after we get some practical consolidations going and dissolve the "super co-ops" of B
Serious question winner, would you list who you consider the "super co-ops"?
heimer wrote:And EHS, don't play nice now. I'm a small, bitter man, remember?
....You speak of credibility, yet you and The Schwab savagely attack a Board of Director's meeting....You attack the VCHS staff ...... you continue to spread your lies about that meeting and the intent
heimer wrote:No spin just facts about the meeting:
Attendance: Board of Directors, NDHSAA staff, Al Cruchet--Activities Director of VCHS, Dean Koppelman, Superintendent of VCHS.
VCHS presents request to change number to 400 for Class B schools for basketball and volleyball. Cites various evidence to support decision.
Board discusses, no objections from the board. A few questions from the board for Dean Koppelmen, none negative.
Board discusses motion. Without further input from VCHS staff, changes request to 400 for all activities, including fine arts.
Motion made, vote held.
Kim Knodle, a member of the Board of Directors at the time, and the current principal at VCHS, abstains from voting. Knodle did not participate in discussion during discussion period.
Vote taken, unanimous vote, motion approved.
So, tell me where the spin is in that. Where was the "smoke-filled" room that made the decision? Oh that's right, the fact that the meeting took place in Valley City is really all you and District 5 need to label the decision as biased.
How about we all admit that the Board of Directors, composed of a cross-section of schools in North Dakota, agreed unanimously that the number should be 400?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests