North Dakota Preps

EHS1998 wrote:3 way tie for 1 seed in District 5 between LLM, MPB and Ellendale at 3 and 1.

LLM beat MPB 82 to 66
MPB beat Ellendale 66 to 65
Ellendale beat LLM 65 to 61 OT

If TB is points differential, LLM is 1.

If it is anything else, I am not sure who has the edge.

Overall records are:

LLM 11 and 6
MPB 8 and 8
Ellendale 12 and 6.

If its Pt Diff: L-LM is #1, then MPB would get #2 via head-to-head over Ellendale.

However, you never know what each district does...I know District 2 does not do Pt. Diff as 3-way tiebreaker (at least first option)

I believe you are correct Run.

Ellendale gets the 1 seed over LLM due to power points. Apparently it was very close.

Here is how the bracket breaks out.

DISTRICT 5
@ Barnes County North (Leal)
February 14, 15 & 17

Friday, February 14th
G1: #4 Edgeley-Kulm-Montpelier vs. #5 Barnes County North
G2: #2 Lamoure Litchville Marion vs. #3 Medina-Pingree/Buchanan

Saturday, February 15th
G3: Loser G1 vs. Loser G2
G4: #1 Ellendale vs. Winner G1

Monday, February 17th
3rd Place: Winner G3 vs. Loser G4
Championship: Winner G4 vs. Winner G2

Never underestimate the importance of power points.

In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

heimer wrote:In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

heimer wrote:In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

Really a great question, its between 1 and 4, but I am leaning toward 1.

I'm glad you at least admit that four is an option. Protect, protect, protect. Not evolve, improve, imagine, but protect, protect, protect.

Gotta love small-town ND

heimer wrote:I'm glad you at least admit that four is an option. Protect, protect, protect. Not evolve, improve, imagine, but protect, protect, protect.

Gotta love small-town ND

Not sure such thinking is isolated to small town ND.

I am a 3 class advocate but I dont think it ever gets done, regrettably due to the mentality you reference above.

heimer wrote:In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

Number 4 for sure

heimer wrote:In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

1.

I think the only way we see 3 classes if you see a few schools out west go over the 325 limit.

heimer wrote:In all seriousness, which of the following scenarios do you find more likely, with VC anticipated to be "B" in 2018 (four years)

1. VC falls to B, plays B, no change
2. Three-divisions, driven by BOD, approved by membership
3. Three-divisions, driven and approved by membership
4. Move by membership to lower A-B division enrollment limit

I'll go first and say #4.

I think right away...1 will be the option. I could see a change around 2020, especially as Flip said, if more western schools get stuck moving up.

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id ... /homepage/

Story made me think of you heimer.

Flip wrote:http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426849/group/homepage/

Story made me think of you heimer.

Interesting read Flip.

Flip wrote:http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426849/group/homepage/

Story made me think of you heimer.

Grab a chair, some snacks and refreshments. We're about to have a party!!!

classB4ever wrote:

Flip wrote:http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426849/group/homepage/

Story made me think of you heimer.

Grab a chair, some snacks and refreshments. We're going to have a party!!!

Popcorn is popping!

In the defense of internet trolls, I can't really call what I do trolling. Trolling describes regular behavior. I am here so infrequently, I'm seeing posts titled "this board going downhill", referring to the lack of intense chatter.

So, I'm a troll that gives even less effort than a regular troll. That's worse than just trolling.

BTW, this is the only message board I "troll" on, so I'm probably not a cookie-cutter case of trolling as evaluated by the study. I'm driven here by a scant few things:

1. Boredom
2. Grudge against District 5
3. Boredom
4. Grudge against the NDHSAA
5. Boredom

OKAY OKAY, in all reality, I am a bit of a jerk in real life. That being said, I have an opinion, and I argue my opinion passionately. That, by our overly politically correct, liberal society is usually considered being a jerk, and that politically correct, liberal society extends deeper into our education system than any other sector of our state.

So, in summation, I'm not surprised your Obama-loving, tree-hugging liberals think the two-class system is great and that I'm a jerk. Consider the source.

Well worth the wait. Running to the bathroom and getting ready for Scene II, Acts 1 & 2. Dang concessions is out of popcorn. sportsphenom, have any extra?
In this next Scene, the "troll" played by heimer, will wait under the bridge (ndpreps) ready to wreak havoc on any "hero" who is on their way to defend the castle (2 class system). This is getting good. Wonder who is playing the "hero"?

Next year district 5 will have 7 teams in it.
Ellendale, LLM, EKM, BCN, Midkota, Carrington, Oakes and MPB will move to district 6 giving them 6

http://www.newsdakota.com/2014/02/18/lo ... t-5-title/

I wonder who was the last team to win District 5 before LaMoure?

Funny, can't have them in the district because all they will do is dominate. That turned out to be just a bit self-serving, huh?

Flip wrote:http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/426849/group/homepage/

Story made me think of you heimer.

The Canadian researchers defined trolling as the “practice of behaving in a deceptive, destructive, or disruptive manner in a social setting on the Internet with no apparent instrumental purpose.”


Is this you Flip? or was this you at one time?....

EHS1998 wrote:Nice! This is great news for VC.

But I cant find any mention about District 5.

district 5 will add Oakes Midkota and Carrington they are sending MPB to district 6 so district 5 will have 7 teams

RebelsThunder wrote:

EHS1998 wrote:Nice! This is great news for VC.

But I cant find any mention about District 5.

district 5 will add Oakes Midkota and Carrington they are sending MPB to district 6 so district 5 will have 7 teams

Thanks. I'm pretty clear on the D5 alignment next year. The response from me that you quote above was to Heimer's post about VC dropping enrollment to the Class B level in a few years.

This sounds like a ton of lobbying to keep VC out of 5.

I'm wondering, if not 5, where. Not 1, too far, not 2, full (eight teams), unless FSHP shifts to 3, which I've heard could happen. Then 2 a good fit.

But 5 was where they landed before.

heimer wrote:This sounds like a ton of lobbying to keep VC out of 5.

I'm wondering, if not 5, where. Not 1, too far, not 2, full (eight teams), unless FSHP shifts to 3, which I've heard could happen. Then 2 a good fit.

But 5 was where they landed before.

With the new re-alignment proposal I could see District 2 as a possible place for them. District 5 is still an option because Oakes can move back when North Sargent & Milnor coop in 2015-16 for all sports.

I saw, on the realignment proposal thread, that FSHP is moving to 3.

So, VC goes 2, here's 2:

Central Cass
Oak Grove
Kindred
Northern Cass
Valley City
Richland
Maple Valley
Enderlin.

Pretty top-heavy district. Hope there isn't a year where its CC, Kindred, OG, and VC in the regional.