3 class proposal

[ndlionsfan]

FW-M traveled the state quite a bit for both boys' and girls'. DT, Shiloh, and OG travel as well. Beulah, Thompson (both boys/girls) and Dunseith have traveled quite a bit the past few seasons. All the A teams coming down are used to travel all over half the state, it would just be going to different locations in this plan.

This isn't a majority by any means, but it is quite a bit. There are many teams in the middle division that would have increased travel to some extent, but like classb4ever said it is for only half of those games since they are home/away. I feel a lot of people look at the distances between towns and don't think about that teams don't travel to all of them every season.

[BasketballMind]

Why not more schools in the middle class? Is it due to a perceived lack of competitiveness?

170 kids as the cutoff for the definition of a small school is curious at best.

[The Schwab]

Here are the items that I think most people can agree on when it comes to the 3 class system:

1. There is a competitive unbalance in the current structure.
2. Schools are not always equally as strong in BBB, GBB, VB
3. Something needs to be done (wether it is increasing the size of class A to include the north star or 3 class)
4. Most people strongly in favor of 3 class want to get the privates out of class B
5. The have's are only going to get stronger

People may disagree with some of these points and that is ok. It is all about your perspective. If you are like me and taught/coached/cheered for small schools all of your life you will more than likely be in favor of a 3 class system. If you have or currently teach/coach/cheer for teams in the proposed middle class you are far more likely to oppose the 3 class system.

I personally don't know what the exact answer is. I have shared and tweaked my proposal numerous times. In my opinion if the "new" plan doesn't do these things it will not fix the problem and will not be a success:

1. Schools must have the flexibility to schedule teams close to home. Having no requirements on who you must play (ie. middle class) will make this a lot easier for those teams to get on board with this. If you have teams from Grafton playing in Bismarck on a Tuesday night for a mandatory game, that is not a good idea. You can accomplish the scheduling flexibility by implementing an RPI type formula. This is better for the game even if we don't go to a 3 class system.

2. This plan can't be designed to get one specific school out of class B. I think most people who want a 3 class system want to see the privates and large class B schools in the middle class. I would agree with this as well. To do this, you must come up with a formula that is easy to understand and stand behind. If we are having a plan that just assumes that some schools will opt up, that is not a good idea.

3. State tournaments will need to be different than in the past. I don't think a combined tournament is the answer. I think you look at what SD does for their boys and girls state tournaments and do something similar. There are enough ways to get games on TV/Internet now a days so every one gets coverage.

Any system that gets implemented must be fluid and must be looked at with a progressive mindset.

[TommiesFan]

After listening to Dom Izzo interview Josh Johnson yesterday, and then hearing the Private's text message to Dom that he read on-air today, here's my interpretation of what I heard:

The Privates want the multiplier gone, in exchange they would be willing to "opt-up" for 4-5 years. However, after that, they could decide to go back down to "B", depending on where their programs are from a competitive standpoint.
Johnson's committee wants that "opt-up" commitment to be longer, probably closer to 10 years.

From the private's perspective, the multiplier will always keep them up in the "A" division, with no room to ever move down. From the committee's perspective, they probably feel the B's out West, possibly across the State, won't vote for the proposal if they know the Privates could possibly be back down in the B division in 4-5 years. Thus, here we sit.

It is in the NDHSAA by-laws that a child living in the boundaries of a school district do not count as open enrolled, so one would think the Privates would have the law on their side, versus an arbitrary multiplier that Johnson and the committee came up with (2.0).

I would think that they should have had this all cleared up prior to asking schools to vote on this. Considering that getting the Privates up to Class A is such a major factor in how most Class B schools will vote on this, I wonder how it plays out with the potential of a lawsuit regarding the multiplier. For example, if they get 60% approval, and then it turns out the Privates win their multiplier lawsuit, and would only opt-up for 4-5 years, do they have the entire state re-vote again? You would certainly think they'd have to, but not sure how that would work? And, are they already losing yes votes based on the uncertainty of not knowing where the Privates will land for sure?

Side note: Wouldn't it be nice as a program to decide if you were "competitive" enough to compete in Class "A" for the next 4-5 years, or stay down at the "B" level...that's essentially what the privates would be entitled to...pretty wild...

Going to be an interesting next few weeks, that's for sure.

[Sportsrube]

The more this plan gets discussed, the more I see it failing. Too many questions about multipliers, opting up, etc.... ND will do what it always does, keep on dong it the same way and then being shocked by the fact than nothing changes. Participation in small schools will continue to drop and you will see more co-ops whether it is to become competitive or whether it is to have enough kids to actually have a program. Eventually the small schools will start dropping programs due to lack of numbers. I still think the NDHSAA is more worried about losing money (TV contracts for State Tournaments) than they are about competitive balance. If they can change the football alignments every 2-4 years they sure as heck can do it with other sports as well.

[BasketballMind]

The more this plan gets discussed, the more I see it failing. Too many questions about multipliers, opting up, etc.... ND will do what it always does, keep on dong it the same way and then being shocked by the fact than nothing changes. Participation in small schools will continue to drop and you will see more co-ops whether it is to become competitive or whether it is to have enough kids to actually have a program. Eventually the small schools will start dropping programs due to lack of numbers. I still think the NDHSAA is more worried about losing money (TV contracts for State Tournaments) than they are about competitive balance. If they can change the football alignments every 2-4 years they sure as heck can do it with other sports as well.

Not enough people are willing to discuss the flaws in the plan.(No, I am not going to post the flaws in the plan again. They've been posted enough in this topic alone.)

Once people state their issues with the plan their opinion is dismissed as "You're just a fan of a middle class school and want to keep beating up on the small schools" instead of actually addressing the problems stated and trying to find a reasonable solution.

Usually ends in a big game of "Whataboutism"

[Thundersnow]

I am fully willing to discuss the problems with this plan. I am fully willing to admit the plan as it is proposed is not flawless. I don't care who anybody cheers for. I don't have a vote, so my opinion doesn't really matter, but I would vote "yes" to the proposal. Because it's perfect? No. Because it's BETTER than our current system? Yes. I think we're headed into an interesting fall and winter. I'm hopeful this proposal passes. If it doesn't? I'll keep on being a basketball fan, but I will cringe every time I see a game end 80-25 and more schools giving up.

[packers21]

I am fully willing to discuss the problems with this plan. I am fully willing to admit the plan as it is proposed is not flawless. I don't care who anybody cheers for. I don't have a vote, so my opinion doesn't really matter, but I would vote "yes" to the proposal. Because it's perfect? No. Because it's BETTER than our current system? Yes. I think we're headed into an interesting fall and winter. I'm hopeful this proposal passes. If it doesn't? I'll keep on being a basketball fan, but I will cringe every time I see a game end 80-25 and more schools giving up.

Jeez, my "cheer" for question really struck a nerve! I wonder what the score off the Devils Lake GBB/HCV game would be. And now that we have 3 class Cavalier GBB won't beat DVE 90-19 or whatever it was. THANK GOD!

[Flying Wallenda]

Here are the items that I think most people can agree on when it comes to the 3 class system:

1. There is a competitive unbalance in the current structure.
2. Schools are not always equally as strong in BBB, GBB, VB
3. Something needs to be done (wether it is increasing the size of class A to include the north star or 3 class)
4. Most people strongly in favor of 3 class want to get the privates out of class B
5. The have's are only going to get stronger

People may disagree with some of these points and that is ok. It is all about your perspective. If you are like me and taught/coached/cheered for small schools all of your life you will more than likely be in favor of a 3 class system. If you have or currently teach/coach/cheer for teams in the proposed middle class you are far more likely to oppose the 3 class system.

I personally don't know what the exact answer is. I have shared and tweaked my proposal numerous times. In my opinion if the "new" plan doesn't do these things it will not fix the problem and will not be a success:

1. Schools must have the flexibility to schedule teams close to home. Having no requirements on who you must play (ie. middle class) will make this a lot easier for those teams to get on board with this. If you have teams from Grafton playing in Bismarck on a Tuesday night for a mandatory game, that is not a good idea. You can accomplish the scheduling flexibility by implementing an RPI type formula. This is better for the game even if we don't go to a 3 class system.

2. This plan can't be designed to get one specific school out of class B. I think most people who want a 3 class system want to see the privates and large class B schools in the middle class. I would agree with this as well. To do this, you must come up with a formula that is easy to understand and stand behind. If we are having a plan that just assumes that some schools will opt up, that is not a good idea.

3. State tournaments will need to be different than in the past. I don't think a combined tournament is the answer. I think you look at what SD does for their boys and girls state tournaments and do something similar. There are enough ways to get games on TV/Internet now a days so every one gets coverage.

Any system that gets implemented must be fluid and must be looked at with a progressive mindset.

Agree with most of this. IMO, 19 in the big class, 32 in the middle, and 74 in the small doesn't pass the sniff test. With the shuffling (Devils Lake /Turtle Mt being moved up, MPCG/HN/EKM etc down), it feels as though that is just pandering for votes - you just gained a bunch of yes's. And what the rationale for the 170 cutoff? That question hasn't been answered. And you are right Schwab, creating a plan to bamboozle a few (Privates) isn't right. Do I think the majority of the privates, especially those in the "cross airs" of many, should be in the middle class? NO QUESTION. I'm also not a fan of joint or simultaneous state tournaments.

To often teams with tremendous coaching continuity (think DT/Buelah/HCV/Oak Grove in boys) get a bad name as people say they are "beating up on the little guys". However, if you look at the girls programs of the same schools, they've lacked the same success. Why? Lack of coaching continuity? DL's girls have been dominate. The boys not so much, however they HAVE been in the state twice in the past 7 years. NOT AWFUL.

No plan is perfect. Wahp/WC/DL/VC/etc's problems will become another schools.

Add 10-15 teams to the middle class and figure out the state tournaments. And do it with fidelity. No hidden agendas. Don't pander to a school because they want to play down, want to play in a different region, etc. Don't pander for votes. Figure out what a fair ratio is without looking at the outliers that "don't seem to fit" the narrative. Do this and I'm on board.

[packers21]

Here are the items that I think most people can agree on when it comes to the 3 class system:

1. There is a competitive unbalance in the current structure.
2. Schools are not always equally as strong in BBB, GBB, VB
3. Something needs to be done (wether it is increasing the size of class A to include the north star or 3 class)
4. Most people strongly in favor of 3 class want to get the privates out of class B
5. The have's are only going to get stronger

People may disagree with some of these points and that is ok. It is all about your perspective. If you are like me and taught/coached/cheered for small schools all of your life you will more than likely be in favor of a 3 class system. If you have or currently teach/coach/cheer for teams in the proposed middle class you are far more likely to oppose the 3 class system.

I personally don't know what the exact answer is. I have shared and tweaked my proposal numerous times. In my opinion if the "new" plan doesn't do these things it will not fix the problem and will not be a success:

1. Schools must have the flexibility to schedule teams close to home. Having no requirements on who you must play (ie. middle class) will make this a lot easier for those teams to get on board with this. If you have teams from Grafton playing in Bismarck on a Tuesday night for a mandatory game, that is not a good idea. You can accomplish the scheduling flexibility by implementing an RPI type formula. This is better for the game even if we don't go to a 3 class system.

2. This plan can't be designed to get one specific school out of class B. I think most people who want a 3 class system want to see the privates and large class B schools in the middle class. I would agree with this as well. To do this, you must come up with a formula that is easy to understand and stand behind. If we are having a plan that just assumes that some schools will opt up, that is not a good idea.

3. State tournaments will need to be different than in the past. I don't think a combined tournament is the answer. I think you look at what SD does for their boys and girls state tournaments and do something similar. There are enough ways to get games on TV/Internet now a days so every one gets coverage.

Any system that gets implemented must be fluid and must be looked at with a progressive mindset.

Agree with most of this. IMO, 19 in the big class, 32 in the middle, and 74 in the small doesn't pass the sniff test. With the shuffling (Devils Lake /Turtle Mt being moved up, MPCG/HN/EKM etc down), it feels as though that is just pandering for votes - you just gained a bunch of yes's. And what the rationale for the 170 cutoff? That question hasn't been answered. And you are right Schwab, creating a plan to bamboozle a few (Privates) isn't right. Do I think the majority of the privates, especially those in the "cross airs" of many, should be in the middle class? NO QUESTION. I'm also not a fan of joint or simultaneous state tournaments.

To often teams with tremendous coaching continuity (think DT/Buelah/HCV/Oak Grove in boys) get a bad name as people say they are "beating up on the little guys". However, if you look at the girls programs of the same schools, they've lacked the same success. Why? Lack of coaching continuity? DL's girls have been dominate. The boys not so much, however they HAVE been in the state twice in the past 7 years. NOT AWFUL.

No plan is perfect. Wahp/WC/DL/VC/etc's problems will become another schools.

Add 10-15 teams to the middle class and figure out the state tournaments. And do it with fidelity. No hidden agendas. Don't pander to a school because they want to play down, want to play in a different region, etc. Don't pander for votes. Figure out what a fair ratio is without looking at the outliers that "don't seem to fit" the narrative. Do this and I'm on board.

^^^ This is a great post

[ndlionsfan]

Here are the items that I think most people can agree on when it comes to the 3 class system:

1. There is a competitive unbalance in the current structure.
2. Schools are not always equally as strong in BBB, GBB, VB
3. Something needs to be done (wether it is increasing the size of class A to include the north star or 3 class)
4. Most people strongly in favor of 3 class want to get the privates out of class B
5. The have's are only going to get stronger

People may disagree with some of these points and that is ok. It is all about your perspective. If you are like me and taught/coached/cheered for small schools all of your life you will more than likely be in favor of a 3 class system. If you have or currently teach/coach/cheer for teams in the proposed middle class you are far more likely to oppose the 3 class system.

I personally don't know what the exact answer is. I have shared and tweaked my proposal numerous times. In my opinion if the "new" plan doesn't do these things it will not fix the problem and will not be a success:

1. Schools must have the flexibility to schedule teams close to home. Having no requirements on who you must play (ie. middle class) will make this a lot easier for those teams to get on board with this. If you have teams from Grafton playing in Bismarck on a Tuesday night for a mandatory game, that is not a good idea. You can accomplish the scheduling flexibility by implementing an RPI type formula. This is better for the game even if we don't go to a 3 class system.

2. This plan can't be designed to get one specific school out of class B. I think most people who want a 3 class system want to see the privates and large class B schools in the middle class. I would agree with this as well. To do this, you must come up with a formula that is easy to understand and stand behind. If we are having a plan that just assumes that some schools will opt up, that is not a good idea.

3. State tournaments will need to be different than in the past. I don't think a combined tournament is the answer. I think you look at what SD does for their boys and girls state tournaments and do something similar. There are enough ways to get games on TV/Internet now a days so every one gets coverage.

Any system that gets implemented must be fluid and must be looked at with a progressive mindset.

Agree with most of this. IMO, 19 in the big class, 32 in the middle, and 74 in the small doesn't pass the sniff test. With the shuffling (Devils Lake /Turtle Mt being moved up, MPCG/HN/EKM etc down), it feels as though that is just pandering for votes - you just gained a bunch of yes's. And what the rationale for the 170 cutoff? That question hasn't been answered. And you are right Schwab, creating a plan to bamboozle a few (Privates) isn't right. Do I think the majority of the privates, especially those in the "cross airs" of many, should be in the middle class? NO QUESTION. I'm also not a fan of joint or simultaneous state tournaments.

To often teams with tremendous coaching continuity (think DT/Buelah/HCV/Oak Grove in boys) get a bad name as people say they are "beating up on the little guys". However, if you look at the girls programs of the same schools, they've lacked the same success. Why? Lack of coaching continuity? DL's girls have been dominate. The boys not so much, however they HAVE been in the state twice in the past 7 years. NOT AWFUL.

No plan is perfect. Wahp/WC/DL/VC/etc's problems will become another schools.

Add 10-15 teams to the middle class and figure out the state tournaments. And do it with fidelity. No hidden agendas. Don't pander to a school because they want to play down, want to play in a different region, etc. Don't pander for votes. Figure out what a fair ratio is without looking at the outliers that "don't seem to fit" the narrative. Do this and I'm on board.

I will agree with you on your last paragraph. When I first saw this plan came out I was all for it (still am for it because I want to see a change to something I feel will be better than the current plan), but that number between the middle and lower class keeps moving up each time I go back in a reread the plan. Seems like they are moving the line to get more votes instead of just sticking with the original ideas that I felt were well laid out and thought through.

[BasketballMind]

I am fully willing to discuss the problems with this plan. I am fully willing to admit the plan as it is proposed is not flawless. I don't care who anybody cheers for. I don't have a vote, so my opinion doesn't really matter, but I would vote "yes" to the proposal. Because it's perfect? No. Because it's BETTER than our current system? Yes. I think we're headed into an interesting fall and winter. I'm hopeful this proposal passes. If it doesn't? I'll keep on being a basketball fan, but I will cringe every time I see a game end 80-25 and more schools giving up.

I do not think it's better than what we are currently doing. It will eliminate some current problems and create more new ones. What good does it do in the long run?

[classB4ever]

Like the rest of society, this topic comes down to a few tugging on emotional strings, making sure to be the loudest in every conversation, using some name calling when necessary and voila', they get their way. It makes absolutely no difference how well a plan is thought out, that there is factual data to back it and a large majority want it. No plan will appease everyone. Impossible. There have been 100s of plans put forth on this website. Some very good, some not so good. One thing they all have had in common, none have had 100% acceptance. There is no "perfect formula" to placate everyone. There is no "perfect cologne" to spray on to pass all sniff tests. What I can say with near 100% certainty, this will be the last chance in a very, very long time. Like always, when something begins to gather steam, it only takes a few to slow it down. Eventually people start asking if it's really worth the effort and they just start giving up. We are close to that point once again. 2 cents.

[Sorenson23]

I would vote yes on this plan, their is always room for improvement.

[Flying Wallenda]

Like the rest of society, this topic comes down to a few tugging on emotional strings, making sure to be the loudest in every conversation, using some name calling when necessary and voila', they get their way. It makes absolutely no difference how well a plan is thought out, that there is factual data to back it and a large majority want it. No plan will appease everyone. Impossible. There have been 100s of plans put forth on this website. Some very good, some not so good. One thing they all have had in common, none have had 100% acceptance. There is no "perfect formula" to placate everyone. There is no "perfect cologne" to spray on to pass all sniff tests. What I can say with near 100% certainty, this will be the last chance in a very, very long time. Like always, when something begins to gather steam, it only takes a few to slow it down. Eventually people start asking if it's really worth the effort and they just start giving up. We are close to that point once again. 2 cents.

I would disagree that this will be "the last chance in a very, very long time". It seems these plans spring up about every 4-5 years or so.

[Sorenson23]

Who do I cheer for?

I cheer for the state of North Dakota. I cheer for schools that are big and small, public and private. I cheer for the coaches who win state championships and for the coaches who go winless for an entire season. I cheer for the players who are future D-1 athletes and for the players who rarely see the floor. I cheer for high quality basketball and for basketball that maybe isn't high quality, but is highly competitive. I cheer for a 3-class system.

For Class AA, a 3-class system will provide more scheduling flexibility and more competitive games. For those that want to challenge themselves, they can go play out-of-state tournaments. For those that are rebuilding, they could schedule some games against Class A teams.

For Class A, a 3-class system provides a home for the homeless. Those moving down into a middle class will no longer have to be beaten by 50 points on a nightly basis. The "Big B's" can now have the same scheduling flexibility that AA could get. Want to challenge yourself? Play a statewide schedule against your class and maybe even a AA team or 2. Find yourself in a rebuilding phase? Play your region opponents and then fill out your schedule with Class B teams.

For Class B, a 3-class system allows them to stay alive. There will still be perennial powers, there will still be underdogs. Teams will cycle through highs and lows. We won't have new co-ops every year. Small schools and small towns can stay on the map.

You can say this sounds cliche, naive, or whatever but that is who I cheer for.

Very well said, I agree 100%,,

[Flip]

I would disagree that this will be "the last chance in a very, very long time". It seems these plans spring up about every 4-5 years or so.

When was the last time there was an actual vote?

It wasn't too long ago the four teams in the state semi-finals were Shiloh, Our Redeemers, Dickinson Trinity, and Four Winds and the three class system didn't seem to pick up any steam from that.

[The Schwab]

I would disagree that this will be "the last chance in a very, very long time". It seems these plans spring up about every 4-5 years or so.

When was the last time there was an actual vote?

It wasn't too long ago the four teams in the state semi-finals were Shiloh, Our Redeemers, Dickinson Trinity, and Four Winds and the three class system didn't seem to pick up any steam from that.

I believe there was a vote at the district chairs meeting in 2017? The vote was 14-2 in favor of a 3 class system.

[Flying Wallenda]

I would disagree that this will be "the last chance in a very, very long time". It seems these plans spring up about every 4-5 years or so.

When was the last time there was an actual vote?

It wasn't too long ago the four teams in the state semi-finals were Shiloh, Our Redeemers, Dickinson Trinity, and Four Winds and the three class system didn't seem to pick up any steam from that.

Google told me there was a membership vote in 2010 and lots of discussion in 2018.....I don't remember if the membership voted in 2018?

[The Schwab]

I would disagree that this will be "the last chance in a very, very long time". It seems these plans spring up about every 4-5 years or so.

When was the last time there was an actual vote?

It wasn't too long ago the four teams in the state semi-finals were Shiloh, Our Redeemers, Dickinson Trinity, and Four Winds and the three class system didn't seem to pick up any steam from that.

Google told me there was a membership vote in 2010 and lots of discussion in 2018.....I don't remember if the membership voted in 2018?

I do not believe that it went to a membership vote in 2018.

[maddog1971]

How about if you go to the State Tournament, the next year you have to play in Class A and if you win 50% of your games you have to stay in Class A? That sounds less complicated than the plans I am readying about... I also like the plan, if you have more than one bar or a Dollar Genera or a Subwayl and a street light you have to be class A. That would be much easier that this plan.

[Sparty48]

Run ND basketball like European Soccer. You can get Regulated or Promoted?

[Mandan]

How about if you go to the State Tournament, the next year you have to play in Class A and if you win 50% of your games you have to stay in Class A? That sounds less complicated than the plans I am readying about... I also like the plan, if you have more than one bar or a Dollar Genera or a Subwayl and a street light you have to be class A. That would be much easier that this plan.

Belfield, Richardton and Glen Ullin have Dollar Generals. I don't think you want to include that as a "Class A" qualification. More than one bar feels very questionable too. Beach has a Subway included in their truck stop.

[WalkingStick]

Don't worry that's just his argument to get Kindred to be a small school even though they are one of the largest Class B schools in the State.

[Flip]

I think the Dollar General line was a joke. They're everywhere now. Shoot Emerado has one!