by heimer » Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:08 pm
Bisonguy,
I have no problem making the small admission that I write with a heavy pro-Valley City bias. As I said, 99% of all media has a heavy bias toward someone or something or some issue. We have conservative talk, liberal talk, sports coverage that favors certain markets, the list goes on and on.
I posted my article to illustrate one thing. I'm not going to get back into the "B vs. A" debate or the "LaMoure vs. VC" debate. It's clear that you and I will never see eye to eye on it. That wasn't the point of the article. Here's the point:
In several threads on the B side, in your advocating against a three-class system, you, and many like you, made the comment (truthfully at the time, based on the Grafton reference) that if the Hi-Liners did not feel the ability to compete in "A", they could choose to play independent, as Grafton did.
What you don't know is that, behind the scenes, I have whole-heartedly agreed with you. I can prove it. I am on a committee that is examining the future of Hi-Liner athletics. We have met semi-regularly throughout this process to discuss where we are going in the future. There has been talk of cutting programs to be more competitive. I feel that is the wrong approach.
No matter what your feelings are on the matter, I do not feel the Hi-Liners will be automatically more competitive in the EDC in basketball by cutting wrestling. The committee doesn't feel that way either. The basis for the argument is that, in this day and age, with the ease of transportation and information exchange, there is no way to funnel kids to a specific sport.
In other words, if the Hi-Liners cut wrestling, the wrestlers will not go play basketball. They will either find a place to wrestle or work. Sure, one or two may find a home in basketball, but not enough to overcome the gap between where the Hi-Liners are and the rest of the EDC.
My argument, through the entire process, has been to play independent and take the bottom seed in the EDC. In my mind, it's this simple: If you're good enough to go to the State A tournament, you're good enough to go on the road and win the play-in over the 7 seed (remember, the bottom is now 10). If you're not good enough to win over the 7 on the road, you don't need to play in the EDC anyway.
Until two days ago, that was an option. The EDC unfairly took the post-season away from anyone playing independent.
Now, Bisonguy, there are a multitude of things I left out of the article because I could not accurately source them. Believe it or not, there are many, many things I do PROFESSIONALLY at my job. Since this is an opinion site, here's what REALLY happened.
When the Hi-Liners began to see the vote coming down the road, they were already planning on losing the vote and the delay amendment. "Straw polling" (making calls to find out the prevailing wind) pretty much indicated that the Hi-Liners were on their way back up in 2010-11.
Planning began. The first salvo was from wrestling. Believe me, the Hi-Liners are anxious to get the heck out of Region I B. So moving back was gladly accepted.
The next salvo was from boys basketball. The Hi-Liners feel that they will have a team that can make a little noise in the EDC next year. How much remains to be seen, but with the ability to win a few, they opted for an EDC schedule.
Girls basketball was not going, period. The Hi-Liners made their thoughts known to the EDC right away. The EDC threatened to revoke their ability to take the bottom seed in the tournament, disqualifying their right to play in the post-season.
The Hi-Liner response was brilliant. They told the EDC that they were fine with that. They would play independent, and tell their players that the Barnes County is your post-season. You get one tournament, so do your best to win it.
So the EDC manufactured this new policy that has no foundation and is anti-precedent. If the girls played independent, they would disqualify every Hi-Liner team from the post-season and the league. In other words:
No regional or state cross-country
No regional or state tennis
No regional or state music
No regional or state volleyball
No regional or state girls basketball
No regional or state boys basketball
No regional or state debate
No regional or state drama
No regional or state dance
No regional or state wrestling, team or INDIVIDUAL
No regional or state golf
No regional or state baseball
No regional or state track and field
In other words, if Al Cruchet thought for a second that any one wrestler was good enough to qualify for state in his weight class, or that any one sprinter or thrower was good enough to qualify for state, or any one golfer was good enough, etc. etc., he would have to succumb and make the girls play EDC basketball. The only activity safe was speech, since speech is technically a WDA team (no idea why).
I don't know about you, but if I were in that position, I'd feel like a guy was put to my head. The EDC actively sought out a way to screw the Hi-Liners and they found it.
Now, if you really want opinion, I feel the EDC is putting a gun to your head as well, Bisonguy. The reason: I believe any action, by nature, has a corresponding motive. What's the motive here? Like you said, it's a minor inconvenience (if any, really) for the EDC to allow the girls to play independent. That can't be the motive. I don't see the good EDC girls teams gaining a lot from their games with Valley City. So, what's the motive?
Personally, I feel the EDC truly believes the state needs a three-class system, and they mean to prove it by beating the Hi-Liners back into the dark ages. Now, in your mind, that won't prove anything that the program is in bad shape.
And Bisonguy, I'll throw you a bone on this one. Maybe your right, to an extent. You'd be surprised what we've talked about in committee. 90% of the conversation has been about reclaiming the youth programs in basketball. The committee believes they are a wreck, myself included. We basically leave it up to the athletes to decide how good they want to be until they are in 7th grade. They are way behind, and the coaches, no matter how good, can't catch them up to compete. We saw the effects of this this year. That approach is good enough to sneak into the region (Region III girls) but from there it's awfully tough. There's no way that approach works in "A".
But, no matter how you feel about it, the winds of the three-class debate are changing. That's not an opinion, thats fact. Five years ago, I would have given you 1000 bucks for every person in District 5 you could convince (you being figurative, I know you wouldn't have taken the job) that three classes is needed. Now, they are working with Valley City to have a plan to vote on by the end of the school year. There is a very good chance that 2010-11 will be the last year of a two-division system. A year full of beatings will only make the cause more sympathetic, and the EDC guaranteed that by taking the action they did.
For the record, Bisonguy, I have never advocated a three-division system as my TOP choice for restructuring. I have always favored applying the 80-40 principle to A, and expanding the A class. I have strongly advocated the modeling A after the NCAA tournament, guaranteeing some small-school representation at the state A, through an expansion of the class to, say, 28-32 teams, maybe two spots, and giving the big small schools something to play for while technically being A.
Before you go off on me about how my posts match someone elses, you ought to understand that you have no access to my e-mail, phone, or private messages. If you could hear some of those, you'd understand why I got pretty torked off. And you have no idea what I lost here at the station. You have no idea how I'm reacting to that, and if you think what's gone on so far is surprising, wait to see what happens after the season is over.
But for now, I'd appreciate you not telling me how to do my job. I am the only person on this board that has publicly stated who I am. Not you, not Mitch Carlson, not LaMoure coaches (all of whom I suspect have usernames), nor anyone else. All of you hide in anonymity, taking shots at me for being open and up to the criticism. That's how real broadcasters handle their business. I don't know what you do for a living, and I wouldn't presume to tell you how to do it better. I assume you're pretty good at what you do. So am I. You can hate on my for my opinions, and you can hate on me for how I express them here. But I care about my job, I put a sh!t ton of hours into it, and for you to take pot shots at me for how I do it while yourself not being on the record for who you are is out of line, and cowardly. Thanks for listening (reading).
God is bigger than football.