Flip wrote:B Historian wrote:As I alluded to in my post above this one, travel would be a huge issue for a new Class A. If there was for example a 32 team Class A split into four regions, then the assumption would be that each team would play every other team within it's region both home and away (14 games). You are looking at extensive travel for many schools, some match ups requiring 300 mile round trips for a "regional" game. With GBB and volleyball also facing similar schedules this would be very tough for many schools.
I don't believe they would ever require a home and away game with every team. My suggestion would be to seed your region tournament on QRF and require no region games.The next issue is state tournament scheduling. The current setup works very well. It's TV friendly and provides exposure for everyone. How do you go about scheduling another entire class? You can't combine the A and B tournaments in the same location on the same weekend: there is no town in the state with enough hotel space. The only scheduling setup that would work is to have the girls A & B tournaments the first weekend in March in different locations, then the Super AA the second weekend and the boys A & B tournaments in different locations the third weekend in March. In this scenario someone is going to left out of the TV coverage. It's also quite possible that attendance suffers greatly as well.
How does SD do it? They have fewer big towns than ND. Or any state? I think ND is the only state to have 2 classes.
B-oldtimer wrote:The above statement that works for tv and gives exposure to everyone is the problem why we haven't changed even addressed this problem. Let me start with it fits with the big tv owners in the state for their programing and its something there willing to pay for. So were talking about money to fund the Activities Association like it has grown into. Second the point one that gets me the most is gives exposure for everyone how can you say that. When we have class b state tournament dominated by about 20 schools that just compete at state tournament every couple of years. How about the 60 schools that haven't even been to regional final in maybe 20 to 30 years at the best. There is no exposure for these schools or participants on state or regional level and you expect them to keep just showing up each year compete. Then you wonder why participation is down and even interest in basketball is down. Getting back to tv coverage somebody is going to be missed would have been the case 10 to 15 years ago but I don't believe that now. First is we have likes of Bek tv for high school sports and now they have even there own tv outlet in Krdk which is part of satellite providers service. Also with ability of streaming I betting even some of Radio stations could get where we may have opportunities to get all the games on tv. So I think there are options out there now and even more because if there's possibility of making some money somebody will step forward. The third point against is scheduling but here again everyone is caught up with how things are scheduled now. If were expanding classes we also could expand the season to help in scheduling and would also help with the traveling time because could have fewer games per week with expanded season. Like I have said the most reasons for not changing is coming from group that have benefitted the most under the current plan.
Schools should also be adjusted for size by qualifier effect. The size of the district by geographical size should be one where they are drawing there kids from. Some the rural schools and coops the size of where they are drawing kids from is that kids on teams may be playing together but may live more than 50 miles apart from each other. Not like schools that are near the large cities or in the large cities competing at class b level. This distance has major effects on development of talent and participation. There other qualifying effects that should be considered also in developing a plan.
We as state are different than other states so how we structure high school activities need to be addressed for our needs. Not how other state make up schools are. I look at states surrounding us they have addressed their needs all differently but they all do have more classes to address level of competition fairness. We have done nothing in over 50 years and last major change was we did away with a class and I think the reason for this was schools that were playing in each class belonged in other class they just combined them because of this. Also class b was so favored on state wide level from public and media that class c never got traction to come into its own. Also class b was so large then it was hard for schools to dominate the competition like it is now. They had powers then but nobody had long runs of success because of sheer numbers of games it took to get to state tournament. We had 32 districts with at least 8 teams per district with tournament one and done. Then after that we had region tournaments of 4 until they expanded it 8 teams and they were one and done. After that we had state tournament where we had no seeding so if you met tough team in opening round or played poorly you were in afternoon games if you lost. So you see it was hard to get there to state I can remember many of the rated teams in the state never ever making it to state because they would get upset in district game and the season was over. Because of this it gave hope to smaller schools and also meant many of these larger schools never reached state tournament so we had feeling that competition level was even enough so nobody dominated region year in year out. The only exception to this was region 2 in the state where we had region of very large schools overall with one school that seemed to dominate that region. That was Hillsboro with ED Byer coached team that seemed to be at state a lot and rest of state disliked. The number are less today but never have we had such dominance of class today by so few schools so something needs to be done.
B Historian wrote:By exposure I mean all classes are currently featured by the same network and receive equal air time. That would be impossible in a three-class system as one network would be unable to carry two tournaments in two different locations on the same weekend.
B-oldtimer wrote:I was not referring to 1940 to 1960 that was whole different era in Nd basketball. There was independent basketball in those times and structure of school systems were entirely different than it was today. Large portion of rural nd many kids did not go past 8 grade education. I know that for a fact because my parents just completed a eight grade education both of which earned high school through GED. If you lived in rural area if you wanted to go to high school you either had to live close enough to travel to that high school or especially in the winter you had go live in that town where that high school was and be boarded. So you see it was whole different time of how basketball was organized. I can remember my great uncle telling of teams made up in area of kids that played like in independent leagues back then and big tournament was local county tournament. Also people of my dad's age tell of how games were cancelled or you played without kids because of weather made it near impossible to play games. Yes there were dominate schools like Kenmare in the past that dominated for period of time. Rugby and FT. Yates all became class a and were that when I was young and if they were like other large schools around here they fought from going class b. St. Mary's I can remember from my youth and I can remember how they had kids from all over SW North Dakota during that time and it was beginning of private school vs public school. The private schools of that time were all in class A because in 1960's most of the private schools of class b closed with exception Oak Grove but that was small school in that time.
The time to I was referring too was 1960 to 1980's where we had basis for modern system of athletics in North Dakota. The state help schools with busing around late 1950's and early 1960
's so we had high school offered to all North Dakota students and large number of the one room schools were closed and moved into the schools that had high schools. This when we had golden age of class b basketball in the state. The people of state went to state tournament if they could or they were glued to the tv to watch the class b state tournament. All newspapers covered class b basketball starting with the districts leading to Regionals and then finally the State tournament.
I can also remember how the Grand Forks herald printed up box scores for all regular season games giving qt. scores, final score, individual scoring, and even also gave the score of the b squad game that night this at least added page to sports section. But things have changed since then number of schools are half of that, participation number are way down, and balance of competition has changed, and level of play is much better which relates back to competition where size and numbers have direct effect on this.
The thing about State tournaments is why can't we have state Tournaments more than two weeks we have whole month of March if we need to work a schedule out and even last week of February if needed. The Tv exposure doesn't mean much to bottom half of class b right now because there chance getting any of it is very small. The chances of them reaching state tournament is maybe once in lifetime and for many of the small schools and even that probably won't happen either. Even with new class the chances will be low but there will be a chance every so often for some of these schools to make it. This is what I believe we need to keep interest from kids and from public. Ps. Class b is not receiving must press anymore I see it our newspapers, and now especially from local tv they hardly cover class b sports its even hard to get the scores let alone the box scores. I wonder if we have waited to long to address our problems and this is reflection how interest has slipped enough where we don't get coverage we had.
B Historian wrote:
My point was (is) that even though it was much harder in the past to make a state tournament, there were still programs just as dominant as there are today. It wasn't like a different team from each region was making it every year. For obvious reasons it will always be tougher for smaller schools to make it. That's simply the nature of sports. That also doesn't mean the current system is necessarily broken.
Over the last 13 years we have had 13 different state champions. During that time the following smaller schools have all made at least one appearance at state: Turtle Lake-Mercer, Strasburg-Zeeland, North Star, Flasher, New England, North Sargent, Milnor, Berthold, Mandaree, Kidder County, Richland, Trenton, Dakota Prairie, Hankinson, P-B-K, LaMoure, Barnes County North, Mott-Regent, Mandaree, Divide County and North Border. By my count 27 of the 79 schools that would likely be Class B in classB4ever's plan have made at least one state tournament appearance in the last 13 years. Some have made several. A few have also won it all. This does not seem like a broken system where it's impossible for the small schools to have a chance. I think most of the three class talk is driven by anger over Dickinson Trinity, Minot Ryan, Shiloh Christian and Fargo Oak Grove currently being successful. As I said earlier, there have been times in the past where private schools dominated as well. That doesn't mean we need to trash the whole system because a few private schools are currently having success.
theman wrote:
Later Addition to the post: What was your definition of "big" vs. "small" school?
B-oldtimer wrote:What is the mean point for all class b schools? I haven't calculated it yet but I would guess its around 125 to 130 enrollment for all class b schools. In my estimation then any school above the mean would be large school not the figure of 170 enrollment.
tmd33643 wrote:Did anyone see the scores for the district 15 tournament yesterday for the girls?
New Town, Watford City, and Parshall beat Williston Trinity, Lewis & Clark-North Shore-Plaza, and White Shield all lost big. Like 60 something to 10 something.
That seems like a good enough reason to go to 3 classes.
classB4ever wrote:B Historian wrote:
My point was (is) that even though it was much harder in the past to make a state tournament, there were still programs just as dominant as there are today. It wasn't like a different team from each region was making it every year. For obvious reasons it will always be tougher for smaller schools to make it. That's simply the nature of sports. That also doesn't mean the current system is necessarily broken.
Over the last 13 years we have had 13 different state champions. During that time the following smaller schools have all made at least one appearance at state: Turtle Lake-Mercer, Strasburg-Zeeland, North Star, Flasher, New England, North Sargent, Milnor, Berthold, Mandaree, Kidder County, Richland, Trenton, Dakota Prairie, Hankinson, P-B-K, LaMoure, Barnes County North, Mott-Regent, Mandaree, Divide County and North Border. By my count 27 of the 79 schools that would likely be Class B in classB4ever's plan have made at least one state tournament appearance in the last 13 years. Some have made several. A few have also won it all. This does not seem like a broken system where it's impossible for the small schools to have a chance. I think most of the three class talk is driven by anger over Dickinson Trinity, Minot Ryan, Shiloh Christian and Fargo Oak Grove currently being successful. As I said earlier, there have been times in the past where private schools dominated as well. That doesn't mean we need to trash the whole system because a few private schools are currently having success.
Good post and you bring up some valid points. Let's say that you are looking at the glass half full. I will take the half empty approach.
First, let's be honest, the private/parochial school success has been the driving point of these discussions. In the past 22 years, there have been 176 teams at state. Of those 176 teams, private schools have been there 41 times. That is a 23.3% showing from 6 teams. If we use this years numbers, 108 total teams, privates make up 5.5% of the teams. However, you must also take into account, they are only in 6 regions, which bumps the success rate up to 31.1%.
Second, from 1999 - 2014, region 3 did not have a big school (170+) in it. Which guaranteed that a small school would be attending. This skewed the numbers also. Following are the numbers that paint a realistic picture of regional participation at state:
Using an average over 22 year period
Region 1 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 3 18.75%
Private = 1 6.25%
Small = 12 75.00%
Region 1 Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 9 40.91%
Private = 7 31.82%
Small = 6 27.27%
Region 2 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 2 12.50%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 14 87.50%
Region 2 Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 13 59.09%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 9 40.91%
Region 3 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 1 6.25%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 15 93.75%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 3 13.64%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 19 86.36%
Note: From 1999 - 2014 there were no bigs.
Region 4 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 2 12.50%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 14 87.50%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 7 31.82%
Private = 0 0.00%
Small = 15 68.18%
Region 5 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 1 6.25%
Private = 1 6.25%
Small = 14 87.50%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 1 4.55%
Private = 11 55.00%
Small = 10 50.00%
Region 6 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 2 12.50%
Private = 2 12.50%
Small = 12 75.00%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 4 18.18%
Private = 9 40.91%
Small = 9 40.91%
Region 7 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 2 12.50%
Private = 1 6.25%
Small = 13 81.25%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 6 27.27%
Private = 12 54.55%
Small = 4 18.18%
Region 8 Schools = 16
Big Schools = 2 12.50%
Private = 1 6.25%
Small = 13 81.25%
Region Champs Over 22 Years
Big Schools = 5 22.73%
Private = 2 9.09%
Small = 15 68.18%
B Historian wrote:
I get what you are saying. However, I will counter what you are saying with a few other facts:
- Over the last 22 years the following five public schools- MPCG, Four Winds, Linton, Beulah and North Star- have combined for 34 state appearances, with 16 championship game appearances and 8 state titles. There are three other schools with four appearances each that have been in the championship game twice each (Rugby, Berthold and Grafton). It's not as if the public schools are suffering at the hands of private schools in the state tournament: the six private schools have a combined 64-59 record in the state tournament over the last 22 years.
B Historian wrote:
- The hands down most successful region in Class B basketball over the last 45 years is Region 2. Schools from this region have won 15 state titles over those 45 years and 7 in the last 22 years. If any small schools should have a reasonable complaint about needing a third class, it would be those that are forced to play in this region.
B Historian wrote:
- Shiloh Christian has been to state 11 times, but has just a 12-21 overall state tournament record. Lots of "empty" trips to state because of playing in a terrible region with little competition.
- Minot Ryan has made 8 trips to state but also has a losing record (11-13) with no state titles and just one title game appearance in your 22 year time frame. Ryan plays in a much better region than Shiloh and has consistently had solid teams which is one of the advantages of a private school. But by no definition has Ryan dominated. 9 different schools have made the state tournament from this region in the last 22 years which is a good number.
- Oak Grove has 7 appearances and won it all with very good teams in 2000 and 2014. However, I would argue that like Shiloh, Oak Grove has the advantage of playing in a weak region. 10 different teams have made it to state out of this region in the last 22 years, but the Region 1 entrants besides Oak Grove have combined for a 15-30 state tournament including a four year stretch of 8th place finishes. The fact that the big schools (Kindred, Central Cass and Lisbon) under perform in basketball has really hurt the overall quality of the region over the years.
- Dickinson Trinity has 12 state appearances and five trips to the state title game. Trinity is in the middle of the pack from an enrollment standpoint in Region 7 and is in a much smaller town than the other private schools which means less athletes to draw from. I really feel the reason Trinity has done so well is Grinsteinner, who is a tremendous coach in my opinion.
- Trinity Christian has been in two state tournaments and went 1-5. Our Redeemer's has only made it the one time. Plus, both of these schools would almost certainly be in the smallest class in a three-class system.
But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative of those that are jealous of the parochial schools?
Run4Fun2009 wrote:Anyone want to run the girls data because all arguments given have just talked BBB?!?
classB4ever wrote:MPCG - was a big school during their run, had once in a generation talent and were well coached.
Four Wind - biggest school in that region and good coaching.
Linton - small school, great runs of athletes, good coaching.
Beulah - biggest school in region and good coaching.
North Star - once in a generation talent during run and good coaching.
No surprises in any of this. Good athletes + Good coaching = Success.
classB4ever wrote:
Not sure about the last 45 years, but the last 22 years, 11 years and 6 years are below:
Average finish last 22 years:
Region 4 3.27
Region 2 3.36
Region 7 4.00
Region 6 4.14
Region 1 5.00
Region 3 5.14
Region 5 5.55
Region 8 5.68
Average finish last 11 years:
Region 4 2.82
Region 2 3.91
Region 6 4.45
Region 1 4.45
Region 3 4.73
Region 7 4.82
Region 8 5.27
Region 5 5.55
Average finish last 6 years:
Region 4 2.00
Region 1 3.33
Region 6 3.50
Region 7 4.67
Region 3 4.83
Region 2 5.33
Region 5 5.50
Region 8 6.67
Region 4 has been the strongest.
classB4ever wrote:
So let me get this straight, you gave examples of how poorly parochial schools have done over this time frame at state and feel people are jealous of their success? Not quite sure of that logic.
Personally, I don't get emotional about these things and is the reason for listing the data and ideas for discussion. Love ND basketball and think there are some problems and believe through discussion there can be some changes to get participation levels up.
Return to Basketball - Class B
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest