The merit based system....

[Indian]

Nevermind, I got my proposed systems mixed up and see which one we're on here.

[VolunteerGeneral]

pujo...small rural schools wouldn`t be moving up unless they start playing way above their competition. If your looking to make things as fair as possible, then you need to be looking at quality of play.

 

The way the TSSAA has it set up now is the most logical. They divide schools according to size. If you want to take it further, then the next thing would be to adjust on actual level of play. This system would be tweeking the one we currently have to make sure each class is more evenly divided on a competitive basis. This isn`t just about 1A public and privates. I`m sure there are some 4A public schools that play more on a 3A level. This would allow them to compete better as well.

[VolunteerGeneral]

pujo... Other than the fact that you don`t think public schools should have to move, do you see anything about this idea that you think wouldn`t work?

[VolunteerGeneral]

Has there been any good arguments as to why a plan of this type won`t work???

[TheEgoHasLanded]

1-it does create hastles driving wise

 

2-in some ways it does punish a team for winning the state title, and it does get rid of rivalries.

 

3-it would create scheduling conflicts...let's say Goodpasture is in 2A, and they are virtually a lock to win the state and then move to 3A, wouldnt they want to host every game they were going to play, then not even worry about playing home and home cus they won't see those teams again.

 

4-it gets rid of familiarity in the games...who wants to play 10 new teams a year, or not even be sure what teams they will be playing?

 

5-I would also say it would make it harder to judge how good or bad a team was the next year...Let's take Ezell, if they moved to 2A, with a new Qb and without a few other skill players, and lets say they went 6-4...do we know if they would have gone 6-4 the season before that...or was it the competition or lack of players this year.

 

6-I just don't think its right for a team, let's say like Maryville a few years ago, who won state, but did struggle a little bit, I think they got on a big time roll and just crushed East in the state title game...I don't think its fair to move them up, because they weren't just blasting the competition...they got better as the season progressed, and weren't head and shoulders better then everyone through the whole season.

 

I like the idea, VG...I like it more than a split, I like it more than a multiplier, I am just presenting flaws that might not even be relevant but I was able to think about in the 2 minutes it took to write this.

[silverpie]

1. It's as likely to solve hassles in driving as it is to create them. South Pittsburg, for example, would have far shorter drives in 2A than it does in 1A.

2/4. The plan ought to be combined with ELA's proposed playoff system or a variant of it. That would answer those objections.

3. Again, abolishing regions would answer that, and would other schools really be willing to play them on an away-only basis?

5. This is why I suggest that the bonuses decay over time. If a team is over its head because of past success, it will fall back to its own level.

6. One state championship would not move a Maryville up as shown--they have about a 150-student margin before hitting the 5A level.

[VolunteerGeneral]

EGO...

 

1. How so? It might cause some schools to do a little extra traveling, but on the other hand, it might help some. JCM is currently playing in a Shelby County region.They will soon be moved to 4A and it will be much better for them.

 

2. Winning a state title does not automatically move a team up. It`s not punishing a team, it`s moving them to more equal competition, which is what everyone keeps hollering about. It doesn`t get rid of rivalries. There are usually 3 out of region games on most teams schedule. So they could be easily kept.

 

3.That`s kind of reaching there. I would think that the TSSAA mandates you play a certain amount of games on the road.

 

4.You wouldn`t be playing ten new teams each year. It`s not like everyone would suddenly change classes. Only the few who exceed their class.

 

5.oops...hit the wrong button!! Here comes the rest of my reponses...

 

5.Why would you worry about something like that? If Ezell failed to make the playoffs, they would start losing students off their total. If they are making the playoffs in 2A then that`s ok. If they start winning 2A championships, then eventually they would be bumped up to 3A.

 

6.Like I said, one championship wouldn`t necessarily move a team up.

[Edited by VolunteerGeneral on 7/2/02 8:31P]

[TheEgoHasLanded]

Driving wise it does cause problems

 

1-Memphis is a prime example...I can't think of any 1A teams that are in the city...all of them play 2A I believe...so we would have to wait till the inner city teams (like Southside who didn't win a game for 3 years) lose and lose and lose...till they get bumped to 1A, then they would have to wait for other teams to lose (I might be completely wrong, but you did say we would bump teams down in classification correct? Otherwise you would have teams that would just stay in one class and never leave).

 

2-Why would a team necessarily want to move up for equal competition? Ezel was pretty bad for about a long time there (I have to be careful what I say cus they like to bash me for no reason whatsoever). I have a hard time believing that after years of living in the gutter, they would suddenly want to move up and start all over again (You can see what I am saying I hope). By the same context, BGA has won the state title in like 95,96, 97 (all three years of Fleming) and again this year...yet I don't see them asking to move up...and BCS has gone to the last 4 title games, yet I don't see them asking to move up.

 

3-I really don't think I am reaching...I don't think my school played an away game till week 6. And that was because it was mandatory by the TSSAA (had to take that cross state journey, and we went on to only play 2 other road games).

 

4-I see what you are saying with the 10 class thing...but I think maybe instead of moving a team up automatically for winning a state title...perhaps we should move a team up a little bit for reaching say the semifinals...a good example would be USJ...who has never won a state title, but has played in 2 or 3 in the last few years...Or Briarcrest Christian, who has gone to the last 4 clinic bowls but failed to get the title...who cares that they lost those ones...they still made it that far four times, which must be harder than winning it just once...perhaps we should move them up for going to the summit even if they didn't win...other wise let's say they did win, and it didn't bump them up...you would have one team dominating for a decade (like USJ or BCS, yet has only one 2 titles...isn't that the basis of your plan? To make the classes fair?)

 

5&6...I guess I can speak because my school is in Division 2-AA and we were forced to play 3 new teams in one year...thats a potential for 3 losses which really hurts your playoff position...I mean think about that 3 new teams you have to play...and 2 of them are larger schools (D2-AAA)...AND the other is across the state! I don't think anyone on our team was just ecstatic on having to play these games...and I could see where a team who had just won the state title wouldn't be too thrilled about having to play in a tougher bracket...I mean if BGA went to D2-AAA...they would lose every game, no doubt in my mind...If Bishop Byrne went to D2-AA they would lose to ECS( which they did), BCS and Harding (which beat ECS three times combined). Bishop Byrne went 0-3 against those 3 schools last year...or even if let's say SBEC had won state and was forced to move up...it would have been even worse! Harding Beat SBEC like 49-6 in a scrimmage, and BCS beat them at least 63-0...can you imagine that?

 

As I said before, I like the idea, I like it more then a multiplier, and it allows privates to keep smashing the publics...but I am just presenting so called problems that may arise...nothing will ever satisfy the rural 1A schools...you get rid of the privates, then Bruceton and South Pitt continue to dominate...VolGen you know more about 1A then me with the luxery of JCS and USJ in your back yard...I really like the idea though.

[VolunteerGeneral]

Ego..financial aid schools are not included in this plan. At least they weren`twhen I proposed it.

[ELA]

VOLUNTEER... my plan is more flexible simply because it doesn't require anyone to play anyone in the regular season they don't want to! NO REGIONS, NO REQUIRED GAMES! Only the top 32 teams go to the playoffs each year (no weak teams)! Fewer championships and less travel with the exception of the championship game! YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE MULTIPLIER OR A TOTAL SPLIT! These are the two accepted methods used throughout the United States and the Multiplier is the only way you will ever put the whole system back together! Under my plan, teams might move up or down but without regions, WHY? If a team feels they are playing at a level too high, they could petition for a change based on their previous five year record!

[TheEgoHasLanded]

So what are the financial aide teams supposed to do then? Just get rid of scholarships all together and then play?

[VolunteerGeneral]

ELA...I`m sorry to say, but you are biased. There`s no question about it. When you make a statement, that says "YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE MULTIPLIER OR A TOTAL SPLIT!" then you are just being prejudiced. There is no way on this earth that a multiplier system is fair. You can argue til the cows come home on that. You do want things fair don`t you? But for the sake of this discussion, let`s take the multiplier system that would leave several private schools in 2A. If that system was employed and private schools started winning 2A championships, are you going to start whining again about changes??? Afterall, you are saying right now that a multiplier is ok. The reason I say this is because a few years ago it was all about scholarships and financial aid. Several great and long time established schools were left out to dry because people like yourself complained that it was unfair. Now, here we are again and it is the same thing. Private schools that elected to abide by the rules are being railroaded by people such as yourself. If the multiplier system is started, are you going to be satisfied??? How long will it be before you and others start complaining again. Will it ever end???

 

A split???

Why on earth should there be a split? Currently there are some 280 something schools competeing in Classes 1A-5A. With the limited amount of private schools there are, don`t you think that we can come up with a solution that can place them in the proper competitive class???

 

When you speak of change ELA, you want things to be more fairer for the small rural public school. A multiplier system disregards fairness for the private school that may not compete as well as some of the other private schools. In your opinion, are public schools more important than private schools??? If so, you are BIASED> If you want a split, then you are PREJUDICED. There is simply no other way around it. I`ve come up with a solution that in theory answers every one of your complaints about having to play private schools. It is fair. It doesn`t dicriminate against any type of school. When you mention multiplier or split, you show your true colors. You`re only interested in what best serves your own needs.