2017 Enrollment Numbers and Classifications

[LazIndexTN]

You open another can of worms if you allowed a team to move down.

 

Imagine the largest 1A team decides to move up. And every team in 2A doesn't want to move down except the largest 2A team.

Why separate 1A and 2A at all if the largest 2A can be grouped with 1A?

 

Do I think this scenario would play out?  Probably not. But it's a possibility.

You're telling me that Richland, Fairley, or Trousdale wouldn't willingly move down to 1A if a team wanted to go up to 2A? I think Any of the bottom 10 schools in enrollment would take that deal in a heartbeat.

[LazIndexTN]

Are we sure that they were going to release the classes today?

[ChrisATN]

You open another can of worms if you allowed a team to move down.

 

Imagine the largest 1A team decides to move up. And every team in 2A doesn't want to move down except the largest 2A team.

Why separate 1A and 2A at all if the largest 2A can be grouped with 1A?

 

Do I think this scenario would play out?  Probably not. But it's a possibility.

Very true.  The other thing to keep in mind is that even though a school requests to play up, the TSSAA can say no...especially if it would creating a big travel burden for other schools.  

[Southtowner]

You're telling me that Richland, Fairley, or Trousdale wouldn't willingly move down to 1A if a team wanted to go up to 2A? I think Any of the bottom 10 schools in enrollment would take that deal in a heartbeat.

I said probably not but it's a possibility.

 

My point is why separate at all if you allow a larger classified team to play in a smaller classification?

Edited October 18, 2016 by Southtowner

[Southtowner]

Are we sure that they were going to release the classes today?

I thought the classes would be released today. No reason not to unless more is being considered besides splitting the classes evenly.   And I realize they can't split exactly even.  

[LazIndexTN]

I said probably not but it's a possibility.

 

My point is why separate at all if you allow a larger team to play in a smaller classification?

If they don't want to move the next lowest attended school down then they shouldn't allow teams to move up. There shouldn't be a hard stance on enrollment anyhow. They should be able to move the 12 highest enrollment schools up and the 12 lowest enrollment schools down if it helps make the travel within the regions more manageable. There really isn't much difference in the strength of those athletic programs anyway. I did a study the last two seasons that showed on average those top or bottom 12 don't differ that much in terms of power rankings. In some cases those bottom 12 schools in enrollment were actually worse in a couple of classifications than the top 12 from the lower class. Classifications need to be flexible in order to better manage the travel since that is a chief complaint amongst public schools.

[Southtowner]

If they don't want to move the next lowest attended school down then they shouldn't allow teams to move up. There shouldn't be a hard stance on enrollment anyhow. They should be able to move the 12 highest enrollment schools up and the 12 lowest enrollment schools down if it helps make the travel within the regions more manageable. There really isn't much difference in the strength of those athletic programs anyway. I did a study the last two seasons that showed on average those top or bottom 12 don't differ that much in terms of power rankings. In some cases those bottom 12 schools in enrollment were actually worse in a couple of classifications than the top 12 from the lower class. Classifications need to be flexible in order to better manage the travel since that is a chief complaint amongst public schools.

I understand in some cases the top 12 teams of the lower class are as strong as the bottom 12 of the class that's right above them.  But you got to have a cut off at some point.  

 

I also understand flexibility.   You have to pay close attention to those that are in charge of what's flexible and what isn't.

I'd rather things be done above board with set rules and more transparency.  Otherwise that flexibility could be misused.

 

If so many teams are interchangeable from the top of 1 class to the bottom of the other class then we are looking at a possible realization that there's too many classes now.  One less class would solve travel issues but they voted in 6 classes. 

 

Put your application in.   

[LazIndexTN]

I understand in some cases the top 12 teams of the lower class are as strong as the bottom 12 of the class that's right above them.  But you got to have a cut off at some point.  

 

I also understand flexibility.   You have to pay close attention to those that are in charge of what's flexible and what isn't.

I'd rather things be done above board with set rules and more transparency.  Otherwise that flexibility could be misused.

 

If so many teams are interchangeable from the top of 1 class to the bottom of the other class then we are looking at a possible realization that there's too many classes now.  One less class would solve travel issues but they voted in 6 classes. 

 

Put your application in.   

Definitely too many classes, you are very correct. But, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't like having 6 classes even though we only need 5.

[TheAmbassador]

I prefer 6 classes. These schools with 150 students competing against 350 is tough enough much less over 400.

[LazIndexTN]

Don't think the TSSAA members are working overtime, doubt we are going to see the new classes tonight.

[chill]

Classes will be announced today on tssaa website. Regions announced next month after teams have a chance to move up. 

[KennyPowers55]

Classes will be announced today on tssaa website. Regions announced next month after teams have a chance to move up.

Any clue on what time?