Viking;648303 wrote:The cut off numbers might change. Also, open enrollment numbers won't act as a multiplier if the school loes more kids than they pick up. I'm pretty sure that Buchtel oses more kids than they gain.

High school administrators are voting, not coaches. This proposal is far from perfect, but it is a beginning. it will pass. I'll bet a MVR dinner on it.

You're faded Viking.

I don't think this was the change he was embracing.

Viking;648303 wrote: This proposal is far from perfect, but it is a beginning.

What is your perfect plan?

Or it could be voted down and therefore being the end. I doubt that many of the scools other than the Toledo Public Schools voting for this in our area. Which would equal 5 votes but the other schools in the area will vote no which will be about 16-17 no votes.

It will pass. The OHSAA doesn't want separate playoffs.

Viking;648303 wrote:The cut off numbers might change. Also, open enrollment numbers won't act as a multiplier if the school loses more kids than they pick up. I'm pretty sure that Buchtel oses more kids than they gain.

High school administrators are voting, not coaches. This proposal is far from perfect, but it is a beginning. it will pass. I'll bet a MVR dinner on it.

Of course the numbers will change. If the OHSAA is hell bent on dividing the schools evenly, they are going to have to change the cutoff points. Especially when Mooney stays in D3, and the OHSAA realizes the proposal didn't screw over one of the schools it was intended to. Then they will adjust the numbers so that Mooney falls into D2.

Here's a few thoughts that I have had regarding this proposal. I have really tried to sit back and give the proposal an honest look to see where the good points are. But I just don't see them.

1.) Is the OHSAA risking a lawsuit by forcing the private schools with no boundaries to have a 10% boundary factor, while state wide open enrollment public schools only receive a 6% multiplier? I realize it would be a silly lawsuit, but I feel that some lawyer that supports a private school may be able to make a discrimination case out of this.

2.) The free lunch factor does not affect schools as much as I thought it would. It basically cancels out the school boundary factor in most cases. The only schools that really truly benefit from it are inner-city schools that are closed enrollment, or adjacent only open enrollment schools with a high population of free lunches.

3.) The free lunch factor is still garbage. There needs to be a better explanation of this. Are all free lunch students counted? Is it just the boys that are counted for boys' sports and just the girls counted for girls' sports. That seems like a lot of work to have to sift through all the free lunches to determine the number of male and female students receiving them. And if it's just the total free lunch number, it doesn't make any sense why the number of girls on free lunch would affect the school's placement in football or baseball...or why the number of boys on free lunch would affect the school's position in girls volleyball and softball. Yet, I still don't think this is the most B.S. factor in the proposal.

4.) The tradition factor is absolute garbage. The OHSAA is basically saying, "Hey, you're too good, get out of here for 4 years and let someone else have a chance at a title." This is where I think a majority of schools will have a problem. The programs that are continuously at the top (both private and public) will not be happy about the fact that they are forced to move up just because they are good. If it was a voluntary move up, that's a different story. But to force a team up just because they are good is absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure Chagrin Falls isn't going to be happy having to move up to D3 because they've lost in the D4 title game 2 years in a row. Same thing with Coldwater in D5. Maple Heights is probably upset that they are forced up into D1 because they have been in the D2 title game two years in a row. I think it's wrong to penalize a team because they are good. Plain and simple. (By the way, notice that I named three public schools there. Three public schools are forced to move up ONLY because they have been to the state title game. Not even WON the state title game. They are penalized for BEING THERE.)

5.) Rural schools are not helped by this proposal. Inner city schools aren't helped by this proposal. The only schools helped by the proposal are schools near the cutoff point with a lot of free lunch applicants, that haven't been to a regional final. A majority of schools will stay the exact same. And the schools that win are just getting bent over.

I really don't think many people are going to embrace this change. I don't think the votes will be there. I really don't think it will pass.

Viking;648375 wrote:It will pass. The OHSAA doesn't want separate playoffs.

Wow well since you said it, then it will pass. You are right about everything that you have said.

rmolin73;648488 wrote:Wow well since you said it, then it will pass. You are right about everything that you have said.

Some people just can't embrace change. So sad.

i think this proposal will greatly benefit campbell memorial. i think it is actually one of the schools that will benefit the most.

Al Bundy;648347 wrote:What is your perfect plan?

I don't know about perfect, but I'd have the multipliers and dividers set so more schools would move up and down 2 divisions rather than just 1 division. For tennis, golf and soccer I'd set up an additional division based on the formula that would consist of urban and some rural schools. Ex. for golf all urban schools in the "Big 8" districts and schools such as Mogadore, Steubenville, Massillon and Lutheran East would all be in the same division. More schools like that might start golf and tennis programs. The kids would be at a similar level rather than competing against private and suburban kids that have been playing those sports for several years and have benefited from private lessons.

I see the rules are now changed . Atleast the OHSAA is finally being proactive

rmolin73;648488 wrote:Wow well since you said it, then it will pass. You are right about everything that you have said.

I have been right about changes coming. Many of you on this site and a couple of other sites blew off Todd Porter of the Repository and Bob Dyer of the ABJ along with a few articles in the PD. School administrators vote. This proposal will pass and more changes will follow over the next several years. Anybody that doesn't think that there will be changes isn't paying attention to the media and more importantly to the superintendents.

Thinthickbigred;648943 wrote:I see the rules are now changed . Atleast the OHSAA is finally being proactive

I see you haven't been paying attention considering no rules have changed.

Viking;648945 wrote: Anybody that doesn't think that there will be changes isn't paying attention to the media

Yes, because everyone knows the media is all about the truth! Right?

sherm03;648483 wrote:Of course the numbers will change. If the OHSAA is hell bent on dividing the schools evenly, they are going to have to change the cutoff points. Especially when Mooney stays in D3, and the OHSAA realizes the proposal didn't screw over one of the schools it was intended to. Then they will adjust the numbers so that Mooney falls into D2.

Here's a few thoughts that I have had regarding this proposal. I have really tried to sit back and give the proposal an honest look to see where the good points are. But I just don't see them.

1.) Is the OHSAA risking a lawsuit by forcing the private schools with no boundaries to have a 10% boundary factor, while state wide open enrollment public schools only receive a 6% multiplier? I realize it would be a silly lawsuit, but I feel that some lawyer that supports a private school may be able to make a discrimination case out of this.

2.) The free lunch factor does not affect schools as much as I thought it would. It basically cancels out the school boundary factor in most cases. The only schools that really truly benefit from it are inner-city schools that are closed enrollment, or adjacent only open enrollment schools with a high population of free lunches.

3.) The free lunch factor is still garbage. There needs to be a better explanation of this. Are all free lunch students counted? Is it just the boys that are counted for boys' sports and just the girls counted for girls' sports. That seems like a lot of work to have to sift through all the free lunches to determine the number of male and female students receiving them. And if it's just the total free lunch number, it doesn't make any sense why the number of girls on free lunch would affect the school's placement in football or baseball...or why the number of boys on free lunch would affect the school's position in girls volleyball and softball. Yet, I still don't think this is the most B.S. factor in the proposal.

4.) The tradition factor is absolute garbage. The OHSAA is basically saying, "Hey, you're too good, get out of here for 4 years and let someone else have a chance at a title." This is where I think a majority of schools will have a problem. The programs that are continuously at the top (both private and public) will not be happy about the fact that they are forced to move up just because they are good. If it was a voluntary move up, that's a different story. But to force a team up just because they are good is absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure Chagrin Falls isn't going to be happy having to move up to D3 because they've lost in the D4 title game 2 years in a row. Same thing with Coldwater in D5. Maple Heights is probably upset that they are forced up into D1 because they have been in the D2 title game two years in a row. I think it's wrong to penalize a team because they are good. Plain and simple. (By the way, notice that I named three public schools there. Three public schools are forced to move up ONLY because they have been to the state title game. Not even WON the state title game. They are penalized for BEING THERE.)

5.) Rural schools are not helped by this proposal. Inner city schools aren't helped by this proposal. The only schools helped by the proposal are schools near the cutoff point with a lot of free lunch applicants, that haven't been to a regional final. A majority of schools will stay the exact same. And the schools that win are just getting bent over.

I really don't think many people are going to embrace this change. I don't think the votes will be there. I really don't think it will pass.

Sherm

Why do you waste your time? Until all of the schools who whine like little girls get their participation trophy they will keep coming up with stupid ideas. Don't try to make sense of any of this BS. I personally hope they do separate the public schools from the private schools. It's getting just to easy to beat them every year. The Ursuline Irish have totally dominated DV to the point that the OHSAA will just about concoct any plan to move them. Never mind that just 5 or 6 years ago they were a 5-5 team at best. When they destroy the public schools in DIV some moron will come up with a new plan. Heck, our friend Viking is already talking about moving 2 divisions and the vote hasn't been taken on this plan.

Viking;648945 wrote:I have been right about changes coming. Many of you on this site and a couple of other sites blew off Todd Porter of the Repository and Bob Dyer of the ABJ along with a few articles in the PD. School administrators vote. This proposal will pass and more changes will follow over the next several years. Anybody that doesn't think that there will be changes isn't paying attention to the media and more importantly to the superintendents.

First off it seems that you couldn't pick up on the sarcasm lol. But myself and others had already been aware of the proposal. I had seen it posted by a Mooney supporter before it had been mentioned on the chatter. In my opinion what will be voted on will be a down graded version of what we have seen. Just like anything political what you first see is not all ways the finished product. Also there more than likely won't be any modifications as you have stated due this in itself a chance vote. Many administrators will not vote for this rural, private, and private while as you have stated inner city public schools will vote for this wholeheartedley I don't think they all will although. On your other proposal which to me seems nice in theory but it will not happen. Public schools in Ohio are cash strapped as it is and now you want them to fund "country club sports", and place those teams in their own little conference. It's not gonna happen in our life time.

Viking;648303 wrote:Also, open enrollment numbers won't act as a multiplier if the school loses more kids than they pick up.

That is nowhere in this proposal. As it is written, a statewide open enrollment school will get 6% added to their total. It does not say that a statewide open enrollment school will get 6% added to their total ONLY if they gain more than they lose.

Also, I'm confused by the wording in the proposal. The proposal says, school enrollment will continue to be the beginning basis for placing schools into their respective tournament divisions. Once that data is received, schools will be placed into their respective tournament divisions based on their sport‐by‐sport “athletic counts.”

Maybe it's just me, but the wording on this is confusing. Does that mean schools are moved up once tournament time comes around? In other words, for the purpose of points, would Ursuline count as a D5 school throughout the year and then be moved up to D4 just for the playoffs? Or if a school beats Ursuline during the season, do they get the points for beating a D4 school since that's where Ursuline will be for the playoffs?

The proposal will pass. Very few schools will be effected. I like the intent and spirit of the proposal, but it is very weak. Either more adjustments will be made in the next several years, or a serious vote to have separate playoffs will be pushed by a group of public school superintendents.

Viking;649315 wrote:The proposal will pass. Very few schools will be effected. I like the intent and spirit of the proposal, but it is very weak. Either more adjustments will be made in the next several years, or a serious vote to have separate playoffs will be pushed by a group of public superintendents.

They should keep the 6 divisions the way that they are and add a 7th division for anyone who wants to join. In the 7th division, scores will not be kept. We will tell of the kids that they are all winners at the end of the game. After the game, we can pass out juice boxes and a snack. We can give everyone a trophy for participating in D7.

The public school superintendents will lose out if they push for a seperate tournament. This not gonna happen even though some fans of poor programs (Akron Public Teams) will beg for it. The majority of private, suburban, and many public school superintendents will like to keep the tournament the way it is. There will be some private schools that will move up and some urban and rural schools that will move down. But the fact remains the teams that are good will continue to be good and the bad teams will continue to be bad. Unless we add the Ohio High School Juice Box Association and give the poor little teams their trophies.

The public school superintendents that are pushing for changes (and really would prefer separate playoffs) aren't from urban schools. They are from smaller rural and suburban public schools. Do some research and you will find that the group started in Wayne County. Districts like Chippewa (Doylestown) and Smithville are leading the charge. Unless the numbers (multipliers/dividers) are revised to force more movement the OHSAA will face serious upheaval in the near future.

That is a small populace in the grand scheme of things. Wayne county was the initial area where the whining started and everyone is aware of that so much for in depth research. But there are several other rural areas whom will not go for this in NWO and WO. You have Hancock, Henry, Wyandot, Putnam, Fulton, Lucas, Wood, and Defiance counties to name a few. I'm not even going to touch the suburban schools that will vote this down I named 16 to 17 in NWO alone. The serious claims of upheavel is a small minority based on your opinion. This little minority of rural schools cannot afford to break away and form their own association. Seperate tournaments is not going to happen, teams are not going to move up or down two divisions, and Akron North will still be in the basement. I continue to laugh at your conspiracy theory though its fun stuff.

The proposal is very weak. It will pass. The real problems are in the next few years if the mutipliers/dividers aren't cranked up. There will be a push for separate playoffs and the OHSAA might not be able to stem the tide this time.

Viking;650901 wrote:The proposal is very weak. It will pass. The real problems are in the next few years if the mutipliers/dividers aren't cranked up. There will be a push for separate playoffs and the OHSAA might not be able to stem the tide this time.

The proposal isn't weak because the multipliers and dividers aren't "cranked up" enough. The proposal is weak because nothing about it makes sense. It's literally just punishing teams for being good.

Absolutely but Viking wants a clear path for schools that have poor football programs to be in a state championship.