|
|
Post by Admin75 on Jun 22, 2012 10:52:43 GMT -6
From the IHSAA: The Committee also voted in favor of a two-year tournament success factor in each team sport (baseball, basketball, football, soccer, softball volleyball), an accumulation of points by which any school would move up one class based on tournament series performance during that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by richsapper on Jun 22, 2012 11:08:32 GMT -6
On the Tradition factor: It's still a bad idea. It's part of an overwhelming problem with America. Everything has to be fair. Well life isn't fair. It's no wonder with everything being so watered down that we are barley in the top 25 in math and science... scores. It is no wonder that everything is less productive that it was, because every thing has to be "fair" What is that teaching kids? You are great, you work hard, you win championships, and, oh by the way, we are going to punish you for that by making you play bigger schools. People think this will corral privates and parochial schools, but look at really successful public schools. Maybe you have a great group of kids who is really talented. They all graduate and because they were good the kids who were underclassmen maybe were not as good. Now THOSE KIDS have to play the tougher competition. This will come back to bite them watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin75 on Jun 23, 2012 11:48:07 GMT -6
This may not be as big of a deal in soccer with only two classes. It could creep in when some teams keep moving back and forth.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyhound on Jun 26, 2012 21:47:49 GMT -6
Guerin girls already playing up a level in 2A. They are a top twenty team every year. Canterbury boys will be the first to get promoted. If not, they will win 1A boys every year
|
|
|
|
Post by richsapper on Jun 26, 2012 21:57:28 GMT -6
What do you think of the idea greyhound? I am not a fan of it as a general rule, but it seems like in soccer it will have the least impact, since there are only two classes at the moment. As the sport continues to grow, it could cause some issues. Catherbury is great on the boys side. They could possibly win 2A. I saw Crown Point a few times last year, and it seems like Canterbury was probably a bit better than them, but they won the 2A title. If (when) Caterbury moves up do they win 2A too?
|
|
|
|
Post by greyhound on Jun 26, 2012 22:15:10 GMT -6
Coach Mauch has taken Canterbury to the single class state finals 8 times, winning 3 and just won the first 1A title. Only North Central's Jerry Little has more state titles. Canterbury should play big boy soccer.
I actually like the new system. I think Cathedral will jump from 4A to 6A football in no time. But then I'm from a big school.
This does seem to be the fairest system that anyone has come up with yet. Multipliers push everyone up even if they are not very good in a sport.
|
|
|
|
Post by richsapper on Jun 27, 2012 21:04:46 GMT -6
greyhound, you are right. Caterbury is on another level and can play with the big boys for sure. I do agree that this is more fair than a multiplier, but I still am not a fan. It doesn't really "fix" the perceived "problem."
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin75 on Jun 28, 2012 12:02:58 GMT -6
Just a thought for conversation. I know that the current IHSAA rule has the number of classes determined by the number of schools participating int the sport, but, could this create a situation where there is a push for more classes, particulary in soccer where we just divided in to classes? I am sure it will happen as more schools begin to offer soccer at the varisty level, but could this make the process faster?
|
|
|
|
Post by greyhound on Jun 30, 2012 21:03:01 GMT -6
You need a certain number of teams in a class to run a tournament. Soccer did not go class for a long time as the IHSAA waited for the number of schools playing girls soccer to reach a number that fit the tournament format. This still has not happened so the 1A girls now play with 16 sectionals while the 2A girls and both boys classes have 32 sectionals. According to the IHSAA by-laws, a certain percentage of IHSAA schools must participate in a sport to add a class. This was waived to get class soccer for girls but I doubt it would be waived again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin75 on Jun 30, 2012 23:43:33 GMT -6
That makes sense considering how few sectionals there are in 1A on the girls side. It is surprising that there are not more schools playing soccer. It seems like a no brainer. Equipment, at least for the school, seems minimal. The sport keeps growing in popularity and I am sure that tere are kids that would play. I wonder why more schools don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccermomrogers on Jul 1, 2012 16:23:24 GMT -6
Isn't it illegal to not have the same number of gitls teams as boys teams? Why did they have to do this? It seems unfair.
|
|
|
|
Post by greyhound on Jul 2, 2012 14:06:26 GMT -6
Actually the other way around, it was unfair to the boys teams to stay as it was. The boys had enough teams to go class long ago but the IHSAA didn't want the boys going without the girls. The move to 16 sectionals allowed everyone to go to class.
Since soccer was is the newest sanctioned sport, many small schools don't have enough athletes to field soccer teams in the fall along with girls golf, volleyball, girls and boys cross country, boys tennis and football.
|
|
|
|
Post by richsapper on Jul 2, 2012 23:50:47 GMT -6
That's interesting greyhound. I had no idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin75 on Jul 3, 2012 7:47:50 GMT -6
Yeah, that its interesting greyhound. I knew there were fewer girls teams them boys and I figured that what you said may have had something to do with it. I think what is interesting with Title IX I am sure that people probably think it means that you have to have a girls sport for every boys sport. That's true, but it doesn't mean that sport had to be soccer.
|
|
|
|
Post by soccermomrogers on Jul 7, 2012 11:52:26 GMT -6
I thought that you had to have the same number of girls teams as boys teams though
|
|
