|
Post by givepullorpitch on Jan 4, 2017 22:38:23 GMT -6
I will give one advantage of larger class sizes and break them into division 1 and division 2 after the top four in each district have qualified for the playoffs:
If you are geographically isolated with very few teams in each class, travel could be tremendous. If you have bigger classes, you won't have to drive as far to play a district game. However, after you make the playoffs, then you wouldn't play a team with a huge enrollment descepancy because they would be in a different division.
One thing I don't like about a lot of your proposals that could be corrected by doing this:
Take 6a and place 32 schools in 4 districts of 8. Take the top 4 in each district and bracket the top 8 schools in enrollment in division 1. Smallest 8 schools that make the playoffs will be division 2. Hypothetically if your enrollment were in the middle and you make the playoffs both years, you could be in division 1 one year and division 2 the next depending on the size of the other schools getting in the playoffs
|
|
|
Post by Hands11 on Jan 5, 2017 9:24:44 GMT -6
ya know people bhitch about the uil in texas on realignment after reading all this stuff you okie dudes go through and do actually makes me like the uil for what they do I know we have more schools but north or the red river sounds like a cluster cantrell jeez louise I don't think it's a cluster at all! I think people are making it that way. Leave all the other classes alone, and take the classes with the most amount of teams like class A and split them evenly like they did with 6a-1 and 6a-2.
|
|
|
Post by bolt92 on Jan 5, 2017 10:01:08 GMT -6
So hands, did my "how 3A would break down" clear it up any for you?
|
|
|
Post by HAZAA on Jan 5, 2017 10:11:21 GMT -6
Lets be honest here. The OSS-Double A-holes don't care about our opinions. They are going to do whatever they want just like they do with the re-districting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2017 10:14:54 GMT -6
Lets be honest here. The OSS-Double A-holes don't care about our opinions. They are going to do whatever they want just like they do with the re-districting. I think there could be a change, only because the big 6a guys have a complaint too. Only people that won't be on board with change is the little 6a guys.
|
|
|
Post by Hands11 on Jan 5, 2017 10:32:03 GMT -6
So hands, did my "how 3A would break down" clear it up any for you? It does, mostly. I just don't like the format. I don't think its fair for anyone actually. And I also don't think Oklahoma is big enough to be able to do it effectively!
|
|
|
Post by Hands11 on Jan 5, 2017 10:33:02 GMT -6
Lets be honest here. The OSS-Double A-holes don't care about our opinions. They are going to do whatever they want just like they do with the re-districting. I think there could be a change, only because the big 6a guys have a complaint too. Only people that won't be on board with change is the little 6a guys. True. The ones to me that really should be complaining are the teams that are on the bottom half of 6A-1.
|
|
|
Post by bolt92 on Jan 5, 2017 10:41:18 GMT -6
I think we were pretty united the last time, except for some influential 3A coaches being mad about not being 32 anymore (They were going to have 48 8-6 team districts and 5 rounds of playoffs). Then the OSSAA decided not to listen to anyone and split 6A and then made 3A have 55 teams in it. I think leaving the way it is now makes it to where most teams play a 4 game non-district schedule in weeks 0-3 and then take a bye during district play. The problem is depending on where the bye is, it may mess with team momentum or it could be a blessing to heal up before the playoff push.
Again, I don't think it personally hurt my school regardless (obviously I would like to compete against 31 others for a gold ball rather than 70, but I say bring it on), but what I'm concerned with is finding a plan that serves the overall growth of our sport in this state.
|
|
|
Post by blitz50 on Jan 5, 2017 10:52:49 GMT -6
I agree. I think those at the bottom of 6A-1 have the biggest complaint and to be honest I think it is hurting big class football overall. For example look at Yukon. Before the split they made the playoffs regularly, they may not have had enough for the east side beast, but they were there. Heck now they can't even get in and I think it is probably hurting their program.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2017 10:53:22 GMT -6
I think the 5 round playoffs is the worst part of the current system. Scheduling issues are minor.
|
|
|
Post by Hands11 on Jan 5, 2017 10:59:45 GMT -6
I think we were pretty united the last time, except for some influential 3A coaches being mad about not being 32 anymore (They were going to have 48 8-6 team districts and 5 rounds of playoffs). Then the OSSAA decided not to listen to anyone and split 6A and then made 3A have 55 teams in it. I think leaving the way it is now makes it to where most teams play a 4 game non-district schedule in weeks 0-3 and then take a bye during district play. The problem is depending on where the bye is, it may mess with team momentum or it could be a blessing to heal up before the playoff push. Again, I don't think it personally hurt my school regardless (obviously I would like to compete against 31 others for a gold ball rather than 70, but I say bring it on), but what I'm concerned with is finding a plan that serves the overall growth of our sport in this state. Not true. I was with all the people who were at these meetings and the west side large 6A's wanted this REALLY BAD, as well as, the schools that knew they would be in the division 2. So, with only 4 East side bigs, the majority was easy. Now, it came back to bite most of the west siders because initially everyone thought the districts would be done geographically which would have put BA, Union, Jenks, and Owasso all in the same district, and when the west side thought that was a reality they foamed at the mouth and all raised their hands in delight!!
|
|
|
Post by 72blue on Jan 5, 2017 11:08:03 GMT -6
Remember, the 6A split came from left field. It was done by a "constitutional committee" of school administrators. I cannot remember anyone talking about splitting 6A and then *poof* it was split.
|
|
|
Post by bolt92 on Jan 5, 2017 11:24:02 GMT -6
Yep, that was crazy considering most coaches didn't see it 6A as the biggest redistricting issue and their brilliant idea has given Bixby (Jenks' little brother 3 state titles) and cost several 6A-I coaches their jobs. No offense to Bixby as they have had 3 really good teams the past 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by email on Jan 5, 2017 11:24:19 GMT -6
I believe those are the accurate numbers now. We have expanded 8 man, and so I think that is actually pretty accurate. I used ossaa.net/docs/2015-16/Football/FB_2015-16_1617Classifications.pdf to come up with the numbers. 8 man football now has 76 schools as opposed to 64 when we last utilized the 32 32 64 breakdown. My opinion is that the classes have to be 16, 32, or 64. 48 gums up the works. 48 8 districts 6 teams each Top 3 make playoffs District champs get a bye
|
|
|
Post by bolt92 on Jan 5, 2017 11:28:28 GMT -6
Or 4 out of 6 make the playoffs and we keep the playoffs the same.
|
|
|
Post by givepullorpitch on Jan 5, 2017 14:39:22 GMT -6
I believe those are the accurate numbers now. We have expanded 8 man, and so I think that is actually pretty accurate. I used ossaa.net/docs/2015-16/Football/FB_2015-16_1617Classifications.pdf to come up with the numbers. 8 man football now has 76 schools as opposed to 64 when we last utilized the 32 32 64 breakdown. My opinion is that the classes have to be 16, 32, or 64. 48 gums up the works. 48 8 districts 6 teams each Top 3 make playoffs District champs get a bye If other classes have 8 team districts, and one class has 6 team districts, scheduling non district games just became a nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by Burnet44 on Jan 5, 2017 17:50:21 GMT -6
like I said
|
|
|
Post by email on Jan 7, 2017 7:34:25 GMT -6
48 8 districts 6 teams each Top 3 make playoffs District champs get a bye If other classes have 8 team districts, and one class has 6 team districts, scheduling non district games just became a nightmare. Not if say 5a and 4a were 48 or say 3a and 4a were and we still have zero week
|
|
|
Post by email on Jan 7, 2017 7:40:40 GMT -6
One or 2 problems i see could Happen on the pre and postseason playoff splits
On the preseason : What if the 4 smallest schools in the district make the playoffs, does that mean there is no large district representives?
Postseason split: Same thing what if the it's actually the 4 smallest schools , and the 2 that have to go to the D1 playoff are actually numbers 18 and 22 in overall Class enrollment
Second thing with post season split; Are we talking just the 2 largest and smallest playofff making teams in predetermined brackets Or all large schools that make playoff are all reseeded by record and all smaller schools too. So everyone is reranked 1-16 (8)so 1 will Play 16 or (8)? Cause if we are talking size discrepancies wouldn't that be the most fair and a True playoff bracket , with 1 seed getting the "easiest " first round game?
|
|
|
Post by email on Jan 7, 2017 7:47:24 GMT -6
And let's all get real, nothing will fix the enrollment issues for 6a, with the 2 biggest school being so much larger. So I don't even know why that's being discussed . So really the class that actually needs split is class A Make 2a 65 And take all the other schools that are left that have over 120 enrollment and the ones that petition up that are smaller and make that Class A, And have that class be Split after the season for playoffs , and make B one class, if there is enough say 35 and down enrollment wanting to play, create 6 man.
|
|