Sykotyk
Well-known member
The big issue with the divide between 8 and 11 man is more an issue of participation and not just raw numbers of students. The only non-D7 schools that would play 8-man are the ones who can barely field 15-16 kids as it is.
8-man state championship coming to Ohio
- Thread starter northwest07
- Start date
FossyWriter8
Active member
It's not quite the same. Many events are the same or similar, many others are not.
Events common to both
High jump
Pole vault
Long jump
Shot put
4x800
4x200
1,600
400
800
200
3,200
4x400
Outdoor only
Discus
100
100 hurdles (girls)
110 hurdles (boys)
4x100
300 hurdles
Indoor only
Triple jump
Weight throw
60
60 hurdles
Bruce Monnin
Well-known member
So, having schools able to participate in championships in indoor and outdoor track in two different seasons would then be like having schools compete in 11-man and 8-man football championships in different seasons.
Hmm, could be interesting.
Hmm, could be interesting.
bulldog1974
Well-known member
Sounds like East Palestine. D6. Had to cancel last game in 2022 because of not enough players. Far cry from the 2015-17 teams that challenged D4 teams on the same field and won. Coaching? Parental influence? Open enrollment losses?
Bulldawg18
Active member
Probably the last one there more than anything
No. If you had told us what you would do that would be your opinion of what should be done.
But when you said what "most schools" would do that is a statement of fact, and you had no real idea what you were talking about.
CC Track Fan
Well-known member
So you have a reading comprehension problem then, I stand corrected. I literally started my post with the words "I think" not sure how I could have been clearer than that that it was my opinion. Should I have started each sentence with "I think"? I am sure you are the only person who read that and thought I meant that I talked to "most of the schools" about this topic.
fbrox
Well-known member
Then you’re talking about club football, not high school football. This basically turns the game into AAU football. No thanks
Sykotyk
Well-known member
That's not how co-ops work in any other state. Ohio is the lone oddball compared to most of the country.
In PIAA the "host" school counts 100% of their enrollment, and the secondary school(s) count 50% of their enrollment.
Is really no different than what OHSAA did with Youngstown East and Youngstown Chaney. Or what CMSD did with Whitney Young.
queencitybuckeye
Well-known member
They would still be representing their school, just slightly differently. Isn't the opportunity for these kids to participate a little more important than worrying about tiny schools becoming big-time?
I think what may happen is that OHSFCA might end up putting a cap on student-boy population. For instance, if there are enough boys in the student population to potentially field a 11 man team, then you cannot field a 8 man team. Perhaps they do this as a percentage?
I believe the breakdown for current OHSSA football divisions are:
D1- 660+
D2- 605-376
D3- 375-270
D4- 269-202
D5- 201-154
D6- 153-113
D7- 112 and less
Let's take a look at a few case studies:
Millersport (D7)- There are 140 students in their high school, 51% are male, meaning there are roughly 71 boys in their high school.
Marion Local (D7)- There are 297 students in their high school, 49% are male, meaning there are roughly 146 boys in their high school.
Pickerington North (D1)- There are 1,536 in their high school, and the student male-female population is roughly the same.
Not that Marion Local or Pick North would ever field a 8 man team, but where does OHSFCA set the number/percentage of student male population that makes them eligible to have a 8 man team? Would this mean there are divisions for 8 man ball? Or, is it just about schools having football and playing games?
Another can of worms to throw in here, what about letting middle schoolers participate?
I believe the breakdown for current OHSSA football divisions are:
D1- 660+
D2- 605-376
D3- 375-270
D4- 269-202
D5- 201-154
D6- 153-113
D7- 112 and less
Let's take a look at a few case studies:
Millersport (D7)- There are 140 students in their high school, 51% are male, meaning there are roughly 71 boys in their high school.
Marion Local (D7)- There are 297 students in their high school, 49% are male, meaning there are roughly 146 boys in their high school.
Pickerington North (D1)- There are 1,536 in their high school, and the student male-female population is roughly the same.
Not that Marion Local or Pick North would ever field a 8 man team, but where does OHSFCA set the number/percentage of student male population that makes them eligible to have a 8 man team? Would this mean there are divisions for 8 man ball? Or, is it just about schools having football and playing games?
Another can of worms to throw in here, what about letting middle schoolers participate?
queencitybuckeye
Well-known member
The Dock
Ohio Hog Voter
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but as it stands virtually none of the current 8-man programs are otherwise in a position to sustain a season’s length of 11-man. What stands in the way of a statewide 8-man footprint is the inertia of “we prefer to keep playing 11-man with rosters in the 20’s, for reasons ‘X, Y, and Z.’” And unless a fighting-for-survival program with even lower numbers and dimmer prospects is up by Lake Erie (where an 8-man circuit has developed), their prospects are 11-man or no football because of how untenable an 8-man program would be longterm due to travel.
I’ll also throw out as a general comment that, yes, there are some schools who purely view 8-man as a last resort. This is a statement of fact.
queencitybuckeye
Well-known member
Thanks for the response. To me, it points out that what should be the primary goal is best achieved by having both 8-man where it makes logistical sense, and allowing small districts to form a combined team instead.
The Dock
Ohio Hog Voter
I’ll work reverse order on this.
re: Co-Op’s — for the past two school years, there has been an OHSAA referendum item that would effectively further the intent behind co-ops “a student enrolled at a public school that does not sponsor a team sport to potentially play that sport at a public school located in a bordering public school district.” In 2022 the margin of defeat was 13 votes, but this year the margin of defeat was 50+.
It doesn’t seem likely that we’ll see the pure, conventional co-op system that other states have for football. Maybe we will eventually see a “play for the adjacent school, retain enrollment at your school” item pass. But I personally don’t see a rising tide of School A-School B co-ops for football purposes here in Ohio. It’s a popular message board idea that gets steam because other states have it, but a co-op requires two schools to tango and to have enough interest to have a postseason to play for (because otherwise you’re asking schools to surrender their postseason eligibility in the process of forming a lone Co-Op) you’re probably going to need a band of 24 (12 schools with a pairing partner, to form 12 co-op programs) at minimum. And, most likely, this is going to require the involvement of schools that never had football to begin with and their investment toward making a co-op program work. (I also really doubt we’ll see established programs, such as Versailles, kick their accustomed football postseason eligibility so that they can be “Versailles-Russia” with a 9:1 roster of Tigers to Raiders playing for a co-op championship.)
I think a referendum item that has better guardrails, more definition as to “what adjacent schools a student can play for” (so that it’s not turning into free agency or picking winners over losers) and language with policy that ensures it’s a ‘last resort’ pathway for kids to play (that ensures existing programs aren’t disappearing into thin air) can pass in due time.
— — —
On 8-man, just as a general comment for this thread’s purposes that I’ve been meaning to add: so three of the earliest 8-man programs in Ohio no longer play 8-man. Toledo Horizon Science doesn’t have football anymore (doesn’t have athletics?), Fostoria St. Wendelin closed and Zanesville Bishop Rosecrans only went to 8-man, and did it for a year, because the alternative was no football season. Since then they’ve gained better footing in sustaining 11-man.
Yea. But there are some middle schoolers that are way more mature than 9-10th, even some 11th graders. Just food for thought. Most likely mom isn't gonna let that happen.
queencitybuckeye
Well-known member
I'd be interested knowing why schools with no real skin (i.e. large schools) in this particular game would vote against such a proposal.
Hopefully.
Why wouldn't they play in the division the number of boys in the combined schools would have them in? This would be D7 in most cases, maybe D6. I doubt that MSML or Kirtland would be sh**ing themselves over these new "rivals".
But Houston-Russia makes perfect sense, assuming the two combined would have enough interest.
Again, hopefully. The main goal should always be to allow as many kids as possible who want to play to be able to play the game.
The Dock
Ohio Hog Voter
There’s a theory that there are enough open enrollment schools that currently benefit from the status quo of ‘playing for school A means you attend school A’ tilting the scale in the favor of “NO.” But, to your point: if our state (at all levels; statehouse, courts, administrative arenas) was unified on being pro-kid we wouldn’t have the inequalities we do with schools. And not unlike policies decided in Columbus on education spending, policies decided upon within the OHSAA constituency don’t always prioritize “more kids playing.” Maybe it’s callousness, maybe it’s cluelessness, or maybe it’s some combination of the two.
I think that’s one way of doing it. If OHSAA approved the idea, the only thing that would stand in the way would be something like the BOE of the assuming school (e.g. Versailles) stamping an approval on “yes, we will allow students from Russia/school Y to play on the football team.” It may be that would not ultimately be an OHSAA requirement (although it was in the language of the failed referendum item being discussed, for boards of education to adapt Memorandums of Understanding), but it would at least stave off any dissent from the assuming school’s community on the matter.
One minor matter would be whether or not those football-playing students from the smaller/dependent school would be tiered for Competitive Balance purposes, and if so then what tiering? I frame it as minor since it (in theory) could just be remedied in the language of the tiering rules when rosters are submitted — although that might also come to a referendum vote.
They do! It also boils down to who is interested in paying for it, or for how much of it, of course.
RollingTrain
Well-known member
Which is a shame on multiple fronts. Then not going 8-man in the past has cost the SBC a chance at other teams for the conference.
Right now in 8 man you have 5 in NW and 1 in NE.
Sebring is in for lots of travel until more around them switch over.
They may also play for the public district in which the private school is located if it's different from their home district.
Thanks so much.
Bruce Monnin
Well-known member
So, have any details come out about this yet? It is Week 8 coming up after all.
Calif_Eagle
Well-known member
Lots of really great posts in this thread. I see the need for co-ops, for 8-man, and I am surprised 6-man isn't getting much love here. I only saw one mention of it and Texas plays it, I think Nebraska does too. I think Ohio would benefit from 6-man because it would cheaper to institute if a school is starting up it's team from scratch. Plus, there are many schools struggling to field teams. Including larger schools like those in the Cleveland Senate. 6-man would accommodate an even smaller roster size. As Queencitybuckeye said, isn't it all about the chance to play? I think teams would be delighted to win an "unofficial" OHSFCA championship, unless &/or until the OHSAA does something about these 3 situations.
A poster above touched on the Ohio Valley and it's population loss. The 10 counties losing population faster than the other 78 are all on the shore of the Ohio River or near it. SEO. Seems to be very fertile ground for the introduction of any/all the three options, co-op, 8-man, 6-man. I think the Senate should look at these as well. probably almost everyone but Glenville's successful program would benefit from a switch. (Assuming the Senate didn't say all or none switch.)
A poster above touched on the Ohio Valley and it's population loss. The 10 counties losing population faster than the other 78 are all on the shore of the Ohio River or near it. SEO. Seems to be very fertile ground for the introduction of any/all the three options, co-op, 8-man, 6-man. I think the Senate should look at these as well. probably almost everyone but Glenville's successful program would benefit from a switch. (Assuming the Senate didn't say all or none switch.)
Sykotyk
Well-known member
A lot of states have 6-man teams. But not as many have state sanctioned 6-man classifications. Usually, it's 'renegade' programs that aren't members of their state's association.
Right now, the best I can tell:
Washington (unofficial), Oregon, California (unofficial), New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota (unofficial), Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, and Missouri (unofficial).
Generally, you're going to need a few things to make six-man work. Very small schools with a lot of distance between schools. The situation where co-ops generally can't work just due to the ungodly travel times for things as simple as practices.
But co-ops do happen at the 6-man level. In Montana, a school I saw was Grass Range/Winnett. Grass Range has 18 students in high school (that's all four grades, boys and girls), while Winnett has 19 students. Winnett is the only town in Petroleum County, which has just 496 people.
Due to low numbers, Grass Range and Winnett joined with a 3-team co-op among Denton, Geyser, and Stanford. Denton has 7 students. Geyser has 12. And Stanford has 26. The MHSA let them combine as a five-team co-op to play 6-man football. It's 114 miles from Geyser, Montana to Winnett, Montana. And they were playing and practicing as one team. They did this for two years. Before Grass Range and Winnett finally had to co-op with the 'big school' in the area: Fergus High School in Lewistown (in Fergus County that sits in the middle of the 5 teams that formed the co-op). With 336 students, this put Grass Range and Winnett players into 11-man football and essentially lost their identities as schools.
And for reference, 8-man is much more common. It's in Montana, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and Maine. Some are unofficial, many out west are official and have their own state playoffs under the state association. Some southeastern private schools play 6 or 8 man. but usually outside a state association and with far less 'official' status.
Notably missing is North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, and Wyoming. Who play 9-man football instead of 8-man football. Interesting that when Wyoming added a level between 6 and 11 man, they went with 9-man instead of 8-man which Montana, Idaho, Utah (added after), Colorado, and Nebraska all play bordering them. While just South Dakota played 9-man.
For six-man, the primary expense to 'start a team' is going to be pads, helmets, and erecting permanent goal posts. I've seen very small schools without any type of stadium whatsoever. Fans simply pull up in their cars to surround the field, or just stand a few yards from the sideline and move like a flock of birds as the line of scrimmage moves up or down the field.
So, a stadium, scoreboard, etc isn't entirely necessarily right off the bat if not needed. Alexander, ND used a small utility trailer to act as a press box with the roof of a bus for the announcer's view of the field. Waterloo, in Ohio, used a flatbed trailer when their stadium was demolished after being condemned and a new one hadn't been rebuilt yet during the covid season.
As for the suggestion about larger schools playing. This is an issue that the smallest of small schools do have with participation. The point of going to 6-man or even 8-man is lack of absolute numbers. At the end of the day, a bigger school with less interest does still have a ton of potential players if or when that interest increases. And you can't just easily hop back and forth between rulesets. Especially from 6-man to 11-man or vice versa.
If and when OHSAA makes 8-man a state tournament eligible classification, I think you'll see more schools opt for it. Or, rather, if they're caught up in some enrollment cutoff they won't fight their placement in 8-man. It's the same issue with mercy rules. If up to the coaches, most would never okay the mercy rule be used in a game of theirs, even if staring down a 50-0 halftime deficit. However, once the 30-point rule was enacted, far fewer coaches would actively fight against their games having a running clock in them. Be it favoring it or against it.
Schools like Beallsville, Corbin Miller, Millersport, Southington Chalker (going next year), Mathews, Windham, Richmond Heights, St Thomas Aquinas, etc. Could all look favorably at 8-man but wouldn't want to be the ones to have to make the decision themselves at the risk of displeasing their communities.
Calif_Eagle
Well-known member
Great Post. It's amazing how much you know about HS football across the whole nation. You must be a traveling salesman or something to be able to see all the games you have, everywhere. I'm not asking you to say what you do for a living, but it sure must be nice to be able to travel and see all the games you have. (Please don't state your vocation here unless you want to. I repeat, I am not asking.) I was marooned in warehouses, factories and offices my whole working career. Took 1 business trip ever.
Sykotyk
Well-known member
I'm always curious how things are done in other states. And then like to see it. I almost made plans to go to Tahoe this weekend. A game Saturday afternoon in North Tahoe and Saturday night in Truckee. With a Friday game somewhere in Nevada (which would be a first for me), but the time/cost was just a bit too much to stomach. So, I'll be in Colorado instead. Though, of course I pick a weekend with very few Thursday games other than the Denver area.