OATCCC Proposal To Be Considered By OHSAA

I like it. Align all the sports. Buy us a little more prep time. Makes the transition from wrestling, swimming, or basketball more rushed, but that can be sorted out with the athlete.
 

JAVMAN83

Active member
Good proposal by OATCCC. I like all the points mentioned, and I hope it passes. #2 is of very practical and IMHO, of necessary import.
 
More time with athletes can always be a good thing, but some of the big issues in my mind are still left hanging. Where did the proposal for additional divisions go? Is there consideration for unequal numbers of teams per division to make them more like-sized? I saw on another thread that Howland girls are looking strong but went D1 with 340 girls. They will face schools 3 and 4 times their size yet OATCCC does not address this year after year.
 

panott

Member
More time with athletes can always be a good thing, but some of the big issues in my mind are still left hanging. Where did the proposal for additional divisions go? Is there consideration for unequal numbers of teams per division to make them more like-sized? I saw on another thread that Howland girls are looking strong but went D1 with 340 girls. They will face schools 3 and 4 times their size yet OATCCC does not address this year after year.
The Ohsaa is working on divisions so there is not a Cross Country proposal along these lines. The 4 divisions for track has been presented and is currently in the hands of the Ohsaa.
 

yj_runfan

Well-known member
More time with athletes can always be a good thing, but some of the big issues in my mind are still left hanging. Where did the proposal for additional divisions go? Is there consideration for unequal numbers of teams per division to make them more like-sized? I saw on another thread that Howland girls are looking strong but went D1 with 340 girls. They will face schools 3 and 4 times their size yet OATCCC does not address this year after year.
This will always be an issue unless you have a division for the top 15 or so schools in the state. It just isn’t practical. Even if you limit D1 to 500 or 600 boys or girls they would still be competing with schools twice their size.
 
I agree, but schools competing against those twice their size is a start, and much more equitable than competing against 3-4 times their size.
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
I'm not 100% sold on the proposal to move the start of practice up. I can't remember the last time we were able to get HJ or PV matts out before mid/late March. Can't jump in the LJ pit until then anyway either. Throws area is usually under snow too. We have to fight for gym space with the other spring sports. Our distance kids are ready to go from day one and are working hard before the first day of practice anyway, so they don't need the extra few weeks. Schools below Mansfield will gain a big advantage but those of us in the north and in the snow belt will get nothing much out of an earlier start date. The OATCCC indoor state meet would be after the start of outdoor practice. I'm not sure that makes sense.

I am not a teacher, so I take a pay hit from my regular job to coach. Gladly! However, I would not get paid more to coach, but would have to take the hit from my regular job for 2 more weeks. That's not insignificant. I'll still do it and won't complain, but it's a reality.

As far as performances go, I'm not sure we need the extra practice. Times and performances are already outstanding.

I will start practice the first day they say I can, but I'm not sure this is all that great an idea. We do not have the facilities to not be outside.

As far as divisions go... D3 1-150. D2 151-300. D1A 301-600 D1B 601+ Something close to that. would be something I'd look at.
 

Mr. Slippery

Well-known member
I'm not 100% sold on the proposal to move the start of practice up. I can't remember the last time we were able to get HJ or PV matts out before mid/late March. Can't jump in the LJ pit until then anyway either. Throws area is usually under snow too. We have to fight for gym space with the other spring sports. Our distance kids are ready to go from day one and are working hard before the first day of practice anyway, so they don't need the extra few weeks. Schools below Mansfield will gain a big advantage but those of us in the north and in the snow belt will get nothing much out of an earlier start date. The OATCCC indoor state meet would be after the start of outdoor practice. I'm not sure that makes sense.

I am not a teacher, so I take a pay hit from my regular job to coach. Gladly! However, I would not get paid more to coach, but would have to take the hit from my regular job for 2 more weeks. That's not insignificant. I'll still do it and won't complain, but it's a reality.

As far as performances go, I'm not sure we need the extra practice. Times and performances are already outstanding.

I will start practice the first day they say I can, but I'm not sure this is all that great an idea. We do not have the facilities to not be outside.

As far as divisions go... D3 1-150. D2 151-300. D1A 301-600 D1B 601+ Something close to that. would be something I'd look at.
Similar boat here. My school doesn't possess great options for indoor training unless we want more of our athletes to have shin splints earlier than usual (our floors are HARD). Also, our biggest obstacle to getting kids out and/or getting them to stay out for track and field is the weather. Starting in February won't improve the odds of us avoiding the kind of weather that makes kids want to quit. I also enjoy having the winter sport athletes get some time off before track and field season begins unless their winter sports teams make a memorable tournament run. In which case, I'd still want them to have some time off but don't want them fretting because track and field season has already officially begun.

Despite being against this proposal, I can see where schools that don't have many track and field athletes involved in winter sports would be in favor of it.
 
I saw the earlier date as an opportunity for schools to take a more conservative approach with two additional weeks for basic conditioning and strengthening without specific sprint or field event specifics. I think any coach knows how many get hurt early in the season due to getting too specific and aggressive too early.

I also thought about pay for the extra two weeks and situations like PD shared. When I coached I had 2-3 volunteers every season. I only skimmed the OHSAA proposal but thought they specifically addressed it implying a district had no expectation to increase compensation.
 

grange45

Active member
I just saw at the ohsaa board meeting today they approved the division breakdown for the next two seasons for track and field but they have nothing on their website of whaat it looks like. Does anyone know if they approved four divisions?
 

psycho_dad

Well-known member
4 divisions was not the proposal was it? 4 divisions is strictly a by the numbers game that there has to be so many 10 person teams at the District and once it hits the magic number then we go to 4 divisions. My guess is they will make us hit the numbers for a few years before granting the extra division since they went to extra qualifiers already. CC609, are you going to stay and watch Woodridge run in the championship races at Saturday night lights? I've lost some weight and could use a new Milton Union 2xl CC shirt.
 

CC Track Fan

Active member
4 divisions was not the proposal was it? 4 divisions is strictly a by the numbers game that there has to be so many 10 person teams at the District and once it hits the magic number then we go to 4 divisions. My guess is they will make us hit the numbers for a few years before granting the extra division since they went to extra qualifiers already.
They don't follow those rules for all sports so could make change for Track if wanted. I don't believe they will, could also drop required district athletes to 4 or 1 and would be over 750 teams.

Football has 7 division when 250 rule says should have 3 (714 teams).
Team Wrestling should have 2 but has 3 (344 teams).
Individual Wrestling should have 2 but has 3 (477).
Softball should have 3 but have 4 (748).
Boys Lacrosse should have 1 but has 2 (145).
Boys Lacrosse should have 1 but has 2 (131).
 

grange45

Active member
4 divisions was not the proposal was it? 4 divisions is strictly a by the numbers game that there has to be so many 10 person teams at the District and once it hits the magic number then we go to 4 divisions. My guess is they will make us hit the numbers for a few years before granting the extra division since they went to extra qualifiers already.
They already had the numbers presented by the oatccc way back during our track clinic in February. I forget the guys name (he was in the southwest district meeting) but was at the table along with others from oatccc presenting it to ohsaa. He said it was not a matter of how to do it (they already have the plan) and reasoning (other states with the amount of teams competing have 4 or even 5 divisions) but it was more about the money. With them complaining about how they are in the negative after most state championships this should put them in the positive for the track championship.
 

grange45

Active member
Wow. Instead of addressing the discrepancy in enrollment in d1 they made the cutoff even lower to 287. I’m shocked by that. They seem to not even listen to oatccc proposal.
 
Last edited:

stew

New member
Agreed. Couldn't believe the cutoff for d3 was down to 150. Doesn't seem that long ago when it was in the 170s for d2-d3 cutoff.
 

grange45

Active member
I think they should stop looking at having the equal number of schools in each division and instead at being fair. The smallest D1 schools are pitted against schools 3 - 4 times their size. That is definitely not fair. Football seems to be the most fair when it comes to divisional breakdowns.
 

CC Track Fan

Active member
So track has more than double the number teams as Team Wrestling yet continue to have the same number of divisions. 5 times that of Lacrosse and only 1 more division. And that is not even counting the teams with not enough district athletics to be counted as a "team".
 

grange45

Active member
So track has more than double the number teams as Team Wrestling yet continue to have the same number of divisions. 5 times that of Lacrosse and only 1 more division. And that is not even counting the teams with not enough district athletics to be counted as a "team".
Totally agree. Its also funny how OHSAA complains about losing money at almost every state competition (see their board meeting notes yesterday). If they add a division in XC they will get 2 extra races at the state meet which would allow 1000+ more spectators to the event and would easily be in the positive, along with making it more fair as well and giving more high school athletes to compete at the state level.

In track it would be very similar and they already have the schedule of how to do it (just look at most other states our size and bigger).
 

JAVMAN83

Active member
I think they should stop looking at having the equal number of schools in each division and instead at being fair. The smallest D1 schools are pitted against schools 3 - 4 times their size. That is definitely not fair. Football seems to be the most fair when it comes to divisional breakdowns.
That was what I faced at my last coaching position 10 years ago. Our division I school was 3 times smaller than the elephant in the room - Mason. Their 4000+ students is a monstrosity in the division I ranks, and given they have 10 track coaches (from the last information I had) - paid - and that they host their own District championship at Mason, is it no wonder that over the last 15 years they've dominated the smaller division I schools? I'm not knocking Mason at all, only the fact that such huge discrepancies in numbers are allowed to exist while still competing in the same division. It isn't apples-to-apples.
 

grange45

Active member
What are the Districts to Regional qualifiers looking like? Any changes?
I doubt it. They didn’t have anything posted.

I feel really bad for the oatccc and the people that have been working hard on the 4 divisions. I know a few oatccc members and they said they felt pretty confident about ohsaa making the change this count year and put a ton of hours working on it. It’s a slap in their face keeping it 3 divisions and making the cutoff even less.
 

yj_runfan

Well-known member
That was what I faced at my last coaching position 10 years ago. Our division I school was 3 times smaller than the elephant in the room - Mason. Their 4000+ students is a monstrosity in the division I ranks, and given they have 10 track coaches (from the last information I had) - paid - and that they host their own District championship at Mason, is it no wonder that over the last 15 years they've dominated the smaller division I schools? I'm not knocking Mason at all, only the fact that such huge discrepancies in numbers are allowed to exist while still competing in the same division. It isn't apples-to-apples.
No matter where the cutoff is for D1 you will still have a huge discrepancy between the top and the bottom. Unless you put the 15 biggest schools in their own division there is no solution that will satisfy the smaller D1 schools.
 

grange45

Active member
No matter where the cutoff is for D1 you will still have a huge discrepancy between the top and the bottom. Unless you put the 15 biggest schools in their own division there is no solution that will satisfy the smaller D1 schools.
Agree but even if a school is twice your size (550 to 1100) that discrepancy still somewhat manageable when compared to 280 to 1100. That is what needs to be addressed. The football super division would make the best sense for track.
 

Termite2

Well-known member
Football has a safety issue that track does not, that is the main reason for the number of divisions in football.
 

grange45

Active member
No it is not. It is all about $$$$$. If fans didn't pay to watch football (OSHAA didn't make money) there would be 3 or 4 divisions.
Totally agree.

I’m just curious: what would it take for the ohsaa to really follow through with this? There is easily more money to be made and it would be a more fair situation for athletes to compete as a team. The coach from Loveland (I just remembered where he was from) worked really hard on this proposal and working with the ohsaa but obviously he was ignored along with oatccc. I would like to hear from someone affiliated with it; would a petition work? I know even the big school coaches (the many I know), even though they are not affected in any way, still see the unfairness with the division distribution.
 

Termite2

Well-known member
No it is not. It is all about $$$$$. If fans didn't pay to watch football (OSHAA didn't make money) there would be 3 or 4 divisions.
How many divisions in basketball? kind of puts a dent in your money being the issue. Football has safety issues, in case you haven't seen the game, the players tend to run into each other; not so much in CC.
 
.
Top