And this is a good thing?
Rumor about 6-7 divisions in basketball
- Thread starter Yappi
- Start date
Just an accurate thing for you. Why do you see it as bad? We could probably find multiple teams that would be D1 in most of the current D1 regions that could be spread out in the 7 division proposal.
Its pretty self explanatory how that would fix absolutely nothing
IT does fix what many coaches see as a problem when a school with an enrollment of 357 is bracketed in the same tournament as a school with 1200. I'm not saying I agree, but that is what they are changing.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
Interestingly, some of us have been calling for the top teams to be moved up to DI. Especially the schools that play a DI schedule the entire season.
The OHSAA then says, "no, we need to make DI weaker by taking teams out of it."
It is beyond silly that a DI school could move to DIII in one year. If this passes, nearly 1/3rd of the DI schools will become DIII. It just doesn't make sense.
The OHSAA then says, "no, we need to make DI weaker by taking teams out of it."
It is beyond silly that a DI school could move to DIII in one year. If this passes, nearly 1/3rd of the DI schools will become DIII. It just doesn't make sense.
It would be exactly 70 schools since the top 2 divisions would each have 64. But this is what a lot of the current D coaches want.
Private schools "recruiting" and open enrollment are far bigger factors in distribution of talent than enrollment. Once Mason loses the best 2-3 players in their district to X or Moeller, how much different are they than the school with 1,000 less kids? How do you account for the Cincinnati/Columbus/Cleveland public school that attracts all of the top players within the city limits even at a smaller school?
Garfield Heights current number is 489 That would put them in D2. I think you're looking at Akron Kenmore-Garfield at 443.
This is not intended to fix that.
NEOfan posted Garfield, not Garfield Heights so I looked at Garfield in Akron.
....so back to my original point lol. 3 D1 regional contenders spread across 3 divisions. If administrators and coaches want to pat themselves on the back for fixing the enrollment disparity by dilluting the tournament in a sport where you need about 8 kids then have at it.
They are getting what the wanted.
Sure.
Over the years there have been many complaints at the state and district meetings about school with enrollments of 450 and below having to be in the tournament with teams having 400 more boys. No other division had that much of a difference. When football went to 7 div. with a 70 D1 div, those complaints became louder.
And people have already mentioned enrollment isnt the end all be all for basketball so like I said congrats. Hopefully that ends all the backhanded compliments and thinly veiled messages about "doing things the right way" when schools lose district tittles
Don't congratulate me, I didn't say I liked it only that I see it happening. Have you watched the proposal meeting? The OHSAA does a nice job of explaining the reasons for this and of course they are looking at 800 schools not just yours.
My alma mater has been to regionals and states in D1 and will drop down to D2. This aint that. IMO Martin RPI breakdown of divisions showed how this doesnt affect the larger issue at hand that the coaches and Ads have but tap dance around
cincyhoops
Well-known member
They tried to address that with competitive balance and it was a weak attempt to do so. Competitive balance is largely a waste of time.
Big waste of time
100% facts!
The larger issue you may be speaking off is the transferring and recruitment of players changing schools yearly. IMO that is an ethics issue that the OHSAA cannot solve. It has to be done by each school's administration bending the rules or looking the other way to win a couple games and maybe a trophy.
OHSAA claims that when CB was put into use, 44% of state titles were won by private schools. Since the CB has been used that number has dropped to 33%.
Probably impossible to do. but would love to see those numbers split up by private/public open enrollment and closed public. Not positive it would change, but suspect it would quite a bit
Using current enrollment and CB numbers:
D1 638 & up (64 schools)
D2 457-637 (64 schools)
D3 281-456 (134 schools)
D4 193-280 (134 schools)
D5 143-192 (132 schools)
D6 99-142 (135 schools)
D7 98 & fewer (136 schools)
From OHSAA's presentation.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
| Largest | Smallest | Difference | % Difference | |
| D2 | 637 | 457 | 180 | 39.4% |
| D3 | 456 | 281 | 175 | 62.3% |
| D4 | 280 | 193 | 87 | 45.1% |
| D5 | 192 | 143 | 49 | 34.3% |
| D6 | 142 | 99 | 43 | 43.4% |
I will say it again, 64 teams is too small for a division. Having 2 divisions at 64 teams makes no sense at all. It's like Oprah is running the OHSAA. You get a trophy! You get a trophy! And you get a trophy!!
Why can't they just split D2-D7 equally? They want to compare it to football but they make this one change in a sport where enrollment is a small variable in a school's ability to compete.
There must be a next step that they are hiding as this makes no sense.
Most of the large and mid-sized public schools are closed enrollment. It won’t make a lick of difference