EXCLUSIVE: FHSAA Classification Task Force Committee proposes changes to classification system to help address competitive balance

[181pl]

9 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Si.

gen x here. 1968. just snuck through 

[181pl]

Silly, silly plan btw

[DarterBlue2]

5 minutes ago, 181pl said:

gen x here. 1968. just snuck through 

I got you beat by a dozen years. 

[PinellasFB]

I am still trying to understand how an open division works.  Is this just for playoffs only?  So if you are in 7A district 10, for example, and your power ranking is one of the top X teams in the state, then you are forced into the open playoffs and can't play for the 7A title?

[Hwy17]

46 minutes ago, PinellasFB said:

I am still trying to understand how an open division works.  Is this just for playoffs only?  So if you are in 7A district 10, for example, and your power ranking is one of the top X teams in the state, then you are forced into the open playoffs and can't play for the 7A title?

That's how I read it

[DarterBlue2]

50 minutes ago, PinellasFB said:

I am still trying to understand how an open division works.  Is this just for playoffs only?  So if you are in 7A district 10, for example, and your power ranking is one of the top X teams in the state, then you are forced into the open playoffs and can't play for the 7A title?

 

3 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:

That's how I read it

If that's correct, you are punishing success. I could support an open division if: 1. It consisted of teams that wanted to play in a super division. 2. If it was created over several years within the context of a promotion and relegation system that ended, say, three or fours years in with the top 32 teams playing in a super division with half of them making the playoffs. 

[Hwy17]

5 hours ago, DarterBlue2 said:

 

If that's correct, you are punishing success. I could support an open division if: 1. It consisted of teams that wanted to play in a super division. 2. If it was created over several years within the context of a promotion and relegation system that ended, say, three or fours years in with the top 32 teams playing in a super division with half of them making the playoffs. 

Imagine this: Let's say a really good program has been coming close but hasn't won a championship in their respective class yet. Then finally they got the team that just might win it, but by chance the computer ranks then 32 in the state. I for one would find that unfair. Especially if my team was 5a or 4a.

[Longtime Observer]

I don't think past results should have additional weight in a rankings system. They already will be factored in through human bias and/or computer algorithm.  

[gatorman-uf]

I will continue to beat the drum of a promotion/relegation system as the only fair to create classifications and not run amok of the state legislature's love of private school/recruiting/transfers.

Use the MaxPreps Rankings
7A and 6A - 32 Teams
5A and 4A - 64 Teams
3A and 2A - 128 Teams
1A - Rural - 34 Teams

7A and 6A

• all teams make playoffs
• required to play 7 games against other 7A or 6A teams.
• Bottom 4 teams move down a class, top 4 move up
• Seeding based on rankings

5A and 4A

• 32 teams make playoffs
• 8 team district, 8 districts
• district champs and 6 wildcards per region
• Bottom 8 teams move down, top 8 team move up (only 4 move up to 6A)

3A and 2A

• 32 teams make playoffs
• 8 team district, 16 districts,
• district champs and 4 wildcards per region
• Bottom 8 teams move down, top 8 team move up

Rankings based on the previous 4 years rankings, reclassification every year.
As a team gets better, their competition gets better, but a team that has a great class of seniors for one season doesn't lose out on a chance of a state title.

Someone is going to complain that the 3A/2A teams don't deserve titles, who cares? They had to win a bunch of games throughout the season and post-season to win the championship. 

The best part is that this can be applied to all team sports, which means that if you have a great football team but a lousy basketball team than you can be in different classifications and not feel boxed in for one sport.

[PinellasFB]

13 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

Imagine this: Let's say a really good program has been coming close but hasn't won a championship in their respective class yet. Then finally they got the team that just might win it, but by chance the computer ranks then 32 in the state. I for one would find that unfair. Especially if my team was 5a or 4a.

Yes this is the exact problem I have with this proposed open division.  As usual the FSHAA fixes something by proposing an even worse solution.  They are avoiding the root cause of all issues and that is recruiting/transfers.  It seems simple enough to separate school choice from athletics such that anyone is free to transfer for academics but they must sit out a year of athletics unless they moved to that school zone?  This doesn't solve the private school unfairness but just throw them into their own athletic association and be done with it.  Screw em.

[Ray Icaza]

1 hour ago, PinellasFB said:

Yes this is the exact problem I have with this proposed open division.  As usual the FSHAA fixes something by proposing an even worse solution.  They are avoiding the root cause of all issues and that is recruiting/transfers.  It seems simple enough to separate school choice from athletics such that anyone is free to transfer for academics but they must sit out a year of athletics unless they moved to that school zone?  This doesn't solve the private school unfairness but just throw them into their own athletic association and be done with it.  Screw em.

THANK YOU!! That has been my simple solution since I began participating on this forum.  All these other gymnastics being proposed have their own set of unintended consequences.  I have no beef against privates, but they operate under a different set of rules, thus should play in their own league. 

[Dr. D]

Tennessee has one division with 6 classes for public schools, and a separate division with 3 classes for private schools.  It works great.  Unfortunately in the current political environment, there is a zero percent chance that such a plan would ever be implemented in Florida. 

[Longtime Observer]

As long as there is open enrollment, public schools are not at a disadvantage (based on rules, anyway) to private schools. They actually have an advantage based on the rules. The reason why some privates are dominating and will continue to dominate is they are often seen as superior educational experiences to their public counterparts. Even if there were no sports, STA would be seen as a much better school than Dillard or Fort Lauderdale high.

The other key factor is population, especially density. The more talent there is within just a few miles of a campus, the easier it is to stockpile all-star teams. It isn't totally wrong to try to group teams according to this factor. The problem is a county-wide approach is not ideal. Lakeland is more "urban" than either Lake Wales or even Seffner (Armwood)! But Armwood happens to be in Hillsborough county, so they play in "metro" while Lakeland and Lake Wales play in "suburban" classes. You could say the same things about schools in Bradenton compared to, say Lennard High. There's a lot more talent within a few miles of Manatee High than there is near Lennard, who is stuck in "metro" due to being over the Hillsborough county line. 

[Floridaatlantic1]

I told everyone that the metro suburb idea would not really help many teams except elite suburban ones. Committee is a joke. Promotion and demotion is only way to get true parity but elite teams will never go for it because they like their state rings and dont want to be challenged for them. We know that most elite teams recruit and should have to fight it out among the other cheaters. go by last 4 year average and bump top 15% up each year and bottom 15% down a year and you will get fair and balanced. 

[PinellasFB]

9 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

As long as there is open enrollment, public schools are not at a disadvantage (based on rules, anyway) to private schools. They actually have an advantage based on the rules. The reason why some privates are dominating and will continue to dominate is they are often seen as superior educational experiences to their public counterparts. Even if there were no sports, STA would be seen as a much better school than Dillard or Fort Lauderdale high.

I *guarantee* you that a majority of high level players give zero shits about their education.  In fact, this is where the privates are at a huge advantage because they can do whatever they want with respect to education and create "athlete friendly" curriculums where they hardly even have to attend classes and can workout and watch film throughout the day.  Do you think anybody on the IMG travelling squad is actually a real student during the day like any other player would be at a public school?  Hell naw.

Mostly though the private schools are at an advantage because of budget.  They will always have the best facilities and top notch coaches since they can actually pay them what they're worth instead of a measly public school stipend.

[gatorman-uf]

9 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

I told everyone that the metro suburb idea would not really help many teams except elite suburban ones. Committee is a joke. Promotion and demotion is only way to get true parity but elite teams will never go for it because they like their state rings and dont want to be challenged for them. We know that most elite teams recruit and should have to fight it out among the other cheaters. go by last 4 year average and bump top 15% up each year and bottom 15% down a year and you will get fair and balanced. 

I agree about promotion/relegation, but I disagree that elite schools would be against it. I don't think a school like STA, Miami Central, Venice, Dr. Phillips, Cocoa, Chaminade want to steam roll teams sorry teams to success, I think those programs (once forced into the elite classification) would admit that they like it more. I think the problem will be those near elite teams will be upset, those good (and occasionally great) schools will feel that the system is stacked against them.

Are there travel logistic problems with an elite division, probably... but I think schools and communities can overcome some of those problems with a bit of creativity.

[Longtime Observer]

11 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

I *guarantee* you that a majority of high level players give zero shits about their education.  In fact, this is where the privates are at a huge advantage because they can do whatever they want with respect to education and create "athlete friendly" curriculums where they hardly even have to attend classes and can workout and watch film throughout the day.  Do you think anybody on the IMG travelling squad is actually a real student during the day like any other player would be at a public school?  Hell naw.

Mostly though the private schools are at an advantage because of budget.  They will always have the best facilities and top notch coaches since they can actually pay them what they're worth instead of a measly public school stipend.

I think you're mostly speaking of the more "fly-by-night" private schools. IMG, Saint Frances in Baltimore and many of these new "schools" very likely do shady things like you mention. But, most of the private schools that are powers are legitimate, rigorous schools that won't take students who won't do the right things and/or take legitimate classes. The shady schools like those mentioned above aren't eligible for state playoffs anyway.

[BigBoyBall]

Why can't we just adopt the Texas or Georgia model and call it a day!!!!!!

[Dr. D]

Here are the states that use the current Florida model for selecting/seeding playoff teams:  Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa, Louisiana, North Carolina.  These are some of the states that use large districts, head-to-head, decide-it-on-the-field process for selecting/seeding playoff teams:  Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama.  Which group has more in common with Florida?  It's not that hard, but Florida is going in the opposite direction.   

[SportsFan]

47 minutes ago, Dr. D said:

Here are the states that use the current Florida model for selecting/seeding playoff teams:  Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa, Louisiana, North Carolina.  These are some of the states that use large districts, head-to-head, decide-it-on-the-field process for selecting/seeding playoff teams:  Texas, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama.  Which group has more in common with Florida?  It's not that hard, but Florida is going in the opposite direction.   

They could have kept the RPI formula for seeding and wild cards but districts should be decided on the field 

[Perspective]

5 minutes ago, SportsFan said:

They could have kept the RPI formula for seeding and wild cards but districts should be decided on the field 

I generally agree.  

Quick question:  how would you handle two-team and three-team ties?   Head-to-head ?   This would work for a two-team tie, but what about those situations where A beats B, B beats C and C beats A?  If both/all the teams would otherwise make the playoffs, we're only talking about seeding (but it could be the difference between getting a 4 seed and hosting a game vs. getting the 8th seed and playing the number 1 seed on the road).  But there could also be situations where only the district winner makes the playoffs and the other one or two teams would not.  I think I'd rather see a 1-quarter playoff on a Monday than have the 'who makes the playoffs and who doesn't' decision left to the computers. 

[181pl]

On 10/6/2023 at 1:41 PM, Longtime Observer said:

As long as there is open enrollment, public schools are not at a disadvantage (based on rules, anyway) to private schools. They actually have an advantage based on the rules. The reason why some privates are dominating and will continue to dominate is they are often seen as superior educational experiences to their public counterparts. Even if there were no sports, STA would be seen as a much better school than Dillard or Fort Lauderdale high.

The other key factor is population, especially density. The more talent there is within just a few miles of a campus, the easier it is to stockpile all-star teams. It isn't totally wrong to try to group teams according to this factor. The problem is a county-wide approach is not ideal. Lakeland is more "urban" than either Lake Wales or even Seffner (Armwood)! But Armwood happens to be in Hillsborough county, so they play in "metro" while Lakeland and Lake Wales play in "suburban" classes. You could say the same things about schools in Bradenton compared to, say Lennard High. There's a lot more talent within a few miles of Manatee High than there is near Lennard, who is stuck in "metro" due to being over the Hillsborough county line. 

Public schools absolutely are at a disadvantage. If your kid gets the chance to play for say Berekely Prep or Jesuit, the top academic schools out there, and play for a great team in a private school setting (and go for free or reduced tuition), you don't think that is an advantage? The same kid might have a choice between Blake, Middleton, or Jefferson on the public side (or any number of otehr schools) and it's no contest. They'll pick the private school every time. 25 years ago or so, private schools did not emphasize football (basketball once in a while). Now they all want to be St. Thomas Aquinas. 

Also, public schools at capacity cannot get transfers. So you get a very highly rated public school like Plant that is filled to its gills with school zone kids and they can't get open transfers.

Private schools still have a big, big advantage.

I would do 4 large public school classes and three private school classes (two normal classes and an open class for STA, IMG (sorry there's no difference), Chaminade, AHP, etc. etc. etc.

[Longtime Observer]

56 minutes ago, 181pl said:

Public schools absolutely are at a disadvantage. If your kid gets the chance to play for say Berekely Prep or Jesuit, the top academic schools out there, and play for a great team in a private school setting (and go for free or reduced tuition), you don't think that is an advantage? The same kid might have a choice between Blake, Middleton, or Jefferson on the public side (or any number of otehr schools) and it's no contest. They'll pick the private school every time. 25 years ago or so, private schools did not emphasize football (basketball once in a while). Now they all want to be St. Thomas Aquinas. 

Also, public schools at capacity cannot get transfers. So you get a very highly rated public school like Plant that is filled to its gills with school zone kids and they can't get open transfers.

Private schools still have a big, big advantage.

I would do 4 large public school classes and three private school classes (two normal classes and an open class for STA, IMG (sorry there's no difference), Chaminade, AHP, etc. etc. etc.

What you describe is an advantage in attracting students based on doing a better job or being a better school. I don't think many people have a problem with that sort of advantage. Alabama and Georgia have an advantage in football recruiting...because they've won spectacularly with the current coaching staffs. Publix has such an advantage over other grocery chains because people feel they run a better business. Etc.  

It appears to be rare for a public school to be so in demand as to be at capacity. But, if/when a school like Plant ends up at capacity, it is in part because the school has already attracted many students from beyond its boundaries. So, the school does end up with an advantage in the form of better students. They just may not be of the stud football player variety. 

[SportsFan]

On 10/9/2023 at 1:28 PM, Perspective said:

I generally agree.  

Quick question:  how would you handle two-team and three-team ties?   Head-to-head ?   This would work for a two-team tie, but what about those situations where A beats B, B beats C and C beats A?  If both/all the teams would otherwise make the playoffs, we're only talking about seeding (but it could be the difference between getting a 4 seed and hosting a game vs. getting the 8th seed and playing the number 1 seed on the road).  But there could also be situations where only the district winner makes the playoffs and the other one or two teams would not.  I think I'd rather see a 1-quarter playoff on a Monday than have the 'who makes the playoffs and who doesn't' decision left to the computers. 

Counter point:

At least In one system the teams in the district are afforded the opportunity to win it on the field, go undefeated in district get a playoff spot 

In the FHSAA proposal you can win a district without playing a single team in your district, I know which of the two options I would take 

[SportsFan]

On 10/9/2023 at 1:28 PM, Perspective said:

I generally agree.  

Quick question:  how would you handle two-team and three-team ties?   Head-to-head ?   This would work for a two-team tie, but what about those situations where A beats B, B beats C and C beats A?  If both/all the teams would otherwise make the playoffs, we're only talking about seeding (but it could be the difference between getting a 4 seed and hosting a game vs. getting the 8th seed and playing the number 1 seed on the road).  But there could also be situations where only the district winner makes the playoffs and the other one or two teams would not.  I think I'd rather see a 1-quarter playoff on a Monday than have the 'who makes the playoffs and who doesn't' decision left to the computers. 

Also could use point differential in district games if you don't want the RPI format to decide it 

Anything better than what the FHSAA has on the table currently