MSHSL adds a 7th class in football

[goldy313]

The MSHSL voted to add a 7th class in football comprised of the states largest 32 teams starting in 2012. This was based on a coaches recomendation due, in large part to just 3 schools; Eden Prairie, Wayzata, and Minnetonka. The original proposal was for 16 teams but was expanded to 32 teams essentially making a metro champion (6A) and an outstate champion (5A). Brainerd may or may not be in 6A and teams that opt up like Cretin and Totino Grace will now have to decide where to play. The Minneapolis and St Paul city schools will still be in lower classes.

How does this relate to hockey? Well the coaches association is pretty sick and tired of football being dominated by 3 teams, this wasn't done because Robbinsdale Armstrong is a large school and a football powerhouse. If class A hockey coaches ever get control of the hockey coaches association all they would have to do is vote to make Class AA the top 72 schools and Viola no more STA which is what football essentially did to EP. Wayzata, and Minnetonka.

[High Flyer]

The MSHSL voted to add a 7th class in football comprised of the states largest 32 teams starting in 2012. This was based on a coaches recomendation due, in large part to just 3 schools; Eden Prairie, Wayzata, and Minnetonka. The original proposal was for 16 teams but was expanded to 32 teams essentially making a metro champion (6A) and an outstate champion (5A). Brainerd may or may not be in 6A and teams that opt up like Cretin and Totino Grace will now have to decide where to play. The Minneapolis and St Paul city schools will still be in lower classes.

How does this relate to hockey? Well the coaches association is pretty sick and tired of football being dominated by 3 teams, this wasn't done because Robbinsdale Armstrong is a large school and a football powerhouse. If class A hockey coaches ever get control of the hockey coaches association all they would have to do is vote to make Class AA the top 72 schools and Viola no more STA which is what football essentially did to EP. Wayzata, and Minnetonka.

or vote to add on more class, just like football...

[HShockeywatcher]

The MSHSL voted to add a 7th class in football comprised of the states largest 32 teams starting in 2012. This was based on a coaches recomendation due, in large part to just 3 schools; Eden Prairie, Wayzata, and Minnetonka. The original proposal was for 16 teams but was expanded to 32 teams essentially making a metro champion (6A) and an outstate champion (5A). Brainerd may or may not be in 6A and teams that opt up like Cretin and Totino Grace will now have to decide where to play. The Minneapolis and St Paul city schools will still be in lower classes.

How does this relate to hockey? Well the coaches association is pretty sick and tired of football being dominated by 3 teams, this wasn't done because Robbinsdale Armstrong is a large school and a football powerhouse. If class A hockey coaches ever get control of the hockey coaches association all they would have to do is vote to make Class AA the top 72 schools and Viola no more STA which is what football essentially did to EP. Wayzata, and Minnetonka.

This was a great post about the situation until it turned from 100% informational. I have been saying for the longest time that hockey would fix it self if it were the top half in AA, or the bottom 64 in A. Etc, etc, etc.

As for the topic, in my opinion this is a very scary thing for MN football. This year there were only 56 teams in 5A, 6 sections with 7, one with 8 and one with 6. One of those is a team, CDH, that opted up. Why was the biggest class, which in the past has been defined as they top 64 + opt ups, now only 55+1? The same is true in 4A.

The states that have more than 5 classes (generally) have systems where you have to qualify for playoffs and have many, many more teams than MN. In Texas, for example, only about 25% of teams (that's 1 in 4) make the playoffs and 12 state champs are crowned.

Found this link to be quite interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mi ... %28Fall%29

Of the last 15 biggest class champions:
Eden Prairie x6
Wayzata x3
CDH x2
Minnetonka x1
Woodbury x1
Lakeville x1
Hastings x1

Very interesting, imo. Is the answer another class? You decide. We live in a day and age where more and more we want everyone to get a trophy. If they aren't good enough, why should they create another class so another school who isn't good enough gets a trophy? How bout we make a class where only EP, Wayzata, CDH and Minnetonka are required to be and anyone else wants to join can? That'd be cool; instead of playoffs they can just play a round robin

A second thought from me is the size of the schools. Lakeville would probably be on that list more had they not split. The three listed public schools are the biggest in the state. 5A football ranges from just over 3000 to just over 1200. Unlike hockey, it is a sport people can play without much experience. Sheer numbers matter a lot, especially in football.

Where did you find this information? It would be interesting to learn the actual information about how/why this happened. Does anyone know if there is some type of coaches/ADs forum out there for them to discuss these issues with their opinions. I know opinions from actual coaches and those in schools are different than the general public, it would be interesting to hear from them.

[DKS1962]

The problem is scheduling for the big Three. Nobody wants to play them.
Adding a class for section play does not solve the problem because teams play a conference schedule. The answer is simple. Get rid of conference football play and have a schedule that revolves around the teams in your section.

SECTION PLAY IS THE ANSWER. That simple

[goldy313]

John Millea has a piece on the change at www.mshsl.org

I was a big sectional scheduling advocate until I heard more details. Sectional scheduling has plus and minuses, one big detractor is the travel in greater Minnesota; Duluth East, Brainerd, St Cloud, Elk River, Buffalo, and Moorhead would be in the same section and that's a budget and program killer. If you're Moorhead and your 4 away games are East, Elk River, Buffalo, and Brainerd you just blew a years athletic budget on 4 games in diesel fuel. It's one thing for metro area schools and a far different dynamic for outstate teams.

Through netwoking with coaches and AD's during the football season and off I have a pretty good idea where the outcry for an adittional class came from and it wasn't from the Apple Valley or Armstrong type schools. It's been the smaller 4A schools and outstate 5A schools. It's not opinion I used to say what could happen in hockey, it's a trend that has happened in hockey by going to 2 classes, wrestling going to 3, baseball has gone from 128 down to 96 in its largest class, now football is adding a class. My point in all of the STA discussion was things always change and the cchange is dictated by the coaches association. It doesn't take as much as you think to get change, a small group of coaches can get it done as we saw when hockey went from 1 class to 2 and we are seeing in football now.

Since going to 6 classes football hasn't been the top 64 schools, it's been 56 plus Cretin who opted up and lately minus St. Paul Central who was allowed to go down. Same in basketball where the top class has been under 64, I beleive only hockey, soccer, and wrestling use the top 64 to determine the top class. Baseball, basketball , football, CC, track, volleyball, don't. (basketball will next year)

[defense]

Instead of being slightly interested in the football state tournement, I now don't care at all. The only thing that will interest me in football at this point will be the conference standings...or just plain the rivalry games. Way to go America....or should I say moms and dads everywhere in America.....
It's funny and more than slightly agravating to listen to some groups of parents. In this case it is the way overly involved moms to a bunch of hockey players who will be squirts next year: "I Know, they should have an A team. But do you really think their good enough???" "I just don't want them to be blown out in every game" " You know, we didn't win a game this year"(all mite scrimmages with very little game coaching, and no score is posted on the board).
Message to all moms and dads: THE BOYS WILL LOSE AT SOME POINT. NOT EVERYONE CAN WIN. LEARNING TO LOSE IS NOT A BAD THING.

[HShockeywatcher]

John Millea has a piece on the change at www.mshsl.org

I was a big sectional scheduling advocate until I heard more details. Sectional scheduling has plus and minuses, one big detractor is the travel in greater Minnesota; Duluth East, Brainerd, St Cloud, Elk River, Buffalo, and Moorhead would be in the same section and that's a budget and program killer. If you're Moorhead and your 4 away games are East, Elk River, Buffalo, and Brainerd you just blew a years athletic budget on 4 games in diesel fuel. It's one thing for metro area schools and a far different dynamic for outstate teams.

Through netwoking with coaches and AD's during the football season and off I have a pretty good idea where the outcry for an adittional class came from and it wasn't from the Apple Valley or Armstrong type schools. It's been the smaller 4A schools and outstate 5A schools. It's not opinion I used to say what could happen in hockey, it's a trend that has happened in hockey by going to 2 classes, wrestling going to 3, baseball has gone from 128 down to 96 in its largest class, now football is adding a class. My point in all of the STA discussion was things always change and the cchange is dictated by the coaches association. It doesn't take as much as you think to get change, a small group of coaches can get it done as we saw when hockey went from 1 class to 2 and we are seeing in football now.

Since going to 6 classes football hasn't been the top 64 schools, it's been 56 plus Cretin who opted up and lately minus St. Paul Central who was allowed to go down. Same in basketball where the top class has been under 64, I beleive only hockey, soccer, and wrestling use the top 64 to determine the top class. Baseball, basketball , football, CC, track, volleyball, don't. (basketball will next year)

If the gas is really going to bust the bank, then there are bigger issues.
Profit sharing of some sort could easily offset this.

Maybe I'm missing something here; how are conferences any closer than sections would be? Sections are done geographically, they should be as close as possible. Or are you saying that conferences allow you to play teams in different classes that are closer?

I don't know how much people (in general) care about seeding, but you routinely see teams with similar records and negligible difference in SOS seeded similarly. Section play would handle this, and with sections and (at least in 4A and 5A) would allow for at least one additional game, or maybe two. Every game played in sectional play matters for seeding.

What is with what seems to be the idea that we want to give more trophies? Or, what goes into the decision for how many classes/teams per class?

Numbers are obviously at play in football, but the idea of blaming others for being good instead of just worrying about getting yourself better is crazy to me.

[HockeyMN1]

Seven classes is ridiculous. Period. There is no reason to have more than three or four. This is a varsity sport, not everyone gets a medal anymore. With only 32 teams in "Seven-A" (how dumb does that sound) 25% of the teams will make state. What? And now we have seven state champions? It's out of hand. Hell, Texas only has five classes for football. We do not, under any circumstance, need two more classes than Texas in football. How anyone could support this is beyond me (unless they are just sick of seeing EP and Wayzata winning, in which case I would suggest growing a pair).

[HShockeywatcher]

Seven classes is ridiculous. Period. There is no reason to have more than three or four. This is a varsity sport, not everyone gets a medal anymore. With only 32 teams in "Seven-A" (how dumb does that sound) 25% of the teams will make state. What? And now we have seven state champions? It's out of hand. Hell, Texas only has five classes for football. We do not, under any circumstance, need two more classes than Texas in football. How anyone could support this is beyond me (unless they are just sick of seeing EP and Wayzata winning, in which case I would suggest growing a pair).

Texas has 7-man and 1A thru 5A. Each district has four teams that make the playoffs; the top two by enrollment go to one tournament, #3 and #4 by enrollment go to another tournament. They crown 12 state champs in football. With seven classes in MN, the biggest would be 6A, not 7A.

That being said, agree 100%. How about 3 classes, divided evenly, top half of teams make playoffs and teams who are tired of losing need to grow a pair and improve their program?

[defense]

In football you need just about half the classes we have now. The reason I say this is because you cannot take nine man out. I would be ok with 3 eleven man classes, but no more. I also cannot say that we only need one class in football, but not a twin cities class...that is bull.

[BodyShots]

When I went to high school, you had to play on a varsity team to earn a letter. Now kids can get letters for grades, weight lifting, debate, chess clubs, etc...

P.C. has made us all softies.

[EHSHack]

When I went to high school, you had to play on a varsity team to earn a letter. Now kids can get letters for grades, weight lifting, debate, chess clubs, etc...

P.C. has made us all softies.

You still have to be on varsity to get a letter.... Yeah seriously why reward kids that arent athletes? Kids that play chess and get good grades? Obviously going nowhere in society...

[The X]

Instead of being slightly interested in the football state tournement, I now don't care at all. The only thing that will interest me in football at this point will be the conference standings...or just plain the rivalry games. Way to go America....or should I say moms and dads everywhere in America.....
It's funny and more than slightly agravating to listen to some groups of parents. In this case it is the way overly involved moms to a bunch of hockey players who will be squirts next year: "I Know, they should have an A team. But do you really think their good enough???" "I just don't want them to be blown out in every game" " You know, we didn't win a game this year"(all mite scrimmages with very little game coaching, and no score is posted on the board).
Message to all moms and dads: THE BOYS WILL LOSE AT SOME POINT. NOT EVERYONE CAN WIN. LEARNING TO LOSE IS NOT A BAD THING.

I agree that 7 classes in football is ridiculous and out of hand. But.... it's no different than Breck, Blake or STA staying in the lower class in hockey. It's still all about getting a trophy. Not sure why lots of people on here talk about hockey Mom's, in my experience the hockey Dad's are the ones who try to live their lives through their Son. The hockey Mom's never played the game and it's not about winning and losing to them as much as the Dad's. To your point Defense, staying down in hockey is just like the Mom's you refer too. JMHO.

[Oldtimehockeyguy23]

When I went to high school, you had to play on a varsity team to earn a letter. Now kids can get letters for grades, weight lifting, debate, chess clubs, etc...

P.C. has made us all softies.

You still have to be on varsity to get a letter.... Yeah seriously why reward kids that arent athletes? Kids that play chess and get good grades? Obviously going nowhere in society...

not true. kids can get letters in cross country by attending every practice... same with track. In football at Wayzata this year I heard almost 100 kids lettered............................................

[deacon64]

ridiculous

[hockeyfan893]

[quote="BodyShots"]When I went to high school, you had to play on a varsity team to earn a letter. Now kids can get letters for grades, weight lifting, debate, chess clubs, etc...

P.C. has made us all softies. [/quote]

Absolutely disagree 100%. As hard as some refuse to believe it, typically it's the kids that letter in Varsity debate, speech, student-congress, academics, etc that will go on to contribute the most to society and attend the top colleges in the country. Am I saying that no athlete is capable of doing so? Absolutely not. But the vast, vast majority of even high school athletes will not earn a pay check by playing a sport. It's not politically correct to reward someone for success in an academic extra-curricular. In fact, I would argue it's more warranted to do so.

[BodyShots]

When I went to high school, you had to play on a varsity team to earn a letter. Now kids can get letters for grades, weight lifting, debate, chess clubs, etc...

P.C. has made us all softies.

Absolutely disagree 100%. As hard as some refuse to believe it, typically it's the kids that letter in Varsity debate, speech, student-congress, academics, etc that will go on to contribute the most to society and attend the top colleges in the country. Am I saying that no athlete is capable of doing so? Absolutely not. But the vast, vast majority of even high school athletes will not earn a pay check by playing a sport. It's not politically correct to reward someone for success in an academic extra-curricular. In fact, I would argue it's more warranted to do so.

You lost me on this one.

The topic is about adding another class to football. Others chime in that the MSHSL is getting carried away with the number of trophies being handed out for all the differnt classes of football, hockey, basketball, etc. I comment that the same affect is happening with earning a letter. What used to be a small group of letter winners in now becoming common place.

What does my reference have anything to do with who is contributing the most to society and attend the top colleges in the country?

[darkhorse]

You lost me on this one.

The topic is about adding another class to football. Others chime in that the MSHSL is getting carried away with the number of trophies being handed out for all the differnt classes of football, hockey, basketball, etc. I comment that the same affect is happening with earning a letter. What used to be a small group of letter winners in now becoming common place.

What does my reference have anything to do with who is contributing the most to society and attend the top colleges in the country?

IMO, your post sounded as though kids shouldn't be getting varsity letters for things like debate, grades, chess club, etc since they aren't "real sports." No idea if that was your intent but that's how it came across. Seems hockeyfan893 was just providing examples why we should encourage kids to participate in academic activities much more than what we currently do.

To keep this on topic, adding another class to high school football is not the right call. I have no idea what the exact rationale was or who was really pushing this but getting more kids medals or a trophy isn't always the answer. The sooner kids can learn that they (along with everyone else in the world) will fail the better off they'll be in the real world. More focus should be put on handling those losses with character and how to pick yourself back up.

[hockeyfan893]

BodyShots, with all due respect I think you're perfectly capable of understanding this one.

You made a political correctness claim about the "softness" of recognizing the accomplishments in academic / non-athletic extracurricular activities.

My point is that the way you phrased it seems to belittle those accomplishments, as if because they're not athletic they're not warranted equivalent accolades. I then went on to inject my own analysis / opinion (yes, how dare I) that giving the same if not more accolades to those who succeed in academics / non-athletic extracurricular is more warranted BECAUSE of the fact that they will go on to the top colleges and contribute the most to society, in general.

[HShockeywatcher]

To keep this on topic, adding another class to high school football is not the right call. I have no idea what the exact rationale was or who was really pushing this but getting more kids medals or a trophy isn't always the answer. The sooner kids can learn that they (along with everyone else in the world) will fail the better off they'll be in the real world. More focus should be put on handling those losses with character and how to pick yourself back up.

Well, in the MSHSL everyone makes the playoffs in most team sports. Not all, but most. The idea seems silly. Why not have one class with 32 teams (as those are considerably larger than the rest), then two or three more where everyone doesn't make the playoffs?

[BodyShots]

BodyShots, with all due respect I think you're perfectly capable of understanding this one.

You made a political correctness claim about the "softness" of recognizing the accomplishments in academic / non-athletic extracurricular activities.

My point is that the way you phrased it seems to belittle those accomplishments, as if because they're not athletic they're not warranted equivalent accolades. I then went on to inject my own analysis / opinion (yes, how dare I) that giving the same if not more accolades to those who succeed in academics / non-athletic extracurricular is more warranted BECAUSE of the fact that they will go on to the top colleges and contribute the most to society, in general.

In no way did my comments intend to belittle anybody. When I was in High School, I was an honor student and received a tassel that I wore on my cap during graduation ceremonies. Now if you are an honor student, you get a letter. We used to lift weights to increase our strength and help us to handle the physical play of the other teams. Now if you lift weights, you get a letter. We played chess because we enjoyed it and liked the competive strategy involved in the game. Now they get a letter.

We give out trophies to many champions at different levels where as in the past we used to give out only one trophy. We also now give out many letters that in the past only a few received. We live in a society that thinks the more accolades that we can hand out, the better off eveyone will be.

You want to know the real reason for these changes? Because some company is selling this stuff, and the more they sell, the better their profits. The more letters handed out, means more letter jackets sold. More letter jackets sold, means more patches sold. More patches sold, means more business sewing these patches on. Its all about the almighty $$$$$.

[darkhorse]

In no way did my comments intend to belittle anybody. When I was in High School, I was an honor student and received a tassel that I wore on my cap during graduation ceremonies. Now if you are an honor student, you get a letter. We used to lift weights to increase our strength and help us to handle the physical play of the other teams. Now if you lift weights, you get a letter. We played chess because we enjoyed it and liked the competive strategy involved in the game. Now they get a letter.

We give out trophies to many champions at different levels where as in the past we used to give out only one trophy. We also now give out many letters that in the past only a few received. We live in a society that thinks the more accolades that we can hand out, the better off eveyone will be.

You want to know the real reason for these changes? Because some company is selling this stuff, and the more they sell, the better their profits. The more letters handed out, means more letter jackets sold. More letter jackets sold, means more patches sold. More patches sold, means more business sewing these patches on. Its all about the almighty $$$$$.

Agreed! I do think we should encourage academic success as much as possible and if that means handing out letters for those activities so be it. But you're right on about kids getting trophies no matter how well they did. As I already said, the sooner we can teach these kids they aren't always going to win and life isn't fair, the better off they'll be later in life.

[HShockeywatcher]

In no way did my comments intend to belittle anybody. When I was in High School, I was an honor student and received a tassel that I wore on my cap during graduation ceremonies. Now if you are an honor student, you get a letter. We used to lift weights to increase our strength and help us to handle the physical play of the other teams. Now if you lift weights, you get a letter. We played chess because we enjoyed it and liked the competive strategy involved in the game. Now they get a letter.

We give out trophies to many champions at different levels where as in the past we used to give out only one trophy. We also now give out many letters that in the past only a few received. We live in a society that thinks the more accolades that we can hand out, the better off eveyone will be.

You want to know the real reason for these changes? Because some company is selling this stuff, and the more they sell, the better their profits. The more letters handed out, means more letter jackets sold. More letter jackets sold, means more patches sold. More patches sold, means more business sewing these patches on. Its all about the almighty $$$$$.

Agreed! I do think we should encourage academic success as much as possible and if that means handing out letters for those activities so be it. But you're right on about kids getting trophies no matter how well they did. As I already said, the sooner we can teach these kids they aren't always going to win and life isn't fair, the better off they'll be later in life.

From the sounds of it, I'm a bit younger than Bodyshots, and even in my lifetime that has changed. Kids go out of sports and instead of asking what they can do to get better, they ask what they need to do to get the letter. What happened to simply doing things for the sake of doing them?

I don't mind letters given out for more things, but they are again given out more loosely. It's the same thing with trophies.

[BodyShots]

In no way did my comments intend to belittle anybody. When I was in High School, I was an honor student and received a tassel that I wore on my cap during graduation ceremonies. Now if you are an honor student, you get a letter. We used to lift weights to increase our strength and help us to handle the physical play of the other teams. Now if you lift weights, you get a letter. We played chess because we enjoyed it and liked the competive strategy involved in the game. Now they get a letter.

We give out trophies to many champions at different levels where as in the past we used to give out only one trophy. We also now give out many letters that in the past only a few received. We live in a society that thinks the more accolades that we can hand out, the better off eveyone will be.

You want to know the real reason for these changes? Because some company is selling this stuff, and the more they sell, the better their profits. The more letters handed out, means more letter jackets sold. More letter jackets sold, means more patches sold. More patches sold, means more business sewing these patches on. Its all about the almighty $$$$$.

Agreed! I do think we should encourage academic success as much as possible and if that means handing out letters for those activities so be it. But you're right on about kids getting trophies no matter how well they did. As I already said, the sooner we can teach these kids they aren't always going to win and life isn't fair, the better off they'll be later in life.

From the sounds of it, I'm a bit younger than Bodyshots, and even in my lifetime that has changed. Kids go out of sports and instead of asking what they can do to get better, they ask what they need to do to get the letter. What happened to simply doing things for the sake of doing them?

I don't mind letters given out for more things, but they are again given out more loosely. It's the same thing with trophies.

Interesting. From reading all of your posts, I had the feeling that I was quite a bit younger than you.

[HShockeywatcher]

Agreed! I do think we should encourage academic success as much as possible and if that means handing out letters for those activities so be it. But you're right on about kids getting trophies no matter how well they did. As I already said, the sooner we can teach these kids they aren't always going to win and life isn't fair, the better off they'll be later in life.

From the sounds of it, I'm a bit younger than Bodyshots, and even in my lifetime that has changed. Kids go out of sports and instead of asking what they can do to get better, they ask what they need to do to get the letter. What happened to simply doing things for the sake of doing them?

I don't mind letters given out for more things, but they are again given out more loosely. It's the same thing with trophies.

Interesting. From reading all of your posts, I had the feeling that I was quite a bit younger than you.

You read all of my posts? You must have gained much knowledge from all those essays