|
Post by loJic on Dec 11, 2013 15:54:11 GMT -6
Because I'm too lazy, can somebody point me in the direction of the most recent enrollment numbers that the LHSAA uses to put teams in their classes?
|
|
|
Post by rlb2024 on Dec 11, 2013 20:50:45 GMT -6
My recommendation to the Executive Committee would be to amend this section as follows:
34. Amend Section 18-Soccer, by amending Rule 18.3.4, Page 114 of the 2013-14 LHSAA Bylaws, to be worded as follows:
18.3.4 The NFHS rules concerning soccer uniform colors will NOT be mandatory in Louisiana.
As a soccer parent, a referee, and a fan, I can see no justification whatsoever for this. Here we are trying to build soccer in Louisiana, and along comes a stupid rule like this that makes school soccer programs spend what little resources they have on new kits. And now they want to add FINES? Really??? Does the Committee not realize that for some programs this expense could mean the end of the program? Do they even care?
I've seen the handout from NFHS that shows the new uniform rules. All white shirts with no trim, and solid white socks? What a load of garbage. Part of what makes the beautiful game beautiful is the colors of the uniforms. Why undo that so that a team has to look like it came out of the old generic section of the grocery store?? Our school has beautiful, relatively new shirts and socks that are not useable now because they have a red stripe on them. And red is the school color -- who would have ever thought that you can't use your school color in your uniform when you're playing at your own school? My only conclusion is that the NFHS is either 1) totally clueless about soccer, 2) somewhat corrupt and getting money from the apparel manufacturers to do this, or 3) a combination of both. (That's the most likely conclusion in my book.)
We recently played our first game in our new home kits with the solid white socks. On a damp grass field. In Louisiana. In the wintertime. Will we be fined at our next game because our socks aren't white anymore? Because I can assure you, ours aren't -- and they never will be again.
If the reasoning is that referees can't tell light blue from red on the pitch, I can assure you that's not an issue. I have a lot more issue with schools that use red paint on a green field to differentiate soccer markings from football.
As has been said earlier in this thread, I know it's too late for most of the current schools who have already had to needlessly spend hundreds of dollars to meet these rules. For schools looking to start a new program, though, this expense could mean that the program can't get started. And who does that hurt?
OK, enough of my rant. I guess I'm getting tired of stupidity in my old age.
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 11, 2013 20:57:31 GMT -6
Love it rlb!
Get this, white isn't even a secondary color in our official school colors.... Navy, orange, and grey! What else makes this even worst, is why mess with the HOME team color? If you need to make one mandatory white, make it the visitors. Let home teams keep their traditions in a sport that is very hard to even get them started in high school! No more clockwork orange? What about the breast cancer awareness games? Will we fine those schools doing a great thing for BCA and wearing special pink jerseys and socks? Its a joke! I have been against this from day 1. We paid for our uniforms. We can afford it due to our Copa tournament being successful in most years... But it wiped us out and we can't afford new goals. And what about the teams that can't really afford it. Sure they can wear white t shirts with numbers, but would we tell football or basketball or baseball the same?
|
|
|
Post by CoachD on Dec 12, 2013 7:38:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 12, 2013 8:23:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by chspc2 on Dec 12, 2013 9:12:05 GMT -6
Justification - Part 2
Ok, for you number people.......I agree that the numbers are low, but let's look at other sports. How many 5A select schools played for a state championship in football this year? ............10 How many C, B, and 1A schools compete for state championships in cross country? 6 in Class C, 17 in Class B, and 13 in Class 1A (boys)......5, 14 and 11 respectively for the girls. Powerlifting........new sanctioned sport last year.......Division V, 10 teams competed for a state title (boys), 8 for the girls.
Small schools have unique challenges when it comes to fielding a soccer teams. 1A, B, and C schools many times have girls playing on their boys teams.........how many 1A schools can't field a team until their football team has finished the payoffs......and I'm not saying fielding a competitive team, I mean having enough players to have 11 on the field! Look at Country Day this year and almost pulling out of the Copa Acadiana due to football team still playing in playoffs.
It wasn't a typo for doing it this year.......I figured if football could get it organized, so could we. There is time to discuss and if voted in, the only things that would need to be done would be to separate the schools at the end......and figure when the championship games would be.
Again, I'm looking at growth in HS soccer. I believe this is something that needs to be done in order for growth in small schools playing soccer.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 12, 2013 9:58:00 GMT -6
Here's my beef.
I don't mind having separate competitive fields of play. What I do mind is separating them by enrollment numbers. Because if we're playing oh poor me I don't have the numbers because we're a small school, then what about the schools that have small numbers because lack of interest?
Listen, I get it. Soccer isn't special so it shouldn't be treated any different than the other sports. But they dynamics of soccer ARE different and it SHOULDN'T be treated like other sports.
I'm all for the 1A class doing their separate thing. I understand that those teams have a very difficult time fielding teams, even when they have all their players. But if you take into consideration that there are some 2A, 3A, 4A and 5A schools that are on the same competitive level, if not less, than some of the 1A schools then what's the difference? This is not to pick on anybody, just an example. But if Episcopal Acadiana played Landry-Walker it would probably be an 8-0 stomping. A 1A school stomping a 5A school. Where's the comfort blanket for the 5A school? Why should they continue to get skull drug up and down the field while, again, schools with smaller numbers, yet better talent, are skipping away to a trophy?
St. Louis doesn't need to be playing in a 3A playoff. If anything they should be playing with the top dogs. Southwood doesn't need to be in a district, let alone a playoff, with teams such as Captain Shreve, Caddo, etc... Higgins doesn't need to be getting monkey stomped by King 20-0 anymore.
I like the idea but hate the enrollment card always being played.
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 12, 2013 10:11:56 GMT -6
A solution to this.
For a city like New Orleans that has a good amount of 1A schools and some programs that are trying to get the hang of soccer in their schools I suggest a city league.
Example: Patrick Taylor Ridgewood Lutheran Ecole Classique International School of NO Landry-Walker Sarah T. Reed Karr Warren Easton
All of these schools could be placed in a league that just has them playing themselves. A few are coed and a few are just soccer programs trying to start up. If at some point one of these schools starts to gain traction then they can be thrown to the wolves in state competition. But this is a far more better approach towards development and growth for this sport IMO.
|
|
|
Post by chspc2 on Dec 12, 2013 10:44:24 GMT -6
Part 3
There are a lot of reasons why some schools are better than others within the same classification. I get it. Yes, there are some 5A schools that I can beat, plenty of 4A schools for that matter. and there are plenty of 1A football teams that can beat bigger schools. If enrollment didn't make a difference, then why does the LHSAA break out the schools into classifications? The easiest way to even things out is based on size.......the more students a school has, the better chance of getting better athletes. I am not going to get into recruiting, location of school, etc.........yes those are factors, but there are LHSAA rules that govern all that (no laughing!!).
We can never do something like a relegation, it just can't work at the high school level. It would be nice, but not feasible.
I have been coaching high school soccer for 14 yrs, first two as an assistant, the last 12 as a head coach. I have seen a lot of changes in high soccer since the beginning. There was a time when 3 divisions (for that matter, two divisions) made sense. I think we are now at a point where we can do something maybe a little out of the box, to improve it more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2013 11:09:20 GMT -6
Here's my beef. I don't mind having separate competitive fields of play. What I do mind is separating them by enrollment numbers. Because if we're playing oh poor me I don't have the numbers because we're a small school, then what about the schools that have small numbers because lack of interest? Listen, I get it. Soccer isn't special so it shouldn't be treated any different than the other sports. But they dynamics of soccer ARE different and it SHOULDN'T be treated like other sports. I'm all for the 1A class doing their separate thing. I understand that those teams have a very difficult time fielding teams, even when they have all their players. But if you take into consideration that there are some 2A, 3A, 4A and 5A schools that are on the same competitive level, if not less, than some of the 1A schools then what's the difference? This is not to pick on anybody, just an example. But if Episcopal Acadiana played Landry-Walker it would probably be an 8-0 stomping. A 1A school stomping a 5A school. Where's the comfort blanket for the 5A school? Why should they continue to get skull drug up and down the field while, again, schools with smaller numbers, yet better talent, are skipping away to a trophy? St. Louis doesn't need to be playing in a 3A playoff. If anything they should be playing with the top dogs. Southwood doesn't need to be in a district, let alone a playoff, with teams such as Captain Shreve, Caddo, etc... Higgins doesn't need to be getting monkey stomped by King 20-0 anymore. I like the idea but hate the enrollment card always being played. Just my two cents. Completely agree. Enrollment figures have little bearing on individual team quality. The common sense solution is to have A, B and C schools grouped into a "Division 4". Just because it is done in other sports doesn't make it right. Again, instead of focusing on creating more trophy opportunities, the way to grow the sport is to increase participation at the younger ages (including elementary/middle school teams/leagues) and have a higher quality and deeper player pool coming into these hs programs..regardless of size. There are very few teams that succeed year after year depending solely on athletes from other sports to make their teams successful in district and certainly postseason play. In other words, what needs to happen is more kids need to choose soccer instead of throwball, basketball, baseball, powerlifting, bass fishing, etc. may sound harsh. But that's reality.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Dec 12, 2013 12:06:53 GMT -6
A solution to this. For a city like New Orleans that has a good amount of 1A schools and some programs that are trying to get the hang of soccer in their schools I suggest a city league. Example: Patrick Taylor Ridgewood Lutheran Ecole Classique International School of NO Landry-Walker Sarah T. Reed Karr Warren Easton All of these schools could be placed in a league that just has them playing themselves. A few are coed and a few are just soccer programs trying to start up. If at some point one of these schools starts to gain traction then they can be thrown to the wolves in state competition. But this is a far more better approach towards development and growth for this sport IMO. There's nothing to stop these schools from playing each other in the regular season. I don't think there's anything that would stop them from playing a round-robin and giving a trophy to the winner, either. But even some of the slightly more established NOLA-area schools barely want to play any games, whether that's due to lack of money or lack of players or lack of coaches or whatever else. For example, these schools played a very light schedule last year on the girls' side: John Ehret, Higgins: 8 games Bonnabel: 7 Riverdale: 4 West Jeff: 6 I know that's for girls' teams, but those are all big D1 schools. How much tougher is it for some of the smaller schools? I think we have to ask ourselves, what can we do to help grow the game, both for boys and girls, in both large schools and small ones? I don't think there's one single answer. Some schools may have players who are interested, but no money for uniforms or buses or the various other costs. Some schools (especially smaller ones) might have trouble finding 11 people to play. Some schools might be sick of getting crushed 12-0. These are all different problems with different solutions. Could five championships help? Quite possibly. Would helping connect some of the schools lojic mentioned help? Quite possibly. But I think there are many other issues. As hall said, if you had more kids playing soccer (and then continuing to want to play into their high school years) teams would have a much bigger pool to draw from. But is a school with no money for a soccer program magically going to come up with a few thousand bucks now that there are more championships? I personally would be interested to know what the finances of two additional championships would look like. Is the extra travel worth it? What sort of revenues would be made from the playoff games and the championships?
|
|
|
Post by newosoccerfan on Dec 12, 2013 13:17:59 GMT -6
Here's my beef. I don't mind having separate competitive fields of play. What I do mind is separating them by enrollment numbers. Because if we're playing oh poor me I don't have the numbers because we're a small school, then what about the schools that have small numbers because lack of interest? Listen, I get it. Soccer isn't special so it shouldn't be treated any different than the other sports. But they dynamics of soccer ARE different and it SHOULDN'T be treated like other sports. I'm all for the 1A class doing their separate thing. I understand that those teams have a very difficult time fielding teams, even when they have all their players. But if you take into consideration that there are some 2A, 3A, 4A and 5A schools that are on the same competitive level, if not less, than some of the 1A schools then what's the difference? This is not to pick on anybody, just an example. But if Episcopal Acadiana played Landry-Walker it would probably be an 8-0 stomping. A 1A school stomping a 5A school. Where's the comfort blanket for the 5A school? Why should they continue to get skull drug up and down the field while, again, schools with smaller numbers, yet better talent, are skipping away to a trophy? St. Louis doesn't need to be playing in a 3A playoff. If anything they should be playing with the top dogs. Southwood doesn't need to be in a district, let alone a playoff, with teams such as Captain Shreve, Caddo, etc... Higgins doesn't need to be getting monkey stomped by King 20-0 anymore. I like the idea but hate the enrollment card always being played. Just my two cents. LoJic (and Hall), If the dynamics of soccer are different (or enrollment doesn't count), explain how maybe two 1A schools (and no B or C schools) have ever won a DIII Soccer State Championship on the boys and girls side combined. Or explain how some small schools routinely beat larger schools in every other sport, too. I am not saying enrollment is the perfect way to separate schools. It is merely the best way to separate schools, and the one soccer, and every other sport, has used forever. If everyone agrees 1A, B and C (as a group) should join 5A and 4A as groups that compete together for a state championship, why not do the same thing for 3A and 2A, and make 5 championships instead of stalling the idea of 5 championships because enrollment, all of a sudden, is a bad way to separate schools? NewO
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 12, 2013 14:16:07 GMT -6
You're missin my point.
If we were to further involve ourselves more in the sport we would see that there are better ways to do it.
The bottom line is that it seems the powers that be are just like," meh yeah that works. A little tape here and some glue there, that should do it."
There are better ways we're just resorting to "patching it up" until itS broke again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2013 14:22:19 GMT -6
Here's my beef. I don't mind having separate competitive fields of play. What I do mind is separating them by enrollment numbers. Because if we're playing oh poor me I don't have the numbers because we're a small school, then what about the schools that have small numbers because lack of interest? Listen, I get it. Soccer isn't special so it shouldn't be treated any different than the other sports. But they dynamics of soccer ARE different and it SHOULDN'T be treated like other sports. I'm all for the 1A class doing their separate thing. I understand that those teams have a very difficult time fielding teams, even when they have all their players. But if you take into consideration that there are some 2A, 3A, 4A and 5A schools that are on the same competitive level, if not less, than some of the 1A schools then what's the difference? This is not to pick on anybody, just an example. But if Episcopal Acadiana played Landry-Walker it would probably be an 8-0 stomping. A 1A school stomping a 5A school. Where's the comfort blanket for the 5A school? Why should they continue to get skull drug up and down the field while, again, schools with smaller numbers, yet better talent, are skipping away to a trophy? St. Louis doesn't need to be playing in a 3A playoff. If anything they should be playing with the top dogs. Southwood doesn't need to be in a district, let alone a playoff, with teams such as Captain Shreve, Caddo, etc... Higgins doesn't need to be getting monkey stomped by King 20-0 anymore. I like the idea but hate the enrollment card always being played. Just my two cents. LoJic (and Hall), If the dynamics of soccer are different (or enrollment doesn't count), explain how maybe two 1A schools (and no B or C schools) have ever won a DIII Soccer State Championship on the boys and girls side combined. Or explain how some small schools routinely beat larger schools in every other sport, too. I am not saying enrollment is the perfect way to separate schools. It is merely the best way to separate schools, and the one soccer, and every other sport, has used forever. If everyone agrees 1A, B and C (as a group) should join 5A and 4A as groups that compete together for a state championship, why not do the same thing for 3A and 2A, and make 5 championships instead of stalling the idea of 5 championships because enrollment, all of a sudden, is a bad way to separate schools? NewO To answer your first question, I have no idea. Because I don't know the enrollment figures and a spreadsheet of past champions. Anyway, it's really irrelevant anyway. I'm all for classifications rather than divisions. We all admit that there is a big difference in enrollment between a Class A, B or C school versus a 3A school playing in the same division. What I am against is having the smaller d3 schools "break off" to have a separate state championship/playoff bracket. if you are going to be separate...then create a 4th division. And i really wish some would cease using the "it's for the kids excuse". A few years back I spoke with a lot of alumni and parents at a local private school. One of the school's biggest selling points (and their justification) for attending this school had a lot to do with their kids being able to play high school sports at varsity level...whereas at a large public hs they wouldn't get that chance. (Along with playing multiple sports. I decided right then and there I wanted no part of it. (Granted that wasn't the only reason.) My point is simple. Let's not lower the bar and instead raise it. You wanna play throwball? (At 5"6 and 135 lbs.) Then go for it. I understand I am talking about mainly private schools in this context. But I'm guessing the current number of small school soccer programs are more than likely a private school majority. And attending a small private school is a choice. And in doing so one must accept the accountability that goes along with that choice. What needs to happen is these small, rural areas need to have summer/rec league programs that obviously benefit the local high school program. This isn't throwball where you can take big, fast and strong kids and turn them into throwballers. because that's only 3-4 months out of the year. Money? Well it certainly isn't a problem for the other sports is it? And why is that? Somehow throwball, basketball and baseball always seem to get funded. (Especially considering they are substantially more expensive.) It's about quality much more so than quantity. How can St. Louis, Northlake, etc. routinely play d1 (5a) teams and beat them? because they are committed to soccer and have an influx of soccer players coming into the school. Kickers/punters aside, when was the last time a nonclub/non fulltime soccer player made D1 allstate? MVP or POY? How many even make all-state? Very, very few....if any! Again, I would support creating another division/tier for the smaller schools. But playing in d3 and then having a separate playoff competition is embracing mediocrity. And i can't buy into that this will somehow grow the sport of soccer. Much less raise the level of play. again, maybe d3 should be overhauled. maybe d3 should only include a, b and c schools. But how many teams would that mean? Either way, the schools with better players would still win. d2 should be 2 and 3 a schools. d1 being 4 and 5 a. Problem solved.
|
|
|
Post by methuselah on Dec 12, 2013 14:24:48 GMT -6
Seems like if they want to get the numbers as even as possible the best way would be decide how many divisions are optimum (i.e.: 3, 4 or 5) and then divide the teams as equally as possible into that number. The situation of trying to stick with the 5A, 4A, etc. classes used in other sports and then combining or re-dividing those seems needlessly cumbersome. Why not do it the cleanest way?
|
|
|
Post by copakid14 on Dec 12, 2013 23:22:18 GMT -6
I also have an issue with the classification of my team being linked to whatever the football team decides is the best thing for them. Why do the other sports get pushed up a division because the football team wants a bigger more convenient district schedule? I'm assuming 3 equal divisions won't change the fact that we can't play in our true division (based on enrollment)
|
|
|
Post by chspc2 on Dec 13, 2013 7:50:26 GMT -6
Part -4 The number of soccer playing schools is skewed to the larger schools, meaning it's not evenly distributed. If you have three even divisions, about ten 4A schools will drop down to Division III. If you divide evenly into four divisions, you will still have about half of the 3A schools still playing in Division III. And as I read the rules, there may be some schools that will have the girls team and boys team in different divisions. I hope the LHSAA in their infinite wisdom would not let that happen!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 8:53:04 GMT -6
Part -4 The number of soccer playing schools is skewed to the larger schools, meaning it's not evenly distributed. If you have three even divisions, about ten 4A schools will drop down to Division III. If you divide evenly into four divisions, you will still have about half of the 3A schools still playing in Division III. And as I read the rules, there may be some schools that will have the girls team and boys team in different divisions. I hope the LHSAA in their infinite wisdom would not let that happen! Then why not add a 4th division for A, B and C schools? If that amounts to 17 total schools, then why not have a smaller playoff bracket? Say, 8 teams? I'm aware of the issues with player numbers for small schools. I understand that. is the current system fair and balanced? Probably not. But that is unrealistic anyway. Team quality is reflective of talent first and numbers second. Certain teams are always going to have an 'advantage'. And throwball classifications should have little to no bearing on soccer division placement.
|
|
|
Post by HCSsoccer on Dec 13, 2013 13:20:22 GMT -6
Thank You Coach Goodman, spot on remarks part 2 and Part 3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 15:05:20 GMT -6
Okay,so what's this REALLY about?
1. Giving small schools a chance to be competitive? (Playoffs, state title?)
2. Fairness? ie 'level playing field'?
3. Money?
4. Growing participation? How would this specifically accomplish that?
5. Does 'winning' in and of itself create more interest/participation?
6. What is being done (other than legislation) being done to increase interest in soccer?
7. With a separate playoff bracket (seemingly where every team qualifies)how will this change being able to field teams made up primarily soccer players amongst small schools keep some or most of these kids from playing 2 or 3 sports? (The reasoning behind this is simple: No team is going to be successful without at least having a core of soccer 'specialists' rather than 'generalist' athletes.
Again, I'm not against a separate division being created with district play. (Same as everyone else.) What I am against is creating a 'separate but somehow equal' playoff system for small schools.
|
|