|
Post by beauchenecoach on Feb 15, 2015 16:32:50 GMT -6
I still don't know for sure what Shreve's status is for next year.
I was told the updated enrollment numbers would keep Shreve in D1. Shreve is 4th largest team in DII. They didn't fill out form to play up by deadline. The only way they are in Div I is if they are allowed some mulligan or something for claiming ignorance that they thought they were Div I and didn't ask to play up. That's the angle I would use to try to play up if that's what Shreve wants to do. Otherwise. Welcome to the new Division II! Mostly public schools and looks to be an exciting new division.
|
|
|
Post by deobserver on Feb 15, 2015 17:51:28 GMT -6
Where can I find the divisions?
|
|
|
Post by methuselah on Feb 15, 2015 17:58:33 GMT -6
Where can I find the divisions? Look at page 5 of this thread in a post by jk52. Seems to be an accurate listing of the teams in each division.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2015 8:19:55 GMT -6
I still don't know for sure what Shreve's status is for next year.
I was told the updated enrollment numbers would keep Shreve in D1. Shreve is 4th largest team in DII. They didn't fill out form to play up by deadline. The only way they are in Div I is if they are allowed some mulligan or something for claiming ignorance that they thought they were Div I and didn't ask to play up. That's the angle I would use to try to play up if that's what Shreve wants to do. Otherwise. Welcome to the new Division II! Mostly public schools and looks to be an exciting new division. Yeah, may not be a bad thing Chad.
Still haven't gotten confirmation on anything though.
|
|
|
Post by ShreveDad on Feb 17, 2015 6:34:04 GMT -6
An article in the Shreveport paper this morning has Shreve playing 5A in football. Football, basketball, baseball, softball, and track are classifications and they are 5A. In soccer, it's 4 equal divisions and they fell 4 schools short into Div II, they needed to request to play up like Caddo did. Thanks. Guess I haven't been following this closely enough. Personally, I have no problem with them playing DII is that is where they fall.
|
|
|
Post by methuselah on Feb 17, 2015 8:35:56 GMT -6
Ok. I had a few minutes (I'm too old to get out there in 34 degree parade weather. Now to watch a soccer game might be a different matter) so I took a shot at doing a D-II map using the teams listed on p.5. Any input/corrections/changes? www.batchgeo.com/map/f3890bb72572bdc381b5378f64d1de33
|
|
|
Post by snoopy1 on Feb 17, 2015 8:50:30 GMT -6
Personally, I think all teams should start this coming year in the division that the school size has them at. Let the semi finalist in next years tournament have right to choose to move up or not one division and relegate the bottom ranked teams in the upper division. If Shreve and Caddo Magnet are good enough to ask to placed in Division I, then they ought to be good enough to make semi finals in Division 2.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2015 9:25:55 GMT -6
Personally, I think all teams should start this coming year in the division that the school size has them at. Let the semi finalist in next years tournament have right to choose to move up or not one division and relegate the bottom ranked teams in the upper division. If Shreve and Caddo Magnet are good enough to ask to placed in Division I, then they ought to be good enough to make semi finals in Division 2.
Mind if I ask where you are drawing this logic from?
Especially since this isn't a system based on promotion and relegation.
I'm pretty sure that the top 4 D2 teams in the state can at least compete in D1.
D1 has more depth and more quality teams overall. Not going to argue that point. But there are always going to be teams capable of competing outside their 'natural' divisions. (For lack of a better term.)
|
|
|
Post by bhsrams on Feb 17, 2015 9:32:00 GMT -6
I tried to create a quick and dirty digital drop pin map of the D-III schools by using the list provided a page above and dropping them into an online program. I had to go in and edit to take out the girls only schools and make some individual hand corrections (among other things the first run through had Loyola Prep in England and St. Louis School in Michigan as well as a couple of schools in the Northeast) But I think I'm still off on some or maybe have some schools missing. Any proof readers out there? www.batchgeo.com/map/ce92082c3c8a670b9b1125e6a575d1e3I look at this map and all I see is the inevitable demise of our program in Bastrop. WE will most likely end up in a district with Bossier, Loyola, Minden, North DeSoto, and probably Union Parish. All though this will be a competitive district, especially for 2nd place, the amount of distance between us and those schools, will mean an even greater budget on our program when it can't stay in the black in our current district. I really wish there was an option to play down (I realize how crazy that sounds) because we would be much better off in a district with St. Fred's and OCS.
|
|
|
Post by CoachD on Feb 17, 2015 10:02:31 GMT -6
I tried to create a quick and dirty digital drop pin map of the D-III schools by using the list provided a page above and dropping them into an online program. I had to go in and edit to take out the girls only schools and make some individual hand corrections (among other things the first run through had Loyola Prep in England and St. Louis School in Michigan as well as a couple of schools in the Northeast) But I think I'm still off on some or maybe have some schools missing. Any proof readers out there? www.batchgeo.com/map/ce92082c3c8a670b9b1125e6a575d1e3I look at this map and all I see is the inevitable demise of our program in Bastrop. WE will most likely end up in a district with Bossier, Loyola, Minden, North DeSoto, and probably Union Parish. All though this will be a competitive district, especially for 2nd place, the amount of distance between us and those schools, will mean an even greater budget on our program when it can't stay in the black in our current district. I really wish there was an option to play down (I realize how crazy that sounds) because we would be much better off in a district with St. Fred's and OCS. If you could convince the district to play each other only once you could cut travel down. Play half the district away and half home the first year and alternate the next. That would only be 2 or 3 games a year that you had to travel for.
|
|
|
Post by bhsrams on Feb 17, 2015 10:06:39 GMT -6
I look at this map and all I see is the inevitable demise of our program in Bastrop. WE will most likely end up in a district with Bossier, Loyola, Minden, North DeSoto, and probably Union Parish. All though this will be a competitive district, especially for 2nd place, the amount of distance between us and those schools, will mean an even greater budget on our program when it can't stay in the black in our current district. I really wish there was an option to play down (I realize how crazy that sounds) because we would be much better off in a district with St. Fred's and OCS. If you could convince the district to play each other only once you could cut travel down. Play half the district away and half home the first year and alternate the next. That would only be 2 or 3 games a year that you had to travel for. I'm hoping they go for that. I'd even be willing to go on a Saturday and play, say Bossier, early in the morning and then, say Loyola, later in the afternoon. Get two teams knocked out in one trip. I'm assuming we will be having two district meetings this year. One with our old district for district honors and then one with our new district for scheduling. Hopefully that happens before the school year is out so I can let our principal and AD know before they make a decision about cutting the program.
|
|
|
Post by thebirdstheword on Feb 17, 2015 11:34:05 GMT -6
Will Baton Rouge just have 1 district next year? With Woodlawn from 5-D1 and Central, Broadmoor and Live Oak from 4-D1 moving down to D2 that would leave 9 teams in BR where you had 13 before. I say have 1 9 team district and have everyone play each other once. Would be nice for all to be in the same district, especially Denham and Catholic BR. Either way, something has to change or distict 4 will only have 3 teams. Look for the Livingston teams still in D1 and Zachary to be sent east, with the Northshore District being broken up. As we projected, Walker, Zachary and Denham will be joined up by Hammond, and Ponchatoula. Hammond has been placed in a district with Denham Springs before, so it has some historic background. I had a chance to talk with Denham Springs coach last night and he seemed to feel this was the way it would go. The other Northshore district will be St Pauls, Northshore, Slidell, Fontainebleau, and Mandeville. Covington can go either way, and according to Coach Inman, they intend to stay with Ponchatoula and Hammond. I think that will be a hard sell given CHS' proximity to St Pauls, Mandeville and Fontainebleau vs Hammond and Ponchatoula The metro BTR District most assuredly will be Catholic, BRHS, McKinley, St Amant, Dutchtown and EA. As the move to single game district play becomes more prevalent, and with there now being 4 divisions, I dont see there being a 9 team distict..anywhere. More, smaller districts seems to be the new mantra Covington may well be in a district with Hammond and Ponchatoula. The travel time between Hammond and Covington High is actually shorter than Hammond to Ponchatoula. All three are within a 15min travel period. That being said, the travel time from Covington to Denham and especially Zachary is considerably longer than Covington to just about any other North shore campus, Northshore High maybe being the exclusion. IMO adding Covington to the 'BR' district would make both a bit more competitive.
|
|
|
Post by snoopy1 on Feb 17, 2015 12:10:15 GMT -6
Personally, I think all teams should start this coming year in the division that the school size has them at. Let the semi finalist in next years tournament have right to choose to move up or not one division and relegate the bottom ranked teams in the upper division. If Shreve and Caddo Magnet are good enough to ask to placed in Division I, then they ought to be good enough to make semi finals in Division 2.
Mind if I ask where you are drawing this logic from?
Especially since this isn't a system based on promotion and relegation.
I'm pretty sure that the top 4 D2 teams in the state can at least compete in D1.
D1 has more depth and more quality teams overall. Not going to argue that point. But there are always going to be teams capable of competing outside their 'natural' divisions. (For lack of a better term.)
|
|
|
Post by bhsrams on Feb 18, 2015 9:13:32 GMT -6
I posted this in another thread but I'm posting it here too in the hopes someone who knows about this can address it:
Did anyone else notice the cutoff numbers changed? The email last week said one thing and now the latest email has different numbers. They've changed as follows:
DI was 1346 and now it's 1340 and above DII was 885-1345 and now it's 802-1339 DIII was 401-884 and now it's 449-801 DIV was 400 and below and now it's 448 and below
I realize this doen't impact everyone but it will some. For instance, our enrollment number being used is 849 (according to our principal). This would move us from DIII up to DII but the latest email has us still with DIII. There is a mistake somewhere unless there is something else I'm not taking into consideration.
|
|
|
Post by Antimatter on Feb 18, 2015 9:29:01 GMT -6
Those cutoff numbers are a bit fishy.
|
|
|
Post by usasoccerboy on Mar 2, 2015 14:16:42 GMT -6
GET RID OF ALL DIVISIONS or go to a Relgation/Promotion system. I said this 10 years ago in this website and I say it again. Now, with 4 divisions, we will have a weaker state system than when we had 3 divisions just as 3 divisions is weaker than when we had 2. With more divisions, means more weaker games until the end of the playoffs. We need stronger competition to win the championship and if that means St. Pauls must beat Vandy or vice versa in the Round of 16, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by coachray40 on Mar 3, 2015 5:35:03 GMT -6
GET RID OF ALL DIVISIONS or go to a Relgation/Promotion system. I said this 10 years ago in this website and I say it again. Now, with 4 divisions, we will have a weaker state system than when we had 3 divisions just as 3 divisions is weaker than when we had 2. With more divisions, means more weaker games until the end of the playoffs. We need stronger competition to win the championship and if that means St. Pauls must beat Vandy or vice versa in the Round of 16, so be it. Hey, I have an even better idea--how about we only let the top 16 programs statewide play soccer and then shut everybody else down? After all, none of the other teams statewide are any good, so lets just let Vandebilt, St Pauls, Lafayette, Jesuit, Brother Martin, Acadiana, St Louis and a few choice others play and the heck with the rest. I mean, hey, we wouldnt want to water down the competition level by letting the sport grow to other places. Promo/relegation was bad idea 10 years ago and its a bad idea now. Nobody wants that, especially the smaller division big time schools. Dont think so? Well if the Vandys, St Louis', Universities, Northlakes, Ben Franklins etc wanted to play up and felt like they needed to prove they need to be in the top level, nothing is stopping them from doing so. They can ALL choose to play up in soccer only. But they dont--they all stay right where they are..every year, every redistrict/reclassification period. Thats why there is just NO CREDENCE in any idea of promotion/relegation--its not needed as the schools can all make a choice to move to the highest classification. They just dont. The reason they dont is because HS soccer is exactly that-- A HIGH SCHOOL SPORT. It needs to be dealt with and thought about from the HS sport genre first, and soccer second. Club soccer can use whatever methods necessary to entice players to come from anywhere to play for that club, and individual teams can strengthen and weaken. Big clubs can attract coaching and playing resources from anywhere. Too much time is wasted debating the quality and player differences between HS and Club teams, without having a full understanding of the differences in the implemetation and administration of each. The competitiveness of each HS sport is based more primarily on school size, binding attendance zones, geography and the public/parochial debate. That is why its playoff structure and administration MUST be different than that of club soccer. Ask Sean Esker --now the President of both LSA and the LHSSCA--and Chad Vidrine--a VP in both organizations-- if they deal with each entity the same way. The fact that soccer is moving forward and progressing both on the HS and Club level right now is probably best attributed to these two guys understanding the key differencesbetween the two and working towards creating synergy between the two, rather than trying to make them the same thing. Thats why the LHSSCA has been so successful in changing HS soccer for the better--they realize its a HS sport first and soccer second.They certainly arent on here using their time to talk about silly promo plans. Before anybody else comes in here and wastes more time FANTASIZING about an inappropriate promotion/relegation system, I want you to call up the head coaches at each of the schools I listed above and ask them why they dont all petition to move up into DI. Meanwhile, Ill go tell my principal that we cant have soccer anymore because we arent any good.
|
|
|
Post by chelsea007 on Mar 3, 2015 9:22:08 GMT -6
Promotion and relegation has too many variables to effectively work in high school. On the flip side, I don't think what we have, and certainly what we are going to have next year, is any better. The reality is, the football minds run the show and anything straying from the norm is unaccetable, even if it is reasonable. I suggest you do what I have done and deal with it. Our sport is in "status quo" mode or, worse, everybody gets a trophy mode. I dont see this changing any time soon. Enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by bhsrams on Mar 3, 2015 9:31:22 GMT -6
Those cutoff numbers are a bit fishy. And the fact that nobody has addressed it is even more fishy
|
|
|
Post by pOkLE on Mar 3, 2015 10:17:26 GMT -6
Those cutoff numbers are a bit fishy. And the fact that nobody has addressed it is even more fishy What's the fishiness? Maybe someone has already explained....but I'm one of ones that's too lazy to scroll through to find.
|
|