CCL & ESCC schedules

[BBCHS77]

just because you repeat it over and over does not make it so. Even the author/creator of the rule said it was meant to apply to all schools not just privates.

I was the first one here that mentioned the SF was going to happen and it did.. there were reasons it was first mentioned to include all schools (how many public schools would it have really effected?)... but when the private schools didn't oppose it, the wording was changed..

Despite the crying from a few private schools and their entitled fans, the IHSA is pleased with the SF and why wouldn't they?

I get it, you guys became used to your advantages, feel entitled to them and hate that they have gone away.. but the next step will be separate classes like other states have gone to.

 

[MWittman]

Lets not forget that the 15 member committee voted 15-0 to recommend this idea, so all 5 of the private school members supported that.

Tiger:

I did not see the vote tally.

Regardless, even if all five private school representatives voted in favor, cursory analysis demonstrates two of three (SICP, GT, and UC) could be described as using the vote in favor of the SF as a vote cast against CCL rivals as opposed to a vote endorsing "equity."

The make-up of the panel was dubious.

 

[pjjp]

Despite the crying from a few private schools and their entitled fans, the IHSA is pleased with the SF and why wouldn't they?

A school just won their 7th 4A title in 8 years. Even given their extreme bias, fair-minded members of the IHSA should be embarrassed by that.

 

[NNFAN]

Ya know guys... just because Huckleberry often has an unpopular position on subjects that most here disagree with, I don't understand why you want him banned. His posts are passionate, his opinion, and from his perspective. I think he receives far more personal attacks than he dishes out. I get that some of you are annoyed with the lack of political correctness and articulation of M(Walt)Wittman, but I believe it makes for a more entertaining board. Ignore or block if you don't want to engage. -Vote/FrankLenti/Oprah/2020

 

[BBCHS77]

A school just won their 7th 4A title in 8 years. Even given their extreme bias, fair-minded members of the IHSA should be embarrassed by that.

Their "advantage" is their coaching staff, should the IHSA step in and make them fire him?

 

[BBCHS77]

Tiger:

I did not see the vote tally.

Regardless, even if all five private school representatives voted in favor, cursory analysis demonstrates two of three (SICP, GT, and UC) could be described as using the vote in favor of the SF as a vote cast against CCL rivals as opposed to a vote endorsing "equity."

The make-up of the panel was dubious.

Simple research...




The Illinois High School Association (IHSA) Board of Directors met at its regularly scheduled meeting at the IHSA office in Bloomington on Wednesday, February 19, 2014, where the Board approved a recommendation to amend Board Policy 17, specifically related to the non-boundaried school multiplier waiver. The changes, which take effect in the 2014-15 school year, establish a point system to determine whether a school receives a multiplier waiver, while also adding a Success Advancement step that will move schools who reach certain thresholds up in classification.

“This recommendation was brought forward with unanimous support from the committee,” said IHSA Executive Director Marty Hickman. “Frankly, I’m not sure the Board would have even considered it if that were not the case. The committee’s makeup was a microcosm of our membership; represented by schools large and small, private and public, city and rural. For such a diverse group to agree on this proposal was a powerful statement to our Board and we appreciate their efforts.”

 

[pjjp]

Their "advantage" is their coaching staff, should the IHSA step in and make them fire him?

No. Some of the boys in Bloomington need to take Derek and the school's administration aside and congratulate them on their tremendous success. Then, they need to explain to him that the consistent success that Rochester has achieved is making the selective application of the SF and the IHSA, as a whole, look bad. They need to politely tell Rochester to "voluntarily" petition up.

 

[BBCHS77]

No. Some of the boys in Bloomington need to take Derek and the school's administration aside and congratulate them on their tremendous success. Then, they need to explain to him that the consistent success that Rochester has achieved is making the selective application of the SF and the IHSA, as a whole, look bad. They need to politely tell Rochester to "voluntarily" petition up.

It is not selective, it is applied to ALL schools that do not have a defined boundary based on the IHSA definition. The idea that some schools should be able to play by a different set of rules that allows them a huge advantage and then not have that equalized in another way is simply ignorant.

 

[MWittman]

Simple research...

Tiger:

First of all, please keep it civil. I detect a strong undercurrent of sarcasm in your remark. I can conduct research, but chose not to as I believe those who proffer contentions are responsible for furnishing supporting evidence.

As far as coming to a unanimous verdict, I remain committed to my earlier assertion the panel which decided this rubbish was a fraud all along. Whether you agree or not, I find it curious GT and SICP, neither of which are football superpowers, and the AD with U of C Lab, a school which does not field a football team (not even flag football), would be included on a committee tasked with studying proposed classification modifications revolving exclusively around football.

As for the appalling Marty Hickman averring: "Frankly, I’m not sure the Board would have even considered it if that were not the case. The committee’s makeup was a microcosm of our membership; represented by schools large and small, private and public, city and rural. For such a diverse group to agree on this proposal was a powerful statement to our Board and we appreciate their efforts," well, this is rich.

Once impaneled, there was no doubt it would pass. Had a legitimate board been established, it would have included at least one member from a valid football power. For example: Why not bring Ken Leonard from SHG on board? Why not JCA's Dan Sharp?

From the onset, the Temple sought to create a sham and it got one with this board.

To further explain, if the Multiplier was created to "level the playing field," why was the SF needed several years later?

 

[MWittman]

I get that some of you are annoyed with the lack of political correctness and articulation of M(Walt)Wittman, but I believe it makes for a more entertaining board. Ignore or block if you don't want to engage. -Vote/FrankLenti/Oprah/2020

NNFAN:

I am not sure this is an endorsement of my membership here or a barrage of insults, but I have always been perfectly content with my established reputation as a natural contrarian in this forum.

In addition to being a natural contrarian, I also have very narrow tastes.

I don't recycle; I cheat on my taxes; I don't think Tom Hanks is an actor, but rather a movie star and a dreadful movie star; and I think Animal House could be the most overrated film ever made. I don't think Pauly Shore, Adam Sandler or Jim Carrey are funny. If one wants real humor, turn over some stones and look for old The Honeymooners episodes or explore the comic genius of Ernie Kovacs or Jack Benny. Gleason, Benny and Kovacs were just brilliant.

As far as my posts here, I have always been flattered at compliments from some who lavish praise; similarly, those who label me long winded only elicit a roll of my eyes. I can be wordy; I admit to this. However, I have also found lengthy posts are to my benefit: I rarely, if ever, find respondents answering with numerous questions or inquiring with an "are you saying?" or "do you mean?" The minimal questions illustrate I cover the issue at hand more than adequately.

FYI: I plan on casting my vote for Angela Davis in 2020 over your suggested Lenti-Oprah ticket.

 

[BBCHS77]

Tiger:

First of all, please keep it civil. I detect a strong undercurrent of sarcasm in your remark. I can conduct research, but chose not to as I believe those who proffer contentions are responsible for furnishing supporting evidence.

As far as coming to a unanimous verdict, I remain committed to my earlier assertion the panel which decided this rubbish was a fraud all along. Whether you agree or not, I find it curious GT and SICP, neither of which are football superpowers, and the AD with U of C Lab, a school which does not field a football team (not even flag football), would be included on a committee tasked with studying proposed classification modifications revolving exclusively around football.

As for the appalling Marty Hickman averring: "Frankly, I’m not sure the Board would have even considered it if that were not the case. The committee’s makeup was a microcosm of our membership; represented by schools large and small, private and public, city and rural. For such a diverse group to agree on this proposal was a powerful statement to our Board and we appreciate their efforts," well, this is rich.

Once impaneled, there was no doubt it would pass. Had a legitimate board been established, it would have included at least one member from a valid football power. For example: Why not bring Ken Leonard from SHG on board? Why not JCA's Dan Sharp?

From the onset, the Temple sought to create a sham and it got one with this board.

To further explain, if the Multiplier was created to "level the playing field," why was the SF needed several years later?

1. Neither one of us know who was asked to be on the committee. You mention the 3 weaker private football programs involved and wonder why football powers were not involved, to me Newman Catholic and Althoff certainly qualify as top tier football programs, but you chose to ignore them being involved. Why???

2. It was obvious the 1.65 multiplier was not enough, there was talk of increasing the multiplier to higher than 1.65, into the 2.0-2.5 range.. that is when the lower tier private programs voiced their opinions that they should not be moved into a higher class just because other private schools choose to be football factories. Thus the solution was the Success Factor.

Of the options

1. All private schools having a multiplier of 2.5
2. Separate Classes
3. Current system, with waiver, 1.65 multiplier and Success Factor

Which do you prefer?

 

[cornerrat]

It is not selective, it is applied to ALL schools that do not have a defined boundary based on the IHSA definition. The idea that some schools should be able to play by a different set of rules that allows them a huge advantage and then not have that equalized in another way is simply ignorant.

All.... Incorrect. The multiplier put into effect years ago for this advantage you speak of solved the problem. Not to the satisfaction of the majority (voting block) of public schools and you of course. So AFTER THE FACT more selective discrimination was dreamed up and the SF was slapped on the privates as well. This open book ability to continue with never ending punitive measures due to jealousy and envy is disgraceful. And quite telling as well by public school administrators around the state. It's as simple as that.... Have to run. A big party down at the Landing in St. Louis is going to start at 5 and I'm two hours away. The rodent is never late for these twice a year gatherings. Ratsy

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... Incorrect. The multiplier put into effect years ago for this advantage you speak of solved the problem. Not to the satisfaction of the majority (voting block) of public schools and you of course. So AFTER THE FACT more selective discrimination was dreamed up and the SF was slapped on the privates as well. This open book ability to continue with never ending punitive measures due to jealousy and envy is disgraceful. And quite telling as well by public school administrators around the state. It's as simple as that.... Have to run. A big party down at the Landing in St. Louis is going to start at 5 and I'm two hours away. The rodent is never late for these twice a year gatherings. Ratsy

As usual you are wrong, private schools were still winning 2X as many state titles as the percentages show. Sorry you feel entitled to use an advantage to beat schools you have an edge over, must make you feel so proud.

 

[SOUTHSIDECFD]

Vote FrankLenti/Oprah/2020

Can she run the veer? Can she make the pitch?

 

[MWittman]

1. Neither one of us know who was asked to be on the committee. You mention the 3 weaker private football programs involved and wonder why football powers were not involved, to me Newman Catholic and Althoff certainly qualify as top tier football programs, but you chose to ignore them being involved. Why???

2. It was obvious the 1.65 multiplier was not enough, there was talk of increasing the multiplier to higher than 1.65, into the 2.0-2.5 range.. that is when the lower tier private programs voiced their opinions that they should not be moved into a higher class just because other private schools choose to be football factories. Thus the solution was the Success Factor.

Of the options

1. All private schools having a multiplier of 2.5
2. Separate Classes
3. Current system, with waiver, 1.65 multiplier and Success Factor

Which do you prefer?

Tiger:

I did mention Newman and Althoff. I agree Newman is a top-tier power, but would not classify Althoff as a power in the same category as a MC, PC or, for example, a Montini or SHG. My point is the purpose of the SF was to target the schools I mention and pack the committee with public schools and weak private schools to achieve a pre-determined outcome. Moreover, the inclusion of Newman and Althoff was specific for the reason neither has geographic competitors. I think the panel was a complete sham.

Here is my question: Do you think the Multiplier should be raised?

 

[BBCHS77]

Tiger:

I did mention Newman and Althoff. I agree Newman is a top-tier power, but would not classify Althoff as a power in the same category as a MC, PC or, for example, a Montini or SHG. My point is the purpose of the SF was to target the schools I mention and pack the committee with public schools and weak private schools to achieve a pre-determined outcome. Moreover, the inclusion of Newman and Althoff was specific for the reason neither has geographic competitors. I think the panel was a complete sham.

Here is my question: Do you think the Multiplier should be raised?

How is it possibly a sham? OMG LOL

Private schools make up about 15% of the IHSA membership, so they should have had 2 members on the committee... Instead they had 5, or 33%..

And those 5 members were 3 from the Chicago area and two from downstate, also representative of IHSA membership... And in competitive terms, also representative of the private schools...

What did you want, the private schools to send MC, LA, SHG, JCA and Montini???? LOL

I think the 1.65 with a waiver and success factor is fine.. only other better system is separate classes.

 

[NNFAN]

NNFAN:

I am not sure this is an endorsement of my membership here or a barrage of insults, but I have always been perfectly content with my established reputation as a natural contrarian in this forum.

In addition to being a natural contrarian, I also have very narrow tastes.

I don't recycle; I cheat on my taxes; I don't think Tom Hanks is an actor, but rather a movie star and a dreadful movie star; and I think Animal House could be the most overrated film ever made. I don't think Pauly Shore, Adam Sandler or Jim Carrey are funny. If one wants real humor, turn over some stones and look for old The Honeymooners episodes or explore the comic genius of Ernie Kovacs or Jack Benny. Gleason, Benny and Kovacs were just brilliant.

As far as my posts here, I have always been flattered at compliments from some who lavish praise; similarly, those who label me long winded only elicit a roll of my eyes. I can be wordy; I admit to this. However, I have also found lengthy posts are to my benefit: I rarely, if ever, find respondents answering with numerous questions or inquiring with an "are you saying?" or "do you mean?" The minimal questions illustrate I cover the issue at hand more than adequately.

FYI: I plan on casting my vote for Angela Davis in 2020 over your suggested Lenti-Oprah ticket.

Always an endorser of your contributions. Don't forget the Smothers Brothers!

 

[bronco man]

SICP is 7A and will always be 7A why they voted for this is beyond me but they could get Nazareth in round one this year.

Jim Punty was the representative from SICP who agreed to the SF.

"“The first couple meetings, we were kind of spinning our wheels,” committee member and St. Ignatius athletic director Jim Prunty said. “Then we all came together. It was a good experience working with everybody.”

The committee had two mandates: to determine whether a success factor was needed on top of the 1.65 enrollment multiplier and to evaluate the waiver system, which removes the multiplier for non-boundaried schools that don’t reach a certain threshold of success.

“Obviously we got stuck on football early on — no surprise,” Prunty said. “At some point, we put football off to the side and focused on other sports. That got things moving. [Then] we came back to football.”

The committee did recommend instituting a success factor that bumps up programs that are high achievers at the state level. Small- to mid-sized schools such as Montini are among those most affected; the Broncos will move up in football, wrestling, girls basketball and girls cross country next school year."


https://www.suntimeshighschoolsport...ber-jim-prunty-stands-by-multiplier-decision/

Prunty retired from SICP and is now the AD at Lockport THS
http://www.theherald-news.com/2015/04/21/prunty-approved-as-new-lockport-ad/awpjuaj/

 

[MWittman]

Tiger:

Do you think the SF should have embraced public schools or private schools only?

 

[stella16]

I guess we shall see, mark my words the success factor will be for everyone or completely eliminated. BBCHS thinks he knows everything, but is clueless.

 

[BBCHS77]

I guess we shall see, mark my words the success factor will be for everyone or completely eliminated. BBCHS thinks he knows everything, but is clueless.

I have been spot on so far....

 

[BBCHS77]

MW- I have never heard anyone suggest that a boundaried school should have a SF, except on this board... never heard a 4A fan suggest Rochester should be moved to 5A.. they are apparently smart enough to understand WHY the open enrollment schools are treated differently.

 

[MWittman]

MW- I have never heard anyone suggest that a boundaried school should have a SF, except on this board... never heard a 4A fan suggest Rochester should be moved to 5A.. they are apparently smart enough to understand WHY the open enrollment schools are treated differently.

Tiger:

I'm asking if you would support the SF applied to all IHSA member schools.

 

[mchsalumni]

Ya know guys... just because Huckleberry often has an unpopular position on subjects that most here disagree with, I don't understand why you want him banned. His posts are passionate, his opinion, and from his perspective. I think he receives far more personal attacks than he dishes out.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And I want him shut down because he derails every single thread he enters. People like him get doxxed for derailing too often...

 

[BBCHS77]

Tiger:

I'm asking if you would support the SF applied to all IHSA member schools.

No

 

[BBCHS77]

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And I want him shut down because he derails every single thread he enters. People like him get doxxed for derailing too often...

Yes, we have established that, when people disagree with your opinion, you want them silenced, it is the only way you are able to win the argument

 

[cornerrat]

As usual you are wrong, private schools were still winning 2X as many state titles as the percentages show. Sorry you feel entitled to use an advantage to beat schools you have an edge over, must make you feel so proud.

All.... Your narrative and one dimensional thinking (child like as it) never fails to amuse me. One that many private school detractors always take. That being those schools are winning strictly because of their ability to accept students from 30 miles out and hey they illegally recruit as well./s Dismiss the coaching staffs, forget the years of work that many went through into making these programs great. Hold onto that discrimination that drives you to comment day after day on this site. This isn't about sports when it comes to your position on Catholic schools But you already know that. As I do. Ratsy

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... Your narrative and one dimensional thinking (child like as it) never fails to amuse me. One that many private school detractors always take. That being those schools are winning strictly because of their ability to accept students from 30 miles out and hey they illegally recruit as well./s Dismiss the coaching staffs, forget the years of work that many went through into making these programs great. Hold onto that discrimination that drives you to comment day after day on this site. This isn't about sports when it comes to your position on Catholic schools But you already know that. As I do. Ratsy

Nobody has said they don't have great coaching staffs, but put KL at any other CS8 school and he doesn't have near the success..

Discrimination?? LOL, I am the one wanting an EQUAL system.. You are the one that feels entitled to your advantage and are crying now that its partially being taken away

 

[cornerrat]

Nobody has said they don't have great coaching staffs, but put KL at any other CS8 school and he doesn't have near the success..

Discrimination?? LOL, I am the one wanting an EQUAL system.. You are the one that feels entitled to your advantage and are crying now that its partially being taken away

All.... Silly HHS always spinning and changing your narrative hoping it sticks. Good luck with that. Nothing the IHSA does through their discriminatory policies will be enough for you. But you and I already know that. As does everyone else for that matter lol Ratsy

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... Silly HHS always spinning and changing your narrative hoping it sticks. Good luck with that. Nothing the IHSA does through their discriminatory policies will be enough for you. But you and I already know that. As does everyone else for that matter lol Ratsy

Thats your problem, you are not intelligent enough to see that the IHSA is trying to stop discriminating against members by attempting to eliminate one group of schools advantages..

If it was discrimination, the litigation happy private schools would have filed a lawsuit years ago, they have chosen not to.. You know why? Because they know they have no case and the likely end result would be separate classes for the private schools..

 

[cornerrat]

Thats your problem, you are not intelligent enough to see that the IHSA is trying to stop discriminating against members by attempting to eliminate one group of schools advantages..

If it was discrimination, the litigation happy private schools would have filed a lawsuit years ago, they have chosen not to.. You know why? Because they know they have no case and the likely end result would be separate classes for the private schools..

All.... Wrong again. Just because the IHSA's discriminatory policies might not meet a winnable standard in court doesn't mean it isn't happening. Also I find it amusing your attempt to adopt the word discrimination into your rantings. The exact description private schools advocates have been using (and putting up with) for years. Always happy to help since you have no idea. And good luck trying to convince all public school supporters their schools are the real victims. Even they are not that dense. lol Ratsy

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... Wrong again. Just because the IHSA's discriminatory policies might not meet a winnable standard in court doesn't mean it isn't happening. Also I find it amusing your attempt to adopt the word discrimination into your rantings. The exact description private schools advocates have been using (and putting up with) for years. Always happy to help./s Ratsy

Discrimination is indeed happening, thats what its called when one set of schools can draw in football kids from a huge area while others are limited to a MUCH smaller area..

 

[Voodoo Tatum 21]

HHS/BBC.... don’t you ever stop and just smell the roses? Or take a vacation? You sound so shrill and bitter about your single most favorite topic - multipliers and success factors.

I think most would agree that a success factor should be applied universally. Not everything is developed and designed to “equal” all playing fields. A success factor in my opinion is exactly what the name suggests - if you kick ass for a long period of time in a class - then you go up and theoretically face higher levels of competition. Why does this have to be applied to only a portion of the schools? One would think publics that kick ass for long periods of time in a class would want to try higher levels of competition.

 

[cornerrat]

HHS/BBC.... don’t you ever stop and just smell the roses? Or take a vacation? You sound so shrill and bitter about your single most favorite topic - multipliers and success factors.

I think most would agree that a success factor should be applied universally. Not everything is developed and designed to “equal” all playing fields. A success factor in my opinion is exactly what the name suggests - if you kick ass for a long period of time in a class - then you go up and theoretically face higher levels of competition. Why does this have to be applied to only a portion of the schools? One would think publics that kick ass for long periods of time in a class would want to try higher levels of competition.

All.... You are wasting your time. In his mind ALL Catholic school football success has been and will always be a direct result of the 30 mile rule and his umm.... ehh... "true" feelings on this particular group of private schools. It doesn't matter how many additional measures can be applied to reach this pie in the sky idea of a level playing field, which I mentioned before in a previous post was fixed by the multiplier. For him it has never been about that. Quite sad really. Ratsy

 

[Normdog]

HHS/BBC.... don’t you ever stop and just smell the roses? Or take a vacation? You sound so shrill and bitter about your single most favorite topic - multipliers and success factors.

I think most would agree that a success factor should be applied universally. Not everything is developed and designed to “equal” all playing fields. A success factor in my opinion is exactly what the name suggests - if you kick ass for a long period of time in a class - then you go up and theoretically face higher levels of competition. Why does this have to be applied to only a portion of the schools? One would think publics that kick ass for long periods of time in a class would want to try higher levels of competition.

Kind of like those super privileged kids from East St. Louis voluntarily did not once for 2 years, but, twice for 2 years. That schools attitude was they wanted additional challenges rather than dominate a lower level, but, surely that is due to how privileged they are. They, of course, are the kids that have been provided with every advantage in the world at one of the wealthiest schools in the state.

 

[BBCHS77]

HHS/BBC.... don’t you ever stop and just smell the roses? Or take a vacation? You sound so shrill and bitter about your single most favorite topic - multipliers and success factors.

I think most would agree that a success factor should be applied universally. Not everything is developed and designed to “equal” all playing fields. A success factor in my opinion is exactly what the name suggests - if you kick ass for a long period of time in a class - then you go up and theoretically face higher levels of competition. Why does this have to be applied to only a portion of the schools? One would think publics that kick ass for long periods of time in a class would want to try higher levels of competition.

Most do not agree that it should be applied to all schools, why punish a school for being successful when they play under the same rules?

You are looking at it wrong, the SF is simply a way to tier the private schools, to differentiate between the schools that choose to be football factories and those that do not

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... You are wasting your time. In his mind ALL Catholic school football success has been and will always be a direct result of the 30 mile rule and his umm.... ehh... "true" feelings on this particular group of private schools. It doesn't matter how many additional measures can be applied to reach this pie in the sky idea of a level playing field, which I mentioned before in a previous post was fixed by the multiplier. For him it has never been about that. Quite sad really. Ratsy

Thats another mistake by you and why so many people in IHSS have blocked you, the multiplier did NOT fix the problem.. even most private schools admitted so..

How successful would SHG be if they had to draw their kids from a defined boundary, of say just the Springfield school district?

 

[Bowie50]

Nobody has said they don't have great coaching staffs, but put KL at any other CS8 school and he doesn't have near the success..

Discrimination?? LOL, I am the one wanting an EQUAL system.. You are the one that feels entitled to your advantage and are crying now that its partially being taken away

Discrimination is indeed happening, thats what its called when one set of schools can draw in football kids from a huge area while others are limited to a MUCH smaller area..

huh?

 

[cornerrat]

Thats another mistake by you and why so many people in IHSS have blocked you, the multiplier did NOT fix the problem.. even most private schools admitted so..

How successful would SHG be if they had to draw their kids from a defined boundary, of say just the Springfield school district?

All.... Running low on material I see HHS. What was your response in post #66 in this subject thread? lol

YOUR question on SHG is not complete and YOU must include additional information having posed it. That would be how many Cyclone players currently reside in what is considered public school Spfld. district 186. Of course you don't know. If you did it would make you unhappy and I seriously doubt a post on that matter. Fishing not going so well for you today. Have to run it's been fun. Ratsy P.S. Don't worry I won't vote yes for your expulsion off this board. Rarely do I giggle this much.. I don't want to lose that.

 

[BBCHS77]

All.... Running low on material I see HHS. What was your response in post #66 in this subject thread? lol

YOUR question on SHG is not complete and YOU must include additional information having posed it. That would be how many Cyclone players currently reside in what is considered public school Spfld. district 186. Of course you don't know. If you did it would make you unhappy and I seriously doubt a post on that matter. Fishing not going so well for you today. Ratsy

So even then, if they would get ALL of their kids from 186, thats a district they can draw from that has about 5000 kids and they drop down and play in 5A or 6A... sprinkle in a few All Stars from other towns, bam you have a state contender..