Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Weird looking district for Naz but offers some tests and some sure W's too.I'll take it. Road games up the road from me.
That said the ESCC is tougher.
It's basically KenoshaNot sure where some of these northside teams play, but SR would be playing games at Rita, Gately, Hanson, St. Patricks? Interesting.
Scheduling tough non-cons early in the schedule then "playing down" in a weaker schedule the rest of the season due to a softer district/conference can negate the effect of the former. I would wonder if the schedule openings for non-cons across the state could be sprinkled in later in the season some way? Altho just an anecdotal case, H-F schedules tough non-cons earlier, hits LWE not long after in recent seasons, then seem to lose their edge as they play out their assigned string of lower tier opposition. Come playoffs, it can be difficult to then play 4 quarters in a more competitive game.All.... What I see for power teams that benefit greatly with this district formula will be the importance of scheduling their one or two non con games. If you are stuck in what is now a weak district it is quite important to play a team(s) that will test yours. One good aspect of this proposal is after two years a school could go to a different district. Ratsy
Scheduling tough non-cons early in the schedule then "playing down" in a weaker schedule the rest of the season due to a softer district/conference can negate the effect of the former. I would wonder if the schedule openings for non-cons across the state could be sprinkled in later in the season some way? Altho just an anecdotal case, H-F schedules tough non-cons earlier, hits LWE not long after in recent seasons, then seem to lose their edge as they play out their assigned string of lower tier opposition. Come playoffs, it can be difficult to then play 4 quarters in a more competitive game.
Weird looking district for Naz but offers some tests and some sure W's too.
Can't complain about my 8A district although I don't see how we escspe the Naperville/Aurora district. But seeing the two Glenbards and Downers Groves isn't bad.
This just looks terrible with some of the cps teams. 99% of cps won’t stand a chance. There’s gotta be a way to do this without having montini playing little village and phoenix military.
But with the noncon games being irrelevant for playoff purposes there is no incentive to go all out to win those. Not that teams wouldn't care, but I could see key players resting injuries and game plans being really vanilla especially late in the season. Early season non-con games as you said would be subject to the typical issues.All.... Yes that is true. The real benefit is a team will have time to correct any apparent weakness they might have by playing those teams. Unfortunately that could be hard to distinguish since weeks 1 and 2 mistakes are common with new varsity players and getting into ones normal playing rhythm. I suppose bookend non cons might be an idea or if it is logistically possible finish the regular season with out of district games.
While all of this is interesting if it gets far enough for a membership vote I don't think it will pass. Conference jumping is happening but those schools are number wise in the minority. Ratsy
No can do. But you can have GBN and GBW.I think this would change depending on where you start working on the districts. Would it not?
Regardless I’d like to reconfigure District 4 and 5. To fit my desires!!
My preferred 9 team district!! East Aurora, West Aurora, Metea Valley, York, Glenbard East, Waubonsie Valley, Neuqua, Oswego, Oswego East.
3 to 4 very winnable games and 2 or 3 tough ones as well.
Bones.... I’m Taking York, and Glenbard East, and trading you Naper Central and Naper North in return
Aside from proximity to you I hate it. ESCC much tougher and more compelling matchups as well.I'll take it. Road games up the road from me.
That said the ESCC is tougher.
I share this opinion. I just like being able to walk to a Naz game.Aside from proximity to you I hate it. ESCC much tougher and more compelling matchups as well.
Loved looking at it! Thanks for all of your hard work!From what I understand, it has to go through committee. And then to a group vote, if this is happening we'll probably know about it around the conclusion of the 2018 season or shortly thereafter.
I've heard a few other things, from people in the know, that are of interest to this. Apparently the CPL is pliable in terms of whether or not all of their teams get into this format. If that's true, and say for example, just the top 25 or so teams from the CPL are allowed to enter the field to give us a clean 512, and eight districts in each class with eight teams in each district a lot of these become A LOT cleaner. I haven't drawn one to reflect this change, because I don't know what it officially does include and does not and as we all know it is very significant what happens on the break lines. Very important teams reside at 64/65 128/129 etc.....
While I'd love to see the geographic "solution" suggests by practiceplan, I can't see them dropping schools down a class. I could however, see where they might move them up one if they agreed to it in lieu of the beast mode travel situation. But it is also unlikely in my eyes.
A hybrid plan that would include districts of say teams from 7A/8A for example, has major problems in regards to how you would make up playoff fields. I know a way it could be done. But it is somewhat complicated for someone to follow who may or may not spend his days scrambling through spreadsheets on playoff pairings night.
I've gotten a LOT of feedback from a lot of people over the past few days and with that, I think this could get through. I did have someone tell me that they probably weren't going to put out a mock because they wanted to have people vote for the concept rather than being concerned with having a team or two they did not like in their district. I get that, but I think it is a really worthwhile conversation to have with the information (sort of) laid out there to see exactly what we might be dealing with rather than random hypothetical situations.
I'm gonna crawl back in my hole now, thanks for the feedback guys!
From what I understand, it has to go through committee. And then to a group vote, if this is happening we'll probably know about it around the conclusion of the 2018 season or shortly thereafter.
I've heard a few other things, from people in the know, that are of interest to this. Apparently the CPL is pliable in terms of whether or not all of their teams get into this format. If that's true, and say for example, just the top 25 or so teams from the CPL are allowed to enter the field to give us a clean 512, and eight districts in each class with eight teams in each district a lot of these become A LOT cleaner. I haven't drawn one to reflect this change, because I don't know what it officially does include and does not and as we all know it is very significant what happens on the break lines. Very important teams reside at 64/65 128/129 etc.....
While I'd love to see the geographic "solution" suggests by practiceplan, I can't see them dropping schools down a class. I could however, see where they might move them up one if they agreed to it in lieu of the beast mode travel situation. But it is also unlikely in my eyes.
A hybrid plan that would include districts of say teams from 7A/8A for example, has major problems in regards to how you would make up playoff fields. I know a way it could be done. But it is somewhat complicated for someone to follow who may or may not spend his days scrambling through spreadsheets on playoff pairings night.
I've gotten a LOT of feedback from a lot of people over the past few days and with that, I think this could get through. I did have someone tell me that they probably weren't going to put out a mock because they wanted to have people vote for the concept rather than being concerned with having a team or two they did not like in their district. I get that, but I think it is a really worthwhile conversation to have with the information (sort of) laid out there to see exactly what we might be dealing with rather than random hypothetical situations.
I'm gonna crawl back in my hole now, thanks for the feedback guys!
But with the noncon games being irrelevant for playoff purposes there is no incentive to go all out to win those. Not that teams wouldn't care, but I could see key players resting injuries and game plans being really vanilla especially late in the season. Early season non-con games as you said would be subject to the typical issues.
From what I understand, it has to go through committee. And then to a group vote, if this is happening we'll probably know about it around the conclusion of the 2018 season or shortly thereafter.
I've heard a few other things, from people in the know, that are of interest to this. Apparently the CPL is pliable in terms of whether or not all of their teams get into this format. If that's true, and say for example, just the top 25 or so teams from the CPL are allowed to enter the field to give us a clean 512, and eight districts in each class with eight teams in each district a lot of these become A LOT cleaner. I haven't drawn one to reflect this change, because I don't know what it officially does include and does not and as we all know it is very significant what happens on the break lines. Very important teams reside at 64/65 128/129 etc.....
While I'd love to see the geographic "solution" suggests by practiceplan, I can't see them dropping schools down a class. I could however, see where they might move them up one if they agreed to it in lieu of the beast mode travel situation. But it is also unlikely in my eyes.
A hybrid plan that would include districts of say teams from 7A/8A for example, has major problems in regards to how you would make up playoff fields. I know a way it could be done. But it is somewhat complicated for someone to follow who may or may not spend his days scrambling through spreadsheets on playoff pairings night.
I've gotten a LOT of feedback from a lot of people over the past few days and with that, I think this could get through. I did have someone tell me that they probably weren't going to put out a mock because they wanted to have people vote for the concept rather than being concerned with having a team or two they did not like in their district. I get that, but I think it is a really worthwhile conversation to have with the information (sort of) laid out there to see exactly what we might be dealing with rather than random hypothetical situations.
I'm gonna crawl back in my hole now, thanks for the feedback guys!
I would be very interested to learn the number of football playing schools back in 2000, which was the first year the IHSA went from six to eight classes, and the number of football playing schools right now. Since 2000, I strongly suspect there has been a net loss in the number of football playing schools what with the increase in co-ops, schools that have dropped football altogether, schools that have moved to 8-man football, and schools that have closed.
Football participation numbers have been trending down for some time now and there is no realistic end in sight to that downward trend. At what point will fewer football playing schools cause the IHSA to reduce the number of classes?
From the IHSA Football Quick Facts page on the website:
17 - 552
16 - 575
15 - 554
14 - 575
13 - 576
12 - 577
11 - 563
10 - 547
09 - 549
08 - 550
07 - 560
06 - 554
05 - 550
04 - 549
03 - 556
02 - 550
01 - 545
00 - 545
99 - 545
98 - 543
97 - 544
96 - 544
95 - 541
94 - 543
93 - 544
92 - 548
91 - 550
90 - 552
89 - 560
88 - 567
74 - 529
So, the high number of schools is: 577
low number last 30 years is: 541
first years of playoffs in '74: 529
I'm trying to figure out the 20 school swings the last couple of years...Is it perhaps smaller rural schools dropping / consolidating / co-oping while CPS schools add charters etc.?
I'm as interested in finding the movement of the enrollment breakdown in classes
Maybe districts are the right thing to do to keep the conference jumping from happening but I still think its going to be tough to keep schools happy.
I know this idea would probably not be to popular either, but hear me out.
First we drop one regular season game and add one additional playoff game. So bringing the playoff field to a total of 512! To determine who the 512 schools are you use records and playoff points like IHSA does now. I really don't think that the schools with the worse records and least amount of playoff points would really care if they don't make the playoffs. If they want a 9th game they can possibly schedule a game with another team that won't make the playoffs right towards the end of the regular season!
So would this have a possibility of working, or am I way off in left field here?
Class 6A District 6 (St. Laurence, Hinsdale South, Lemont, Richards and Providence) would be a load annually.