2023 MN High School Football season

Donate To GopherHole

short ornery norwegian said:
the MSHSL - showing their typical spineless approach:

instead of making a real decision on seeding, they cop out and say "we'll let each sport decide for themselves."
Click to expand...
Serious question as you obviously pay significantly greater attention to these issues than I do, why is it bad that they are letting each sport decide what's best for that sport? Do you think that all sports should have the same system or just that the League should be the entity that decides for each sport?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
another issue - Boys Volleyball will be a sanctioned sport starting in '24-'25. The MSHSL decided to make it a Spring Sport. The Spring Sports coaches were strongly opposed. But the VB coaches didn't want Boys and Girls VB in the same season, because some of those coaches will now be able to coach both Boys and Girls.
Click to expand...
It should be a spring sport.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Serious question as you obviously pay significantly greater attention to these issues than I do, why is it bad that they are letting each sport decide what's best for that sport? Do you think that all sports should have the same system or just that the League should be the entity that decides for each sport?
Click to expand...
it's the latter. the MSHSL is supposed to be the organization that governs HS sports in the State. for better or worse, they are supposed to be a representative body that makes the final decisions. and yet, time after time, they make a conscious choice - and that choice is "we don't want to choose." I just think that the MSHSL passes the buck far too often when they are faced with making a decision.

beyond that, yes, I do think that all sports should have the same system for seeding State Tournaments for reasons of consistency. so now, it falls on each Sport to choose. who is going to make that choice and how is it going to be made? a vote of every coach in the state? this just creates more issues.
 

2nd Degree Gopher said:
Serious question as you obviously pay significantly greater attention to these issues than I do, why is it bad that they are letting each sport decide what's best for that sport? Do you think that all sports should have the same system or just that the League should be the entity that decides for each sport?
Click to expand...
If I had to guess, it's because the MSHSL is notoriously wishy washy and spineless, and this is just another example.
 


Gopher 461 said:
Big matchup tomorrow night. EP at Minnetonka. All of EP's OL road graders are healthy so Tonka has to bring their A game to be competitive. Weather shouldn't be a factor.
Click to expand...
Having seen both play, EP is just too physical. No disrespect to Tonka, but I don't see this one being close with Tonka's very talented QB out.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
the MSHSL - showing their typical spineless approach:

instead of making a real decision on seeding, they cop out and say "we'll let each sport decide for themselves."

again - here's the skinny on what they decided:

starting with the '24-'25 school year, each team sport (including Football) can choose 1 of 3 options for seeding state tournaments:
1. seed 1-8
2. seed 1-5 with random draw for last 3 teams
3. no seeding - with matchups determined by sections (1 vs 3, 2 vs 4 and so on)

the option that is chosen will be in effect for 4 years.

so, you now have a system where one sport may seed 1-8 and a different sport may seed 1-5.

the MSHSL chose by not making a choice and dumping it on the individual sports to decide.

sports with multiple classes must use the same seeding option for all classes. sports that have boys and girls must use same seeding option for both sexes.

-----

AND - the Football advisory committee requested approval for this season to seed the Semi-Final round 1-4 in each class. the Board voted "No" because that would go against their new seeding policy - which doesn't go into effect for another year.

------

another issue - Boys Volleyball will be a sanctioned sport starting in '24-'25. The MSHSL decided to make it a Spring Sport. The Spring Sports coaches were strongly opposed. But the VB coaches didn't want Boys and Girls VB in the same season, because some of those coaches will now be able to coach both Boys and Girls.
Click to expand...
Another huge issue with fall boys VB is court space
 


2nd Degree Gopher said:
Serious question as you obviously pay significantly greater attention to these issues than I do, why is it bad that they are letting each sport decide what's best for that sport? Do you think that all sports should have the same system or just that the League should be the entity that decides for each sport?
Click to expand...
Agreed. Who thinks a 22 person Board knows better?
 




Some guy said:
Another huge issue with fall boys VB is court space
Click to expand...
Spring is bad for spring sports with weather, but good for coaching to grow the sport. Fall would have been fine for gym space with Girls volleyball. Winter has basketball, wrestling and dance all in gyms. It will be interesting to see how fast boys volleyball grows.
 


Boys' and men's (college) volleyball is a spring sport. It is a spring sport, just like football is a fall sport.

There's nothing to discuss. Plus, it has other benefits being in the spring.

Absolutely the right call for it to be spring.


Plus one of the arguments the sponsors made to the MSHSL in order to argue for it to be sanctioned was showing that the boys vball athletes were new spring athletes, not stealing from baseball, track, and lacrosse. That was/is largely true.

Good


OK, back to football
 






The EP at Minnetonka game was three games within one. The first half was dominated by EP and they led 21-0. Tonka must have received a motivational speech at half time as they dominated the third quarter, cutting the lead to 21-14. EP put the game away in the fourth quarter with a drive taking nine plus minutes and scored a TD making the final 28-14. The EP OL road graders worked very well tonight. So fellow GopherHolers know here's the EP offensive front from LE to RE: 6'5"/205, 6'2"/290, 6'7"/300, 6'1"/275, 6'2"/255, 6'5"/270, 6'4"/255.
 

Welp there goes Hopkins’ final hope for avoiding a second straight winless season losing 30-0 to Roseville. They need to be moved to 5A. It’s ridiculous.
 

GopherPharmaBiz said:
Welp there goes Hopkins’ final hope for avoiding a second straight winless season losing 30-0 to Roseville. They need to be moved to 5A. It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure they'd be any better in 5A. The entire program needs an overhaul.

Forest Lake was historically bad for about 20 years. Last year they ended the season ranked in the top ten in 6A and are one of the better teams in the metro.
 

GopherPharmaBiz said:
Welp there goes Hopkins’ final hope for avoiding a second straight winless season losing 30-0 to Roseville. They need to be moved to 5A. It’s ridiculous.
Click to expand...
They lost 30-0 to the second worst team in the state.
They probably need to do things differently.
They’ve already been given a schedule with 5 of the 6 worst teams in the state on it (they themselves being the other).

Let’s say they could beat St. Louis park (I’m not convinced), why should some lower level team be given a loss so they can get a win? What right does Hopkins have a right to win games over Minneapolis Roosevelt or Minneapolis southwest (if that’s who you scheduled to get Hopkins a win)?

They should try hiring a coach who has enough of a circle to fill out a 6a coaching staff for a start
 

What right does SLP have to not be put in 6A?

Why even hand out more than one state championship trophy?

If you’re going to classify different schools, then the criteria should be fair and reasonable.

Right now, they aren’t even close.
 



MplsGopher said:
What right does SLP have to not be put in 6A?

Why even hand out more than one state championship trophy?

If you’re going to classify different schools, then the criteria should be fair and reasonable.

Right now, they aren’t even close.
Click to expand...
St. Louis Park is not a 32 top enrollment. If you take a straight enrollment,

Moorhead, Spring Lake Park, Robbinsdale Armstrong and Brainerd would move up.
Lakeville South, Lakeville North, and Hopkins.

Based on this site. https://www.publicschoolreview.com/school-size-stats/minnesota/high

MSHSL has free and reduced lunch stipulations that factor into the enrollments. According to this site Hopkins is the 51st largest school in the state, taking out the online school.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
St. Louis Park is not a 32 top enrollment. If you take a straight enrollment,

Moorhead, Spring Lake Park, Robbinsdale Armstrong and Brainerd would move up.
Lakeville South, Lakeville North, and Hopkins.

Based on this site. https://www.publicschoolreview.com/school-size-stats/minnesota/high

MSHSL has free and reduced lunch stipulations that factor into the enrollments. According to this site Hopkins is the 51st largest school in the state, taking out the online school.
Click to expand...

I question some of the numbers on that list, but there's one glaring problem in the list regarding Hopkins having nothing to do with the reduced lunch stipulation.

The MSHSL classifies high schools for classification by grades 9-12. Hopkins was the last major metro school to be 10-12 and still using a Junior High model. This site lists Hopkins as 10-12, and if it's going by raw numbers of people who attend that building, that would mean the 9-12 population would be closer to 2000, which would put Hopkins about 21st, which I think is more accurate.
 

A few games of interest tonight:

9-Player:
#5 Ogilvie (5-0) at #4 Nevis (5-0)
Hills-Beaver Creek (5-0) at #8 Edgerton (4-0).

On Saturday: #9 Kingsland (5-0) at #7 LeRoy-Ostrander (5-0)

1A:
#8 Parkers Prairie (5-0) at (class 2A) Staples-Motley (4-1)
Mayer Lutheran (4-1) at #10 Lester Prairie (4-1)

2A:
#3 Chatfield (5-0) at #2 Caledonia (5-0) !!!!!!!
#10 K-M-S (5-0) at (class 1A) Upsala-Swanville (4-1)

3A:
#4 (4A) Detroit Lakes (5-0) at #7 (3A) D-G-F (4-1)

4A:
#7 Rocori (4-1) at #1 Becker (5-0)
#10 Kasson-Mantorville (4-1) at #3 Byron (5-0)
Chisago Lakes (4-1) at #6 Princeton (5-0)

5A:
Owatonna (4-1) at #3 Mankato West (4-1)
#9 Robbinsdale Cooper (4-1) at Bloomington Jefferson (4-1)

6A:
#7 Centennial (4-1) at #9 Anoka (4-1)
 

disco said:
I question some of the numbers on that list, but there's one glaring problem in the list regarding Hopkins having nothing to do with the reduced lunch stipulation.

The MSHSL classifies high schools for classification by grades 9-12. Hopkins was the last major metro school to be 10-12 and still using a Junior High model. This site lists Hopkins as 10-12, and if it's going by raw numbers of people who attend that building, that would mean the 9-12 population would be closer to 2000, which would put Hopkins about 21st, which I think is more accurate.
Click to expand...
That is accounted for in the calculation, yes
 

Hopkins is listed as 1677 (9-12) adjusted by the high school league. The high school also has 40.3% free and reduced. That seems REALLY high for a school located in the city of Minnetonka, but I expect a lot of that is open enrolled kids.

I don't know the exact formula, but that leads me to think actual enrollment in grades 9-12 is closer to the 2000 I mentioned above. It's definitely in the top 32 and should be classified as such.
 

disco said:
Hopkins is listed as 1677 (9-12) adjusted by the high school league. The high school also has 40.3% free and reduced. That seems REALLY high for a school located in the city of Minnetonka, but I expect a lot of that is open enrolled kids.

I don't know the exact formula, but that leads me to think actual enrollment in grades 9-12 is closer to the 2000 I mentioned above. It's definitely in the top 32 and should be classified as such.
Click to expand...
The 1677 is after a 40% reduction per each Free and reduced kid.
So the 1677 is not actual enrollment it is the MSHSL enrollment, it is the enrollment for classification purposes.

Someone with better math skills than me could figure out what that means.


But my guess is their actual 9-12 enrollment (prorated since they are 10-12) is about 2150
 

Some guy said:
The 1677 is after a 40% reduction per each Free and reduced kid.
So the 1677 is not actual enrollment it is the MSHSL enrollment, it is the enrollment for classification purposes.

Someone with better math skills than me could figure out what that means.


But my guess is their actual 9-12 enrollment (prorated since they are 10-12) is about 2150
Click to expand...
We're on the same page. In any case, we agree that is not a school that should be 5A just because they suck at football.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom