This is what's wrong with The State High School League

[GophersInIowa]

Basketball is different than football and the difference in rules between college divisions and high school divisions does factor into your question, but to give a straight-forward answer, yes, yes, the duluth players would get better by playing against a Big Ten team. They'd get more national exposure losing in the first round against the highest level competition than they did winning d2.

I guess I'll just have to disagree. The exposure thing doesn't relate to high school sports. Recruiting is not nearly as big of a factor in HS. Either way, I don't see how losing by 50 in one game is better than going 4-0 against good competition and winning a championship.

D1 college basketball is worthy of emulating. You give everyone a chance to play in the big tournament, then hold other tournaments for non-qualifiers to give more post-season opportunities to teams so they can travel and play other schools they wouldn't normally play in the regular season. If the NCAA were to adopt the MSHSL way of doing things, Ohio, Lehigh, VCU and Butler would play exclusively in the NIT. Let the kids play.

Not a good comparison. The Butler's and VCU's could compete if they all of a sudden were put in the Big Ten. You throw BBE or Browerville into the Lake or Northwest Suburban Conference and they won't stand a chance. A better comparison would be having Division I, II, and III schools all play for one championship.

 

[GophersInIowa]

A good reason to have just one class is the normal basketball fan will have a larger desire to go watch if his or her school is out. People want to see games that produce a true champion.

Multiple classes makes sense for football, but basketball, you only need 5 guys on the court.

Then you would also agree that the NCAA should do away with having different divisions, right? No more Division I, II, or III.

 

[MaxyJR1]

People are focused too much on the on court benefits of one class. We would all love to see 1 champ. However, you need to look further at the off court situations. Small towns are now smaller then ever and school are combining to have a program. Look at Montgomery-Lonsdale and Le Center. They are a 2A and 1A school combining next year, however they have to combine this year in girl's basketball just to have a team. People are moving closer to the metro area. Metro teams because of population can handle kids having other interests. Outstate schools can not. Add in money and many kids in smaller towns are working more then ever before.

I would support forcing private schools up a class, but times are different now and fewer then three classes doesn't work anymore. Take into account weight training, access, education, time, and we are not comparing apples to apples.

The MSHSL actually added classes in part due to declining attendance at State. They could make up the money loss by adding classes and through T.V. rights. In this day and age unless you are a fanatic like us on this board, you will only go watch your school play.

Looking at the 2A field here are some results from the year.

Plainview-Elgin-Milville lost to Osseo (State) by 24 and Henry Sibley (14-13) by 1.
St. Peter beat Rocori (3A State Participant) by 3.
Perham beat St. Thomas Academy (18-11 in 3A) by 5.
Braham lost to Hopkins (#1 Team at State) by 35.

 

[AO54]

I guess I'll just have to disagree. The exposure thing doesn't relate to high school sports. Recruiting is not nearly as big of a factor in HS. Either way, I don't see how losing by 50 in one game is better than going 4-0 against good competition and winning a championship.
Not a good comparison. The Butler's and VCU's could compete if they all of a sudden were put in the Big Ten. You throw BBE or Browerville into the Lake or Northwest Suburban Conference and they won't stand a chance. A better comparison would be having Division I, II, and III schools all play for one championship.

The exposure thing matters a lot to the athletes and fans. You don't have to measure your exposure boost in terms of new practice facilities or booster donations.

As I've said before, you don't have to eliminate the class A and AA tournaments, just hold them separately from the one-class State Tournament. It's not rocket science. If you don't want to add games, you could shorten the regular season or make the regular season more important by only inviting the .500 teams to the tourney. This would go along fine with your desire to avoid the 50 point losses we see in the 1 vs 8 games.

You throw Butler and VCU into the Big Ten in most years of the last 20 and they get beat just as bad as BBE would in the Lake. Schnauzer put it best when he talked about the occassion when a small school can compete with the big boys. You wouldn't put them in the same conference most years, but there does exist times when they can compete. Contrary to popular belief, small school kids can play. Give them a chance.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I agree with the notion, stated above, that the "casual" fan doesn't go to the games anymore. When I was in college, my brother and our friends used to go to state just to see what the good teams looked like in person. Now that we're older with families, houses and bills, we don't go anymore. It's easier to sit at home and watch the semis and finals on TV.

Also, think about this - in the glory days of the state tournament, the NCAA tournament was an afterthought. now it dominates the sports scene in March - the exact same time the state tournament is going on. Also, we live in a world with multiple entertainment options, 100+ channels of cable t-v, video games, etc. A lot more options, too, for the sports fan, with pro BB, college BB, etc.

 

[Schnauzer]

Maxy, I disagree on all your points. Keep in mind, I am not necessarily advocating one class. I'm simply saying the current format is killing interest, and isn't serving any kids by giving them a better experience.

1. Not sure where you get the idea more kids from small schools are working now. In my experience, that rate has remained steady and hasn't cut into the quality of high school basketball. I'm not sure how the loss of programs by consolidation means things can be improved by MORE classes. I'd argue just the opposite is true.

2. I see no difference in weight training, access, time, etc. when comparing schools. In fact, the prospect of having indoor facilities available for individual work outs can actually be better outstate compared to litigation-minded suburban gyms.

3. Overall attendance has remained similar in the tournament simply because there are so many more teams participating. This is obvious proof that the drop off has actually been with basketball fanatics (like us) that DON'T have a horse in the race, not the participating schools.

 

[MaxyJR1]

Maxy, I disagree on all your points. Keep in mind, I am not necessarily advocating one class. I'm simply saying the current format is killing interest, and isn't serving any kids by giving them a better experience.

1. Not sure where you get the idea more kids from small schools are working now. In my experience, that rate has remained steady and hasn't cut into the quality of high school basketball. I'm not sure how the loss of programs by consolidation means things can be improved by MORE classes. I'd argue just the opposite is true.

2. I see no difference in weight training, access, time, etc. when comparing schools. In fact, the prospect of having indoor facilities available for individual work outs can actually be better outstate compared to litigation-minded suburban gyms.

3. Overall attendance has remained similar in the tournament simply because there are so many more teams participating. This is obvious proof that the drop off has actually been with basketball fanatics (like us) that DON'T have a horse in the race, not the participating schools.

You make some excellent points. I'm not clear on your 3rd point. The attendance would not be similar had they not added classes. The outstate teams actually play in front of larger crowds all year long. The metro sections play in smaller venues for sections then outstate.

To your point #1. When I played we went to state and had 25 kids out for basketball and they were all jrs. and srs. My school made state this year and they have fewer kids out and had to fill out roster with underclassment. Look at the small schools in girls basketball. They fill out rosters with 9th and 8th graders. That didn't happen 20 years ago. You didn't dress for varsity as a underclassmen unless you started. This also spreads the gap between small and larger schools.

 

[zambam]

I would support forcing private schools up a class, but times are different now and fewer then three classes doesn't work anymore. Take into account weight training, access, education, time, and we are not comparing apples to apples.

I don't think you can just make all private schools move up a class. I know my school and private school nearby would not be able to compete at 2A in most sports other than maybe baseball.

I think you miss the point and you also miss a reality of small town basketball. First, the people missing from the state tournament seats are the people with casual interest, not the fans from the participating schools - big or small.

Second, small town fans tend to follow their teams as a form of community pride and the reality that they likely know or recognize the players even if they don't have a connection to the school. This is usually not the case with big or private schools where parents and students make up the bulk of the fan base. At the subsection and section playoffs, small school game crowds are often as big or even bigger than 4A games. At the state tourney big school games do draw more because they attract more neutral fans.

I understand that the big school draw bigger crowds, and ya you're right about small towns having a large following of basically the entire town. But I don't get what this has to do about people saying that there isn't enough attendance. Do people really think that small schools would rather play in front of more people than they normally do just to get killed? I guarantee the teams in the State Tournament would rather have the chance to actually win a championship.

 

[GophersInIowa]

The exposure thing matters a lot to the athletes and fans. You don't have to measure your exposure boost in terms of new practice facilities or booster donations.

I'm confused with what you're trying to say here. You originally said that the UMD football team would be better off losing to a Big Ten team because that will get them more exposure. I assumed you meant that would help elevate their program even more (help recruiting, donations, etc.) But if you are saying that it would be better for UMD because the kids and fans would have more pride by getting their butt kicked over winning a D2 championship, I think you are completely wrong. Nothing brings out the pride in your school more than winning, no matter who it's against.

As I've said before, you don't have to eliminate the class A and AA tournaments, just hold them separately from the one-class State Tournament. It's not rocket science. If you don't want to add games, you could shorten the regular season or make the regular season more important by only inviting the .500 teams to the tourney. This would go along fine with your desire to avoid the 50 point losses we see in the 1 vs 8 games.

So are you saying, have two classes and each one decide their own state champion? Then afterwards, have another tournament with the top teams from each class? Or would it be the two championship teams playing each other?

You throw Butler and VCU into the Big Ten in most years of the last 20 and they get beat just as bad as BBE would in the Lake.

I completely disagree.

Schnauzer put it best when he talked about the occassion when a small school can compete with the big boys. You wouldn't put them in the same conference most years, but there does exist times when they can compete. Contrary to popular belief, small school kids can play. Give them a chance.

I played at a very small school so I know this. I know small schools have beaten some big schools before. It's just very rare and takes a very special team to accomplish it.

 

[Schnauzer]

Two quick points and I'll shut up for fear of being a soapbox preacher jamming my opinion down your throats every time somone differs with me...

First, Maxy, my third point is saying that the attendance figures are what they are simply because so many more teams are now in the tournament. If there were half as many teams, the attendance figures would probably be similar with the loss in fans from participating schools replaced with general fans interested to see THE tournament and/or a David/Goliath matchup.

Next, zambam, I think our differences begin and end with the prospect of a little school beating a big school at basketball. While I would argue this has happened with semi-regularity in the past in many state tournaments as well as the present during the regular season, and the prospect of competitive games between schools of differing sizes would draw attention to the games; it appears your point is small schools simply can't compete with big ones (ever?) so there isn't a point in even playing those games. There is a big difference between a school like Sleepy Eye competing in the same conference or regularly with Wayzata, compared to a once-in-a-generation team from Sleepy Eye catching Wayzata in a state tournament. I think there is a huge distinction between those two situations and it appears to me you are lumping them together.

 

[zambam]

Two quick points and I'll shut up for fear of being a soapbox screamer jamming my opinion down your throats every time somone differs with me...

First, Maxy, my third point is saying that the attendance figures are what they are simply because so many more teams are now in the tournament. If there were half as many teams, the attendance figures would probably be similar with the loss in fans from participating schools replaced with general fans interested to see THE tournament and/or a David/Goliath matchup.

Next, zambam, I think our differences begin and end with the prospect of a little school beating a big school at basketball. While I would argue this has happened with semi-regularity in the past in many state tournaments as well as the present during the regular season, and the prospect of competitive games between schools of differing sizes would draw attention to the games; it appears your point is small schools simply can't compete with big ones (ever?) so there isn't a point in even playing those games. There is a big difference between a school like Sleepy Eye competing in the same conference or regularly with Wayzata, compared to a once-in-a-generation team from Sleepy Eye catching Wayzata in a state tournament. I think there is a huge distinction between those two situations and it appears to me you are lumping them together.

I'm not lumping them together, I'm thinking that small schools would rather have a chnce to win a championship more than once in a generation. Those once-in-a-generation teams only exist once in a generation, and the rest of the time they aren't going to have that chance to win a championship. Some small schools right now require once-in-a-generation teams just to compete in the class they are in right now.

 

[sunnyday2]

What's really wrong with the MSHSL is that they run the tournament(s) for the kids and not for us fans? What would really be wrong is if they did it the other way around.

 

[station19]

No matter how many classes there are, there will always be pluses and minuses to each.

On the down side of the one class tournament a couple of things come to mind.

1. Bemdji was the only town with a population over 500 people in their region(region 8 I believe) and they went to the state tournament about 3 of every 4 years. Yes I am exaggerating.

2. Wilmar had some tremendous teams in the 50s and 60s but was in the same region (5) as the Lake Conference and could never get to state. This was when the Lake Conference was THE CONFERENCE in Minnesota by far.

 

[WolfontheProwl]

The real reason that the crowds are down at the State High School League Tournaments has nothing to do with how the tournament is run its how easy it is to get information. Almost everyone has a chance to watch the state tournament on TV or via the internet. In the past not everyone had access to the state tournament promoting more fans to go watch the games. Also as time has moved on its not as easy to get off from work to simply go watch basketball.

Lets also remember basketball has changed. I know some especially the older crowd loves the idea of David vs Goliath but the gap between David and Goliath has grown. Take Ellsworth for example they went to 3 straight Class A title games winning two and finishing in the top 3 4 straight years. They were willing to take on some top AAAA schools in Holiday Tournaments and got destroyed. Those Ellsworth teams had 3 and 4 kids who went on to play D-1, D-II, and D-III college basketball. The game hasnt changed over the years all that much but how schools prepare to play the games have. I am all for a tournament of champions that has been thrown around as of late but I wouldnt get away from the 4 class system. Either way it wont help the crowds at the games.

 

[dpodoll68]

Take Ellsworth for example they went to 3 straight Class A title games winning two and finishing in the top 3 4 straight years. They were willing to take on some top AAAA schools in Holiday Tournaments and got destroyed.

What? No, they didn't.

 

[Juicer]

I agree that the gap has widened between the large schools and the small schools. Take 1996 as an example, the final year of the Sweet 16, single champion format. There were still 2 classes; 2A and 1A, but in the tourney there were 8 1A and 8 2A schools. At the time, and for the 2 years this format was in existence, it was a great format. Small schools performed very well; in 1996 3 out of 4 teams to make it to the semifinals were 1A schools (Minnehaha Academy, Staples, and Fertile-Beltrami). Minnehaha Academy beat Eden Prairie that year (ranked #2 in the state behind MPLS North) in the quarterfinals.

That kind of action would just simply never happen anymore. The only "small" school that consistently can play at the highest level in the state is De La Salle, and they can do so because of their reputation as a powerhouse and a school that can attract and product top talent and scholarship worthy.

Could Staples beat Hopkins today? Nope, and it won't happen in the future either. Too many kids with talent are too highly concentrated at the bigger schools, and those kids are now specialists in playing basketball (fewer multi-sport kids).

 

[zubb]

Minnesota should go back to the two class tournament! The biggest joke is the 3a class. Many of the teams play in 4a confrences - then drop down for playoffs. Not to mention the fact that many of the 3a schools are better then 4a schools

 

[zambam]

Minnesota should go back to the two class tournament! The biggest joke is the 3a class. Many of the teams play in 4a confrences - then drop down for playoffs. Not to mention the fact that many of the 3a schools are better then 4a schools

So they should go to a 3 class system? Combine less 2A schools with 1A, Lesser 3A schools with the rest of 2A, and the better 3A schools with 4A

 

[zubb]

I think 3a and 4a could be combined and 1a and 2a could. Not sure about border schools- would have to look at enrollment numbers.

 

[sunnyday2]

The re

al reason that the crowds are down at the State High School League Tournaments has nothing to do with how the tournament is run its how easy it is to get information. Almost everyone has a chance to watch the state tournament on TV or via the internet.

This is ridiculous. By this logic, the NFL and the NCAA tournament (just to name 2) would be belly up in a week.

And no format change is going to affect attendance. High schools are just not as central to people's lives and the life of the community as they once were. It doesn't matter what high school is playing what high school. It's that the whole concept of a high school tournament is just not meaningful to most people anymore.

And it is much much less likely for small town teams to beat the bigger metro schools anymore thanks to open enrollment. That is not to say that 2 or 3 classes is not fair, but 1 single class, no.

 

[book]

Play the first round games Tuesday night double headers at smaller college gyms (Hamline, Augsburg, Concordia...) not at 10 AM on Wednesday. The best games are regional finals like EP vs. Chan this year... when the gyms are packed... Also 3A teams can compete with 4A teams (Benilde had beaten Hopkins this year - Washburn and Delaselle could compete easily with Lakeville and Osseo - so combine these classes when they get to the final four...

 

[GophersInIowa]

So they should go to a 3 class system? Combine less 2A schools with 1A, Lesser 3A schools with the rest of 2A, and the better 3A schools with 4A

This is the best solution if you ask me. Top 104 in 3A (13 teams per section), next 136 in 2A (17 teams per section), and the rest in 1A (about 22 per section).

I think 3a and 4a could be combined and 1a and 2a could. Not sure about border schools- would have to look at enrollment numbers.

I'd be fine with this as well.