foxbat

Looks nice! Looks like it's held up well after 7 home games.

I though that teams can petition to play up, but I believe it requires the IHSAA to approve said request ... especially because of the impact in 5A/6A which have set numbers of teams. A petition from Cathedral, for example, to play up, would force a 6A team to move down based on activity not applied to all schools in general process ... i.e., SF. Not that too many 6A schools on the lower rung of 6A would vigorously object to heading down to 5A.

I think what you might be thinking about is, in the case of an all-male school, I thought the IHSAA had an exception component that would double the count for classification purposes to make the classifications more apples and apples.

This is an interesting case that I've seen at LCC where there are "split families" where some of the kids in the family go to LCC and some of them go to the public school. Of interest is that it isn't really something tied directly to sports/non-sports. I've seen siblings where the sister stays at LCC and doesn't play sports while the brother is at the public school playing sports. I've seen situations where it's a brother at LCC playing football and a sister at the public school not playing sports. I've seen a split where neither is playing a sport. I'll have to do some thinking on this to see if there's a situation that I recall where the siblings were both playing sports at LCC and a public school. Incidentally, this also happens with public school families too. My kids have been homeschooled since my oldest was 5th grade and they tend to split time between homeschool and the public school/Ivy Tech when they get to high school ... although my middle kid went public in junior high and the first two years of high school and returned to split schooling this year. My oldest three went/go to Jeff and my boys are attending / will attend Harrison. Even in the public school families, sometimes it's a house divided. 🙂

That's what I was hinting at with the pound-for-pound equivalency. At a lot of small schools, and even some mid-sized schools, they have players on the team who are "just enough to play." The first question the coach probably asks is "Are you alive?" as opposed to "What's your best position?" or "How many years have you played?"

Interesting take. Not a knock or anything, but could this lead to "culling" for numbers/classification? In most schools, I think football is a "no-cut" sport, so you get lots of kids who play even if they don't play a bunch on Friday night. Would teams feel compelled or at least enticed to cut kids to slim down? For smaller schools, wouldn't it quickly increase their classification without necessarily a corresponding pound-for-pound equivalency? For example, Trader Point Christian has 128 kids in the school. Assume half are boys: 64. Their roster shows 24 on the team which gives you 37.5%. For a school like Carmel, which has 5,286 kids, half for boys would be 2,643. At 37.5%, that would be 991 kids that would be need to play to get to Trader's Point 37.5%. I think you'd need something other than a linear formula for this.

The anomaly storyline is the one you keep pitching about Pioneer. You make it sound like Pioneer has some secret going on and then dismiss their accomplishments in your zeal to stick a PP. But again, if we want to go down the anomaly path, what's the storyline as to why your predictive scenario of 2020 wasn't to fruition in 2017 and 2018? As for South Adams schedule, Sagarin shows it at 34.03 right along with LCC's at 36.06. Covenant Christian's is down around 26.66. As for the HC preparing a team; it certainly does, except that this year, LCC's only played a half HC schedule and two of its games were against the #9/#10 teams in the conference, so not much schedule strength to hang a hat on this season with four games missing of HC competition ... add to that that LCC hasn't even played a whole regular season yet and we're about to play semi-state tonight.

Maybe more broadbrush ... again, while you "convincingly" posted a single season of data to make your point, the two seasons that I posted, which were ignored, don't. And before you go with the "but Pioneer's an anomaly" storyline, LCC would not have gotten to LOS in 2017 if Pioneer wasn't there and would likely not have gotten past Adams Central in 2018 either. Matter of fact, in 2016, 2017, and 2018, Pioneer's crossfield rival at LOS was a public school which means that those nasty old PPs out of the south were so dominant as we're led to believe with this year's bracket. As for Covenant Christian, I think their strength of schedule catches up with them against South Adams.

And in 2018 it was: 5A New Palestine 4A Fort Wayne Bishop Dwenger 3A West Lafayette 2A Western Boone 1A Pioneer And in 2017 it was: 5A Columbus East 4A East Central 3A Evansville Memorial 2A Southridge 1A Pioneer Maybe more like "Eggshell?" Especially given that LCC's a 45-point underdog against SA according to Harrell's.

Or, in the case of 1A public and private adversaries LCC and Pioneer it will look like Godzilla and Rodan in Kyoto instead of Tokyo as they will both, likely, have an opportunity to meet again in 2A via SF.

In this area, I think that Jeff is likely to be passed up in enrollment by 5A Harrison. In driving my son to practice, we pass by a new subdivision that's currently being grated and divided. Building will probably start soon. A colleague of mine tells me that on the other side of the intersection where Battleground Middle School sits diagonal from Harrison's campus is another subdivision going it. I think he said that it's estimated that there will be about 300 new households moving into that area. Harrison's currently just about 85 kids behind Jeff. You only need about 28% of those household to have a high school student in them to have Harrison catch Jeff and that doesn't account for any other growth. Harrison's just starting to find their flex in 5A. My son's on the freshman squad and they said this is the largest freshman squad in the school's history. The freshman dropped their game with Westfield by just a touchdown this season spanked Jeff by three TDs. Unfortunately, Harrison may end up in the same boat with Jeff ... too big for 5A, not enough horses to thrive there just yet. Given what's in 6A and the top of 5A, I don't know if there's enough to "push Jeff down" into 5A.

That's right. I forgot about NewPal. Didn't new Pal actually do this twice, but one time was in different classes? They won state last year and in 2018 in 5A, so avoided SF. They also won in 2014 as 4A and were runner-up in 2015 as 5A, but that also straddled an eval period.

Actually, I think they are ... I think they are the only exception so far ... at least among teams that won back-to-back state. All other teams that won back-to-back state titles have moved up like LCC, Pioneer, And even a couple that didn't like Scecina in 2011 and 2012, but still moved up via SF for 6 points. I think that Columbus East also ended up with a split where they lost state in 5A in 2013 and then won in 2014, which would have been 7 points, but didn't move up for that pair of back-to-back LOS appearances. That's not necessarily as big an issue given that their home class is actually 4A and they would have been heading up to 6A, but for the split eval year.

Hardly. Since you want to stick to the details, then please go back and DIRECTLY address my post that refutes your idea that SF and multiplier are the same.

Would make about as much sense as a 2.0 multiplier. BTW, from the data, this last Friday. Two of the five games where the TD, either way, would have made a difference involved PP teams. In one case, Winamac would have beaten LCC and in the other, Andrean would have beaten Pioneer ... basically a split. Incidentally, Pioneer is a 1A program playing in 2A due to Success Factor and will remain there given the number of points earned. They will get another chance at a PP this weekend again Luers ... and Harrell's has them slightly favored.

By this argument, we should also make the argument that letting a team start with a one touchdown lead in regionals won't significantly impact play. So when we do the coin flip, the team that wins the coin toss gets to pick or take a TD. After all, that policy would have only impacted five out of 22 games and that would have only happened if it went to five out of 44 specific teams last Friday.

So what you are saying is that a 2.0 Multiplier would be grossly unfair to a team like Bishop Noll because they have low numbers and aren't as competitive ... i.e., they can't absorb/process said assumed benefits that said 2.0 Multiplier erroneously asserts that they have?

No ... it isn't and no ... it doesn't. SF applies to all schools regardless of public or private and addresses the ACTUAL outcome of the system/process. You can argue about the fairness to the next class, but it applies itself equally based upon a defined and measurable outcome. A multiplier is targeted, at least in your version, to a subset of schools, and is based on a perceived/expected outcome whether or not said outcome would have been achieved. In SF, Bishop Noll never sees a class above its enrollment. In your version of multiplier, it goes up two classes even if it only fields a team of 12 kids every season. Probably the most telling issue is that there hasn't yet been an indication of why 2.0 should be picked, as opposed to 1.5 or 1.25 or 1.75 or any other number. The fact that SF could have a team move up two classes and the fact that a 2.0 multiplier can do the same doesn't make them any more the same as cheating on an exam and studying on for exam to get an A make both activities the same.

I can't speak for Guerin, but I would suspect that, on principal, Guerin would not attempt to poach Indy-Diocese players. As for their own diocese, LCC and Guerin are the only Catholic high schools in the Diocese of Lafayette-in-Indiana ... and that's a big diocese for two high schools. With that said, LCC's not really in a position to contend for kids that are really outside of the Lafayette area and basically the Tippecanoe County area despite the fact that the diocese spans from the Indiana/Illinois border all the way over to the Indiana/Ohio border, down to just north of Indy and just south of South Bend and southwest of Ft. Wayne. LCC has six parishes just in Lafayette/West Lafayette and Guerin has a few, including a couple good-sized ones, in close proximity too.

Artificial intelligence is much easier to develop than artificial malice. 😀

I seriously think, especially in light of the fact that just about everyone here on GID who were involved or provided input to the IHSAA decision say that they had pushed for four years, leads me to believe that the IHSAA originally wanted to have a multiplier or class move that targeted P/P only. For whatever reason, they veered away from that and then it became a question of "What's the easiest thing to do that shows complainers that we are doing something?" Two-year cycle for both move up and possible move down was the answer. To @Bobref's questions about 2-year/4-year, it would seem that, if you HAVE to have something, then perhaps the following might work better: Up to four-year cycle for initial move up ... with three as a minimum. Must have visited LOS at least twice in those four years and come away with a blue ring at least once. This avoids a team being Scecina'd. Three trips in four sends you up regardless of outcome. If you are at LOS three years in a row or three in four, you have POTENTIAL beyond just a good class. Certainly mileage can vary, but three trips to LOS in four years probably points in the direction of more program than individual(s) ... again, although not perfect. Four-year period is a rolling period for SF consideration. Enrollment is still done on a two-year basis. We know annually, about this time, who is primed to move up or down anyway, as per @Coach Nowlin's other thread, and it's not really a large number in any given year given the requirements. Is it less than optimal in terms of time and effort doing four-year rolling? Sure, but the question is "Are we really serious about this or looking for expedience?" If it's the latter, then why even waste time pretending? For move back down, this is progressive in nature: First year up, must make it to sectional championship, minimum, to stay up ... otherwise immediate drop back down to previous class. Second year, must win a sectional or higher to stay up otherwise you go back down. Note that, in this case here, you will have won a sectional or appeared in a sectional championship the first year in order to have made a second year, so it would be similar to the current situation we have for staying in a higher class except for the ability to move back down after a single year. This a sweet/sour mix compared to the current version, but not by a lot. If you don't make it to a sectional championship, you get to go "back home" after your first year ... sweet. If you only win a single sectional, but have appeared in two, you stay up ... sour. Third year, must show progress. Must pick up at least a regional victory to stay up, otherwise you move down. Note that, in this case, a team will have needed both a sectional and regional championship to stay up. If not, they move back down. Fourth year, must have at least two sectional wins and a regional, minimum, to stay up ... four points AND the regional or higher must have come in one of the last two years. If not, they move back down. This avoids a team moving up, picking up a regional in the first year of the new class, and then having something like sectional, section, nothing. That's a team that's regressing and the upward move may well have been tied toward a couple good classes in a row. This year is probably the one that I need to think more about and tweak further. Note that, in this case an argument might be, but Team A can just keep winning semi-state if they come out of the north/south and don't have any competition. That's true, but if it's a program issue as opposed to a talented individual or class, they will likely be at LOS three years in four and will move up. Again, the idea here is to minimize the impact of a talented class and focus on a program situation. In the situation above, there's a progressive nature to it that would more likely than not, provide heavier weight for staying for program impacts and less for individual or a good class. Again, I'm kind of spitballing this, so there's some need for adjustment ... this is beyond my pay grade and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.

I live in a neighborhood that has pretty decent, strong middle-class grouping that wouldn't qualify for free-/reduced-lunch ... the houses on the street behind us are older "mansion" type houses, yet across the street from them are apartments and smaller footprint houses. A couple blocks away is a liquor store across from a pawn shop with one of those "we finance" car lots with an inventory of about 20 cars. I'm pretty sure that there's Section 8 housing close by as well. It's definitely a socioeconomic mix that feeds into Jeff which has 61% or so free/reduced and a minority-majority status as a school.

So what's up for the Hoosier Conference in the coming seasons? For a while, the Hoosier Conference was able to boast that it had a representative at LOS in one or more contests for several years strung together. That has fallen off recently. Since 2000, the Hoosier Conference has had a representative on Thanksgiving Weekend in 1A, 2A, or 3A, and sometimes more than one, in 12 of those years. Going back just the last ten years, it's 7 years worth of HC representation. This year it looks like an outside chance, Harrell's gives LCC just a 15% chance of coming out of semi-state alive and the recent line shows LCC as an unprecedented 40+ point underdog in the semi-state game which now appears that it's going to be a roadtrip. LCC moves up to 2A this next year which will, for the second time in 20 years will give the HC no chance for representation in 1A ... the last time came when LCC was SF'd into 2A back in 2013/2014. Chatard moves up to 4A next season which makes the Sectional of Death slightly less deadly for West Lafayette. What lies in store for RCHS, Tipton, and Western as well as a building HH? TL still holding down the middle, with Cass attempting to rebuild, and BC and Northwestern showing some signs of life.

Thanks @Rudy. Really appreciate the time and effort this season that you put in keeping GID up to date on the very fluid situations.