There have been talks on the sports animal show about deciding how to catagorize DI and DII schools.
OIA has a good system in football where the winners in the OIA White, (correct me if I'm wrong) has the opportunity to move into the DI field. It could possibly work in other sports.
I personally don't think it was fair to catagorize Farrington and Mckinely as a DII team in basketeball. They have a bigger pool of student athletes to choose from. The HHSAA should not reward the big population base schools by catagorizing them as a DII and then punish the smaller DII schools by letting the big schools run over them. I can guarantee you that the bigger schools, like Farrington and Mckinely have the necessary talent to compete in DI.
Catagorizing DI and DII should start with the following:
1. School size
2. I would institute what I consider the "Kahuku" rule where a school with a small student population, but have the necessary talent to compete yearly at the DI level, remain a DI school until they petition to drop to the DII level.
3. Small schools would remain a DII school unless they petition to move up to the DI level. They would have to show history of consistently beating DI talent
JMHO
How would you catagorize DI and DII sports???
-
giversgain
- Starter
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 10:14 am
Good points, GP. I agree all the way with you.
I. Classification by enrollment, an initial criteria, but not all-encompassing.
II. Allow D-II teams to move up by petition (or whatever process the league uses), but no D-I teams move down.
III. Standardize the hybrid criteria for all leagues, then leave it to each league to handle the process. I prefer the OIA's approach: a two-year window rather than the ILH's annual flip-flopping. Why? It gives a new class of kids a junior season, and then a senior season to develop and mature. The one-year window is a cycle of insanity, as many coaches and fans know.
You know, until we have Division III, there will still be some imbalance. Christian Academy will still have to face schools with 1,000 kids like Konawaena. That's not too far a stretch, and I always liked the Hoosiers scenario of a David slaying a Goliath.
I just don't like the 90-student school going up against a 2,700-student school.
Just to clarify for anyone who is venturing into this topic for the first time, the HHSAA executive board doesn't initiate new proposals, per se. It has to come from the athletic directors first, then moves its way up to a league's chief (executive secretary) and/or representing principal before being discussed at the HHSAA's board meetings, which are held every two or three months.
I. Classification by enrollment, an initial criteria, but not all-encompassing.
II. Allow D-II teams to move up by petition (or whatever process the league uses), but no D-I teams move down.
III. Standardize the hybrid criteria for all leagues, then leave it to each league to handle the process. I prefer the OIA's approach: a two-year window rather than the ILH's annual flip-flopping. Why? It gives a new class of kids a junior season, and then a senior season to develop and mature. The one-year window is a cycle of insanity, as many coaches and fans know.
You know, until we have Division III, there will still be some imbalance. Christian Academy will still have to face schools with 1,000 kids like Konawaena. That's not too far a stretch, and I always liked the Hoosiers scenario of a David slaying a Goliath.
I just don't like the 90-student school going up against a 2,700-student school.
Just to clarify for anyone who is venturing into this topic for the first time, the HHSAA executive board doesn't initiate new proposals, per se. It has to come from the athletic directors first, then moves its way up to a league's chief (executive secretary) and/or representing principal before being discussed at the HHSAA's board meetings, which are held every two or three months.
What a sham!
I, along with many others, have said this for years. The separation between D1 and D2 state tournaments should be based on one thing.... enrollment. We are the only state in America that does not classify by enrollment.
We here on Maui have a local sports talk radio show called ESPN Sportsphone 550 in which local listeners are free to call in and talk about any and every topic in sports. The issue of D1 and D2 separation is often a topic for discussion. Absolutely 100% of the audience believes that the OIA has no business sending teams like Aiea, Roosevelt, McKinley, and Farrington to the D2 tournament.
An enrollment figure needs to be placed in regulating the separation of divisions. I would like to see an enrollment figure of say...825 determine classification and if no OIA schools fit this criteria, well then tough $#!^.
This business of McKinley (enrollment 1877) playing Kohala (enrollment 297) for the D2 state basketball title is absolute BS! It is an embarrasment for the OIA to send the LARGEST public school in the state of Hawaii, Farrington (enrollment 2569), to the D2 state basketball tournament to compete against the likes of Molokai (394) and Seabury Hall (180). What a joke!
I have no problem with a smaller school opting to compete at the D1 level. Many schools across the nation petition to play "up" in their leagues. One of the main reasons for this is they feel playing in the bigger enrollment school's division attracts more opportunity to be seen by college scouts. However, when we have teams like McKinley, whose senior class alone is much larger than the total enrollments of Academy of the Pacific, University High, and Seabury combined, it really lowers the credibility of a Division 2 State Champion.
Schools like Roosevelt, Campbell, Farrington, McKinley, Aiea competing in a D2 state championship scenario against schools that are 5..6..7 times less the enrollment leaves many, many people shaking their heads in disgust.
We here on Maui have a local sports talk radio show called ESPN Sportsphone 550 in which local listeners are free to call in and talk about any and every topic in sports. The issue of D1 and D2 separation is often a topic for discussion. Absolutely 100% of the audience believes that the OIA has no business sending teams like Aiea, Roosevelt, McKinley, and Farrington to the D2 tournament.
An enrollment figure needs to be placed in regulating the separation of divisions. I would like to see an enrollment figure of say...825 determine classification and if no OIA schools fit this criteria, well then tough $#!^.
This business of McKinley (enrollment 1877) playing Kohala (enrollment 297) for the D2 state basketball title is absolute BS! It is an embarrasment for the OIA to send the LARGEST public school in the state of Hawaii, Farrington (enrollment 2569), to the D2 state basketball tournament to compete against the likes of Molokai (394) and Seabury Hall (180). What a joke!
I have no problem with a smaller school opting to compete at the D1 level. Many schools across the nation petition to play "up" in their leagues. One of the main reasons for this is they feel playing in the bigger enrollment school's division attracts more opportunity to be seen by college scouts. However, when we have teams like McKinley, whose senior class alone is much larger than the total enrollments of Academy of the Pacific, University High, and Seabury combined, it really lowers the credibility of a Division 2 State Champion.
Schools like Roosevelt, Campbell, Farrington, McKinley, Aiea competing in a D2 state championship scenario against schools that are 5..6..7 times less the enrollment leaves many, many people shaking their heads in disgust.
-
giversgain
- Starter
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 10:14 am
Hey SM 96753,
I'm assuming you have a Kihei zip code. I remember talking to my high school friends about the football disadvantage we had when we attended Lahainaluna back in the late 80's. It's amazing to see the disadvantage at the state level today.
Here's how we saw the football pool in terms of where the kids came from back then:
Maui High- 1/2 of Kahului, Paia, Haiku, Makawao, Pukulani, Kua, Hailemaile
Baldwin- 1/2 of Kahului, Waikulu, Waikapu,Waihee, the whole Kihei area
Lahainaluna-Lahaina, Napili area.
St Anthony- The few who chose to attend the school.
Back then, Baldwin and Maui High, would always have more kids to choose from, and it showed in their dominance of the MIL.
I'm glad to see more parity in the MIL, now that there are more schools.
Who knows, Lets hope the HHSAA or whomever the governing body is can see what's going on and correct their mistakes, granting they recognize that there is a mistake in the first place, and that they are not reluctant to change the current format.
I'm assuming you have a Kihei zip code. I remember talking to my high school friends about the football disadvantage we had when we attended Lahainaluna back in the late 80's. It's amazing to see the disadvantage at the state level today.
Here's how we saw the football pool in terms of where the kids came from back then:
Maui High- 1/2 of Kahului, Paia, Haiku, Makawao, Pukulani, Kua, Hailemaile
Baldwin- 1/2 of Kahului, Waikulu, Waikapu,Waihee, the whole Kihei area
Lahainaluna-Lahaina, Napili area.
St Anthony- The few who chose to attend the school.
Back then, Baldwin and Maui High, would always have more kids to choose from, and it showed in their dominance of the MIL.
I'm glad to see more parity in the MIL, now that there are more schools.
Who knows, Lets hope the HHSAA or whomever the governing body is can see what's going on and correct their mistakes, granting they recognize that there is a mistake in the first place, and that they are not reluctant to change the current format.
This was the first year of D-II in boys basketball statewide, so there were going to be some kinks. I really don't think, however, that the executive board of the HHSAA is going to change a thing. They applied the same format to boys basketball that they do for volleyball, soccer, girls basketball.guiltypleasure wrote:Who knows, Lets hope the HHSAA or whomever the governing body is can see what's going on and correct their mistakes, granting they recognize that there is a mistake in the first place, and that they are not reluctant to change the current format.
It's not set in stone, but pretty close.
The board is comprised of one executive director and one principal from each league. Those two cast a block vote on behalf of their league's schools. It's not a big mystery.
I will say this, though: with only a few exceptions in recent years, the Neighbor Island reps do not demonstrate the will nor the creativity to propose a new format. They haven't before and I doubt they will any time soon. And when a propsoal is made, there is a lack of determination (will) to get the votes.
If you want change, send people from your league who are agents of change. Otherwise, the leagues get what they settle for. The OIA has a lot of votes (24), but that is not a majority in of itself.
And I'll also say this: the OIA shows consistently that it has the will to make its voice heard, more so than any other league. Until the other leagues match or exceed that sense of purpose and conviction, the classification format will remain status quo.
Unless a persuasive proposal hits the next HHSAA meeting, I'd rather have the D-II tourney as is rather than none at all.
Exactly! This is why the OIA should be ashamed of themselves. It seems that the OIA powers that be see nothing wrong with a school who's enrollment is 2000 plus competing against schools that are comprised of less than 200 total students.HRC Paul wrote: And I'll also say this: the OIA shows consistently that it has the will to make its voice heard, more so than any other league. Until the other leagues match or exceed that sense of purpose and conviction, the classification format will remain status quo.
It's great to get your voice heard...but not for the wrong reasons. The OIA's voice should shout out for the right thing....classification by enrollment. If the OIA has the most "sense of purpose and conviction" as how Honda states, then they are to blame for this bull crap D1/D2 classification fiasco.
How the heck can anyone defend a system in which schools with enrollments of 2000, compete against schools comprised of less than 200. I guess it may be the Hawaii confinement of not experiencing any other prep sports system in every other state in America.
Can every other high school athletic league in America be wrong by classifying by enrollment? I guess the OIA seems to think so.
Well put, SM, but you missed my point. What I mean to say is, the OIA does its job of persuading other leagues to vote a certain way. The OIA doesn't always get its way, but the persistence of its admins has my respect.
By the same token, when other leagues are in opposition, the onus is on each of them to speak up and have solid proposals with a persuasive, compelling line of reasoning to back them up. All the OIA is doing is working for its best interest, but the OIA alone doesn't have enough votes to get its way.
The responsibility, through voting, is shared by all the leagues. Now that the boys basketball tourney is done, if any of some of the leagues aren't fully satisfied with the format, these leagues should draw up a proposal for a better structure.
It's not a matter of a bully pushing everyone else around. It's a matter of whether the other voting factions will rise to the occasion and speak fully, just like the OIA always does.
Just like the teacher said in class: if you have a question, speak up. If you don't raise questions when you don't understand (or disagree), that burden is on you (as a league). Every league has its opportunity to contribute to discussion when the HHSAA calls a meeting. From what I see there, the OIA is the most robust, determined and persuasive.
There is absolutely nothing stopping other leagues from presenting arguments that are equally or more robust, determined and persuasive, when the occasion calls for such action.
Over the summer, the ILH admins on the HHSAA board suggested to the rest that the responsibility for Division I/II criteria should be handed over to the HHSAA. The HHSAA in turn recommended that each league go back to its respective athletic directors for approval of this transfer of power.
At the next meeting, each of the leagues reported that they preferred to decide their own criteria rather than surrender power to the HHSAA. Remember now, the ILH, which suggested this change, has 29 members, easily outnumbering the OIA. And yet, the MIL, BIIF and KIF did absolutely nothing to take advantage of this golden opportunity.
SM, the question is not, 'Why is the OIA persuasive?' The question should be, 'Why aren't the MIL, BIIF and KIF more progressive?'
* * * I would like to see the leagues give the HHSAA a one-year window of experimentation regarding classification. Let the HHSAA establish and execute a new order of criteria and revisit the whole thing after a year. I think it would be worth the effort to at least try to have a uniform standard statewide. If it were to fail, then revert back to the current way.
By the same token, when other leagues are in opposition, the onus is on each of them to speak up and have solid proposals with a persuasive, compelling line of reasoning to back them up. All the OIA is doing is working for its best interest, but the OIA alone doesn't have enough votes to get its way.
The responsibility, through voting, is shared by all the leagues. Now that the boys basketball tourney is done, if any of some of the leagues aren't fully satisfied with the format, these leagues should draw up a proposal for a better structure.
It's not a matter of a bully pushing everyone else around. It's a matter of whether the other voting factions will rise to the occasion and speak fully, just like the OIA always does.
Just like the teacher said in class: if you have a question, speak up. If you don't raise questions when you don't understand (or disagree), that burden is on you (as a league). Every league has its opportunity to contribute to discussion when the HHSAA calls a meeting. From what I see there, the OIA is the most robust, determined and persuasive.
There is absolutely nothing stopping other leagues from presenting arguments that are equally or more robust, determined and persuasive, when the occasion calls for such action.
Over the summer, the ILH admins on the HHSAA board suggested to the rest that the responsibility for Division I/II criteria should be handed over to the HHSAA. The HHSAA in turn recommended that each league go back to its respective athletic directors for approval of this transfer of power.
At the next meeting, each of the leagues reported that they preferred to decide their own criteria rather than surrender power to the HHSAA. Remember now, the ILH, which suggested this change, has 29 members, easily outnumbering the OIA. And yet, the MIL, BIIF and KIF did absolutely nothing to take advantage of this golden opportunity.
SM, the question is not, 'Why is the OIA persuasive?' The question should be, 'Why aren't the MIL, BIIF and KIF more progressive?'
* * * I would like to see the leagues give the HHSAA a one-year window of experimentation regarding classification. Let the HHSAA establish and execute a new order of criteria and revisit the whole thing after a year. I think it would be worth the effort to at least try to have a uniform standard statewide. If it were to fail, then revert back to the current way.
The ILH, MIL, BIIF, KIF, and OIA prefer to govern their respective leagues within their own rights. You can't blame them for that. The MIL is trying to spearhead the way in classification based on enrollment.
Listen up, if the OIA wishes to classify THEIR OWN REGULAR SEASON LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP based on their current criteria, I don't have a problem with that. I understand that each individual prep league such as the OIA, ILH, MIL...etc would prefer to govern themselves. (Proof of that was in the La Pietra B-ball issue)
The problem I, and many others have, is the classification issue regarding the State Championship Tournaments. If the OIA wants to place a highly populated school like Farrington in THEIR White division against smaller schools like Wailua for THEIR regular season title, that's their business. However, when it comes to a STATE TOURNAMENT format involving all leagues, some with schools 1/10th the size of Oahu's public schools, an enrollment criteria separating D1 and D2 needs to be implemented. How much credibility can a D2 state championship title have when it goes to a school of 1877 students that "beat" another school comprised of 297 students? From an honor standpoint, it's pretty meaningless.
You're right, the OIA is looking out for it's best interest and it's best interest alone. Unfortunately it comes at the expense of the children enrolled at the smaller schools throughout this great state.
Listen up, if the OIA wishes to classify THEIR OWN REGULAR SEASON LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP based on their current criteria, I don't have a problem with that. I understand that each individual prep league such as the OIA, ILH, MIL...etc would prefer to govern themselves. (Proof of that was in the La Pietra B-ball issue)
The problem I, and many others have, is the classification issue regarding the State Championship Tournaments. If the OIA wants to place a highly populated school like Farrington in THEIR White division against smaller schools like Wailua for THEIR regular season title, that's their business. However, when it comes to a STATE TOURNAMENT format involving all leagues, some with schools 1/10th the size of Oahu's public schools, an enrollment criteria separating D1 and D2 needs to be implemented. How much credibility can a D2 state championship title have when it goes to a school of 1877 students that "beat" another school comprised of 297 students? From an honor standpoint, it's pretty meaningless.
You're right, the OIA is looking out for it's best interest and it's best interest alone. Unfortunately it comes at the expense of the children enrolled at the smaller schools throughout this great state.
SM, we are on the same page. I posted the other day that it would've been very uncomfortable (for me) to see a school with more than 2,700 students win the D-II state title.SM96753 wrote:You're right, the OIA is looking out for it's best interest and it's best interest alone. Unfortunately it comes at the expense of the children enrolled at the smaller schools throughout this great state.
But again, where is the MIL, BIIF and KIF? If they didn't want this format, why didn't they tell the HHSAA that they wanted to go along with the ILH in creating a new format?
Why?
In this system of decision-making by the executive board of the HHSAA, the MIL, BIIF and KIF have power, yet haven't used it to make change regarding classification.
Why?
Between the MIL, BIIF, KIF and ILH, there are way more than enough votes to outnumber the OIA. And yet, they backed off when offered that opportunity.
WHY??
I wonder why you continue to chastize the OIA in this case when the MIL, BIIF and KIF escape your scrutiny. They have the power to influence each other when they submit proposals at the HHSAA board meetings. Is the MIL not accountable in your view?
Because the OIA is the main entity sending schools with enrollments of 1500 plus to compete in a tournament against schools 1/10 or even smaller in size. The OIA needs to take it upon themselves, do the right thing, and realize that sending schools such as Farrington (enrollment 2569) to compete against schools like St. Anthony (enrollment 233) invalidates the credibility of a Division 2 tournament. I guess for the powers that be in the OIA, morality is a non issue. Perhaps the only thing they care about is defeating the ILH.HRC Paul wrote:I wonder why you continue to chastize the OIA in this case when the MIL, BIIF and KIF escape your scrutiny.
Also, I have been critical of the MIL when it comes to classification. I did not, and still do not, believe that King Kekaulike belonged in the D2 state football tournament based on their enrollment. I have even discussed the issue with someone who really matters...King K's coach! John Wallace Kenton is a personal friend of mine and a darn good man. However, the MIL deserves credit in the fact that they are attempting to do things the correct way and classify all sports based on school size unlike the OIA. Is the OIA taking this step?
Why doesn't the OIA do the right thing and prevent these schools with 2000 plus students from playing in the state tournament against schools with total enrollments of a little over 100? Why do they need the ILH, MIL, KIF, and BIIF to influence them when it comes to classification by enrollment? Are they not able to think for themselves? Obviously the good 'ole boys that run the OIA only care about their best interest at the expense of the children of Hawaii enrolled at smaller schools.
I would think, and this is only a personal thought, each individual league would prefer to govern themselves based on each league's bylaws. In some cases, involving a third party may not be what the MIL, KIF, BIIF wants because it could effect issues other than classification (revenue, transfer rules, jurisdiction, age limits, eligibility, etc). This is just speculation on my part. I can't speak for MIL authorities. You'd have to ask Stephen Kim about that.HRC Paul wrote:SM, why do you think the MIL didn't go along with the ILH in allowing the HHSAA to determine a statewide, uniform policy about classification? I'd love to poll MIL, BIIF and KIF ADs regarding their choice.
The bottom line is that the MIL, or any other league, should not need to rely on the HHSAA to create an ethical standard. The ILH and MIL seem to be making great strides in classification based on enrollment in sports such as boys/girls volleyball, boys/girls basketball, softball, etc, involving competition within their own respectives leagues.
It's absolutely true that each league has unique needs, more so in Hawaii than most other states. But I have no doubt that the HHSAA (not the executive board), if given the trust to enforce a uniform standard, would succeed with flying colors. They would do right by the Neighbor Islands, I believe. It's a trust issue.SM96753 wrote:I would think, and this is only a personal thought, each individual league would prefer to govern themselves based on each league's bylaws.
The NCAA has clear rules for all of its members. So does the NAIA. So does the CIF.SM96753 wrote:The bottom line is that the MIL, or any other league, should not need to rely on the HHSAA to create an ethical standard.
For the MIL, you want the byproduct of uniformity without the burden of responsibility. Can't have one without the other, not in a democratic system. For best results, the MIL, BIIF and KIF have to step up, represent and get persuasive. It's less about ethics and much, much more about embracing the reality that these leagues have voted against a uniform policy by not accepting new proposals (re: ILH asking the HHSAA to take control of classification), not speaking up, not voting in favor of progress.
The 'quiet, but effective' mantra is dead. It doesn't work in today's world, at least not with high school athletics policy. The results are plain to see. It's time for consistently proactive steps if the Neighbor Island leagues truly, passionately want results. As much as I love my Neighbor Island friends, the 'quiet mouse' syndrome is baffling to me.
If they simply vote in favor of change, all of your questions about the OIA's ethics would be squashed. Instead, we have what we have.
Creativity and courage. Where are they?
All of my, and many other's, questions about the OIA's ethics would be squashed if they stopped sending schools comprised of over 2000 students to the D2 state tournament to compete against schools with enrollments of under 200.HRC Paul wrote: all of your questions about the OIA's ethics would be squashed.
Once again, the OIA does not need the HHSAA to regulate this. The OIA has the power to control this issue themselves. Unfortunatley, at the expense of Hawaii's children enrolled at smaller schools, the OIA chooses not to.
To think that the ILH, MIL, BIIF, and KIF, need unite in order for the OIA to take action and do the ethical, moral, and correct thing is the thought process of a FOOL. Is OIA leadership that backwards and incompetent? Oh yeah, it seems that they are.
The OIA executive thought process:
OIA executive 1: "Eh brah, I tink Mililani not going be that good in softball next year."
OIA executive 2: "Oh yeah...how come?"
OIA executive 1: "They losing players."
OIA executive 2: "Oh shoots den, we go throw them in D2 even though they is a big school with 1700 students. Then they going get more chance to win states."
OIA executive 1: "Yeah! Never mind that they going play against teams like Word of Life, St. Francis, and Lanai. Entire schools with less students than da Mililani Senior class alone."
OIA executive 2: "Yeah!!!! So long we WIN and beat the ILH!"
OIA executive 1: "Yeah! Who cares about integrity! Like how that guy from the Starbulletin said, we just gotta look out after our best interest."
Why enrollment size isn't everything
I agree with many of SM96753's points, and yes Mckinley should not have been in the DII tourney. But has anyone forgotten that Kohala DID beat Aiea?
Maybe someone can help me on this with more specific numbers, but large enrollments at OIA schools does not automatically mean they'll be able to compete at DI level. In some sports yes, and others, no.
Three examples of schools with "big" enrollments:
1) Kaimuki. Took the DI state hoops championship this year. But in football, they truly deserved to be in DII due to limited turnout of players. Lost in the state tourney to Iolani, which lost to King Kekaulike. On a related note, why is it OK for Iolani to be in the DII tourney?
2) Kapolei. Great football program, but their hoops team, which did have some great athletes from the football team was not very competitive, going 1-10 and only beating another 1-10 team, which had its lone win against Kapolei.
3) Kalani. Two words: Kalani football. Two more words: Not DI. A good example though, of what should be considered when a team is DII but can compete at DI - The girl's hoops team. Won the DII hoops title last year, moved to DI, and even beat Punahou couple nights ago. Well, helps to have two skilled 6 footers transfer to your school I guess.
But seriously there needs to be better ways of determining which OIA schools belong in which division, not just for how state tournament competition will be, but also competition in the OIA itself. I've seen DI OIA hoops games this season where the quality of play was just not very good. I don't think enrollment should be the main factor in deciding who goes where.
Maybe someone can help me on this with more specific numbers, but large enrollments at OIA schools does not automatically mean they'll be able to compete at DI level. In some sports yes, and others, no.
Three examples of schools with "big" enrollments:
1) Kaimuki. Took the DI state hoops championship this year. But in football, they truly deserved to be in DII due to limited turnout of players. Lost in the state tourney to Iolani, which lost to King Kekaulike. On a related note, why is it OK for Iolani to be in the DII tourney?
2) Kapolei. Great football program, but their hoops team, which did have some great athletes from the football team was not very competitive, going 1-10 and only beating another 1-10 team, which had its lone win against Kapolei.
3) Kalani. Two words: Kalani football. Two more words: Not DI. A good example though, of what should be considered when a team is DII but can compete at DI - The girl's hoops team. Won the DII hoops title last year, moved to DI, and even beat Punahou couple nights ago. Well, helps to have two skilled 6 footers transfer to your school I guess.
But seriously there needs to be better ways of determining which OIA schools belong in which division, not just for how state tournament competition will be, but also competition in the OIA itself. I've seen DI OIA hoops games this season where the quality of play was just not very good. I don't think enrollment should be the main factor in deciding who goes where.