ENROLLMENT-BASED AND COMPETITIVE EQUITY-BASED DIVISIONS

[Coach Cardinal]

Coaches,

Thoughts on the recent NCS proposal that was adopted:
1) Returns to enrollment-based divisions for badminton, cross country, golf, girls' fall soccer, boys' fall soccer, tennis, and dual-team wrestling.
2) Competitive-equity base divisions for baseball, basketball, football, girls' lacrosse, boys' lacrosse, girls' winter soccer, boys' winter soccer, softball, girls' volleyball, boys' volleyball, and water polo.

For Basketball:
Division 1 – 1900+
Division 2 – 1421-1900
Division 3 – 900-1420
Division 4 – 400-899
Division 5 – 200-399
Division 6 – 199 and less

 

[ClayK]

A couple thoughts:

Division 1: Berkeley and James Logan have 3,000+ students, meaning they have at least 500 more girls to draw from for their teams. The fact that Berkeley has been down for a long time is more administrative than anything else.

Division 3 and 4: The difference in talent pool is 250 girls in both, and in D4, that means the largest schools have almost as many additional girls to draw from as the smallest schools have in total.

Division 5: Having twice as many students is a huge advantage.

A question about Division 6: In the past, these schools could opt into D5 so they could play for a state title. Is that still true?

 

[ankleassassin]

got a question... is enrollment and competitive equatity an issue with bandmiten, golf, or tennis? do tennis parents complain that logan has 3500 students? do they play versus all schools?

 

[Cranky29er]

So to clarify, this would mean hoops would be pure enrollment based again ? Everyone back to where they started based on school size regardless of how they have done? At that the state level CE means just ranking top to bottom not enrollment so the terminology seems inconsistent ? Help me understand.

 

[ClayK]

As I understand it, it's still CE -- but if not in the Open, teams cannot be moved up or down more than two enrollment divisions.

 

[Norcal_Fan]

As I understand it, it's still CE -- but if not in the Open, teams cannot be moved up or down more than two enrollment divisions.

is that ONLY for NCS or both Norcals? I"m really sick of seeing teams moved up 2-3 divisions only to get pounced in the first round.

 

[ClayK]

That's NCS only, I'm pretty sure. The complication with making it state-wide is that then sections would have to agree on the range of enrollment for each division. And since they can't even agree on a common start date, that seems unlikely.

For example, the Southern Section has, in the past, classified a 2,200-student school as Division 2. The Northern Section, though, has Chico, with nearly 2,000 students as Division 3. In NCS, Mater Dei would be Division 1, and if Chico had 44 more students, it would be Division 1.

 

[Coach Cardinal]

The NCS Sports Advisory Committee meeting notes are saved in a format that will NOT allow me to copy/paste the proposal that seems to have been adopted at the December meeting.
Here is the link for the notes:

https://d2o2figo6ddd0g.cloudfront.net/7/o/qc3u8teoxu81nr/SACmin12-4-23.pdf

1) Go to page 26 for the bracket development for the NCS playoffs
2) Go to page 27 for the format of how NorCal bids will be distributed for NCS playoff teams

 

[CW Golden Eagles]

Exactly my question...we have enrollment based for some sports and CE for others? Why would there be a difference? It also would be nice to have the sections align so there is a commonplace on rules rather than 10 sections doing 10 different things and then competing for a State Championship under vastly different rules all year.

 

[CW Golden Eagles]

is that ONLY for NCS or both Norcals? I"m really sick of seeing teams moved up 2-3 divisions only to get pounced in the first round.

Is it worse to watch schools go up to lose big or big schools to lose and go down 2-3 divisions and win titles?

 

[CW Golden Eagles]

got a question... is enrollment and competitive equatity an issue with bandmiten, golf, or tennis? do tennis parents complain that logan has 3500 students? do they play versus all schools?

Exactly my question...we have enrollment based for some sports and CE for others? Why would there be a difference? It also would be nice to have the sections align so there is a commonplace on rules rather than 10 sections doing 10 different things and then competing for a State Championship under vastly different rules all year.

 

[Norcal_Fan]

Is it worse to watch schools go up to lose big or big schools to lose and go down 2-3 divisions and win titles?

LOL that is a GREAT question. I'd say having a small school go up...they (mostly) dont' stand a chance.

 

[cptmycpa]

LOL that is a GREAT question. I'd say having a small school go up...they (mostly) dont' stand a chance.

Very true. However, there is one exception in the SJS. Colfax played up in the NorCals and was very successful. They are also a legit D4 with an enrollment of 666 students in 2023-24. But this is an exception.
2023-24: Colfax D4 SJS section champions; D2 NorCal regional champions
2022-23: Colfax D4 SJS section champions; D3 NorCal regional champions

 

[CW Golden Eagles]

LOL that is a GREAT question. I'd say having a small school go up...they (mostly) dont' stand a chance.

I’m not a fan of teams going up or down. But a team going up impacts that one team. Sending a large school down 3 divisions impacts all of those teams playing their normal division. Play it rewards losing.

 

[ClayK]

At one level, you can say it "rewards losing." But what does "losing" mean in this context?

As any coach knows, you can schedule 18 wins, even if your league is strong. Just go to the bottom of the MaxPreps' rankings and start calling. So "winning" is not necessarily a function of having a good team, or being a good coach, especially if your league is weak.

With a weak league and creative scheduling, you can go 22-4 pretty easily.

OK, let's say you're building a program. You took over a bad team -- most new coaches wind up at places that didn't do well. You can start by scheduling weak to get some wins and build momentum, but then you want your team to get better.

So you schedule better teams as part of the process to get better and of course you will lose some or a lot of them. You are getting better, but you go 14-12 and your MaxPreps' rating isn't that good because the algorithm is biased towards wins. When seeding comes, you're two divisions below your enrollment because that's how good you really are.

So should you refuse to play in postseason? Of course not. You go out and hope to play well. You may be playing a school with 1,000 fewer students but with an established program. You win a close game. The next game you play great and win again.

And the loser whines that you don't belong because you were "rewarded for losing." No, you were rewarded for making your team better. And next year, if you keep improving, you might be one division below your enrollment, and someday you might be two divisions above.

Now I don't know the history of Clovis West, and maybe they never lost a lot of games, but most coaches and programs have to build through losing. (You don't learn nearly as much through winning.) If you challenge your team, you'll lose some games. Or you can just beat up on bad teams and not get better.

Again, no system is perfect and CE is definitely flawed. But to say it "rewards losing" is far too simplistic for a complicated situation.

 

[CoCoCty]

Pardon my ignorance, but what was the purpose of the CE shift? It seems like the schools that are the perennial winners (privates) should be the only ones required to move around.

The publics are up/down winners depending on a bunch of factors (talent, coaching stability, wavering admin/community support of sports). Leave them be and let them enjoy their success when they have it, because it won't last if history is our guide.

 

[ClayK]

If all publics were equal in terms of recruiting and ease of transfer, that might make sense. But top publics recruit, if they can, and gain a significant advantage by doing so.

Also, "good" public schools have an advantage over schools with a lesser academic reputation, and families look to transfer in.

Remember that CE is on a year-by-year basis so a team that's loaded up this year but collapses next year will be more likely to placed appropriately.

And finally, some publics have a long-running basketball culture and consistently punch above their weight.