Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
If those that live in Illinois have not noticed there is a PowerPoint presentation about possibly expanding from two classes to 3 or 4 classes in most sports. I just wanted to see what others thought about this if you are from Illinois. If anyone else has a comment about how this works in your state (outside of Illinois of course) comment as well.
Peace
|
I have heard this is being serioulsy considered after having been discussed for several years. Strictly from a personal, selfish standpoint it gives officials (and schools) more chances in the post-season. So instead of having 4 tournaments and champions (boys' small and large school, and girls' small and large school), there could be six or eight tournaments, with six or eight possible champions, and more chances as officials to go farther into post-season. So is that a good thing? Honestly, I'm ambivilent. Maybe it gives a school who would've lost in the super-sectionals now a chance to win their class. But I also think it diminishes somewhat the value of the championship if there are more of them. It starts to turn into boxing (without Don King). How many different heavyweight champions are there? And then, who cares?
From an officiating standpoint, yea, I want to do post-season, and eventually, a championship game. But I'm not as excited about it if "everyone's doing it".
|
We've had a population-based class system (A - AAAAA) in Utah for as long as I've been aware. The multiple champions issue really isn't an issue. Perhaps it would be in a state that moved to this format for the first few years, but not for long. In such a system, a school competes every year against other schools in its same class and you begin to think of the world in terms of those schools. You're aware that there are other state tournaments going on too, but generally only one matters to each school.
Sure, there are sometimes debates about whether a smaller school would have beaten a larger school. This year in Utah there's talk about whether the 3A state football champion would have beaten the 4A and 5A champions. But as far as I can tell, nobody feels cheated to not have an overall champion. And it provides ready fodder for good-spirited debate.
As far as diminishing the "...value of a championship...," what is the value of a championship? If a person wants to become the best heavyweight boxer on planet Earth, then the fragmentation of professional boxing titles is a serious issue. Of course these contenders are usually adults, and the point of their pursuit is to obtain the fame and fortune afforded a world champion.
But what of the student athlete? For most, the opportunity to play for their school is a notable acheivement. If they make it to state, that becomes a significant and fulfilling event in their young lives. Should they win, well that's bragging rights for a whole lifetime. Are these athletes somehow diminished, do they feel a sense of loss, do the multitude of state champions feel any less a champion because other champions also exist? I think the answer is no.
Sure, we may never have another Milan, Indiana (the school the movie Hoosies was based on). But we'll always have the Jamaican bobsled team
