7th division for high school football?

TODD PORTER
Canton Repository

October 09, 2008 02:11 am

— A proposal to create a seventh division within the Ohio High School Athletic Association’s football tournament seems to provide more questions than answers. Like how much money could be lost by schools who no longer can host a first-round playoff game?
Washington High School Athletic Director Tim Ridgley, whose school would likely be affected by a change, wants more answers to his many questions. So does North Canton Hoover Superintendent Mike Gallina. Hoover and Washington high schools are two of the smaller Division I programs in the state.
An OHSAA subcommittee has recommended that Division I — with the greatest disparity among enrollment — be cut in half and a seventh division be created. It is unknown whether that subdivision of Division I would be Division II or Division I-A, or what the name would be.
What to call it, however, is the least of Ridgley and Gallina’s concerns.
“It’s noble that they’re looking at trying to bring equity to Division I in terms of the range of boys at the high school level,” Gallina said. “With that thought, however, comes the idea ... with that equity you don’t want to create an unintended result and not have a good playoff situation.”
According to the OHSAA, if the proposal passes — and that’s not likely to happen for years to come — the Division I and the new sub-Division I would only send four teams per region to the postseason.
That creates another set of questions? The rest of the OHSAA’s divisions will remain the same, with eight playoff teams per the four computer regions. While Divisions II-VI are playing a 32-team tournament, the larger two divisions would only play a 16-team tournament. Does that mean the two larger divisions would have a bye week in week 11? Would top-seeded teams still host a first-round game? What is the economic impact if that’s not the case?
“I think there’s a lot of things that need answered,” Ridgley said. “Without looking at the pros and cons and the nuts and bolts, it seems very similar to what the NCAA did with scholarship limitations. When they limited scholarships, that created parity. Isn’t that the same thing that’s being done here?”
The proposal would not require a change to OHSAA bylaws, but rather the association’s sports regulations. That means the OHSAA Board of Directors could act solely on the proposal without a vote of member schools.
“The recommendations were presented to the Board of Directors and our plans are to study the proposal further,” said Mike Richards, president of the board and superintendent of Allen East Local Schools. “We also have not set a timetable for acting on the recommendation. I can safely say that, should the proposal be accepted or a modification of the proposal be approved, we do not anticipate implementations of a change occurring in the next few years.”
The smallest enrollment in Division I is 528 boys and the largest is 1,246, more than twice the male enrollment of the smallest school.
“I think it’s our obligation as a school district and an athletic department to put our athletes in a situation where they have a chance to be successful,” Ridgley said. “What makes the difference how we feel about it (going to a smaller division)? If they put it in place, does that matter? ... It’s important to put kids in a situation where they can attain success.”
OHSAA Commissioner Dr. Dan Ross commended the subcommittee for its work.
“The committee was charged with looking at our tournaments to try to determine if our format is the best and if they are conducted as fairly as possible,” Ross said. “On behalf of the board, I want to thank the committee for meeting its charge.”
Whether that’s happened or not doesn’t seem to be answered.
“I get a little nervous about does the equity create an unintended result for good playoff football?” Gallina said.