M
MingjaiI was reading about the the recent realignment in Utah's HS sports, and that the plan is to have scheduled realignments every 2 years based on student body size. While student body size is correlated to athletic success, the amount of correlation is questionable, making the division of schools by size to be an almost arbitrary determination.
That got me to thinking--why don't HS sports associations use a promotion/relegation model for their divisions?
I know there are only a few soccer fans here on this board, so for those unfamiliar with promotion/relegation, I'll describe it quickly. In most soccer federations around the world, teams are divided in to different levels of play--much like baseball has Rookie, A, AA, AAA, and MLB. But the twist is that at the end of each year, the bottom two or three teams in one league are relegated to the lower level league, and the top two or three teams in the lower level league are promoted to the upper league.
Because of the size of the US, promotion/relegation wouldn't work at the pro level or even the college level because of the travel costs and scheduling issues it would create. But at the state high school level, promotion/relegation would be easily implemented and rather than realigning based on size, teams are realigned based on merit.
I guess the major issue preventing this model is that high schools are in a conference structure that is often independent of the division they are in. For promotion/relegation to work, conferences with teams from different divisions would have to be eliminated.
Here's an example of how it could work:
Assume the state has 48 high schools, divided into 2 divisions of 24 each. We'll name the upper division I and the lower division II. Within each division, we create two conferences (say, east and west) for geographic reasons--there are four total conferences, I-West, I-East, II-West, II-East.
We decide to promote/relegate 3 teams between divisions I and II each year. For demotion to division II, we have a four-team tournament involving the two worst teams each from I-East and I-West. The winner of the tournament stays in division I, while the other three are demoted.
For promotion to division I, we follow the same pattern--a four team tournament with the top two teams each in II-West and II-East. The two finalists and the winner of the consolation game are all promoted, while the loser of the consolation game stays in division II.
Once all the promoted/relegated teams are determined, the two conferences within the divisions are set based on convenience for the next season.
The benefit of this model is that it's a competition- or merit-based system, allowing underdogs their chance to shine--some small schools may be powerhouses in certain sports. Another benefit is that it gives bad and even mediocre teams and their fans something to play for besides pride as the end of the season approaches. I know soccer teams playing to avoid relegation play some of the most inspired soccer around in their last few games.
What does everyone else think? How would this work in your state?
That got me to thinking--why don't HS sports associations use a promotion/relegation model for their divisions?
I know there are only a few soccer fans here on this board, so for those unfamiliar with promotion/relegation, I'll describe it quickly. In most soccer federations around the world, teams are divided in to different levels of play--much like baseball has Rookie, A, AA, AAA, and MLB. But the twist is that at the end of each year, the bottom two or three teams in one league are relegated to the lower level league, and the top two or three teams in the lower level league are promoted to the upper league.
Because of the size of the US, promotion/relegation wouldn't work at the pro level or even the college level because of the travel costs and scheduling issues it would create. But at the state high school level, promotion/relegation would be easily implemented and rather than realigning based on size, teams are realigned based on merit.
I guess the major issue preventing this model is that high schools are in a conference structure that is often independent of the division they are in. For promotion/relegation to work, conferences with teams from different divisions would have to be eliminated.
Here's an example of how it could work:
Assume the state has 48 high schools, divided into 2 divisions of 24 each. We'll name the upper division I and the lower division II. Within each division, we create two conferences (say, east and west) for geographic reasons--there are four total conferences, I-West, I-East, II-West, II-East.
We decide to promote/relegate 3 teams between divisions I and II each year. For demotion to division II, we have a four-team tournament involving the two worst teams each from I-East and I-West. The winner of the tournament stays in division I, while the other three are demoted.
For promotion to division I, we follow the same pattern--a four team tournament with the top two teams each in II-West and II-East. The two finalists and the winner of the consolation game are all promoted, while the loser of the consolation game stays in division II.
Once all the promoted/relegated teams are determined, the two conferences within the divisions are set based on convenience for the next season.
The benefit of this model is that it's a competition- or merit-based system, allowing underdogs their chance to shine--some small schools may be powerhouses in certain sports. Another benefit is that it gives bad and even mediocre teams and their fans something to play for besides pride as the end of the season approaches. I know soccer teams playing to avoid relegation play some of the most inspired soccer around in their last few games.
What does everyone else think? How would this work in your state?