Up until at least a year or so ago, I know Marshalltown still played sophomore games before the varsity game.
MVC and MAC to discuss district football on Wednesday
- Thread starter tylercoan
- Start date
Ten-year wins total for 4A, assuming the state still uses them as a guide toward balancing districts.
4A WEST
Tier 1...
78 West Des Moines Valley
76 West Des Moines Dowling
70 Ankeny
66 Waukee
64 Southeast Polk
60 Ankeny Centennial(prorated)
56 Ames
55 Des Moines Lincoln
Tier 2...
53 Ottumwa
52 Sioux City East
51 Johnston
49 Marshalltown
47 Des Moines East
41 Fort Dodge
40 Urbandale
39 Council Bluffs Lincoln
Tier 3...
38 Indianola
35 Sioux City North
28 Des Moines Roosevelt
21 Mason City
20 Council Bluffs Jefferson
18 Sioux City West
10 Des Moines Hoover
09 Des Moines North
4A EAST
Tier 1...
80 Cedar Falls
79 Bettendorf
75 Iowa City High
67 North Scott
59 Cedar Rapids Washington
57 Pleasant Valley
56 Cedar Rapids Kennedy
Tier 2...
53 Cedar Rapids Prairie
51 Muscatine
46 Dubuque Hempstead
42 Iowa City West
40 Marion Lin-Mar
37 Clinton
35 Burlington
Tier 3...
31 Davenport Central
30 Waterloo West
22 Dubuque Senior
17 Waterloo East
16 Cedar Rapids Jefferson
12 Davenport West
10 Davenport North
My guess would be if Ottumwa or Marshalltown were moved from West to East, they would stay in the Tier 2, which would create a 8-7-8 tier grouping in the West and a 7-8-7 in the East, essentially keeping balance to both sides as far as Tiers were concerned. Mason City moving over(less likely in my eyes) would bump Davenport Central up to Tier 2 with Mason City replacing them.
This post was edited on 12/17 4:10 PM by screwloose
4A WEST
Tier 1...
78 West Des Moines Valley
76 West Des Moines Dowling
70 Ankeny
66 Waukee
64 Southeast Polk
60 Ankeny Centennial(prorated)
56 Ames
55 Des Moines Lincoln
Tier 2...
53 Ottumwa
52 Sioux City East
51 Johnston
49 Marshalltown
47 Des Moines East
41 Fort Dodge
40 Urbandale
39 Council Bluffs Lincoln
Tier 3...
38 Indianola
35 Sioux City North
28 Des Moines Roosevelt
21 Mason City
20 Council Bluffs Jefferson
18 Sioux City West
10 Des Moines Hoover
09 Des Moines North
4A EAST
Tier 1...
80 Cedar Falls
79 Bettendorf
75 Iowa City High
67 North Scott
59 Cedar Rapids Washington
57 Pleasant Valley
56 Cedar Rapids Kennedy
Tier 2...
53 Cedar Rapids Prairie
51 Muscatine
46 Dubuque Hempstead
42 Iowa City West
40 Marion Lin-Mar
37 Clinton
35 Burlington
Tier 3...
31 Davenport Central
30 Waterloo West
22 Dubuque Senior
17 Waterloo East
16 Cedar Rapids Jefferson
12 Davenport West
10 Davenport North
My guess would be if Ottumwa or Marshalltown were moved from West to East, they would stay in the Tier 2, which would create a 8-7-8 tier grouping in the West and a 7-8-7 in the East, essentially keeping balance to both sides as far as Tiers were concerned. Mason City moving over(less likely in my eyes) would bump Davenport Central up to Tier 2 with Mason City replacing them.
This post was edited on 12/17 4:10 PM by screwloose
I am guessing what they're trying to say is there will be no more conference standings for sophomore teams. The MVC always kept track of that right alongside the varsity standings. I don't think the writer meant there wouldn't be sophomore games anymore.
As for freshmen, the Cedar Rapids/Iowa City schools have played in their own CRANDIC league for quite a while, with their own schedules and standings separate from the MVC. I assume that can continue.
Screwloose,
I said this on the 3A board. My money is on the IHSAA adding CBLC to 4A and moving Marshalltown and Ottumwa east to districts for a 46 team 4A class. It seems like the easiest and least painful solution for two more years.
It sure would be helpful if they placed Marshalltown/Ottumwa in 6 team districts in the alignments.
I said this on the 3A board. My money is on the IHSAA adding CBLC to 4A and moving Marshalltown and Ottumwa east to districts for a 46 team 4A class. It seems like the easiest and least painful solution for two more years.
It sure would be helpful if they placed Marshalltown/Ottumwa in 6 team districts in the alignments.
The time for a 700 BEDS cut off is over. North Scott & Dav North are flirting with the number regularly & Fort Dodge will soon be in that boat. Just go top 48 for ease of scheduling, that still leaves Class A hovering around 56 teams for the near future. Even if LC is moved up to make an even # of teams, what happens when IC North comes on line in a few years. Norwalk is growing, so give them a head start on playing 4A, and Newton might stand a better chance at the play offs returning to 4A.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Loco mentioned the "conference option on the 3A board" He mentioned that the MVC could keep their two conferences and schedule games between the two...and lose the playoff spot to the Western teams. It would be interesting if these two old conferences chose that option...status quo. If the 3 private schools defecting to 3A, agreed to play as many non district games with local 4A schools and the MVC/MAC added some non-conference games, would this alternative work?
The only question I would have is if the IHSAA presented this option to all 45 of the current 4A football members, for a up and down vote, would a simple majority of schools determine the decision to align all the members into districts vs conferences?
The only question I would have is if the IHSAA presented this option to all 45 of the current 4A football members, for a up and down vote, would a simple majority of schools determine the decision to align all the members into districts vs conferences?
I was talking with Kid on Facebook and said the same thing that tnobd did. If CBLC is going to have a BEDS number around 730, they nee to move them up. If it's going to be districts anyway, they should move up. At worst, Ottumwa should be moved over to make the split 23/22. If CBLC is moved up, Marshalltown should probably go over also to make it 23/23. The idea about IC North, when they open(when?), and they are going to be 4A and leave IC High and IC West still 4A, then the state should be ready. Norwalk is growing and starting to encroach on the 700 number. But just going to a straight 48 might be the best option yet.
The state would likely have to change the rules for playoff qualification for this to happen, specifically the penalty for playing teams in a lower class.
The MVC could operate just fine with 12 teams in two 6-team divisions, and play a full schedule amongst themselves. That would mean Xavier would have to find their non-district games with 3A or 2A teams (or maybe Regina ... talk about your Catholic Bowl) outside the Cedar Rapids metro area, but the MVC probably wouldn't care about that. The MAC, however, is stuck with just 9 teams, meaning their members still have to find a ninth game (assuming the schedule is still nine games) from Assumption or Maquoketa or De Witt Central or some other smaller-class school. The MAC would not be happy taking the points hit from having to fill their schedule that way.
Again, the MVC probably wouldn't care about the MAC's problems, seeing as the MAC brought this issue up in the first place.
If the state goes to 8 games for playoff qualification, this issue would go away. MAC teams that didn't make the playoffs would get paired with, I don't know, maybe some MVC teams ... or maybe just have rematches. Still, since the MAC was so desperate to change their playoff fates by getting outside competition, a 9-team conference with a round-robin 8-game schedule is EXACTLY the situation they are trying to get out of.
Basically I think a 12-team MVC/9-team MAC could work just fine. Especially if the conferences were able to work out some cross-scheduling to fill out 9 games for the MAC teams ... it wouldn't be that hard. And as I've mentioned earlier, having only 15 playoff teams out of 21 really shouldn't be the "shoot ourselves in the foot" issue the east-side ADs seem to think it is (15 of 21 is 71.4%, with 6 teams missing the playoffs; 17 of 24 is 70.8%, with 7 teams missing - so you could say the east side is actually getting a better deal out of that).
But I don't think it will happen. There's not enough creative thinking among the athletic departments, and they're so aghast at the notion of "losing" a playoff spot, that I don't believe they'll be able to see a way through.
On the other hand, press types around here are also talking about the conferences basically dividing up their 21 teams into their own four districts, thinking that's the way they'd still get their precious 16 playoff qualifiers and retain control of scheduling. I don't see the state going for that, either.
But I don't think it will happen. There's not enough creative thinking among the athletic departments, and they're so aghast at the notion of "losing" a playoff spot, that I don't believe they'll be able to see a way through.
On the other hand, press types around here are also talking about the conferences basically dividing up their 21 teams into their own four districts, thinking that's the way they'd still get their precious 16 playoff qualifiers and retain control of scheduling. I don't see the state going for that, either.
That's why I think the state should implement a one-game 3A exemption or use a point system more like South Dakota's, which I explained earlier in this thread.
I totally agree with the bolded above. Lewis Central looks like they are going to fit the state's own definition of a 4A program. They should join the party. Ottumwa probably should move to the east and play Burlington and the Iowa City schools. And the state needs to just say the top 48 are 4A, the next 56 are 3A, and so on and so on.
I don't know about your idea of moving Marshalltown to make a 23/23 split. Now you've got odd numbers and bye weeks ... it just seems easier to me to leave it 24/22.
Or, if 4A is actually going to go whole-hog districts ... scrap the entire east-west thing. Set up the best districts you can geographically, then deal with playoffs as geographically as possible. Have a fourth-place finisher play a division champion that isn't all that far away. You don't need to have paired districts for the first couple of rounds ... maybe a 4-1 matchup between Districts 5 and 7 and a 3-2 matchup between Districts 5 and 6 ends up making more travel sense.
We need more creative thinking from Boone (and the east-side ADs), that's for sure.
Those are both good ideas. I liked the notion of getting more points for each win your opponent had, instead of just winning/non-winning record.
Okay, here's how I would do the whole thing, keeping the 46 team 700+ BEDS in 4A.
===========================================================
DISTRICT 1...
WDM Valley, DM Lincoln, Johnston, CB Lincoln, SC North, DM Hoover
DISTRICT 2...
Waukee, Ank Centennial, SC East, Indianola, DM Roosevelt, CB Lewis Central
DISTRICT 3...
WDM Dowling, Ames, DM East, Fort Dodge, CB Jefferson, SC West
DISTRICT 4...
Ankeny, SE Polk, Urbandale, Mason City, DM North
DISTRICT 5...
Cedar Falls, CR Kennedy, CR Prairie, Marshalltown, Marion Lin-Mar, Wat East
DISTRICT 6...
IC High, CR Washington, Dub Hempstead, Dav Central, Wat West, Dub Senior
DISTRICT 7...
Bettendorf, IC West, Ottumwa, Burlington, Dav West, CR Jefferson
DISTRICT 8...
North Scott, Pleasant Valley, Muscatine, Clinton, Dav North
===========================================================
SCHEDULING...
A. Round-robin within each district.
B. No East/West split, cross-over games will be scheduled and played.
C. 4A schools are allowed to play 3A schools, but will be penalized for playing against the lower class.
===========================================================
PLAYOFF QUALIFYING...
A. Champions and second place team from each district qualify automatically. (16 teams)
-------- 1. Those automatic qualifiers will all receive home games in the First Round.
B. The remaining teams will be awarded at-large bids on basis of the new 4A Point System. (16 teams)
C. Teams will be paired up geographically, no East/West split necessarily.
-------- 1. Teams will be seeded based on the Lot System.
---------------- a. Seeds 1-4(district champions) will be placed on opposite sides of the bracket and will be paired with seeds 5-8(also district champions). *NOTE: #1 will not necessarily be matched with #8, but the seed between #5 and #8 that is closest geographically.
---------------- b. Seeds 9-16(second place district teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically with seeds 1-8.
---------------- c. Seeds 17-24(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 9-16.
---------------- d. Seeds 25-28(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 5-8.
---------------- e. Seeds 29-32(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 1-4.
D. Hosts in the Second and Quarterfinal Rounds will be determined by overall record, not necessarily seed.
-------- 1. Tiebreaker for home field will be head-to-head winner, 4A Playoff Points, better opponents' winning percentage and lastly A-Z Alphabetical tiebreaker(starting at A in odd numbered years, from Z in even numbered years).
===========================================================
4A PLAYOFF POINT SYSTEM...
A. Points
-------- 1. Wins
---------------- a. 45 points against a 4A opponent.
---------------- b. 40 points against a 3A opponent.
-------- 2. Losses
---------------- a. 25 points against a 4A opponent.
---------------- b. 20 points against a 3A opponent.
-------- 3. Opponents' Bonus
---------------- a. 3 points for every win a team's opponent has, not counting against said team itself. *EXAMPLE: A team loses to an opponent who finishes the season 7-2. Only 6 of those wins count, as one was against said team. So they would be credited with 18 bonus points(6 x 3).
B. Average
-------- 1. Total Points are divided by the total number of games a team has played to determine their 4A Playoff Average.
===========================================================
It's not a perfect system, but I think it would fill a lot of the holes that are currently there. But this is a "my" scenario anyway. Take it for what it's worth.
===========================================================
DISTRICT 1...
WDM Valley, DM Lincoln, Johnston, CB Lincoln, SC North, DM Hoover
DISTRICT 2...
Waukee, Ank Centennial, SC East, Indianola, DM Roosevelt, CB Lewis Central
DISTRICT 3...
WDM Dowling, Ames, DM East, Fort Dodge, CB Jefferson, SC West
DISTRICT 4...
Ankeny, SE Polk, Urbandale, Mason City, DM North
DISTRICT 5...
Cedar Falls, CR Kennedy, CR Prairie, Marshalltown, Marion Lin-Mar, Wat East
DISTRICT 6...
IC High, CR Washington, Dub Hempstead, Dav Central, Wat West, Dub Senior
DISTRICT 7...
Bettendorf, IC West, Ottumwa, Burlington, Dav West, CR Jefferson
DISTRICT 8...
North Scott, Pleasant Valley, Muscatine, Clinton, Dav North
===========================================================
SCHEDULING...
A. Round-robin within each district.
B. No East/West split, cross-over games will be scheduled and played.
C. 4A schools are allowed to play 3A schools, but will be penalized for playing against the lower class.
===========================================================
PLAYOFF QUALIFYING...
A. Champions and second place team from each district qualify automatically. (16 teams)
-------- 1. Those automatic qualifiers will all receive home games in the First Round.
B. The remaining teams will be awarded at-large bids on basis of the new 4A Point System. (16 teams)
C. Teams will be paired up geographically, no East/West split necessarily.
-------- 1. Teams will be seeded based on the Lot System.
---------------- a. Seeds 1-4(district champions) will be placed on opposite sides of the bracket and will be paired with seeds 5-8(also district champions). *NOTE: #1 will not necessarily be matched with #8, but the seed between #5 and #8 that is closest geographically.
---------------- b. Seeds 9-16(second place district teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically with seeds 1-8.
---------------- c. Seeds 17-24(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 9-16.
---------------- d. Seeds 25-28(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 5-8.
---------------- e. Seeds 29-32(at-large teams) will be placed into the bracket paired geographically at seeds 1-4.
D. Hosts in the Second and Quarterfinal Rounds will be determined by overall record, not necessarily seed.
-------- 1. Tiebreaker for home field will be head-to-head winner, 4A Playoff Points, better opponents' winning percentage and lastly A-Z Alphabetical tiebreaker(starting at A in odd numbered years, from Z in even numbered years).
===========================================================
4A PLAYOFF POINT SYSTEM...
A. Points
-------- 1. Wins
---------------- a. 45 points against a 4A opponent.
---------------- b. 40 points against a 3A opponent.
-------- 2. Losses
---------------- a. 25 points against a 4A opponent.
---------------- b. 20 points against a 3A opponent.
-------- 3. Opponents' Bonus
---------------- a. 3 points for every win a team's opponent has, not counting against said team itself. *EXAMPLE: A team loses to an opponent who finishes the season 7-2. Only 6 of those wins count, as one was against said team. So they would be credited with 18 bonus points(6 x 3).
B. Average
-------- 1. Total Points are divided by the total number of games a team has played to determine their 4A Playoff Average.
===========================================================
It's not a perfect system, but I think it would fill a lot of the holes that are currently there. But this is a "my" scenario anyway. Take it for what it's worth.
There is a lot of positioning going on that blurs the simple logic.
Included in the positioning is my claim for 4A districts, which had to be done to bring about resolution. Not implementing 4A districts, but considering them.
For example, I viewed it inevitable that Wahlert must not continue to play in 4A as it was not constructive to their school.
Logically, all that was needed was for a school or conference to petition the IHSAA about 4A districts..
Once the topic was opened, Wahlert made their case within conference. As did Assumption. Xavier followed, again logically.
What remains is still quite logical...the MVC goes to two divisions of six and the MAC remains. If there are 8 regular season games or 9 regular season games just impacts the non-divisional games. If there are different point assignments for playing 3A, so what. Lots of teams get into the playoffs and you have to beat your opponent to move on.
Now the positioning, that makes the logic difficult.
1. The MVC didn't want to advance a new league organization until current options were exhausted. Thus, the Wahlert gambit and its impact.
2. The MAC wanted to advance the overall conversation, secure in the knowledge that the MAC could easily adapt.
3. The hub bub about Xavier and Assumption was just opinions (all welcome, of course), as Assumption is on the lower end of 3A and Xavier on the very high end of 3A. There might be some prideful feelings, but the logic following the Wahlert gambit was inevitable for any reasonable analysis.
Now, the MVC is free to position itself, as is the MAC. Keeping both conferences intact is easily done. So is implementing districts. Perhaps a two year period of the former before going on with the latter.
This was always a matter of inevitability (call for 4A districts, Wahlert declaration, other 3As follow, MVC and MAC left to choose schema).
So go 4A districts, the unlocking tool. Now the MVC and MAC can do as they wish, with the only downside a playoff spot in an already overpopulated playoff.
Included in the positioning is my claim for 4A districts, which had to be done to bring about resolution. Not implementing 4A districts, but considering them.
For example, I viewed it inevitable that Wahlert must not continue to play in 4A as it was not constructive to their school.
Logically, all that was needed was for a school or conference to petition the IHSAA about 4A districts..
Once the topic was opened, Wahlert made their case within conference. As did Assumption. Xavier followed, again logically.
What remains is still quite logical...the MVC goes to two divisions of six and the MAC remains. If there are 8 regular season games or 9 regular season games just impacts the non-divisional games. If there are different point assignments for playing 3A, so what. Lots of teams get into the playoffs and you have to beat your opponent to move on.
Now the positioning, that makes the logic difficult.
1. The MVC didn't want to advance a new league organization until current options were exhausted. Thus, the Wahlert gambit and its impact.
2. The MAC wanted to advance the overall conversation, secure in the knowledge that the MAC could easily adapt.
3. The hub bub about Xavier and Assumption was just opinions (all welcome, of course), as Assumption is on the lower end of 3A and Xavier on the very high end of 3A. There might be some prideful feelings, but the logic following the Wahlert gambit was inevitable for any reasonable analysis.
Now, the MVC is free to position itself, as is the MAC. Keeping both conferences intact is easily done. So is implementing districts. Perhaps a two year period of the former before going on with the latter.
This was always a matter of inevitability (call for 4A districts, Wahlert declaration, other 3As follow, MVC and MAC left to choose schema).
So go 4A districts, the unlocking tool. Now the MVC and MAC can do as they wish, with the only downside a playoff spot in an already overpopulated playoff.
There is a lot of positioning going on that blurs the simple logic.
Included in the positioning is my claim for 4A districts, which had to be done to bring about resolution. Not implementing 4A districts, but considering them.
For example, I viewed it inevitable that Wahlert must not continue to play in 4A as it was not constructive to their school.
Logically, all that was needed was for a school or conference to petition the IHSAA about 4A districts..
Once the topic was opened, Wahlert made their case within conference. As did Assumption. Xavier followed, again logically.
What remains is still quite logical...the MVC goes to two divisions of six and the MAC remains. If there are 8 regular season games or 9 regular season games just impacts the non-divisional games. If there are different point assignments for playing 3A, so what. Lots of teams get into the playoffs and you have to beat your opponent to move on.
Now the positioning, that makes the logic difficult.
1. The MVC didn't want to advance a new league organization until current options were exhausted. Thus, the Wahlert gambit and its impact.
2. The MAC wanted to advance the overall conversation, secure in the knowledge that the MAC could easily adapt.
3. The hub bub about Xavier and Assumption was just opinions (all welcome, of course), as Assumption is on the lower end of 3A and Xavier on the very high end of 3A. There might be some prideful feelings, but the logic following the Wahlert gambit was inevitable for any reasonable analysis.
Now, the MVC is free to position itself, as is the MAC. Keeping both conferences intact is easily done. So is implementing districts. Perhaps a two year period of the former before going on with the latter.
This was always a matter of inevitability (call for 4A districts, Wahlert declaration, other 3As follow, MVC and MAC left to choose schema).
So go 4A districts, the unlocking tool. Now the MVC and MAC can do as they wish, with the only downside a playoff spot in an already overpopulated playoff.
Included in the positioning is my claim for 4A districts, which had to be done to bring about resolution. Not implementing 4A districts, but considering them.
For example, I viewed it inevitable that Wahlert must not continue to play in 4A as it was not constructive to their school.
Logically, all that was needed was for a school or conference to petition the IHSAA about 4A districts..
Once the topic was opened, Wahlert made their case within conference. As did Assumption. Xavier followed, again logically.
What remains is still quite logical...the MVC goes to two divisions of six and the MAC remains. If there are 8 regular season games or 9 regular season games just impacts the non-divisional games. If there are different point assignments for playing 3A, so what. Lots of teams get into the playoffs and you have to beat your opponent to move on.
Now the positioning, that makes the logic difficult.
1. The MVC didn't want to advance a new league organization until current options were exhausted. Thus, the Wahlert gambit and its impact.
2. The MAC wanted to advance the overall conversation, secure in the knowledge that the MAC could easily adapt.
3. The hub bub about Xavier and Assumption was just opinions (all welcome, of course), as Assumption is on the lower end of 3A and Xavier on the very high end of 3A. There might be some prideful feelings, but the logic following the Wahlert gambit was inevitable for any reasonable analysis.
Now, the MVC is free to position itself, as is the MAC. Keeping both conferences intact is easily done. So is implementing districts. Perhaps a two year period of the former before going on with the latter.
This was always a matter of inevitability (call for 4A districts, Wahlert declaration, other 3As follow, MVC and MAC left to choose schema).
So go 4A districts, the unlocking tool. Now the MVC and MAC can do as they wish, with the only downside a playoff spot in an already overpopulated playoff.
Well, now. Does this force the MVC's hand? How could the MVC continue on as a 12-team conference with the former MAC teams in districts? Could you even make districts out of the nine MAC teams alone ... it would be something stupid like a 5-team district and a 4-team district.
I just don't see that happening. Looks like we're going all districts next year, which is fine. It's a great chance to scrap the east/west divide and handle 4A just like all the other classes are handled for playoffs. I hope they do keep the five-team districts to a minimum, though - with 46 teams they would only need two, which is two more than I'd like but you gotta do what you gotta do.
I just don't see that happening. Looks like we're going all districts next year, which is fine. It's a great chance to scrap the east/west divide and handle 4A just like all the other classes are handled for playoffs. I hope they do keep the five-team districts to a minimum, though - with 46 teams they would only need two, which is two more than I'd like but you gotta do what you gotta do.
I don't think the IHSAA has any choice but to move Lewis Central up. They are projected to be 730 BEDS this year. That's bigger than North Scott & Davenport North, just below Des Moines Hoover and over the 700 threshold. North Scott & Dav North would pitch a fit if Lewis Central gets to stay 3A. Dav North might actually be below 700 this year, so that rule needs to go away. To avoid any controversy (not sure if the Boys in Boone care about that) they need to go straight top 48 and bring up Newton & Norwalk along with Lewis Central. Norwalk is growing and Newton can tough it out for a couple cycles until Iowa City North is planned to open in 2018. Heck, it might even be easier for Newton to make the playoffs in a 6-team 4A district than a 7-team 3A district.
Just read on the DMR website that Lewis Central has confirmed they are playing 4A football next cycle. The same article said that 4A would be 46 teams and the MVC has until some point in January to indicate if they wish to participate in District football. The MAC has already elected to play in assigned districts. If the MVC decides to stay in their own little sandbox, I assume that Ottumwa would join the 9 MAC schools in two 5-team districts.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
So the MAC is basically swapping Ottumwa for Assumption, but otherwise still have each other to play?
Oh, sure, they can play non-district games against De Witt Central, or Maquoketa, or maybe Wahlert ... but still, not exactly the improved playoff preparation they were looking for, huh?
Oh, sure, they can play non-district games against De Witt Central, or Maquoketa, or maybe Wahlert ... but still, not exactly the improved playoff preparation they were looking for, huh?
If the MVC is going to be given the choice as to whether they want to play districts or not, if you think about it, they're holding Marshalltown or Mason City hostage. If they decide to NOT go districts, both will probably remain in the west, as part of a 24-team alignment. If they DO go districts, one or the other will get moved east with Ottumwa into a 23/23 split.
That is shorter than the 200 mile trip from Des Moines to Sioux City that most of the DM Metro schools have to make every year or every other year.
IMO
I don't think adding Ottumwa into two 5-team districts with the rest of the former MAC teams was what their ADs have in mind.
I saw this in the Muscatine newspaper:
"Realizing not all conference schools agree, it is the position of the Mississippi Athletic Conference to move forward with the district football concept."
Muscatine seemed to be one of those schools as, according to an article from October by the Cedar Rapids Gazette, sources said all MAC schools but Bettendorf and Muscatine favored the move to district play at that time.
"I prefer the point system we've had on the eastern side of the state," Muscatine coach Jake Mueller said Tuesday. "Unfortunately, it looks like the entire state is going the entire [other] direction."
I am surprised Bettendorf was against district play. I assumed they were looking for more difficult opponents in the regular season.
This post was edited on 12/20 5:51 PM by tnobd
I don't think adding Ottumwa into two 5-team districts with the rest of the former MAC teams was what their ADs have in mind.
I saw this in the Muscatine newspaper:
"Realizing not all conference schools agree, it is the position of the Mississippi Athletic Conference to move forward with the district football concept."
Muscatine seemed to be one of those schools as, according to an article from October by the Cedar Rapids Gazette, sources said all MAC schools but Bettendorf and Muscatine favored the move to district play at that time.
"I prefer the point system we've had on the eastern side of the state," Muscatine coach Jake Mueller said Tuesday. "Unfortunately, it looks like the entire state is going the entire [other] direction."
I am surprised Bettendorf was against district play. I assumed they were looking for more difficult opponents in the regular season.
This post was edited on 12/20 5:51 PM by tnobd
Screwloose,
Here is the Marshalltown newspaper's coverage of these possible changes that I assume you have read. I find it interesting that your AD wants to continue to schedule Mason City and Ottumwa....probably because they are 4A teams that that Marshalltown feels like they are "competitive" with.
This post was edited on 12/22 10:21 AM by tnobd
Marshalltown Newspaper 4 District story
Here is the Marshalltown newspaper's coverage of these possible changes that I assume you have read. I find it interesting that your AD wants to continue to schedule Mason City and Ottumwa....probably because they are 4A teams that that Marshalltown feels like they are "competitive" with.
This post was edited on 12/22 10:21 AM by tnobd
Marshalltown Newspaper 4 District story
Screwloose, any idea of how the playoffs on the Eastern Side of the State will play out if you have two districts and a conference?
That Marshalltown newspaper reporter kept getting his MACs and MVCs mixed up ...
I suppose the MVC might consider its two 6-team divisions as "districts" of their own, maybe? If the MAC ends up with two 5-team districts (adding Ottumwa), and the MVC basically says the Valley and Mississippi divisions are "districts" of their own? I am not even sure this is possible, for a conference to turn themselves into a district format and keep control of scheduling rather than turning things over to the state. Would the state go for that? How would they determine playoff qualifiers - points, as per the current system, or by district finish/conference record? Would the MVC be able to make their own determination about how their members qualify?
If this does end up being possible, MVC members would have five in-division games. The rest could be all within conference, as it has been and would likely need to remain if the point system stayed in effect (this would lock Xavier and Wahlert out of any chance of playing their metro foes). Or, if they were able to operate as "districts," they could still play 3A opponents in non-district games.
I have no idea what the thinking is with current MVC members. It seems statewide districts are inevitable - I just can't see the state agreeing to let one conference do things on their own - but it might not be until 2016.
This is something my son and I were hashing out yesterday as well. It's tricky to see exactly how that could work.
I suppose the MVC might consider its two 6-team divisions as "districts" of their own, maybe? If the MAC ends up with two 5-team districts (adding Ottumwa), and the MVC basically says the Valley and Mississippi divisions are "districts" of their own? I am not even sure this is possible, for a conference to turn themselves into a district format and keep control of scheduling rather than turning things over to the state. Would the state go for that? How would they determine playoff qualifiers - points, as per the current system, or by district finish/conference record? Would the MVC be able to make their own determination about how their members qualify?
If this does end up being possible, MVC members would have five in-division games. The rest could be all within conference, as it has been and would likely need to remain if the point system stayed in effect (this would lock Xavier and Wahlert out of any chance of playing their metro foes). Or, if they were able to operate as "districts," they could still play 3A opponents in non-district games.
I have no idea what the thinking is with current MVC members. It seems statewide districts are inevitable - I just can't see the state agreeing to let one conference do things on their own - but it might not be until 2016.
If the East side is 22 teams, 10 "MAC" and 12 "MVC" split 5-5-6-6, my guess would be each division/district would qualify four teams each. I can't see how the "MVC" teams would like that proposal.
The Times-Republican(Marshalltown newspaper) idea to drop a few schools and make 4A 40 teams is interesting also. I believe the IGHSAU restructured their classifications a couple years back and they only have 40 teams in 5A. On a side note, I like the idea of having 5A down to 1A as opposed to 4A down to A. It's still five different classes. But what the hell is A? Zero A? Always thought that was dumb.
Ball is in the MVC's court now. I find it hard to believe they will form their own six-team divisions and allow only 8 of their 12 to qualify for the playoffs and let the MAC remainders and Ottumwa(presumably) get 8 of 10.
Seeing that Ottumwa and Marshalltown are the more likely candidates to move east, to even 4A 23/23 - provided it goes that way. I see the east/west split gone, at least as far as regular season scheduling goes. Especially with Marshalltown's desire to keep Fort Dodge and Mason City on the schedule. I would figure Ames would probably be on that wish list too.
This post was edited on 12/22 2:50 PM by screwloose
The Times-Republican(Marshalltown newspaper) idea to drop a few schools and make 4A 40 teams is interesting also. I believe the IGHSAU restructured their classifications a couple years back and they only have 40 teams in 5A. On a side note, I like the idea of having 5A down to 1A as opposed to 4A down to A. It's still five different classes. But what the hell is A? Zero A? Always thought that was dumb.
Ball is in the MVC's court now. I find it hard to believe they will form their own six-team divisions and allow only 8 of their 12 to qualify for the playoffs and let the MAC remainders and Ottumwa(presumably) get 8 of 10.
Seeing that Ottumwa and Marshalltown are the more likely candidates to move east, to even 4A 23/23 - provided it goes that way. I see the east/west split gone, at least as far as regular season scheduling goes. Especially with Marshalltown's desire to keep Fort Dodge and Mason City on the schedule. I would figure Ames would probably be on that wish list too.
This post was edited on 12/22 2:50 PM by screwloose
The MVC will not be a football conference. The coaches already submitted their non district "wish list" teams they would like to play to their AD's.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Change was bound to happen, this is where Cedar Falls stood in years in a Conference
Northeast Iowa Conference- 14yrs.
1947-1948 played in Conference Schedule, but games didn't count in conference play.
1949-1960
Big Six- 7yrs.
1961-1967-However CF and DM East are the only schools that did not play each other in Football.
Big 8/ Big 9/ Big 8- 24yrs.
1968-1991
Newton dropped out in 1974 season -Cedar Falls was 6-1 vs Newton
Ames dropped out after 1982 season-Cedar Falls was 9-7 vs Ames
Wat. Central no longer a High School after 1987 Season. Cedar Falls was 13-2 vs Central
Marshalltown dropped out after 1990 season. Cedar Falls was 18-12-1 vs Marshalltown. Cedar Falls had won the last 10
Big 8 Disbanded after 1991 Season
Ft. Dodge-CF was 18-14 vs the Dodgers. CF was 9-3 vs Ft. Dodge in last 12 meetings.
Mason City-CF was 21-12-1 vs Mason City. CF was 7-1 vs Mason City last 8 games played.
MVC- 22yrs.
1992-2013
18 playoff Appearances
20 Winning Seasons
12 Conference Championships
5- 9-0 Seasons
6- 8-1 Seasons
Northeast Iowa Conference- 14yrs.
1947-1948 played in Conference Schedule, but games didn't count in conference play.
1949-1960
Big Six- 7yrs.
1961-1967-However CF and DM East are the only schools that did not play each other in Football.
Big 8/ Big 9/ Big 8- 24yrs.
1968-1991
Newton dropped out in 1974 season -Cedar Falls was 6-1 vs Newton
Ames dropped out after 1982 season-Cedar Falls was 9-7 vs Ames
Wat. Central no longer a High School after 1987 Season. Cedar Falls was 13-2 vs Central
Marshalltown dropped out after 1990 season. Cedar Falls was 18-12-1 vs Marshalltown. Cedar Falls had won the last 10
Big 8 Disbanded after 1991 Season
Ft. Dodge-CF was 18-14 vs the Dodgers. CF was 9-3 vs Ft. Dodge in last 12 meetings.
Mason City-CF was 21-12-1 vs Mason City. CF was 7-1 vs Mason City last 8 games played.
MVC- 22yrs.
1992-2013
18 playoff Appearances
20 Winning Seasons
12 Conference Championships
5- 9-0 Seasons
6- 8-1 Seasons
