6/8/2006 OHSAA Board of Control Minutes (regarding 2007-08 divisions)

[DaveDawg]

OHSAA BOARD OF CONTROL MINUTES
(June 8, 2006)
The Ohio High School Athletic Association Board of Control held a regularly scheduled meeting in the Board Room
of the OHSAA office building on June 8, 2006.
President Larry Acker called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
The meeting was opened with a prayer led by President Acker and was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by
Dan Adams.
Board Members Present: Larry Acker, president, presiding; Kyle Kanuckel, vice president; Rick Edwards,
Kent Homoelle; Bill Koppel; George Rise; Jerry Snodgrass, and Dan Adams and Jeff Jordan (ex-officios).
Administrative Staff Present: Dan Ross, commissioner; John Dickerson Bob Goldring, Deborah B. Moore,
Steve Neil, Duane Warns and Henry Zaborniak Jr., assistant commissioners, and Roxanne Price, director of membership
services.
Others Attending: Incoming Board of Control Members Phil Ackerman, administrator, Ohio Valley Education
Service Center, Cambridge; Dan Bise, assistant principal/athletic administrator, Williamsport Westfall High
School; Karen O’Hare, principal, Creston Middle School; Beth Hill, principal, Newark Catholic High School; Bill
Schumacher, assistant principal/athletic administrator, Twinsburg High School; and Phil Stevens, athletic administrator,
Warrensville Heights High School; Steve Craig, OHSAA attorney; Todd Boehm, OHSAA staff; Caitlin
Carducci, OHSAA intern; Jim Harbuck, Ohio Association of Secondary School Administrators; Jeff Mielcarek,
David Barrow, Chuck Rinkes, David Burkett and Frank Gamble, Ohio High School Baseball Coaches Association;
Joe Balogh and David Froelich, Ohio High School Basketball Coaches Association; Mike Mauk, ---- Kerschbaum,
and Bob Brigati, Ohio High School Football Coaches Association; Vern Kiehl, Ohio Association of Track and Cross
Country Coaches; Carol Russo and Kaye Keller, Ohio High School Volleyball Coaches Association; Marci Truex,
Ohio Boys Volleyball Coaches Association; Gary Wise, Ohio High School Wrestling Coaches Association; Julia
Hodgkinson, and Tom Giovangnoli, James Montaquila and Gary Huber.


I. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion by Jerry Snodgrass, second by Rick Edwards to adopt the agenda for the June 8, 2006, Board of
Control meeting.
Motion passed 7-0.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by George Rise, second by Kent Homoelle to approve the minutes from the May 11, 2006, Board
of Control meeting.
Motion passed 7-0.

(edited for space)

B. 2006 Fall Sports Tournament Regulations
In football, it was noted that schools will
be fined a maximum of $5,000 if they are not in compliance with using the official football of the OHSAA
(Wilson) during the tournaments. Regional quarterfinals will be held November 3 and 4; regional semifinals
will be held November 10 and 11; regional finals will be held November 17 and 18; state semifinals will be
held November 24 and 25, and the state finals will be held December 1 (11:00-Division IV, Massillon; 3:00-
Division VI, Canton; 7:00-Division II, Massillon) and December 2 (11:00-Division V, Canton; 3:00-Division
III, Massillon; 7:00-Division I, Canton. During the regionals and state semifinals, Division II, IV and VI will
play on Fridays and Divisions I, III and V on Saturdays. The top four seeds will host regional quarterfinal
contests, while the OHSAA will select neutral sites for regional semifinal, regional final and state semifinal
contests.
Additionally, a slightly modified lightning policy was presented and approved. The new policy is posted on
the OHSAA web site ([Only Registered Users Can See Links.]) and will be published in the 2006-07 OHSAA Handbook.
Motion by Kent Homoelle, second by Jerry Snodgrass to approve the fall sports tournament regulations as
amended by the assistant commissioners.
Motion passed 7-0.

(edited for space)


2. Proposed Change to Sports Regulation 13.3, Divisions for OHSAA Tournaments
The OHSAA Blue Ribbon Subcommittee on Recruiting/Boundaried vs. Non-Boundaried Schools recommended
that the following changes be made in Sports Regulation 13.3, Divisions for OHSAA Tournaments:
a.) In football, Division I will be comprised of the top 10 percent of schools participating in the football
tournaments each biennium. The bottom two percent of the remaining schools will be taken out of the
count. The remaining number will be divided equally between the bottom five divisions, with the two percent
previously taken out being added back to Division VI.
b.) In sports with four divisions (boys basketball, girls basketball, baseball, softball and volleyball),
Division I shall be comprised of the top 22 percent of schools participating in the respective tournaments,
while Divisions II, III and IV shall each be comprised of 26 percent of the schools participating in the
respective tournaments.
c.) In sports with three divisions (boys cross country, girls cross country, boys golf, boys soccer,
boys track & field, girls track & field and wrestling), Division I shall be comprised of the top 28 percent
of the schools participating in the respective tournaments, while Division II and III shall each be comprised
of 36 percent of the schools participating in the respective tournaments.
d.) In sports with two divisions (girls soccer, girls swimming & diving, boys tennis and girls tennis),
Division I shall be comprised of the top 45 percent of the schools participating in the respective tournaments,
while Division II shall be comprised of 55 percent of the schools participating in the respective
tournaments.
In addition, schools shall have the option of moving up to Division I on a sport-by-sport basis with the understanding
that this division jump will last for a minimum of two years.
Motion by George Rise, second by Kent Homoelle to approve the recommendations.
Motion passed 7-0.
It was noted that the division changes for OHSAA tournaments will be effective beginning with the
2007-08 school year.

E. Recommendations from the District Board Review Committee
The Board of Control was presented with recommendations from the District Board Review Committee. The
recommendations were tabled until the Board of Control can meet for a special meeting on June 12, 2006.

(Edited for space)

It was noted that the first two recommendations will require revisions to the OHSAA Bylaws, so the proposals
will be placed up for referendum vote of the OHSAA membership. Voting on the referendum issues
will take place between October 1 and 15, and the proposals will be reviewed in September at the OHSAA
Athletic Discussion Meetings. The third recommendation will be changed within the OHSAA Sports
Regulations and does not require a referendum vote of the OHSAA membership.
The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m.

[GrowlingTiger87]

Thanks for sharing that. It's sure spawned a LOT of debate around these parts.

[Smitty]

... In addition, schools shall have the option of moving up to Division I on a sport-by-sport basis....

I can see benefits for the "other" Massillon sports (track, volleyball, golf, etc.) to be in D-2.


FOOTBALL?? D-1 baby! :weightlift:

[austinsm11]

I agree Smitty, but the percents are different for each sport. Would we qualify to be DII?

For example, if I am looking at this correctly, it looks like the top 28% of schools would stay in DI for track, golf, soccer, and cross country.

I have no idea where Massillon falls in terms of percent.

[The Butler]

For example, if I am looking at this correctly, it looks like the top 28% of schools would stay in DI for track, golf, soccer, and cross country.

I have no idea where Massillon falls in terms of percent.

I don't know the percentage either, but I would venture a guess that Massillon would be D-1 in everything except football.

[austinsm11]

I don't know the percentage either, but I would venture a guess that Massillon would be D-1 in everything except football.

I kind of had that feeling too.

[tiger#22]

[QUOTE In addition, schools shall have the option of moving up to Division I on a sport-by-sport basis with the understanding
that this division jump will last for a minimum of two years.
[/QUOTE]

The key word there is MINIMUM, put Massillon down now for the next 50 years. :weightlift:

[Red50Go]

Did anyone else notice who recommended this? - The OHSAA Blue Ribbon Subcommittee on Recruiting/Boundaried vs. Non-boundaried Schools. Huh??? I am not saying this proposal is good or bad but it certainly does not seem to address (or tries to appease, in a lazy way imo) the more recognized problem.

I dont know about separating privates and publics but I always felt whatever private schools are allowed to do, public schools should be allowed to do, if they choose. ie. enrollment campaigns, first contact, creative marketing, open houses, camps, etc, (out of district too of course).

[Fats]

I dont know about separating privates and publics but I always felt whatever private schools are allowed to do, public schools should be allowed to do, if they choose. ie. enrollment campaigns, first contact, creative marketing, open houses, camps, etc, (out of district too of course).

I have been preaching this for years, If you look at the rules, they are no different for us. IT is just that WE have not been using the rules to our advantage. We can do marketing for our schools, open houses, enrollment campaigns, camps. You just need to follow the rules closely. Include all the benefits of going to Washington High not just the sports. THE PROBLEM - we have not been doing this. It is time we DID.

[Red50Go]

Well Fats, I have repeatedly said the same thing. Great minds think alike. Actually anyone w/ common sense thinks alike.

We need a boe & adm w/ a vision on how to increase enrollment. Unless of course the vision is to lose enrollment 13 of the last 15 years and drop to Div. 2, then our vision is working out great. At the same time, I think we'd also have to show much improved academic performance.

I still think outsiders would have a conniption and allegations would fly into OHSAA, thats why I would like OHSAA to spell things out more so we COULD be sure its by the book.

[Smitty]

Gentlemen (and ladies), PLEASE:

Enrollment & "recruiting" have NOTHING to do with our playoff problem.

Honest.

[Obie Wan]

I dont know about separating privates and publics but I always felt whatever private schools are allowed to do, public schools should be allowed to do, if they choose. ie. enrollment campaigns, first contact, creative marketing, open houses, camps, etc, (out of district too of course).
We are permitted to do much of that, but we choose not to.

I once proposed that Massillon create a new administrative position: Director of Pupil Enrollment. This person's sole responsibility would be to attract students from other districts to Massillon. Given that each student who comes to Massillon brings about $5500 in state money, a reasonable performance would pay for itself many times over. There is nothing stopping us from creating an Admissions Ofiice just like the private schools have.

Of course, Massillon's test scores would make this a very challenging responsibility, but that's an issue for another discussion.

[austinsm11]

We are permitted to do much of that, but we choose not to.


I really wasn't aware of this. Do you know of any public school districts that do you this? We should be taking advantage of this. Would we only be able to use this to attract kids from a certain area, say Stark County? I guess the other problem is that even if we followed the rules there will always be someone to say we recruited unfairly and didn't follow the rules.



Of course, Massillon's test scores would make this a very challenging responsibility, but that's an issue for another discussion.

Very true. We do have other things that make us attractive though: football tradition, a nice highschool/middle school, good band, speech team, etc. I always thought our plays/musicals were very well done as well, although I haven't really been to any other schools to compare.

[Obie Wan]

Would we only be able to use this to attract kids from a certain area, say Stark County?
An Ohio school district is required by law to choose how it implements open enrollment. There are 3 choices: no open enrollment, open enrollment only from contiguous districts, and open enrollment from any district in the state. Massillon has chosen to accept students from all other districts.

If an Admissions Office is set up correctly, it will not run afoul of OHSAA regulations. OHSAA permits institutional recruiting, but with a couple of main restrictions: recruiting efforts must directed to the public and large and not specifically targeted to athlets, athletics cannot be the sole/main focus of recruiting literature, and contact between the prospective student and athletic staff is prohibited prior to enrollment. All contact must be through the district's designated representative. Of course, there's no reason that we couldn't make Stacy the Director of Admissions. :)

[austinsm11]

Sounds like an idea!

[Red50Go]

Of course, there's no reason that we couldn't make Stacy the Director of Admissions. :)

Or we could add it to Hennon for another 50 large and show a $5000 savings. ;)

But to your point - THAT"S what I am talking about! Aww geez we'd never get in the Fed that way though.