Brad Garrett 143
From: Rothenberger, Bart
Bob and Brad-
I apologize I have been in an Admin meeting. The reason for us providing testimony is that you haven't heard much from the lower level classifications. We feel that this issue of 5A or 6A is really between those schools currently in those levels. We are primarily asking that you leave all schools alone from the 4A level down. If those 83 schools want to go to 5A or 6A then let them. The other issue is where do we cut off the numbers? We prior testimony and prior history from the the past 8 years we feel their is definitely an easy separation between 4A, 3A, 2A and 1A. Mr. Mulkey presented some findings that we felt were very pertinent on what leve you should be affiliated with. Those findings looked at lower level programs offered at a particular school. With that being said we feel the following ADM would be a good representation for the next four year block.
4A: 725 -371 (40 schools) 3A: 370 - 200 (38 Schools) 2A: 199-89 (44 Schools) 1A: 89- (85 schools)
If we could do a survey of those 207 schools with these numbers I think you would be surprised.
Take the remaining 81 schools with ADM over 726 and decide if you should go 5A or 6A. I do not see how a school with 800 can compete with school of 2500. I don't feel it should be our input if those 81 should break up into two divisions or one. Just like we don't feel they should have a say if we should be in four divisions or 3 divisions. As you will see we didn't put into leagues. Once you determine the break points for ADM allow those schools in each division to bring you a proposal of leagues.
-- BART ROTHENBERGER TAFT HIGH 7-12 SCHOOL Asst. Principal / Athletic Director [email protected] Cell: 541-912-7010
1 6A (Option 1) (52) 6A (Option 2) (52) 5A (36) 4A (40) 3A (32) 2A (43) (43) 1A (cont.) 1330+ 1330+ 1329-670 669-331 330-190 200-95 89- 6A-1 - PIL (9) 6A-1 - PIL (9) 5A-1 - Northwest Oregon Conference (8) 4A-1 - Cowapa League (6) 3A-1 - Lewis & Clark League (9) 2A-1 - Northwest League (8) (0) 1A-5 - Mountain Valley League (12) Benson Techmen 750 Benson Techmen 750 Hillsboro Spartans 1195 Astoria Fishermen 511 Catlin Gabel Eagles 308 City Christian Lions 148 52 Butte Falls Loggers 47 Cleveland Warriors 1478 Cleveland Warriors 1478 La Salle Prep Falcons 679 Banks Braves 358 Clatskanie Tigers 216 Columbia Christian Knights 115 60 Cascades144 Academy Steelhead NEW Franklin Quakers 1346 Franklin Quakers 1346 Milwaukie / Arts Academy Mustangs 1152 Gladstone Gladiators 631 De La Salle North Catholic Knights 308 Gaston Greyhounds 177 113 Central Christian Tigers 58 Grant Generals 1376 Grant Generals 1376 Parkrose Broncos 774 Seaside Seagulls 375 Neah-Kah-Nie Pirates 201 Portland Christian Royals 175 64 Chiloquin Panthers 76 Jefferson Democrats 417 Jefferson Democrats 417 Putnam Kingsmen 1034 Tillamook Cheesemakers 533 Oregon Episcopal Aardvarks 313 Faith Bible Falcons 113 48 Gilchrist Grizzlies 56 Lincoln Cardinals 1605 Lincoln Cardinals 1605 Sandy Pioneers 1215 Valley Catholic Valiants 384 Portland Adventist Cougars 284 Nestucca Bobcats 130 67 Hosanna Christian Lions 68 Madison Senators 909 Madison Senators 909 Scappoose Indians 721 Rainier Columbians 285 Knappa Loggers 121 57 North Lake Cowboys 65 Roosevelt Roughriders 742 Roosevelt Roughriders 742 St. Helens Lions 842 4A-2 - Tri-Valley Conference (7) Warrenton Warriors 228 Vernonia Loggers 156 41 Paisley Broncos 36 Wilson Trojans 1225 Wilson Trojans 1225 Corbett Cardinals 379 Yamhill-Carlton Tigers 311 24 Prospect Cougars 61 5A-2 - Mid-Willamette Conference (7) Estacada Rangers 474 Rogue Valley Adventist Red Tail Hawks 33 6A-2 - Metro League (9) 6A-2 - Metro League (6) Canby Cougars 1316 Madras White Buffaloes 641 3A-2 - West Valley League (10) 2A-2 - Central Valley League (7) (0) Triad Timber Wolves 50 Aloha Warriors 1794 Aloha Warriors 1794 Cascade Cougars 683 Molalla Indians 662 Amity Warriors 260 Chemawa Braves 236 49 Trinity Lutheran Saints 54 Beaverton Beavers 1654 Beaverton Beavers 1654 Central Panthers 859 North Marion Huskies 530 Blanchet Catholic Cavaliers 225 Culver Bulldogs 181 75 Jesuit Crusaders 1294 Mountainside Mavericks NEW Dallas Dragons 918 Sisters Outlaws 404 Colton Vikings 201 Delphian School Dragons 162 52 1A-6 - Big Sky League (10) Mountainside Mavericks NEW Southridge Skyhawks 1614 North Salem Vikings 1404 Woodburn Bulldogs 1256 Dayton Pirates 279 Gervais Cougars 281 39 Arlington Honkers 44 Southridge Skyhawks 1614 Sunset Apollos 2123 Silverton Foxes 1149 Horizon Christian Hawks (TUAL) 151 Kennedy Trojans 152 44 Condon Blue Devils 35 Sunset Apollos 2123 Westview Wildcats 2508 Wilsonville Wildcats 1077 4A-3 - Oregon West Conference (7) Riverdale Mavericks 241 Western Mennonite Pioneers 150 63 Dufur Rangers 80 Tigard Tigers 1771 Junction City Tigers 492 Salem Academy Crusaders 235 Santiam Wolverines 137 49 Horizon Christian Hawks (HR) 68 Tualatin Timberwolves 1770 6A-3 - Inter County Conference (6) 5A-3 - Southern Oregon League (7) Marist Catholic Spartans 563 Sheridan Spartans 211 87 Ione Cardinals 68 Westview Wildcats 2508 Barlow Bruins 1528 Ashland Grizzlies 940 Newport Cubs 550 Westside Christian Eagles 220 2A-3 - Tri-River Conference (7) 52 Mitchell Loggers 27 Bend Lava Bears 1468 Crater Comets 1158 Philomath Warriors 444 Willamina Bulldogs 232 Central Linn Cobras 169 52 Sherman Huskies 67 6A-3 - Mt. Hood Conference (9) Gresham Gophers 1369 Eagle Point Eagles 911 Stayton Eagles 608 East Linn Christian Eagles 142 St. Paul Buckaroos 90 South Wasco County Redsides 67 Barlow Bruins 1528 Hermiston Bulldogs 1240 Marshfield Pirates 682 Sweet Home Huskies 639 3A-4 - Mountain Valley Conference (7) Jefferson Lions 259 (0) Spray Eagles 17 Centennial Eagles 1477 Mountain View Cougars 1225 North Bend Bulldogs 676 Taft Tigers 359 Bandon Tigers 199 Monroe Dragons 125 46 Wheeler Falcons 24 Central Catholic Rams 891 Summit Storm 1391 Springfield Millers 1078 Coquille Red Devils 216 Regis Rams 142 48 Clackamas Cavaliers 2297 Thurston Colts 1174 4A-4 - Far West League (8) Harrisburg Eagles 272 Toledo Boomers 148 87 1A-7 - Old Oregon League (9) David Douglas Scots 2499 6A-4 - Mt. Hood Conference (6) Brookings–Harbor Bruins 449 La Pine Hawks 324 Waldport Irish 146 42 Cove Leopards 73 Gresham Gophers 1369 Centennial Eagles 1477 5A-4 - Midwestern League (8) Cottage Grove Lions 648 Pleasant Hill Billies 294 51 Echo Cougars 82 Hermiston Bulldogs 1240 Central Catholic Rams 891 Churchill Lancers 1022 Creswell Bulldogs 342 Santiam Christian Eagles 230 2A-4 - Mountain View Conference(6) 58 Elgin Huskies 87 Oregon City Pioneers 1940 Clackamas Cavaliers 2297 Corvallis Spartans 1117 Douglas Trojans 352 Scio Loggers 257 Bandon Tigers 199 44 Griswold Grizzlies 58 Reynolds Raiders 2142 David Douglas Scots 2499 Crescent Valley Raiders 937 Elmira Falcons 345 Gold Beach Panthers 143 61 Joseph Eagles 59 Oregon City Pioneers 1940 Lebanon Warriors 1052 Siuslaw Vikings 347 3A-5 - Eastern Oregon League (6) Myrtle Point Bobcats 164 65 Nixyaawii Eagles 41 6A-4 - Three Rivers League (9) Reynolds Raiders 2142 North Eugene Highlanders 771 South Umpqua Lancers 336 Burns Hilanders 222 Oakland Oakers 173 Crow Cougars 93 Pine Eagle Spartans 46 Century Jaguars 1437 South Albany Rebels 1158 Sutherlin Bulldogs 357 Irrigon Knights 209 Oakridge Warriors 120 (0) Powder Valley Badgers 69 Forest Grove Vikings 1654 6A-5 - Three Rivers League (6) West Albany Bulldogs 1264 Nyssa Bulldogs 277 Reedsport Braves 165 63 Wallowa Cougars 58 Glencoe Crimson Tide 1471 Century Jaguars 1437 Willamette Wolverines 1198 4A-5 - Skyline Conference (8) Riverside Pirates 211 72 Lake Oswego Lakers 1307 Forest Grove Vikings 1654 Cascade Christian Challengers 249 Umatilla Vikings 318 79 1A-8 - High Desert League (12) Lakeridge Pacers 1126 Glencoe Crimson Tide 1471 5A-5 - Intermountain Conference (6) Henley Hornets 581 Vale Vikings 225 2A-5 - Sunset Conference (7) 69 Adrian Antelopes 67 Liberty Falcons 1372 Liberty Falcons 1372 Crook County Cowboys 703 Hidden Valley Mustangs 535 Bonanza Antlers 122 12 Burnt River Bulls 25 Sherwood Bowmen 1569 Newberg Tigers 1414 Hood River Valley Eagles 1171 Klamath Union Pelicans 640 Canyonville Christian Pilots 134 78 Crane Mustangs 49 St. Mary's Academy Blues 1435 Sherwood Bowmen 1569 Pendleton Buckaroos 779 Mazama Vikings 572 Glide Wildcats 181 78 Dayville Tigers 20 West Linn Lions 1707 Redmond Panthers 808 North Valley Knights 462 Illinois Valley Cougars 261 58 Four Rivers Charter Falcons NEW 6A-6 - Greater Valley League (6) Ridgeview Ravens 854 Phoenix Pirates 621 Lakeview Honkers 224 34 Harper Hornets 34 6A-5 - Greater Valley League (10) McKay Scots 1768 The Dalles Riverhawks 706 St. Mary's Crusaders 320 Lost River Raiders 126 Umpqua Valley Christian Monarchs 95 Huntington Locomotives 18 Bend Lava Bears 1468 McMinnville Grizzles 1793 Rogue River Chieftains 208 45 Jordan Valley Mustangs 22 McKay Scots 1768 McNary Celtics 1681 4A-6 - Greater Oregon League (4) 73 Long Creek Mountaineers 14 McMinnville Grizzles 1793 South Salem Saxons 1578 Baker Bulldogs 434 Monument Tigers 19 McNary Celtics 1681 Sprague Olympians 1490 La Grande Tigers 539 2A-6 - Wapiti League (8) Prairie City Panthers 36 Mountain View Cougars 1225 West Salem Titans 1559 McLoughlin Pioneers 400 Enterprise Outlaws 115 Ukiah Cougars 28 Newberg Tigers 1414 Ontario Tigers 541 Grant Union Prospectors 148 South Salem Saxons 1578 6A-7 - Southwest Metro League (7) Heppner Mustangs 97 Sprague Olympians 1490 Jesuit Crusaders 1294 Imbler Panthers 97 Summit Storm 1391 Lake Oswego Lakers 1307 Pilot Rock Rockets 98 West Salem Titans 1559 Lakeridge Pacers 1126 Stanfield Tigers 119 St. Mary's Academy Blues 1435 Union Bobcats 107 6A-6 - Southern Oregon Conference (6) Tigard Tigers 1771 Weston-McEwen Tiger Scots 175 Grants Pass Cavemen 1526 Tualatin Timberwolves 1770 North Medford Black Tornado 1477 West Linn Lions 1707 Roseburg Indians 1394 KEY Sheldon Irish 1359 6A-8 - Southern Oregon Conference (6) Historical Placement / Play Up South Eugene Axemen 1345 Grants Pass Cavemen 1526 Denotes projected enrollment increase South Medford Panthers 1545 North Medford Black Tornado 1477 Denotes potential interest in playing down Roseburg Indians 1394 Denotes projected enrollment decrease KEY Sheldon Irish 1359 Denotes geographic isolation Historical Placement / Play Up South Eugene Axemen 1345 Denotes projected enrollment increase South Medford Panthers 1545 Denotes potential interest in playing down Denotes projected enrollment decrease Denotes geographic isolation 2 Pilot Rock Rockets 98 1 Catlin Gabel Eagles 308 4 Seaside Seagulls 375 2 Union Bobcats 107 1 Clatskanie Tigers 216 4 Corbett Cardinals 144379 2 Santiam Wolverines 137 1 Oregon Episcopal Aardvarks 313 4 Tillamook Cheesemakers 533 2 Gold Beach Panthers 143 1 Rainier Columbians 285 4 Ontario Tigers 541 2 Oakland Oakers 173 1 Warrenton Warriors 228 4 Molalla Indians 662 2 Portland Christian Royals 175 1 Westside Christian Eagles 220 4 Woodburn Bulldogs 1256
2 Heppner Mustangs 97 2 Blanchet Catholic Cavaliers 225 4 Cascade Christian Challengers 249 2 Stanfield Tigers 119 2 De La Salle North Catholic Knights 308 4 Baker Bulldogs 434 2 Monroe Dragons 125 2 Portland Adventist Cougars 284 4 Estacada Rangers 474 2 Regis Rams 142 2 Riverdale Mavericks 241 4 La Grande Tigers 539 2 Waldport Irish 146 2 Salem Academy Crusaders 235 4 Newport Cubs 550
2 Toledo Boomers 148 2/3 Horizon Christian Hawks (TUAL) 151 4 Mazama Vikings 572
2 Milo Adventist Mustangs 94 3 Amity Warriors 260 4 Banks Braves 358 2 Enterprise Outlaws 115 3 Dayton Pirates 279 4 Sisters Outlaws 404 2 Myrtle Point Bobcats 164 3 Taft Tigers 359 4 Klamath Union Pelicans 640 2 Weston-McEwen Tiger Scots 175 3 Willamina Bulldogs 232 4 North Bend Bulldogs 676 2 Gaston Greyhounds 177 3 Yamhill-Carlton Tigers 311 4 La Salle Prep Falcons 679
2 Imbler Panthers 97 4 Burns Hilanders 222 4 St. Mary's Crusaders 320 2 Lost River Raiders 126 4 Irrigon Knights 209 4 Junction City Tigers 492 2 Canyonville Christian Pilots 134 4 Nyssa Bulldogs 277 4 North Marion Huskies 530 2 City Christian Lions 148 4 Riverside Pirates 211 4 Marist Catholic Spartans 563 2 Reedsport Braves 165 4 Umatilla Vikings 318 4 Madras White Buffaloes 641 2 Central Linn Cobras 169 4 Vale Vikings 225 4 Cottage Grove Lions 648
2 Faith Bible Falcons 113 5 Coquille Red Devils 216 4 Valley Catholic Valiants 384 2 Oakridge Warriors 120 5 Douglas Trojans 352 4 Philomath Warriors 444 2 Nestucca Bobcats 130 5 La Pine Hawks 324 4 Astoria Fishermen 511 2 East Linn Christian Eagles 142 5 Pleasant Hill Billies 294 4 Hidden Valley Mustangs 535 2 Vernonia Loggers 156 5 South Umpqua Lancers 336 4 Gladstone Gladiators 631 2 Delphian School Dragons 162 5 Sutherlin Bulldogs 357 4 Sweet Home Huskies 639
2 Columbia Christian Knights 115 4 McLoughlin Pioneers 400 2 Knappa Loggers 121 6 Creswell Bulldogs 342 4 Brookings–Harbor Bruins 449 2 Grant Union Prospectors 148 6 Elmira Falcons 345 4 Henley Hornets 581 2 Western Mennonite Pioneers 150 6 Santiam Christian Eagles 230 4 Stayton Eagles 608 2 Kennedy Trojans 152 6 Scio Loggers 257 4 Phoenix Pirates 621 2 Bonanza Antlers 122 6 Siuslaw Vikings 347 4 North Valley Knights 462 2 Culver Bulldogs 181 6 Harrisburg Eagles 272 4 Marshfield Pirates 682 2 Glide Wildcats 181 4 Cascade Cougars 683 2 Bandon Tigers 199 2 Neah-Kah-Nie Pirates 201 2 Colton Vikings 201 2 Rogue River Chieftains 208 2 Sheridan Spartans 211 2 Jefferson Lions 259 2 Illinois Valley Cougars 261 2 Gervais Cougars 281 3 Lakeview Honkers 224 1 Chemawa Braves 236
5 Crook County Cowboys 703 5 The Dalles Riverhawks 706 5 Scappoose Indians 721 5 North Eugene Highlanders 771 5 Parkrose Broncos 774 5 Pendleton Buckaroos 779 5 Redmond Panthers 808 5 St. Helens Lions 842 5 Ridgeview Ravens 854 5 Central Panthers 859 5 Eagle Point Eagles 911 144 5 Dallas Dragons 918 5 Crescent Valley Raiders 937 5 Ashland Grizzlies 940 5 Churchill Lancers 1022 5 Putnam Kingsmen 1034 5 Lebanon Warriors 1052 5 Wilsonville Wildcats 1077 5 Springfield Millers 1078 5 Corvallis Spartans 1117 5 Silverton Foxes 1149 Milwaukie / Arts Academy 5 Mustangs 1152 5 Crater Comets 1158 5 South Albany Rebels 1158 5 Hood River Valley Eagles 1171 5 Thurston Colts 1174 5 Hillsboro Spartans 1195 5 Willamette Wolverines 1198 5 Sandy Pioneers 1215 5 West Albany Bulldogs 1264 5 Canby Cougars 1316 5 North Salem Vikings 1404
6 Jefferson Democrats 417 6 Roosevelt Roughriders 742 6 Benson Techmen 750 6 Central Catholic Rams 891 6 Madison Senators 909 6 Lakeridge Pacers 1126 6 Wilson Trojans 1225 6 Mountain View Cougars 1225 6 Hermiston Bulldogs 1240 6 Jesuit Crusaders 1294 6 Lake Oswego Lakers 1307 6 South Eugene Axemen 1345 6 Franklin Quakers 1346 6 Sheldon Irish 1359 6 Gresham Gophers 1369 6 Liberty Falcons 1372 6 Grant Generals 1376 6 Summit Storm 1391 6 Roseburg Indians 1394 6 Newberg Tigers 1414 6 St. Mary's Academy Blues 1435 6 Century Jaguars 1437 6 Bend Lava Bears 1468 6 Glencoe Crimson Tide 1471 6 Centennial Eagles 1477 North Medford Black 6 Tornado 1477 6 Cleveland Warriors 1478 6 Sprague Olympians 1490 6 Grants Pass Cavemen 1526 6 Barlow Bruins 1528 6 South Medford Panthers 1545 6 West Salem Titans 1559 6 Sherwood Bowmen 1569 6 South Salem Saxons 1578 6 Lincoln Cardinals 1605 6 Southridge Skyhawks 1614 6 Beaverton Beavers 1654 6 Forest Grove Vikings 1654 6 McNary Celtics 1681 6 West Linn Lions 1707 6 McKay Scots 1768 144 6 Tualatin Timberwolves 1770 6 Tigard Tigers 1771 6 McMinnville Grizzles 1793 6 Aloha Warriors 1794 6 Oregon City Pioneers 1940 6 Sunset Apollos 2123 6 Reynolds Raiders 2142 6 Clackamas Cavaliers 2297 6 David Douglas Scots 2499 6 Westview Wildcats 2508 6 Mountainside Mavericks NEW Powers Public Schools #31 PO Box 479 #1 High School Hill Road 145 Powers, OR 97466 Phone: 541-439-2291 Fax: 541-439-2875 [email protected] Mr. Matt Shorb – Superintendent/Principal
February 15, 2017
The most recent update on proceedings of the Classification and Districting Committee included a new methodology for determining classification for football that concerns me. The use of “on the field success” to determine classification sets a dangerous precedent, in our opinion. We strayed into dangerous ground a few years ago when we allowed the poverty calculation to impact placement. That was not a good idea either and this seems like the next step down that ill-advised path. ADM should always be considered when determining classification and poorly run programs should not be rewarded by moving them down to a lower classification.
There are successful programs at every level that defy the odds by consistently winning against larger schools within their classification. More often, and especially in the smaller schools, we see fluctuation in success due to groups of athletes that cycle through programs. Those schools that have run a successful program in recent years, such as Banks (ADM – 358) should not be punished for their success by having Corvallis (ADM – 1117) dropped down into their classification. As another example, Heppner (ADM – 97) has the highest winning percentage of any 2A school, yet there are only 3 schools smaller than them at the 2A level. Under this proposal they would now be competing with the likes of Portland Christian (ADM – 290).
Most concerning is the impact this proposal would have on the 1A classification. It’s not any more glaring regarding the numbers, although those examples are there as well (Waldport, ADM – 146 in the same league as Alsea, ADM – 46), but there are two additional reasons that make this proposal worse at the 1A level. First, the 1A schools are being “squished” again. As was the case when the poverty calculation was added, there is no place for the lower 1A schools to go. The 1A schools that score a ‘4’ in this rating scale will not be playing down to a lower classification. Instead they will be competing against a new slate of even larger schools. The other reason why it’s worse for 1A schools is that we don’t play the same game. If you allow a 2A school, such as Oakridge (ADM – 120, Ave. Part. – 25), to take their top 8 players from their 11 man team and compete in a league with schools less than half their size at the 1A level, it does more than level the playing field for them.
If the committee wishes to preserve the health of football programs across the state, it should not do so with no regard for ADM. It sets a dangerous precedent by rewarding poor program performance and creates too many inequities on the playing field. If the committee is sold on this idea, it should at least consider ways to hold 8-man football harmless by either not pushing more 2A schools into 1A, simply adjusting 1A ADM instead, or by creating two separate playoff classifications within the 51 proposed 1A football programs.
Respectfully,
Skyline ‘A’ League
Brad Garrett 146
From: Gary Roberts
Brad,
I was not able to attend yesterday's meeting but I wanted to again vocalize South Lane School District's support for the six classification system. We are not in favor of 5 classifications or special districts for football. We feel that the current model works as is.
Thanks,
-- Gary Roberts Assistant Principal/Athletic Director Head Football Coach Cottage Grove High School 541-942-3391 ext. 809
1 Brad Garrett 147
From: Howard Rub
Gentlemen,
Good afternoon. I hope you are all doing well.
Unfortunately, I have been slammed with issues in my building the past two weeks. As such, I was not able to attend last Monday's Classification meeting. Hence, please allow me to use email to again express my view that the six class system has been good for the majority of schools in Oregon. I truly believe the smallest ten schools in any of the 5 class proposals will struggle competitively in a more dramatic way than in the current six class system. I am also very opposed to special districts. The five class system creates even more special districts than we currently have in a six class system. I especially believe special districts in football will have a detrimental long term effect for the sport of football in smaller communities (Class 4A and smaller). Small communities still identify their school with their league. Boys Soccer became more relevant at Astoria High when we started having success in the Cowapa League. When Boys Soccer was in "Special District", there was no real identity or relevance to having success in a "special district". I realize there in no way to quantify this with a number, but it is true.
We have been extremely fortunate in 4A to have a relatively solid balance of competitiveness and likeness amongst our schools since the OSAA has moved to a six class system. I believe the Committee has viewed the Championship numbers that Mr. Wayne Spencer of Newport High showing the competitive balance of state titles in Class 4A. I believe this is factual data backing how a six class system has been effective.
I am not sure at what stage the Classification Committee will make a decision with regard to moving towards a 5 class system or staying with a 6 class system. Hence, I wanted to share this view to be passed onto Committee Members should you deem this to be appropriate.
Thank you for all that you do the students and student‐athletes of Oregon. I hope to see all of you very soon.
Sincerely,
H Rub Astoria School District 1C Director of Athletics
1 Brad Garrett 148
From: Robert Hoepfl
Hey,
I have spoke with you before about the proposals, but once again I just want to express my concern for what Model #13 would do to our Athletics here at Warrenton. While model #12 is very tough, with Seaside, Valley Catholic and Banks. #13 is even worse adding Astoria and Tillamook with the before mentioned schools. We have struggled tremendously against schools at the current 3A level and moving into a modified or full Cowapa league would be detrimental for our sports, in particular sports like Football. Warrenton is a huge advocate of keeping the 6A system in either form as it allows us to be in leagues which are challenging, but if we work hard we can find a path to success. I understand that you have nearly 300 schools to consider and I don't envy the task laid in front of you. However, I must advocate for what is best for our kids.
If you have any questions let me know.
Thank you,
Robert Hoepfl Warrenton High School Athletic Director Varsity Girls Basketball Coach/ Teacher (503) 861-3317 [email protected]
1 Brad Garrett 149
From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 1:01 PM To: Brad Garrett; [email protected] Subject: Classification Proposals
Hi Brad,
Speaking as a wrestling coach and weighing the different proposals out there I wanted to share my thoughts with the committee regarding what I personally prefer of the the current proposals (drafts 10- 13).
In my particular sport I would prefer to see a 6 Class model over a 5 Class model for a variety of reasons, most importantly because I think going to 5 classes would create an environment where the larger 6A schools would have a large competitive edge over the smaller schools based on enrollment numbers. I think things are fairly equal presently and combining the 5A and 6A schools into one classification would drastically impact a lot of programs (both 5A & 6A) that have experienced decent success over the last decade. It would simply put too many "good programs" in the same classification. I would personally prefer cutting it down to 3 or 4 classifications than going to 5.
Of the two 6 classification models put forth, I prefer draft #11 because it preserves the nucleus of the current Conference we've been a part of for the last 7 years and allows for continued rivalries, collaborations, and friendships among coaches, players, and programs. We enjoy the relationships we've built and don't want to have to start that process all over again.
I think trying to maintain historical opponents is a key element to the building of programs and should be fostered as much as possible taking into consideration enrollment numbers and driving distance. It seems to me opponents generally shouldn't have to make commutes longer than 90 minutes to reach an opponent. The longer the drives, the greater the impact on education the following day.
Just my two cents,
Larry Topliff Sandy Wrestling
1 Brad Garrett 150
From: Mark Vidlak
Hello guys, I have been following the meetings and proposals that have been put out. I will keep this short. I believe the best proposal put forward is Draft #13. I am favor of this for league and classification equity, tradition, and travel. It is my hope that this model is chosen. Thank you. Mark
-- Mark Vidlak Hidden Valley High School Social studies/Vocational education Head Football and Baseball coach "Go Stangs"
1 Brad Garrett 151
From: Townsend, Eddie
A few things. First I realize there are a huge number of schools that all have very subjective views and therefore you have to filter all forms of communication through that lens.
I am the head basketball coach for Toledo. I currently lead the voting for the 2A Boys All State teams voted on by the coaches. I am close communication with all current 2A boys basketball coaches. I am going to speak on behalf of the coach's of my current league and in the 2A classification.
First- on the current playoff system. The AT Large addition has been well received. However, most coaches (everyone I have spoken to) thinks we should have the same system as 4A with the play-in round. We do not think that a few Sups should be able to override the vote of all coaches and ADs because of unknown future costs that may or may not happen.
Next, the 2A cutoff from current proposal 10-11 is a best fit for us. Most coaches do not feel a school should be able to play down when there is such a huge gap in enrollment just because of prior lack of success. However, it is understood there are exceptions.
What I have gathered is if we use the current proposal #10-11 without the schools coming down the leagues should stay as close as current as possible. There is a cost to changing all leagues every 4 years with banners in gyms, fields, etc. Also once leagues are chosen there should be some say in a NEW league name if it is with new representation.
Here is a proposed 2A league formations within the Proposal #10-11 which it looks like is the most feasible from Classification 1A-6A.
The recalibration of the 2A leagues to keep them as similar to they are now as well as keeping them small enough to be reasonable is what we tried to accomplish.
PLEASE get back to me on this
1 Class 2A in Proposal adjustment for Proposals #10 or 11 ***Chemawa, Jefferson, and Gervais come into Tri River but no This proposal for the class 2A makes minor changes to the proposed reason to break up traditional conference so larger schools151 can play leagues/conference alignments. Most coaches feel smaller conferences allows for down. more non-league participation as well as a more balanced, intimate, and competitive feel to the conferences. In addition, most schools feel that keeping the If they do not play down they easily slide into Quad County leagues as intact as possible is the best thing for everyone involved. Conference (Gervais) and West Valley Conference (Chemawa). ***Add Jefferson if they play down. They can slide into Mountain This would put minimum 38 and maximum 43 schools in the 2A and Would level out Valley League if they stay 3A the 3A to around the same if those schools did not play down.
Please email me back to redo or adjust anything for 2A Sunset Conference (6) representation. 25/25 coaches I have talked with favor the Nestucca Bobcats following league alignments Gold Beach Panthers Myrtle Point Bobcats Northwest Conference (8) Reedsport Braves City Christian Lions Toledo Boomers Columbia Christian Knights Waldport Irish Delphian Dragons Gaston Greyhounds Mountain View Conference (6-8) Portland Christian Royals Bonanza Antlers Faith Bible Falcons Canyonville Christian Pilots Knappa Loggers Glide Wildcats Vernonia Loggers ***Lakeview (play down?) Lost River Raiders Tri-River Conference (7) Oakland Oakers Chemawa Braves Oakridge Warriors Gervais Cougars ***Riddle (play down?) Jefferson Lions Kennedy Trojans ***Lakeview to 3A FarWest, ***Riddle to 1A Skyline Regis Rams St. Paul Buckaroos Wapiti (8) Western Mennonite Pioneers Enterprise Grant Union Emerald Valley Conference (7) Heppner Central Linn Cobras Imbler Crow Cougars Pilot Rock Culver Bulldogs Stanfield East Linn Eagles Union Monroe Dragons Weston-McEwen Santiam Wolverines Second option for 2A Leagues*** Gold Beach Panthers Northwest Conference (8) ***Lakeview (play down?) 151 City Christian Lions Lost River Raiders Columbia Christian Knights Oakland Oakers Gaston Greyhounds Myrtle Point Bobcats Portland Christian Royals ***Riddle (play down?) Faith Bible Falcons Reedsport Braves Nestucca Bobcats Knappa Loggers ***Lakeview to 3A FarWest Vernonia Loggers ***Riddle to 1A Skyline
Tri-River Conference (7,8 or 9 if add) Wapiti (8) Culver Bulldogs Enterprise Delphian Dragons Grant Union Kennedy Trojans Heppner Santiam Wolverines Imbler Regis Rams Pilot Rock St. Paul Buckaroos Stanfield Western Mennonite Pioneers Union ***Chemawa or Gervais come into Tri River but no reason to break up Weston-McEwen traditional conference so larger schools can play down. If they do not play down they easily slide into Quad County Conference (Gervais) and West Valley Conference (Chemawa). Valley-Coast (VALCO) Conference (7 or 8) Central Linn Cobras Class 2A in Proposal adjustment for Proposals #12 or 13 Crow Cougars If we were to go to the 5A classification system most coaches feel the East Linn Eagles cutoff of proposal #12 is the most reasonable at 204. League Monroe Dragons alignments are what they are. I think if you polled most 2A schools Oakridge Warriors they would want to stay at the current 6A model and current league Toledo Boomers formations FOR the MOST part! I have done my due diligence on Waldport Irish this. Thanks ***Add Jefferson if they play down. They can slide into Mountain Valley League if they stay 3A
Mountain View Conference (8-10) Bonanza Antlers Canyonville Christian Pilots Glide Wildcats Brad Garrett 152
From: Darren Shryock
Dear Committee Members,
Thank you for your work on the classification and redistricting process. I know it is a thankless job; I appreciate you taking all items into account when making these decisions.
To honor your time, I will simply list items that I would ask you to consider:
* Thank you for considering new cut off points for enrollment. Most of the proposals take enrollment into consideration. Draft #13 however, does not. I urge you to remove Draft #13 from consideration. Schools like Newport (550) should not be in the same league as South Albany (1158); nor should Westside Christian (220) have to compete with North Marion (530).
* Please consider allowing an exception to Woodburn playing down a level. While Woodburn has indeed struggled in many sports and a strong case can be made for them competing at the 4A level in most sports, their boys' soccer team has not struggled, and in fact, won the state championship in boys' soccer at the 5A level this year. Allowing them to compete at the 4A level in soccer would be unfair to the rest of the 4A teams. The argument for allowing Woodburn to play down is, in part, that many of their students do not turn out for athletics. That is true in many sports, but not in boys' soccer. I would suggest they continue to play 5A for boys' soccer. While that may be unprecedented, allowing a state championship team to play down a level is also unprecedented. Much like Jefferson chooses to play at the 6A level, in large part for competition for their boys' basketball team, Woodburn boys' soccer would likely choose to play up as well.
* Finally, letters A and D of the charge to the committee involve student safety and school enrollment data. Taking into account these two primary directives makes staying with six classifications appear to be the rational choice. Again referencing Draft #13, in football, pitting a large school like Crater, with 10 kids who break the 250 pound barrier, vs. a school like Henley, who has just 1 kid that heavy, produces dangerous conditions for players. It won't be a matter of competition; it will be a matter of safety. Larger schools simply have a larger population from which to draw, statistically producing larger and/or more athletes.
I have been reluctant to weigh in on this because I know you all have so much material to wade through. I chose to respond however, because I want to stand up for kids and not be the person who whines about the election results but never voted.
Thanks so much for considering these points.
Sincerely,
-- Darren Shryock Athletic Director/Asst Principal Stayton High School (503) 769-2171
1 153
Edits to 5A draft 12
From 1015-451 to 1015-400
Schools changing
Sisters 3a to 4a Baker 3a to 4a Baker 3a to 4a Mac Hi 3a t o4a
1. You would need to split the 4a intermountain conference into two different conferences if this were to happen
League one would be as follows
Baker Mac Hi La Grande Pendleton Ontario
League two would be as follows
The Dalles Sisters Madras Crook County Redmond Ridgeview
2. Brookings Harbor would need to move into The Lake of the Woods league 3. The leagues for 4A would be set up very well geographically; sisters wouldn’t have to travel over the pass for any league games. The Eastern Oregon teams would be in a decent league. The Lake of the Woods league would be larger than the rest but considering how a lot of those teams are geographically isolated from the other leagues it wouldn’t be difficult. 4. As far as wrestling goes every conference would have a partner for regionals with the exception of the Lake of the Woods league. With that league being 9 teams I think it would work out fine
Jeff Roberts, Principal Seaside High School Brian Purnell, Assistant Principal154 Preparing All Students for a Jason Boyd, CAA, Athletic Director Productive Future Travis Cave, Counselor Kalyn Knudsvig, Counselor
March 6, 2017
Peter Weber Executive Director Oregon School Activities Association
Dear Mr. Weber,
I am sending you this letter on behalf of Seaside High School and the Seaside School District. After reviewing the latest proposals released by the Classification Committee, it has become clear to us at Seaside High School that there is one proposal that we prefer more than any other listed. Proposal #12 in the 5 classification system proposal makes the most sense for Seaside School District.
Proposal #12 increases our league size which is something we have desired as it will reduce our overall travel. This proposal increases our league travel by about 15%, but the increase in league travel will actually reduce our non league travel by a significant amount. We believe that former Cowapa league schools such as Astoria and Tillamook will still play us in non league contests. Add this travel factor to the additional league teams and for basketball we would not have to travel to Corbett or Estacada for non league contests. Having a variety of teams in the two adjacent 3A leagues within 100 miles will drastically reduce our travel and save transportation cost for Seaside School District.
Proposal #12 will also increase seat time for our student-athletes. With so many league and non league schools in our proximity travel times will be shorter. Therefore assuming game times stay the same student-athletes will be afforded the opportunity to be in class longer. Currently our basketball team leaves at an average of 1pm for non league games during the season. Under proposal #12 the average leave time for non league games would be 2:15pm. That is a pretty big increase in seat time. Our school day ends at 3:10pm. Under this same proposal our varsity football team would not leave prior to the end of the school day.
From a competitive balance perspective we feel Proposal #12 gives Seaside High School student- athletes the greatest chance to be competitive in a larger variety of sports. With the current classification system Seaside is one the smallest schools. At 375 (SES) we do not have the student population to support competitive teams against school whose SES is twice our size. If our athletes focus on one sport we are very competitive, but that is to the detriment of other sports. Track for instance at Seaside has been competitive through the years. Softball and baseball have one Play-in round appearance since 2011. Both programs have averaged less than 22 players over the last 4 years. Yearly we are unsure if we will have a JV teams until the first week of the season. Playing with schools that are closer to our ADM will increase the multi sport participation by our student-athletes.
1901 N Holladay Dr. SEASIDE, OREGON 97138 503-738-5586 FAX 503-738-5589 www.shs.seaside.k12.or.us
Jeff Roberts, Principal Seaside High School Brian Purnell, Assistant Principal154 Preparing All Students for a Jason Boyd, CAA, Athletic Director Productive Future Travis Cave, Counselor Kalyn Knudsvig, Counselor
There is lots of evidence that suggests you grow more as a person when you have the opportunity to triumph over failure. I also believe this to be true, but when your program is in constant failure mostly due to the perceived outcome of the season by its players, something needs to change. Hope is very powerful and if you give a student-athlete hope, they will be successful more often than not.
We appreciate all the work the Classification Committee is doing to find a solution that is as near perfect as possible. We hope this letter will provide a little more evidence that the current 4A classification could be improved and is not as unified as some may suggest.
Sincerely,
Jason Boyd
1901 N Holladay Dr. SEASIDE, OREGON 97138 503-738-5586 FAX 503-738-5589 www.shs.seaside.k12.or.us
Brad Garrett 155
From: Kyle Stanfield Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 8:53 AM To: Chris Knudsen Cc: Brad Garrett Subject: RE: Reclassification
Thanks Coach – we will put in correspondence.
KYLE STANFIELD ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR O 503.682.6722 X239 C 503.919.8525 [email protected]
25200 SW PARKWAY AVE. STE. 1, WILSONVILLE, OR 97070
From: Chris Knudsen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 7:34 AM To: Kyle Stanfield
------Forwarded message ------From: John Beck
Hi Chris ‐ what is the feeling of the committee on where Crater should land? Seeing the proposals ‐ especially for football...and putting Crater with smaller schools like Mazama and Henley would not be very competitive situation. I think our student population is too large and it would put those smaller schools at a huge disadvantage.
I would look to move Crater into a league with larger schools. We have been very competitive with the 6A schools now for a few years in all of our sports...and I don't see that trend changing.
Just an opinion from down south. :)
John J. Beck Head Football Coach - Crater HS Past President Oregon Athletic Coaches Association Football Chair - OACA Cell: 541-941-0315 Email: [email protected] 1 Brad Garrett 156
From: Usher, Larry
Just wanted to share this with you gentlemen, I know we have had these discussions that this was possible and it turns out it going to happen. As you mentioned the classification committee had conversations early on about us being able to replace some of our non conference games out west with more across the border to alleviate some of the increased mileage problems. This is the answer we will be getting from them and I do not blame them for doing so. There is a pretty good chance we will be looking at playing all 24 games in Oregon next year. As it is, no one wants to come out here, some schools refuse to bring sub varsity when they do, and the situation is not going to get any better.
In a nut shell, our travel situation just got much worse due to the RPI and Colley ranking systems in both states.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Casey Gant
***EXTERNAL EMAIL: Please only click links and attachments if you're sure they are safe.***
Larry – I hate to do this to you but we need to get out of our basketball agreement for next year. The RPI set up that the WIAA put together actually hurts us to play out of state – we can get Wa teams that will help move our kids into a better position for the post season..
I hate doing this but with our teams both having a good shot at post season next year we have to do all we can to better our RPI ranking.
Sorry about this. I hope the WIAA allows you guys to join our conference so we don’t have to mess with this stuff because we do enjoy the matchup.
Casey T. Gant Kamiakin Athletics
1 Sandy High School 37400 Bell St. - Sandy, OR 97055 157
Matt Newell, Athletic Director ext. 7114 503-668 -8011
Rita McCombs, Secretary ext. 7106 503-668 -7646 (fax)
SHS Pioneers March 8, 2017
To Whom It May Concern,
This letter is to give some input into the re-classification and districts of the OSAA and the impact it will have for Sandy High School, our athletes and our community. I have been monitoring the different options that have been presented to the OSAA for re-classifications from both the public and OSAA committee. Many of these scenarios work very well for Sandy High School. I know that this process is not easy and I thank those individuals who have been working and listening to everyone’s ideas. There are some scenarios that would also have a negative impact on our students. I think it is important to share those negative impacts so that the committee understands how it would affect our students, parents, and community.
Sandy High school believes that when OSAA makes this decisions it needs to be in the best interest of our students as I am sure you would also agree. Keeping with the current six classifications is very appropriate for any number of good reasons. If we were to move to a five classification system Sandy High School begins to be moved around into other conferences that would not be very beneficial for our students. When our students and families are affected in a negative way it needs to be addressed, hence, this letter. I would like to take one example and discuss this change. If we were to be placed in the Draft #9 proposal and placed in the option 2 5A Inter County Conference this would be very hard on our students, district and community.
First off, I would like to point out that our travel time would increase 6x compared to what we have currently. We would be driving 3,000 more miles of pure travel time. We would also be travelling at a cost 6x that of what we current pay for transportation. As you very well know, increasing your travel budget by this amount is a major burden on many groups in the community. The mere amount of money that would be spent from our general budget would grossly affect our overall budget. This would obviously affect the athletic budget but the general budget that is earmarked for educating our students would have to be reduced and this would affect all of our students not just our athletes. This is not to mention the amount of time our families would have to travel to watch an away game. By increasing our travel time parents would be placed in a very difficult position financially and would need to choose between watching their child play sports and other vital needs. Traveling 6x as much as we currently travel is putting undo strain on a community that tries to support our athletic programs and create a successful culture of an all “purposeful” high school that meets the needs of all of our students.
Secondly, after having just gone through the winter season that we have I would be amiss if I did not bring up the safety factor of traveling into Central Oregon. The hazardous road conditions 157 and rescheduling of games would cause havoc with our student safety and our schedules. The psychological yo-yo that this would put our athletes through in and of itself is not good for them. The safety of our students needs to be seen as a major factor in helping the committee make this decision.
Finally, and probably one of the most important points, would be the fact that we would lose academic time with our students. Time in the classroom is precious and most valuable in moving our students to be academically successful. Our graduation rate is something that we are working to improve. When we take our athletes out of school it affects them. When we lose close to 4,000 hours of time teaching our students it does not make sense. We are in the business of making sports competitive and sustainable, but not over the most important part of why we participate in sports and that should be to engage our student athletes in education. We need our athletes to graduate from school. We need our athletes to find success in the classroom. Anything that stands as a barrier to making our athletes more successful academically needs to be avoided, plain and simple. Sandy High School wants to be competitive, we want to compete against other like schools, and we understand that this might mean several schools including Sandy might need to be moved around from classification to classification and league to league. We do not want this reclassification to stand in the way of helping to create and mold academically excellent athletes, and high school athletes who have the potential to find great success after 4 years of participating in high school sports. Sandy High School is open to being flexible when it comes to the re- classification, but we don’t want it to come at the price of our student’s success in the classroom. We respectfully ask that the committee look at maintaining the 6 classifications and specifically looking at the how these changes will affect our student’s success in the classroom.
Sincerely,
158 158 Brian Halter – AD Glide HS 159
During a standard basketball season, we can assume that the boys and girls varsity teams will travel to our conference opponents 1 time. Each team will take one bus. The chart below shows the numbers for the two buses to travel to each school 1 time during the season. The hours traveled is the absolute minimum based on Google Maps and represents nonstop travel by car, not by school bus. It is safe to assume the actual hours of travel would be much greater.
In Oregon from mid-October through March, winter weather conditions are likely to be present above 2500’ in elevation. Driving in adverse weather conditions exposes our students and travelling families and fans to increased risks. Traveling in these conditions would also cause a significant increase to travel time increasing the hours traveled by our students.
Sunset Conference Mountain View Conf. % Difference 35% fewer miles travel Miles traveled 3204 2092 in Mountain View Miles traveled in adverse 100% fewer miles weather conditions. 1840 0 traveled in adverse (>2500’ elev.) weather conditions 30% fewer hours Hours traveled 29.5 20.7 traveled
Sunset Conference Distance to Miles above 2500' el. Minimum hrs. to Bonanza 169 130 3 hr 10 min Canyonville Christian 43 0 47 min Lakeview 242 200 4 hr 33 min Illinois Valley 114 0 2 hr 3 min Lost River 172 130 3 hr 4 min Milo Adventist 61 0 1 hr 8 min Total one way 801 460 14 hrs 45 min Total round trip 1602 920 29.5
Mountain View Conference Distance to Miles above 2500’ el. Minimum hrs. to Crow 74 0 1 hr 29 min Gold Beach 150 0 3 hr 7 min Myrtle Point 75 0 1 hr 28 min Oakland 27 0 39 min Oakridge 112 0 1 hr 56 min Reedsport 85 0 1 hr 41 min Total one way 523 0 10 hrs 20 min Total round trip 1046 0 20.7
160
Scanned by CamScanner
161
2016-2017
Cascade Christian • Illinois Valley • Lakeview • Rogue River • St. Mary’s
March 14, 2017
Classification Committee:
I am writing this a President of the Southern Cascade League to support proposal number 13 in the latest proposals put out by the Classification Committee of the OSAA. Our league is in unanimous support for this proposal.
This specific proposal is good to all of the members of our current league. This keeps three of our current Southern Cascade League schools together and allows the best competitive situation for the two schools that are staying at the 3A level.
We recognize the hard work of the committee. Also, we understand the inability to make all parties happy when you work on a committee such as this. We appreciate the opportunity to formally let you know which proposal we support.
Respectfully,
The Athletic Directors of the Southern Cascade League Rusty Zysett, Lakeview Bruce Reece, Illinois Valley Thomas Grimes, Rogue River Danny Miles, Cascade Christian Dave Fennell, Cascade Christian Jamie Young, St. Mary’s School of Medford
Brad Garrett 162
From: Josh Grotting
Greetings,
After to speaking to a number of small 4A school athletic directors by phone, I thought I would send an email regarding the re‐classification process. Looking at the latest proposals that have been released, the smaller 4A schools would prefer draft 10 of the 6 class model or draft 12 of the 5 class model, if 5 classes is the way we go. We feel this way because draft 11 would keep almost all of us as the smallest schools in our classification while a number of the schools we compete against would continue to operate charter/alternative‐ed schools to manipulate their numbers to stay down a classification (Marshfield, Cottage Grove, etc.). I have no problem playing a larger school, if its ADM is accurately reflected in the reporting to OSAA, and at this time that is not happening. Currently those most opposed to the 5A model seem to be the large 4A schools that would no longer be the biggest kid on the block so to speak. I personally feel that a school of 300‐350 playing against a school of 800‐850, is much different that school of 800 playing against a school of 1100. However, at the 4A level we are being told by those large schools that it will be a real burden on them to have to play larger schools, welcome to our world! Again, just my opinion which is also shared by a number of other small, rural 4A schools.
Thanks,
Josh Grotting Athletic Director Girls Basketball Coach Sutherlin High School 541-459-9551
1 Brad Garrett 163
From: Jamie P. Ongman
Gents,
I hope that you are having as much fun as I am this time of year! I wanted to drop you a note regarding some feedback on the classification proposals. We (Lost River) are in favor as well as support either of the 6 classification proposals (#10 and #11), the only impact both of these proposals have negatively is the league size in terms of the number of schools. Both proposals include Milo Academy, they have not participated in any athletic season currently in our conference, this making our league one school smaller with their non-participation. Additionally Canyonville Christian is also looking into options of going independent or petitioning to play down, I would imagine that if we adopt this league they will for sure go independent with having to compete with Lakeview and Illinois Valley. Without Milo and Canyonville Christian the proposed Sunset Conference would have 5 schools. For football we would only have 4 schools.
But wait that’s not all , I had a conversation with the Superintendent from Glide, he’s concerned with the travel (particularly winter) with being in this league. I believe that he is going to ask to play in the proposed Mountain View Conference where it’s mostly all freeway driving, wouldn’t we all love that. If this proposal from Glide is entertained we would drop to a 4 school conference, 3 in football. That being said, I would like to propose (with or without Glide) that we move Oakridge into the Sunset Conference making it a true 5 school league in football and 6 in basketball. The travel for us to Oakridge is not that bad and it would be a good school competitively with those currently proposed.
Just some thoughts from a Southern Oregon boy!! Thanks
Jamie Ongman Principal Lost River Jr./Sr. High School 541‐798‐5666 GO RAIDERS!!!!
1 164 Brad Garrett 165
From: Spencer, Wayne
Newport High School wishes to indicate its support of a 6-Classification model. We believe that six classifications best serves Newport High as well as schools of our size - the vast majority of the schools in the current 4A classification. 4A schools, for the most part, represent single community of similar demographics. 4A schools offer similar number of sub-varsity teams. 4A schools have developed a play-off model that functions very well. 4A schools have a high level of competitive balance. After All, since 2010 76% of the 4A schools have won a state championship in at least one of the sports sanctioned by the OSAA. That is a system that works! I question why there would be consideration to blow-up such a successful framework. In regard to the our prefered 6-Classification model we would support Draft #10.
Thank You for your consideration, WS
-- Wayne Spencer Athletic Director Newport High School Office: 541-265-9281 ext. 268 Cell: 541-270-1776
1 Brad Garrett 166
From: Tyler Kelleher
Good Afternoon Kyle and Brad, I am just emailing you to express our interest in remaining in a 6 classification system. To us 4A has great competitive balance in the current model and to us and the rest of 4A that is extremely important. Any shift in this structure will have an adverse effect on the competitive balance of all schools and magnified by those schools who may be at the bottom end of their classification numbers. We enjoy being apart of the Tri-Valley league and feel it is best for our school, students, and community. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Tyler Kelleher Athletic Director Head Boys Basketball Coach Molalla High School
1 Brad Garrett 167
From: Gary Roberts
Brad,
Please pass this onto the committee for me. I will not be there Monday but will be on the webcast
Dear Committee Members,
South Lane School District is 100% in favor of either 6 classification proposals for the 2018-2022 time block. We believe that draft #11 provides us the highest chance at school wide success year in and year out, but we actually believe draft #10 is what is best for our state as a whole. Draft #10 allows the adjustments to the current model that make the most sense; moving schools around that have struggled to compete.
I understand why that the 6A classification wants to shrink the numbers to 5 classes; it allows them to more easily schedule and find more schools to beat up on. The Oregonian article and data provided by athletic directors has shown that a small amount of 6A schools actually have a realistic shot at success. By shrinking the number of classifications you don't balance the playing field, you only provide those small number of 6A schools the chance to beat up new and smaller opponents.
I, along with approximately 75% of the entire OSAA membership believe that the current system is working fine and encourage the committee to recommend staying the course with some slight ADM adjustments. We have parity in most classifications (all but 6A) and shrinking to 5 classes will not provide better parity. I encourage the committee to re-exam data from Greg Mulkey and Wayne Spencer on sub- varsity offerings.
As I stated in earlier testimony, CGHS has had success in the current model in some sports, but has heavily struggled in others. A move to 5 classifications would equal further losses for these sports and bring our school back to the 1990's.
Lastly, in looking at draft #12 and #13 I can say that CGHS is nowhere near the level and would never schedule Crescent Valley, Dallas, North Salem, Redmond, Ridgeview (a prime example of the difference in the 4A and 5A levels from recent history), and Ashland in ANY sport as we don't have the athletes to compete with those schools.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I know you have a tough decision but I encourage you to look at what the OSAA members want as a whole; not the small minority who make up the 6A classification.
Sincerely,
-- Gary Roberts Assistant Principal/Athletic Director Head Football Coach Cottage Grove High School 541-942-3391 ext. 809
1 Brad Garrett 168
From: Evan Brown
Dear Classification Committee,
The 4A classification and Madras High School remains steady and staunch in our support of the 6 class system. The overwhelming majority of the 4A classification has been adamant in support of the 6 class system.
Many others are asking the 4A AD's which of the two 5A proposals (12 or 13) they prefer. Let it be known that the 4A does not support the 5 class proposals.
4A has great competitive balance in the current classification structure. Any shift in this structure will have an adverse effect on the competitive balance of all schools and magnified by those schools who may be at the bottom end of their classification numbers. While this is currently the case and will be the case in any system, a smaller number of classifications will only magnify the competitive balance issue brought forth by other classifications.
Wayne Spencer testified before the committee that with 70% of the current 4A schools earning a state title in a sport over the past 4 years, that we actually do have competitive balance (especially compared to 6A).
If you did not hear Greg Mulkey's presentation on "like schools" he did a great job of pointing out how 4A school's are alike in competitiveness and in the offerings of programs. The current 5 classification proposals blur those lines and schools may have a difficult time with securing contests for their developmental programs.
Current smaller sized 4A schools, that would go down to 3A, may not have lower level programs to play in some sports. Just the opposite may be true of schools moving into leagues with larger schools from current 5A classification. Current 4A schools may not have the developmental programs of those larger schools in their new league and new classification.
Current 5A and 6A schools do have similar developmental programs. The shift in offerings really begins at the 4A level. There is a difference between 5A and 4A, There is also a difference between 4A and 3A.
We feel that the 4A classification has done a great job of enhancing the competitive balance of our play-in which has direct implications on the OSAA state events. We, as a classification, have modified the play-in system over the years to reduce competitive imbalances there were present and have been willing to work as a classification to honor and reward league champs, value league play, and still have a system in place to get our best teams involved in the play-in and state playoffs.
1 We feel that other classifications could work together to help solve some of these issues they may be having. We know that if we feel strongly about an issue within our classification that the OSAA is willing to168 listen and work with us in coming up with creative solutions.
Right now the 4A classification is feeling that the problems at other levels can be addressed by the AD's in that classification by coming up with a plan to help reduce their concerns. We also feel that their lack of creativity and desire to work together on an alternative plan is being trickled down to the 4A classification to help solve their problem (i.e. S. Eugene vs Jesuit in football).
By asking 4A schools to support one or the other of these two 5 Class proposals (12 &13), we feel that our true line and level of support for the 6 class system is being dismissed. Know that we stand strong in our support of the 6 class system.
Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments.
-- Evan Brown, CAA Athletic Director Madras High School OADA 4A Rep
2 Brad Garrett 169
From: James Hitt
Enclosed in the attachment are my alignments in response to Draft #13 (Option 2) of the 5-class model. I believe this model really addresses travel considerations, regional rivalries and larger leagues, which would outweigh the negative of less championships awarded with one less classification, IMO. I've also adjusted some of the alignments in Draft #13, attempting to address further travel issues and maintain longtime rivalries, as well as maintaining balance between the classifications.
Obviously, not everyone will be satisfied, as the size disparity of schools in each class will increase. Also there will be less opportunity to compete for state championships for some schools. But I believe this is the best way to classify the schools moving forward. Plus, you'd deal with less expenses in putting on state tournaments with one less classification.
Also, special attention is paid to the Hermiston travel situation. I believe it's in everyone's best interest to allow Hermiston to play down one classification for the purposes of reducing their admittedly difficult travel situation. The Central/Eastern/Southern Oregon schools will always have this difficulty, but there are some positive ways to handle their predicament. Thank you for your consideration.
James Hitt
1 2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK 169 5-CLASS MODEL (DRAFT #13, OPTION 2) SCHOOL NICKNAME CLASS DIST LEAGUE 2015-16 ADM CHANGES / ADJUSTMENTS Benson Techmen 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 750 Cleveland Warriors 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 1478 Franklin Quakers 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 1346 Grant Generals 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 1376 Jefferson Democrats 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 417 Lincoln Cardinals 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 1605 Madison Senators 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 909 Roosevelt Roughriders 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 742 Wilson Trojans 5A 1 Portland Interscholastic League 1225 Aloha Warriors 5A 2 Metro League 1794 Beaverton Beavers 5A 2 Metro League 1654 Jesuit Crusaders 5A 2 Metro League 1294 Mountainside Mavericks 5A 2 Metro League NEW Southridge Skyhawks 5A 2 Metro League 1614 Sunset Apollos 5A 2 Metro League 2123 Westview Wildcats 5A 2 Metro League 2508 Barlow Bruins 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 1528 Centennial Eagles 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 1477 Central Catholic Rams 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 891 Clackamas Cavaliers 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 2297 David Douglas Scots 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 2499 Gresham Gophers 5A 3 Mount Hood Conference 1369 Canby Cougars 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1316 Century Jaguars 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1437 Forest Grove Vikings 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1654 Glencoe Crimson Tide 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1471 Hillsboro Spartans 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1195 Liberty Falcons 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1372 McMinnville Grizzlies 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1793 Transfer to 5A-4-Pacific Conference Newberg Tigers 5A 4 Pacific Conference 1414 Lake Oswego Lakers 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1307 Lakeridge Pacers 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1126 Oregon City Pioneers 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1940 Transfer to 5A-5-Three Rivers League Sherwood Bowmen 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1569 St. Mary's Academy Blues 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1435 Tigard Tigers 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1771 Tualatin Timberwolves 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1770 West Linn Lions 5A 5 Three Rivers League 1707 McKay Royal Scots 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1768 McNary Celtics 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1681 South Salem Saxons 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1578 Sprague Olympians 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1490 West Albany Bulldogs 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1264 West Salem Titans 5A 6 Greater Valley Conference 1559 Bend Lava Bears 5A 7 Inter County Conference 1468 Hood River Valley Eagles 5A 7 Inter County Conference 1171 Mountain View Cougars 5A 7 Inter County Conference 1225 Reynolds Raiders 5A 7 Inter County Conference 2142 Sandy Pioneers 5A 7 Inter County Conference 1215 Summit Storm 5A 7 Inter County Conference 1391 Grants Pass Cavemen 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1526 North Medford Black Tornado 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1477 Roseburg Indians 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1394 Sheldon Irish 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1359 South Eugene Axemen 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1345 South Medford Panthers 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1545 Thurston Colts 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1174 Willamette Wolverines 5A 8 Southwest Conference 1198 2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK 169 5-CLASS MODEL (DRAFT #13, OPTION 2) Gladstone Gladiators 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 631 La Salle Prep Falcons 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 679 Milwaukie Mustangs 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 1152 Parkrose Broncos 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 774 Putnam Kingsmen 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 1034 Scappoose Indians 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 721 St. Helens Lions 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 842 Tillamook Cheesemakers 4A 1 Northwest Oregon Conference 533 Transfer to 4A-1-Northwest Oregon Conference (4A Timeblock [1164 - 530]) Cascade Cougars 4A 2 Capital Conference 683 Molalla Indians 4A 2 Capital Conference 662 North Marion Huskies 4A 2 Capital Conference 530 Transfer to 4A-2-Capital Conference (4A Timeblock [1164 - 530]) North Salem Vikings 4A 2 Capital Conference 1404 Silverton Foxes 4A 2 Capital Conference 1149 Stayton Eagles 4A 2 Capital Conference 608 Wilsonville Wildcats 4A 2 Capital Conference 1077 Woodburn Bulldogs 4A 2 Capital Conference 1256 Central Panthers 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 859 Corvallis Spartans 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 1117 Crescent Valley Raiders 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 937 Dallas Dragons 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 918 Lebanon Warriors 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 1052 Newport Cubs 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 550 South Albany Rebels 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 1158 Sweet Home Huskies 4A 3 Mid-Willamette Conference 639 Churchill Lancers 4A 4 Midwestern League 1022 Cottage Grove Lions 4A 4 Midwestern League 648 Marist Catholic Spartans 4A 4 Midwestern League 563 Marshfield Pirates 4A 4 Midwestern League 682 North Bend Bulldogs 4A 4 Midwestern League 491 North Eugene Highlanders 4A 4 Midwestern League 771 Springfield Millers 4A 4 Midwestern League 1078 Crook County Cowboys 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 703 Hermiston Bulldogs 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 1240 Transfer to 4A-5-Intermountain Conference (Play Down / Geographic Exception) La Grande Tigers 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 539 Transfer to 4A-5-Intermountain Conference (4A Timeblock [1164 - 530]) Madras White Buffalos 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 641 Pendleton Buckaroos 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 779 Redmond Panthers 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 808 Ridgeview Ravens 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 854 The Dalles Riverhawks 4A 5 Intermountain Conference 706 Ashland Grizzlies 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 940 Crater Comets 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 1158 Eagle Point Eagles 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 911 Henley Hornets 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 581 Hidden Valley Mustangs 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 535 Transfer to 4A-6-Lake of the Woods League (4A Timeblock [1164 - 530]) Klamath Union Pelicans 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 640 Mazama Vikings 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 572 Phoenix Pirates 4A 6 Lake of the Woods League 621 Astoria Fishermen 3A 1 Cowapa League 511 Banks Braves 3A 1 Cowapa League 358 Clatskanie Tigers 3A 1 Cowapa League 216 Transfer to 3A-1-Cowapa League (3A Timeblock [529 - 205]) Rainier Columbians 3A 1 Cowapa League 285 Seaside Seagulls 3A 1 Cowapa League 375 Valley Catholic Valiants 3A 1 Cowapa League 384 Warrenton Warriors 3A 1 Cowapa League 228 Yamhill-Carlton Tigers 3A 1 Cowapa League 311 Catlin Gabel Eagles 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 308 Corbett Cardinals 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 379 Transfer to 3A-1-Cowapa League &/or Special District (Football) De La Salle North Catholic Knights 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 308 Estacada Rangers 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 474 Transfer to 3A-1-Cowapa League &/or Special District (Football) 2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK 169 5-CLASS MODEL (DRAFT #13, OPTION 2) Oregon Episcopal Aardvarks 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 313 Portland Adventist Cougars 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 284 Riverdale Mavericks 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 241 Westside Christian Eagles 3A 2 Lewis & Clark League 220 Amity Warriors 3A 3 West Valley League 260 Blanchet Catholic Cavaliers 3A 3 West Valley League 225 Dayton Pirates 3A 3 West Valley League 279 Salem Academy Crusaders 3A 3 West Valley League 235 Santiam Christian Eagles 3A 3 West Valley League 230 Scio Loggers 3A 3 West Valley League 257 Sheridan Spartans 3A 3 West Valley League 211 Transfer to 3A-3-West Valley League (3A Timeblock [529 - 205]) Taft Tigers 3A 3 West Valley League 359 Willamina Bulldogs 3A 3 West Valley League 232 Creswell Bulldogs 3A 4 Sky-Em League 342 Elmira Falcons 3A 4 Sky-Em League 345 Harrisburg Eagles 3A 4 Sky-Em League 272 Junction City Tigers 3A 4 Sky-Em League 492 La Pine Hawks 3A 4 Sky-Em League 324 Philomath Warriors 3A 4 Sky-Em League 444 Pleasant Hill Billies 3A 4 Sky-Em League 294 Sisters Outlaws 3A 4 Sky-Em League 404 Siuslaw Vikings 3A 4 Sky-Em League 347 Baker Bulldogs 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 434 Burns Hilanders 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 222 Irrigon Knights 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 209 Transfer to 3A-5-Greater Oregon League (3A Timeblock [529 - 205]) McLoughlin Pioneers 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 400 Nyssa Bulldogs 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 277 Ontario Tigers 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 541 Remain in 3A (Play Down / Geographic) Riverside Pirates 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 211 Transfer to 3A-5-Greater Oregon League (3A Timeblock [529 - 205]) Umatilla Vikings 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 318 Vale Vikings 3A 5 Greater Oregon League 225 Brookings-Harbor Bruins 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 449 Cascade Christian Challengers 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 249 Coquille Red Devils 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 216 Transfer to 3A-6-Southern Cascade League (3A Timeblock [529 - 205]) Douglas Trojans 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 352 North Valley Knights 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 462 South Umpqua Lancers 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 336 St. Mary's Crusaders 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 320 Sutherlin Bulldogs 3A 6 Southern Cascade League 357 City Christian Lions 2A 1 Northwest League 148 Columbia Christian Knights 2A 1 Northwest League 115 Faith Bible Falcons 2A 1 Northwest League 113 Gaston Greyhounds 2A 1 Northwest League 177 Knappa Loggers 2A 1 Northwest League 121 Neah-Kah-Nie Pirates 2A 1 Northwest League 201 Portland Christian Royals 2A 1 Northwest League 175 Vernonia Loggers 2A 1 Northwest League 156 Chemawa Braves 2A 2 PacWest League 236 Colton Vikings 2A 2 PacWest League 201 Delphian Dragons 2A 2 PacWest League 162 Gervais Cougars 2A 2 PacWest League 281 Horizon Christian Hawks 2A 2 PacWest League 151 Kennedy Trojans 2A 2 PacWest League 152 Transfer to 2A-2-PacWest League Nestucca Bobcats 2A 2 PacWest League 130 St. Paul Buckaroos 2A 2 PacWest League 90 Western Mennonite Pioneers 2A 2 PacWest League 150 Central Linn Cobras 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 169 Crow Cougars 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 93 Culver Bulldogs 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 181 2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK 169 5-CLASS MODEL (DRAFT #13, OPTION 2) East Linn Christian Eagles 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 142 Jefferson Lions 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 259 Monroe Dragons 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 125 Oakridge Warriors 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 120 Regis Rams 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 142 Santiam Wolverines 2A 3 Tri-River Conference 137 Bandon Tigers 2A 4 Sunset Conference 199 Gold Beach Panthers 2A 4 Sunset Conference 143 Myrtle Point Bobcats 2A 4 Sunset Conference 164 Oakland Oakers 2A 4 Sunset Conference 173 Reedsport Braves 2A 4 Sunset Conference 165 Toledo Boomers 2A 4 Sunset Conference 148 Waldport Fightin' Irish 2A 4 Sunset Conference 146 Bonanza Antlers 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 122 Canyonville Christian Pilots 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 134 Glide Wildcats 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 181 Illinois Valley Cougars 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 261 Lakeview Honkers 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 224 Lost River Raiders 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 126 Milo Adventist Mustangs 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 94 Rogue River Chieftains 2A 5 Southern Oregon League 208 Remain in 2A (Play Down / Petition) Enterprise Outlaws 2A 6 Wapiti League 115 Grant Union Prospectors 2A 6 Wapiti League 148 Heppner Mustangs 2A 6 Wapiti League 97 Imbler Panthers 2A 6 Wapiti League 97 Pilot Rock Rockets 2A 6 Wapiti League 98 Stanfield Tigers 2A 6 Wapiti League 119 Union Bobcats 2A 6 Wapiti League 107 Weston-McEwen TigerScots 2A 6 Wapiti League 175 Country Christian Cougars 1A 1 Valley 10 League 52 Damascus Christian Eagles 1A 1 Valley 10 League 60 Life Christian Lions 1A 1 Valley 10 League 113 North Clackamas Christian Saints 1A 1 Valley 10 League 64 Open Door Christian Huskies 1A 1 Valley 10 League 48 Portland Waldorf Wolfpack 1A 1 Valley 10 League 67 Southwest Christian Wildcats 1A 1 Valley 10 League 57 St. Stephens Archers 1A 1 Valley 10 League 41 Valor Christian Knights 1A 1 Valley 10 League 24 C.S. Lewis Watchmen 1A 2 Casco League 49 Crosshill Christian Eagles 1A 2 Casco League 75 Falls City Mountaineers 1A 2 Casco League 52 Jewell Bluejays 1A 2 Casco League 39 Kings Valley Eagles 1A 2 Casco League 44 Livingstone Adventist Lions 1A 2 Casco League 63 Oregon School for the Deaf Panthers 1A 2 Casco League 49 Perrydale Pirates 1A 2 Casco League 87 Veritas Vanguard 1A 2 Casco League 52 Willamette Valley Christian Warriors 1A 2 Casco League 52 Alsea Wolverines 1A 3 Mountain West League 46 Eddyville Eagles 1A 3 Mountain West League 48 Lowell Red Devils 1A 3 Mountain West League 87 Mapleton Sailors 1A 3 Mountain West League 42 McKenzie Eagles 1A 3 Mountain West League 51 Mohawk Indians 1A 3 Mountain West League 58 Oak Hill Falcons 1A 3 Mountain West League 44 Siletz Valley Warriors 1A 3 Mountain West League 61 Triangle Lake Lakers 1A 3 Mountain West League 65 Camas Valley Hornets 1A 4 Skyline League 63 Days Creek Wolves 1A 4 Skyline League 72 2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK 169 5-CLASS MODEL (DRAFT #13, OPTION 2) Elkton Elks 1A 4 Skyline League 79 Glendale Pirates 1A 4 Skyline League 69 Melrose Christian 1A 4 Skyline League 12 New Hope Christian Warriors 1A 4 Skyline League 78 North Douglas Warriors 1A 4 Skyline League 78 Pacific Pirates 1A 4 Skyline League 58 Powers Cruisers 1A 4 Skyline League 34 Riddle Irish 1A 4 Skyline League 95 Umpqua Valley Christian Monarchs 1A 4 Skyline League 45 Yoncalla Eagles 1A 4 Skyline League 73 Butte Falls Loggers 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 47 Cascades Academy Steelhead 1A 5 Mountain Valley League NEW Central Christian Tigers 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 58 Chiloquin Panthers 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 76 Gilchrist Grizzlies 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 56 Hosanna Christian Lions 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 68 North Lake Cowboys 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 65 Paisley Broncos 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 36 Prospect Cougars 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 61 Rogue Valley Adventist Red Tail Hawks 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 33 Triad Timber Wolves 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 50 Trinity Lutheran Saints 1A 5 Mountain Valley League 54 Arlington Honkers 1A 6 Big Sky League 44 Condon Blue Devils 1A 6 Big Sky League 35 Dufur Rangers 1A 6 Big Sky League 80 Horizon Christian Hawks 1A 6 Big Sky League 68 Ione Cardinals 1A 6 Big Sky League 68 Mitchell Loggers 1A 6 Big Sky League 27 Sherman Huskies 1A 6 Big Sky League 67 South Wasco County Redsides 1A 6 Big Sky League 67 Spray Eagles 1A 6 Big Sky League 17 Wheeler Falcons 1A 6 Big Sky League 24 Cove Leopards 1A 7 Old Oregon League 73 Echo Cougars 1A 7 Old Oregon League 82 Elgin Huskies 1A 7 Old Oregon League 87 Griswold Grizzlies 1A 7 Old Oregon League 58 Joseph Eagles 1A 7 Old Oregon League 59 Nixyaawii Golden Eagles 1A 7 Old Oregon League 41 Pine Eagle Spartans 1A 7 Old Oregon League 46 Powder Valley Badgers 1A 7 Old Oregon League 69 Wallowa Cougars 1A 7 Old Oregon League 58 Adrian Antelopes 1A 8 High Desert League 67 Burnt River Bulls 1A 8 High Desert League 25 Crane Mustangs 1A 8 High Desert League 49 Dayville Tigers 1A 8 High Desert League 20 Four Rivers Falcons 1A 8 High Desert League NEW Harper Hornets 1A 8 High Desert League 34 Huntington Locomotives 1A 8 High Desert League 18 Jordan Valley Mustangs 1A 8 High Desert League 22 Long Creek Mountaineers 1A 8 High Desert League 14 Monument Tigers 1A 8 High Desert League 19 Prairie City Panthers 1A 8 High Desert League 36 Ukiah Cougars 1A 8 High Desert League 28 Brad Garrett 170
From: Ralph Brown
Brad, I have been a 4A principal for most of my career at McLoughlin High School and now at Sweet Home High School. I believe very strongly that a switch to a 5 tier system will devastate schools like Sweet Home that will be competing with many current 5A schools. I much prefer the current 6 tier system. Thank you.
Ralph J. Brown, Principal Sweet Home High School 541-367-7140 [email protected]
“We are what we repeatedly do; excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.” —Aristotle
1 Brad Garrett 171
From: Trevor Syring
Dear Brad and Committee,
There has been a lot of discussion at your level and many below in regards to the reclassification of athletics in Oregon. After much thought and discussion, our Tri-Valley league would like to add our opinion in that we feel it is best for our students and our communities to stay at what we currently have – a 6 classification – with minor tweaks at the 6A level. The schools represented in the Tri-Valley league would like to continue to stay in the same league and work together over time for the betterment of our entire school communities. It would also benefit our students to stay at the current classification for competitive balance amongst the schools. Therefore, know that we stand strong in our support of the 6 class system.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Trevor Syring Estacada High School Athletic Director Vice Principal 503-630-8515 X2860
"Our mission is to equip every student with the skills necessary to be competent, resourceful, and successful." - Estacada School District
1
172 Gladstone High School Athletics Gladstone High School Athletics 18800 Portland Ave., Gladstone, Oregon 97027
(503) 655-2544 ▪ Fax (503) 655-0320
To Whom It May Concern:
Athletic Director Ted Yates I have some growing concerns about the change of classification from 6 class system to 5 class system. I have coached football, basketball, and baseball at a variety of levels so I Athletic Secretary understand what a change in classification can do to all levels of play (freshmen, JV, Denise Durkee Varsity). I have coached in some of those games at the sub-varsity level where all you Football can tell your kids is do the best that you can. The overwhelming majority of the 4A Wayne Harris athletic directors have been adamant support of the 6 class system. I think Wayne Spencer
Volleyball and Greg Mulkey may have said it best at our 4A Athletic Director meeting this winter. Cathy Mitchell When we really start to examine what “like” schools goes far beyond scheduling varsity contests. It extends to your sub-varsity schedules and determining competitiveness. As it Cross Country Jamie Jenson is now, 90% of the schools in our league all have the same amount of sub-varsity teams whether it be 3 teams in some sports or just 2 teams others. For example in boys and girls Boys Soccer soccer have just two teams, varsity and JV, while boys’ and girls’ basketball will have Ryan Hardwick three teams, freshman, JV, and Varsity. This means we are “like” schools. Gladstone is Girls Soccer a unique school because we are nestled between several 5A and 6A schools. On several Greg Hess occasions we have scheduled games with some of our neighboring schools at the sub- Cheer varsity level. From my experience, we are not alike because we schedule without Angie Schassen knowing what we will see on the other sideline.
Dance Denise Harris It is our responsibility to keep the playing field as level as we can, for all levels of play. It is my opinion that moving to a 5 classification system creates an imbalance. There is a Boys Basketball Cody Aker tremendous difference between a 4A JV softball team and a 5A JV softball team. Without modifications, there will be some interesting scores. This might be fine for a Girls Basketball game or two, but when you combine multiple games through several seasons, there will Pat Scott be a mass exodus in athletes turning out for that sport. Programs do not grow, nor is this Wrestling the experience we all want for our athletes. We have seen this cycle before. What Michael Hess happens is that the JV level then becomes nonexistent. All levels of sport matter. The
Swim success of a program is not measured by win-loss records or by championships. If that Jackie Holstrom were the case most of us fail every year. The measure should be answered by the
Baseball question posed at the end of each season, “Will I do this again?” If we have athletes, Casey Webster coaches, and parents saying, “No”, then we did it wrong. Let’s get this right. Stay at a 6 classification system. Softball David Just Respectfully, Boys Track Bob Johnson
Girls Track Ted Yates Greg Hess Athletic Director
Boys Golf Gladstone High School Izaak Thoman
Brad Garrett 173
From: Maiocco, Fred
Reclassification committee members,
As you prepare for more difficult discussions related reclassification next week, I’m sure you are interested in the status of Hermiston’s request to join the WIAA. Resolution of Hermiston’s situation and a favorable determination by the WIAA would alleviate much travail in the reclassification process and serve the interests of OSAA 5A/6A students in a much improved format than currently proposed. We need your help to resolve this situation and aid the reclassification committee’s work.
Unfortunately, the WIAA decision is held up awaiting a determination by the OSAA executive board. Absent support from the OSAA, the WIAA is unlikely to support our request and the extraordinary hardships facing Hermiston will not only grow, they will increase hardships to other 5A/6A schools affected by these pending reclassification determinations. Isn’t it time for the OSAA to resolve this matter and support Hermiston’s request to join the WIAA? After months of investigation and fact finding, we know that there is substantial evidence of cross border participation by contiguous schools in states across the West. In over thirty years, with rich a rich history of such practice, there has never been a problem with such participation.
This weekend the WIAA executive board will meet and Hermiston’s request is on their agenda for consideration (see this related news story). We are requesting a letter of support from the OSAA executive board. A neutral response is not sufficient, such as, “OSAA is a voluntary organization, Hermiston can choose to do as it pleases,” because the WIAA will only approve our request for membership if the OSAA endorses/supports it. With a simple letter of support from the OSAA, the WIAA is likely to consider our request in a more favorable light. I am suggesting specific language to the OSAA executive board as follows: “Based upon Hermiston’s exceptional hardship circumstances, the OSAA supports Hermiston School District’s request to join the WIAA, subject to the development of mutually agreeable hardship/exception language by both associations.” Such language preserves the flexibility of both associations to determine hardship exceptions on a case by case basis, or to consider bylaw changes if required, while giving the WIAA the nod they need from the OSAA to fully consider Hermiston’s petition.
Included as an attachment is a summary and rationale for our request, including details related the exceptional hardship facing our students in this round of reclassification discussions. We firmly believe 5A/6A schools in the OSAA will benefit by supporting Hermiston’s move to join the WIAA. Moreover, bringing this matter to a speedy conclusion now will support resolution of the reclassification process and aid in deliberations for the committee when it meets next week.
We urge you to contact Peter Weber, Don Grotting, and other executive board members to express your support for Hermiston’s move to the WIAA and a speedy resolution to this matter. Encourage them to provide Hermiston a letter of support immediately.
Respectfully,
1 173
Fred Maiocco, Jr., Ph. D. Superintendent of Schools Hermiston School District 8R 305 SW 11th Street Hermiston, OR 97838
“Striving to be the premier public school district in Oregon!”
Email: [email protected] Phone: 541‐667‐6010
2 173 173 Brad Garrett 174
From: Chris Johnson
Hi:
I am writing in response to the correspondence from Ted Yates and Evan Brown and their insistence that 4A schools are all (or most) in agreement on the state of the classifications. It may be true that 70% of 4A schools voted to keep 4A the same (according to the question on Evan Brown's survey that didn't propose what something different might look like), but the other 30% feel like the current system is a big advantage for the bigger 4A schools...several of whom have alternative or charter schools that divert ADM in what looks like a calculated ploy to, in essence, play down. There are several current 4A schools who are motivated not to become a smaller school in a new classification.
Many of us at the 4A Scheduling meeting voiced opposition to Evan Brown's statement that we all think the current 4A model is fine. Many of us feel that the bigger 4A schools are motivated to keep the classification model that has them as the biggest schools in the classification.
Siuslaw is in favor of 6A Draft #10 or if we go 5A, then 5A draft #12. We DO NOT want to have a special district for football regardless, of whether the committee decides to go 6 classes or 5 classes.
Also, I beg the Classification Committee and/or the Executive Board to discuss the aforementioned use of Charter/Alternative Schools to circumvent the rules and the spirit of fair play. We know it is going on and I would like to see this elephant in the room discussed in an official and public forum.
1 175 176
Tom Bendt Classification March 16, 2017
Dear OSAA Classification Committee;
The decision in front of you will impact our state for the upcoming years. We all realize this is a daunting task.
In preparation for Monday, I am sending 2 short articles and 2 short videos that speak to the “purpose” of high school sports from my point of view. There are many groups throughout the nation that are questioning the “win at all cost” mentality of youth and high schools sports. “Winning is our Goal; It is NOT our purpose.” The impact of coaches and athletics is much more than league and state titles. My experience in more than 20 years of coaching has taught me that athletes remember the bus trips, team dinners and growing together, far more than the wins and losses. They remember transformational coaches and life lessons taught from the experience.
I hope the committee members find the time to read the 2 short articles and 2 short videos that speak to this vital topic.
If you measure success by wins; I have had successful and unsuccessful seasons. I hope we measure success by seeing everyone reach his or her potential on the field of competition.
I look forward to seeing all of you on Monday.
I am an advocate for the 5 class model because I believe it serves the state better.
Have a great weekend!
Sincerely,
Tom Bendt Aloha Athletic Director 176
WHY WE PLAY Just Fine or All In — The Choice Makes a Difference By Jody Redman, Associate Director, MSHSL
The following article is the second of a four-part series in The Prep Coach focusing on the importance of what we do as coaches and the value of participation in educational athletics. Preface by Bubba Sullivan, Northfield High School Head Football Coach A few years ago we decided to be intentional about the values and characteristics we wanted our football play- ers to learn. We realized that whether we won all of our games, lost all of them, or finished somewhere in between, that we were able to say we had a successful season—that our players learned and practiced skills that they could carry into life. We believed the true measure of our success should not be wins and losses, as so many in society feel, but instead our success should be measured by the quality of the students experience and by the lasting values and traits they developed. We decided to be more intentional and put a plan in place on how to do just that. This past year, it was a student who helped remind me of what high school athletics are all about, I’d like to share my story with you. Part way through this year’s season, as we struggled to win on the scoreboard, I found myself feeling the frustration and doubt that a competitive coach feels when they don’t win many games. We were 1-4 at the time and I was worried that our players might be looking forward to the end of the season. I was talking to our senior captain, Max Weaver, and asked him how he felt the season was going. He said, “Great Coach.” I was surprised and asked him what he meant. He said, “Coach, the guys are working hard, keeping positive attitudes, and we are having fun playing together every day. We have been competitive in every game, we never give up, and the games have been a blast.” We finished the conversation and I realized that Max just helped me improve my attitude and he saved my sea- son. He reminded me that what was really important was the experience that the players were having, regardless of the wins and losses. He reminded me that by intentionally teaching character traits and measuring our success based on the development of those traits, we could consider each season a success regardless of the record. We are going to work our tails off and start next season with the hope and expectation of winning many foot- ball games. Who knows, maybe we will win them all…or maybe we won’t win many. We know one thing for sure— we can have a successful season either way if we remember to focus on the right things.
Sports are a valued part of our culture. We value the backstroke in swimming or the wrist shot in hockey.” At sports because we believe the students who are involved every practice and in every game there is an opportunity to acquire something meaningful through their participation. teach students a multitude of lessons through their par- But have we ever looked closely at how they benefit? What ticipation. But this won’t happen if the coach is ASLEEP — do the students who participate in our programs actually unaware of the power coaches possess to make a lasting get? When the game is over and the score is final, what impact and where development of the whole student is left do they win? to chance. We as coaches have to be awake — aware, Participation in sports provides students with experi- alert and willing to focus our attention on more than win- ences they can draw upon for a lifetime. Valuable life ning and the development of physical skills and instead lessons can be learned from participating on a sports focus on what students really should be getting from us: team—lessons such as working through adversity, becom- the development of life skills. ing disciplined, finding the courage necessary to move out- side one’s comfort zone to learn something new, and Asleep working as a member of a team. The potential for this As coaches and educators, are we awake or asleep? growth only exists if the coach is AWAKE. Awake coaches Do we falsely assume that the students who participate in recognize that something deep and lasting is possible when our programs are learning valuable life skills and positive a student fights through failure. Awake coaches under- character attributes simply because they are a member of stand that when a student takes a risk and makes a our team? mistake that there is an incredible potential for growth to If we ask students after a competition, “Hey, how’d ya occur—growth that, if fostered, will impact that student for do,” will they only answer with “we won” or “we lost” or pro- a lifetime. vide us with some personal statistic. Or have we made the In the book Top 20 Teachers, the authors share that effort to create awareness in them that so much more is the most effective coaches “are as intentional in developing possible? life skills and habits in students as they are in developing Continued on Page 29
28 whyweplay 176
Continued from Page 28 If we as coaches are asleep—unaware and unrespon- To learn sive to the needs of our students—then our students will Awake coaches realize that sports and other co-cur- never know the extent of what is really possible. InSideOut riculars are part of the overall educational experience Coaching author Joe Ehrmann asserts that “one of the of students. They help young people discover the pow- great myths in our culture is that sports builds character, erful life lessons that are available in these activities. as if doing a handstand, running a race, hitting a curveball, Some of these lessons will help students work more or simply suiting up are sufficient to strengthen a young effectively with others throughout their lives. Besides person’s moral fiber. Unless a coach teaches and models focusing on touchdowns, rebounds and musical instru- character and encourages its development in athletes, it is ments, they open youngsters up to these possibilities by more likely organized sports will spoil play and undermine sharing things they themselves are learning and asking the development of the very character and virtue they claim students what they are getting from these experiences. to build.” To improve Awake We cannot improve by only doing what we can already To develop better people, not just athletes, we must be do. Awake coaches who expect improvement encourage intentional—we must be awake. The greater call of a coach students to take healthy risks and stretch outside their is to be awake—mindful of what students in our programs comfort zone. This expectation helps students overcome are really getting. Our main role as a coach is the human the fear of failure and the fear of making mistakes. development of every student on our team. Winning is the by-product of something bigger, an awareness in us that To help others succeed transforms a game of throwing a ball through a hoop into It must be the expectation of every student that they an opportunity to create caring, empathetic, responsible learn to help others succeed. Coaches must convey that members of society. When coaches are awake, they take expectation to their students. They help them become the student’s learning of physical skills and Xs and Os to the aware of the importance of this and provide opportuni- next level. They concurrently teach them the Ys, the last- ties for it to happen. By helping young people help oth- ing values acquired through the learning of those same ers succeed, coaches guide their students toward the physical skills. most direct route to their own success. Think about the power of this outcome—it is those who lift others Defining Success with “Y” Values around them who will become great future leaders. Consciously creating a game plan is necessary to trans- form a student’s experience from only Xs and Os to value- To conduct yourself well filled Ys. Asking the right questions, creating awareness, Many times in the heat of an athletic contest, players, and providing experiences with greater depth are key to coaches, and fans lose sight of their values and act in being successful. When this happens, success will no ways that tarnish their reputation. Embarrassing longer be measured only by the outcome on the score- behavior on the court, on the sidelines and in the board or the acquisition of a new physical skill. Instead, the stands has unfortunately become too common in many true measurement of success will be seen in the students athletic events. As a rule, players, coaches, and spec- who learn the valuable life lessons participation in educa- tators regret those negative behaviors after the tion-based athletics provides. contest. It is important that coaches are vigilant about So what are the desired outcomes of participation? The their teams’ and fans’ behavior during events. No following are some crucial outcomes of education-based matter how the ball bounces or how the officials’ calls athletics as presented by Top 20 Training’s concept How’d go, awake coaches must always do their best to main- Ya Do (www.top20training.com): tain dignity, composure, and perspective.
To have fun To appreciate the opponent For many adults, recreation is more like ‘wreck-reation’. Opponent does not mean enemy. Yet if aliens from We are driven as we play games to compete with a outer space observed many of our athletic events, they necessity to win and prove our worth. What is it that probably would not notice a difference between these makes a grown person swear and throw a golf club two words. Often fans, athletes, and coaches treat when that little white ball doesn’t go straight? Our play opponents as if they are the enemy. As coaches striving is often not about having fun, but rather about getting to improve, we should be looking to learn from our stressed out. Awake coaches have a responsibility to opponents and appreciating skills or qualities they direct practices and co-curricular activities in such a bring to the competition. The awake coach knows that manner that young people have fun. This doesn’t mean, their opponents offer challenges and opportunities of course, that it’s only fun. Hard work, adversity, dis- to develop physically and mentally. They also offer appointment, and not getting everything a kid wants friendships that are built on mutual respect and can should also be part of the experience. last for a lifetime. Continued on Page 30
whyweplay 29 176
Continued from Page 29 To do your best However, losing without having significant experiences John Wooden defined success as “peace of mind, of success can diminish a student’s confidence. It can which is a direct result of self-satisfaction in knowing develop in a student a reluctance to try things in the you did your best to become the best you are capable future unless success is assured. The fear of failing or of becoming.” Wooden’s purpose was not to coach his losing can keep kids in their comfort zone. As coaches, players to be better than someone else or compare we know there are positives and negatives gleaned on themselves to others. He coached for more than win- both sides of the winning and losing ledger; we must be ning. He coached his team to be the best that they intentional to ensure our athletes have the same could be as a team. The fact that UCLA won 88 understanding. consecutive basketball games and twelve national championships resulted from Wooden’s mantra of What did we get? being “the best you are capable of becoming.” It may be a cliché, but the enemy of “the best” is not “the worst.” The enemy of “the best” is “just fine.” The To learn life skills (Star Qualities) experiences our students are having may be “just fine” but Coaches should understand that blocking and tackling can we make a commitment to give them more? Can we skills are of no value to young people once they stop challenge ourselves to kick it up a notch, see our role as playing football. However, the Star Qualities that coaches differently, provide more for our students, and be students can attain in sports and co-curriculars are “all in”? You can choose to accept “just fine” or you can valuable for a lifetime. It is the awake coach’s role to choose to be “all in” and commit to being awake and help students develop internal strengths, social skills, making a difference. and problem solving skills that can make a positive Be committed and give your students more this sea- difference in their lives during their school years and son; give them experiences that will be the foundation for beyond. It is important that the children who are which they will build a successful life. So when asked at the participating learn not only the sport skills being taught, conclusion of a practice, game or season, “What did we but also the important qualities of confidence, self- get?” you can answer by saying, “My students got an discipline, courage, and teamwork. experience that prepared them for more than a game. They acquired the skills necessary to be prepared for life.” To learn from both winning and losing Winning and losing are significant events in students’ lives. Awake coaches realize that both winning and This article, written by Jody Redman, MSHSL Associate losing offer wonderful and potentially dangerous results Director and Troy Urdahl, St. Anthony Village Activities for young people. Students who experience winning Director and Head Baseball Coach and is the second of benefit by learning that they have what it takes to be four articles to appear in The Prep Coach this year. The successful. This can help develop their confidence and next issue will focus on the role failure and mistakes play motivate them to strive for even greater challenges. On in the development of our students. the other hand, winning has such a high value in our culture that it can create pressure on youth to win at Weekly lessons have been designed for coaches to teach all costs. Furthermore, the emphasis on winning can the “Y” values discussed in this article. You may find result in young people believing that their inner worth them on the rotating front page of the League’s website only comes from achievement. under the Education header at www.mshsl.org. We If guided properly, kids can benefit from losing. Los- encourage you to utilize this resource as a starting point ing provides a healthy perspective. It keeps us humble or as a supplement to develop the “Y” values in the and highlights areas where improvement can be made. students on your team.
30 whyweplay 176 The Way of the Champion
All-American. World-champion. Greatest shooter on the planet. Most Valuable Player…twice. Yes, I am talking about Steph Curry, the all-world guard for the Golden State Warriors. These are the things we all say about him – we all know about him – when the lights are shining brightly. What about the when no one is watching?
A few years back, before most of us heard about Steph Curry, he was invited to the Kobe Bryant Nike Skills Camp, a collection of the top twenty high school and top ten college guards in the country. As camp coach and friend Alan Stein tells it in the video below, even though he was the least well-known player in attendance, there was something special about Steph Curry. Despite the fact that they practiced twice a day, every time Alan showed up to training there was Steph Curry. He was pouring sweat, He was draining shots. If he didn’t get it right, he did it again. He was working his tail off before the other attendees had even laced up their shoes.
Curry continued to work throughout each session, seeking perfect form, perfecting footwork, and again, if he didn’t get it right, he did it repeatedly until he did. He didn’t wait for a coach to tell him; he just did it. As everyone else called it an afternoon and headed to eat, Curry stayed on the court. He would not leave until he swished 5 straight free throws. Swished them! Only then was it time to go home. As Stein concludes in the video:
“Success is not an accident. Success is a choice, and Stephen Curry is the best shooter on the planet because he has made the choice to create great habits. And the question every athlete has to ask themselves is this: Are the habits you have today on par with the dreams you have for tomorrow?”
Becoming a champion is not something you become when you win an award. It is not that medal around your neck or the plaque on your mantel. Becoming a champion is a way of being. It is a journey. It is a choice, as Dr. Jerry Lynch says in his coaching bible The Way of the Champion. “It starts now by acting as a champion…committing yourself to the habits and ways of a champion, and choosing to engage in a lifestyle that demonstrates such qualities and characteristics on a consistent, daily basis.”
Many people want to be champions. I have coached quite a few of them. They want to win the big game, a league title, or perhaps even a national championship. They want to represent their state, province, perhaps even their country. They are filled with wants and they say all the right words at all the right times. But wanting does not make one a champion; action does Great achievements comes from excellent habits. Greatness is a lifestyle, not a hobby.
Over the years, I have coached, mentored, met, studied and learned from champions in sport, business and life. My travels take me all over the world, and my passion to meet and study the best of the best is far from being quenched. Here is what these athletes, coaches, and incredible men and women have taught me, which I hope you will use to inspire your own athletes: 176
1. Champions know that “Well done is better than well said.” Ben Franklin said it first; champion’s actions say it every day. 2. Champions possess fearlessness; they are unafraid to come up short and understand that adversity and even failure are opportunities to learn. Ordinary people are far too worried about what people will say about them when they come up short, so they never really go all in. 3. Champions have a tenacious focus on the process, the grind, that daily and weekly commitment to excellence. Ordinary people focus on the outcome and love to point fingers when it does not go their way. Champions find joy in the crucible. 4. Champions control the controllables. While the not-quite-champs complain about officials, or field conditions, or bad coaching decisions, or cheating opponents, champions get back to work. They take care of their own house: show up early, stay late, focus on the process, get 1% better every day. 5. Champions see the opponent as their partner in achieving excellence. The word competitor is derived from the latin word meaning “seek together.” Opponents are not to be feared or hated; they are fellow travelers on this amazing journey. 6. Champions ask not “what can I get from my team” but “what can I give?” I can give 100% effort every single day. I can give my team a positive attitude, I can give my team a better chance to win not matter what position I play, or how many minutes I earn. 7. Champions have the will to prepare relentlessly in case their big moment ever comes. They are committed to being ready when the universe says “it’s your time.” Not- quite champs hope that big moments don’t present themselves in “the offseason.” Everyone wants to do what it takes on game day to win; champions are willing to do what it takes six weeks, six months, even six years before kickoff. 8. Champions are humble. Just like the two-time defending world rugby champion New Zealand All Blacks, they “Sweep the Shed’ and are never afraid to do all the little things it takes to be at the top. Not-quite- champs, on the other hand, leave the picking up of cones, or carrying the water jug, to the underclassmen and the bench players, because, well, “I have earned the right to not do my part.” 9. Champions don’t focus on winning; they focus on competing. Every. Single. Day. They are willing to do, and likely have already done, what others hate to do, and consistently avoid. 10. Champions understand that excellence is a way of being, not something you do. Your habits are a way of being. Your attitude, love of teammates, and celebration of the success of others is a way of being. Your joy in play is a way of being. Your mindfulness and accountability is a way of being. You are a human being, not a human doing.
176
As you can see from the list above, being a champion is not about being on every podium. There are so many true champions who will never be seen on ESPN, or recognized in the way we often think of when we say the word “champion.” Some athletes, and some teams, will never have the physical gifts to be celebrated in this way.
No, being a champion is different. It is living in a way that assures you will become the best you are capable of becoming, and time after time achieving personal best performance on and off the field. It is living in a way that gives you the best opportunity to be on a podium, but also leads to something far greater: The satisfaction of knowing that you did your best, that you spent yourself in a worthy cause, leaving you with no regrets, and fully aware that becoming extraordinary is a choice that you have made. That is the way of the champion. Now get to work.
(If you are interested in learning how to instill this type of culture in your program, Dr. Jerry Lynch, John O’Sullivan and the Changing the Game Project team will be conducting our second ever Way of Champions Transformational Coaching Conference June 2-4 at The Hun School in Princeton, NJ. Registration opens March 1, click here for more info. or watch the video below. Email us at [email protected] to learn about staff discounts for multiple coaches.)
Brad Garrett 177
From: Kyle Stanfield Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:24 PM To: Kellen Peters Cc: Dee Dee Collins; Brad Garrett Subject: Re: Reclassification Recommendation
Thanks Kellen. We will add to the correspondence for the committee. Thanks!
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2017, at 11:43 AM, Kellen Peters
Hey Kyle, As a league the 2A Tri-River Conference would prefer the 6 classification model and we would like to stay intact as a league. If we need to split up the TRC, our preference is to go with Draft #10 which would place half of the TRC in the Casco league and the other half in the Tri-River.
--
Kellen Peters
ATHLETIC DIRECTOR, RAA | 6-12 PE TEACHER | HEAD TRACK & XC COACH
East Linn Christian Academy | 36883 Victory Dr | Lebanon, OR 97355
cell: 503.341.6174 | school: 541.451.1076 | fax: 971.244.9334 | [email protected]
1 Brad Garrett 178
From: Mike Bussard
To: Brad Garrett Assistant Executive Director OSAA
Re: Input for Classification and Districting Committee
Philomath High School strongly objects to the OSAA proposal for a 5 Division Classification Model. There are two basic reasons why we object, competitive balance and league schedule structure. The 5 classification models proposed by the OSAA places Philomath High School into two proposed divisions. The first would place us in the Mid‐Willamette Conference. In this conference Philomath would have less than half the population of the majority of member schools. Depth on varsity and sub‐varsity squads will become an unsustainable competitive model that will prevent our school from providing any sense of competition for the remainder of the league institutions. We do not field a Freshman program in the majority of our sports including football. The remainder of the league will have holes in their schedule due to the lack of sub‐varsity programs at Philomath. Also, according to Draft #12 the cutoff attendance is 451, yet Philomath is still placed in the 4A level with an attendance of 444. The attendance projections in Philomath are decreasing, which will create an even greater competitive gap between member schools. Draft #13 moves Philomath to the 3A level, in the Sky‐Em league where there is greater competitive balance, yet now requires our athletic teams to travel over the Cascades on numerous occasions. I know the OSAA’s job is not easy; however, we also believe that traveling back from La Pine or Sisters on a weeknight does not serve the interest of academic and athletic integrity. In closing, Philomath supports the call of the vast majority of 4A schools in not supporting a 5 Classification Model. The 4A level has proved to be arguably the most competitive division in the state of Oregon. State titles are spread throughout various leagues and geographic regions. Thank you so much for considering one of many opinions on your most difficult of jobs.
Mike Bussard Assistant Principal Philomath High School 541-929-3211 [email protected]
1 179 Brad Garrett 180
From: Benjamin Bonser
I'm writing on behalf of the North Marion School District with the perspective of the Girls' Soccer program concerning the 2018 proposals for classification and districting.
Most of the proposals look reasonable for our school and size that would allow for competitive match ups with the exception of the inclusion of the Woodburn and possible North Salem schools in draft 10, 11, and 12. Most concerning is the success that their soccer programs have had at their current level. Especially, the boys programs that have won multiple championships. Proposal 13 looks fair and competitive as written for our Conference. Proposal 10 and 11 seem to provide a fair and competitive Conference with the exception of the inclusion of Woodburn.
Thanks for your time,
Ben Bonser
1 181
Mr. Garrett,
Please know that I am in full support of a 6 classification system with my choice of #11. The 6 classifications serves the school of our size within our league perfectly. To stay in the 6 classification at either draft proposal would continue to keep our league competitively balanced.
The current 4A classification is most affected by a move to 5 classifications. I believe the 4A as it is current, as well as the Skyline conference, has competitive balance and a move to any 5 classification will be a detriment to that. Please understand that I do not support any of the 5 class proposals.
It is the concern of administrators, coaches, parents and student-athletes that we keep the playing field as level as we can, for all levels of play. Moving to a 5 classification system creates a great imbalance in competitiveness from our standpoint.
It is evident that kids stop competing on teams when competitiveness is not on equal playing ground. We all want to see programs grow in numbers of participants (Varsity through sub- varsity), or at the minimum remain the same here at Henley High School. We also want to see our student-athletes leave Henley High School having had a great experience during their time competing in athletics at the high school level. A move for us at the 4A level to a 5 classification would have the opposite effect.
Thank you,
Tom Loney Athletic Director Henley High School
182
To: OSAA Classification and Redistricting Committee
From: Tony Smith – Principal/AD St. Paul HS
Re: 1A/2A Cut-off
I would like to encourage the committee to look at raising the 1A cutoff from the current 89 to 99. I know the majority of the classification would like to keep the number down at 89 but what classification wouldn’t? I believe if you asked any classification if they want to raise the number the majority of that classification would say no. So when the committee says that the 1A’s like the number at 89 I’m not surprised. What I would ask the committee to do is be able to rationalize the cut-off of 89. Why is 89 the right number? I don’t think “The 1A’s want 89” is rationale enough. So what is the rationale?
Ratio When the committee works with a ratio to decide the stretch between each of the cut-offs it is difficult in 1A because Melrose Christian at the bottom has 12 and if you multiply that by 2.25 the top of 1A is 27. Not a realistic number, correct. So what is? I think you need to look at schools that consistently field teams and schools that field them in all sports. When you do that and you look at 45 as the bottom then a ratio of 2.25 puts the top of 1A at 101.
There isn’t too many 1A teams The total number of 1A schools is misleading. In the drafts coming out of the committee it will list 83 schools at the 1A level and when you compare that with other classifications then it does seems like the number should be lower so there aren’t too many 1A schools. The reality is there aren’t 83 1A schools that consistently field teams.
Football 39 Boys Soccer 11 Baseball 9 (individual teams) 20 in some kind of Co-op Girls Basketball 62 Boys Basketball 69 Volleyball 65
1A needs more schools due to the remote locations of the schools and the extensive travel requirements for leagues.
Thank you for considering this proposal and your work for the schools of the OSAA.
183 183 184
Classification and Districting Committee Members,
Thank you for the hard work you have put in over the past school year. We know you have had a lot of tough decisions to make and it’s difficult to satisfy all schools. We would like to give you our thoughts on the current proposals: 1. Travel time is the biggest consideration for our schools. Given the new league suggestions for proposals #10 and #11, we would compete outside the Portland Metro Area for all games except against each other. These are the first proposals which have had such significant travel (all other proposals had at least three other league opponents in the Metro area). These league alignments would cause our students to miss a tremendous amount of class time, especially at the JV level. It puts our youngest student-athletes, those who are just learning to manage academics and athletics, in an extremely difficult situation. 2. We are open to either the 5 or 6 classification models, but we lean toward the six classification model due to travel (specifically #12). We would love to stay in leagues that allow us to compete against schools in the Portland Metro Area. 3. We favor Draft # 12 which has a cap at 450 students. Draft #13 has a significant jump at a high end of 544. 4. If we had to make a decision on longer travel or competing against larger schools, we would always choose the latter. Our students average four hours of homework per night. We believe the current proposals of both six classification models (draft #10&11) would discourage participation for our younger student- athletes. Again, thank you for the time you put into each proposal.
Sandy Luu- Athletic Director, Catlin Gabel Dennis Sullivan-Athletic Director, Oregon Episcopal School
Sunset High School IB World School John Huelskamp, Principal185 Shawn Davitt, Assistant Principal Chris Bick, Assistant Principal Cheri Martin, Assistant Principal
March 17, 2017
Curt, Kyle, and the OSAA Classification committee:
Attached you will find some data for the current 5A and 6A classifications. I used the last 2 2/3 years of team sport league standings to compile the information on the attached document. The only thing missing is Softball and Baseball from this spring.
For each school, using TEAM sports only – I calculated how many times they finished lower than fifth in their league standings and have put that total down on the document. I then sorted the totals by the MOST TIMES they finished lower than fifth. (note: for the leagues of 4 schools I counted only 4th place and for leagues of 5 schools I counted 4th or 5th)
Also, for each school, using TEAM sports only – I calculated how many times they finished in the top 3 of their league standings and put these totals down on the document. This total was not sorted. It stayed associated with the first sort shown above.
Notes 2 2/3 years of results means that the sample space has a school having 22 possibilities (8 sports per season with 2 2/3 years)
I have also omitted the names of the schools to avoid being influenced by who is who.
The first two sheets are the 6A data and the last sheet is the 5A data.
EXAMPLE: School 1 for the 6A has finished lower than fifth 20 times out of a possible 22. They also finished in the top three of their league zero times out of a possible 22. Finally, their free and reduced percentage is 83%.
On Monday I will make a brief presentation on these numbers.
Thanks Pete Lukich Athletic Director
Sunset High School
District Goal for 2010-2015: All students will show continuous progress toward their personal learning goals, developed in collaboration with teachers and parents, and will be prepared for post-secondary education and career success. The Beaverton School District recognizes the diversity and worth of all individuals and groups. It is the policy of the Beaverton School District that there will be no discrimination or harassment of individuals or groups based on race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, marital status, age, veterans' status, genetic information or disability in any educational programs, activities or employment.
Sunset High School 13840 NW Cornell Rd Portland, Oregon Office: 503.259.5050 FAX:503.259.5066
185 3/17/17 6A Data 22 possible in both columns School # of NOT in the TOP 5 of their League # of TOP 3 finishes in League Free Reduced % 1 20 0 83% 2 North Salem 20 0 78% 3 Century 18 1 35% 4 Madison 17 2 63% 5 David Douglas 16 3 72% 6Jefferson, Portland 16 3 68% 7 Roosevelt 15 3 70% 8 Benson 15 3 64% 9 Canby 15 1 30% 10 Aloha 14 1 52% 11 Reynolds 13 4 67% 12 Roseburg 13 4 47% 13 Newberg 13 3 34% 14 South Eugene 12 7 25% 15 Centennial 12 3 64% 16 Franklin 12 5 47% 17 Glencoe 12 0 38% 18 Willamette 12 3 57% 19 Gresham 11 3 59% 20 Sprague 11 6 38% 21 Sherwood 11 8 15% 22 Forest Grove 10 3 50%
23 West Albany 10 6 27%
24 Lakeridge 10 8 10%
25 Barlow 8 7 41%
26 Tualatin 8 6 26%
27 McMinnville 8 8 46%
28 Liberty 8 10 37%
29 Beaverton 7 9 37%
30 Tigard 7 10 31%
31 Cleveland 7 7 25%
32 St. Mary's Acad. 7 1 0%
33 Lake Oswego 6 7 8% 34 McNary 5 13 56% 185 35 Westview 5 13 24% 36 Southridge 5 12 22% 37 Sunset 5 9 21% 38 South Medford 4 14 44% 39 Grants Pass 4 5 51% 40 South Salem 4 13 51% 41 Oregon City 4 10 38% 42 Wilson 4 10 20% 43 Sheldon 2 19 25% 44 Grant 2 14 19% 45 Central Catholic 2 18 0% 46 North Medford 1 14 43% 47 West Salem 0 17 38% 48 Clackamas 0 21 18% 49 Lincoln 0 20 11% 50 West Linn 0 21 11% 51 Jesuit 0 21 0% 185 3/17/17 5A Data 22 possible in both columns Free Reduced School # of NOT in the TOP 5 of their League # of TOP 3 finishes in their League % 1 Milwaukie / Milwaukie Acad. of the Arts20 0 65% 2 Redmond 20 1 66% 3 Woodburn 18 3 76% 4 Parkrose 17 3 71% 5 St. Helens 16 5 31% 6 Ridgeview 15 2 48% 7 Thurston 14 2 46% 8 Eagle Point 14 3 50% 9 Lebanon 13 8 59% 10 South Albany 13 1 49% 11 North Eugene 12 4 54%
12 Springfield 10 9 70%
13 Sandy 8 6 38%
14 Dallas 8 6 29%
15 Liberty 8 10 37%
16 The Dalles 7 4 47%
17 Crater 7 4 52% 18 Pendleton 6 12 42% 19Hood River Valley 6 12 53% 20 Putnam 5 5 38% 21 Mountain View 5 9 43% 22 Ashland 5 12 35% 23 La Salle Prep 5 12 0% 24 Central 4 5 51% 25 Crescent Valley 4 9 26% 26 Wilsonville 4 15 26% 27 Hermiston 3 16 64% 28 Hillsboro 3 12 51% 29 Bend 2 12 50% 30 Corvallis 2 19 36% 31 Silverton 2 16 36% 32 Summit 1 21 20% 33 Churchill 0 14 45% 34 Marist Catholic 0 19 0% Brad Garrett 186
From: Jason Scanlan
Kyle/Brad- My recommendations for your proposals are as follows:
I would prefer we stay at 6 classifications-
My picks for each level:
#1- 6 classification: Draft #10
For 5 levels:
#2- 5 classification: Draft #12
If Draft #13 wins, we will have scheduling nightmares(we would want a different league.)
Thank you, -- Jason Scanlan Physical Education/Health Teacher Head Track Coach North Marion High School 503-678-7123 [email protected]
1
COQUILLE JR/SR187 HIGH SCHOOL
To: OSAA Classification Committee
From: Jeff Philley, Principal Coquille High School
Date: 3/19/17
I support the move to a 5 classification system and model #13. It creates larger leagues and significantly reduces travel for our school.
I would like the committee to consider travel distances as the highest priority in creating the new districts.
The current league travel is hurting what I’m trying to accomplish in the classroom.
I appreciate all the hard work from this committee in making these difficult decisions.
Please contact me if you have any questions,
Thank you,
Jeff Philley
499 West Central, Coquille Oregon, 97423 (541) 396-2163 (541) 396-4635 fax Principal Jeff Philley Vice Principal Armando Ruiz Athletic Director Dan Hampton A
Brad Garrett 188
From: Kyle Stanfield Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 8:21 PM To: Dennis Burke Cc: Dave Hood; K. T. Emerson; Dan Schumaker Subject: Re: Classification Proposals
Thanks Dennis, we will share with the committee. Thanks!
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 19, 2017, at 4:16 PM, Dennis Burke
1 > > Please let me know if there are questions for me. If it is best to present our thoughts at a meeting, please advise 188 accordingly. > > Sincerely, > > Dennis Burke > > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > Sent from my iPad > *********** This message scanned by GWAVA Anti‐Spam and AntiVirus System. *********** >
2 189
Date: 3/19/2017
To: OSAA Classification and Districting Committee
From: Athletic Directors of the Salem-Keizer School District
Re: Draft #13 5 Classification Proposal Option 2
We are writing this letter to the committee to express our support of a 5 classification system. More specifically, we feel that draft #13 option 2 is a model that we feel is the best option for our student- athletes.
The athletic directors of the Salem-Keizer School District would like to thank the committee for your service to the OSAA and the work you are doing for the students in the state of Oregon. We understand that you have a difficult decision in front of you. Throughout this process you have heard passionate testimony from the public and OSAA member schools on what they feel is the best model moving forward. In reality, the testimony you have heard has not given the committee a clear mandate because the landscape of our state is so unique that there cannot be a model that will meet the needs of each of the OSAA member schools. Using the filter of the charge to the committee, you must come up with a compromise that is best for student-athletes while adhering to criteria spelled out before you. We do not envy the decision in front of you.
With all that being said, we are in full support of draft #13 option 2 as the classification model beginning in the Fall of the 2018-2019 school year for the following reasons:
The first charge of the committee is safety. A five classification system allows for more schools to be in a specific classification and therefore keeps travel at the shortest and safest distances possible. More schools in a classification allows for a reduction in travel time so it helps the impact of missed instructional time. More schools in a classification keep expenditures down. Travel is decreased since schools can play like schools in their classification that are close. A 5 classification model will better allow member schools generate revenue. When schools in neighboring communities compete against each other, gates are steady and may grow since students and fans do not have to travel distances to watch the competition. Outside of football size really does not matter. Colorado for example divides its largest classification at 1150 for basketball but 1350 for football.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Brian Armstrong Bill Wittman Jeff Chandler Ron Richards Jerimy Kelly
190
March 17, 2017
Dear Classification and Districting Committee,
We are sending you this letter on behalf of Forest Grove, McMinnville, and the Newberg School District. After reviewing the latest proposals released by the Classification Committee, it is still clear to us that we support a 5 classification system and specifically proposal 13 option 1.
Our schools have been competing with one another since 1912 and have continued until the last classification committee decision. Prior to that, and for most of Oregon Athletic history, our schools had been in the same conference. Competing in the same conference has allowed us to build relationships, and have intentional planning for our programs, because we have similar socio‐economic communities. We feel a 5 classification system, with more teams in each classification, allow opportunities at each level of classification 1‐5 to build conferences that minimize impact on the classroom and provide safe travel and competition. It also allows for placing equal numbers on teams in each conference to benefit scheduling outside the conference. In proposal 13 competing with the Hillsboro school district and Canby provides us this opportunity.
We feel that the purpose of creating leagues (conferences) is truly to create an educational‐athletic program based on schools with similar demographics ‐“like schools”‐ that can face the same challenges, work together, share together, and most importantly grow together in an education‐based athletic conference. It is this opportunity to share resources around professional development that helps our students on the playing field and in the classroom.
If the 6A classification system worked, why has the classification committee every four years created major shifts and redistricting in the state at all levels? A 5 Classification system would begin to give the state the opportunity to provide some stability, as it was in the 3A and 4A classification systems. This would allow schools to build those relationships and keep conferences intact for those very reasons mentioned above. It is evident to us, and many others, that it is time to go to a 5 classification system to create those traditions, build equity, and minimize travel.
We also believe it is the Championship committee’s job to create a structure for teams to get to post season play. This committee should not be creating conferences with the ultimate goal to get schools to the state tournament or winning a state championship. Within a 5 classification structure, the committee is afforded the opportunity to examine what schools should compete within each conference. High School athletics should be about competing in your conference, not winning state titles.
190
Together with Superintendents, Principals, Athletic Directors, Teachers, Coaches, and Support Staffs, we can build a cohesive conference. This conference is built on these working relationships that allow schools of similar demographics, geographies and philosophies to collaborate. In the past we have met regularly to share ideas on how we can promote academic and athletic success, create a fan culture that is positive and appropriate, and support the arts as a way to build student engagement.
In closing we have all seen the changes around a 6 classification system every four years. It is time to provide some stability with a 5 classification system, that as you know, has more opportunities to fix what has ailed the 6 classification system over the past two decades.
Sincerely,
Doug Thompson Tim Burke Ryan McIrvin Athletic Director Athletic Director Athletic Director Forest Grove High Newberg High McMinnville High
191 Kyle Stanfield
From: Brad Garrett Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:36 AM To: Kyle Stanfield Subject: Fwd: Letter to Classification and Districting Committee
Brad Garrett, CAA Assistant Executive Director Oregon School Activities Association
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jodi Drescher"
Dear Committee,
Just over one week ago, I was standing at Gill Coliseum, waiting for the Girls 5A Championship game between Silverton HS and LaSalle Prep to begin. As always, the OSAA representatives were gracious and approachable. Mr. Weber greeted me and asked how I was doing. I responded that I was relishing what was likely one of the last times Silverton will see a state tournament if the 5-classification model goes through. I know he didn’t want to discuss it there, I get it, but I pressed on and told him, “You know it’s true. We go to five classes and Silverton doesn’t SNIFF a tournament spot.” You all know this is true as well.
That’s basketball. Football drives the bus so let’s take a look at that. I think we can all agree the Mid-Willamette Conference is one of the most competitive in the state at the 5A level. Let’s take a look at the teams of the MWC: Central, Corvallis, Crescent Valley, Dallas, Lebanon, Silverton, South Albany, and Woodburn – let’s throw in West Albany for good measure. A simple review of the brackets (not quick) shows that in the years prior to reclassification (2001-2005), ZERO teams from MWC make the final eight and only ONE makes the final 16. After reclassification (2006-2016), the makeup of the final eight is dramatically different – including MWC teams in several of the years. Silverton isn’t always in there but at least there is a fighting chance. The same goes for every other activity. This is what is referred to as competitive balance: the situation in which no one business (school) of a group of competing businesses (schools) has an unfair advantage over the others
It is difficult to establish and maintain a culture of hard-work and competition when you are constantly being beat down. The culture of a school is hit hard and this is reflected in participation numbers in all school events. This is a cyclical matter -- You battle and lose, numbers drop – over and over again. What I think what you miss here is that these schools – the Silvertons, the Cascades, the Lebanons are the central focus of their communities and the lifeblood of OSAA. Assistant Executive Director Kris Welch stated as much when I spoke with him at the 5A Basketball Tournament. I asked him how attendance was and while he wasn’t thrilled with the turnout (are we ever?) he said, “… well, except when Silverton is here!” …because these communities will rally around their schools when they have the opportunity. The 5-Class system takes away that opportunity.
Ultimately, going to a 5-class system is not in the best interests of students or the schools and communities you serve. This change will not improve the competitive balance we have achieved in the present system and will damage it. The 6-class system works – please don’t go backwards.
Respectfully submitted,
Jodi Drescher Assistant Principal Silverton High School 1 191
As an aside: I sat at recent Classification and Redistricting Committee and listened to an AD state that a 5-class system is just so much easier for scheduling purposes. Frankly, I don’t care if it is easier for ADs. I care, first and foremost, if it is better for kids. That should be your number one focus as well.
2 192 Kyle Stanfield
From: Brad Garrett Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:41 AM To: Kyle Stanfield Subject: Fwd: if the attachment did not go through here are the notes in an email.
Brad Garrett, CAA Assistant Executive Director Oregon School Activities Association
Begin forwarded message:
From: "White, Shawn"
March 20, 2017 meeting
I would like to start by quickly referencing the information from the December meeting and highlighting three major reasons that we support the 6 classification system.
The six classification system is not broken. It has been functioning well and has provided opportunity and success to many schools, communities, and students. Decreasing a classification would decrease these opportunities. It provides competitive balance. It has us playing other schools that “look like we do”. This gives athletes a chance to prove themselves on a level and safe playing field. This competitive balance helps to preserve programs that would be hurt by large imbalances in the 5A systems that create too much difference between the large and small schools in the classification.
You asked for feedback on the current proposals.
Football as a special district is still a major concern. At least at the 1A/2A classifications the issues have not changed concerning football. I believe the committee has not heard a lot because most of the presentations to the committee has come from larger districts. Once a decision is made on 5A or 6A, I hope that the committee will explore special districts for the smaller classifications. Either 6A proposal works as there are no schools between those cut-off numbers for the 2A and is our preferred proposal. As there is obviously support for a 5A classification proposal, I would like to address possible cut-off numbers as this is at the heart of creating a level playing field at the 2A level. I would like to see a number as close to 200 as possible. IF, we go to a 5 class system, I see the possibility that the upper number will just keep creeping higher.
1