|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 20, 2017 9:50:57 GMT -5
Chs71... Old Fort is already a member of the SBC River and they do not have a football team. As far as larger schools to add.. Fostoria is the only D4 school in the NBC so numbers wise they would seem to make the most sense. Ontario is too far away IMO and I doubt they would reconsider anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 10:36:00 GMT -5
Chs71... Old Fort is already a member of the SBC River and they do not have a football team. As far as larger schools to add.. Fostoria is the only D4 school in the NBC so numbers wise they would seem to make the most sense. Ontario is too far away IMO and I doubt they would reconsider anyway. IMO, Hawkins would have very little interest in getting in a schedule playing Bellevue, Huron, Margaretta, Clyde, Edison, Vermillion, Port Clinton, Calvert or Gibsonburg. |
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 20, 2017 11:22:19 GMT -5
Chs71... Old Fort is already a member of the SBC River and they do not have a football team. As far as larger schools to add.. Fostoria is the only D4 school in the NBC so numbers wise they would seem to make the most sense. Ontario is too far away IMO and I doubt they would reconsider anyway. IMO, Hawkins would have very little interest in getting in a schedule playing Bellevue, Huron, Margaretta, Clyde, Edison, Vermillion, Port Clinton, Calvert or Gibsonburg. They wouldn't play Clyde and Bellevue (Lake Division) or calvert, gibsonburg or margaretta (River Division). |
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Mar 20, 2017 11:22:55 GMT -5
Here's the Blade/BCSN article on Danbury joining the SBC: www.bcsn.tv/news_article/show/770841In this one they actually mention Gibsonburg's possible move to the SBC, which could be decided as early as tonight's board meeting. They also got the SBC divisions mostly right in this article (only mistake was not including Margaretta as school that will play in the River for football only) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 12:20:23 GMT -5
IMO, Hawkins would have very little interest in getting in a schedule playing Bellevue, Huron, Margaretta, Clyde, Edison, Vermillion, Port Clinton, Calvert or Gibsonburg. They wouldn't play Clyde and Bellevue (Lake Division) or calvert, gibsonburg or margaretta (River Division). There has been talks of crossover games to make a full schedule so I listed some of the other schools Hawkins may not want to play. |
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108 
|
Post by chs71 on Mar 20, 2017 15:45:00 GMT -5
Chs71... Old Fort is already a member of the SBC River and they do not have a football team. As far as larger schools to add.. Fostoria is the only D4 school in the NBC so numbers wise they would seem to make the most sense. Ontario is too far away IMO and I doubt they would reconsider anyway. I know that Old Fort is in the SBC, but if they were interested they could add football. Fostoria struggles to be relevant in the NBC where they are the second largest school. I very much doubt that they would move to the Bay Division where they would be the smallest school. For that matter, Woodmore and Elmwood are in a similar boat. They don't like being the smallest schools in the NBC. If they move to the SBC they become the smallest school in the Bay Div., against even larger schools. Elmwood, Fostoria, & Woodmore all make sense geographically, but I cannot see any of them joining the SBC, unless it is to be the largest school in the River Division. |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 20, 2017 16:28:43 GMT -5
Here's a good idea. With the addition of Danbury & Gibsonburg the new SBC will have 20 schools with football. There are seven small schools, they need to add one more for 8 in the River Division and that's perfect. They have five to choose from; Elmwood, Woodmore, Seneca East, Hopewell-Loudon, and even Old Fort if they are interested. Whoever says "yes" first is in. There are 13 bigger schools. I don't think that there are 3 schools that they could talk into joining to create two more divisions of 8. But if they add 1 school they can create two divisions of 7. That gives you 3 non-league games, 6 division games, and 1 crossover game. It is easy to schedule so that the crossover game would be the biggest school in the Lake Division vs. the biggest in the Bay Division, 2nd biggest vs. 2nd biggest, etc. Fremont Ross is "too big." Maumee is the perfect size for the Lake Division but too far away. Upper Sandusky is the perfect size for the Bay Division, but is likely not interested. Would Ontario reconsider? If it's not one of those four I don't see anyone else on the map that fits into either of the two larger divisions. Where they ever asked? Many thought they were to far south to even be included. ALL NOL schools were invited to join the NEW SBC. The powers to be in the "merger" knew Ontario wouldn't want all of the drives to the Northern schools and would most likely turn down the invite. Which is what happened. If in the SBC Bay all Northern schools would only have to drive south to Ontario once per sport per team. Whereas Ontario would have to drive north to all schools, not just one. |
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Mar 20, 2017 18:11:34 GMT -5
I have no idea, but would Ross dominate this division? Consider sports other than football too.
Ross
Norwalk
Columbian
Sandusky
Clyde
Bellevue
Perkins
|
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 20, 2017 18:50:00 GMT -5
I have no idea, but would Ross dominate this division? Consider sports other than football too. Ross Norwalk Columbian Sandusky Clyde Bellevue Perkins Ross has a long history of playing Sandusky and Columbian and they don't dominate. IMO... The only sport Ross would dominate is swimming in this fictional division. In the other sports they would be much more competitive than they are on the TRAC but not dominate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 19:20:53 GMT -5
Cross's swim program and wrestling program would dominate.Ross won trac in wrestling and sent 3 to state.Football Ross sucks bad. Around 40-50 kids varsity.Ross is weak.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 19:23:00 GMT -5
Any word on gibsonburg? There school board meeting was tonight to vote for sbc admission.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbcchamp1 on Mar 20, 2017 21:28:53 GMT -5
If I remember correctly I think woodmore at one time was interested in the TAAC. With Gburg leaving does woodmore now get its shot at the TAAC
|
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 20, 2017 23:17:13 GMT -5
They wouldn't play Clyde and Bellevue (Lake Division) or calvert, gibsonburg or margaretta (River Division). There has been talks of crossover games to make a full schedule so I listed some of the other schools Hawkins may not want to play. "talks" of forced cross over games could be the death knell. Why wouldn't Hawkins want to play Calvet, Gibsonburg or Margaretta??? Other than the trips being twice as far as non-league games that could be scheduled around the Mansfield area. Hawkins would have no problem being in the Bay Division, Ontario would be it's largest school. |
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 21, 2017 4:58:45 GMT -5
There has been talks of crossover games to make a full schedule so I listed some of the other schools Hawkins may not want to play. "talks" of forced cross over games could be the death knell. Why wouldn't Hawkins want to play Calvet, Gibsonburg or Margaretta??? Other than the trips being twice as far as non-league games that could be scheduled around the Mansfield area. Hawkins would have no problem being in the Bay Division, Ontario would be it's largest school. Nobody said "forced" crossover games. |
|
|
|
Post by dolittle on Mar 21, 2017 8:43:19 GMT -5
any news from Gibsonburg?
|
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 21, 2017 13:23:37 GMT -5
"talks" of forced cross over games could be the death knell. Why wouldn't Hawkins want to play Calvet, Gibsonburg or Margaretta??? Other than the trips being twice as far as non-league games that could be scheduled around the Mansfield area. Hawkins would have no problem being in the Bay Division, Ontario would be it's largest school. Nobody said "forced" crossover games. Then there is no need for the powers to be to have "talks about cross over games" without them feeling a need to more than suggest who should play who. The ADs at 2 SBC schools are perfectly capable of working out the details of a cross over game if they want one.. |
|
|
|
Post by sbcchamp1 on Mar 22, 2017 4:41:25 GMT -5
Gibsonburg said yes to the SBC reported on channel 13 this morning
|
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 22, 2017 4:53:44 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 5:20:18 GMT -5
Congrats to gibsonburg! Good move
|
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Mar 22, 2017 10:08:10 GMT -5
Nobody said "forced" crossover games. Then there is no need for the powers to be to have "talks about cross over games" without them feeling a need to more than suggest who should play who. The ADs at 2 SBC schools are perfectly capable of working out the details of a cross over game if they want one.. There is no "need" to be in a league at all. AD's are perfectly capable of working out the details of scheduling 10 non-conference football games if that is what the school wants to do. Or, mandatory crossover games between divisions could be part of the agreement to be in the league, if that is what a majority of the league chooses to do. You're entitled to your opinion, as am I, but neither of us has a vote. And the term is powers "that" be, not powers "to" be whoever it is you imagine are pulling the strings in the SBC. |
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Mar 22, 2017 10:53:28 GMT -5
Anyone know what the planned division alignment is for 2018-2019?
If the 2 new schools are joining the River Division for all sports, and all other schools stay where they are, the division lineups would have:
6 Lake, 6 Bay, 8 River for football
7 Lake, 7 Bay, 9 River for the other sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 22, 2017 11:40:14 GMT -5
Anyone know what the planned division alignment is for 2018-2019? If the 2 new schools are joining the River Division for all sports, and all other schools stay where they are, the division lineups would have: 6 Lake, 6 Bay, 8 River for football 7 Lake, 7 Bay, 9 River for the other sports. I would assume all the other schools stay where they are. The 6-6-8 format keeps all the football divisions with an even number of teams which is much easier for scheduling. An odd number of teams means that someone is always trying to schedule non-league games in weeks 5-10 where the options are limited. |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 22, 2017 14:58:42 GMT -5
Then there is no need for the powers to be to have "talks about cross over games" without them feeling a need to more than suggest who should play who. The ADs at 2 SBC schools are perfectly capable of working out the details of a cross over game if they want one.. There is no "need" to be in a league at all. AD's are perfectly capable of working out the details of scheduling 10 non-conference football games if that is what the school wants to do. Or, mandatory crossover games between divisions could be part of the agreement to be in the league, if that is what a majority of the league chooses to do. You're entitled to your opinion, as am I, but neither of us has a vote. And the term is powers "that" be, not powers "to" be whoever it is you imagine are pulling the strings in the SBC. There is a huge "need" to be in a league. Ask any AD how much more difficult it is to schedule 10 non-league football games vs only having to schedule 3 or 4 non-league games. Mandatory cross over games finished off the 2 Division NCC. I'm sure it wasn't the custodians and cooks from the NEW SBC who were involved in "talks of cross over games". Not just anyone can have official "talks" about league rules or bylaws. It must be an agreed upon select few. If not, chaos runs rampant. NOW, it is clearly possible that Dude might have made up the "talks of cross over games". It's part of his shtick. |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 22, 2017 15:17:14 GMT -5
Anyone know what the planned division alignment is for 2018-2019? If the 2 new schools are joining the River Division for all sports, and all other schools stay where they are, the division lineups would have: 6 Lake, 6 Bay, 8 River for football 7 Lake, 7 Bay, 9 River for the other sports. I would assume all the other schools stay where they are. The 6-6-8 format keeps all the football divisions with an even number of teams which is much easier for scheduling. An odd number of teams means that someone is always trying to schedule non-league games in weeks 5-10 where the options are limited. 6-6-8 makes it easier to schedule non-league games for one division. The difficulty of finding two games in weeks 5 and 6 remain the same for the other 2 Divisions. Would 7-7-7 be the fairest for all involved as far as scheduling is concerned? |
|
|
|
Post by gridiron58 on Mar 22, 2017 16:13:45 GMT -5
I would assume all the other schools stay where they are. The 6-6-8 format keeps all the football divisions with an even number of teams which is much easier for scheduling. An odd number of teams means that someone is always trying to schedule non-league games in weeks 5-10 where the options are limited. 6-6-8 makes it easier to schedule non-league games for one division. The difficulty of finding two games in weeks 5 and 6 remain the same for the other 2 Divisions. Would 7-7-7 be the fairest for all involved as far as scheduling is concerned? Wrong. In a 6 team division or league, there is no difficulty in finding games in week 6...... weeks 6,7,8,9 & 10 are division/league games. Two small schools were added to the small school division. With the 6-6-8 format, the Lake and Bay need to find non-league games weeks 1-5 and the River weeks 1-3. In a 7-7-7 format every team would need to find non-league games weeks 1-4 plus one other non-league game somewhere between weeks 5-10 (each school would be a different off week). I think any reasonable person would see that option 1 is preferable from a scheduling standpoint. So.... no, 7-7-7 would not be the fairest for all involved. In fact, it would be worse for everyone involved. |
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Mar 22, 2017 16:43:52 GMT -5
Mandatory cross over games finished off the 2 Division NCC. I'm sure it wasn't the custodians and cooks from the NEW SBC who were involved in "talks of cross over games". Not just anyone can have official "talks" about league rules or bylaws. It must be an agreed upon select few. If not, chaos runs rampant. NOW, it is clearly possible that Dude might have made up the "talks of cross over games". It's part of his shtick. Or perhaps Dude was just referring to posts on here and you are taking it way out of proportion. Although Dude will have to be the one to clarify what he meant. On the topic of crossovers, when the first SBC expansion to 2 divisions was announced, it was made clear by several posters in the know that there would be NO mandatory crossovers, and that trend has continued into the 3 division version of the SBC so far. 6-6-8 makes it easier to schedule non-league games for one division. The difficulty of finding two games in weeks 5 and 6 remain the same for the other 2 Divisions. Would 7-7-7 be the fairest for all involved as far as scheduling is concerned? It would be weeks 4 and 5, not 5 and 6. 7-7-7 isn't currently possible in this 20 team scenario, but anyway, the problem with 7-7-7 is it guarantees a leftover school looking for a non crossover OOC game every week from weeks 4-10. The nice thing about 6-6-8 is that it sures up the scheduling in one division, while the other two have several options available for scheduling games in weeks 4 and 5, such as playing volunteer cross overs against the other division, playing a Toledo City league team, or playing any other school that has one of those weeks available. You're more likely to be able to find schools with an open date in weeks 4 and 5 than you are in weeks 6-10, especially in this specific scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 22, 2017 18:27:56 GMT -5
I looked back through this thread and Dude is the only one that said anything about "cross over games" and he said "talks of". Also, his opinion on who Hawkins would not want to play makes no sense what so ever. And had absolutely no bearing on Ontario not joining the SBC. He had not yet been hired by Ontario when that decision was made. The decision between the 2 choices was 100% about distances traveled. Ontario chose being a middle sized school in the MOAC over being the largest school in the Bay Division. Due to the average drive in the Bay for Ontario being 55 miles one way. The average in the MOAC is 32.
You got me on the 7-7-7, have no idea what I was thinking.
|
|
chs71
All Conference
Posts: 108
|
Post by chs71 on Mar 22, 2017 22:10:29 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2017 4:19:28 GMT -5
Mandatory cross over games finished off the 2 Division NCC. I'm sure it wasn't the custodians and cooks from the NEW SBC who were involved in "talks of cross over games". Not just anyone can have official "talks" about league rules or bylaws. It must be an agreed upon select few. If not, chaos runs rampant. NOW, it is clearly possible that Dude might have made up the "talks of cross over games". It's part of his shtick. Although Dude will have to be the one to clarify what he meant. That would be a first, the old douchebag taking something way out of proportion. You are correct BB. |
|
|
|
Post by BellevueBuckeye on Apr 21, 2017 17:10:36 GMT -5
So, with the announcement of St. Wendelin closing, looks like the 2018-19 alignment might be 6-6-8 for football and 7-7-8 for the other sports.
|
|
