From the California Interscholastic Federation Southern Section:
Girls Basketball divisional power profiles
By recommendation of the CIF-SS Basketball Coaches Advisory Committee and the Executive Board of the Southern California Interscholastic Basketball Coaches Association (SCIBCA), we have moved to a weighted system using 30%-('12), 30%-('11), 30%-('10), 10%-('09) to determine each schools 4-year "Power Point" profile. This 4-year Power Point profile along with the 2011 CBED enrollment numbers (2012 CBED's if gain or loss of 15% enrollment or more) are used to determine final division placement of schools for post season basketball championships. We have posted a listing of the individual school Power Point profiles below. Along with this alphabetic listing of schools and profiles, is a description of the criteria and process that was adopted and will be used to develop final basketball playoff divisions for 2012-13. Please review these pages with your basketball coaches to find your school's profile and familiarize yourself with the process. The finalized basketball playoff divisions will be posted in mid-November, once the enrollment adjustments have been received by the CIF-SS office to account for the 15% shifts in 2012 CBED enrollment.
The breakdown:
Every year, schools will be placed into 2 groups based upon the predetermined state enrollment guidelines. One group will be for schools at 1250 students and below and the other group being schools at 1251 and above. These numbers are derived from the previous year’s CBED enrollment figures. 1250 students and below: Schools will be placed into 5 original enrollment divisions. Divisions 4AA, 4A, 5AA and 5A will have 40-49 schools. A single Division 6 will be larger to allow for a larger pool of schools to fully fill a 32 team playoff bracket. This has been a problem the last 3 years in this division. 1251 students and above: Schools will be placed into 7 original enrollment divisions. These 7 divisions (1AA,1A,2AA,2A,3AAA,3AA,3A) will have 40-49 schools.
Secondly, each member school will then have a cumulative CIF-SS playoff “four-year point profile” logged for the preceding four seasons (08-09, 09-10, 10-11, 11-12). These totals are accumulated with points earned by a win in rounds one through the finals of each season. The 4 year profile will then be weighted at 90% for the past 3 years (30% per year) and 10% for 4 years ago. This will put more focus on recent success in indentifying “power” schools while minimizing what was accomplished 4 years ago.
At this stage, schools failing to qualify for the CIF-SS playoffs or not winning a playoff game over a preceding four-year span, thereby accumulating “0” weighted points, will then be moved down one-half division from their original enrollment grouping, in an effort to address competitive equity.
Next, those “power schools” that have collected significant “weighted” point totals over 4 years will be moved up accordingly from their original enrollment grouping based upon the following:
0.1-5.7 weighted points – No movement, will remain in original enrollment grouping
5.8-6.4 weighted points - will be moved up ½ division (example: 2A to 2AA),
6.5-7.1 weighted points - 1 full division (example 2A to 1A)
7.2-7.7 weighted points – 1-1/2 divisions
7.8-8.3 weighted points - 2 full divisions
8.4-8.9 weighted points – 2-1/2 divisions
9.0 weighted points and over - 3 full divisions
What does this mean for public and private schools?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This may not have too much of an effect on Div. 1 - 3, but this will have a big effect on Div. 4, where a number of private schools have had a disproportionate advantage over public schools of similar size. A bigger public school in Div. 1 can somewhat overcome that advantage because it has more students to draw from, but many of the smaller schools of Div. 4 have a tough time just fielding a team, much less developing a team that can compete with the private schools that can, and do, recruit players from all over the city. I'm looking forward to the division announcements in November to see how this shakes out.
The way this is presented, it looks like just a Southern Section ruling -- or is this just the document you had available to report on? Seems like any divisional changes would have to cover the whole state, but this document addresses just the Southern Section so I thought I would ask. Although sometimes folks in that Section think they ARE the state. Used to drive me nuts to hear Southern Section title winners calling themselves "CIF champs," a shorthand SoCal people used in those days to differentiate between the suburban schools and the LA City Section but bothersome to Northern folks.
Well considering the number of schools one had to go through to get to a title I would say it s much harder for the south than the north so stick that in your pipe if you' re offended.
Post a Comment