143 senators 909 madison senators 909 scappoose indians 721 rainier columbians 285 knappa loggers...

1

Brad Garrett

From: Rothenberger, Bart <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 10:12 AMTo: Bennett, Bob; Brad GarrettSubject: West Valley Proposal

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

143

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 47Cleveland Warriors 1478 Cleveland Warriors 1478 La Salle Prep Falcons 679 Banks Braves 358 Clatskanie Tigers 216 Columbia Christian Knights 115 60 Cascades Academy Steelhead NEWFranklin 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 58Grant Generals 1376 Grant Generals 1376 Parkrose Broncos 774 Seaside Seagulls 375 Neah-Kah-Nie Pirates 201 Portland Christian Royals 175 64 Chiloquin Panthers 76Jefferson Democrats 417 Jefferson Democrats 417 Putnam Kingsmen 1034 Tillamook Cheesemakers 533 Oregon Episcopal Aardvarks 313 Faith Bible Falcons 113 48 Gilchrist Grizzlies 56Lincoln Cardinals 1605 Lincoln Cardinals 1605 Sandy Pioneers 1215 Valley Catholic Valiants 384 Portland Adventist Cougars 284 Nestucca Bobcats 130 67 Hosanna Christian Lions 68Madison Senators 909 Madison Senators 909 Scappoose Indians 721 Rainier Columbians 285 Knappa Loggers 121 57 North Lake Cowboys 65Roosevelt Roughriders 742 Roosevelt Roughriders 742 St. Helens Lions 842 4A-2 - Tri-Valley Conference (7) Warrenton Warriors 228 Vernonia Loggers 156 41 Paisley Broncos 36Wilson 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 336A-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 50Aloha Warriors 1794 Aloha Warriors 1794 Cascade Cougars 683 Molalla Indians 662 Amity Warriors 260 Chemawa Braves 236 49 Trinity Lutheran Saints 54Beaverton Beavers 1654 Beaverton Beavers 1654 Central Panthers 859 North Marion Huskies 530 Blanchet Catholic Cavaliers 225 Culver Bulldogs 181 75Jesuit 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 44Southridge Skyhawks 1614 Sunset Apollos 2123 Silverton Foxes 1149 Horizon Christian Hawks (TUAL) 151 Kennedy Trojans 152 44 Condon Blue Devils 35Sunset Apollos 2123 Westview Wildcats 2508 Wilsonville Wildcats 1077 4A-3 - Oregon West Conference (7) Riverdale Mavericks 241 Western Mennonite Pioneers 150 63 Dufur Rangers 80Tigard Tigers 1771 Junction City Tigers 492 Salem Academy Crusaders 235 Santiam Wolverines 137 49 Horizon Christian Hawks (HR) 68Tualatin Timberwolves 1770 6A-3 - Inter County Conference (6) 5A-3 - Southern Oregon League (7) Marist Catholic Spartans 563 Sheridan Spartans 211 87 Ione Cardinals 68Westview 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 676A-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 67Barlow Bruins 1528 Hermiston Bulldogs 1240 Marshfield Pirates 682 Sweet Home Huskies 639 3A-4 - Mountain Valley Conference (7) Jefferson Lions 259 (0) Spray Eagles 17Centennial Eagles 1477 Mountain View Cougars 1225 North Bend Bulldogs 676 Taft Tigers 359 Bandon Tigers 199 Monroe Dragons 125 46 Wheeler Falcons 24Central Catholic Rams 891 Summit Storm 1391 Springfield Millers 1078 Coquille Red Devils 216 Regis Rams 142 48Clackamas 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 73Gresham Gophers 1369 Centennial Eagles 1477 5A-4 - Midwestern League (8) Cottage Grove Lions 648 Pleasant Hill Billies 294 51 Echo Cougars 82Hermiston 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 87Oregon City Pioneers 1940 Clackamas Cavaliers 2297 Corvallis Spartans 1117 Douglas Trojans 352 Scio Loggers 257 Bandon Tigers 199 44 Griswold Grizzlies 58Reynolds 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 416A-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 46Century Jaguars 1437 South Albany Rebels 1158 Sutherlin Bulldogs 357 Irrigon Knights 209 Oakridge Warriors 120 (0) Powder Valley Badgers 69Forest Grove Vikings 1654 6A-5 - Three Rivers League (6) West Albany Bulldogs 1264 Nyssa Bulldogs 277 Reedsport Braves 165 63 Wallowa Cougars 58Glencoe Crimson Tide 1471 Century Jaguars 1437 Willamette Wolverines 1198 4A-5 - Skyline Conference (8) Riverside Pirates 211 72Lake 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 67Liberty Falcons 1372 Liberty Falcons 1372 Crook County Cowboys 703 Hidden Valley Mustangs 535 Bonanza Antlers 122 12 Burnt River Bulls 25Sherwood Bowmen 1569 Newberg Tigers 1414 Hood River Valley Eagles 1171 Klamath Union Pelicans 640 Canyonville Christian Pilots 134 78 Crane Mustangs 49St. Mary's Academy Blues 1435 Sherwood Bowmen 1569 Pendleton Buckaroos 779 Mazama Vikings 572 Glide Wildcats 181 78 Dayville Tigers 20West 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 346A-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 18Bend Lava Bears 1468 McMinnville Grizzles 1793 Rogue River Chieftains 208 45 Jordan Valley Mustangs 22McKay Scots 1768 McNary Celtics 1681 4A-6 - Greater Oregon League (4) 73 Long Creek Mountaineers 14McMinnville Grizzles 1793 South Salem Saxons 1578 Baker Bulldogs 434 Monument Tigers 19McNary Celtics 1681 Sprague Olympians 1490 La Grande Tigers 539 2A-6 - Wapiti League (8) Prairie City Panthers 36Mountain View Cougars 1225 West Salem Titans 1559 McLoughlin Pioneers 400 Enterprise Outlaws 115 Ukiah Cougars 28Newberg Tigers 1414 Ontario Tigers 541 Grant Union Prospectors 148South Salem Saxons 1578 6A-7 - Southwest Metro League (7) Heppner Mustangs 97Sprague Olympians 1490 Jesuit Crusaders 1294 Imbler Panthers 97Summit Storm 1391 Lake Oswego Lakers 1307 Pilot Rock Rockets 98West Salem Titans 1559 Lakeridge Pacers 1126 Stanfield Tigers 119

St. Mary's Academy Blues 1435 Union Bobcats 1076A-6 - Southern Oregon Conference (6) Tigard Tigers 1771 Weston-McEwen Tiger Scots 175Grants Pass Cavemen 1526 Tualatin Timberwolves 1770North Medford Black Tornado 1477 West Linn Lions 1707Roseburg Indians 1394 KEYSheldon Irish 1359 6A-8 - Southern Oregon Conference (6) Historical Placement / Play UpSouth Eugene Axemen 1345 Grants Pass Cavemen 1526 Denotes projected enrollment increaseSouth Medford Panthers 1545 North Medford Black Tornado 1477 Denotes potential interest in playing down

Roseburg Indians 1394 Denotes projected enrollment decrease KEYSheldon Irish 1359 Denotes geographic isolation Historical Placement / Play UpSouth Eugene Axemen 1345 Denotes projected enrollment increaseSouth Medford Panthers 1545 Denotes potential interest in playing down

Denotes projected enrollment decreaseDenotes geographic isolation

144

2 Pilot Rock Rockets 98 1 Catlin Gabel Eagles 308 4 Seaside Seagulls 3752 Union Bobcats 107 1 Clatskanie Tigers 216 4 Corbett Cardinals 3792 Santiam Wolverines 137 1 Oregon Episcopal Aardvarks 313 4 Tillamook Cheesemakers 5332 Gold Beach Panthers 143 1 Rainier Columbians 285 4 Ontario Tigers 5412 Oakland Oakers 173 1 Warrenton Warriors 228 4 Molalla Indians 6622 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 2492 Stanfield Tigers 119 2 De La Salle North Catholic Knights 308 4 Baker Bulldogs 4342 Monroe Dragons 125 2 Portland Adventist Cougars 284 4 Estacada Rangers 4742 Regis Rams 142 2 Riverdale Mavericks 241 4 La Grande Tigers 5392 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 3582 Enterprise Outlaws 115 3 Dayton Pirates 279 4 Sisters Outlaws 4042 Myrtle Point Bobcats 164 3 Taft Tigers 359 4 Klamath Union Pelicans 6402 Weston-McEwen Tiger Scots 175 3 Willamina Bulldogs 232 4 North Bend Bulldogs 6762 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 3202 Lost River Raiders 126 4 Irrigon Knights 209 4 Junction City Tigers 4922 Canyonville Christian Pilots 134 4 Nyssa Bulldogs 277 4 North Marion Huskies 5302 City Christian Lions 148 4 Riverside Pirates 211 4 Marist Catholic Spartans 5632 Reedsport Braves 165 4 Umatilla Vikings 318 4 Madras White Buffaloes 6412 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 3842 Oakridge Warriors 120 5 Douglas Trojans 352 4 Philomath Warriors 4442 Nestucca Bobcats 130 5 La Pine Hawks 324 4 Astoria Fishermen 5112 East Linn Christian Eagles 142 5 Pleasant Hill Billies 294 4 Hidden Valley Mustangs 5352 Vernonia Loggers 156 5 South Umpqua Lancers 336 4 Gladstone Gladiators 6312 Delphian School Dragons 162 5 Sutherlin Bulldogs 357 4 Sweet Home Huskies 639

2 Columbia Christian Knights 115 4 McLoughlin Pioneers 4002 Knappa Loggers 121 6 Creswell Bulldogs 342 4 Brookings–Harbor Bruins 4492 Grant Union Prospectors 148 6 Elmira Falcons 345 4 Henley Hornets 5812 Western Mennonite Pioneers 150 6 Santiam Christian Eagles 230 4 Stayton Eagles 6082 Kennedy Trojans 152 6 Scio Loggers 257 4 Phoenix Pirates 6212 Bonanza Antlers 122 6 Siuslaw Vikings 347 4 North Valley Knights 4622 Culver Bulldogs 181 6 Harrisburg Eagles 272 4 Marshfield Pirates 6822 Glide Wildcats 181 4 Cascade Cougars 6832 Bandon Tigers 1992 Neah-Kah-Nie Pirates 2012 Colton Vikings 2012 Rogue River Chieftains 2082 Sheridan Spartans 2112 Jefferson Lions 2592 Illinois Valley Cougars 2612 Gervais Cougars 2813 Lakeview Honkers 2241 Chemawa Braves 236

5 Crook County Cowboys 7035 The Dalles Riverhawks 7065 Scappoose Indians 7215 North Eugene Highlanders 7715 Parkrose Broncos 7745 Pendleton Buckaroos 7795 Redmond Panthers 8085 St. Helens Lions 8425 Ridgeview Ravens 854

144

5 Central Panthers 8595 Eagle Point Eagles 9115 Dallas Dragons 9185 Crescent Valley Raiders 9375 Ashland Grizzlies 9405 Churchill Lancers 10225 Putnam Kingsmen 10345 Lebanon Warriors 10525 Wilsonville Wildcats 10775 Springfield Millers 10785 Corvallis Spartans 11175 Silverton Foxes 1149

5Milwaukie / Arts Academy Mustangs 1152

5 Crater Comets 11585 South Albany Rebels 11585 Hood River Valley Eagles 11715 Thurston Colts 11745 Hillsboro Spartans 11955 Willamette Wolverines 11985 Sandy Pioneers 12155 West Albany Bulldogs 12645 Canby Cougars 13165 North Salem Vikings 1404

6 Jefferson Democrats 4176 Roosevelt Roughriders 7426 Benson Techmen 7506 Central Catholic Rams 8916 Madison Senators 9096 Lakeridge Pacers 11266 Wilson Trojans 12256 Mountain View Cougars 12256 Hermiston Bulldogs 12406 Jesuit Crusaders 12946 Lake Oswego Lakers 13076 South Eugene Axemen 13456 Franklin Quakers 13466 Sheldon Irish 13596 Gresham Gophers 13696 Liberty Falcons 13726 Grant Generals 13766 Summit Storm 13916 Roseburg Indians 13946 Newberg Tigers 14146 St. Mary's Academy Blues 14356 Century Jaguars 14376 Bend Lava Bears 14686 Glencoe Crimson Tide 14716 Centennial Eagles 1477

6North Medford Black Tornado 1477

6 Cleveland Warriors 14786 Sprague Olympians 14906 Grants Pass Cavemen 15266 Barlow Bruins 15286 South Medford Panthers 15456 West Salem Titans 15596 Sherwood Bowmen 15696 South Salem Saxons 15786 Lincoln Cardinals 16056 Southridge Skyhawks 16146 Beaverton Beavers 16546 Forest Grove Vikings 16546 McNary Celtics 1681

144

6 West Linn Lions 17076 McKay Scots 17686 Tualatin Timberwolves 17706 Tigard Tigers 17716 McMinnville Grizzles 17936 Aloha Warriors 17946 Oregon City Pioneers 19406 Sunset Apollos 21236 Reynolds Raiders 21426 Clackamas Cavaliers 22976 David Douglas Scots 24996 Westview Wildcats 25086 Mountainside Mavericks NEW

144

Powers Public Schools #31

PO Box 479 #1 High School Hill Road

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

145

1

Brad Garrett

From: Gary Roberts <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:43 AMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Classification and Redistricting

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

146

1

Brad Garrett

From: Howard Rub <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 4:19 PMTo: Peter Weber; Brad Garrett; Kyle Stanfield; [email protected]: classification system

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

147

1

Brad Garrett

From: Robert Hoepfl <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 11:25 AMTo: Brad Garrett; Kyle StanfieldCc: Rod HeyenSubject: Warrenton Placement in Proposals

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]

148

1

Brad Garrett

From: [email protected]: Friday, March 03, 2017 1:01 PMTo: Brad Garrett; [email protected]: 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

149

1

Brad Garrett

From: Mark Vidlak <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 1:13 PMTo: Kyle Stanfield; Brad GarrettSubject: reclassification

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"

150

1

Brad Garrett

From: Townsend, Eddie <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 9:01 PMTo: Brad Garrett; Kyle StanfieldSubject: Redistricting Suggestions from 2A basketball coaches perspectiveAttachments: Class 2A League Alignement for Proposal #10‐11.docx

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

151

Class 2A in Proposal adjustment for Proposals #10 or 11 This proposal for the class 2A makes minor changes to the proposed leagues/conference alignments. Most coaches feel smaller conferences allows for 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 leagues as intact as possible is the best thing for everyone involved. This would put minimum 38 and maximum 43 schools in the 2A and Would level out the 3A to around the same if those schools did not play down.

Please email me back to redo or adjust anything for 2A representation. 25/25 coaches I have talked with favor the following league alignments Northwest Conference (8) City Christian Lions Columbia Christian Knights Delphian Dragons Gaston Greyhounds Portland Christian Royals Faith Bible Falcons Knappa Loggers Vernonia Loggers Tri-River Conference (7) Chemawa Braves Gervais Cougars Jefferson Lions Kennedy Trojans Regis Rams St. Paul Buckaroos Western Mennonite Pioneers Emerald Valley Conference (7) Central Linn Cobras Crow Cougars Culver Bulldogs East Linn Eagles Monroe Dragons Santiam Wolverines

***Chemawa, Jefferson, and Gervais come into Tri River but no reason to break up 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). ***Add Jefferson if they play down. They can slide into Mountain Valley League if they stay 3A Sunset Conference (6) Nestucca Bobcats Gold Beach Panthers Myrtle Point Bobcats Reedsport Braves Toledo Boomers Waldport Irish Mountain View Conference (6-8) Bonanza Antlers Canyonville Christian Pilots Glide Wildcats ***Lakeview (play down?) Lost River Raiders Oakland Oakers Oakridge Warriors ***Riddle (play down?) ***Lakeview to 3A FarWest, ***Riddle to 1A Skyline Wapiti (8) Enterprise Grant Union Heppner Imbler Pilot Rock Stanfield Union Weston-McEwen

Second option for 2A Leagues***

151

Northwest Conference (8) City Christian Lions Columbia Christian Knights Gaston Greyhounds Portland Christian Royals Faith Bible Falcons Nestucca Bobcats Knappa Loggers Vernonia Loggers Tri-River Conference (7,8 or 9 if add) Culver Bulldogs Delphian Dragons Kennedy Trojans Santiam Wolverines Regis Rams St. Paul Buckaroos Western Mennonite Pioneers ***Chemawa or Gervais come into Tri River but no reason to break up 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 Crow Cougars East Linn Eagles Monroe Dragons Oakridge Warriors Toledo Boomers Waldport Irish ***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

Gold Beach Panthers ***Lakeview (play down?) Lost River Raiders Oakland Oakers Myrtle Point Bobcats ***Riddle (play down?) Reedsport Braves ***Lakeview to 3A FarWest ***Riddle to 1A Skyline Wapiti (8) Enterprise Grant Union Heppner Imbler Pilot Rock Stanfield Union Weston-McEwen

Class 2A in Proposal adjustment for Proposals #12 or 13 If we were to go to the 5A classification system most coaches feel the cutoff of proposal #12 is the most reasonable at 204. League alignments are what they are. I think if you polled most 2A schools they would want to stay at the current 6A model and current league formations FOR the MOST part! I have done my due diligence on this. Thanks

151

1

Brad Garrett

From: Darren Shryock <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 11:33 AMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Classification and Redistricting Committee

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

152

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

153

Jeff Roberts, Principal Brian Purnell, Assistant Principal Jason Boyd, CAA, Athletic Director Travis Cave, Counselor Kalyn Knudsvig, Counselor

1901 N Holladay Dr. SEASIDE, OREGON 97138 503-738-5586 FAX 503-738-5589 www.shs.seaside.k12.or.us

Seaside High School Preparing All Students for a

Productive Future

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.

154

Jeff Roberts, Principal Brian Purnell, Assistant Principal Jason Boyd, CAA, Athletic Director Travis Cave, Counselor Kalyn Knudsvig, Counselor

1901 N Holladay Dr. SEASIDE, OREGON 97138 503-738-5586 FAX 503-738-5589 www.shs.seaside.k12.or.us

Seaside High School Preparing All Students for a

Productive Future

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

154

1

Brad Garrett

From: Kyle StanfieldSent: Friday, March 10, 2017 8:53 AMTo: Chris KnudsenCc: Brad GarrettSubject: 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 <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Reclassification

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Beck <[email protected]> Date: Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:46 AM Subject: Reclassification To: chris knudsen <[email protected]>

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]

155

1

Brad Garrett

From: Usher, Larry <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 10:01 AMTo: Peter Weber; Brad Garrett; Kyle StanfieldCc: Maiocco, Fred; Spoo, TomSubject: Fwd: Hoops next year

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 <[email protected]> Date: March 10, 2017 at 9:51:33 AM PST To: "Usher, Larry" <[email protected]> Subject: Hoops next year

***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

156

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

Sandy High School 37400 Bell St. - Sandy, OR 97055

Matt Newell, Athletic Director ext. 7114 503-668-8011

Rita McCombs, Secretary ext. 7106

503-668-7646 (fax)

SHS Pioneers

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,

157

Brian Halter – AD Glide HS

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

Miles traveled 3204 2092 35% fewer miles travel

in Mountain View

Miles traveled in adverse weather conditions.

(>2500’ elev.) 1840 0

100% fewer miles traveled in adverse weather conditions

Hours traveled 29.5 20.7 30% fewer hours

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

159

Scanned by CamScanner

160

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

161

1

Brad Garrett

From: Josh Grotting <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:26 PMTo: Brad Garrett; Kyle StanfieldSubject: Classification Committee Correspondence

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

162

1

Brad Garrett

From: Jamie P. Ongman <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 10:03 AMTo: Kyle Stanfield; Brad GarrettSubject: Classification input

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!!!!

163

1

Brad Garrett

From: Spencer, Wayne <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 1:38 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: To Classification and Districting Committee

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

165

1

Brad Garrett

From: Tyler Kelleher <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 2:48 PMTo: Kyle Stanfield; Brad GarrettSubject: Reclassification

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

166

1

Brad Garrett

From: Gary Roberts <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:03 PMTo: Brad GarrettCc: Evan BrownSubject: Message to Classification and Redistricting

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

167

1

Brad Garrett

From: Evan Brown <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:50 PMTo: Brad Garrett; Kyle Stanfield; DeAnn Jenness; Aaron Schemerhorn; Bill Burns; Brian Brands; Brian Miller AD;

Buell Gonzales; Chris Johnson; Craig Rothenberger; Darren Shryock; Dave Ehrhardt; Erik Lathan; Evan Brown; Gary Roberts; Gary Thorson; Greg Mulkey; Heidi Hermansen; Howard Rub; Jacob Pence; Jason Boyd; Jay Rodighiero; Joel Sobotka; Josh Grotting; JP Soulagnet; Kevin Wilson; Manny Alvaarado; Matt Wiles; Mike Forrester; Rex Metcalfe; Rob Bonner; Robert Medley; Scott Mason; Steve Brown; Ted Yates; Tim Smith; Toby Walker; Tom Loney; Trevor Syring; Tyler Kelleher; Vic Lease; Wayne Spencer

Subject: Classification and Districting Correspondence

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.

168

2

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 to 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

168

1

Brad Garrett

From: James Hitt <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 5:02 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Classification & Districting Committee (Draft #13, Option 2‐5 Class Model)Attachments: OSAA 2018‐22 Classification.xlsx

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

169

2018-22 OSAA CLASSIFICATION TIMEBLOCK

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

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)

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

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

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

169

1

Brad Garrett

From: Ralph Brown <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:15 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Re‐districting

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

170

1

Brad Garrett

From: Trevor Syring <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 8:58 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Reclassification

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

171

To Whom It May Concern:

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

understand what a change in classification can do to all levels of play (freshmen, JV,

Varsity). I have coached in some of those games at the sub-varsity level where all you

can tell your kids is do the best that you can. The overwhelming majority of the 4A

athletic directors have been adamant support of the 6 class system. I think Wayne Spencer

and Greg Mulkey may have said it best at our 4A Athletic Director meeting this winter.

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

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

soccer have just two teams, varsity and JV, while boys’ and girls’ basketball will have

three teams, freshman, JV, and Varsity. This means we are “like” schools. Gladstone is

a unique school because we are nestled between several 5A and 6A schools. On several

occasions we have scheduled games with some of our neighboring schools at the sub-

varsity level. From my experience, we are not alike because we schedule without

knowing what we will see on the other sideline.

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

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

game or two, but when you combine multiple games through several seasons, there will

be a mass exodus in athletes turning out for that sport. Programs do not grow, nor is this

the experience we all want for our athletes. We have seen this cycle before. What

happens is that the JV level then becomes nonexistent. All levels of sport matter. The

success of a program is not measured by win-loss records or by championships. If that

were the case most of us fail every year. The measure should be answered by the

question posed at the end of each season, “Will I do this again?” If we have athletes,

coaches, and parents saying, “No”, then we did it wrong. Let’s get this right. Stay at a 6

classification system.

Respectfully,

Ted Yates

Athletic Director

Gladstone High School

Athletic Director

Ted Yates

Athletic Secretary

Denise Durkee

Football

Wayne Harris

Volleyball

Cathy Mitchell

Cross Country

Jamie Jenson

Boys Soccer

Ryan Hardwick

Girls Soccer

Greg Hess

Cheer

Angie Schassen

Dance

Denise Harris

Boys Basketball

Cody Aker

Girls Basketball

Pat Scott

Wrestling

Michael Hess

Swim

Jackie Holstrom

Baseball

Casey Webster

Softball

David Just

Boys Track

Bob Johnson

Girls Track

Greg Hess

Boys Golf

Izaak Thoman

GGllaaddssttoonnee HHiigghh SScchhooooll AAtthhlleettiiccss 18800 Portland Ave., Gladstone, Oregon 97027 (503) 655-2544 ▪ Fax (503) 655-0320

172

1

Brad Garrett

From: Maiocco, Fred <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:01 AMTo: [email protected]; Gustavo Balderas; [email protected]; [email protected];

[email protected]; [email protected]; Raymon Smith ([email protected]); [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Brad Garrett; Kyle Stanfield

Cc: Usher, Larry; Peter Weber; [email protected]: Update for reclassification membersAttachments: WIAA request 20170306.pdf

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,

173

2

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

173

1

Brad Garrett

From: Chris Johnson <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 2:50 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: "The other 30%"

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.

174

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

28 whyweplay

The following article is the second of a four-part series in The Prep Coach focusing on the importance of whatwe do as coaches and the value of participation in educational athletics.

Preface by Bubba Sullivan, Northfield High School Head Football CoachA 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 couldcarry into life. We believed the true measure of our success should not be wins and losses, as so many in societyfeel, but instead our success should be measured by the quality of the students experience and by the lasting valuesand 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 toshare 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 timeand I was worried that our players might be looking forward to the end of the season. I was talking to our seniorcaptain, Max Weaver, and asked him how he felt the season was going. He said, “Great Coach.” I was surprisedand asked him what he meant. He said, “Coach, the guys are working hard, keeping positive attitudes, and we arehaving fun playing together every day. We have been competitive in every game, we never give up, and the gameshave 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, regardlessof the wins and losses. He reminded me that by intentionally teaching character traits and measuring our successbased 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.

WHY WE PLAYJust Fine or All In— The Choice Makes a DifferenceBy Jody Redman, Associate Director, MSHSL

Sports are a valued part of our culture. We valuesports because we believe the students who are involvedacquire something meaningful through their participation.But have we ever looked closely at how they benefit? Whatdo the students who participate in our programs actuallyget? When the game is over and the score is final, whatdo they win?

Participation in sports provides students with experi-ences they can draw upon for a lifetime. Valuable life lessons can be learned from participating on a sportsteam—lessons such as working through adversity, becom-ing disciplined, finding the courage necessary to move out-side one’s comfort zone to learn something new, andworking as a member of a team. The potential for thisgrowth only exists if the coach is AWAKE. Awake coachesrecognize that something deep and lasting is possible whena student fights through failure. Awake coaches under-stand that when a student takes a risk and makes a mistake that there is an incredible potential for growth tooccur—growth that, if fostered, will impact that student fora lifetime.

In the book Top 20 Teachers, the authors share thatthe most effective coaches “are as intentional in developinglife skills and habits in students as they are in developing

the backstroke in swimming or the wrist shot in hockey.” Atevery practice and in every game there is an opportunity toteach students a multitude of lessons through their par-ticipation. But this won’t happen if the coach is ASLEEP —unaware of the power coaches possess to make a lastingimpact and where development of the whole student is leftto chance. We as coaches have to be awake — aware,alert and willing to focus our attention on more than win-ning and the development of physical skills and insteadfocus on what students really should be getting from us:the development of life skills.

AsleepAs coaches and educators, are we awake or asleep?

Do we falsely assume that the students who participate inour programs are learning valuable life skills and positivecharacter attributes simply because they are a member ofour team?

If we ask students after a competition, “Hey, how’d yado,” will they only answer with “we won” or “we lost” or pro-vide us with some personal statistic. Or have we made theeffort to create awareness in them that so much more ispossible?

Continued on Page 29

176

whyweplay 29

If we as coaches are asleep—unaware and unrespon-sive to the needs of our students—then our students willnever know the extent of what is really possible. InSideOutCoaching author Joe Ehrmann asserts that “one of thegreat myths in our culture is that sports builds character,as if doing a handstand, running a race, hitting a curveball,or simply suiting up are sufficient to strengthen a youngperson’s moral fiber. Unless a coach teaches and modelscharacter and encourages its development in athletes, it ismore likely organized sports will spoil play and underminethe development of the very character and virtue they claimto build.”

AwakeTo develop better people, not just athletes, we must be

intentional—we must be awake. The greater call of a coachis to be awake—mindful of what students in our programsare really getting. Our main role as a coach is the humandevelopment of every student on our team. Winning is theby-product of something bigger, an awareness in us thattransforms a game of throwing a ball through a hoop intoan opportunity to create caring, empathetic, responsiblemembers of society. When coaches are awake, they takethe student’s learning of physical skills and Xs and Os to thenext level. They concurrently teach them the Ys, the last-ing values acquired through the learning of those samephysical skills.

Defining Success with “Y” ValuesConsciously creating a game plan is necessary to trans-

form a student’s experience from only Xs and Os to value-filled Ys. Asking the right questions, creating awareness,and providing experiences with greater depth are key tobeing successful. When this happens, success will nolonger be measured only by the outcome on the score-board or the acquisition of a new physical skill. Instead, thetrue measurement of success will be seen in the studentswho learn the valuable life lessons participation in educa-tion-based athletics provides.

So what are the desired outcomes of participation? Thefollowing are some crucial outcomes of education-basedathletics as presented by Top 20 Training’s concept How’dYa Do (www.top20training.com):

To have funFor many adults, recreation is more like ‘wreck-reation’.We are driven as we play games to compete with a necessity to win and prove our worth. What is it thatmakes a grown person swear and throw a golf clubwhen that little white ball doesn’t go straight? Our playis often not about having fun, but rather about gettingstressed out. Awake coaches have a responsibility todirect practices and co-curricular activities in such amanner that young people have fun. This doesn’t mean,of course, that it’s only fun. Hard work, adversity, dis-appointment, and not getting everything a kid wantsshould also be part of the experience.

To learnAwake coaches realize that sports and other co-cur-riculars are part of the overall educational experienceof students. They help young people discover the pow-erful life lessons that are available in these activities.Some of these lessons will help students work more effectively with others throughout their lives. Besidesfocusing on touchdowns, rebounds and musical instru-ments, they open youngsters up to these possibilities bysharing things they themselves are learning and askingstudents what they are getting from these experiences.

To improveWe cannot improve by only doing what we can alreadydo. Awake coaches who expect improvement encouragestudents to take healthy risks and stretch outside theircomfort zone. This expectation helps students overcomethe fear of failure and the fear of making mistakes.

To help others succeedIt must be the expectation of every student that theylearn to help others succeed. Coaches must convey thatexpectation to their students. They help them becomeaware of the importance of this and provide opportuni-ties for it to happen. By helping young people help oth-ers succeed, coaches guide their students toward themost direct route to their own success. Think about thepower of this outcome—it is those who lift othersaround them who will become great future leaders.

To conduct yourself wellMany times in the heat of an athletic contest, players,coaches, and fans lose sight of their values and act inways that tarnish their reputation. Embarrassing behavior on the court, on the sidelines and in thestands has unfortunately become too common in manyathletic events. As a rule, players, coaches, and spec-tators regret those negative behaviors after the contest. It is important that coaches are vigilant abouttheir teams’ and fans’ behavior during events. No matter how the ball bounces or how the officials’ callsgo, awake coaches must always do their best to main-tain dignity, composure, and perspective.

To appreciate the opponentOpponent does not mean enemy. Yet if aliens fromouter space observed many of our athletic events, theyprobably would not notice a difference between thesetwo words. Often fans, athletes, and coaches treat opponents as if they are the enemy. As coaches strivingto improve, we should be looking to learn from our opponents and appreciating skills or qualities they bring to the competition. The awake coach knows thattheir opponents offer challenges and opportunities to develop physically and mentally. They also offer friendships that are built on mutual respect and canlast for a lifetime.

Continued from Page 28

Continued on Page 30

176

30 whyweplay

To do your bestJohn Wooden defined success as “peace of mind,which is a direct result of self-satisfaction in knowingyou did your best to become the best you are capableof becoming.” Wooden’s purpose was not to coach hisplayers to be better than someone else or comparethemselves to others. He coached for more than win-ning. He coached his team to be the best that theycould be as a team. The fact that UCLA won 88 consecutive basketball games and twelve nationalchampionships resulted from Wooden’s mantra ofbeing “the best you are capable of becoming.”

To learn life skills (Star Qualities)Coaches should understand that blocking and tacklingskills are of no value to young people once they stopplaying football. However, the Star Qualities that students can attain in sports and co-curriculars arevaluable for a lifetime. It is the awake coach’s role tohelp students develop internal strengths, social skills,and problem solving skills that can make a positive difference in their lives during their school years andbeyond. It is important that the children who are participating learn not only the sport skills being taught,but also the important qualities of confidence, self-discipline, courage, and teamwork.

To learn from both winning and losingWinning and losing are significant events in students’lives. Awake coaches realize that both winning and losing offer wonderful and potentially dangerous resultsfor young people. Students who experience winning benefit by learning that they have what it takes to besuccessful. This can help develop their confidence andmotivate them to strive for even greater challenges. Onthe other hand, winning has such a high value in ourculture that it can create pressure on youth to win atall costs. Furthermore, the emphasis on winning canresult in young people believing that their inner worthonly comes from achievement.

If guided properly, kids can benefit from losing. Los-ing provides a healthy perspective. It keeps us humbleand highlights areas where improvement can be made.

However, losing without having significant experiencesof success can diminish a student’s confidence. It candevelop in a student a reluctance to try things in the future unless success is assured. The fear of failing orlosing can keep kids in their comfort zone. As coaches,we know there are positives and negatives gleaned onboth sides of the winning and losing ledger; we must beintentional to ensure our athletes have the same understanding.

What did we get? It may be a cliché, but the enemy of “the best” is not

“the worst.” The enemy of “the best” is “just fine.” The experiences our students are having may be “just fine” butcan we make a commitment to give them more? Can wechallenge ourselves to kick it up a notch, see our role ascoaches differently, provide more for our students, and be“all in”? You can choose to accept “just fine” or you canchoose to be “all in” and commit to being awake and making a difference.

Be committed and give your students more this sea-son; give them experiences that will be the foundation forwhich they will build a successful life. So when asked at theconclusion of a practice, game or season, “What did weget?” you can answer by saying, “My students got an experience that prepared them for more than a game.They acquired the skills necessary to be prepared for life.”

This article, written by Jody Redman, MSHSL AssociateDirector and Troy Urdahl, St. Anthony Village Activities Director and Head Baseball Coach and is the second offour articles to appear in The Prep Coach this year. Thenext issue will focus on the role failure and mistakes playin the development of our students.

Weekly lessons have been designed for coaches to teachthe “Y” values discussed in this article. You may findthem on the rotating front page of the League’s websiteunder the Education header at www.mshsl.org. We encourage you to utilize this resource as a starting pointor as a supplement to develop the “Y” values in the students on your team.

Continued from Page 29

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.)

176

1

Brad Garrett

From: Kyle StanfieldSent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 12:24 PMTo: Kellen PetersCc: Dee Dee Collins; Brad GarrettSubject: 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 <[email protected]> wrote:

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]

177

1

Brad Garrett

From: Mike Bussard <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 8:20 AMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Input for Classification

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]

178

1

Brad Garrett

From: Benjamin Bonser <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 2:41 PMTo: Brad GarrettSubject: Future Classification and Districting

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

180

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

181

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.

182

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

184

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

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

Sunset High School IB World School John Huelskamp, Principal Shawn Davitt, Assistant Principal Chris Bick, Assistant Principal Cheri Martin, Assistant Principal

185

3/17/17 6AData 22possibleinbothcolumns

School #ofNOTintheTOP5oftheirLeague #ofTOP3finishesinLeague FreeReduced%

1 20 0 83%

2 NorthSalem 20 0 78%

3 Century 18 1 35%

4 Madison 17 2 63%

5 DavidDouglas 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 SouthEugene 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 ForestGrove 10 3 50%

23 WestAlbany 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'sAcad. 7 1 0%

33 LakeOswego 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 SouthMedford 4 14 44%

39 GrantsPass 4 5 51%

40 SouthSalem 4 13 51%

41 OregonCity 4 10 38%

42 Wilson 4 10 20%

43 Sheldon 2 19 25%

44 Grant 2 14 19%

45 CentralCatholic 2 18 0%

46 NorthMedford 1 14 43%

47 WestSalem 0 17 38%

48 Clackamas 0 21 18%

49 Lincoln 0 20 11%

50 WestLinn 0 21 11%

51 Jesuit 0 21 0%

185

3/17/17 5AData 22possibleinbothcolumns

School #ofNOTintheTOP5oftheirLeague #ofTOP3finishesintheirLeagueFreeReduced

%

1 Milwaukie/MilwaukieAcad.oftheArts20 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 EaglePoint 14 3 50%

9 Lebanon 13 8 59%

10 SouthAlbany 13 1 49%

11 NorthEugene 12 4 54%

12 Springfield 10 9 70%

13 Sandy 8 6 38%

14 Dallas 8 6 29%

15 Liberty 8 10 37%

16 TheDalles 7 4 47%

17 Crater 7 4 52%

18 Pendleton 6 12 42%

19HoodRiverValley 6 12 53%

20 Putnam 5 5 38%

21 MountainView 5 9 43%

22 Ashland 5 12 35%

23 LaSallePrep 5 12 0%

24 Central 4 5 51%

25 CrescentValley 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 MaristCatholic 0 19 0%

185

1

Brad Garrett

From: Jason Scanlan <[email protected]>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 9:48 AMTo: Kyle Stanfield; Brad GarrettSubject: Reclassification: North Marion

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]

186

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

C O Q U I L L E J R / S R H I G H S C H O O L

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

187

1

Brad Garrett

From: Kyle StanfieldSent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 8:21 PMTo: Dennis BurkeCc: Dave Hood; K. T. Emerson; Dan SchumakerSubject: 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 <[email protected]> wrote: > > The current staff at Wilsonville High School has reviewed Proposals 10, 11, 12, and 13. > > The committee has asked for feedback regarding league placements, and classifications, and we greatly appreciate the request for information and opinions. > > We urge the committee to drop proposal #12. It puts the state back to what we moved away from prior to the adoption of 6 classifications. It sacrifices medium to larger schools of the current 5A classification. As we looked at the large leagues, it appears the goal was to create a preconceived bracket for strong schools, 2/3 to a league, and then fill them in with all others, as fodder. The value and meaning of being in a league will be lost in this proposal. > > Wilsonville, with changing demographics, enrollment numbers (current & projected), and the active numbers across the board for all sports and levels, does not fit in with a league as shown in the five classification proposal #12's Mt Hood League, especially with the enrollment numbers so wide. > > Wilsonville is not a 6A school in a six classification system, and it is not a 5A school in a five classification system. Please give this careful consideration in future proposals. We are at 1077, and will be around that number for a few more years, with a growing percentage of families on free and reduced lunch plans. > > Not that it is or should be a concern for the committee, but we'd like to share that during new boundary lines discussions within the West Linn‐Wilsonville District, the Wilsonville end of the district was generally viewed as the lower tier side of the district. We continue to battle equity issues in terms of adding quality new fields and upgrades for the middle schools and community on our end of the district. This would perpetuate the challenges we face, and as some continue to perceive Wilsonville High School as a school which closely resembles West Linn, Lake Oswego, Clackamas, etc. > > As a staff, we favor proposal 11 and 10. In our opinion, the 6 Classification models are making the most sense and are more in alignment with the criteria and charge the committee has been provided and/or has developed. After 5 rounds, it appears the committee should look at tweaking and improving the current 6 classification system, and shift away from creating major changes to a system that the state has adapted to, and has made functional. > > We are aware there is some support for proposal 13, and if there is a decision to go 5 classifications, we can support 13, with reservations. We feel that for a number of schools, proposal 13 creates similar concerns Wilsonville has with proposal #12. Newport, Cascade, and Mollala are a few of those examples, with too much disparity within leagues. > > We want to thank the committee for it's time and hard work in taking on this endeavor. We also want to thank you for the opportunity to share our thoughts. Unfortunately, we may not be able to have someone present at the March 20 meeting.

188

2

> > Please let me know if there are questions for me. If it is best to present our thoughts at a meeting, please advise accordingly. > > Sincerely, > > Dennis Burke > > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > Sent from my iPad > *********** This message scanned by GWAVA Anti‐Spam and AntiVirus System. *********** >

188

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

189

March17,2017DearClassificationandDistrictingCommittee,WearesendingyouthisletteronbehalfofForestGrove,McMinnville,andtheNewbergSchoolDistrict.AfterreviewingthelatestproposalsreleasedbytheClassificationCommittee,itisstillcleartousthatwesupporta5classificationsystemandspecificallyproposal13option1.Ourschoolshavebeencompetingwithoneanothersince1912andhavecontinueduntilthelastclassificationcommitteedecision.Priortothat,andformostofOregonAthletichistory,ourschoolshadbeeninthesameconference.Competinginthesameconferencehasallowedustobuildrelationships,andhaveintentionalplanningforourprograms,becausewehavesimilarsocio‐economiccommunities.Wefeela5classificationsystem,withmoreteamsineachclassification,allowopportunitiesateachlevelofclassification1‐5tobuildconferencesthatminimizeimpactontheclassroomandprovidesafetravelandcompetition.Italsoallowsforplacingequalnumbersonteamsineachconferencetobenefitschedulingoutsidetheconference.Inproposal13competingwiththeHillsboroschooldistrictandCanbyprovidesusthisopportunity.Wefeelthatthepurposeofcreatingleagues(conferences)istrulytocreateaneducational‐athleticprogrambasedonschoolswithsimilardemographics‐“likeschools”‐thatcanfacethesamechallenges,worktogether,sharetogether,andmostimportantlygrowtogetherinaneducation‐basedathleticconference.Itisthisopportunitytoshareresourcesaroundprofessionaldevelopmentthathelpsourstudentsontheplayingfieldandintheclassroom.Ifthe6Aclassificationsystemworked,whyhastheclassificationcommitteeeveryfouryearscreatedmajorshiftsandredistrictinginthestateatalllevels?A5Classificationsystemwouldbegintogivethestatetheopportunitytoprovidesomestability,asitwasinthe3Aand4Aclassificationsystems.Thiswouldallowschoolstobuildthoserelationshipsandkeepconferencesintactforthoseveryreasonsmentionedabove.Itisevidenttous,andmanyothers,thatitistimetogotoa5classificationsystemtocreatethosetraditions,buildequity,andminimizetravel.WealsobelieveitistheChampionshipcommittee’sjobtocreateastructureforteamstogettopostseasonplay.Thiscommitteeshouldnotbecreatingconferenceswiththeultimategoaltogetschoolstothestatetournamentorwinningastatechampionship.Withina5classificationstructure,thecommitteeisaffordedtheopportunitytoexaminewhatschoolsshouldcompetewithineachconference.HighSchoolathleticsshouldbeaboutcompetinginyourconference,notwinningstatetitles.

190

TogetherwithSuperintendents,Principals,AthleticDirectors,Teachers,Coaches,andSupportStaffs,wecanbuildacohesiveconference.Thisconferenceisbuiltontheseworkingrelationshipsthatallowschoolsofsimilardemographics,geographiesandphilosophiestocollaborate.Inthepastwehavemetregularlytoshareideasonhowwecanpromoteacademicandathleticsuccess,createafanculturethatispositiveandappropriate,andsupporttheartsasawaytobuildstudentengagement.Inclosingwehaveallseenthechangesarounda6classificationsystemeveryfouryears.Itistimetoprovidesomestabilitywitha5classificationsystem,thatasyouknow,hasmoreopportunitiestofixwhathasailedthe6classificationsystemoverthepasttwodecades.Sincerely,DougThompson TimBurke RyanMcIrvinAthleticDirector AthleticDirector AthleticDirectorForestGroveHigh NewbergHigh McMinnvilleHigh

190

1

Kyle Stanfield

From: Brad GarrettSent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:36 AMTo: Kyle StanfieldSubject: Fwd: Letter to Classification and Districting Committee

Brad Garrett, CAA Assistant Executive Director Oregon School Activities Association Begin forwarded message:

From: "Jodi Drescher" <[email protected]> Date: March 19, 2017 at 11:30:58 PM PDT To: <[email protected]> Subject: Letter to Classification and Districting Committee

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

191

2

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.

191

1

Kyle Stanfield

From: Brad GarrettSent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:41 AMTo: Kyle StanfieldSubject: 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" <[email protected]> Date: March 20, 2017 at 12:33:13 AM PDT To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: if the attachment did not go through here are the notes in an email.

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.

192

143 senators 909 madison senators 909 scappoose indians 721 rainier columbians 285 knappa loggers...

Documents