blade12
Nothing groundbreaking out of today's BOC meeting although I find this matter to be of interest.  The end run around the WIAA being able to make rules that cost schools money seems to have been averted but I have to ask, if member schools are the ones bringing these petitions, how many schools have to support a petition before the BOC takes a vote on the matter?  Seems that a unanimous vote to not support this petition is not representing those schools that thought enough of it to create the petition in the first place. 

The third amendment brought forward by membership petition would require all changes to maximum game limits, as well as any WIAA adaptation to NFHS rules that would lead to a financial impact on schools must go to the Annual Meeting for a vote by the entire membership. The Board voted unanimously not to support the amendment.

The only other news was addressing the boarding schools and the apparent loophole in getting around the transfer eligibility matter which was a topic a bit here in one of the threads about transfers and why kids at these schools get immediate eligibility vs many others who do not.

Two of the amendments addressing residence schools were advanced to the Annual Meeting with the Board’s support. The first amendment defines a residential school, and the second removes an unintended advantage of a transfer student attending and boarding at a residence school at the beginning of 11th grade that had resulted in unrestricted eligibility.

The annual meeting is sometime in mid to late April.
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:
Nothing groundbreaking out of today's BOC meeting although I find this matter to be of interest.  The end run around the WIAA being able to make rules that cost schools money seems to have been averted but I have to ask, if member schools are the ones bringing these petitions, how many schools have to support a petition before the BOC takes a vote on the matter?  Seems that a unanimous vote to not support this petition is not representing those schools that thought enough of it to create the petition in the first place. 

The third amendment brought forward by membership petition would require all changes to maximum game limits, as well as any WIAA adaptation to NFHS rules that would lead to a financial impact on schools must go to the Annual Meeting for a vote by the entire membership. The Board voted unanimously not to support the amendment.

The only other news was addressing the boarding schools and the apparent loophole in getting around the transfer eligibility matter which was a topic a bit here in one of the threads about transfers and why kids at these schools get immediate eligibility vs many others who do not.

Two of the amendments addressing residence schools were advanced to the Annual Meeting with the Board’s support. The first amendment defines a residential school, and the second removes an unintended advantage of a transfer student attending and boarding at a residence school at the beginning of 11th grade that had resulted in unrestricted eligibility.

The annual meeting is sometime in mid to late April.

The BOC votes today were advisory only; passage of the amendments is dependent on a membership vote at the Annual Meeting. 

The amendment about BOC powers and "financial impact" on schools is very vague and could lead to a number of issues potentially about what the BOC can do and what must go to membership. Also, it goes against the current Constitution, which would need to be further amended potentially to avoid conflicting regulations.
The Packers/Badgers/Brewers are like your children; you don't love them because they're good, you love them because they're yours.
10/22/2010 -- 598,210 pageviews for WSN
Follow me on Twitter: @travisWSN
Quote 0 0
blade12

The BOC votes today were advisory only; passage of the amendments is dependent on a membership vote at the Annual Meeting. 

The amendment about BOC powers and "financial impact" on schools is very vague and could lead to a number of issues potentially about what the BOC can do and what must go to membership. Also, it goes against the current Constitution, which would need to be further amended potentially to avoid conflicting regulations.


Changes to maximum game limits and changes to NFHS approved game rules is pretty precise if you ask me.  Can you give an example of a vague or unintended cost that this may involve? In a sense this is also keeping the WIAA in line with NFHS standards.
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:


Changes to maximum game limits and changes to NFHS approved game rules is pretty precise if you ask me.  Can you give an example of a vague or unintended cost that this may involve? In a sense this is also keeping the WIAA in line with NFHS standards.

The amendment doesn't say the WIAA BOC can't make state adaptations to NFHS rules, it is saying the BOC can't make adaptions that have a "financial impact". That is a pretty vague statement. What is a "financial impact"? What regulations would fall under that? The biggest thing they're targeting is the shot clock, which is pretty clear. I get why schools would want such a change decided on by the membership instead of the BOC.

But what about changing to 18 minute halves instead of four, 8-minute quarters? Would that have fallen under that guideline? The mercy rule? Reduction in basketball pregame warmup time? 
The Packers/Badgers/Brewers are like your children; you don't love them because they're good, you love them because they're yours.
10/22/2010 -- 598,210 pageviews for WSN
Follow me on Twitter: @travisWSN
Quote 0 0
blade12

The amendment doesn't say the WIAA BOC can't make state adaptations to NFHS rules, it is saying the BOC can't make adaptions that have a "financial impact". That is a pretty vague statement. What is a "financial impact"? What regulations would fall under that? The biggest thing they're targeting is the shot clock, which is pretty clear. I get why schools would want such a change decided on by the membership instead of the BOC.

But what about changing to 18 minute halves instead of four, 8-minute quarters? Would that have fallen under that guideline? The mercy rule? Reduction in basketball pregame warmup time? 


Agree it's an effort to address the shot clock issue with maybe a few other items in mind for the future.  What this does is keep the WIAA operating within the NFHS rules and guidelines or going to the full membership in order to attempt to make a change. The WIAA botched the shot clock matter and now they have the schools on high alert as to the financial commitments that just a select few are making for every SD around the state. If the NFHS adopts a shot clock provision then this amendment no longer applies and the WIAA could implement it without a full vote as it would be within the NFHS rules.

I think the bigger question schools are starting to ask is how far outside the NFHS rules and guidelines do you want to allow the WIAA to venture and I see this as a measure to try and ensure it isn't too far off that path.

Changes to 18 minute halves, mercy rule etc do not involve any cost. 
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:


Agree it's an effort to address the shot clock issue with maybe a few other items in mind for the future.  What this does is keep the WIAA operating within the NFHS rules and guidelines or going to the full membership in order to attempt to make a change. The WIAA botched the shot clock matter and now they have the schools on high alert as to the financial commitments that just a select few are making for every SD around the state. If the NFHS adopts a shot clock provision then this amendment no longer applies and the WIAA could implement it without a full vote as it would be within the NFHS rules.

I think the bigger question schools are starting to ask is how far outside the NFHS rules and guidelines do you want to allow the WIAA to venture and I see this as a measure to try and ensure it isn't too far off that path.

Changes to 18 minute halves, mercy rule etc do not involve any cost. 

Sure they do. 18-minute halves (depending on who you ask) increased the amount of time for games. This increases the amount of time needed to pay workers (in theory, in some places). Officials in some areas have pushed for increased fees to cover the additional time. There are other regulations where the ambiguity of financial impact comes into play as well.
The Packers/Badgers/Brewers are like your children; you don't love them because they're good, you love them because they're yours.
10/22/2010 -- 598,210 pageviews for WSN
Follow me on Twitter: @travisWSN
Quote 0 0
blade12

Sure they do. 18-minute halves (depending on who you ask) increased the amount of time for games. This increases the amount of time needed to pay workers (in theory, in some places). Officials in some areas have pushed for increased fees to cover the additional time. There are other regulations where the ambiguity of financial impact comes into play as well.


18 min halves and a 15 min warm up is less scheduled minutes than 20 min warm up and four 8 min qtrs.

Official pay is not really based on the time of the game. If it was they would punch a time clock or be willing to give back when a game is running clock or has few stoppages in play.

Can you give an example of some of these other ambiguous financial impacts? I'd bet some of them will be examples of how the WIAA has already stretched the rules and limits and that has the schools looking to have more say in those things.

3 man officiating crews.
Increase in the max number of games played.
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:


18 min halves and a 15 min warm up is less scheduled minutes than 20 min warm up and four 8 min qtrs.

Official pay is not really based on the time of the game. If it was they would punch a time clock or be willing to give back when a game is running clock or has few stoppages in play.

Can you give an example of some of these other ambiguous financial impacts? I'd bet some of them will be examples of how the WIAA has already stretched the rules and limits and that has the schools looking to have more say in those things.

3 man officiating crews.
Increase in the max number of games played.

Here are the things specifically mentioned by the group that circulated the petition:  "...involved financial impact such as the softball fence, 45 minute soccer halves, 18 minute basketball halves, shot clock, and 2 game increase in the basketball game limit."

There are state adaptations to NFHS rules in every sport. If you go through all of them, some would seem to fall under the financial impact issue, but some are certainly very ambiguous of whether that would be the case. The WIAA Constitution and membership has given the power to the BOC to pass season regulations, including adaptations to NFHS rules. 
The Packers/Badgers/Brewers are like your children; you don't love them because they're good, you love them because they're yours.
10/22/2010 -- 598,210 pageviews for WSN
Follow me on Twitter: @travisWSN
Quote 0 0
blade12

Here are the things specifically mentioned by the group that circulated the petition:  "...involved financial impact such as the softball fence, 45 minute soccer halves, 18 minute basketball halves, shot clock, and 2 game increase in the basketball game limit."

There are state adaptations to NFHS rules in every sport. If you go through all of them, some would seem to fall under the financial impact issue, but some are certainly very ambiguous of whether that would be the case. The WIAA Constitution and membership has given the power to the BOC to pass season regulations, including adaptations to NFHS rules. 


Isn't this really just a message to the WIAA (BOC) that if it involves significant (I know that's a vague amount) cost run it past us first in the way of a vote instead of a BOC mandate?
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:


Isn't this really just a message to the WIAA (BOC) that if it involves significant (I know that's a vague amount) cost run it past us first in the way of a vote instead of a BOC mandate?

I don't disagree, and think there should have been a lot more discussion about the shot clock issue prior to it being voted on by the BOC. I'm not sure there needs to be as much full membership approval as this proposal proposes.
The Packers/Badgers/Brewers are like your children; you don't love them because they're good, you love them because they're yours.
10/22/2010 -- 598,210 pageviews for WSN
Follow me on Twitter: @travisWSN
Quote 0 0
wissportsnet

Boys Basketball Alumni Round-up: February 21st, from @ColtonWilson23 #wisbb -- https://t.co/0K6CZzZWpf https://t.co/715tfpBGVS

wissportsnet

WSN15: Boys Basketball Top Teams #12 -- Two NCAA Division I players at one WIAA Division 4 school = state champions… https://t.co/1MThqzce9L

wissportsnet

Predicting winners of every state wrestling title plus a look By The Numbers, from @Nate_Woelfel -… https://t.co/HgU1bLP7d6

wissportsnet

Join the free Boys Basketball Playoff Pick 'Em Contest; Staff picks coming Tuesday #wisbb -- https://t.co/Y6yTA3OgP8 https://t.co/hA6Uyw9uje