blade12
Saw this late last week and thought is was a little interesting. Not sure that 2 additional games really changes a whole lot. The season will be the same number of weeks.  This is only for varsity and not JV and Frosh teams. It should be the same for all if you ask me.  

WIAA Board of Control approved an increase to 24 varsity basketball games starting in the 2020-21 season by a 6-4 vote.


In the end I think we will just end up with more teams playing out of state special tournaments and events organized by the AAU programs with select invites for only the HS with players in those AAU programs and other top players the AAU programs are recruiting. 
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:
Saw this late last week and thought is was a little interesting. Not sure that 2 additional games really changes a whole lot. The season will be the same number of weeks.  This is only for varsity and not JV and Frosh teams. It should be the same for all if you ask me.  

WIAA Board of Control approved an increase to 24 varsity basketball games starting in the 2020-21 season by a 6-4 vote.


In the end I think we will just end up with more teams playing out of state special tournaments and events organized by the AAU programs with select invites for only the HS with players in those AAU programs and other top players the AAU programs are recruiting. 

I think 90% of teams will play 24 games, just like 90% of teams (at least tried to) played 22 games once it was increased from 20 a few years ago. Even those coaches that don't really want 24 games will feel the need to do so to keep up with the Jones' and avoid the impression they're somehow doing less or providing less opportunities for players, especially in this environment of ever-increasing player movement for any number of reasons.
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
nospotshooters
And the pursuit of Pieper's records gains yet another asterisk.

Who knew the "1000 point plaque" syndicate had such an effective lobbyist?
Quote 0 0
blade12

I think 90% of teams will play 24 games, just like 90% of teams (at least tried to) played 22 games once it was increased from 20 a few years ago. Even those coaches that don't really want 24 games will feel the need to do so to keep up with the Jones' and avoid the impression they're somehow doing less or providing less opportunities for players, especially in this environment of ever-increasing player movement for any number of reasons.


Agree that if you are in a school that isn't playing the max some kids will use that as reason to go to a school that is so in a round about way everyone will be scheduling 24 games.  2 less practices per year replaced by 2 more games, I don't think that is a major deal. Kids will like it, coaches won't care about finding refs or the cost of an additional away game. It will likely mean more schools are scheduling more games before Christmas to get them in. Some schools play very few games before Christmas right now.

Any idea why this doesn't apply to sub varsity levels? 
Quote 0 0
traviswilson
blade12 wrote:


Agree that if you are in a school that isn't playing the max some kids will use that as reason to go to a school that is so in a round about way everyone will be scheduling 24 games.  2 less practices per year replaced by 2 more games, I don't think that is a major deal. Kids will like it, coaches won't care about finding refs or the cost of an additional away game. It will likely mean more schools are scheduling more games before Christmas to get them in. Some schools play very few games before Christmas right now.

Any idea why this doesn't apply to sub varsity levels? 

Many schools schedule a smaller number of games for sub-varsity as for varsity across many/most sports. Done to keep costs down at lower levels, where there's almost no income to off-set increased costs. Also, I think most agree that the younger the player, the more development time needed and less number of contests.
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
yzerman1
According to BOC member Dave Steavpack, the athletic director of Manitowoc, he estimates that it will cost his school $3,000 for these additional games when figuring in cost of travel, hiring officals, and game day personnel.   Where is all the outrage over all the extra costs like there was over the shot clock?  two extra games a year are going to cost way more than a shot clock ever would.
If you want to drink all day, you have to start in the morning.
Quote 1 0
db11
yzerman1 wrote:
According to BOC member Dave Steavpack, the athletic director of Manitowoc, he estimates that it will cost his school $3,000 for these additional games when figuring in cost of travel, hiring officals, and game day personnel.   Where is all the outrage over all the extra costs like there was over the shot clock?  two extra games a year are going to cost way more than a shot clock ever would.


If $1,500 per game is what it costs to play a singular HS basketball game, then maybe we need to consider dropping HS basketball altogether...
https://twitter.com/barwickipedia - Follow me. Because we all need a bit of sports snark in our lives.

"Doin' right ain't got no end."
-The Outlaw Josey Wales

"'Allegedly' is right, Mr. Polian. I have a hole in my ear drum, I'd never go for a swim, no matter how drunk me is."
-Pat McAfee
Quote 0 0
kenny78
yzerman1 wrote:
According to BOC member Dave Steavpack, the athletic director of Manitowoc, he estimates that it will cost his school $3,000 for these additional games when figuring in cost of travel, hiring officals, and game day personnel.   Where is all the outrage over all the extra costs like there was over the shot clock?  two extra games a year are going to cost way more than a shot clock ever would.


Not when you factor in the training of people to run the shot clock, making room at the scorer's table for that person (which could require a new table), paying those people (for those schools where those are paying positions), and determining how many people you need to have trained so that you can cover both boys and girls games along with having alternates.
Quote 0 0
blade12

Many schools schedule a smaller number of games for sub-varsity as for varsity across many/most sports. Done to keep costs down at lower levels, where there's almost no income to off-set increased costs. Also, I think most agree that the younger the player, the more development time needed and less number of contests.


But that's getting into things like; why at a small school where freshmen are routinely on varsity they get 24 games because they are ready but a frosh or soph at a D1 school gets 22 or maybe less because he/she isn't ready. Same with the SC being for varsity only. 

Seems like this is specifically geared toward allowing varsity teams to play in more tournaments and special invite only events and no other reason.
Quote 1 0
oldballcoach1
Blade - you hit it on the head.  The coaches I know and have talked with said they were surprised by this and that there really had been no discussion amongst them about the move to 24 games.  While they are not necessarily opposed, the driving force for this move did come from a small number of coaches that have seen their teams play in these invite tournaments and have had to drop teams late to be able to attend.  Many felt left out of the process and that is not of their own doing.  They were just never brought into the conversation.  That is unfortunate.  

This move did not take into consideration everyone.  The years of trying to eliminate travel, especially on weeknights, seems to no longer be a consideration.  For some rural schools and for some bigger schools on the western side, they are looking at some longer trips.  And, if we have some winters as the last few we have had, teams will be forced into playing back to backs or even having to cancel games.  
Quote 1 0
traviswilson
db11 wrote:


If $1,500 per game is what it costs to play a singular HS basketball game, then maybe we need to consider dropping HS basketball altogether...

That does seem extremely high. In regards to the shot clock question, an extra home game does equate to additional revenue, so it may be budget neutral to add two more games, depending on how teams choose to use them.
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
Blade - you hit it on the head.  The coaches I know and have talked with said they were surprised by this and that there really had been no discussion amongst them about the move to 24 games.  While they are not necessarily opposed, the driving force for this move did come from a small number of coaches that have seen their teams play in these invite tournaments and have had to drop teams late to be able to attend.  Many felt left out of the process and that is not of their own doing.  They were just never brought into the conversation.  That is unfortunate.  

This move did not take into consideration everyone.  The years of trying to eliminate travel, especially on weeknights, seems to no longer be a consideration.  For some rural schools and for some bigger schools on the western side, they are looking at some longer trips.  And, if we have some winters as the last few we have had, teams will be forced into playing back to backs or even having to cancel games.  


Which encourages the "have vs have not" scenario.  Schools that just happen to be good enough or have a star player(s) and are invited to play in "prestigious" events use that to recruit more good players or their AAU programs use it. 

I wouldn't be surprised if it gets voted down at the annual meeting.
Quote 0 0
yzerman1

That does seem extremely high. In regards to the shot clock question, an extra home game does equate to additional revenue, so it may be budget neutral to add two more games, depending on how teams choose to use them.


Two games for the boys and two for the girls.  So it's $750 a game which is probably one home and one away game.
If you want to drink all day, you have to start in the morning.
Quote 0 0
db11
That still seems high...but everybody has different game ops, I guess.

The bright side is you won't have to play 24 if you don't want....or you can find ways to alleviate costs with your scheduling (one-day tournaments like the old Benton Tourney or boy/girl non-con doubleheaders for example).
https://twitter.com/barwickipedia - Follow me. Because we all need a bit of sports snark in our lives.

"Doin' right ain't got no end."
-The Outlaw Josey Wales

"'Allegedly' is right, Mr. Polian. I have a hole in my ear drum, I'd never go for a swim, no matter how drunk me is."
-Pat McAfee
Quote 0 0
blade12
Saw this over the weekend https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27125793/these-kids-ticking-bombs-threat-youth-basketball

Still wondering what the WIAA is thinking in continuing to allow expanded play/off season contact etc. Nice that the article uses a guy from UW as a source and authority. You'd think the WIAA has access to him for input as well.
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