PNCLL Fall Meeting

[nlyon02]

if allowed in the league, wsu wil go down to boise so there arer 2.

[Ryan Hanavan]

I put a spreadsheet together to try and work it out so that everyone gets 4 home and 4 road conference games but I keep coming back to BSU getting 6 home games in year 1 and 2 in year two. All schools play 8 home games and 8 road games over the course of 2 years and everyone except for BSU gets 4/4 in both years but I just can't figure out how to get BSU a better balance. I'll throw out a quick example and maybe someone else can work it out. I'm supposed to be writing a dissertation!


Idaho -
Yr 1: Home against SFU, UW, BSU, WSU Away against: GU, UM, UO, OSU
Yr 2: Home against GU, UM, UO, OSU Away against: SFU, UW, BSU, WSU

WSU -
Yr 1: Home against SFU, UW, BSU, GU Away against: UI, UM, UO, OSU
Yr 2: Home against UI, UM, UO, OSU Away against: SFU, UW, BSU, GU

Montana -
Yr 1: Home against UO, OSU, UI, WSU Away against: SFU, UW, BSU, GU
Yr 2: Home against SFU, UW, BSU, GU Away against: UO, OSU, UI, WSU

Gonzaga -
Yr 1: Home against UO, OSU, UM, UI Away against: SFU, UW, WSU, BSU
Yr 2: Home against SFU, UW, WSU, BSU Away against: UO, OSU, UM, UI

Washington -
Yr 1: Home against UM, GU, UO, OSU Away against: UI, WSU, BSU, SFU
Yr 2: Home against UI, WSU, BSU, SFU Away against: UM, GU, UO, OSU

Simon Fraser -
Yr 1: Home against UM, GU, UO, OSU Away against: UI, WSU, BSU, UW
Yr 2: Home against UI, WSU, BSU, UW Away against: UM, GU, UO, OSU

Oregon -
Yr 1: Home against UI, WSU, SFU, UW Away against: UM, GU, UW, BSU
Yr 2: Home against UM, GU, UW, BSU Away against: UI, WSU, SFU, UW

Oregon State -
Yr 1: Home against UI, WSU, SFU, UW Away against: UM, GU, UW, BSU
Yr 2: Home against UM, GU, UW, BSU Away against: UI, WSU, SFU, UW

Boise State -
Yr 1: Home against UM, GU, SFU, UW, UO, OSU Away against: UI, WSU
Yr 2: Home against UI, WSU Away against: UM, GU, SFU, UW, UO, OSU

send me a pm with an e-mail address that allows attachments and I will send you the spreadsheet to play around with. I'm sure there is a way to get more balance to BSU.

I'm also not trying to step on any toes and make everyones schedules.

[Shawn Carman]

Looks like Ryan is working very hard on this, I know I have said it many times but I am going to throw it out there again. Idaho is very well off with Ryan behind the wheel.

Here is something that might throw a wrench into the mix Ryan. I know from our teams experience after being admitted into the league in 06' that WSU will be required to play all of their league games in YEAR 1 on the road, which is part of their probationary status. That is if nothing has changed over the span of two years.

Secondly, I am not sure if maybe this happened to just our team because of timing or if it is required of every team that is in their second year in the league, but our YEAR 2 was apparently our away season where the majority of our league games had to be played on the road or at a neutral site;

For example

Boise -
Yr 1 (2006): Home 0 Away against SFU, UW, GU, UI, OSU, UO
Yr 2 (2007): Home GU, UI, *UO, *OSU Away against SFU, UW
* Games were played in Bend, Oregon in a NEUTRAL SITE with Boise State as the home team.

So when WSU joins the league every team will get 5 home games and 3 away games by your numbers, with the exception of WSU getting 0 home games and 8 away games in Yr 1.

I really don't know or want to think about where that would take Yr 2 afterwards.

[Hi-Line Lax]

It was my understanding that when Boise petitioned into the PNCLL they offered to play all of their conference games on the road to sweeten the deal... there were those not too happy about traveling to Boise. I'm pretty sure that WSU will not be forced to comply with the same standards... although they may offer to do the same as part of their presentation before we vote. Maybe somebody else can clarify if this isn't the case.

[nlyon02]

from talking to Dan Wish, WSU found out that the reason why boise played on the road was the transfer from one league to another. We are technically a new team just petitioning to join the league so we will not have to do all of our games on the road.

[Dr. Jason Stockton]

It was my understanding that when Boise petitioned into the PNCLL they offered to play all of their conference games on the road to sweeten the deal... there were those not too happy about traveling to Boise. I'm pretty sure that WSU will not be forced to comply with the same standards... although they may offer to do the same as part of their presentation before we vote. Maybe somebody else can clarify if this isn't the case.

There was a lot of doubt in the PNCLL as to whether or not Boise State was leaving the RMLC for the right or wrong reasons. I was probably the loudest supporter of BSU's move to the PNCLL, but Kevin is partially right - BSU offered to play all of their games in year one on the road to show their commitment to the PNCLL. . .and then they offered to play some of their home games on a neutral site in year 2. . .which they did.

BSU is fully entitled now to play half of their home games in Boise, just like the other PNCLL teams. If we do decide to go with an 8-game conference schedule, I would not support any schedule that did not include at least 4 games in Boise. Ryan's proposal with 6 games in Boise, if necessary, works just fine for me as well.

I appreciate all of the thought and discussion that has taken place on the forums thus far. M.B.- you noted my conspicuous absence to date. . .essentially, I wanted to be a quiet observer and let you all discuss things without any intervention. Dan took care of answering a few questions that came about during the discussions.

It is my understanding that WWU desires to remain in the 2nd division of MCLA play for 2008. They may not have a choice in 2009. Any plan you guys dream up for division play in 2008 should consider what it may look like with 10 teams in 2009. I can't see any scenario where WWU is allowed to play in the 2nd division after the MCLA meets in December to determine the enrollment figures that determine the placement of member teams. If the number is a small one, we may see an even larger D1 group of teams in 2009. . .

We always seem to spend time planning the schedule for many years to come, only to see teams come and go, and our hopes for a balanced, consistent schedule go by the wayside. . .

Marilyn Hoskins will be emailing out our league agenda for the meeting at least one week before the meeting. I also have not received any bids for the Final Four, other than the one I submitted to host again at Curtis H.S. in Tacoma. I hope some other options present themselves in the coming days leading up to our meeting.

If you are planning to put in a bid to host the Final Four Tournament, you NEED to get it to me or Marilyn BEFORE the meeting, not during the meeting.

Also, please keep in mind we are voting on 3 positions at our league meeting. We will be voting for a new president, treasurer (Dave will not be back) and member at large at the meeting (Dan will not be running for re-election). These are critical decisions and if you are interested in one of these positions and want to know more about the responsibilities of the job, please feel free to call or email me in the next 2 weeks.

OK, I'm done rambling for now. If any of you have questions please email me directly. I don't often read my messages on this website. Thanks.

[Timbalaned]

I don't see why in 2009 at 10 teams you would not go to a divisional split. 10 teams would be plenty with 4 divisional games and a mandated 2 more opposite division games. The issue this year is going to be hard to figure out and good luck to all of you. I am glad I am not there to try and figure it out. Ryan does seem to have it figured out pretty well and I hope something along those lines get used if a split doesnt happen this year (which i still think is best cause it is going to happen the year after anyway).

[Kyle Berggren]

Doing a split with an odd number of teams is problematic. I've been experimenting with the schedule a bit (again),& getting an even number of conference games is an issue. A team ends up missing one, or a team has 1 extra. If there's an odd number of teams in the A division, we either need to play everyone, or accept that 1 division will have more conference games than the other.

Regardless, the travel partners you guys have brought up sound great & make the most sense financially. Thankfully BSU has several certified officials in Boise which keeps officials costs down. They're a much better team to be on their own than a Montana or Gonzaga.

One of the other things brought up was bylaws. JC from CWU said he would work on bylaws for ratification if I remember correctly.

I agree with 90+% of what you guys have hashed out, you're are doing a good job. Granted, we're stilling going to have a long, fantastically interesting, discussion about all of these things at the AGM. If you've got a proposal for league splits, ref fees, by all means bring it. Write it down, be ready with the pros & cons, we need some new solutions.

[Dr. Jason Stockton]

JC and Keith our LAA are working on updating the by-laws with the changes that have been voted upon at the last few meetings. The by-laws are way out-of-date and hopefully that problem will be rectified by the time we meet again next Saturday.

As for a 9 team league, I personally like the idea for all of the A division teams playing one another -- I think it is good for the league. With travel partners that schedule could be completed in 4 weekends, which isn't too much to ask of a program, even if they do have a national schedule planned.

Obviously, it isn't ultimately up to me, but I like the plan with 8 divisional games. Like others have stated, a 9-team league makes playoff scenarios in to an absolute nightmare if we try a split. It's not impossible. . .but it has it's problems.

If any of you didn't get a copy of our meeting agenda, Marilyn emailed them out the other day. Email me if you want to see the agenda and I will get it to you right away.

See you all on Saturday.

[Dr. Jason Stockton]

Pretty interesting discussion in the general discussion forum. . .

Dan started a thread asking other conferences how they handle the payment of officiating costs for their leagues. I know this is going to be a huge discussion at the meeting this year, so I think you all should keep an eye on the thread. . .

So far, it appears the PNCLL and WCLL are the only conferences that split officiating costs equally across the league. The other conferences that have posted on the thread all bill the home team for the actual ref fees, including travel costs. . .

Just some food for thought before we get together on Saturday.

[Sonny]

So far, it appears the PNCLL and WCLL are the only conferences that split officiating costs equally across the league. The other conferences that have posted on the thread all bill the home team for the actual ref fees, including travel costs. . .

The SELC does that as well. SELC teams split officiating games fees equally regardless of game site. The teams pay an extra fee for travel that is set annually per game. Makes it much easier for budgeting and invoicing than trying to figure out how to bill for exact amounts.

You just have to make the travel fee large enough to give yourself a cushion (financially).

[Ryan Hanavan]

As for a 9 team league, I personally like the idea for all of the A division teams playing one another -- I think it is good for the league. With travel partners that schedule could be completed in 4 weekends, which isn't too much to ask of a program, even if they do have a national schedule planned.

Obviously, it isn't ultimately up to me, but I like the plan with 8 divisional games. Like others have stated, a 9-team league makes playoff scenarios in to an absolute nightmare if we try a split. It's not impossible. . .but it has it's problems.

I like the 8 conference games for now too. Would this also result in a new playoff system? Quarter Finals - Top 2 teams get a bye and 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5, Semi Finals - 1 plays lowest seed to advance and 2 plays the other winner, Finals (winners of the semi finals)

Or should we stick to a final four format? If cost was an issue we might go with 6 but keep the final four format making the Quarter finals a home game for the higher seed?

[TheBearcatHimself]

So far, it appears the PNCLL and WCLL are the only conferences that split officiating costs equally across the league. The other conferences that have posted on the thread all bill the home team for the actual ref fees, including travel costs. . .

The SELC does that as well. SELC teams split officiating games fees equally regardless of game site. The teams pay an extra fee for travel that is set annually per game. Makes it much easier for budgeting and invoicing than trying to figure out how to bill for exact amounts.

You just have to make the travel fee large enough to give yourself a cushion (financially).

I personally think that is a great idea. I am not aware if we already charge a fee for this, but if we added say $200 per team to PNCLL fees wouldn't that give us a huge financial bubble to work within?? I just made up that $200 as an example, but it's an idea to work around to give the Eastern teams some financial flexibility and show that we are not trying to punish them for their location. However any solution should also not punish Western teams for being closer to each other.

[Dr. Jason Stockton]

Or should we stick to a final four format? If cost was an issue we might go with 6 but keep the final four format making the Quarter finals a home game for the higher seed?

As far as the A division playoffs go. . .with 9 teams we can better justify expanding the playoffs to 6 teams. . .that will be discussed on Saturday. If teams want to stick with just the top 4 teams in the playoffs, that can be voted on as well.

Your suggestion of $200 per team per game (plus ref fees) is essentially what we did last year to cover travel for the whole season. . .last year we had every team pay $350 for every game on their schedule. That was for ref fees and travel. . .and it ended up covering all of our costs. The cheaper games on the West side in effect subsidized the games on the East side.

This will probably be our most important discussion on Saturday. Many leagues bill the home team the actual cost of each game, the same way we bill when an OOC team travels into the Northwest to play one of our member teams.

As Sonny noted, the SELC, PNCLL and WCLL split the costs evenly for every team. We can keep it this way if the members chose to do so. . .there will certainly be a significant amount of debate over this issue, as it will have huge financial impact on every team in the league.

With Keith as our LAA utilizing the Arbiter software, we know the actual cost of every game at least a month in advance. If we decide to charge the home team for the entire game fees, we know precisely what the costs are and the teams can be invoiced accordingly. Last year we had each team pay one half up front based upon their estimated fees, and then a second inovice went out mid-season for the remainder of game fees. . .and by then we knew exactly what each team owed.

We can do it either way. It will be up to the member teams to decide how the costs are distributed.

[nlyon02]

We are bringing a power point presentation. Do we need anything besides the laptop to run it?