The Bobcat Nation

What does the move down to 8-man football by Shelby in '18-'19 mean to both the B and C divisions? Does that mean they move down for all sports?

I'd think so. To the best of my knowledge if a school moves from one class to another, it's for the entire school and all of its sports. Wouldn't make sense to have the football team playing Class C, but leaving Basketball and Volleyball playing different schools in Class B.

Nope. New rules this year. You can drop for football only. A schools can also drop to B for football only.

Any reasoning behind the rules changes? And how do they determine which schools get to split between classes and which have to stay all in one?

MTCowpoke22 wrote:Any reasoning behind the rules changes? And how do they determine which schools get to split between classes and which have to stay all in one?

There are enrollment guidelines to give the option of moving down for football. I'm told Fergus could go to B for football with our enrollment but chose not to.

I think it just has to do with numbers making it hard for some schools to compete--especially in football.

I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

Cat Grad wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

So how should they do it? Each class has it's dominant schools, and each has those that can't seem to ever get it together. Should we move Baker up to Class A if they've made the playoffs for 5 years in a row, and move Livingston down to Class B because they've missed for the same stretch? Should Wibaux, dominant as they have been for the past 15 years, have been forced to play 11 man, even though they have had barely had enough kids to play 8-man most of those years? Using Enrollment is far from perfect, but it attempts to establish a level playing field in a state that has school enrollments from 6 to 1500 students. Those bigger schools have a much better chance at finding those 30 good, dedicated players than the smaller schools. If they can't, too bad. There was recently a story about the new coach at Glendive trying to change the culture there in order to make the Red Devils competitive again. The only thing holding them back is themselves. Personally, I don't think Manhattan or Baker would hold up all that well in Class A. Sure, they'd probably beat Glendive and Polson, but could they hang for a whole game with Miles City, Dillon, or Billings Central? Again, when Hellgate couldn't field an 11 man team, should we have let them play 6-man? Finding six kids that enjoy football at that school vs. "the" six boys in the entire school at Ekalaka isn't really fair either. Those kids playing both ways at AA and A schools are good enough to do so. The kids playing both ways at B and C schools usually don't have the option of playing one way. Either way, it's a very interesting discussion.

MTCowpoke22 wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

So how should they do it? Each class has it's dominant schools, and each has those that can't seem to ever get it together. Should we move Baker up to Class A if they've made the playoffs for 5 years in a row, and move Livingston down to Class B because they've missed for the same stretch? Should Wibaux, dominant as they have been for the past 15 years, have been forced to play 11 man, even though they have had barely had enough kids to play 8-man most of those years? Using Enrollment is far from perfect, but it attempts to establish a level playing field in a state that has school enrollments from 6 to 1500 students. Those bigger schools have a much better chance at finding those 30 good, dedicated players than the smaller schools. If they can't, too bad. There was recently a story about the new coach at Glendive trying to change the culture there in order to make the Red Devils competitive again. The only thing holding them back is themselves. Personally, I don't think Manhattan or Baker would hold up all that well in Class A. Sure, they'd probably beat Glendive and Polson, but could they hang for a whole game with Miles City, Dillon, or Billings Central? Again, when Hellgate couldn't field an 11 man team, should we have let them play 6-man? Finding six kids that enjoy football at that school vs. "the" six boys in the entire school at Ekalaka isn't really fair either. Those kids playing both ways at AA and A schools are good enough to do so. The kids playing both ways at B and C schools usually don't have the option of playing one way. Either way, it's a very interesting discussion.

Two items bother me tremendously upon my return to Montana.

Consolidating for athletics and not academics first is a travesty to me. And the other aspect is kids being allowed to attend schools out of their district, if you will.

Those five kids from Columbia Falls in the Shrine Game tomorrow night earned it. The hours those kids spent running, lifting and watching film reminds me of all my relatives in those huge towns of Richland and Scobey out chasing tin cans or team roping all summer long.

Personally, I'd love to see what my grandparents did when I was young. Basketball had the Big 32 but I'd much rather see something such as the Great 48 and all the rest of the towns and schools in ONE classification. There were 156 Class C schools during the 60s and early 70s.

There would be zero consolidation just for athletics. If two or more town's consolidate for athletics, they would consolidate for academics also.

Anyway, without checking the numbers, I'm curious how many schools in the Class A level are competing athletically but their enrollment is somewhere at the Class B level?

I've listened to so many people in the few years I've been back in Montana tell me there is no way the smaller schools can compete with the AA schools in football. Maybe in Montana but that is an entirely different topic...and one best left for another day.

I'm off to Billings to watch a large number of A, B and C kids play in the Shrine Game.

Don't disagree with you one bit about consolidating for academics vs. athletics. In most cases it makes just as much sense to consolidate smaller schools completely as it does to keep both schools open and combine the sports teams. The one argument I've heard is that once the school closes, the town will never get it back. True, but at what point is the detriment to the kids being overlooked for the benefit of a tiny town keeping it's school open. Right before it closed, a teacher from Peerless expressed concern for how well their few students there were truly prepared to deal with the outside world after being in such a small family-type setting in high school. Again, probably a conversation for another day. Thank you for your insight. And if you don't mind me asking, who are your relatives in Daniels County? I was born and raised south of Scobey. Enjoy the Shrine Game!

Cat Grad wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

So how should they do it? Each class has it's dominant schools, and each has those that can't seem to ever get it together. Should we move Baker up to Class A if they've made the playoffs for 5 years in a row, and move Livingston down to Class B because they've missed for the same stretch? Should Wibaux, dominant as they have been for the past 15 years, have been forced to play 11 man, even though they have had barely had enough kids to play 8-man most of those years? Using Enrollment is far from perfect, but it attempts to establish a level playing field in a state that has school enrollments from 6 to 1500 students. Those bigger schools have a much better chance at finding those 30 good, dedicated players than the smaller schools. If they can't, too bad. There was recently a story about the new coach at Glendive trying to change the culture there in order to make the Red Devils competitive again. The only thing holding them back is themselves. Personally, I don't think Manhattan or Baker would hold up all that well in Class A. Sure, they'd probably beat Glendive and Polson, but could they hang for a whole game with Miles City, Dillon, or Billings Central? Again, when Hellgate couldn't field an 11 man team, should we have let them play 6-man? Finding six kids that enjoy football at that school vs. "the" six boys in the entire school at Ekalaka isn't really fair either. Those kids playing both ways at AA and A schools are good enough to do so. The kids playing both ways at B and C schools usually don't have the option of playing one way. Either way, it's a very interesting discussion.

Two items bother me tremendously upon my return to Montana.

Consolidating for athletics and not academics first is a travesty to me. And the other aspect is kids being allowed to attend schools out of their district, if you will.

Those five kids from Columbia Falls in the Shrine Game tomorrow night earned it. The hours those kids spent running, lifting and watching film reminds me of all my relatives in those huge towns of Richland and Scobey out chasing tin cans or team roping all summer long.

Personally, I'd love to see what my grandparents did when I was young. Basketball had the Big 32 but I'd much rather see something such as the Great 48 and all the rest of the towns and schools in ONE classification. There were 156 Class C schools during the 60s and early 70s.

There would be zero consolidation just for athletics. If two or more town's consolidate for athletics, they would consolidate for academics also.

Anyway, without checking the numbers, I'm curious how many schools in the Class A level are competing athletically but their enrollment is somewhere at the Class B level?

I've listened to so many people in the few years I've been back in Montana tell me there is no way the smaller schools can compete with the AA schools in football. Maybe in Montana but that is an entirely different topic...and one best left for another day.

I'm off to Billings to watch a large number of A, B and C kids play in the Shrine Game.

I'm a little late to the discussion, but it's a good one.

To answer your question, Butte Central is the only Class A school small enough to be Class B under the new reclassification. The bottom end of Class A now is 307, but the MHSA allows Class B schools to remain in B if their enrollment doesn't exceed 10% OVER 307 for two years (337). Dillon and Billings Central would fall in that area, but that doesn't allow schools to move down to the lower classification if they're already in the higher one.

It's an interesting discussion, because no matter how good the argument is about smaller schools having a harder time in football, you have smaller schools dominating in football. Dillon and Fairfield are two of the smallest schools in their classes, but they're two of the best programs. Fairfield had 109 students a year ago and they must have had close to 50 suited up for the playoff game I watched last season. Dillon's success speaks for itself in Class A.

I'm the AD at Bigfork, and we are on the verge of moving back to Class A. We've had some pretty good success in Class B football, but we'd struggle in Class A. We will have the option in a couple years to petition to stay B in football, and at this point I think we'd try and stay. We have 40+ out for football every year, and we travel with that many, but 10-12 of those are freshmen who could quite literally be killed in a Class A football game. Everybody has those. Another handful of the 40+ are sophomores or juniors who just aren't strong enough or talented enough to play a varsity game at any level. So that leaves us with about 20 kids who we're counting on to play considerable snaps. We plug in a few of the marginal kids on special teams, but basically we're hiding them on the field. Of the 20 kids we're counting on, a handful of them could play at any level in Montana (Sandry, Jordt, Farrier, etc). To me, it's the makeup of the rest of the 20 or so that makes the difference.

I don't know a good solution either. I do think the football only classification is a good idea, but we'll see how it pans out. It will hurt rivalries, I can say that much. You want to have a rivalry with somebody where you have great battles with them in football and basketball and track and wrestling. Taking football out of that equation makes it tough, because you could argue football is king (although basketball is pretty darn popular, especially in Bigfork). We'll see how it all works out.

kennethnoisewater wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

So how should they do it? Each class has it's dominant schools, and each has those that can't seem to ever get it together. Should we move Baker up to Class A if they've made the playoffs for 5 years in a row, and move Livingston down to Class B because they've missed for the same stretch? Should Wibaux, dominant as they have been for the past 15 years, have been forced to play 11 man, even though they have had barely had enough kids to play 8-man most of those years? Using Enrollment is far from perfect, but it attempts to establish a level playing field in a state that has school enrollments from 6 to 1500 students. Those bigger schools have a much better chance at finding those 30 good, dedicated players than the smaller schools. If they can't, too bad. There was recently a story about the new coach at Glendive trying to change the culture there in order to make the Red Devils competitive again. The only thing holding them back is themselves. Personally, I don't think Manhattan or Baker would hold up all that well in Class A. Sure, they'd probably beat Glendive and Polson, but could they hang for a whole game with Miles City, Dillon, or Billings Central? Again, when Hellgate couldn't field an 11 man team, should we have let them play 6-man? Finding six kids that enjoy football at that school vs. "the" six boys in the entire school at Ekalaka isn't really fair either. Those kids playing both ways at AA and A schools are good enough to do so. The kids playing both ways at B and C schools usually don't have the option of playing one way. Either way, it's a very interesting discussion.

Two items bother me tremendously upon my return to Montana.

Consolidating for athletics and not academics first is a travesty to me. And the other aspect is kids being allowed to attend schools out of their district, if you will.

Those five kids from Columbia Falls in the Shrine Game tomorrow night earned it. The hours those kids spent running, lifting and watching film reminds me of all my relatives in those huge towns of Richland and Scobey out chasing tin cans or team roping all summer long.

Personally, I'd love to see what my grandparents did when I was young. Basketball had the Big 32 but I'd much rather see something such as the Great 48 and all the rest of the towns and schools in ONE classification. There were 156 Class C schools during the 60s and early 70s.

There would be zero consolidation just for athletics. If two or more town's consolidate for athletics, they would consolidate for academics also.

Anyway, without checking the numbers, I'm curious how many schools in the Class A level are competing athletically but their enrollment is somewhere at the Class B level?

I've listened to so many people in the few years I've been back in Montana tell me there is no way the smaller schools can compete with the AA schools in football. Maybe in Montana but that is an entirely different topic...and one best left for another day.

I'm off to Billings to watch a large number of A, B and C kids play in the Shrine Game.

I'm a little late to the discussion, but it's a good one.

To answer your question, Butte Central is the only Class A school small enough to be Class B under the new reclassification. The bottom end of Class A now is 307, but the MHSA allows Class B schools to remain in B if their enrollment doesn't exceed 10% OVER 307 for two years (337). Dillon and Billings Central would fall in that area, but that doesn't allow schools to move down to the lower classification if they're already in the higher one.

It's an interesting discussion, because no matter how good the argument is about smaller schools having a harder time in football, you have smaller schools dominating in football. Dillon and Fairfield are two of the smallest schools in their classes, but they're two of the best programs. Fairfield had 109 students a year ago and they must have had close to 50 suited up for the playoff game I watched last season. Dillon's success speaks for itself in Class A.

I'm the AD at Bigfork, and we are on the verge of moving back to Class A. We've had some pretty good success in Class B football, but we'd struggle in Class A. We will have the option in a couple years to petition to stay B in football, and at this point I think we'd try and stay. We have 40+ out for football every year, and we travel with that many, but 10-12 of those are freshmen who could quite literally be killed in a Class A football game. Everybody has those. Another handful of the 40+ are sophomores or juniors who just aren't strong enough or talented enough to play a varsity game at any level. So that leaves us with about 20 kids who we're counting on to play considerable snaps. We plug in a few of the marginal kids on special teams, but basically we're hiding them on the field. Of the 20 kids we're counting on, a handful of them could play at any level in Montana (Sandry, Jordt, Farrier, etc). To me, it's the makeup of the rest of the 20 or so that makes the difference.

I don't know a good solution either. I do think the football only classification is a good idea, but we'll see how it pans out. It will hurt rivalries, I can say that much. You want to have a rivalry with somebody where you have great battles with them in football and basketball and track and wrestling. Taking football out of that equation makes it tough, because you could argue football is king (although basketball is pretty darn popular, especially in Bigfork). We'll see how it all works out.

Wow! I just had this discussion with a few folks from Whitehall, Twin Bridges, Eureka, Boulder, Manhattan and Dillion. Whitehall is losing all their girls to Twin, Boulder loses most of their good players to Helena but Dillon because of their strength and conditioning program will continue to dominate...and I was at the Sitting Duck talking to some folks who were also from Bigfork and they echoed your statements. Bigfork will not go up just like Belgrade and Columbia Falls will not go up because, as one of the parents stated, Bigfork does not have the staff or faculty willing to be present during weight lifting, conditioning, etc. as the faculty in Dillon does. Every community is unique in their priorities. Dillon is kid oriented and Bigfork is like Kalispell or Whitefish. Party towns and that's their staff too. The kids ultimately suffer because they don't learn how to train unless they have parents like the Moreley's to show the kids what they need to do...like O'Brien Byrd and soccer in Columbia Falls or Jax Schweikert with football in C Falls. You only need 35-45 dedicated kids and dedicated coaches to have a dominate high school program such as Dillon and Glacier. You can bet your sweet arse those kids are grinding right now while the Bigfork kids are floating the Swan, probably with their coaches. Wonder what the Eureka kids are doing now?

Cat Grad wrote:

kennethnoisewater wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

LTown Cat wrote:

MTCowpoke22 wrote:I guess I disagree with MHSA on that one. After living in three different Class C towns, I fully understand the enrollment issues a school can have. However, if the enrollment shows you are a Class A school, then you are a Class A school. And if you don't have enough kids going out for a sport, sorry, but you don't have a team. Should MHSA have let Missoula Hellgate move it's football team to Class C 8 or 6-man a few years ago? I don't think so. if a school is going to move down, it should be the entire school. And it should still have to fit the enrollment standards for the class that it is in. Just my opinion.

Can't say I disagree. To me it should lead the MHSA into larger talks about redefining class enrollment boundaries.

I'm amazed at our classifications. Most of my educational career was in Georgia where a school such as Lincoln County with an enrollment of about 200 kids (give or take) would play teams such as Burke County in nonconference and beat the crap out of them (Burke County at the time had an enrollment of about 1500 students) but for whatever reason we get wrapped around the axle because of student body numbers. You only need 45 kids to field a competitive football team year in and year out if you have good teachers (coaches) such as Eureka has this year. Troy Purcell got his start in that school.

I just don't understand why the numbers seem to be such a huge deal in Montana. Thirty good, dedicated football players similar to what Dillon or Columbia Falls last year will beat the crap out of a school with 2k to 3k in most states.

Manhattan or Boulder most years since I've been back in Montana will compete with any team as the Fort Benton and Baker teams would in the early 2000s.

I mean, get real. Even the AA schools have several kids playing virtually every snap like Hoerner, Miller and the Karlin kid from Columbia Falls last year.

So how should they do it? Each class has it's dominant schools, and each has those that can't seem to ever get it together. Should we move Baker up to Class A if they've made the playoffs for 5 years in a row, and move Livingston down to Class B because they've missed for the same stretch? Should Wibaux, dominant as they have been for the past 15 years, have been forced to play 11 man, even though they have had barely had enough kids to play 8-man most of those years? Using Enrollment is far from perfect, but it attempts to establish a level playing field in a state that has school enrollments from 6 to 1500 students. Those bigger schools have a much better chance at finding those 30 good, dedicated players than the smaller schools. If they can't, too bad. There was recently a story about the new coach at Glendive trying to change the culture there in order to make the Red Devils competitive again. The only thing holding them back is themselves. Personally, I don't think Manhattan or Baker would hold up all that well in Class A. Sure, they'd probably beat Glendive and Polson, but could they hang for a whole game with Miles City, Dillon, or Billings Central? Again, when Hellgate couldn't field an 11 man team, should we have let them play 6-man? Finding six kids that enjoy football at that school vs. "the" six boys in the entire school at Ekalaka isn't really fair either. Those kids playing both ways at AA and A schools are good enough to do so. The kids playing both ways at B and C schools usually don't have the option of playing one way. Either way, it's a very interesting discussion.

Two items bother me tremendously upon my return to Montana.

Consolidating for athletics and not academics first is a travesty to me. And the other aspect is kids being allowed to attend schools out of their district, if you will.

Those five kids from Columbia Falls in the Shrine Game tomorrow night earned it. The hours those kids spent running, lifting and watching film reminds me of all my relatives in those huge towns of Richland and Scobey out chasing tin cans or team roping all summer long.

Personally, I'd love to see what my grandparents did when I was young. Basketball had the Big 32 but I'd much rather see something such as the Great 48 and all the rest of the towns and schools in ONE classification. There were 156 Class C schools during the 60s and early 70s.

There would be zero consolidation just for athletics. If two or more town's consolidate for athletics, they would consolidate for academics also.

Anyway, without checking the numbers, I'm curious how many schools in the Class A level are competing athletically but their enrollment is somewhere at the Class B level?

I've listened to so many people in the few years I've been back in Montana tell me there is no way the smaller schools can compete with the AA schools in football. Maybe in Montana but that is an entirely different topic...and one best left for another day.

I'm off to Billings to watch a large number of A, B and C kids play in the Shrine Game.

I'm a little late to the discussion, but it's a good one.

To answer your question, Butte Central is the only Class A school small enough to be Class B under the new reclassification. The bottom end of Class A now is 307, but the MHSA allows Class B schools to remain in B if their enrollment doesn't exceed 10% OVER 307 for two years (337). Dillon and Billings Central would fall in that area, but that doesn't allow schools to move down to the lower classification if they're already in the higher one.

It's an interesting discussion, because no matter how good the argument is about smaller schools having a harder time in football, you have smaller schools dominating in football. Dillon and Fairfield are two of the smallest schools in their classes, but they're two of the best programs. Fairfield had 109 students a year ago and they must have had close to 50 suited up for the playoff game I watched last season. Dillon's success speaks for itself in Class A.

I'm the AD at Bigfork, and we are on the verge of moving back to Class A. We've had some pretty good success in Class B football, but we'd struggle in Class A. We will have the option in a couple years to petition to stay B in football, and at this point I think we'd try and stay. We have 40+ out for football every year, and we travel with that many, but 10-12 of those are freshmen who could quite literally be killed in a Class A football game. Everybody has those. Another handful of the 40+ are sophomores or juniors who just aren't strong enough or talented enough to play a varsity game at any level. So that leaves us with about 20 kids who we're counting on to play considerable snaps. We plug in a few of the marginal kids on special teams, but basically we're hiding them on the field. Of the 20 kids we're counting on, a handful of them could play at any level in Montana (Sandry, Jordt, Farrier, etc). To me, it's the makeup of the rest of the 20 or so that makes the difference.

I don't know a good solution either. I do think the football only classification is a good idea, but we'll see how it pans out. It will hurt rivalries, I can say that much. You want to have a rivalry with somebody where you have great battles with them in football and basketball and track and wrestling. Taking football out of that equation makes it tough, because you could argue football is king (although basketball is pretty darn popular, especially in Bigfork). We'll see how it all works out.

Wow! I just had this discussion with a few folks from Whitehall, Twin Bridges, Eureka, Boulder, Manhattan and Dillion. Whitehall is losing all their girls to Twin, Boulder loses most of their good players to Helena but Dillon because of their strength and conditioning program will continue to dominate...and I was at the Sitting Duck talking to some folks who were also from Bigfork and they echoed your statements. Bigfork will not go up just like Belgrade and Columbia Falls will not go up because, as one of the parents stated, Bigfork does not have the staff or faculty willing to be present during weight lifting, conditioning, etc. as the faculty in Dillon does. Every community is unique in their priorities. Dillon is kid oriented and Bigfork is like Kalispell or Whitefish. Party towns and that's their staff too. The kids ultimately suffer because they don't learn how to train unless they have parents like the Moreley's to show the kids what they need to do...like O'Brien Byrd and soccer in Columbia Falls or Jax Schweikert with football in C Falls. You only need 35-45 dedicated kids and dedicated coaches to have a dominate high school program such as Dillon and Glacier. You can bet your sweet arse those kids are grinding right now while the Bigfork kids are floating the Swan, probably with their coaches. Wonder what the Eureka kids are doing now?

First of all, Belgrade is moving up two years from now. That was just confirmed this week. Columbia Falls won't go up because they're not big enough.

I'm not sure who you talked to in Bigfork, but be careful who you listen to in the Sitting Duck! Almost all the Football coaches in Bigfork are older men, and not one of them is a partier--I think you can ask anybody who actually knows what they're talking about. The weight room is open every single day for a set time and is opened any other time a handful of kids want to go lift, which happens a lot during the summer. I think you also might be forgetting that Bigfork has made the playoffs every year since 2010, winning a state championship in that span. Bigfork has one of the top football programs in Class B. Remember Josh Sandry, Matt Farrier, Adam Jordt, Cody Dopps, Cameron Nissen, Dillon Fraley, Brandon McDonald, Connor Coleman, Christian Ker, Travis Knoll, Austin Pacheco, or Colter Trent? I'm sure I'm missing a couple, but those are all Bigfork players who went on to play in college in the last handful of years. Last year was the first year in 7 years that Eureka was able to beat Bigfork. That Eureka team was pretty special last year...11 guys playing football in college, including Graves who is still in HS.

And you said Bigfork is like Kalispell or Whitefish. Whitefish won a state championship two years ago. And maybe you don't realize Glacier is in Kalispell.

The Bigfork kids are in the middle of two-a-days, not floating the Swan. You've always said some crazy things on here, but now I know you have no idea what you're talking about and you're either making stuff up or believing everything you hear from other people who are making stuff up. Get back on your meds.

Well said!

I'll add that no doubt Dillon probably has a top-notch strength and conditioning program. What they've done the past 15 years is exceptional! But I can say with 100% certainty that over that same span at Fergus we could've had 45 kids in the weight room 24 hours/day and would not have had anywhere near the same success. You have to have the horses! 5 kids playing D1 football right now for MSU alone tells me that what Dillon has had lately goes just a tad further than a top-notch strength program. They've been blessed with an absolutely phenomenal run of elite athletes on top of their top programs and community support.