The GHSA's reclassification committee is reviewing several plans, including expanding from five to six classifications, reducing to three or four classifications yet with two state championships in each class (for example, a Class AAA Div. I champion and Div. II champion) or tweaking the current setup of five classifications. We asked several metro high school athletic directors the following: Which do you prefer? Or do you have a better idea to suggest?
- Parkview's Mark Whitley: I would be in favor of six classifications as my first priority, if the cutoff number is correct. We need to play in one level from the top with the number of students we have. But if they place schools with 2,500 students in the same class with 3,500, then I say just leave it like it is -- because that is what is happening now.
- Pope's Steven Craft: I really like the current structure of five classifications. The GHSA might want to change the enrollment numbers to even out the classifications, but I am a strong believer that the classifications were created for a reason. I think that Pope has really benefited this year from dropping down in classifications. We are now competing against schools that are our size. For years, we were one of the smallest AAAAA schools.
- Norcross High's Kirk Barton: Personally, I like the idea of going to six classifications. There is a wide gap in some of the enrollment figures in AAAAA, for example, and some schools are competing against other schools that have 1,500-plus more students. Six classifications would level the playing fields for many of these schools.
- McEachern's Jimmy Dorsey: I do not like the idea that we have eight different state championships. I think that waters down that honor. Can one really feel like the "state champ" in AAAA Division II is as worthy as the "state champ" Division I? States up north have done this and we have seen the decline in football in those states. Being a "state champion" in any sport should be very exclusive in my opinion. It should be something very few obtain but we all strive to reach.
- Creekside's Mekia Troy: It would seem like we'd be better off playing schools of similar size, but not at the risk of having to travel extreme distances to do so. With the gap being so large between the biggest and smallest AAAAA schools, six classifications may be best. It just doesn't seem fair to have schools that are twice as big competing against others half their size. We lost over 1,000 students when Langston Hughes opened and the smaller population does have an effect on the pool you pull from. On the other hand, we would benefit financially from playing schools in close proximity, regardless of size. Three classifications and two divisions sounds decent on paper. I think the reality of it, though, is that you'll still end up in situations where, if the sole determining factor is population, competition will vary across the board and we'll call that unfair, too.
- Chattahoochee's Milo Mathis: The biggest inequity problem with the current classification lies near the top, close to the line between AAAA and AAAAA. While we sympathize with Class A and their concerns, when you have to play schools with 1,500-2,000 more students, it is like playing two schools with large athletic programs. It is not fair for everyone to work very hard without a decent chance of success. We understand the isolation problems associated with adding a AAAAAA, so probably just working within the current system would be best.
- Riverwood's Jeff Holloway: I have only had a chance to look at one of the proposals. I think the six classifications is the best option here. It seems that the problem is that there is such a discrepancy in the size difference in the schools in Class AAAAA. If you add a sixth classification and use schools with 2,000 or more students, you could help with the problem. I agree there is a huge difference in 1,900 students and 3,200 students, but without looking at the present numbers I think you could justify this.
About the Author
Keep Reading
The Latest
