I guess I am a part of Coach Steinke's coaching tree... My high school coach was the lead runner on Coach Steinke's state championship squad in the 70's. I was blessed to have met and talked with Coach Steinke on multiple occasions. This article in the Milwaukee Journal shows why he was such a successful coach, but more importantly, why he left such a lasting impression with many people. Even as a young high school kid who didn't run for him, it was easy to see. Obviously, both Coach Steinke and my coach (Joe Whitmore) were some of the many great role models I had as a young athlete. Hopefully we are continuing a bit of that tradition here in Poynette!!!!

@Marty Bushland I really don't want this to turn into a four division discussion here. If you would like to communicate by email about that, I would be glad to. I just want to respect Chad and his plan by keeping this on topic.

@rtmarks65 there are lots of things going on here. I am a spreadsheet/list guy, so I will list some thoughts... 1) Regarding ranked teams that would make it, 62% of the teams that would have qualified under this proposal were ranked teams. There are lots of good teams that would get an opportunity that they wouldn't normally have. That list is in Chad's proposal. 2) From the beginning, Chad has been completely honest about the weaknesses of this plan. I have talked with Chad extensively and helped him collect data to come up with the 29% plan. He is very aware that the 3rd place team in some sectionals have a better chance at meeting this standard than the 3rd place team in a more competitive sectional. 3) The way this is better than our current system is that it gives 3rd place teams a chance they currently don't have. It is as simple as that. My team has been in a loaded sectional each of the five years, with 3-5 ranked teams each year. I know full well that my chances of meeting that 29% is not very good with that many good teams. I know that other "weaker" sectionals will have a better chance at meeting this criteria than we would. However, at least we have that chance with this plan. That is better than what we currently have. Not perfect, but better. 4) As I have said many times, there are lots of ideas out there that are good. Sectional seeding is one great idea. I have officially proposed a four division plan twice that has not moved forward. This 29% proposal is the latest idea that has gotten some traction. Again, it is an idea that does not pretend to solve all the problems. It simply attempts to better our situation by meeting an objective measure at the sectional and giving an opportunity that doesn't currently exist. I think that is better. 5) In the end, our association has to decide if the status quo is the best we can do. If we would like change, we have to get behind something. Do we do that idea by idea and try to make incremental changes? Do we go in feet first with a comprehensive plan that includes a number of ideas and makes a major shift in qualifying procedures? Do we just stay the course we are currently on? I don't have an answer to those questions for our association, but I am firmly in the group that the status quo can be improved, even if we cannot find a perfect solution.

Guys, I am not going to say anything you don't already know... I think we need to look at this and any other proposal under the lens of does it make things better than they currently are. There are lots of ideas out there, many of which I have started. One of the real positives of this plan is that it doesn't change or take something away from anyone. It is designed to give teams who currently don't have a chance to qualify (3rd place teams) an opportunity. It is not perfect. Chad has acknowledged that from the beginning. Kent's data shows that, more times than not, 3rd place teams from "tougher" sectionals get a chance. That is the complaint we have often heard with our current system and the problem Chad has tried to address from the beginning. This plan can definitely make things better. This does not mean that other ideas cannot also make things better, but this is the one that has the most legs right now. My feeling is that we should continue to look at and propose lots of possible improvements. It gets tiresome watching other sports get ideas approved at the WIAA level while we struggle to even put things in front of them. I guess that is discussion for another forum...