Class in Session: A History in Classification

July 24, 2017

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

This is the first part in a series on MHSAA tournament classification, past and present, that will be published over the next two weeks. This series originally ran in this spring's edition of MHSAA benchmarks.

Conversation and discussion at the March 2017 MHSAA Representative Council Meeting leaned heavily toward the subject of 8-Player Football and how to properly balance its tournament with the growing number of schools sponsoring the sport.

While the proposal to split the tournament into two divisions beginning with the 2017 school year was adopted, the MHSAA then faced questions such as when to set the divisions, how to determine qualifiers and where to host the championship games.

The topic continues to create a buzz in Class D schools across both peninsulas, and likely will do into the start of school this fall.

Likewise, the lone holdouts still conducting tournaments by class – MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball and Girls Volleyball – took center stage at the May Council discussion, and following the 2017-18 school year, class is out for good. Both genders of basketball, and girls volleyball, will move to divisional formats thereafter.

There is much to be decided to be sure; but as those in education are well aware, history is the best teacher.

Fortunately for the sports in flux and for all sports under the governance of the MHSAA, the Association more or less wrote the book on the subject of sport classification. Following is a history lesson, with a little advanced division thrown in.

Class structure

Credited with being the first state with multiple tournament classifications, Michigan’s attention to trends and shifts in philosophy aimed at fair play and equal tournament opportunity can be traced from 80 years ago to the present.

In the earliest years of the MHSAA, there were four classifications for elections and tournaments –  Classes A, B, C and D. Classes C and D had far more schools than Classes A and B. For example, 80 years ago (1937), there were only 58 schools in Class A, 94 schools in Class B, 297 schools in Class C and 253 schools in Class D.

Gradually through the years, as Michigan’s major cities spawned suburbs, there was a shift in the other direction to the point 30 years ago (1987) when school size became more balanced: 173 Class A schools, 178 Class B schools, 179 Class C schools and 182 Class D schools.

Up until 1987, the MHSAA published the dividing line between each classification, after which schools submitted their enrollments. Then, for 1988 and thereafter, the MHSAA adopted the plan of gathering all enrollments first and then placing 25 percent of the schools in each of four classes. This completed the equalization of the number of schools in each class for elections.

However, the change for 1988 did nothing to equalize the number of teams actually entered by each class in each sport. And unlike the early years of the Association when there were many more Class C and D teams than A and B teams, there were more Class A and B teams than C and D teams entering MHSAA tournaments decades later.

Moreover, the difference in number of teams entered in the different classifications for a sport continued to increase as many small schools, the fastest growing portion of the MHSAA's membership, sponsor only a few sports, or they sponsor no sports at all but enter into cooperative programs with other schools.

Because of these differences, Class A or B schools sometimes had to win twice as many games as Class C or D schools to reach the MHSAA Finals in a sport. At times, the larger classifications had District Tournaments, even rat-tail games, and/or a Quarterfinal game, and the smaller classifications did not. Most Class D Districts have had four teams (some only three), while Class A Districts often had seven or eight teams. In Regional levels of individual sports, the number of entries in the larger classification once greatly outnumbered those in the smaller classifications of the tournament for the same sport.

Over the years, these dividing lines between classes escalated gradually, as did the differences in enrollments of largest and small schools in each class. In 1937 the dividing lines were 700, 300 and 100 between Class A and B, B and C, and C and D, respectively. By 1987, the dividing lines were 1,129, 571 and 298, respectively, leading to the current method of collecting enrollments and then setting the classification.

With the pendulum swinging well past center by the late 1980s, coaches associations, MHSAA sport committees, tournament managers and school administrators began discussion and offered proposals to correct what many believed had become a flawed system of MHSAA tournament classification.

At the 1996 MHSAA Update Meetings, ¾ of 858 respondents to that year’s annual survey indicated they favored a system that would divide schools which actually sponsor each sport into two, three or four nearly equal divisions.

Problem solving

At its meeting May 4-6, 1997, the Representative Council defeated a motion that would have adopted in one action a coordinated plan of reclassification for all sports to equalize the number of schools in each tournament for each respective sport. Instead, the Council discussed and voted on each proposal that had been presented from sport committees.

This resulted in the Representative Council adopting four equal divisions for baseball and softball, four equal divisions for boys and girls tennis, four equal divisions for boys soccer and three equal divisions for girls soccer, effective with the 1997-98 school year. Helping in the decision was the success of the 1995-96 MHSAA Wrestling season, which saw the sport move to four divisions for its tournament structure

The Council delayed action on similar proposals for football and boys golf at that time to glean additional input. The same decision was made with respect to a proposal from the Ice Hockey Committee that would have split the Class A schools in two divisions and left the Class B/C/D Tournament unchanged.

“The gist of the move from classes to divisions was to equalize the path to championships for students of all schools, regardless of the size of those schools,” said MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts.

While the restructuring accomplished that goal for the majority of competitors, opposition exists now as it did then. The primary argument in opposition to the changes is that, in some sports, it increases the range between largest and smallest schools in the division for smallest schools, even as the range is usually reduced for other divisions.

Larger schools offered a counterpoint.

“The larger schools suggested that while they may have more students, they also attempt to sponsor more sports than the smaller schools, in some cases spreading the enrollment as thin as a much smaller school with fewer sports,” Roberts said.

“Even today, the idea of four equal divisions can be unpopular among some Class D schools which feel especially burdened by the equal division concept,” Roberts said. “There was enough opposition in 1997 that equal divisions were rejected for boys and girls basketball and girls volleyball, and some of that opposition remains.”

The numbers of schools sponsoring each MHSAA tournament are still close to the totals today, with the exception of soccer in both genders, which has enjoyed substantial increases. This spring, 466 girls teams were scheduled to compete in the MHSAA Soccer Tournament, while 473 boys teams will suit up this fall.

Since the beginning of MHSAA divisions in 1996 with wrestling, 147 additional team champions have been crowned and countless individuals have known the thrill of victory due to an extra level of Finals in various sports. Girls soccer has seen the most growth in opportunity, moving from two classes in 1987 to three divisions the following year, and then four divisions in 2000. Boys soccer had enjoyed four classes for two years prior to the new four-division format, and it was the sport of soccer that helped to create a caveat in the nearly equal division movement.

Lower Peninsula boys and girls swimming & diving expanded from two to three divisions in 2008, while boys and girls bowling are the most recent sports to enjoy increased tournament opportunity, adding a fourth division in 2010.

“Fairness is in the eye of the beholder. While having the same number of schools in each division is one kind of fairness, holding in check the enrollment range between the largest and smallest schools in Division 4 is another kind of fairness that is dear to a great number of people,” Roberts said. “Because more schools sponsor basketball and volleyball than other sports, Class D schools would have been least affected by the equal divisions concept in those sports; but that, and ‘tradition,’ did not dissuade the opponents in the 1990s.”

The shift to divisions not only paved the way for student-athletes, but also assisted administrators and schools hosting tournaments. MHSAA tournament mangers looked to equal divisions to more closely equalize the number of schools in District or Regional Tournaments and to better equalize the length of day required for these rounds of tournaments, both for management and participating teams and individuals.

Pinning down an answer

Wrestling became the first MHSAA Tournament to be conducted in nearly equal divisions when team and individual champions were crowned in Divisions 1, 2, 3 and 4 rather than Classes A, B, C/D for the 1996 winter championships. 

The movement was well received, as schools saw more opportunity for success: four champions where there once were three at the District, Regional and Final levels, and a smaller range of enrollment between the smallest and largest school in all four tournaments, leading to the impetus for the Fall 1996 Update Meeting Survey of schools regarding similar movement in other sports.

Team champions that year were Holt (D1), Petoskey (D2), Middleville Thornapple Kellogg (D3) and Dundee (D4).

Getting their kicks

When the "equal divisions" concept was approved by the Representative Council for most MHSAA Tournaments for the 1997-98 school year, there was opposition from the smallest schools which, under the equal divisions, are forced to play against larger schools than reside in Class D. Compelling arguments were made – and still are – that an enrollment difference between schools with smaller enrollments (e.g., Class D) is more difficult to overcome in athletic competition than an even larger enrollment difference between schools with larger enrollments (e.g., Class A).

The opposition was most intense in soccer because of the number of students needed to field a team and the physical nature of the sport. As a result, from 2000-01 through 2010-11, soccer operated with a “20-percent modification.” This placed 20 percent of all schools that actually sponsored soccer in Division 4, and the remaining 80 percent were placed equally in Divisions 1, 2 and 3.

At the time the 20 percent modification was adopted, it was also established that soccer would return to four equal divisions when the largest Division 4 soccer school had an enrollment equal to or smaller than the mid­ point for Class C schools. That occurred in 2010.

Last class on the schedule

In the same volume of “history being the best teacher,” one can also find the adage, “times change.” While the division format was a welcome change in some sports, others were left to hold class without change.

In the sports of boys and girls basketball, and girls volleyball, the number of schools sponsoring the sports were so close to the overall membership of the MHSAA that divisions were not necessary; the enrollment breakdowns themselves were enough to delineate equal opportunity for tournament success.

That is no longer the case, according to MHSAA membership. The last move from classes to divisions occurred for the 2006-07 school year following Council action. Before this May, that is. Action at the most recent Representative Council meeting, May 2017, called for the shift to divisions for MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball, and Girls Volleyball, beginning with the 2018-19 season.

“Because the MHSAA Volleyball Committee had requested this change several times a number of years ago, and because the Council felt the change inevitable, there should not be further delay,” Roberts said. “It is an important detail that the Class D maximum has dropped 50 students over the past decade so the objection that much larger schools would be competing in Division 4 isn’t very strong now.”

Using the 2017-18 enrollment figures, just eight Class C schools would be competing in Division 4 for boys basketball, 11 for girls basketball and 14 for girls volleyball.

Good things came of the previous most-recent switches in 2006-07. Competitive Cheer was re-classified from Class A, B and C-D into four equal divisions assisting in the rapid growth of sponsoring schools (approximately 80 schools per division). Alpine skiing was changed from Class A and B-C­ D to two equal divisions.

At that time, the MHSAA Basketball Committee had recommended to the Council the study of increased classifications, but status quo remained.

Back on the grid

As such, MHSAA Basketball and Volleyball remained the only holdovers of the MHSAA class structure. Discussion resurfaced periodically during the last two decades to bring those tournaments in line with the other MHSAA sports.

Regular-season football-playing schools are separated by class, then are reshuffled by divisions for the playoffs. Football, as we know, underwent a significant postseason facelift in the late 1990s.

While MHSAA Football also remained a class sport through 1998, it had expanded from four to eight classes from 1990-98, becoming the first MHSAA sport to crown more than four team champions. Member schools were asked to consider a pair of options in November of 1997. One called for eight equal divisions, and the second would leave Class D by itself as division 8, and split Class A, B and C schools into seven nearly equal divisions.

After much discussion, retooling, and crunching of formulas, the MHSAA unveiled its revised Football Playoff model that continues to roll today, nearly 20 years later. It was determined that 256 teams would qualify for the tournament based first on a minimum of six wins, then by Playoff Points determined by formula. From there, the field would be divided into eight divisions, with the field being filled out by a nearly equal number of five-win teams in each division as needed to reach 256.

Eight championships would indeed be enough, until football sponsorship among the MHSAA’s smallest schools – some with rich football traditions – began to trend downward. The MHSAA again went to the drawing board, examining the viability of 8-player football. After an experimental year in 2010 without a tournament, the 8-player game was playoff-ready for 2011, with a field of 16 qualifiers embarking on a four-week tournament.

Not only did the 8-player option restore recently canceled programs, but it also created teams in schools which previously had none, and convinced some 11-player schools that this new division was the best path to take.

What did this do for the Class D holdovers staying in the traditional 11-player game? Well, a couple of things, positive and negative. As two and three dozen Class D schools opted for the 8-player game, the remaining 11-player Class D schools at times found themselves in disrupted leagues and had to travel further to complete schedules. They also competed against larger teams in Division 8 of the 11-player MHSAA Football Playoffs.

However, the growth of the 8-player game among the smallest schools also resulted in more Class D schools qualifying for the MHSAA Football Playoffs than ever before. In 2012, an all-time high 44 percent of Class D schools sponsoring football qualified for either the 8-player tournament or Division 8 of the 11-player tournament. That compared to 42.2 percent of Class C schools, 44.9 percent of Class B schools and 41.6 percent of Class A schools which qualified for the 2012 playoffs.

Much is to be determined in the most recent chapter of MHSAA Tournament expansion as the 8-Player Football Playoffs welcome a second division. As the past illustrates, there will be pluses and minuses. History also shows that the MHSAA has received maximum input from its constituents, researched all possibilities, and will find solutions to questions still in the balance before an additional group of athletes hoists a new trophy in November.

Through the Years

A chronology of when which sports moved from Class to Division in the MHSAA. 

1995-96: LP Wrestling

1997-98: Baseball, Boys Soccer, Girls Soccer, Softball, LP Girls Tennis, LP Boys Tennis

1998-99: LP Boys Golf, LP Girls Golf

1999-2000: Ice Hockey, LP Boys Track & Field, LP Girls Track & Field

2000-01: LP Boys Cross Country, LP Girls Cross Country, UP Boys Cross Country, UP Girls Cross Country, UP Boys Golf, UP Girls Golf, UP Boys Tennis, UP Girls Tennis, UP Boys Track & Field, UP Girls Track & Field

2002-03: LP Girls Swimming & Diving, LP Boys Swimming & Diving

2005-06: Boys Bowling, Girls Bowling

2006-07: Girls Competitive Cheer, Boys Skiing, Girls Skiing

2018-19: Boys Basketball, Girls Basketball, Girls Volleyball

Note: Boys and Girls Lacrosse has been a divisional sport since it began in during the 2004-05 school year.

Preview: Pair of Reigning Champions Racing to Extend Successful Streaks

By Geoff Kimmerly
MHSAA.com senior editor

October 31, 2025

A pair of two-time reigning champions will attempt to join an even more exclusive list of title winners at Saturday’s Lower Peninsula Girls Cross Country Finals at Michigan International Speedway.

Romeo in Division 1 and Whitmore Lake in Division 4 will enter their championship races both seeking to become the 10th and/or 11th Lower Peninsula teams to win at least three straight Finals championships.  

Whitmore Lake also is led by Kaylie Livingston, who is joined by St. Johns’ Ava Schafer as returning individual champions seeking to repeat.

See below for several more team and individual contenders. The "season bests" list referred to frequently is a ranking list of every runner's best time this season, maintained by Athletic.net. The first girls race, in Division 4, begins at 9:30 a.m.; click here for the full schedule and ticket information.

Additionally, all eight races Saturday at MIS will be streamed live and viewable with subscription on the NFHS Network: Divisions 1 & 2 | Divisions 3 & 4.

Division 1

Reigning champion: Romeo
2024 runner-up: Saline
2025 top-ranked: 1. Ann Arbor Pioneer, 2. Brighton, 3. Romeo.

Romeo is seeking to become the 10th Lower Peninsula program to win at least three straight Finals championships and will return to MIS with four racers from last year’s top seven including sixth-place senior Natalia Guaresimo and 11th-place junior Annie Hrabovsky. Pioneer is forecast to win its first title since claiming three straight from 2019-21, and after finishing sixth last season but returning four of their top five from that race including third-place sophomore Natasza Dudek and 15th-place sophomore Sienna Klemmer. Brighton finished fifth last year with only one senior, and four of its top six placers will run again this weekend after the team won a Regional that also included No. 6 Ann Arbor Skyline and No. 11 Okemos.

Individuals: Dudek is the highest returning placer as four of the top five last season graduated, and she has the fastest 5K time in the state this fall (16:11.2) across either peninsula and all divisions. Hrabovsky ranks second on the Division 1 list of season-best times this fall, and Okemos sophomore Rachel Smith has the third-fastest on that list after finishing 10th at last year’s Final. Total, 10 of last season’s top 20 will be back this weekend, including as well Rockford seventh-place junior Daisy Cox, Midland Dow eighth-place sophomore Emilia Garces, Ann Arbor Skyline 12th-place sophomore Lucia Llanes, Rochester Hills Stoney Creek 13th-place junior Leah Corby and Rochester 19th-place senior Ella Abraham. Pioneer freshman Keira Von Blon also has run one of the top 10 times in Division 1 this fall, and Zeeland East sophomore Adalyn Raab finished 11th in Division 2 in 2024.

Division 2

Reigning champion: Goodrich
2024 runner-up: Zeeland East
2025 top-ranked: 1. Otsego, 2. Grand Rapids South Christian, 3. Grand Rapids Christian.

Goodrich last season won its first championship in nearly two decades, and is ranked No. 5 heading into this weekend. Otsego finished fifth a year ago but is the favorite after also finishing second in 2023 and most recently winning the title in 2022. Three of last season’s top four are back this weekend for the Bulldogs – including the reigning runner-up, senior Emma Hoffman – and they are bolstered by four freshmen including three whose top times this fall rank among the top 40 on the Division 2 season bests list. South Christian is expected to make a jump from 13th a year ago as it pursues its first Finals team title after previously finishing a program-best second in 2005. The Sailors return three runners from last year’s lineup as well, with four freshmen providing a boost. Grand Rapids Christian is another regular in this conversation, finishing fourth with no seniors a year ago after winning the title in 2023. Five of last year’s seven Finals racers are back for the Eagles this weekend.

Individuals: Only five of last season’s top 20 were seniors, and St. Johns junior Ava Schafer is running for a repeat after winning last year’s race by 10 seconds. Hoffman has the fastest time in Division 2 this season (16:20.6), with Gaylord senior Katie Berkshire’s season best (16:32.0) ranking second in Division 2 after she placed third at last year’s Final. The other 11 non-seniors from last season’s top 20 (with Raab running in Division 1) all will be back as well, including Holland Christian fourth-place sophomore Avery Engbers, Freeland sixth-place junior Clara Kaczor, Ludington eighth-place junior Annabelle Lowman and Frankenmuth ninth-place senior Natalie Foltz. Pinckney junior Jaelyn Ray finished 12th last  season and has the third-fastest top time in Division 2 this season, and Ludington freshman Eliza Schwass has posted the fourth-fastest top time in the division.

Division 3

Reigning champion: Lansing Catholic
2024 runner-up: Pewamo-Westphalia
2025 top-ranked: 1. Lansing Catholic, 2. Pewamo-Westphalia, 3. Jackson Lumen Christi.

The top two from last season are predicted to finish that way again, with Lansing Catholic returning its top six runners from last year’s championship lineup and P-W four of its seven – with both teams also featuring one of the fastest freshmen in the division. Pirates junior Alyssa Kramer finished 14th individually a year ago and has the second-fastest top time this fall in Division 3, with Cougars junior Grace Wonch and sophomore Josie Bishop (20th last season) also ranking among the top seven on the division’s top times list. Lumen Christi finished ninth a year ago led by now-junior Samantha Schroeder, who finished eighth individually. She’s one of three runners back from last season’s Finals lineup and has the third-fastest top time in Division 3 this fall.

Individuals: The top five and eight of last season’s top 11 graduated, with Leslie senior Hailey Creisher the highest returning placer at sixth a year ago and also entering with the fastest time in Division 3 this season at 17:51.9. Following her and Schroeder among returning placers is Lakeview junior Kamryn Salladay, who was 10th and is back as an individual qualifier. Blissfield senior Hope Miller (12th), Grand Rapids Covenant Christian junior Shelby Kuiper (13th), Kramer  (14th), McBain sophomore Caelyn Torry (16th), Kent City sophomore Elliana Max (18th) and Monroe St. Mary Catholic Central senior Bella LaFountain (19th) also are back from the 2024 top 20. Expect some new names as well: Six of the top 23 top times run in Division 3 this season have been run by freshmen.

Division 4

Reigning champion: Whitmore Lake
2024 runner-up: Auburn Hills Oakland Christian
2025 top-ranked: 1. Whitmore Lake, 2. Buckley, 3. Maple City Glen Lake.

Whitmore Lake also is running to become the 10th Lower Peninsula girls program to win three straight Finals titles, and the Trojans are once again paced by junior Kaylie Livingston – last year’s individual champion and holder of the fastest time in Division 4 this fall at 17:45.0. Total, Whitmore Lake returns six racers from last year’s title-winning lineup, with senior Carina Burchi finishing 11th individually a year ago and senior Elodie Weaver back after placing 24th. Buckley impressively placed 11th as a team last year after graduating two-time individual champion Aiden Harrand and without a senior. The Bears return four of their top six racers from 2024. Glen Lake didn’t run at the Finals as a team last season, but now-sophomore Carmella Julian placed 20th as an individual qualifier and is back as the Lakers pursue their first team title since 2000. Glen Lake will run three freshmen, three sophomores and a junior after finishing second at its Regional to Buckley.

Individuals: Livingston and Gobles third-place junior Libby Smith are the only two from last  year’s top seven racing again, and they could make this a classic. Although Livingston won last year’s race by 14 seconds and finished 20 ahead of Smith, Smith’s top time this fall (17:46.8) is just two seconds off Livingston’s division-best pace. Harbor Springs junior Stefi Reskevics (eighth), Onekama sophomore Callie Sinke (ninth), Burchi (11th), Breckenridge senior Ally Schmitz (14th), Grand Traverse Academy junior Amelia McKinney (15th), Ubly senior Katie Sweeney (16th) and Kalamazoo Hackett Catholic Prep senior Emma Riker (18th) also are back from the top 20, and three freshmen and an eighth grader have run top times among the top 17 in Division 4 this fall. Leland sophomore Sophia Grinage finished 51st  in her Finals debut last year, but has run the third-fastest top time in the division.

PHOTO Several teams, including this weekend's expected Division 2 contender Grand Rapids South Christian, take their opening strides during the Otsego Invitational Division 2 race on Sept. 27. (Photo by Gary Shook.)