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: Favorites Set, but Challengers Aim to Prevent Repeat Results

By Geoff Kimmerly
MHSAA.com senior editor

October 19, 2023

Three 2022 Lower Peninsula boys tennis champions are ranked No. 1 heading into this weekend's Finals, but at least one new champion is guaranteed. 

Bloomfield Hills in Division 1 and Midland Dow in Division 2 are considered favorites to repeat in those respective divisions. But reigning Divison 3 champion Ann Arbor Greenhills is playing again in Division 4, opening up the Division 3 bracket to other contenders – although of course hopefuls will be aspiring to prove the rankings wrong in all four. 

Play begins between 8-8:30 a.m. Friday at the various sites for opening rounds, and between 8-9 a.m. Saturday for anticipated semifinals and championship matches. Visit the Boys Tennis page to find out which flights will be played at each location and to track results as they are received. 

Below is a glance at several contenders in all four divisions. 

LP Division 1 at Midland Tennis Center & Midland High School

Top-ranked: 1. Bloomfield Hills, 2. Troy, 3. Northville

Bloomfield Hills moved up from runner-up in 2021 to champion last fall, winning by 10 points and with that title the program’s third over the last six seasons. Troy was the 2021 champion and finished third a year ago, one point behind runner-up Northville as the Mustangs earned their first top-two Finals finish in program history.

Bloomfield Hills: The Black Hawks won three doubles and two singles flight championships during their dominating 2022 run, and they’re seeded to win six this time. Junior Pierce Shaya (21-0), part of last season’s No. 1 doubles champion, is seeded first at No. 2 singles, and sophomore Connor Shaya (24-0) was last year’s No. 4 singles champion and is seeded first at No. 3 this time. Senior Merrick Chernett was the other half of that No. 1 doubles champion, and he and senior Aaron Rose are seeded first at that flight. Seniors Ryan Rose and Michael Dillon are seeded first at No. 2 doubles and won that flight last year. Senior Kierth Lingam and junior Dominic Pascarella are seeded first at No. 3 after winning No. 4 last year, and senior Ethan Endelman and junior Asher Langwell are seeded first at No. 4 this time. Sophomore Jonah Chernett is the third seed at No. 3 singles.

Troy: The Colts are seeded fourth or better at all eight flights, with the second seeds at all four doubles. Senior Haresh Anand (26-1) has the team’s lone top seed, at No. 4 singles, but junior Dhruv Gupta is seeded third at No. 3 singles after finishing runner-up at No. 4 a year ago. Senior Nish Palepu and sophomore Derrick Kim were the runners-up at No. 2 doubles last season and are the second seeds at No. 1 this weekend. Senior Derek Blackwell is the fourth seed at No. 1 singles.

Northville: All eight flights are seeded fifth or higher, with the singles lineup including two second seeds after top-seeded senior and two-time reigning champion Sachiv Kumar (24-0) at No. 1 singles. Junior Brian Zhang was part of the runner-up at No. 4 doubles last season and is teaming with senior Nathan Waller for the third-seeded pair at No. 2.

Clayton Anderson, Rochester senior: The No. 1 singles runner-up the last two seasons, he’s 21-1 this fall with his only loss to Kumar in August. He’s second-seeded at the top flight.

Chad Anderson, Rochester sophomore: He’s also second-seeded, at No. 2 singles, and 17-3 with two of those losses to Pierce Shaya.

LP Division 2 at Byron Center West Sports Complex, East Kentwood & Grand Rapids South Christian

Top-ranked: 1. Midland Dow, 2. Mattawan, 3. Birmingham Seaholm

Dow is the reigning champion, coming off its first Finals title since 2016 and seventh under coach Terry Schwartzkopf since 2009. Mattawan is seeking its first title and finished fourth last season and second in 2020. Seaholm also is seeking a first Finals team championship in this sport and has finished runner-up three times, most recently tying for second in 2018. The Maples placed third last year.

Midland Dow: The Chargers are undefeated this fall, and their seeding reflects that dominance as six flights are top-seeded. The entire singles lineup is back from last season, with senior Aaron Li (24-1) the reigning champion at No. 2 and the top seed at that flight, junior Nimai Patel (28-1) the reigning champion and top seed at No. 4, senior Logan Yu (27-0) the reigning No. 3 runner-up and top-seeded, and No. 1 singles junior Austin King (33-0) also a top seed after making the semifinals last season. Seniors Roofy Elsaadany and Vishagen Karthikeyan are the top seed at No. 1 doubles after Elsaadany was part of last year’s No. 2 champion and Karthikeyan part of the No. 3 runner-up, and senior Andrew Frickey and sophomore Matthew McGaugh are the top seed at No. 4.

Mattawan: The Wildcats will be playing for their best finish with six seeded flights, including all four at singles. Senior Garrett Cheng and freshman Dylan Hodgman lead the way as the second seeds at Nos. 3 and 4 singles, respectively.

Birmingham Seaholm: The Maples graduated two doubles champions from last season but are seeded at seven flights, led by No. 3 doubles top-seeded seniors Mohan Badhwar and Sammy Abdo. Junior Carson Wright and senior Sean Joyce are the second seed at No. 3, and senior Blake Smith is the second seed at No. 2 singles.

Karan Deol, Grand Rapids Forest Hills Northern junior: He’s seeded third at No. 1 singles after taking Dow’s Li to three sets in last season’s No. 2 singles championship match. He’s 24-3 this fall with his only losses twice to Drew Hackney (below) and once to Dow’s King.

Drew Hackney, Muskegon Mona Shores senior: He’s 28-0 and the second seed at No. 1 singles. He reached the quarterfinals last season, giving King a tough match there after entering as the sixth seed.

LP Division 3 at Kalamazoo College & Western Michigan University

Top-ranked: 1. Bloomfield Hills Cranbrook Kingswood, 2. Detroit Country Day, 3. East Grand Rapids

Reigning champion Ann Arbor Greenhills is back in Division 4, and Cranbrook is back as the favorite in Division 3. The Cranes have won six of the last eight Division 3 titles, with Greenhills winning the other two during that time. Cranbrook followed its 2021 championship with a runner-up finish last fall, finishing only two points off the lead. Country Day finished third and is seeking its first title since 2014, and East Grand Rapids tied for fourth last season and is seeking its first title since the spring 2007 season.

Bloomfield Hills Cranbrook Kingswood: Saturday should be busy as four Cranes flights are top seeds, and the other four are second seeds. Junior Amaan Khan (20-0) was the champion at No. 4 singles last season and is top-seeded at that flight, and sophomore Jace Bernard (17-3) is the top seed at No. 3. Cranbrook won No. 1 doubles last season and finished runner-up at the other three doubles flights, with Bernard and senior Andrew Fink that champion at No. 1; Fink is second-seeded at that flight this weekend with junior Aryan Tiwari, part of last year’s No. 2 runner-up. Freshman Ryan VanDyke and senior Ben Stevenson are the top seeds at No. 3 doubles, and seniors Ketan Swami and Kevin Guo are the top seeds at No. 4 after Guo was part of the runner-up at that flight last season and Swami was part of the runner-up at No. 3. Junior Ryan Michaels (10-10) is the second seed at No. 1 singles after reaching the semifinals at No. 2 last year.

Detroit Country Day: The Yellowjackets are set up well to make a push. Country Day is seeded third or higher at every flight, with two top seeds and a second seed in singles. Junior Saahitth Reddy is the top seed at No. 1 after receiving the seventh seed at that flight last season; he’s 10-9, but has won nine of his last 10 matches with all of his defeats to Division 1 opponents. Junior Dan Marin (19-4) is the top seed at No. 2 singles after reaching the semifinals at that flight last season.

East Grand Rapids: The Pioneers are seeded at seven flights and could make their move based on the success of some highly-regarded doubles pairs. Seniors Charlie Lentz and Luke Lentz are top-seeded at No. 2, seniors Ben Ruppert and Walter Zimdar are second-seeded at No. 3 and senior Joe Mulder and junior Tommy Rosmarin are second-seeded at No. 4.

Bhavesh Burramukku, St. Joseph junior: The third seed at No. 1 singles is 26-2 with his only losses to Division 1 opponents.

LP Division 4 at Hope College & Holland Christian

Top-ranked: 1. Ann Arbor Greenhills, 2. Traverse City St. Francis, 3. Grosse Pointe Woods University Liggett

As noted above, Greenhills was last season’s Division 3 champion but is back in Division 4, where St. Francis and Liggett have combined to win the last three titles. Liggett won last year and in 2020 and was runner-up in 2021, edging Hudsonville Unity Christian by three points to claim last season’s championship.

Ann Arbor Greenhills: The Gryphons are seeded second at No. 1 singles and first at the other seven flights as they seek to win this division for the first time since 2018 after playing in Division 3 the last four seasons. Junior Kabir Rajendra (12-8) is that second seed at No. 1 after he was runner-up at Division 3 No. 3 last year. He’s followed in the singles lineup by top-seeded junior Teddy Staebler (23-7) at No. 2, sophomore Charlie Rich (22-7) at No. 3 and freshman Murli Pandey (21-9) at No. 4. Seniors Lucas Nor and Alex Ye are top-seeded at No. 1 doubles after Ye was part of last year’s runner-up at No. 1 in Division 3 and Nor was part of the champion at No. 2. Senior Charles Branch and sophomore Ajay Purohit are the top seed at No. 2; they teamed up to win No. 4 in Division 3 last fall. Sophomore Richard Wu and freshman William Pearce are the top seed at No. 3, and senior Shyam Pandey and freshman Maksim Rakic-Denis are the top seed at No. 4.

Traverse City St. Francis: The Gladiators are seeded fifth or higher at all eight flights, led by strength in doubles. Juniors Eli Schmude and David Ansley are the second seed at No. 1, and freshman Casey Jackson and sophomore Brady Thelen are the second seed at No. 4. Ansley was part of the No. 3 runner-up last season. Junior Owen Jackson (26-9) is the third seed at No. 1 singles after winning No. 2 last season and No. 3 in 2021, and senior Chris Bobrowski is the fourth seed at No. 2 after finishing No. 3 runner-up in 2022.

Grosse Pointe Woods University Liggett: The Knights are seeking their fifth Division 4 championship over the last eight seasons, and they’ll enter with six seeded flights and a singles lineup that will be especially key. Senior Sebastian Courtright (22-8) is the top seed at No. 1 after finishing runner-up at that flight the last two seasons, and junior Charlie Cooksey is the second seed at No. 2 after winning No. 4 last season.

PHOTO Troy's Dhruv Gupta returns a volley during last season's Lower Peninsula Division 4 Finals. (Click for more from High School Sports Scene.)