So, it’s been a couple of days since the HHSAA executive board met and voted on the proposals/recommendations that were launched out of HIADA. For the most part, the HHSAA board approved HIADA’s recommendations.
But I can’t help wondering this: with the ILH abstaining from voting on Tuesday — its league president missed another board meeting and there was, technically, no next-in-line proxy present — what would’ve happened if the MIL’s proposal (at HIADA) had been on the HHSAA table?
That proposal, from Kamehameha-Maui’s Kurt Ginoza, involved an expansion from six teams in Division I to eight. The formula would’ve provided the first seven teams. The eighth team would’ve been an at-large team. In most years, that would be an ILH powerhouse (runner-up). Or it would be an exceptional runner-up from the MIL or BIIF. You can use your imagination on these scenarios, of course.
But had the MIL’s proposal passed at HIADA — it was defeated by a relatively narrow 44-37 (seven abstained) vote — what would’ve happened on Tuesday? Would the ILH have abstained then? A league representative at the HHSAA board meeting said yes. Nothing would’ve changed.
But the prevailing sense I get is that an issue as big as football expansion would’ve changed that stance. Somehow, some way. For years, the ILH has sided with the OIA in voting down all proposals to expand the Division I state tourney. Proposals came from both the BIIF and MIL over the years. None succeeded, though discussion opened up as result.
So let’s imagine the MIL proposal this year had reached the HHSAA table. The OIA would vote against it, as usual. The MIL and BIIF would have voted for it. That would make the KIF the deciding vote because of the weighted system (one vote per school). With no team in D-I, the KIF has no horse in the race, so to speak.
My guess? The KIF would’ve voted with the OIA and the total vote, with the ILH abstaining, would’ve been tied 36-all. In a tie, there is no passage. Status quo.
But if the KIF had voted in favor of expansion in this dream scenario, the D-I football tournament would be back at eight teams as it was for years.
It’s all academic now, of course. What do you think? How would you have voted? Let’s play it out.
HIADA: If you were an athletic director, would you vote in favor of the MIL football expansion (D-I) proposal or against?
HHSAA: If the proposal had passed at HIADA and you were a league executive director, would you vote in favor of the MIL football expansion (D-I) proposal or against?
Paul Honda, Star-Advertiser