SoDAK 32 Proposals Fall Short But the Conversation Shouldn’t Going Away

Travis Kriens/KORN News Radio Sports Director

Change in South Dakota high school sports rarely happens overnight and this month’s South Dakota High School Activities Association basketball advisory committee meeting was another reminder of that reality.

Two separate SoDAK 32 proposals were presented to the committee but ultimately failed to advance earlier in February. On paper, the ideas made sense. In practice, the hesitation from decision-makers shows the road to postseason expansion remains complicated.

Still, if anything, this year’s Class B girls bracket continues to show why the conversation shouldn’t going away anytime soon.

The current system has unquestionably improved the state tournament. It reduced the number of elite teams knocking each other out too early and helped ensure the best teams reach March. Still, geography continues to create avoidable problems.

What the Proposals Would Have Done

The primary proposal would have created a Round of 32 in both Class A and Class B boys and girls basketball.

Under the plan:

• Girls basketball would add a Round of 32 on the Saturday following region quarterfinals (NFHS Week 34), with games hosted by the higher seed.

• Boys basketball would follow a similar model in Week 35.

• The SoDAK 16 and state tournament formats would remain unchanged.

The stated goal was straightforward: give the best teams in the state the best opportunity to reach the state tournament while allowing four teams from each region to advance to a true “sub-state” round.

Two seeding options were proposed.

Option 1: Traditional seeding
Teams would simply be ranked 1 through 32 by power points, with standard bracket pairings (1 vs. 32, 2 vs. 31, etc.).

Option 2: Regional protection model
After one round of region play, teams would be matched to ensure higher remaining seeds in each region received favorable cross-region opponents while maintaining home-court advantage. The SoDAK 16 would then be fully reseeded.

Both models attempted to balance competitive equity with travel realities, a constant challenge in a geographically large state.

Why the Pushback?

While the proposals had clear competitive benefits, the resistance likely comes down to three familiar concerns:

Travel and logistics.
Even with higher seeds hosting, expanding to 32 teams increases travel demands for schools already managing tight budgets and winter weather concerns.

Calendar congestion.
Adding another meaningful postseason round compresses an already busy late-season schedule, particularly for multi-sport athletes and school facilities.

Philosophical caution.
South Dakota traditionally moves deliberately with postseason changes. The SoDAK 16 itself took years of discussion before implementation.

None of those concerns are trivial and they help explain why the committee was not ready to move forward.

A Regional Logjam

Region 3B and Region 4B girls alone feature eight of the top 16 teams remaining in Class B seed points. That’s a remarkable concentration of talent and it guarantees quality teams will be eliminated before the SoDAK 16 even tips off.

The headline matchup comes in Region 3B, where No. 5 Colman-Egan (20-1) meets No. 9 Chester (19-2). Together, the teams have a combined 39-3 record.

That’s not a typical late-February regional semifinal. That’s the kind of matchup fans expect to see in the state tournament.

Instead, one of those teams will be home early.

In the other Region 3B semifinal, No. 4 Ethan faces No. 16 Sanborn Central/Woonsocket in Madison. SCW sits at 16-5 and reached the state title game a year ago, hardly the profile of a team that should draw a top-four opponent this soon.

Region 4B brings its own intrigue. No. 2 Parkston hosts No. 14 Freeman, while No. 7 Centerville meets No. 12 Gayville-Volin.

We already know these teams can beat each other. Gayville-Volin knocked off Centerville 57-46 on Jan. 6, and Freeman gave Parkston a competitive game early in the season. These are high-quality matchups, perhaps too high-quality for this stage.

The Other End of the Bracket

While Regions 3B and 4B are overloaded, other regions guarantee much lower-seeded teams will advance.

Region 8B will send either No. 42 McIntosh or No. 54 Faith forward. Region 6B ensures either No. 27 Herreid/Selby Area or No. 28 Ipswich moves on.

There’s a very real possibility those advancing teams become the No. 15 and No. 16 seeds in next week’s SoDAK 16.

That contrast highlights the central issue: the current format still allows geography to shape the bracket more than competitive balance.

What a SoDAK 32 Fixes

If the final four teams from each region were seeded 1 through 32 statewide, the bracket would immediately look more balanced.

Consider a few examples from this year’s projections:

• No. 5 Colman-Egan would face No. 28 McIntosh instead of No. 9 Chester.

• No. 9 Chester would draw No. 24 Ipswich, a far more appropriate seed matchup.

• No. 16 Sanborn Central/Woonsocket would see No. 17 Northwestern instead of No. 4 Ethan.

• No. 7 Centerville would play No. 26 North Central rather than familiar foe Gayville-Volin.

• No. 2 Parkston would meet No. 31 Timber Lake instead of upset-minded Freeman.

None of this guarantees wins, of course. Teams still have to prove it on the court. But the path becomes far more equitable.

The Goal Hasn’t Changed

This isn’t about punishing strong regions or rewarding weaker ones. It’s about continuing the progress the SoDAK 16 already started.

And that progress has been real.

Last year’s Class B state tournament delivered outstanding drama. No. 5 Bennett County defeated No. 6 Sanborn Central/Woonsocket 71-61 for the championship. No. 8 Deubrook Area nearly stunned No. 1 Centerville. Both the No. 2 and No. 3 seeds fell in the quarterfinals.

That’s exactly what fans want, meaningful, competitive games in March.

A SoDAK 32 would increase the odds of getting even more of them.

Not Dead — Just Delayed

If history tells us anything, it’s that postseason evolution in South Dakota tends to come in steps.

First came the three-class system.
Then the SoDAK 16.
Now the Round of 32 is knocking on the door.

The advisory committee’s decision doesn’t end the discussion, it simply presses pause. As competitive imbalances continue to surface, the pressure to revisit the format will likely grow.

Because ultimately, the question hasn’t changed:

Is the system designed primarily around geography or around getting the best teams to March?

For now, the SoDAK 16 remains the standard. But based on what we’re seeing across Class B this season, the SoDAK 32 conversation is far from finished.