Jump to content

***UIL Considering Radical Football Realignment Plan***


Recommended Posts

Guest ECBucFan

HS travels....but JH don't.... 5A does,...but the rest don't...for now...90% approves...but that comes from the UIL site...

What a mess! That's what happens when beaurocrats micromanage. It's gonna cause a lot of problems, in the name of "fairness". IMHO, if you are scared of the "larger" teams in your own district, well, you shouldn't be playing ball, period.

BTW: EC was 5th out of 7 teams, sizewise in district. We went undefeated.  8)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

HS travels....but JH don't.... 5A does,...but the rest don't...for now...90% approves...but that comes from the UIL site...

What a mess! That's what happens when beaurocrats micromanage. It's gonna cause a lot of problems, in the name of "fairness". IMHO, if you are scared of the "larger" teams in your own district, well, you shouldn't be playing ball, period.

BTW: EC was 5th out of 7 teams, sizewise in district. We went undefeated.   8)

Good point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

ask buna how it is to be the small school in district for years and now get to be the big school in district. as for the travel most small schools travel anyway. the larger schools are lucky in this area that the district have mostly been local a few exceptions "dayton baytown" westbrook and pam travel all other locals have dropped.i rteally like the sound of this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of all the whining about school size. In 2000, we went to the championship game as one of the smallest 4A schools in Texas. I realize it makes a difference in the size of the talent pool, but not enough for some wacky re-alignment like this one. That re-districting would leave us with Bridge City as our only reasonably close rival. Silsbee would be the next closest. That totally ruins what high school football is supposed to be about - playing your neighbors, your neighboring school, your neighboring town, etc. Cross-town rivalries could be squashed with this crap.

WO-S just beat a school with almost double its enrollment for the second straight year. Get over this enrollment thing, UIL. The current system is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of all the whining about school size. In 2000, we went to the championship game as one of the smallest 4A schools in Texas. I realize it makes a difference in the size of the talent pool, but not enough for some wacky re-alignment like this one. That re-districting would leave us with Bridge City as our only reasonably close rival. Silsbee would be the next closest. That totally ruins what high school football is supposed to be about - playing your neighbors, your neighboring school, your neighboring town, etc. Cross-town rivalries could be squashed with this crap.

92

You could still play either Orangefield, Hamshire-Fannett or Kirbyville as non-district. You would want to keep LCM, then it's either dropping Dayton or Bay City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here would be WO-S's travel numbers for that district:

To Silsbee - 40 miles

To Jasper - 66 miles

To Splendora - 101 miles

To Cleveland - 91 miles

To HJ - 44 miles

To Bridge City - 7 miles

That's a grand total of 349 miles between us and district away games. I realize that only about half would be away, but still - it's ridiculous. The current district is almost 100 fewer miles of travel.

And it's not as bad for us as it is for teams like LC-M. Look at their district! How could they be excited to play any of those teams when they've got all of these familiar foes in their own backyards?

I'm not worried about playing OF or HF. I'm worried about half of our games being against teams we have no connection with. District is supposed to be about familiar foes - deep-rooted "hatred." Splendora? Come on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of all the whining about school size. In 2000, we went to the championship game as one of the smallest 4A schools in Texas. I realize it makes a difference in the size of the talent pool, but not enough for some wacky re-alignment like this one. That re-districting would leave us with Bridge City as our only reasonably close rival. Silsbee would be the next closest. That totally ruins what high school football is supposed to be about - playing your neighbors, your neighboring school, your neighboring town, etc. Cross-town rivalries could be squashed with this crap.

WO-S just beat a school with almost double its enrollment for the second straight year. Get over this enrollment thing, UIL. The current system is fine.

I agree.  It is just an attempt to have the weaker schools feel good because they "made" the playoffs. Kirbyville is one of the smallest 3A schools and is on the verge of being in the top 10.  How can this be since obviously they are just too small to even compete?    HF was dominant in the early 90s.  Orangefield had a run.  Hj has been to the playoffs recently.  BC has been there.  The potential is there.  If schools really want to compete, get those kids out there and have them buy into your program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of all the whining about school size. In 2000, we went to the championship game as one of the smallest 4A schools in Texas. I realize it makes a difference in the size of the talent pool, but not enough for some wacky re-alignment like this one. That re-districting would leave us with Bridge City as our only reasonably close rival. Silsbee would be the next closest. That totally ruins what high school football is supposed to be about - playing your neighbors, your neighboring school, your neighboring town, etc. Cross-town rivalries could be squashed with this crap.

WO-S just beat a school with almost double its enrollment for the second straight year. Get over this enrollment thing, UIL. The current system is fine.

I couldn't agree more. Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here would be WO-S's travel numbers for that district:

To Silsbee - 40 miles

To Jasper - 66 miles

To Splendora - 101 miles

To Cleveland - 91 miles

To HJ - 44 miles

To Bridge City - 7 miles

That's a grand total of 349 miles between us and district away games. I realize that only about half would be away, but still - it's ridiculous. The current district is almost 100 fewer miles of travel.

And it's not as bad for us as it is for teams like LC-M. Look at their district! How could they be excited to play any of those teams when they've got all of these familiar foes in their own backyards?

I'm not worried about playing OF or HF. I'm worried about half of our games being against teams we have no connection with. District is supposed to be about familiar foes - deep-rooted "hatred." Splendora? Come on...

There would be probably worst scenerios than this. Orangefield would have to travel to Shepherd and Coldspring. The west Texas teams would travel further.

Like I said before, the UIL claims they are doing it for fairness, but we all know the reason we have more playoff games and more state champions is to generate more money for the UIL, plain and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of all the whining about school size. In 2000, we went to the championship game as one of the smallest 4A schools in Texas. I realize it makes a difference in the size of the talent pool, but not enough for some wacky re-alignment like this one. That re-districting would leave us with Bridge City as our only reasonably close rival. Silsbee would be the next closest. That totally ruins what high school football is supposed to be about - playing your neighbors, your neighboring school, your neighboring town, etc. Cross-town rivalries could be squashed with this crap.

WO-S just beat a school with almost double its enrollment for the second straight year. Get over this enrollment thing, UIL. The current system is fine.

Well, thats great WOS92 that WOS won in 2000 being one of the smallest 4A schools in texas, quite an accomplishment.  Lets face it though, you are fortunate to be a fan of WOS which is probably the only elite football program this area (there are a lot of good ones but not elite except maybe Newton).  I think its real easy to complain about the new realignment plan when you are an elite program and can play with anyone in size.  But try being a fan of a small school like Orangefield thats traditionally been a small 3A school for a long time and is now pretty much playing mostly old 4A teams now that moved down to 3A.  Half of the teams they played 10-20 years ago are now in 2A.  Most of the districts look totally different than they did 10 years ago so rivalries have already been effected for a while, so your rivalry argument is weak.  Since most teams have 2-4 non district games they could play their former district rivals then (like LCM and WOS).  Orangefield has no rivalry with any of these former 4A teams which is half the district now, i know you will say BC but they just moved down to 4A less than 10 years ago and didnt really play OF on a year to year basis till after 2000 to start a rivalry really.  And yeah, OF has made the playoffs since 2000, but WOS and Silsbee werent in the district yet.  I know Orangefield and some of these other small schools dont have traditional big teams, but you cant sit through a game with OF vs WOS or Silsbee or other big 3A schools and honestly say they should be playing in the same district/classification, the size difference between the kids of both schools is an obvious disadvantage.  If you just looked at the size of the schools and teams on the schedule, Orangefield looked a lot closer to EC and Buna in size on the field, and thats because they are close in enrollment.  The new realignment plan is totally fair for everyone.  WOS92, you pointed out in another post that the difference in travel between old and new districts is 100 miles or so.  If you average it out, thats only like 20 more miles on average more of travelling distance for 3-4 away games a season.  If you are going to "whine" about travelling a little further for 3-4 games a year, i think most people on this board like myself see that as sour grapes for a plan that gives many schools in this area and statewide a lot better chance to succeed against schools their own size and making more competitive balance.

I think if you going to have a big school and small school state champ from each classification, this realignment plan makes sense and is necessary.  In my opinion, if they dont realign the schools to make a true small school and big school districts for each classification, they should just do away with big and small school state champs in each class and have just one state champ for each class.  A good example of why: wasnt the 5A div II state champ bigger than the div I state champ in recent years?  The system now is just flawed, because the of the disparity in enrollments between districts creates some big schools getting in the playoffs as small schools and some small schools forced to play in the big school playoffs because the small enrollment #'s in their district.  Plus, many small schools are left out of the current playoffs that would normally make the playoffs if they played under the new realignment plan. 

I also think if they are gonna do this new realignment plan for football, they should extend it to baseball and basketball also.  Its hypocritical to say its unfair to small schools playing big schools only in football and change it and not do the same for other sports.  Because those same disadvantages for football, also exist in the other sports. 

What do yall think of my ideas, yall agree with me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined



  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...