Should UIL have other sports go to divisions like football?

[AggiesAreWe]

I ask this question with this example of a bit of the unfairness the other sports face that football doesn't.

In Region I 4A DII, there are 20 schools. 16 of those will make the playoffs (80%). That means only 4 teams will not make playoffs in the entire region.

Where as in the other sports (basketball, baseball, etc.) there are 51 schools in that region but only 16 make playoffs (31%).

This seems extremely unfair.

 

Thoughts?

[aTmfan06]

I don’t think it should. 

[AggiesAreWe]

15 minutes ago, aTmfan06 said:

I don’t think it should. 

Why?

[BH85]

27 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I ask this question with this example of a bit of the unfairness the other sports face that football doesn't.

In Region I 4A DII, there are 20 schools. 16 of those will make the playoffs (80%). That means only 4 teams will not make playoffs in the entire region.

Where as in the other sports (basketball, baseball, etc.) there are 51 schools in that region but only 16 make playoffs (31%).

This seems extremely unfair.

 

Thoughts?

I think they should, but more importantly you have to figure out how not to have it setup for any sport where 80% of the teams are making the playoffs.

[AggiesAreWe]

Just now, BH85 said:

I think they should, but more importantly you have to figure out how not to have it setup for any sport where 80% of the teams are making the playoffs.

Thank you!!

[RETIREDFAN1]

"Fair" only exists in Heaven, and this ain't it......lol......if it ain't broke, don't fix it...........

[AggiesAreWe]

10 minutes ago, WestHardinfan1 said:

"Fair" only exists in Heaven, and this ain't it......lol......if it ain't broke, don't fix it...........

What makes one think it's not broke?

Any playoff system that allows 80% of it's teams to make the playoffs seems broken to me.

I'm just wondering why fairness was the big factor in creating divisional districts in football but not considered in doing them in other sports?

Travel was certainly not a factor when making those divisional football districts.

[oldschool2]

Or.. just do away with divisions in football and make the basketball/football/baseball districts the same, but in football send two of them to a big school bracket and two to a small school one.  Go ahead and do that with baseball and basketball too... big school champ and small school champ.

I don't know.  I'm sure there are plenty of flaws with that theory that I'll get bombarded with shortly. 

[AggiesAreWe]

14 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

Or.. just do away with divisions in football and make the basketball/football/baseball districts the same, but in football send two of them to a big school bracket and two to a small school one.  Go ahead and do that with baseball and basketball too... big school champ and small school champ.

I don't know.  I'm sure there are plenty of flaws with that theory that I'll get bombarded with shortly. 

Personally, I never had a problem with separating playoff teams into divisions after district play. 

I'm just wondering why in football it's all about "fairness" and travel is not a factor but in other sports travel is a factor and "fairness" is not?

[RETIREDFAN1]

27 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

What makes one think it's not broke?

Any playoff system that allows 80% of it's teams to make the playoffs seems broken to me.

I'm just wondering why fairness was the big factor in creating divisional districts in football but not considered in doing them in other sports?

Travel was certainly not a factor when making those divisional football districts.

People don't MIND travelling to watch football.....compare attendance figures.......people won't travel far to watch basketball or any other sport......

[oldschool2]

5 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Personally, I never had a problem with separating playoff teams into divisions after district play. 

I'm just wondering why in football it's all about "fairness" and travel is not a factor but in other sports travel is a factor and "fairness" is not?

Agree 100%.  Like I said.. just do it the same with them all.  Football, basketball, baseball, volleyball.. and just sent two big school and two small school.  Could possibly go back to 8+ sized districts which would be great in my opinion.

[oldschool2]

9 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Personally, I never had a problem with separating playoff teams into divisions after district play. 

I'm just wondering why in football it's all about "fairness" and travel is not a factor but in other sports travel is a factor and "fairness" is not?

Especially considering that football won't travel to every opponent every year for varsity sports.. they alternate each year.  Whereas the other sports will travel to every opponent every year.  Playing two games a week. 

[waltersobchak]

13 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Personally, I never had a problem with separating playoff teams into divisions after district play. 

I'm just wondering why in football it's all about "fairness" and travel is not a factor but in other sports travel is a factor and "fairness" is not?

I dont personally care either way, but there seems to be more parody across other sports whereas due to depth reasons, there seems to be more of an advantage to bigger schools in football specifically. 

[SherriffReesie]

One reason travel doesn't matter for football is most varsity games are played on Friday or Saturday instead of a Tuesday. It makes a big difference when you play a team in basketball on Tuesday night 150 miles away then you expect the kids to also give effort in the classroom the next day. I know what about middle school football and sub-varsity football. Teams that have those spread out districts are starting to join leagues where they play the schools closer to them that aren't the same size. Using the district with Shepherd for example, I would not be surprised if they decided to try to play local teams like Coldspring and Livingston on Thursday night instead of traveling to Carthage.

[AggiesAreWe]

13 minutes ago, WestHardinfan1 said:

People don't MIND travelling to watch football.....compare attendance figures.......people won't travel far to watch basketball or any other sport......

Oh, so this is about the "fans", not about "fairness"?

I said this many times. Policies, regulations, decisions should never factor the fan in when concerning high school sports. It's about the schools, athletes, coaches and students. Not the fans.

[ST413]

44 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

Or.. just do away with divisions in football and make the basketball/football/baseball districts the same, but in football send two of them to a big school bracket and two to a small school one.  Go ahead and do that with baseball and basketball too... big school champ and small school champ.

I don't know.  I'm sure there are plenty of flaws with that theory that I'll get bombarded with shortly. 

That was already done....thing is like has been said it comes down to two things1) money for the uil. 2) and travel for teams playing two rounds in district.  Quit honestly there are too many teams making the playoffs when that number gets remotely close to 80%.  Don’t know if any way it would work out logistically but you need districts with Fairly even numbers of teams then you could base the number of playoff teams on that.  

[RETIREDFAN1]

12 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Oh, so this is about the "fans", not about "fairness"?

I said this many times. Policies, regulations, decisions should never factor the fan in when concerning high school sports. It's about the schools, athletes, coaches and students. Not the fans.

COACHES don't want to be travelling on Tuesday nights, either........

[ST413]

15 minutes ago, SherriffReesie said:

One reason travel doesn't matter for football is most varsity games are played on Friday or Saturday instead of a Tuesday. It makes a big difference when you play a team in basketball on Tuesday night 150 miles away then you expect the kids to also give effort in the classroom the next day. I know what about middle school football and sub-varsity football. Teams that have those spread out districts are starting to join leagues where they play the schools closer to them that aren't the same size. Using the district with Shepherd for example, I would not be surprised if they decided to try to play local teams like Coldspring and Livingston on Thursday night instead of traveling to Carthage.

So why don’t they schedule district games like I notice college baseball does on the Friday or Saturday and play a nondistrict on tuesday just start the district season a lot earlier in the year?  Of course you would run into the players playing in the football playoff problem.

[AggiesAreWe]

25 minutes ago, WestHardinfan1 said:

COACHES don't want to be travelling on Tuesday nights, either........

If it meant for them to face more equal number size teams and gives them a better chance to make playoffs (aka football) I'm pretty sure the majority would be ok with extra travel. On a resume, wins and playoff success far out weigh the travel it took to accomplish those things.

[oldschool2]

3 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

If it meant for them to face more equal number size teams and gives them a better chance to make playoffs (aka football) I'm pretty sure the majority would be ok with extra travel. On a resume, wins and playoff success far out weigh the travel it took to accomplish those things.

Fact.  A good buddy of mine that used to coach used to say "I'd drive across the state for a win but I won't walk across the street for an a$$ whipping."

Seems logical to me. 

[navydawg31]

I had this conversation before with some people.... You will always upset someone and somebody that’s the nature of the beast. But IMO I believe it needs to be a split big school and a little school D1 and D2 in all Sports.  Have a set up where Even years The Big school plays the first set of games weekend 1 then Little schools play the following weekend championship games and they alternate every year. Stagger the playoffs so it won’t have that week off and the athletes can play straight through. More money for UIL, more of a fair shot at the other sports because you can’t use enrollment numbers as a excuse. You build rivalries through football, basketball, baseball instead of play in football but won’t see you in basketball till playoffs etc. 

[WOSgrad]

3 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I ask this question with this example of a bit of the unfairness the other sports face that football doesn't.

In Region I 4A DII, there are 20 schools. 16 of those will make the playoffs (80%). That means only 4 teams will not make playoffs in the entire region.

Where as in the other sports (basketball, baseball, etc.) there are 51 schools in that region but only 16 make playoffs (31%).

This seems extremely unfair.

 

Thoughts?

 I think we have to take a bigger look at the numbers here.  In Class 4A Region I football, there are only 39 teams (19 in DI, 20 in DII).  Whereas AAW noted earlier, there are 51 in other sports in Class 4A, Region I.  It appears that the percentage disparity, as 32 teams make it in the other sports due to their being 4 teams coming out of 8 districts in other sports and 32 teams come out of 8 districts (4 DI and 4 DII), is really with the number of teams that the UIL put in Region I in Class 4A, 39 for football vs. 51 for the other sports.

That being said, I still think the UIL should do the same for all sports, divisions or no.

[AggiesAreWe]

19 minutes ago, WOSgrad said:

 I think we have to take a bigger look at the numbers here.  In Class 4A Region I football, there are only 39 teams (19 in DI, 20 in DII).  Whereas AAW noted earlier, there are 51 in other sports in Class 4A, Region I.  It appears that the percentage disparity, as 32 teams make it in the other sports due to their being 4 teams coming out of 8 districts in other sports and 32 teams come out of 8 districts (4 DI and 4 DII), is really with the number of teams that the UIL put in Region I in Class 4A, 39 for football vs. 51 for the other sports.

That being said, I still think the UIL should do the same for all sports, divisions or no.

Then that would be 32 teams making playoffs out of 39, which is 82%.

[BMTSoulja1]

Very good debate from both sides.  This is a conversation that I've pondered about for years.  I know the reason the UIL splits the classifications up in football, but if you're already even Steven, then you'd just have to let all districts be the same across the board, Football, Basketball, Volleyball, and Soccer.  Maybe YOU should foot part of the bill for travel expenses for the nonfootball  side of things and just take the talk of cost out of the equation.  That just leaves distance. for these distant Tuesday and Friday games, these athletes get out of school early, missing class time.  The sacrifice would be some kind of catchup day, maybe a Saturday a month so that these student athletes can catch up on those later period classes they left to go to the game early.  Bottom line, you want maximum participation  in every sport so you can't make exceptions for one and not the rest just because it generates more money or is more popular...

[myrecordwashorrible]

 

The fairness aspect is a big issue. Not trying to avoid the original question, but the following is about to be lengthy enough.  The UIL's 4A classification itself has issues as it is the classification with the least number of schools (I believe this to be correct).  If I counted correctly, there are 188 football schools in 4A and 202(boys) and 203(girls) basketball schools.  The 188 football programs causes an issue that I am not sure how to deal with.  Unless there was a decision to pull 10 or so schools down from 5A and do the same with a pull up from 3A, the numbers simply leave a mathematical issue before we even discuss logistics.  If the UIL allows the largest school districts to keep all schools from that district in the same athletic district (ex. HISD - District 11 D1), you are left with 180 schools for the 31 remaining districts (whether combined as 1 conference or split into 2).  If one would then make things as equal as possible, you are left with 6 districts with 5 schools and 25 with 6.    This would still leave (if using the split conference method) of 2 regions have 2 districts with 5 teams and 2 with 6 teams.  This still leaves only 6 teams staying home in those regions with 16 still entering the playoffs. 

 Even with this, there would definitely be even more travel involved than already exists. 

There just are not simply enough schools in this classification for it to have an equitable set up and pulling from the others would likely cause problems for those classifications as well.  Maybe, a better answer for this classification is larger districts with some byes in the first round of the playoffs?  However, that starts a whole new argument.  We may all have disagreements with the UIL, but I simply do not envy the task they have with realignment.  

Side note: If you look closely there is quite a bit of shifting of schools to different regions from football to basketball to make the basketball alignment more "equal".