Alto caught fudging numbers

[AggiesAreWe]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

·

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Listening to the UIL hearing on Alto's division alignment. * Alto turned in enrollment number in error. * True number would have placed it in division 1. The difference was 3 students.

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

·

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

UIL committee has ruled that Alto will stay in 11-2AD2 for football but will be ineligible for district honors (can't make playoffs). Doesn't not apply to any sports other than football as they were properly aligned.

[AggiesAreWe]

Question now is will the ban be for just this year or next year as well?

[AggiesAreWe]

txhsfb(Tony Blalock)

 

@TXHSFB

· 13m

Alto can seek a Division I district to play in for 2023. This would require a unanimous vote from 11-2AD2 to allow Alto to leave & a unanimous vote of the district they would be joining.

[Hupernikomen]

Sure sad for the seniors this year.  Probably see a move or two to Rusk or Crockett. 

[2wedge]

A sure 2 year ban. No way they will get 100% of the vote in two different districts to move back up to D1 next year. Chances are the coach they just hired will be gone after this year and Alto will suffer the negative effects of this issue for years to come. That's a huge blow to a declining program in a town that's on the decline also. 

I am curious if any of this is tied into why Gamble left abruptly. I figured when he took that job he would be there for a long time, so when he resigned, I assumed something was going on behind the scenes that no one was aware of. 

[Hagar]

I wonder……….

Only one, or only one that got caught?

[Matthew328]

22 hours ago, 2wedge said:

A sure 2 year ban. No way they will get 100% of the vote in two different districts to move back up to D1 next year. Chances are the coach they just hired will be gone after this year and Alto will suffer the negative effects of this issue for years to come. That's a huge blow to a declining program in a town that's on the decline also. 

I am curious if any of this is tied into why Gamble left abruptly. I figured when he took that job he would be there for a long time, so when he resigned, I assumed something was going on behind the scenes that no one was aware of. 

I think this had a LOT to do with it reading between the lines

[Justafan72]

On 8/2/2022 at 10:35 PM, Hupernikomen said:

Sure sad for the seniors this year.  Probably see a move or two to Rusk or Crockett. 

Agreed ! Why should the players pay for administrative blunders ? UIL should open it up for these players.

[2wedge]

3 hours ago, Justafan72 said:

Agreed ! Why should the players pay for administrative blunders ? UIL should open it up for these players.

Are we sure this was an administrative blunder, or do we think Alto purposely held the 3 kids out in order to fall below the cut line. Based on Gamble's resignation and the smoke surrounding that, I am working under the assumption that this was intentional and I'd expect we will see more heads roll as a result of it. 

[AggiesAreWe]

22 minutes ago, 2wedge said:

Are we sure this was an administrative blunder, or do we think Alto purposely held the 3 kids out in order to fall below the cut line. Based on Gamble's resignation and the smoke surrounding that, I am working under the assumption that this was intentional and I'd expect we will see more heads roll as a result of it. 

I had heard that the implication was they dis enrolled a few students before snapshot then re-enrolled them.

Regardless, the UIL really had no other choice but to ban them from postseason. I also think the UIL suspects there was intent on Alto's part.

[2wedge]

2 hours ago, AggiesAreWe said:

I had heard that the implication was they dis enrolled a few students before snapshot then re-enrolled them.

Regardless, the UIL really had no other choice but to ban them from postseason. I also think the UIL suspects there was intent on Alto's part.

IMO, this could be true, but its hard to believe. If they did unenroll 3 kids, snapshot happens, then they re-enroll them, that's fishy as heck. Maybe admin didn't know, and Gamble was utilizing a tactic his dad used years ago and that's what did him in at Alto. I am sure the truth will leak out someday. 

[myrecordwashorrible]

My question and wish I knew school law a bit better.  Might this be a violation of law?  Falsifying documents in a professional capacity at least should be grounds for dismissal without pay for all involved.  

[Matthew328]

9 hours ago, myrecordwashorrible said:

My question and wish I knew school law a bit better.  Might this be a violation of law?  Falsifying documents in a professional capacity at least should be grounds for dismissal without pay for all involved.  

Regardless that registrar was fired by Alto ISD

[myrecordwashorrible]

The registrar did it alone?  If so, that's almost impressive.  

[Matthew328]

33 minutes ago, myrecordwashorrible said:

The registrar did it alone?  If so, that's almost impressive.  

 I dont believe the registrar was solely responsible and I dont believe the UIL feels that way either

[lcm93]

Lucky gamble was the coach at lcm for 2 years 89 and 90 season !! He was also the head coach at deweyville in the early to mid 80s

[Mr. Thornton Melon]

Alto hiring former employees from Livingston ?  Sounds like Livingston math , although it's still referred to as arithmetic @ LISD

 

[tvc184]

On 8/2/2022 at 2:19 PM, AggiesAreWe said:

Question now is will the ban be for just this year or next year as well?

I listened to most of the UIL meeting online. This if what I got from the meeting and action.

1. Alto was represented and under oath admitted the violation whether intentional or accident. It happened.

2. The UIL did not ban nor take a vote ban Alto. The ban is an automatic rules violation and UIL rules are that a school is not eligible for post season or honors if placed in a lower division by falsifying the numbers (again, intentional or otherwise).

3. Alto suggested simply changing to the correct 2A Div 1 where they were supposed to be. THAT is what seems like the main discussion focused on after the investigation phase. Okay, they messed up but do you punish the students? What is the relief?

4. The UIL committee voted unanimously that there simply was no time. If I understood what was being said in the meeting, the UIL committee had no authority to change the realignment. Alto could technically change districts however scrimmages start this coming Friday (realistically with no effect on the district) but the regular season in a couple of weeks. There is no time for two districts to throw out there schedules and start over. The false numbers were reported this month so the UIL was up against a severe time constraint. Basically it was, sorry Alto but this was turned in to late to correct.

5. Alto is not banned from post season next year but by the same rule, Alto is not allowed to compete in the lower division. You can’t have a 2A Div 1 school potentially winning the 2A Div 2 district they are currently in or even state championship. Can we imagine… The new 2A Div 2 state champion is, 2A Div 1 Alto!!! 🤣

6. Alto will be allowed to compete in 2A Div 1 next year however……

Alto has to find any district in their region that will accept them. If they do, then each member school from the district committees in BOTH districts must unanimously accept releasing Alto from their current district and being accepted into the new district. So any school from either district has essentially veto power and again, this was not a vote but a UIL rule.

We know locally those district committees have life and death authority over rules violations locally. Was it Nederland a few years ago who had to forfeit a district game because of an ineligible transfer player and it took them out of the playoffs?  If I remember correctly, paperwork for the transfer was submitted and like Alto, intentional or not, the district committee gets to make the call. They voted for the forfeiture.

To make it short, the UIL did not vote to ban Alto, UIL rules did that automatically. You can’t play and qualify in a lower division due to the mistake. Alto has the option of correcting it next year but they have to find a district to accept them and then both districts will have to unanimously accept the change. 

[tvc184]

If anyone wishes to listen to the one hour and 10 minutes meeting, this is it. You can drag it down to about the 18 minutes remaining point and get the rules discussion and results and see if I understood it correctly. 
 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Balanor]

I listened to this ruling several days ago and it seems to have been a simple "small school with not enough resources" and not a "let's falsify the numbers so our kids can compete against schools with less kids" to my ears.

The two primary folks that were involved in the counting students to send these reports have 3 years in those roles combined.  I would be shocked if this was intentional.  Sure the coach / AD would know where that line was that divides the divisions, but that doesn't mean the folks actually doing the work did. 

And looking at it from an outside perspective, they could have easily held a few students out of the official counts because they were being overly cautious so that the funding per student was not unintentionally inflated.. which would have potentially caused issues on the administrative / financial side of things.

But it sounded like it boiled down to 1-2 folks either being lazy or not having a good process in place or a combination of both.

I get WHY the UIL can't allow them to play in the post-season, but feel bad for these seniors.  I'm not sure how the process played out, but it sounds like Alto could have admitted their mistakes and potentially found a district for these kids months ago.  But instead tried to fight it until it was too late.. but again I'm not sure the timing of all of these procedures.

[tvc184]

53 minutes ago, Balanor said:

……but it sounds like Alto could have admitted their mistakes and potentially found a district for these kids months ago.  But instead tried to fight it until it was too late.. but again I'm not sure the timing of all of these procedures.

That is what I kind of understood and it was brought up in part of the hearing that I listened to. The UIL in the hearing said that the coaches knew back in December what district they would be in. I didn’t listen to the entire hearing but I am reasonably certain that the UIL committee didn’t get the case until early August or over 7 months after the mistake was made  

Also from what I understood, the UIL didn’t punish Alto except to put them on (I think) 3 years of probation. The chairman said in the meeting, probation is pretty much, we will have our eye on you for 3 years to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

Alto was caught up in a severely limited time frame leaving almost no option for this year.

 I didn’t hear where Alto was accused of intentionally falsifying the numbers. In fact if that could be proven, it is likely a felony.

 The UIL drew an attendance line for divisions and Alto by their own mistake fell on the wrong side of the line.

Someone needs to listen to the entire 70 minute hearing and report back….. 😀

[Balanor]

3 hours ago, tvc184 said:

That is what I kind of understood and it was brought up in part of the hearing that I listened to. The UIL in the hearing said that the coaches knew back in December what district they would be in. I didn’t listen to the entire hearing but I am reasonably certain that the UIL committee didn’t get the case until early August or over 7 months after the mistake was made  

Also from what I understood, the UIL didn’t punish Alto except to put them on (I think) 3 years of probation. The chairman said in the meeting, probation is pretty much, we will have our eye on you for 3 years to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

Alto was caught up in a severely limited time frame leaving almost no option for this year.

 I didn’t hear where Alto was accused of intentionally falsifying the numbers. In fact if that could be proven, it is likely a felony.

 The UIL drew an attendance line for divisions and Alto by their own mistake fell on the wrong side of the line.

Someone needs to listen to the entire 70 minute hearing and report back….. 😀

I listened to it all.  The arbitrator / investigator / lawyer said there was no indication of intentional wrong doing.  It was more or less not enough people involved combined with a poor process in how the numbers are collected and then reported.

Probation (3 years), report turned in to the UIL detailing the improved process of reporting enrollments, AND no playoffs (1 year) is my understanding of the penalties / sanctions.

[tvc184]

12 minutes ago, Balanor said:

I listened to it all.  The arbitrator / investigator / lawyer said there was no indication of intentional wrong doing.  It was more or less not enough people involved combined with a poor process in how the numbers are collected and then reported.

Probation (3 years), report turned in to the UIL detailing the improved process of reporting enrollments, AND no playoffs (1 year) is my understanding of the penalties / sanctions.

Yep, I think that is what I said and understood in the sections that I listened to.

And the no playoffs, if I heard correctly, is not a penalty but a rule (like I think you said earlier). A school can’t make the playoffs in a lower classification and for this year, they are stuck in that lower classification because it was too late (like you said earlier).

I was reading another sports forum where a few people were angry with the UIL, it was some underhanded dealings toward Alto, they were cheating the kids and blah blah.

I don’t think so. It was unfortunate but the UIL didn’t do anything wrong toward Alto. 

[Balanor]

49 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

Yep, I think that is what I said and understood in the sections that I listened to.

And the no playoffs, if I heard correctly, is not a penalty but a rule (like I think you said earlier). A school can’t make the playoffs in a lower classification and for this year, they are stuck in that lower classification because it was too late (like you said earlier).

I was reading another sports forum where a few people were angry with the UIL, it was some underhanded dealings toward Alto, they were cheating the kids and blah blah.

I don’t think so. It was unfortunate but the UIL didn’t do anything wrong toward Alto. 

Yeah I agree. 

The UIL can seem heavy handed at times, but they follow the rules set forth and in my opinion really do try and be fair.  The primary thing they seem to keep in the back of their minds at all times is to "keep a level playing field". 

MOST of their 'cases' are appeals from players who were deemed "transferring for athletic purposes" and I have to say.. I am impressed with the way they handle their proceedings. 

Some of them are tough decisions that they don't want to make, but they know they can not simply overrule a district's decision based on 'feelings'. 

Of course some of them are obvious in that the players have told their old coaches / teachers and sometimes through texts / emails that they are going to the school up the road because the program is better.