Jump to content

Lumberton 45 Hardin-Jefferson 70/FINAL


Recommended Posts

  • AggiesAreWe changed the title to Lumberton 45 Hardin-Jefferson 70/FINAL
11 hours ago, Knox34 said:

I’ll bite 😂. I just enjoy watching a playoff game when the number 15 team in state gets to play at home. 

Should be the standard.  4th place teams in 6-7 team districts should just be happy to get a shot and another game.  Rental and travel cost reduced for school districts that are limited on funds anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, swamp123 said:

Should be the standard.  4th place teams in 6-7 team districts should just be happy to get a shot and another game.  Rental and travel cost reduced for school districts that are limited on funds anyway. 

I agree. A district champ should always host the 1st round game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll tell you this. If I’m a 4th place team and I have an option of that not happening I’m taking it. If it “should” be a rule … that’s another discussion. But to have the option and not use it to me is foolish. Would it have changed outcome. Probably not. But it surely couldn’t hurt to have a neutral site. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A playoff game setting and hype and the fun these kids have playing in gyms and traveling and the whole process is something these kids hold onto and remember. To flip a coin and not give those seniors and players a good opportunity to enjoy the atmosphere and experience is not something I personally wouldn’t do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Knox34 said:

A playoff game setting and hype and the fun these kids have playing in gyms and traveling and the whole process is something these kids hold onto and remember. To flip a coin and not give those seniors and players a good opportunity to enjoy the atmosphere and experience is not something I personally wouldn’t do. 

It's only 20 miles from Lumberton HS to Hardin-Jefferson HS.

I don't have a problem with a coach doing what he thinks is the best thing for his team to win. Coach Mitchell obviously thought his best chance of winning was being able to play at home so he took the chance.

I have always believed that a district champion should be rewarded with hosting a 1st round game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Knox34 said:

I like his thought and balls on the situation. But to have to win 2 coin flips to get it seems pretty unrealistic. Wasn’t it 2 flips?  

Yes. First flip is to get the opportunity to flip for home and home. Win that flip and then the 2nd flip determines which school hosts the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • 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...