KFDM COOP Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up SPLIT CONFERENCE FOOTBALL ALIGNMENT STUDY - DRAFT This is a draft of a plan that could split football conferences into two divisions. This is not a proposal by UIL staff, nor has it been approved by the UIL Legislative Council. The study of a split conference alignment plan for football is complete. This plan divides each conference into two divisions in football. The largest half of each conference is grouped into a division and the smaller half of the conference is divided into a separate division. The large school division has 16 districts and the smallest half of each conference has 16 districts. Approximately six to eight schools are placed into each district. The same number of schools from each district advance to the playoffs. Twelve champions would be crowned as is done currently. Possible Advantages: • Provides more clarity and less confusion regarding who is Division I and who is Division II. • Clearly defines divisions prior to the season rather than at the end of district play. • Creates more equity in relation to the largest and smallest school within a division. • Eliminates two schools with the largest enrollments in the state advancing to the playoffs in the smaller enrollment division. • Eliminates the smallest schools in a conference grouped with the largest schools in a conference. Possible Disadvantges: • Additional travel. • Other team sport activities could want the same division alignment. • Creates an additional group of schools that will be the smallest within a division. • Creates administrative inconvenience. • Scheduling issues could occur in multi-school districts that share stadiums. The UIL staff presented the concept to the Legislative Council in June and October. The Council authorized this study to provide information regarding the actual placement of schools into districts. This draft is for study purposes only and applies only to football. Conference -Enrollment -Range -Number of schools 5A Division 1 -2565 and above -123 5A Division 2 -2085 - 2564 -123 4A Division 1 -1520 - 2084 -120 4A Division 2 -980 - 1519 -121 3A Division 1 -629 - 979 -89 3A Division 2 -430 - 628 -88 2A Division 1 -292 - 429 -103 2A Division 2 -200 - 291 -102 1A Division 1 -155 - 199 -82 1A Division 2 -100 - 154 -82
KFDM COOP Posted May 5, 2008 Author Report Posted May 5, 2008 5A D1 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 5A D2 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 4A D1 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 4A D2 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 3A D1 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 3A D2 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 2A D1 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 2A D2 Proposal This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
Guest Pirate V Ball Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 Hope this passes next time. Teams will play teams closer to their enrollment.
RETIREDFAN1 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Looks like Coop forgot that Class A is a part of the UIL..... ;D Class A Division 1 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Class A Division 2 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
Guest ECBucFan Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 http://texasprepxtra.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=804727 SPLIT CONFERENCE FOOTBALL ALIGNMENT STUDY - DRAFT Possible Disadvantges: • Additional travel. Possible Disadvantges? Ha! Its a flat out certainty. Heres one example: District 12 Deweyville Garrison Groveton New Waverly San Augustine Shelbyville When you are pumping a $100 of gas into your car, and about to make the two hour drive...THANK THE UIL.
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 Looks like Coop forgot that Class A is a part of the UIL..... ;D Class A Division 1 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up Class A Division 2 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up 1A Link wasn't working last night, thanks for posting it.
HouTexan Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Just don't see some of these alignments happening. Central will go broke... District 9 Beaumont Central Conroe Caney Creek Humble Kingwood Park Huntsville Magnolia Magnolia West Montgomery Willis
SFA85 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Smiley/Forest Brook combo is a done deal so put them in division 1 and swap places with Central and get them back in the Golden Triangle
AggiesAreWe Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 This is all a joke. School districts with low budgets will not go for more travel with the prices of gas and diesel are now. The UIL believing that getting schools to compete against similiar enrollment schools while making some go broke is the right thing to do just shows where the mindset is. They could care less how much it will cost a school district to carry out there plan. This is so lame.
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree and i see what your saying. But you would be surprised the Coaches especially Small School Coaches who want this to pass. The UIL is wanting Teams to play teams close to their enrollment so they'll have a better chance to make the postseason and more.
AggiesAreWe Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree and i see what your saying. But you would be surprised the Coaches especially Small School Coaches who want this to pass. The UIL is wanting Teams to play teams close to their enrollment so they'll have a better chance to make the postseason and more. Of course the coaches would want this, evens the playing field, maybe. : But the fact is, the coaches don't set the school district's budget. I am sure you have some coaches out there who don't mind spending the money while taking away from something else. The ole " robbing Peter to pay Paul " bit. I am sure there are many sensible coaches who are against this plan too.
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree and i see what your saying. But you would be surprised the Coaches especially Small School Coaches who want this to pass. The UIL is wanting Teams to play teams close to their enrollment so they'll have a better chance to make the postseason and more. Of course the coaches would want this, evens the playing field, maybe. : But the fact is, the coaches don't set the school district's budget. I am sure you have some coaches out there who don't mind spending the money while taking away from something else. The ole " robbing Peter to pay Paul " bit. I am sure there are many sensible coaches who are against this plan too. There are.
Guest ECBucFan Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 http://texasprepxtra.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=804727 SPLIT CONFERENCE FOOTBALL ALIGNMENT STUDY - DRAFT Possible Disadvantges: • Additional travel. Possible Disadvantges? Ha! Its a flat out certainty. Heres one example: District 12 Deweyville Garrison Groveton New Waverly San Augustine Shelbyville When you are pumping a $100 of gas into your car, and about to make the two hour drive...THANK THE UIL. Those beating the drum for this fiasco will quickly have reality hit when the scheduals are released. Look at the DV opponents. Instead of playing Warren and Kountze, they get to travel to New Waverly, Garrison, and Shelbyville, etc. BRILLIANT! :
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree but the plan is for Schools to play Schools with near are the same enrollment.
shorttexas1 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Smiley/Forest Brook combo is a done deal so put them in division 1 and swap places with Central and get them back in the Golden Triangle It wont work because Central has a high enrollment than the Triangle schools... They are all in D2. But at least put them with the houston schools... We have Livingston this year without that alignment, so there is really no difference. Every year there is some school in some district traveling so that is not the biggest disadvantage. I kind of like this idea!
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 They'll flip flop Central and North Forest.
Guest ECBucFan Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree but the plan is for Schools to play Schools with near are the same enrollment. Yes, everyone understands that. To some degree this will backfire. In 2A, some "large" teams were pathetic, and some of the smallest (Alto, now 1A, for a perfect example) were awesome. Betcha DV would rather take their chances against Warren than New Waverly, Garrison or San Augustine...betcha.
SteelerCzy Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up SPLIT CONFERENCE FOOTBALL ALIGNMENT STUDY - DRAFT Possible Disadvantges: • Additional travel. Possible Disadvantges? Ha! Its a flat out certainty. Heres one example: District 12 Deweyville Garrison Groveton New Waverly San Augustine Shelbyville When you are pumping a $100 of gas into your car, and about to make the two hour drive...THANK THE UIL. Those beating the drum for this fiasco will quickly have reality hit when the scheduals are released. Look at the DV opponents. Instead of playing Warren and Kountze, they get to travel to New Waverly, Garrison, and Shelbyville, etc. BRILLIANT! : I'm opposed to the idea, travel alone will be a killer and the fact the games and rivalries will be lost/missed.
SteelerCzy Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I agree but the plan is for Schools to play Schools with near are the same enrollment. Yes, everyone understands that. To some degree this will backfire. In 2A, some "large" teams were pathetic, and some of the smallest (Alto, now 1A, for a perfect example) were awesome. Betcha DV would rather take their chances against Warren than New Waverly, Garrison or San Augustine...betcha. Your right, Warren is always a tough game, no matter the sport, I like 23-AA just the way it is.
Cat22 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 3A Div2 District 10 Tarkington Coldspring Diboll Hamshire-Fannett Huntington Orangefield Shepherd I like it!! Hope it passes!!
Guest ECBucFan Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 3A Div2 District 10 Tarkington Coldspring Diboll Hamshire-Fannett Huntington Orangefield Shepherd I like it!! Hope it passes!! Can't blame you for wanting to avoid H-J, Silsbee, WOS, and BC...
SFA85 Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 Smiley/Forest Brook combo is a done deal so put them in division 1 and swap places with Central and get them back in the Golden Triangle It wont work because Central has a high enrollment than the Triangle schools... They are all in D2. But at least put them with the houston schools... We have Livingston this year without that alignment, so there is really no difference. Every year there is some school in some district traveling so that is not the biggest disadvantage. I kind of like this idea! Yeah but Smiley/FB is bigger than Central. At least move Central closer to the Triangle if not a straight flip/flop
KFDM COOP Posted May 6, 2008 Author Report Posted May 6, 2008 3A Div2 District 10 Tarkington Coldspring Diboll Hamshire-Fannett Huntington Orangefield Shepherd I like it!! Hope it passes!! It will pass eventually!
AggiesAreWe Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 3A Div2 District 10 Tarkington Coldspring Diboll Hamshire-Fannett Huntington Orangefield Shepherd I like it!! Hope it passes!! It will pass eventually! No it won't. The costs of travel will be too much. Just another stupid idea that the UIL has come up with no regard to the schools budgets. If the UIL wants an even playing field, then let them counter the travel costs with a state travel fund for poor school districts. I bet that will go over real good with the UIL. :
Recommended Posts