Can we finally admit....

Johnny South":33yrqous said:
LBK6manFan":33yrqous said:
I still feel like most people would push for a unified division instead of 2 regarding 6man.

I believe that you are way off on that statement. You with all of your umpteen posts here is about all the support you have.
With the high enrollment cut-off numbers, the current system is the only way to go. Whether the tiny schools have a chance or not, they believe that they do with our current system in place.

You are right Johnny. With the two divisions smaller schools DO believe they have a chance. There are plenty of people on school boards today that would love to see football dead and gone. They just need Justification, not a reason. Go back to one division and you will see schools shutting down their six man program to “focus” on other programs. Their definition on “focus” is to eliminate the brutal exhibitions of men glorifying the hitting of each other, and as we all know that is what causes all the problems in the world today. Just ask AOC.
So go ahead guys, keep assisting those with that mentality. Hey, but as long as it’s not your ox getting gored, who cares ?
Go Johnny Go.............!
 

LBK6manFan

New member
FCSA football":2ogce7av said:
Johnny South":2ogce7av said:
LBK6manFan":2ogce7av said:
I still feel like most people would push for a unified division instead of 2 regarding 6man.

I believe that you are way off on that statement. You with all of your umpteen posts here is about all the support you have.
With the high enrollment cut-off numbers, the current system is the only way to go. Whether the tiny schools have a chance or not, they believe that they do with our current system in place.

You are right Johnny. With the two divisions smaller schools DO believe they have a chance. There are plenty of people on school boards today that would love to see football dead and gone. They just need Justification, not a reason. Go back to one division and you will see schools shutting down their six man program to “focus” on other programs. Their definition on “focus” is to eliminate the brutal exhibitions of men glorifying the hitting of each other, and as we all know that is what causes all the problems in the world today. Just ask AOC.
So go ahead guys, keep assisting those with that mentality. Hey, but as long as it’s not your ox getting gored, who cares ?
Go Johnny Go.............!

Like I said before, I respect your opinion but why cannot disagree? Also, I'd still take Grandfalls '13 (the lowest enrollment in the state that year) over your 30 player team and yes I believe it would mean more more for the players, school, and the history of 6Man
 

TebowTime15

Active member
That 13 Grandfalls Team had the best spread defense I've never seen outside of TE's Coyotes! It was like a red wave gobbling up the other team's ball carrier.
 
TebowTime15":3fe3heco said:
That 13 Grandfalls Team had the best spread defense I've never seen outside of TE's Coyotes! It was like a red wave gobbling up the other team's ball carrier.

No doubt about it. Defense wins football games.!And Championships!
 

rainjacktx

Active member
All this debate about going back to one division is like debating whether or not to ditch the Electoral College and go to a straight popular vote to elect our president: On one side it makes all the sense in the world. On the other it makes all the sense in the world.

Sure it's fun to pontificate what-if's, but given the fact that every classification in the state (except 6A maybe, I can't be bothered to look it up) has two divisions, and 4 teams are taken from each district, what we have in 6-man is tame by comparison. There's every possibility that a non-6man team could be 0-fer the season and still "earn" a playoff spot. At least in 6man, they havve to win at least once, unless there's a 2 team district of which I am unaware

Nothing will change now that it is proven that playoff football is profitable.

Edited for clarity
 

ryry

Member
My thought....
I didn't care for the split division at the time but now I support it because there is no choice with the cutoff number being increased. With that increase came the UIL creating our (1A) own division in other sports, which is invaluable for our kids/schools. Yes, the number of kids and size of schools matter in the great scheme of things. There are always outliers but for the most part it matters. It mattered when our 1A kids were having to compete with 2A kids/schools in district games and the playoffs for baseball, softball, track meets etc. The division split did not only impact football but most other sports for the better in my opinion.
 

Superjrj

Member
Just beating a dead horse with this discussion Nothing is going to change. Coaches don’t want it. Uil doesn’t want it They do things they feel that the schools feel is most advantageous for their school. A miniscule number of small D2 schools would make the playoffs which is the dream of every athlete who participates. Granted there are some perrinnal ones that can compete but that is a very small number. This issue has been discussed now it’s time to let it go.
 

wths

Member
Here’s my two cents...two divisions have both pluses and minuses for obvious reasons, (money, travel, school size etc.) I know there are schools that prefer one division just like there are those that prefer two but at the end of the day the UIL has the final say (hey that rhymed) and they’ll let you know what that is when they get done counting their money.

Personally, I favor one division as it forces the good teams to rise to the top whether they have 6 or 26 on the team. Growing up that’s how it always was and that only changed because of greed. The UIL played lowball by knowing that smaller schools would go for a division split because they were sick and tired of getting decimated every year by the bigger teams in their district. So they offered a solution, you all can go play teams your own size ( or closer to your size) and get the trophy you seek, we get more money by having double the playoff games and everybody wins!

What the UIL failed to realize, and still doesn’t frankly, is that the numbers needed to sustain the two division system are dwindling every year. As mentioned previously you’re getting 1-7 or 2-6 teams in the playoffs every single year just because there aren’t enough teams in the districts using two divisions. Sure it’s great for those schools who might not have had success in a bigger district to get a district title here and there but more often than not it’s usually one game and then onward to basketball season. Schools are closing or not fielding teams and when those were Division 2 schools now you make a four team district a two team district and you could have an 0-8 team make the playoffs and for what 100$ at the gate? Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that you could have an 8 team district with Higgins, Follett, Darrouzett, LeFors, Groom, Hedley, Miami and Claude. Problem is Darrouzett doesn’t have a high school team and I read in the paper this week that Higgins is in the process of closing so you’d still have 6 at least but with the smaller schools possibly abandoning football or closing altogether you run the risk of watering down and already watered down product by maintaining two divisions that contain districts with low numbers of teams.

That’s probably fifty cents worth but oh well...
 

LBK6manFan

New member
Superjrj said:
Just beating a dead horse with this discussion Nothing is going to change. Coaches don’t want it.
* Not True, opinion

Uil doesn’t want it
*True

They do things they feel that the schools feel is most advantageous for their school.
* False
A miniscule number of small D2 schools would make the playoffs which is the dream of every athlete who participates.
*False, Opinion

Granted there are some perrinnal ones that can compete but that is a very small number.
*False, opinion
 

LBK6manFan

New member
wths":31dwzay8 said:
Here’s my two cents...two divisions have both pluses and minuses for obvious reasons, (money, travel, school size etc.) I know there are schools that prefer one division just like there are those that prefer two but at the end of the day the UIL has the final say (hey that rhymed) and they’ll let you know what that is when they get done counting their money.
* Fact

Personally, I favor one division as it forces the good teams to rise to the top whether they have 6 or 26 on the team. Growing up that’s how it always was and that only changed because of greed.
*Fact

The UIL played lowball by knowing that smaller schools would go for a division split
*Fact

because they were sick and tired of getting decimated every year by the bigger teams in their district. So they offered a solution, you all can go play teams your own size ( or closer to your size) and get the trophy you seek, we get more money by having double the playoff games and everybody wins!
*Fact, well said

[b]What the UIL failed to realize, and still doesn’t frankly, is that the numbers needed to sustain the two division system are dwindling every year. As mentioned previously you’re getting 1-7 or 2-6 teams in the playoffs every single year just because there aren’t enough teams in the districts using two divisions.
* Fact
Sure it’s great for those schools who might not have had success in a bigger district to get a district title here and there but more often than not it’s usually one game and then onward to basketball season. Schools are closing or not fielding teams and when those were Division 2 schools now you make a four team district a two team district and you could have an 0-8 team make the playoffs and for what 100$ at the gate?
* Great point but schools are still closing or consolidating regardless of the split

Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that you could have an 8 team district with Higgins, Follett, Darrouzett, LeFors, Groom, Hedley, Miami and Claude. Problem is Darrouzett doesn’t have a high school team and I read in the paper this week that Higgins is in the process of closing so you’d still have 6 at least but with the smaller schools possibly abandoning football or closing altogether you run the risk of watering down and already watered down product by maintaining two divisions that contain districts with low numbers of teams.
* Darrouzette is in the process of building their FB program from JH to high school as most of their kids are bussed from Perryton and will most likely replace Higgins. Higgins kids will probably go to Follett or Canadian if/when the schoold does close. I also mentioned White Deer and Mclean to add to the district because that would have most likely happened if not for a split. if you have to dive deeper for an 8th team in this hypothetical District 1, it would probably be Silverton, Valley, Wildorado, or Happy to make it. UIL realignment would settle the it for 2 years until the next realignment.

That’s probably fifty cents worth but oh well...
* Great points and I appreciate your opinion on this thread.
 

wths

Member
LBK6manFan":24mbvamg said:
wths":24mbvamg said:

* Darrouzette is in the process of building their FB program from JH to high school as most of their kids are bussed from Perryton and will most likely replace Higgins. Higgins kids will probably go to Follett or Canadian if/when the schoold does close. I also mentioned White Deer and Mclean to add to the district because that would have most likely happened if not for a split. if you have to dive deeper for an 8th team in this hypothetical District 1, it would probably be Silverton, Valley, Wildorado, or Happy to make it. UIL realignment would settle the it for 2 years until the next realignment.

That’s probably fifty cents worth but oh well...

* Great points and I appreciate your opinion on this thread.



No problem. I didn’t realize Darrouzett was trying to build it back up again. I know they had one a few years ago and then they lost it again but then I saw they had JH again this year. I would imagine when Higgins closes Follett, Darrouzett and probably Shattuck, OK will get the majority with the rest going to Canadian.
 

Shad Kline

Active member
2 divisions just makes more sense. Just like having 2a, 3a, 4a, 5a and 6a makes sense in 11 man. The competition level is higher for schools with higher enrollment. 2013 Grandfalls is an exception, not the norm. Almost every kid in high school was male and played football. Strawn in 03 had DI numbers, now they don’t. 98 Trinidad ran the table on almost every playoff team they played. And it wasn’t “watered down” that year. Sure, there’s going to be years where the dII champion is as good or better than the DI champ, but again, it’s the exception, not the norm. You say smaller enrollment isn’t a good argument for 2 divisions, but it absolutely is. Enrollment is why 2a schools can’t compete with 6a schools. That don’t mean there’s never been a 2a school that could beat a 6a school, but the odds are against it. Yeah, it would be cool if we could have seen the ‘06 stephenville yellowjackets try and beat the 5a champ that year, but it’s not going to happen, numbers. If the 2a teams had to try and compete with the 6a schools, eventually they would just stop playing football. Same would happen in 6man. Things WERE different back in the day. And the cutoff number was much lower then too. I believe it was either 74 or 79 back in 1990. Even then, other than the occasional exception, the schools on the bigger end of that cutoff dominated.

Districts too small? Absolutely. I feel like we could go half as many districts per division with twice as many teams per district. So 8 districts with 8 or 9 per district instead of 3-5 in 16 districts. The UIL wouldn’t want to give up a playoff round so we would have to take 4 to the playoffs per district. I know that makes people cringe to think of taking 4, but the quality of teams making the playoffs would increase slightly and I can explain why.

Current system
District 1 has teams a b c and d
District 2 has teams e f g and h
Right now the top two go, so a plays f and e plays b in the playoffs. A beats f and b beats e because district 2 is a really weak district. Team c went 8-2 including beating team f pre district by 35, they are also ranked higher and it is common knowledge that they are generally the better team than team f, but they start basketball while team f makes the first round and gets 45’d by team a.

With the new system a b c d e f g and h are all in the same district and battle it out for the top 4 spots, with the top team getting a 4th place team from district 2 in round one. So winning district means you earned it AND an easier first round opponent. So teams a b c and e make the playoffs, meaning that the 4 teams that go are collectively better than the 4 teams in the old system ( because c went instead of f). (And c made it to the 3rd round because even though they lost to b in district, they beat them in round 2).

Hope that made sense...... it does in my head. Lol

Last point. Someone said playing each other twice in district only one would count. Not true. Grandfalls, Balmorhea, Sanderson, Buena vista and I think Benjamin did it a couple years back, did a home and home and all the games counted. I’m pretty sure the district can determine how they wanna do it. A district could play their district games in weeks 4 5 and 6 if they wanted to and the UIL wouldn’t care.
 

Johnny South

Well-known member
You are right as rain Shad. Combine two districts and take 4. Most of the scheduling headaches would be gone! A lot of coaches could breath a sigh of relief.
 

Leman Saunders

Well-known member
If you want bigger district then the easiest way is to go back to one division.

Personally I believe the competition would be much better all around, in district play and in the playoffs, and scheduling would not be as trying on the coaches either.

The opinions of Richland Springs folks on this topic would be very interesting to read, as they suffer bc of the 2 division system in district play and scheduling...but in contrast it stands to reason they would not have 8 titles if there wasnt a division split...so they have both suffered and benefited from the split.

also numbers dont = success. numbers do help, it's a handy tool, but only if you have a combination of other factors (culture, right coach, good support ect...). If numbers = success then the highest enrollments would win every year and they dont, in fact they rarely do if ever.
 

Leman Saunders

Well-known member
Shad is kind of suggesting going back to the old Zone system seems like. Use to be a few districts that were so big they divided them into zones (1980s). there would be a zone playoff game (essentially the district championship)
 

Leman Saunders

Well-known member
txhsfb":240qrrvy said:
You do know there is a different solution to the scheduling issue don't you? And it's a solution that doesn't require sitting around waiting for the UIL to do something they aren't going to do.

If scheduling non-district games is such a hassle and having more district games is desirable, then have more district games. Play your district playing every team in your district twice. In a four team district, that would give you 6 district games.

Their is no UIL rule governing how a district conducts district play. It is left to the DEC of the district.

This would help some, but teams like Richland Sp would still face the same problem (sub topic...Lohn just needs to play outlaw football every year)
 

Superjrj

Member
LBK6manFan":1dxvg9yy said:
Superjrj":1dxvg9yy said:
Just beating a dead horse with this discussion Nothing is going to change. Coaches don’t want it.
* Not True, opinion

Uil doesn’t want it
*True

They do things they feel that the schools feel is most advantageous for their school.
* False
A miniscule number of small D2 schools would make the playoffs which is the dream of every athlete who participates.
*False, Opinion

Granted there are some perrinnal ones that can compete but that is a very small number.
*False, opinion
If UIL doesn’t want it WHY are there still two divisions
Schools most certainly do what they feel is most advantageous for their school or there wouldn’t be one division
Uil polls schools for input!! And the result is two division !
Just which D2 schools could compete in D1. Strawn. Richland. Gordon Calvert!
The facts are that the polls the UIL sends out come back the way it’s structured now. That’s a fact. Check with UIL
IF THIS IS A SCHEDULING PROBLEM then do like the D 1 schools schedule and meet halfway. All those schools mentioned were D2 in that 8 man district. All that was accomplished was travel
 

oldfolks

Active member
It is still about the kids. The more that have a chance to play, the better it is. So what if we have some mercy rule games. The larger schools need a mercy rule because they have quite a few blow outs. It is all classes that have strong and weak teams. Most go through a cycle. Thanks Shad for your input. I still wonder about the person that started this subject. His info states that he joined 11 days ago. Short time to be such an authority. He probably has several accounts and a different opinion on each one. We all have an opinion and mine is, let the kids play and us armchair quarterbacks let them play and support them.
 
Top