SnapShot Numbers

This was posted on 1A football.com

Anthony 209
New Deal 209
Rosebud-Lott 207
Mason 205
Harper 205
Hamilton 205
Hawley 205
Panhandle 204
Junction 204
Anderson-Shiro 204
Bosqueville 203
Tolar 203
Alvord 202
Pineland West Sabine 202
San Saba 200
Harleton 199
Crawford 197
Valley Mills 197
Como-Pickton 197
Forsan 196
Beckville 196
Axtell 196
Big Sandy 195
Valley View 195
Amarillo Boys Ranch 194
Alto 194
Floydada 193
Cayuga 192
Holland 191
Simms Bowie 190
Hale Center 189
Refugio 187
Tahoka 187
Valley Mills 187
Hull-Daisetta 186
Thorndale 185
San Augustine 185
Chico 185
Stinnett West Texas 185
Goldthwaite 184
Riviera-Kaufer 182
Hico 179
Flatonia 178
Price Carlisle 177
Kerens 176
Olton 175
Stratford 173.5
Blue Ridge 173
Anson 173
Clarksville 171
Shiner 171
Lovelady 169
De Leon 168
Dallas Gateway 165
Center Point 165
Windthorst 164
Mart 164
Stamford 162
Honey Grove 162
Sabinal 162
Three Rivers 162
Grapeland 162
Archer City 161
Wellington 160
Saratoga West Hardin 159
Quanah 157
La Villa 156
Kenedy 156
Sunray 155.5
Seymour 155
Santo 153
Memphis 153
Normangee 153
Iola 153
Overton 152
Meridian 152
Eldorado 152
Woodsboro 152
Petrolia 150
Wolfe City 150
Seagraves 150
Milano 149
Lindsay 149
Winters 149
Hamlin 148
Collinsville 148
Timpson 147
Haskell 146
Era 146
Italy 145
Tenaha 142
Farwell 142
La Pryor 141
Charlotte 141
Snook 139
Wortham 137
Chilton 137
Evadale 137
Sudan 137
Dawson 136
Wheeler 134
Colmesneil 133
Louise 133
Ralls 131
Detroit 130
Muenster 129
Miles 129
Gruver 128
Van Horn 126
Albany 125
Agua Dulce 125
Somerville 125
Clarendon 124.5
Electra 124
Morton 124
Plains 123
Falls City 121
Shamrock 121
Ranger 118
Iraan 118
Frost 115
Irion County 115
Smyer 110
Booker 109
Fruitvale 108
Cumby 107
Bruni 105
Munday 104
Mount Enterprise 102
Burton 100
Perrin-Whitt 100
Crosbyton 99
D'Hanis 99
Wink 98
Baird 95
Leakey 93
Springlake-Earth 93
Runge 93
Bronte 89
Cross Plains 88
Nueces Canyon 86
Menard 86
Rocksprings 72
 
Bronte 89

I remember going through the Bronte newspapers in the Archive. Every year the high school would post attendance numbers similar to that, anywhere between 70 and 100. They could have gone 6 man many, many years ago.
 
These are the numbers I have and they are definitely not official (This from numbers posted on this thread). The list I have is numbers for 134 schools, The middle is 54.5 with 67 above and 67 below that number. If I include Bynum and Fort Davis the middle is 55 with 69 schools at 55 or above and 67 below. if you include Star and Benjamin the middle is 54.5.

Campbell 100 or 102 two different were posted
White Deer 100
Whiteface 99
Knox City 96
Blum 96
Ropes 94
Abbott 92
Water Valley 91
Coolidge 89
May 88
Garden City 88
Savoy 87
Medina 87
Covington 87
Aquilla 86
Marfa 85
Ira 85
Happy 84
Spur 82 or 76 two different numbers were posted
Lometa 82
Bloomburg 81
Bryson 78
Avalon 78
Tioga 76
Sterling City 76
Gordon 76
Hart 76
Bynum ???????? last enrollment 75
Rotan 75
Lorenzo 74
Veribest 73
Meadow 73
Saint Jo 72
O'Donnell 71
Borden 71
Robert Lee 69
Paint Rock 69
Evant 69
Fort Davis ??????? last enrollment 67
Hermleigh 67
Zephyr 66
Penelope 66
Nazareth 64
Highland 64
Newcastle 63
Grady 63
Gholson 63
Kopperl 63
Westbrook 63
New Home 62
Lingleville 62
Eden 62
Aspermont 61
Santa Anna 60
Rankin 60
Petersburg 60
Milford 60
Miami 60
Klondike 59
Strawn 58
Rochelle 58
Gustine 58
Crowell 58
Anton 58
Leverretts Chapel 57.5
Valley 57
Apple Springs 57
Chillicothe 56
Mount Calm 55
Chester 55
Mclean 54
High Island 54
Throckmorton 53
Southland 53
Jonesboro 53
Forestburg 53
Blanket 53
Walnut Springs 52
Fannindel 52
Brookesmith 52
Paducah 50
Trinidad 49
Silverton 49
Rising Star 49
Cherokee 48
Follett 47
Wellman-Union 46
Sierrs Blanca 46
Lazbudie 46
Gold-Burg 46
Sands 45
Kress 45
Fort Elliott 45
Buckholts 45
Mullin 44
Whitharral 44
Northside 44
Blackwell 44
IREDELL 44
Prairie Lea 44
Cranfills Gap 44
Calvert 43
Paint Creek 42
Oglesby 42
Oakwood 42
Jayton 42
MOTLEY COUNTY 42
Panther Creek 42
Karnack 41
Balmorhea 41
Higgins 40
Trent 39
Lefors 39
Cotton Center 39
Groom 39
Moran 38
Loraine 38
Buena Vista 38
MORGAN 38
GUTHRIE 38
Amherst 38
Richland Springs37
Hedley 37
Harrold 36
Sanderson 36
Lohn 35
Rule 35
Loop 34
Dawson 34
Lueders Avoca 32
SIDNEY 32
Wilson 32
WOODSON 28
Grandfalls 26
Star last enrollment 25
Patton Springs 22
Dell City 21
Benjamin last enrollment 11.
If here any any errors feel free to correct them. Again these are unofficial.
 
Leman Saunders":3ntkww8x said:
For those that missed it on the other topic here were the answers I got when asked if they would be playing 6man:

104 Munday - No
100 Burton - No
100 Perrin-Whitt - No
99 Crosbyton - No
99 D’Hanis - No
98 Wink - Didn't think so
95 Baird - No
93 Runge - No
93 Springlake-Earth - No
93 Leakey - waiting to see
91 Cross Plains - No
91 Burkeville - "If I knew the answer to that question I wouldn't tell"
89 Bronte - did not speak to anyone who would know, but secretary said she didn't think their was talk of it
87 Medina - YES
86 Nueces Canyon - voted on it and No
86 Menard - A strong NO
78 Gorman - Danced around it but No (principal)
72 Rocksprings - No
*71 Roby - The most resounding NO out of all of them


So can any of these schools change their mind between now and the next football season and play sixman?
 
Total of grades turned in. Some count 8th grade I think. 8-11or 9-12. Probably wrong on that but I'll blame it on my ex-superintendent bro-in-law.
 
GSB":1k0p9bky said:
Are these numbers total in high school or total number of boys in high school?

Scott ... UIL uses total enrollment (boys and girls) as UIL permits girls to play football. There are about three or four different calculations that UIL allows six-man schools to use:

Schools choosing to participate in six-man football may submit enrollment figures by any one of the following combinations of grades: grades 9, 10, 11 and 12; grades 8, 9, 10 and 11; grades 7, 8, 9 and 10; or grades 9 and 10 doubled. UIL Rules, Section 351 (a)(3)

The maximum to be eligible for district alignment is 104.9, so I would guess any school near that number is going to check each of those calculations and send in the lowest. For example, if you have a large 12th grade class and a small 8th grade class, you'll probably send in the 8-9-10-11 number. But if the 7th and 8th grades are large, you'll send in the 9-10-11-12 number or double the 9-10 number.
 
freeagent":3o7oyhjh said:
GSB":3o7oyhjh said:
Are these numbers total in high school or total number of boys in high school?

Scott ... UIL uses total enrollment (boys and girls) as UIL permits girls to play football. There are about three or four different calculations that UIL allows six-man schools to use:

Schools choosing to participate in six-man football may submit enrollment figures by any one of the following combinations of grades: grades 9, 10, 11 and 12; grades 8, 9, 10 and 11; grades 7, 8, 9 and 10; or grades 9 and 10 doubled. UIL Rules, Section 351 (a)(3)

The maximum to be eligible for district alignment is 104.9, so I would guess any school near that number is going to check each of those calculations and send in the lowest. For example, if you have a large 12th grade class and a small 8th grade class, you'll probably send in the 8-9-10-11 number. But if the 7th and 8th grades are large, you'll send in the 9-10-11-12 number or double the 9-10 number.
So the cutoff is 104.9 or was it just one of the proposed amendments?
Thanks for the clarification on the reasons for the different methods of counting because I always wondered why seniors would be counted since those students would not be in school in the next alignment.
 
freeagent":226a9mdq said:
GSB":226a9mdq said:
Are these numbers total in high school or total number of boys in high school?

Scott ... UIL uses total enrollment (boys and girls) as UIL permits girls to play football. There are about three or four different calculations that UIL allows six-man schools to use:

Schools choosing to participate in six-man football may submit enrollment figures by any one of the following combinations of grades: grades 9, 10, 11 and 12; grades 8, 9, 10 and 11; grades 7, 8, 9 and 10; or grades 9 and 10 doubled. UIL Rules, Section 351 (a)(3)

The maximum to be eligible for district alignment is 104.9, so I would guess any school near that number is going to check each of those calculations and send in the lowest. For example, if you have a large 12th grade class and a small 8th grade class, you'll probably send in the 8-9-10-11 number. But if the 7th and 8th grades are large, you'll send in the 9-10-11-12 number or double the 9-10 number.
So the cutoff is 104.9?
Thanks for the clarification on the reasons for the different methods of counting because I always wondered why seniors would be counted since those students would not be in school in the next alignment.
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www ... 3MJDtfdd1g
 
If the number is really below 60, Division II is going to be ridiculous!! Division I will be good, but I think that Division II will be LOADED.
 
Why 51? Let's say you have 80% participation from your boys. So you now have 20 boys out of the 25 in your school playing football. You can't play JV with that? And before I get hammered about the participation rate, don't the good schools year in and out generally have pretty good participation rates?
 
Johnny South":3uhhqjip said:
The cut-off for D2 should be no more than 51 to be fair and equitable.

Why 51?

Make it too low and D2 has two and three team districts (since UIL said in their rules they were going with 16 districts in each classification). That's not real fair and equitable. I'm not sure anything short of Heaven can always be both fair and equitable in everybody's eyes.

Cut it down the middle, as in the past, and the top half is D1 and bottom half is D2. Yeah, it is gonna be tough being the smallest D1 school, but that's how stuff goes.
 
I agree. I just wanted to know what made 50 or 51 such a magical number. He's talking fair and equitable but Richland Springs definitely doesn't have a ton of kids and it hasn't stopped them. Numbers don't mean everything.
 
Back
Top