Two Year Honeymoon: Is It Over

  • Thread starter Thread starter BE
  • Start date Start date
B

BE

Six-man fan
The new track division seemed like a dream come true for the first two years. Is it all changing now that more and more elevenman schools are opting to take advantage of the cut off number and compete in the Class A division instead of their 2-A? Time will tell, but in just one year there appears to be some "writing on the wall" already.

Teams like Munday, Springlake-Earth, Wink and Burton flexed their 2-A numbers and muscles in the Regional Meets last week, as well as others. The smaller schools can and must match the muscle contrast if we want to stay competitive, otherwise the same problem we had before the new format will raise its ugly head again. However, there is absolutely nothing we can do about the sheer number advantage these schools have over us. Most class A schools will never be able to enter three girls and boys in every event like the class AA teams can.

And what is the logic being used to allow this numerical mismatch? I spoke with several judges at the SPC Meet and several expressed the argument that because it was not feasible to compete in baseball and softball with Class A schools only, the unfairness of allowing track to do so was the problem. That's is what they were told by comrades further up the decision-making tree.

So basically the argument is because baseball and softball cannot compete versus class A schools only, neither can track be allowed to do so. In plain speech, because the playing field is unlevel for smallballers, it must also be unlevel for run and jumpers.

Is it me or is there something wrong with said logic??
 
HP Drifter":23pod6u6 said:
If you play 11 man, then run 2-A track
Click to expand...

If you took out all of the 11 man schools out of 1A track & field the it would already be even more watered down then it already is. There are numerous examples from last weekends regional meets that you could look at, but after looking at the Texas Track and Field Coaches website one is the 400 meter Run in Region 4.

1st place would remain the same with Cranfills Gap with a time of 52.04
2nd place would have been Gholson with a time of 55.14
3rd place is where it gets tricky because there wasn't even a 6 man school that was fast enough. The 8th place kid ran a 59.05.

After looking at this do yall coaches really want a kid to run a 60.0 second lap and be the possible wildcard spot for the state track meet? The mediocrity that some sports are becoming is the reason why we now have kids who are happy just to get a participation ribbon and move on. So how about a coach just tells the kid that in the end he either is just not fast enough or in some cases the student shouldn't have taken those days off and he/she should have worked out or not skipped reps in the weight room. If the UIL continues the mediocrity of High School sports then before you know it there will be 4 teams in a district making playoffs and who knows they might even make a new division for just 6 man basketball schools. In the end if you don't want 11 man schools to attend it because your either scared of the competition or you looking just to pat your resume with statistics that don't mean jack squat. So if your are a a coach who doesn't want your kids to run at the regional meet against 11 man or private schools (Primer Learning). Then how about you don't take your students to invitational meets with those schools there? Because when push comes to shove the schools hosting the invitationals are just like the UIL and they want that entry money and concession stand money for thereselves.

This was written by me Cliff Baker who is just a parent with kids in the lower elementary grades.
 
It has nothing to do with mediocrity. When a school has more kids, they are more likely to have better athletes. 1A should only compete against 1A - in every sport. 2A doesn't compete against 3A, so why should it be different for us?
 
So any school that chooses to play 11-man should have to participate in 2-A sports across the board on both the girls and boys?

This would probably persuade a few of these schools to join the six-man ranks, especially if it started hurting both sides.
 
Just putting in my own two cents here....It seems that if you have the numbers to play class A football(sixman football) and you opt to not play sixman football then you play class AA football(eleven man)...Baird and Roby for example....They play eleven man football (AA) but have the numbers to play sixman.....(under 102.5 I believe)....Even though they choose to play AA football the UIL still allows them to play class A basketball because they are under 102.5.....That puts them in class A for spring sports as well......(track is the one we are talking about here).....So they choose to play up in football but are allowed to play down in basketball and track....Makes no sense to me but that is the way it is done......So apparently Munday, Wink and the rest have the numbers to play sixman but choose not to......So they can play Class A basketball and be in a Class A district for the spring as well......To me an easy fix for this problem would be if you choose to play up (AA football) then you should play up (class AA) in everything.......That would force these schools in question to play class A to be able to be in class A in everything else.....Just saying....
 
CowboyP":3a600zoa said:
It has nothing to do with mediocrity. When a school has more kids, they are more likely to have better athletes. 1A should only compete against 1A - in every sport. 2A doesn't compete against 3A, so why should it be different for us?
Click to expand...


Using your algorithm. Then answer me this question.

Ira who is a sixman school has a total enrollment of 97. 9th through 12th grade.
9th- 29
10th- 29
11th- 17
12th- 23

Cross Plains who is a 11 man school has a total enrollment of 92. 9th through 12th grade.
9th- 26
10th- 24
11th- 25
12th- 17

Then using your lodgic Cross Plains shouldn't get to compete in 1a track because why? They actually have less students then the 6 man schools but they just choose to play 11 man football?

All information was taken straight from the TEA website and you can look it up at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/adhocrpt/adste.html
 
I disagree with the 2-A should play 2-A period argument. I also do not understand the initial rant/question. You are trying to tell me that schools like Munday (enrollment of 104), Burton (100) and springlike-earth (93) have a numbers advantage? Really? White Deer (100), Blum (96), Water Valley (91) are all numerically comparable as are several other 6-man schools. They play six man, the others choose not to.

So what is the argument? If all things are equal (and they are, these schools all have less than 105 students using the UIL's allowed formulas) then the only difference is which brand of football they play. If you truly believe these schools have an advantage then to me all you are saying is 11-man football schools are better because they play 11 man football. Yes, some of the smaller schools have trouble competing. Many of the smaller schools do struggle to compete in their respective divisions. This is no reason to whine because some school has more kids than you and they beat you.
 
CowboyP":2ocnkr04 said:
If you choose to "play up" in any sport, you should have to do so in all sports. No school should be allowed to pick and choose. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

We'll see you wont answer that question then here is another one.

What if the UIL came in next year and told all 6 man division II schools that if they wanted to play football they would have to move up to division I. However after football was over they would allow them to compete in 6 man division II basketball. Would you make all the division II schools play division I basketball?
 
Fulcrum":2h4r4h1t said:
CowboyP":2h4r4h1t said:
If you choose to "play up" in any sport, you should have to do so in all sports. No school should be allowed to pick and choose. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

We'll see you wont answer that question then here is another one.

What if the UIL came in next year and told all 6 man division II schools that if they wanted to play football they would have to move up to division I. However after football was over they would allow them to compete in 6 man division II basketball. Would you make all the division II schools play division I basketball?
Click to expand...
In answer to your first question, if they have 1A numbers, they should play all 1A sports. Period.
As to your 2nd question, I stick with my opinion. If the divisions are merged for football, they should be merged for all sports.
 
So you are asking a team that is already at a numerical disadvantage playing 11man football to do it in all sports? Doesn't seem like your bball/track coaches would be on board. Like many have stated, there are numerous schools that have similar numbers but you are okay with them because they choose to play sixman. Hopefully you are just trolling for responses and not actually believe it makes sense. There is no logic to it.
 
Well can you show me anywhere on the UIL website that says that 6 man is 1A? How about the simple solution is that the UIL adds a 1A 11-man division for schools then it wouldn't be an issue because let's be all honest do you really want schools like cross plains and Burton playing 6 man football? Crowell did enough of a number on the perineal 6 man powerhouses the last 2 years
 
Fulcrum":sgfl4592 said:
Well can you show me anywhere on the UIL website that says that 6 man is 1A? How about the simple solution is that the UIL adds a 1A 11-man division for schools then it wouldn't be an issue because let's be all honest do you really want schools like cross plains and Burton playing 6 man football? Crowell did enough of a number on the perineal 6 man powerhouses the last 2 years
Click to expand...
http://www.uiltexas.org/alignments/cate ... n-football
Btw, I don't watch 11-man ball because it bores me.
 
The problem with forcing six man schools who want to play 11man football to play all sports in 2a is the girls programs. You shouldn't punish all the other programs because one wants to "play up". Looking at most of the "11 man schools" records on the track last year, most couldn't compete at the 2a level. Munday hardly had anyone get to regional. Look at it now, the girls and boys both took over the regional meet in 1A. (The girls were an anomaly, had 3 freshmen come in and win most of their races). I'm all for making competition tougher. Otherwise lets go ahead and make a division 1 and division 2 in track also.
 
Fulcrum":2525tlih said:
n you show me anywhere on the UIL website that says that 6 man is 1A? How about the simple solution is that the UIL adds a 1A 11-man division for schools then it wouldn't be an issue because let's be all honest do you really want schools like cross plains and Burton playing 6 man football? Crowell did enough of a number on the perineal 6 man powerhouses the last 2 years
Click to expand...

LMAO cause cross plains makes the playoffs every year in 11 men. When is the last time they won more then 2 games. What a joke.
 
A few years ago, Anthony HS had small (then 2A) numbers...about the size of Crane and Alpine, but opted up in football for travel purposes. They had to participate in that division year-round, in all sports. That's the way it's always been done when schools opt up for any reason.
 
This is a never ending tetter-totter.

I say leave the cutoff (at whaterver it currently may be) and take away the "choice" of which type of football is played.

If your enrollement says your 1A, then your playing 6-man or Outlaw 11 -Man. If your enrollement says your 2A then your playing 11-man or 6-man outlaw.

Then keep the rest of the sports in their respective division.
 
Fulcrum":31nwsdzq said:
HP Drifter":31nwsdzq said:
If you play 11 man, then run 2-A track
Click to expand...

If you took out all of the 11 man schools out of 1A track & field the it would already be even more watered down then it already is. There are numerous examples from last weekends regional meets that you could look at, but after looking at the Texas Track and Field Coaches website one is the 400 meter Run in Region 4.

1st place would remain the same with Cranfills Gap with a time of 52.04
2nd place would have been Gholson with a time of 55.14
3rd place is where it gets tricky because there wasn't even a 6 man school that was fast enough. The 8th place kid ran a 59.05.

After looking at this do yall coaches really want a kid to run a 60.0 second lap and be the possible wildcard spot for the state track meet? The mediocrity that some sports are becoming is the reason why we now have kids who are happy just to get a participation ribbon and move on. So how about a coach just tells the kid that in the end he either is just not fast enough or in some cases the student shouldn't have taken those days off and he/she should have worked out or not skipped reps in the weight room. If the UIL continues the mediocrity of High School sports then before you know it there will be 4 teams in a district making playoffs and who knows they might even make a new division for just 6 man basketball schools. In the end if you don't want 11 man schools to attend it because your either scared of the competition or you looking just to pat your resume with statistics that don't mean jack squat. So if your are a a coach who doesn't want your kids to run at the regional meet against 11 man or private schools (Primer Learning). Then how about you don't take your students to invitational meets with those schools there? Because when push comes to shove the schools hosting the invitationals are just like the UIL and they want that entry money and concession stand money for thereselves.

This was written by me Cliff Baker who is just a parent with kids in the lower elementary grades.
Click to expand...


Cord Neal from Chester ran 54 in that region. I guess you missed that. He was in 5th.
 
Back
Top