District Champions Discussion

[Phil C]

This is just something for discussion to see what everyone thinks. The way the current playoff system is set up there is little incentive other than a bye week (and that is not even the case in football and even a bye week may not always be that much of an advantage) for a team to win district. I think that an additional incentive is in order. For example in baseball and softball after the runner ups and third place teams have had their games when they play the district champion right afterward I think the district champion should have the home field advantage for at least that one game. Of course afterward due to distance you may need the coin flip situation. In football in the first and maybe even the second playoff game the district champions should always have the home field advantage or the choice of the neutral field. This would give an extra incentive to be district champions. It used to be that only the district champion advanced years ago so second and third place should be greatful to be in the playoffs. This is just my opinion and I was curious what others felt.

[Old Dog]

Phil...I have always thought the district champ should have some advantage (at least until game one is on the shelf). Teams that are 5-6 should not have the same consideration as teams who are 10-0.

Bandera proved the validity of allowing third place teams a shot. They overcame their injuries and rose to meet their opportunity. Personally, I have been pretty set against the third team even getting in the playoffs, but Bandera sure made me rethink my stand. I wonder what the odds of third place teams winning state are? Pretty slim probably!

<small>[ April 19, 2003, 11:00 AM: Message edited by: Old Dog ]</small>

[Ozzy]

Old Dog:

Third place teams going deep in the playoffs or even winning the championship are not are rare as you might think. This past year, Bandera won it all, and Midland should have. The first few years 3 teams were taken, Converse Judson and Killeen both won 5A Div. I as 3rd place qualifiers. The arguement about taking 3 teams has always been it waters down the playoffs, but most weak teams are gone after the first round. Strong districts usually make very strong showings into December. I personally would like to see 4 teams taken from each district, 2 in each division. This would help eliminate have very large schools playing in Division II.

[TarponFanInNorthTexas]

Ozzy, I agree with your point to add a 4th team in the playoffs that way the Div I teams will play the same number of playoff games as the Div II teams. However, I really don't think it would work well....example. With District 31, Falfurrias is the largest school with about 530 students and was the 3rd place team this past season, the district champ (Orange Grove) and the 2nd place team (Bishop) each have less than 400 students. The 4th place team (Hebbronville) is a borderline 3A. Now, with district 32, the three teams that made the playoffs ALL have enrollments larger than Falfurrias. District champion Port Isabel has about 630, 2nd place Raymondville has 720, and 3rd place La Feria has 760. The 4th place team, Lyford, has an enrollment similar to Falfurrias, give or take a few students. What would have ensued would have been in Div. I, Falfurrias and Orange Grove (530 and 380) respectively, playing against La Feria 760 and Raymondville 720. Enrollment wise, district 32 would have a HUGE advantage.

I think a good way to go at it is to have 3 teams in, and have the brackets set up just like the baseball playoff system is right now. District champions with a bye week, and the 2nd and 3rd place teams face off. Besides, it would help ensure another Sinton/Port Isabel classic. :D Both crowds go nuts, and is a great atmosphere.

<small>[ April 20, 2003, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: TarponFanInNorthTexas ]</small>

[Chief Woodman]

This is a personal opinion and not ment to upset anyone. However, except for the greed of UIL, there is no reason whatsoever to have more than one team per district in the playoffs. If you are going to allow three or even four teams per district, why not allow EVERY team in the State in the playoff brackets? It is just a watered down politically correct thing to do so that "More are included". Consider this...under the one team per district rule there would not be two 3A state football champs a year. Both teams cannot be THE champions, that concept is a joke. In fact neither of the 2002 state champs would be champs at all, because neither one actually won their district. (Everman was second to Kennedale who beat them fair and square) I am not saying that the teams did not peak at the right time, but if we were really intrested in rewarding a seasons effort instead of a five or six game hot streak, there should only be one team per district, and only one State Champ. But as long as money talks, we will not do that, but instead the UIL will find even more ways for more teams to make the playoffs.

[Jacket2000]

Im kinda leanin' towards Chief's way of thinkin', but not completely. I dont think that only one team per district should go, b/c I think it would be a real shame to have 9-1 teams sittin' at home. But, when half of the teams in a district go to the playoffs, there is a problem.
I think the first thing that needs to happen is for the districts to be even. All districts should have the same number of teams. It's ridiculous to have 10 teams in one district and 6 in another. The next thing that needs to happen is to do away with the two-tier system, and in my opinion, the only way to do that is to go back to 2 playoff teams per district, b/c 3 teams in the same bracket is entirely too much and would water it down more than it already is. So, my solution is this: 7 teams, 2 playoff spots per district.
J2K

[PPHSfan]

But before you can do that...you have to re-align the entire conference, so that schools with enrollments of 345 students are not competing with schools of 899 students for the same title. Is it just me or is that just a little too big of a spread? :p

<small>[ April 20, 2003, 11:24 PM: Message edited by: PPHSfan ]</small>

[Jacket2000]

PPHS, I did the math last offseason, and it would have to go to 7a. I sent it to the UIL several times...I have yet to receive a response. :confused:
J2K

[BULLDOGFAN]

I know being from Bandera this might sound odd, but I kinda like the old day's when you received what you earned.

The road to the Championship has many bumps in the road. In order for a state to produce a true champion each team must pay it's dues. That means playing with the cards that are in your hand.

Either make it that the best team in district goes further or develope a statewide playoff system that includes all teams. At least either way one knows what they are aiming towards.

Bandera just received their Championship ring last week. To all the kids that are practicing and aiming towards next year. Well, there is no better ring to wear.

Good luck Burnet and Midland and Port Isabel. Maybe you will wear the ring someday.

Bandera .......

[TarponFanInNorthTexas]

Jacket2000:
PPHS, I did the math last offseason, and it would have to go to 7a. I sent it to the UIL several times...I have yet to receive a response. :confused:
J2KWait a minute......I thought *I* did the math, or at least got all the enrollment figures and put them all in order in the same database file.

[Jacket2000]

LOL, yes, you did, and much more precise than I did. All I did was the numbers, and that was two years ago.
J2K

[Old Dog]

Ain't this a hoot, like our opinions really matter! Like someone said earlier, it's money, money, money for the UIL. I'm glad the legislature didn't see fit to deep six them, but they are a LONG way from having things right! My vote still goes for two teams from each district and ONE state champion. This gives room for two good teams in a district and a real top team.

[Phil C]

Old I almost totally agree with you but I still favor having three teams from each district with the first week's playoff between the second and third place district teams and letting the district winners have a bye week. It works in baseball and other sports so why not football. True you lose a week if you are district champions but you gain a week for your injuries to heal and that is important in football and be a big plus for the district champions. That way if one district has two potential strong teams (i.E. last year Kennedale and Everman) both teams would have a second chance. And by having the third team it gives someone a second chance too (Last year's Bandera) but it also gives teams that are not as strong a chance to maybe get into the playoffs which I feel is good. True most of them would be eliminated in the first or second game but it does give their players and fans and coaches a second chance to at least participate. Of course the UIL probably won't listen to us as has been said but if Nixon threatens to put up another bill in two years maybe they will. Who knows.

[TarponFanInNorthTexas]

Jacket2000:
LOL, yes, you did, and much more precise than I did. All I did was the numbers, and that was two years ago.
J2KActually, my friend, those enrollment figures I used were direct from the UIL site from the last realignment which was last Spring.